How do ERE men attract women?

[George the original one]

As long as you treat relationships as a transaction, the women you attract will not be there for love.

[C40]

As long as you treat relationships as a transaction, the women you attract will not be there for love.

Yes, absolutely. This is the first and most important thing. You seem to be looking at relationships, intimacy, and especially sex as some kind of commodity. If a woman feels like she is giving something to you that you otherwise use a prostitute for, she isn't going to be too excited about you. You have to look at sex as something enjoyable for both of you - and not as having some kind of value that is transferred to you.

I was wondering after reading your post, what country are you from? And is english not your first language? I wonder how much cultural differences may be at play here, and also if, in translating to english, your thoughts may have been simplified down and lost some of the nuances that are important with a subject like this..

I can't quite tell where it is that you're failing. I'll try to answer your question / give you some advice. Assuming that you are indeed able to initially approach and meet women, here are some ways to build on initial attraction:

1 - Do not treat sex like a commodity. Treat it like an enjoyable way to spend time with someone who's company you like outside of sex. Women, for the most part, don't like to feel like whores (even if they DO like to feel like one during sex).

2 - If you're looking for relationships that are basically only sex, understand that there are different challenges than normal relationships.
2a - A sex-only relationship is unlikely to last for long - most having a maximum duration of (UP TO) a year or two.
2b - Focus on learning about and getting better at sex. If that's the primary focus of your relationship, you'd better be good at it. Sex is not just about you putting your penis in someone and having an orgasm. Focus on the woman (anticipation, arousal, surprises, slow build ups and big crescendos, finding out what she likes, teaching her new things she likes, etc.. If you have every bit as much fun pleasing her as you do feeling pleasure yourself, well - that helps a lot)

3 - Attractive qualities for yourself. Here are some examples (not any kind of attempt at an exhaustive list). They are generally related to having your shit together:
3A - Fitness - Take good care of your body. You have limited control over how attractive your face is, but you have complete control over how attractive the rest of your body is. Use it.
3B - Confidence (words and actions). If you feel that you have good control over your life, it shows. When looking for a partner people want someone who has their affairs in order, and who has the ability and mindset to handle things that come up well. Ways that people identify this include: you being calm and composed - not someone who gets flustered, conversational tact, positive/optimistic mindset, identifying good things about other people (not just their appearance!). You have to let these things show through your actual words and actions - not by talking about them, boasting, or making a show of it. Don't worry - women can pick up on this stuff plenty well enough that you don't have to strut around like a peacock.
3C - Confidence (body language, posture) - Learn about this. Read books. It is important - you make big judgements about people just from the way they move and position their body. There are two sides - of this - one is your own body language, and the other is being able to interpret that of others. Most women give much more subtle signals than men do - many of them physical - so being able to pick up on these helps a lot to talk to / hit on the right women.
3D - Appearance of yourself - you don't need to wear expensive clothes. Women that notice and are impressed by that are not the kind of women you want. Wear clothes that conform well enough with current fashion - but NOT short-term fads that will soon be out of fashion. Wear clothes that fit you well - where a person can get a good idea what your body is like (how good of shape you are in), but that aren't awkwardly tight.
3E - Appearance of your home - Keep your home in good order. Think "web of goals" here - your home contents can be very simple and minimalist (inexpensive overall) and look very attractive. No clutter, no dirt, functional and organized. When a woman first goes to a guy's house, they're usually worried that it's going to be dirty/immature. When they come in and are surprised with a clean and well-organized home, they'll be more comfortable with you
3F - Conversational skill is very important. I don't know how to summarize this so I'll suggest a couple books that will help: How to Win Friends and Influence People (Dale Carnigie) and You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation (By Deborah Tannen)

As others have mentioned, it is important and challenging to find women who you will match well with - rather than trying to overcome attraction challenges related to your ERE lifestyle. I definitely haven't figured this out yet. Akratic posted some advice about this that would go along well with this thread (maybe in his journal? he wrote about attending Couchsurfing events to meet people who are both frugal and like to travel)

[JasonR]

o

[Spartan_Warrior]

x2 C40. Good post.

