A few years ago, I was your typical office-worker: stressed out, uneven energy, overweight, and inconsistent complexion. Now I'm just your typical 28-year old urban hunter-gatherer on a quest to be healthy, and having a few adventures along the way. See my full bio.
Athol Kay is on a roll over at Married Man Sex Life. If you are interested in how to create a healthy and happy sex-filled marriage, then his blog is a must read.
Here are a few excerpts from Male Captains Are a Sexual Turn On describing what he calls the Captain and First Officer model of marriage, where the wife willingly creates and allows opportunities for her husband to be dominant.
(Note: the political examples of alpha dominance displays that I've linked to are between two competing men in extreme high stakes situations, not a man and a woman in a loving and lifelong marriage. The dominance Athol is referring to could be as simple as choosing a restaurant without a long drawn-out process or showing a little more assertiveness in the bedroom.)
First, the obligatory flashing neon sign warning label in bold highlighted extra large font underlined and italicized:
But here's why the Captain and First Officer model works for a lot of people:
"Female nurses fall in love with male doctors far more often they fall in love with male nurses aides. Female teachers fall in love with male principals far more than they fall in love with male janitors. Female managers fall in love with male directors far more often than they fall in love with a male working the retail counter."
What happens when this dynamic changes? (My highlighting.)
"It is very common that wives that end up dominating their husbands, find their attraction for him diminishing over time. I get zero email from husbands who are leading their relationship saying they have a sexless relationship. I get an avalanche of email from husbands who have dominant wives saying they have a sexless relationship. It's really that simple."
"More frequently than not, women are appalled at the realization their sexuality actually works this way. You would think that the $74 trillion dollar romance novel market featuring dominant male leads would have tipped them off."
Not exactly a PC conclusion, but there you have it. Before leaving angry comments, please see the preface to this post. It's a free country, go live your life as you see fit...and feel free to blog about it.
Comments
Thanks for pointing out this
Thanks for pointing out this blog! He writes a lot of great stuff--stuff I've been wanting men to figure out for a long time! :)
Dear John and other men
Dear John and other men working to reclaim their maculine natures, THANK YOU. No really. Thank you. By stepping up and being MEN, by reclaiming your natural leadership positions and providing that solid, dependable alpha energy, you are leaving women like me - alpha, desperate for male authority, sick of performing traditionally male roles - the room to explore our feminine sides. I have recently met a man who is unquestionably a leader after a lifetime of attracting beta men who were more than happy to be in a female-led relationship. This man, although he is only a friend, is unabashedly masculine and he takes on the more masculine roles in my life, freeing me up to be the soft one. The feminine one. The trusting follower, and it's a RELIEF and a RELEASE. I would follow this man to the ends of the earth, because he makes me feel protected and safe. And let me stress this, he is a friend, not a LOVER. If he were a partner, I would die for him, just for the way he makes me feel. Male authority and leadership is a powerful, powerful force in the female heart.Men, if you feel a natural urge to gently lead the females in your life, go with it. Please don't suppress your alpha urges. The women who are capable of 'hearing' that will respond. A thousand, million times over!
I'm with Natalie! Yes and
I'm with Natalie! Yes and yes.
Natalie and Rachael, thank
Natalie and Rachael, thank you and beautifully said. It's really important when women like you speak up on this issue to show that this isn't about men trying to keep women down.
Hi John,thanks for the link
Hi John,thanks for the link love, much appreciated!No matter how many times I explain it's not for everyone and there's no requirement to do this sort of thing, people always get offended.
I know, it's amazing. No
I know, it's amazing. No worries on the links, keep churning out the good content.
Found Athol's blog because of
Found Athol's blog because of one of your earlier posts & reviews of his book. Thank you. It has been a game changer for me personally and in my marriage.
Great to hear! If you want
Great to hear! If you want to (anonymously) share any stories to help others who might be in a similar situation, just put in the comments here or email me at john [at] hunter-gatherer.com
Will do. It's still a work in
Will do. It's still a work in progress (my reclaiming positive masculinity), but I'll see what thoughts I can muster up in an email for ya.
This makes perfect sense. I
This makes perfect sense. I am for sure more drawn to alpha male types. I don't think there's anything offensive about that. When a guys more passive than I am I end up feeling like his mom and nothing about that is sexy.
