Sunday, January 25, 2015

"Why Women Get Tingles"

“A mass movement those who crave to be rid of an unwanted self." - Eric Hoffer

I'll admit, I'm amused at those in the Manosphere who speak with such assurance of "tingles, "Alphas, "hypergamy," "cash and prizes," etc. They think they know the minds of women, when in reality they clearly don't know much about them. They read these things in the Manosphere and think it's God's own truth. Simple things are easy to understand but life is a lot more complicated.

This is from Kings and Queens.

The often repeated disparagement of women is that they get “tingles” for the wrong kinds of men, and for the wrong reasons. What I find amusing about this is that men on the internet really believe they know what is in each and every woman’s head at all times, and that they know more about what turns us on than we do ourselves. They ascribe notions as though they are factual, when all they need to do is actually listen to what we have to say to get to the truth.

Yes I know, here is where you insert a comment such as, “But women lie, they don’t even know what they want…what they want is constantly changing…research shows…I’ve never observed it…you’re shaming me...your calling me a misogynist…NUH UH!” Really guys, you need to start adopting new ways of shifting blame for your own short comings.

It’s your choice if you don’t believe what we say, or choose not to listen. This will be at your peril. When good women talk who haven’t been tainted by feminism, and you ignore them, you lose out on opportunities to learn more about them. And yes there are many women out there who are not now, nor ever have been, or ever will be feminists. RoQ is going to continually shoot down false notions made by men who are teaching men the wrong things, and encouraging them to engage in wrong behaviors. We understand it’s easier to point and bleat, “FEMINIST” at a woman if you’ve been unsuccessful in your interactions with her, but being right isn’t always the easiest path to take.

So lets talk about this whole “tingle” thing. Apparently women aren’t supposed to feel this for a man. The only explanation many men give on why we get them is that we only feel them for bad guys, that we never feel them for “useful” men, or ones who have utility, or are industrious. It’s been said that women never talk about how the “good guys” make them “wet” or arouse us.

Well, if we did go around saying things in the only words men seem to understand such as wet, horny, aroused, turned on, or whatever other sexually blatant words, we would be called whores, or criticized for not speaking like proper ladies. Ladies don’t go around saying those kinds of things in public, right? Maybe around other women in private, but never among mixed company or in the public arena. It’s one of those situations where we are damned if we do, or damned if we don’t.

Also, many of us women, at least those who have been raised properly, don’t feel comfortable using dialogue that includes words or phrases that are sexually charged. I am not comfortable just coming out and saying, “oh man, just look at that guy [insert a man doing something manly], he makes me wet!” It’s just not something I would say. If you are looking for dialogue which is like this, you should probably go to a place like Jezebel because feminists will say just about anything, and use any words even if they are inappropriate for a lady to use.

But, yes, we do get “tingles” for all different kinds of men. Our tingles and why we feel them are as varied as we are as women. Some women get tingles for obvious reasons; a big strong man doing something obviously manly requiring strength and/or agility, or for dangerous looking men, etc. Then there are women who get tingles for men for reasons that perhaps even they can’t explain themselves. It just happens.

Take QueenA for instance. I don’t understand her infatuation with Steve Buscemi, but as she’s said it several times, he, or guys like him, “do it” for her. There are women who’ve made comments here who’ve described the man in their life who gave them tingles – men who although may not be “alpha” according to society’s or other men’s standards, is alpha to her and gives her tingles. Of course men don’t believe these women because it goes against their flawed paradigm, but it’s par for the course with many guys in the manosphere.

So how is it possible that there are women out there who get tingles for men who aren’t viewed by the majority as being the kind that would typically turn a woman on? It depends on two things:



We’ve talked here before about Oxytocin. Yes it really is the bonding hormone. It’s the hormone that gives us all those obvious feel good feelings, makes us want to bond, and helps us enjoy mating so much, among other things.

There is another chemical though that plays a role in a woman’s tingle system, and that chemical is Dopamine. Believe it or not, the brain has a “reward system“, where Dopamine plays a role. Dopamine also plays a role in pair bonding:

These differences are located in the ventral forebrain and the dopamine-mediated reward pathway.

Both vasopressin and dopamine act in this region to coordinate rewarding activities such as mating, and regulate selective affiliation. These species-specific differences have shown to correlate with social behaviors, and in monogamous prairie voles are important for facilitation of pair bonding.

On the reward system:

Reward or reinforcement is an objective way to describe the positive value that an individual ascribes to an object, behavioral act or an internal physical state. Primary rewards include those that are necessary for the survival of species, such as food and sexual contact.