@JasonR: Whether dating is more difficult for ERErs may be a matter of opinion, but it's certainly an idea that's been discussed here plenty of times before, and at one point we even had a "Dating" sub-forum (which I believe is now "Personal Ads"?). I don't see any reason to assume this is a troll. If it is, it's a very bad attempt.

Like C40, given the references to legal happy endings and whatnot, I suspect the OP is from a non-western culture, and that may be influencing his outlook and behavior as well. I also agree that perhaps more context would be relevant. Regardless, the question was "How do ERE men attract women?" so that's what I answered.

(IMO it's pretty much the same way all men attract women, but never mind.)

[JohnnyH]

I doubt many of the guys here (driven, intelligent, healthy) have problems attracting women... I'd be really curious to hear from a single guy who is retired about the dating differences pre and post retirement... Not having "a job" sends women running.

"Overall, 75 percent of women said they would be unlikely to date an unemployed man."
"On the other hand, the prospect of dating an unemployed woman was not a problem for nearly two-thirds of men."
source: http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/2753-d ... women.html

Nah, that's just it--I didn't have to sell or convert. My GF already lived frugally. She had paid off her student loans before we met, drove a used car (late model compared to mine from last century, but still), and to this day has no debt save that car loan.

That's great, and probably the key; find someone who is already displaying ERE compatible tendencies... But even she took some conversion, no?

[Spartan_Warrior]

@JohnnyH: Eh, maybe a little. Looking back, the "conversion" was mostly in respect to getting her to believe ERE was financially possible. She was skeptical at first because she didn't understand/had no interest in the math. She still doesn't, but I do think she trusts that I understand it and has faith that it's possible. She knows I hate my job severely and could lose it or quit at any time and it doesn't bother her. I've even gotten her talking about living in an RV and stuff like that. (Okay, that did take a little convincing, but mostly just me looking at RVs and daydreaming about it out loud long enough to catch her interest.)

In terms of lifestyle, though? Honestly, if conversion was necessary, it happened transparently and painlessly. Our first date was bowling, but our second date was home-cooked dinner at my place and Netflix. I don't think I took her to a restaurant until we'd been dating for a few months. She's fine with such things being occasional treats. Even my more extreme tendencies don't seem to phase her. For instance, she jumped on board with my bucket-washing and air-drying of laundry--still washes some of her stuff this way (and mine, don't tell her mom). She even likes lentil soup (way more than me).

She did insist on a dog, but that has been a negligible expense that she's covered herself. I thought it was an anti-ERE move at first, but it's really no worse than any other hobby. The dog is smart, too. Maybe we'll make millions from a cute Youtube video some day!

"Overall, 75 percent of women said they would be unlikely to date an unemployed man."

That's one way of looking at it. The other way is that 1/4 of women wouldn't be less likely to date an unemployed man.

The odds could be worse...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX5jNnDMfxA

I'm not trying to discount what you're saying... women (or men, I suspect) who live and appreciate simpler lifestyles aren't exactly common, to be sure, but they are out there. Personally, my standards are high enough that the additional filter doesn't seem significantly limiting. Probably closer to 90-95% of women wouldn't interest me for a relationship, for one reason or another--be it age, fitness, bad habits, inability to converse. ERE-compatibility is just one of them.

That "one in a million" talk seems about right. Finding the right match might be a more universal problem than just ERE. In fact, IMHO, when I see guys get fixated on something like that (or fitness, or looks, or height, or job/car, etc) as "the one reason I can't attract girls", the real reason is more likely to be one of the underlying principles of attraction (like self-confidence, attitude, and presentation) that C40 and SilverElephant alluded to.

[bottlerocks]

IMO objectifying financial independence is a lot easier and more constructive than objectifying human relationships. The way people connect is so complex I find it better to not think about it at all and although the intelligent parts of r/redpill (I just cringed saying that) may be effective I don't think they're healthy. I've never found a person who adhered to that kind of point of view and thought to myself "that person seems happy". Throwing dynamite into a pond is an effective fishing technique but I wouldn't recommend it for ecosystem stability.