Hahaha, exactly. I love women
Hahaha, exactly. I love women who can see that the end goal of this, in many cases, is to make both people happier and the marriage stronger. (Oh yeah, and the sex hotter.)
JLD, I'm a new-ish reader,
JLD, I'm a new-ish reader, checking in here for the last few months, and now I'm a first-time commenter here. I was very intrigued by your New Year's message, dedicating this to the year of being unapologetically male and masculine. I applaud your decision to do so; it's needed and timely. However..knowing the paleosphere as I do. (did I just coin a phrase?) and also being quite familiar with the manosphere & various bloggers associated with Athol Kay, and some even more extreme, I knew that you would be courting public outcry from the paleoconstituency (I'm on a roll) by taking up the mantle of purveyor of Evolutionary Sociosexual Biopsychology Theory & Practice. (OK, that one's just clunky. but descriptive, and far more PC than "game" or "charismatic arts.") The outcry, predictably, will be from feminist-indoctrinated women, and the men who seem to think that parroting the female agenda will get them laid. Women, for their part, will describe their attraction triggers in one way, yet will act in another way. It's already being demonstrated in this comment thread. But science shows us that women often don't have a clue as to what turns them on, and often are disingenous about it, or possibly even legitimately in the dark about the nature of own attraction. The science, viz and to wit, reported in the "Newspaper of Record:"http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/magazine/25desire-t.html?pagewanted=all So, you've got your work cut out for you, amigo. You have essentially committed to bringing the Red Pill knowledge about sex to a group of people who have already swallowed (no pun intended) the Red Pill knowledge about food & basic needs lifestyle. One would think that this is an easy transition, but I assure you that giving up grains & legumes and learning to sleep when it's dark out is a cakewalk compared to restructuring one's thinking about gender roles. The latter is a heavily loaded emotional minefield, and people react to these topics viscerally.There's a reason that many bloggers in the manosphere blog anonymously. This topic attracts a crazy amount of vitriol and armies of trolls. Those manosphere bloggers like Athol that don't blog anonymously have developed two important evolutionary adaptations to the slings and arrows of teh haters: 1. a very thick skin and inability to take anything personally 2. a humorous, devil-may-care attitude (aloof mastery) about who buys in to the message and who hates on it. Good luck! I'll be back here now & then to observe the fray & occasionally toss a science-primed hand grenade into the mix.
Nice analysis. Thanks for the
Nice analysis. Thanks for the moral support. It's going to be tricky, and I'm sure I'll make a few (entertaining) mis-steps along the way. But we need some alpha males who are good people to start talking about what's going on using their real names. Science-primed hand grenades are encouraged. Don't be a stranger.
Apologies for that "Wal of
Apologies for that "Wal of Text" monstrosity; for whatever reason I frakked up the formatting on paragraph breaks. You understand. Cheers!
Honestly I´m more turned on
Honestly I´m more turned on by a man that dominates other people but treats me like an equal... ;-) Tend to like women as friends with the same qualities by the way.
Fair enough...whatever works!
Fair enough...whatever works!
I'm a chick and I used to
I'm a chick and I used to read Athol's blog. Some good stuff, some silly. Too many Commenters were rude and really just plain hate women. I mean, I get SOME women are bitches (just like SOME men -- there are douchebags for every gender). But for crying out loud -- it's like the Commenters all came from the Land of the Shrew! Where is this magical place where all women take sniveling pleasure in putting men down and immasculating them?. It's a shame. The problem with his site is that I get that HE'S not misogynist or anything like that. But the information that he's given is being used by guys who don't know their ass from their hands. They're not putting things together correctly. They think that THEIR WIFE (not some strange woman, not a co-worker or friend. Their WIFE. You know, the woman that they live with and supposedly love?) is giving them "shit tests" when she asks for simple things, like taking out the trash. They can't tell the difference between "Honey, give me $10,000 for a new kitchen that i don't even cook in" and "honey, it's Sat, don't forget to mow the lawn".Also, I think that it should be addressed whether or not a man DESERVES to have full Captian privileges. Meaning that giving a dude blanket authority is silly. What person (male or female) is that smart? That's what makes a relationship so worthwhile -- you are merging the strengths of TWO people, instead of 1. I'm better at certain things that my husband. If he ever insisted on taking charge of that, I would actually look at him as LESS of a man -- a real man would be comfortable in his strengths and shortcomings and have the confidence to say "hey, hon -- you take care of that". I'm also smarter than my husband. But I think that sexy masculinity is only marginally about intelligence -- I want a man that can throw me onto the bed, not perform calculus.