In addition to Oxytocin, Dopamine may also be the source of a woman’s tingles – especially if the reward system is activated. When women see men doing things that are useful, and get turned on by them while watching what they are doing, or perhaps just thinking about them doing something that is likely to produce some reward (food, shelter, etc.), Dopamine starts working in the area of our brain which causes us to, you said it, get the tingles. It’s a natural and spontaneous response which many of us have a hard time understanding and pinpointing when we try to talk about it. If our bodies and minds are functioning in a healthy way, women should get tingles when experiencing men in their natural habitat doing things that are likely to produce some kind of reward. We understand the value of men’s “work”, and are physically stirred by it.

The other aspect determining how women get the tingles is what goals we may have when seeking out companionship or a mate. If a woman merely wants to have sex, she falls into the “Short-term pair-bond: a transient mating or associations” or “Clandestine pair-bond: quick extra-pair copulations” categories of pair bonding. If her goal is instead to find a long term mate, she will fall into the “Long-term pair-bond: bonded for a significant portion of the life cycle of that pair” or the “Lifelong pair-bond: mated for life” categories. As said above, species studied who were found to be monogamous were more likely to have higher levels of receptors in the area of the brain where the dopamine-mediated reward pathway is located.

It’s true, NAWALT. Some women will have lower levels of chemicals in their body that are likely to cause them to want to seek out long term mates. Then again, many women will have these chemicals, and proper levels of them. Being that these women are healthy in mind, body, and spirit, they will be naturally inclined to seek out men who will be able to show they are good at something a woman needs. Because of chemicals working in our body, we will be unable to deny our tingles when we see a man of this caliber; a useful, industrious, talented, good guy; even if he isn’t what society tells us is alpha.

We don’t turn this system off and on ourselves. It’s mediated by our wonderful, complicated, minds and bodies. We may not be good in describing why we get the tingles, not feel comfortable saying that yes, we get aroused, we get wet, we become physically turned on by guys who show they are good providers (of something we need or want), but we do feel them even for men who are otherwise dismissed as being beta by the snake oil peddlers in the PUA industry.

The key here for guys is that they need to understand what is the true essence of a woman’s motivation for wanting him. If she wants you because you can build or fix things, or know things, or do other desirable things, she’s a keeper. If she wants you for how you can provide for her financially, she is not a keeper. Yes, some women are physically turned on by men who are rich. These women are a scourge upon the earth.

My only advice to men here is to not initiate the relationship with things that require a lot of money. You have to shit test them. If you begin dating by engaging in activities that don’t require a lot of money, if she is still dating you after several months, she may be a keeper. Also, never discuss how much money you make with a woman in the beginning. If she focuses on your job and money early on, or insists you take her on expensive dates, or encourages you to buy her expensive things, RUN Forest RUN! If you at some point lose your income and have to sell off all your “things”, she is probably going to leave you. If you end up marrying her she will more than likely divorce you then take half of everything you have.

But, never ever refuse to believe that a woman can get the tingles for a man who other men have labeled beta, or who are considered good guys. We do get hot and bothered by these men. We just don’t go around the internet talking about it in words that men want to hear.

For those of you men who continue to parrot crap being peddled out there and attempt to again, (and again and again) rationalize your lack of success with women by insisting that it’s the woman’s fault for being hypergamous, or whatever other reason is fashionable at the moment for why men don’t succeed with women, give it a rest. Instead look inward on why this topic bothers you so much. Do you see yourself as being a “good guy”, or that you have many useful qualities that should be getting you dates, but don’t get them? There is something else going on with you that is putting women off.

We can’t tell you what that something is. You have to discover it for yourself. The longer you shut the idea out of your head that women are attracted to all different kinds of men, and for many different reasons which cause many different responses in us, the longer it will take you to find the right woman. We know when a man is shutting down to us, or shutting us out. We will look elsewhere.


Anders said...

"We understand the value of men’s “work”, and are physically stirred by it." You know how I know this is complete bullshit? Because every fucking goddamn day I run into women who take everything in this modern world created by men for granted.
There may be some so called good girls out there, but as long as feminist law is the law of the land, there is no woman worth committing to now or ever.

Anonymous said...

All of the time consuming confusion could be 90% wiped out by lack of "choice, freedom, liberation" and all the general you-go-girl nonsense. Drop the liberal democracy in the bin along with certain laws while instituting a culture with rules and you can have almost none of these problems. It happened before, it can happen again, if men want it to be so.

Rusty Shackleford said...