First figure out want you want -- it sounds like this is your biggest issue. There are millions of people within 4 degrees of separation to you and the expected value of people that have similar desires is probably >1. Finding them involves trial and error for sure. Like other responses so far suggest, I think a good way to maximize the trial and minimize the error is to use online dating. It's basically like a large prescreening process.

That said I also think people are a lot more malleable than they're given credit for. All serious partners I've had came from similar middle class consumerist upbringings that I've had and I like to think that all of them became more similar to me when it came to finance and consumption. Maybe prescreen more for an open mind than the exact attributes you're looking for.

[GandK]

Great replies.

It's good that you're putting a lot of thought into what you want. My main concern is that you seem to see commitment as a negative.

A few years ago, I read a letter from Janet Fitch, the woman who wrote (among other things) the book "White Oleander." It changed forever the way I write. I think it may be what you need to hear now, too:

Working on White Oleander, I kept hitting this wall, about chapter 8. It was all going great, all the wheels in motion, and then WHAM. I just couldn't decide what to do next. I'd try this, try that, but each time I'd get stuck. The character would put her toe in and pull it out again. No, not that. Should I just bag it? Write a different book?

Luckily I was seeing an amazing therapist at the time. I explained I was afraid that if I chose route 6, then I would be eliminating all the other possible routes. What if route 15 was better? Or 3 1/2 ? So I hedged. I couldn't commit. I was stuck. And she gave me the piece of advice which has saved my writing life over and over again, and I will give it to you, absolutely free of charge.

She said, "I know it feels like you have all these options and when you make a decision, you lose a world of possibilities. But the reality is, until you make a decision, you have nothing at all."

That's where I perceive your problem to be. You're thinking of commitment as something that restricts you, not something that indicates your values. Commitment to your financial future doesn't mean "oh, snap! I can't do cool things." It means you live your life deliberately so you can do cool things in the way that matches your values: independence, security, wealth, etc. This you know.

Similarly, commitment to a woman doesn't mean your freedom is decreased. Or rather, if that's how it strikes you, you have no business marrying, because no woman wants to be seen/treated as a hindrance. Marriage means you value the woman, and your relationship with her, and the effect that relationship has on your life, to such a great degree that you want the world to know it.

[jacob]

My understanding of ERE is to avoid debt, avoid commitment, avoid obligation, and instead create passive income, which creates choice, options, and freedom.

Not entirely ... if I may lay down the dogma as it pertains, ERE is about
* increasing accessibility and optionality
* building capital (in its many different forms), i.e., assets
* increasing resilience typically by diversifying over ALL dimensions (web of goals)
* eliminating liabilities

A given partner (or anything/one else) should be a net positive in these regards. You can see this "transaction" as a trade-off between various aspects. I do see every choice as some kind of transaction with the goal to make each side better off... the free trade mantra. As others have pointed out, you suggest that the transaction is a zero-sum proposition or even negative.---That for you to get what you want, you have to "pay" more than "fair"-value.---That the other party is only looking out for number one.

Sorry if I misunderstood the last part, but I think if there's any kind of moral basis behind ERE, it is to add value to the world in some sense. So, especially, with regards to people you interact with nakedly, you should consider adding value to them as much or more than you do yourself. Note I said as much. Well ... at least I think this should be on your mind.

Personally, attracting women seemed to be nigh impossible for me through a combination of total obliviousness on my part (which became regretfully obvious to me several years later) and the fact that my qualities (nerdy, mature, adult, born old) aren't that attractive to most teenagers until I was 21 or so and such qualities suddenly became attractive. People look for different things at different ages. (Consequentially, when I was ready to settle, I was actually trying to figure out what potential mates would be like 30+ years later. Yes, I'm that strategic ;-P )

I have NEVER directly discussed ERE in terms of money and savings rates or other crude financial metrics. This is not how I think of ERE. Instead I have emphasized behavior and values. As I try to mention whenever the $7000/year comes up, the difference between me and a consumer is not one of lifestyle. It is one of economic efficiency and not tying my solutionspace into the consumer economy to the same degree. IOW, if you didn't know, it would be hard to tell by looking at my lifestyle how little I spend. In summary, my spending or savings-rate is not my defining quality. Therefore, this is not something I would emphasize.

