I’m guilty of reading rivelino’s blog without commenting much. I know as a blog writer we sort of get paid for our efforts in the satisfaction of getting comments, so I’ve been short-changing him. He’s a thoughtful and insightful guy, and his twitter feed is cool too.

Lately he’s been thinking about his desire for an all around worthy girl – someone who isn’t a tatted up slut without any future time orientation or sexual self control and who has some brains and drive. He received some advice from Tom Torrero that his desires are founded in wrong thinking, and show a lack of truly swallowing the red pill. Tom thinks Riv suffers from a Madonna/whore complex, and should give up these silly sexual preferences, as they are just childish and stubborn holdovers from naive blue pill ways.

I made these comments on some of his posts:

Men and women both have a wide variety of socio-sexual scores. Some women DO marry as virgins and DO die only having ever had sex with their husband.

In any group of women in any country, there will be a wide variance in the desire for novelty and openness to new sexual experiences.

It’s black and white thinking based on the need to protect the ego from loss to try to correct for an error in thinking that may not be an error at all. Sure, all women should be seen of as a risk for infidelity. We never know. But it’s lying to ourselves in order to inure ourselves from the pain of heartbreak to say that all women will sooner or later fuck some other guy.

Yes, even virgins that a man marries are a risk. But risk is not equal to certainty. If it was we would use a different word.


You seem to clearly know what you DO feel.

And isn’t that the question you need an answer to? Or is it what you SHOULD feel, or could train yourself to feel?

It’s natural, normal, healthy and good to want a holistic experience with a woman. Why shouldn’t it be. People do it all the time.

I’m sick of my 18 year old banana brain. She gives great head unprompted, all the time, but you can’t talk to her. And that makes me sick of her.

Of course you have standards. You’re supposed to.

Fucking for fun is fun. So is chocolate. It’s fine to fuck for fun and eat some chocolate. But you want a meal. That’s not a pathology.

That’s evolution too – your forefathers wanted a smart wife, and you wound up being a smart guy. Thank the feeling you have now for your own brains.


I think Tom has the wrong attitude about “game” and girls. It’s too cookie cutter.

Men and women have wide variance. We don’t all feel the same things or want the same things.

I, for instance, likely have genes that make me a bit more anxious and prone to novelty seeking, and these have been correlated with an increased libido. So I fuck a few times or more per day, every day, year after year and decade after decade, even now into my late forties. I’ve also been romantically involved with girls since the age of three. Every single year of my life since age three, I’ve had a love interest. So for me oxytocin is a physical and psychological need.

I would never assume that other guys share my needs. I’m biologically and genetically built slightly differently than other people.

There is no cookie cutter approach to a man’s needs.

By the way, if you read this blog by RSS, I should remind you that my writing process is to immediately publish my first drafts, and then to work them over the next few hours. So the posts on the blog and the RSS feed are very different. I would suggest you use RSS only to let you know I have a new post, and to click over to read (and comment) here.

Update: And from a related comment left on Krauser’s recent post where he denounces the natural inclination to form powerful bonds with our women as an error of judgment:

For some, perhaps most people, the oxytocin bonding and love rush are extremely pleasurable, in a long lasting way. Some sustain that feeling of improved mood for 6 months to two years, or even longer.

Oxytocin IS meaning. When people feel an emotional sense of meaning, it is very often directly connected to oxytocin.

It’s perfectly reasonable and pragmatic to go through seasons of love. Do you denounce the value of summer because there is always winter?

This idea that love is an error is itself the error.

Love can be as meaningful and joyful as can an excellent spring and summer. Far more so.

People who take impermanence as a sign of a reason to not enjoy are making a massive error in how to fully enjoy being fully alive and human. Of course love is a temporary madness. So what? Is that some sort of an unmanageable problem? No, it’s not. All the emotions of love can be handled properly, and it can be included properly into a rich, full life.


It is an arrogance that borders on religious zeal to make this assumption that the natural inclination to form strong bonds with our women is fundamentally an error in judgment.

It is not necessarily so. An introspective and skilled man will be able to use the winds of emotions and understand the currents and seasons, and navigate.

Some of you guys talk as if winds are nothing but uncontrollable storms, to be avoided at all costs. Have you no sense of navigation at all?

Humans are born to get MAXIMUM possible pleasure in life through the experiences relating to procreation; sex and love.

It is therefore a no brainer. If you want maximimum happiness, you have to know how to USE these emotions. To navigate.

Love is not an uncontrollable tempest at all. It is a tool.

An adult human male who can not use that tool is not living up to his full potential for happiness.


And let’s all stop pretending that we are unaware of the variety of options that we have with women. It’s time to stop pretending that it’s a choice between divorce rape and pump and dump.

Serial and parallel monogamy are not some rare moon meteorites, heard of but never seen. The options are not stark and polar at all. It’s natural and normal and common to have strong romantic attachments that don’t lead to ruin.

Update 2: And another related comment to Riv’s new post:

And yet it is a scientifically verifiable and verified fact that all humans have a socio-sexuality that lies upon a continuum.

That goes for men, as well as women.

Yes, circumstance and even life stages will affect our openness to non-monogamy. But it is as common as morning sunshine for a girl to be relatively locked down. For a while at least.

And in my experience even a girl with a hugely slutty past can become intensely bonded to a guy.

I think some guys are taking on a philosophy that pair bonding is an error. And that philosophy is an error.

I’ve had personal experiences of lasting loving relationships where the girl was relatively locked down, for long periods. With both virgins and sluts. I never thought it was a permanent situation, nor aimed for one, but the data is obvious that for some people lifetime monogamy DOES happen.

Good girls are just bad girls who didn’t get caught? Yes, and also they are just bad girls who didn’t fuck another guy yet. That DOES indisputably happen. For some periods of time it is even to be expected with girls. They are capable of and enjoy being relatively locked down.


And keep in mind that I’m also an advocate of mate guarding.

Let’s keep our nuance.