NAWALT but in my experience enough are to often make dating/relationships/marriage a brutal, marginal activity for men. A large percentage of men have successfully been conditioned to believe that being a nice, humble, useful, socially acceptable guy is a good thing and that women should think so, too. While these are of course good qualities both in and of themselves and for society, a majority of girls, unfortunately, could care less about that. They aren't attracted because, well, who knows why, but maybe being nice just isn't masculine in and of itself. The minority of girls that are attracted to the conditioning that society puts these men through marry young to the most successful boy scout types and won't be much use to the surplus legions of aging nice guys. Looking for the "good girl" thus becomes like trying to find a piece of straw in a stack of needles.

Further, the full burden and responsibility for failure is on men at every step of this process from the initial approach to marital failure ending in divorce. And what is all this for? The typical American girl is materialistic, entitled, perpetually aggrieved and angry and does not dress well or care much about her physical fitness. She cusses like a mechanic, drinks like a pirate and sleeps around like a gigolo and thinks that it's all still supposed to be very cute and charming. American men who've spent anytime at all around women from other countries know that we're paying Jaguar prices for Hyundai quality. I don't have any respect for men who use women just for sex but it's not a hard phenomena too understand. The increasing multitude of men in all strata of American life who say "f--- this noise" and sit around the house playing video games are so widespread and obvious a development that giving a name like MGTOW to it is almost redundant.

Still, I do not think that either benefits society or the individual men themselves in the long term. At the risk of giving an answer to an impossible problem, it seems to me that men having a thicker skin towards women and a loss of their unhealthy respect for women that has been conditioned into them would go at least some way towards setting things right. There are men who'd more readily fight other men than walk up and ask an unknown woman out when sober. All that a woman can really do in such a situation is reject the man for trivial reasons, and the more violent the rejection the more ridiculous she looks. Yet the social conditioning in men is so strong that they cannot imagine themselves worthy of some girl's time if they don't look like Brad Pitt and have a Phd and six figure income. I'm suggesting that men should have fearlessness with women(who are the weaker sex) without committing to the PUA life of serial fornication, VDs and psychopathy, and that they should not think too highly or them or their opinions but also without having a scorched earth contempt for all things female. The balance in relations between the sexes may be way in the favor of women but neither paralysis, stoicism or satyriasis are very good ways for men to respond, anyway.

Unknown said...

There are women who get turned on by the illusion of con men (or your bad boys) and there are women who get turned on because a man has merit.

Most of your big time manosphere writers want you to take on the man of illusion by using deception...and keep up the illusion. Well you can't keep up the illusion when the heat is turned up. They get exposed or they leave. The only women they'll attract is women who've lived a life of deception and illusion. A woman with merit can certainly find a way to poke holes in his bubble of a story.

Be the man who earns it...that way you don't need to create an illusion. You might just attract a woman who doesn't need to create an illusion about herself either. And if you think women will be attracted only to the men who create can still know you lived an honest life with dealing with deceitful women.

Mark said...

This writer seems to have a strong desire to avoid any responsibility being placed on women. Which sex is more likely to be the one that shows up at the voting booth and vote for a large socialist welfare state which transfers wealth from the productive members of the other sex? If women really valued productive males instead of bad boy loser types, they wouldn't do that. They would marry the productive males. They would avoid having children until they were married. They would vote for a smaller and not bigger government. Yes there are exceptions but generally they aren't doing these things in ever larger numbers. You really need to look at what women actually do and not take seriously attempts at obfuscation like this.

Mindstorm said...

Whatever. If a woman feels 'hots' for some men, but not for other men, it's not about deserving it or not. It might be about a personal fantasy of hers, it might be about physical attraction, it might be about the 'thrill of the chase', or even him reminding her some ex-lover.

'Dad' qualities are NOT taken into consideration. Nor being 'nice'.

Unknown said...

"There are women who get turned on by the illusion of con men (or your bad boys)"

I've pointed out before the most successful PUA I know was a liar and a con man.

Mindstorm said...

"him reminding her of some ex-lover"

deti said...

I stopped ascribing any credibility to this passage after:

“all [men] need to do is actually listen to what we have to say to get to the truth.”

Don’t ever listen to what a woman says. Watch what she does. And observe who she sleeps with.

deti said...

As I read this more, it just confirms red pill thinking and knowledge on women.

QueenA likes Steve Buscemi because he’s a talented, famous actor.

“Chemicals” and “goals” as being tingle inducing? This is silly.

“Chemicals”, i.e. oxytocin/dopamine, i.e short term mating = alpha fux.

“Goals”, i.e. searching for long term mate = beta bux.

A man who fails to get a woman into bed fails because he isn’t attractive enough. It is all about attraction, and hotness.

Unknown said...

Buscemi is a creepy, second-rate actor and about as "unalpha" as can be.