In terms of "dating", I believe in "fishing the ponds" according to your strengths. For example, if my strategy had been to pick up women in bars, I'd probably still be single and a virgin to boot. If I relied on befriending a lot of women, I don't think I would have fared well either (because making 'unscreened' friends takes months of IRL interactions for me). However, I write well and so I've mostly used online dating (1/6 of all marriages now originate based on that) as a giant screening process. In fact, I haven't really "dated" either. Based on an admittedly small sample size, my hit/miss ratio is really really high. I've been mailing back and forth for weeks ... and those who lasted that long worked out when we finally met.

[MSfreeinHou]

Women like us on this site would be thrilled to meet an ERE man. At least you don't have to explain to him why you don't want him to buy you stuff for all those commercialized holidays....or ever, really. We don't go through life getting rid of stuff because it owns us just to meet someone who wants to give us stuff that will own us.

[7Wannabe5]

I think there are a lot of good points being made in this thread. I think I might have an interesting perspective to add since I am experienced-because-older, female, frugal, intelligent, rational, kind, romantic, tend-to-err-on-the-side-of-being-too-nice-rather-than-too-b*tchy-in-relationship-to-men, self-aware-have-been-in-therapy-etc. AND I am currently and recently very happily back in a loving, sexual, committed relationship with a wealthy, moderately-thrifty moderately-early retired man who chooses to financially support me in exchange for companionship.

First off, my take is that although I believe that people are first and foremost individuals and after that more likely to behave in alignment with their MBTI (or similar ilk) personality profiles than as members of their gender, it is very, very difficult to completely evade or escape biological imperative and men and women do have different imperatives so a female rational actor will tend to behave differently than a male rational actor in that realm. For instance, I am 49 years old and I had my tubes clamped after the birth of my second child 23 years ago so my rational self is aware that there is no chance that I am going to be rendered knocked-up and vulnerable through sexual behavior but I still can't completely stop running the primitive chemical/emotional script associated with that risk. I can recognize when it is running and take some proactive behavior to circumvent it but I believe it is too deeply hard-wired to completely cut-out.

What I believe this script basically informs myself and most (not all!) members of my gender in terms of mate selection is that I should choose somebody who CAN and WILL offer me protection in the likelihood that I am rendered knocked-up and vulnerable. The CAN corresponds to choosing somebody I RESPECT (not in the sense of being synonymous with "admire" but more like a measure of skill, strength, intelligence in the sense meant in "I respected him as a fencing opponent." ) and the WILL corresponds to somebody that I TRUST. So, most women are looking for some best-case-scenario combination of both of these to the extent they are running primitive-script vs. maybe the alternative of looking for what she would look for in anybody of either gender she might like as a friend or housemate. The mistake most men who err on the side of being "nice guys" make in relationship to women is that they behave more like they are in sympathy with a woman's need to TRUST her mate and less like they are in empathy with a woman's need to RESPECT her mate. Here's the best (admittedly weak) I can do to help with the empathy. Imagine your younger sister is about to walk down a dark alley with a basket full of puppies, who do you want to accompany her? I mean, you might righteously respond that the rational reality is that your younger sister is a master of mixed martial arts and well-able to defend her own self and a basket full of external vulnerability/need but that does not change the reality of the irrational hard-wired script that will kick into play when/if she is engaged in mate selection rather than choosing to mostly go it on her own through the many flavors of dark alley life and love offer up.

Money, like love and sex, runs through everything in life, so there is no way to rationally avoid or discount its importance. On the one hand, it's easy to write off as shallow the woman who puts out because a player lied about owning a horse farm but what about the woman who chooses to drop a man who is otherwise attractive because he is a gambler who thinks he can win or because he has a tendency to lapse into severe depression which causes him to quit any job he might have at the time? What you might want to think about is what is the extent to which YOU do want to be respected or trusted or validated (bad/weak) or valued (good/strong) because you do have skills and abilities that allow you to acquire and hold on to financial assets? To what extent would YOU like to be respected/trusted/valued for these skills/assets as opposed to other traits/assets/behaviors you have or wish to exhibit or share in relationship? Because I am very frugal but a weak earner of money myself, I have had the experience on more than one occasion and in more than one relationship that I have carelessly made comments along the lines of "I don't care about your money." to a man and thereby rendered him very hurt and angry because he wanted/wished for more appreciation from me. I guess, no different than saying something like "I don't care about hockey or basketball." (mistake I have also made more than once - lol.)