First, do whatever works for
First, do whatever works for you. That's my same attitude in diet and fitness. // Second, if you read Athol's other Captain/First Officer posts, you'll see that it's not about the man making all (or even most) of the decisions. The actual Captain and First Officer on a ship are the two most respected and competent people, and the vast majority of decisions are divvied up between them and made independently, trusting in the other's judgment. // Third, at the end of the day, most women are still sexually attracted to men that are dominant in some way. Just look at height. Most women are sexually attracted to men that are taller than they are. That will never change. Rather than denying that effect, why not harness it for the good of the sexlife?
True, but I must not have
True, but I must not have been clear -- I agree with Athol on some things. My gripe is that this theory needs to be spelled out TO THE LETTER because the readership seems to not understand -- taking it to mean that dude has to be a boss/bully (the guys) or that a guy has to be a boss/bully (the so-called "feminists"). I love a strong man. I agree with your comment "to harness it for the good of the sex life". I addressed that in my last sentence about wanting a guy that can throw me on the bed, not perform calculus. But so many people are confusing a domineering douche with a good, strong and masculine man. I really wish that you and Athol would address how NOT to be a meathead. You guys are great at addressing how men can be wuss and how women can be bitches. How's about how the ladies CAN be cool and how guys can be jerks and how to fix that? The guys start getting all high-and-mighty about criticizing women ((r)Evoluzione's comment is really patronizing. Come on, dude! "Science shows us that women often don't have a clue as to what turns them on...") Turn the mirror on yourselves fella's -- you guys ALSO don't have a clue about certain things AS WELL. I thought that sexual relations involve BOTH a male and female. Yet these guys also bitch about the woman's part. Argh... So, "whatever works" is cool. I'm thinking that your blog is for both guys and gals, correct? So take a moment to also consider the ladies POV -- the way we act ain't in a vacuum. We act because of the back-and-forth reaction.
Am I right in saying that
Am I right in saying that all the "women nurses marry male doctors" stated in the article are purely anecdotal? Are there any statistics to back up the claim? Also, if a woman makes space and creates opportunity for the husband to be dominate - then isn't the woman in charge really when all is said and done?
The point is that women are
The point is that women are attracted to high status men. If you need a paper to reach that conclusion, then you probably need a paper to concluded that women are attracted to taller men. // As for the woman creating space for the husband to lead, it's possible to trick the brain -- just like make-up tricks the brain. The point is that there is fundamental equality and the woman is still acting with free will of her own volition.
My sociologist background
My sociologist background always gives me the inclination to see statistics. My hypothesis would be that you are right, women show a preference for high status men, but that it would be a small statistical variance. As for my second comment: I didn't intend to imply self delusion. What I meant was...well I can only think to explain it by example. I was in a relationship were the woman was very competitive with me and would be upset if I could do somethings better than her and was happy when she could do things better than me. One tiny example, she worked in a bakery for awhile and one day I was there while she was cutting up bread samples, but the bread was fresh and hot and soft and she kept squishing it - so I cut it without squishing it, but instead of seeing how she got upset because that was her job and she should know better than me how to do it. That relationship did not last (sex was bad too). With my wife (twelve years and four kids married), we are good at widly different things and know it - so I learn from her and she learns from me. I would categorize the relationship as equal. And since neither one of us has any status ;) she would not fall in the "high status seeker" statistic. [I'm wondering how that category of women would be defined in the study - the definition of status would be difficult to define]
"I get zero email from
"I get zero email from husbands who are leading their relationship saying they have a sexless relationship. I get an avalanche of email from husbands who have dominant wives saying they have a sexless relationship. It's really that simple."seriously? no problem here with your content, but drawing "not so PC conclusions" about the population from the readership of a blogger? come on.
Fits with the evolutionary
Fits with the evolutionary biology of the sexes, personal experience, experience of marriages I know, and the romance novel industry moves far beyond anecdote. And studies that I didn't post here. Will post more.