Dusty Meckelherd said...

In reality, dating/relationships/marriage is a worthwhile endeavor for men. It is s small number of males who have been deluded by the anti-Godly manosphere that being a prick will enable them to pick up woman with a couple of lines, “pump and dump” them, and repeat this immoral cycle. These “men” then have the audacity to blame womanhood for their own shortcomings. “Good girls”, which are in plentiful supply—fit, confident, agreeable—desire masculine men who are kind but assertive; these alphas males exude the “nice” guy persona and realize that women are decidedly attracted to them because they are overall kind but assertive. The “failure” for any relationship is the result of a myriad of factors, with men and women being equally culpable. Those men who find solace in fucking foreign women or in completely distancing themselves from entering any meaningful — only demonstrate their inner child. Of course, there are still those men and women who are unrealistic in their expectations when finding a mate, which has been and will always be an issue so long as they believe the other sex is inferior.

Rusty Shackleford said...

Hi, Dusty, I'm a former nice guy. Allow me to summarize the main points from my post above (if you read this, feel free to reply or take issue with all or any one of them individually) and then I'll reply to your post. First, society deliberately socializes men to be "nice" while sneering at any expectation of equivalent or complimentary behavior in females. Second, some women find nice guys attractive, they are a minority and these women marry quickly to the most successful eagle scout types, leaving a surplus of clueless, permanently single nice guys. Third, while some women are attracted to nice men, almost all women are attracted to masculine men. Finally, men grow up in an emasculated environment that actively frowns upon masculine behaviour. Men are taught to be nice without being masculine. The two have become uncoupled and modern masculinity is thus mostly expressed in exaggerated or ridiculous forms by jerks.

You say there are an ample supply of fit, smiling, comely maidens just waiting at the crossroads for their nice guy. I spent my 20s standing in the pews at the cathedral. I saw plenty of old women and young women with their families, but rarely any women my age by themselves. I saw lots of other bachelors. We would wave to each other across the aisles while the married men hugged their wives during the handshake/sign of peace part of the mass. Where were the single women?

To your remarks about fucking foreign women: That's not actually what I was talking about at all (let's ignore the fact altogether that American women are the queens of the one nighter.) What I mean is that that an American man is much more likely to be able to form a genuine emotional connection these days with a woman from another country than he is with an American woman. Women from certain parts of the world on average are just a lot kinder, more feminine and frankly better looking than American women. The behaviour and conversations with women that I had as a teenager generally left me confused and repulsed and were at cross grains with the upbringing I'd been given. I thought it was my problem. It was not until I began meeting women from more traditional parts of the world that I realized the problem was an American one. It wasn't until then that I could even understand why a man would work a lousy job to take on the burden of family life. There was none of the harshness, anger or competition. For the first time in my life I felt that I was with a real woman who unequivocally respected my right to be a man. The only meaningful friendships and relationships I've ever had with women have been with women who grew up outside the US.
The PUAs, MGTOWs and MRAs are a direct response to what American women have become.

As to "unrealistic expectations", yeah, sure some people have those, but what's going on here is a lot bigger than that.

Rusty Shackleford said...

"Buscemi is a creepy, second-rate actor and about as "unalpha" as can be."

Buscemi made millions of dollars and won a lot of awards at his job. I should be lucky enough to be that second rate. In real life he was a high school wrestler and fire fighter in New York City before becoming a famous actor. He worked 12 hour shifts sifting through rubble to find the dead after 9/11. The example works against the writer's intent.

Look at the careers and personal lives of Don Knots and Woody Allen for similar phenomena.

Unknown said...

I wouldn't care to look like Buscemi, Knotts or Allen, no matter how successful they are. For that matter, Buscemi has commented on how many women find him repulsive and creepy.

Rusty Shackleford said...

Of course he would say that. That's his game. Here's a photo of his wife. Most people would look kind of funny standing next to hollywood stars. Buscemi is a professional actor being paid to look funny. No one would think there was anything odd about Allen, Knots or Buscemi if they walked past them in a store and they weren't doing their schtick. But, sure, if looks were the only thing that mattered none of those guy would have had much success with women or their careers.

Mindstorm said... - right on time

See? I don't want 'sloppy double digits' to pass as 'a reward for the self-qualifying effort'. It's bitter only if you are an idealist, romanticist and pedestalizer.

Unknown said...

Mindstorm ,

I'd had more than one one-night stand and they meant absolutely nothing. These self-proclaimed "alphas" with their notch-counts have a lot to learns.

Mindstorm said...

"...they meant absolutely nothing"
Compared to what? Being settled for in her thirties or beyond? It's worse than nothing.