I think the question you might want to ask about any woman you are considering for sexual/romantic relationship in terms of either her own economic (broadly defined) functioning in combination with the form of relationship you are seeking would be something like "Can or will she be able to afford to be generous with/in her feminine energy?" This is a question that can be considered on many different levels from the spiritual down to the very in-the-moment pragmatic. Some examples might be if she was sexually abused as a child and has not had therapy the answer will very sadly, very likely be "No." If she just gave birth to triplets and there is not enough money for food, the answer will also be "No." If she is absolutely driven in competition against her prettier, more successful cousin, the answer is "No." All of these would be examples of can't afford to be generous because can't relax because too anxious. OTOH, would be circumstances that would render her too listless, bored, unexcited to be sexual. For instance, she feels compelled to work at a job that is extremely monotonous or you tend towards initiating sex from a flaccid position on the sofa during commercial breaks or in a dating situation you send her 30 messages full of flowery speech about her pretty hair without one speck of dominant posturing and she starts to feel like she is going to vomit like she is being spoon-fed a glass full of Karo syrup when what she prefers is a triple Americano with mmm-just a shot of hazelnut pul-eee-uz.

Anyways, the pragmatic reason why my male partner chooses to offer me financial support is on one level simply because he wants me to be available for sex at 2 in the afternoon on a Tuesday and he wants me to be available to spend most of the winter traveling with him in warmer climate. Since I do not have the financial resources to feel completely free to be that generous with my time without anxiety that is what works for us. OTOH, a good deal of the reason why I agreed to get back together with him is that he also clearly communicated that I (me alone) am the woman, he very particularly wants to be with, not just any female who would make herself available for companionship (trust.) Second reason being that I do truly love and like him even though he is sort of impossible (EXTJ) to deal with sometimes (I feel confident that I can generally extend generosity in his direction.) Third reason being because he looks kind of like a big burly cross between Sean Connery and Omar Sharif and there were tears in his eyes (soft-touch here) when he picked me right up off the ground (respect and uh-yum) and carried me back to his lair like the primitive Persephone I am at times (sigh) : )

In conclusion, purely practical note, the thing that strikes me is that it may or may not be the case that what you want from a woman or a relationship with a woman during the phase where you are working hard most of the day and saving up a lot of money will be the same as what you might want if you are ERE and just breaking even or in the event (which I consider likely for most members of this forum) that you become quite well-off and retired. If you don't consider your own best-case-scenario in which you are exhibiting your highest possible functioning in all realms, including financial, and choose your mate from that perspective, she will sense it and likely feel resentful and/or anxious.

[Sclass]

7wannabe5,

Wow. I wish somebody would have pulled me aside and told me this when I was younger.

I got the basket of puppies part. That was an eye opener.

Oh well, for the next life.

[C40]

I was wishing I could upvote 7wannabe5s post

[BPA]

Do any ERE males here have trouble attracting women? I certainly do. I save up 85% of my income and live a frugal life and women seem to look down on me. My friends tell me to buy a more expensive looking car so that I can attract women and to also buy a modern apartment, but I just cannot do that because I've already committed to my 85% savings rate.

To address this deficiency in female intimacy, I've been visiting massage parlours and paying for the services because it is safe and efficient (these services here are legal and regulated).

My friends tell me that traditional dating and marriage are best for me, but I am very reluctant. I sometimes date women but I don't really progress the relationship any further because I am a commitment phobe.

I am a commitment phobe mainly because commitment decreases freedom. If you marry a female, you suddenly have an obligation, which is similar to a debt. My understanding of ERE is to avoid debt, avoid commitment, avoid obligation, and instead create passive income, which creates choice, options, and freedom.

I suppose I am just keen on hearing what you guys think. I am still reading through the ERE book and hope to find a chapter in there about efficient procurement of female intimacy.

So, you don't like commitment, but want the "efficient procurement of female intimacy?" Basically, a fuck and chuck? Or many fucks and chucks?

Very few men are successful in this endeavour. These sorts of "relationships" don't require a lot of money, but they do require a sort of charm which from this post, I suspect you lack. I am a woman and everything you've written above would turn me and every single woman I know off. I'd stick with massage parlours.

And btw, I don't think commitment is anti-ERE. If you've read the blog, you'll know that Jacob advocates getting married.

[IlliniDave]

Typically, the topic (or science of) relationships is not something I spend time dwelling on. Might be why I've been single for some time! In the last couple weeks though, the topic has come up in a couple of venues and has been inordinately on my mind.

To throw a 21st century American male's perspective alongside 7wb5's insight, I clearly see the protector/protected dynamic. There is a core wiring to select for genetic contribution and protector (not necessarily the same) in women that goes back to our pre-civilized primate past. And an analogous male wiring.

Like it or not, to cede partial or complete responsibility of protecting yourself to another also cedes to that other an amount of power over you, be that other a person, a government, a church, or whatever. In the traditional male-female dynamic that was the generic arrangement, the male was the provider/protector, and the head of the household. It was a servicable reflection of the more primitive underpinnings.

Now however we have a culture that is pushing for a much more egalitarian set of roles. My experience has been that that leads to the most difficult facet of "modern" relationships for me: the need to have this switch to toggle back and forth between Tarzan-Jane mode, everyone is equal mode, and even Jane-Tarzan mode sometimes. Actually the switch isn't all that hard, it's the prescience required to keep the switch in just the right setting for what the next moment will require.

I could probably settle into a pairing that was a close facsimile of the traditional roles so long as there was some consistency to it. It's not what I'd consider the best possible outcome for me, but it wouldn't make me disfunctional. What I seem to be really awful at is the game of entering the right mode at just the right time. So I tend to just be me, which is probably the worst choice of all. I guess the takeaway is, irrespective of gender, is that we select a partner because they exhibit certain traits when we want them to, we have to accept that they will be exhibited at times when we don't want them to. I think the deeper the trait in question approaches primitive wiring, the more true that is.

[Tyler9000]

I've been married for almost 15 years, so take my advice on dating with an appropriate grain of salt.

In my experience the more ERE I've become the more attention I seem to get (from both my wife and others). I don't advertise my spending or savings at all. But maturity, lack of money stress, self-worth built around something other than material possessions, and the ability to enforce healthy boundaries at work (while still delivering when it counts) are all attractive qualities. The vibes you give off are important, and the personal confidence financial independence enables can be magnetic.

I agree with others that the core problem to the OP is more about personal relationship expectations than an issue with ERE.

[elegant]

OP - I've struggled with this issue myself. I hate to say that eventually I just gave up on women. I don't understand them, let alone able to attract them. Trying to do so caused me a lot of stress. By avoiding females I've been able to reduce that and now it is no longer an issue.

[JamesR]

elegant,

When I was younger, I used to struggle with understanding women. One *huge* mistake I used to make as a teenager, from a feminist upbringing was thinking that "if women have equal rights as men, then they should be expected to behave like men, and be judged by the exact same standards as men, etc." You may have heard of the analogy of "Women are from Venus, Men are from Mars", or as I occasionally oversimplify in a sci-fi manner: we are basically two alien species that have a symbiotic relationship to reproduce. Basically, while women absolutely deserve equal rights, they are not men and should not be confused with men. They have their own circumstances, they have to deal with a double standard (it's okay for guys to be promiscuous but not girls), massive amounts of attention from guys if slightly attractive, and lots of other differences.

Hope that was helpful.. P.S. you could study some of the stuff from manosphere/fastseduction community which tries to understand the female/male dynamics. I studied stuff from that community back in 2002/2003, helpfully broke all my bad assumptions, and that helped make me a more understanding person.

[Dragline]

If you are going to read The Game, I'd also suggest The Score (from the female scientist perspective):

http://www.amazon.com/The-Score-Science ... B0031MA892

Full disclosure -- it was written by an old friend/classmate.

[iceet]

7Wannabe5 thank you again for the advice. I feel like that post itself is worth a few years in the dating game in terms of the knowledge it contains.