Apollo Masters

Reaffirmation through denial babyyyyyyy

Mutual trade, for mutual benefit.

I just want to say for the record: That is not at all what I meant. I should have focused more on how I worded my post. I know, obviously, that men aren't to be used by women to give women a cushy lifestyle.

Thank you for responding again, but your response and Peikoff's audio doesn't clear up what is confusing me. Was Rearden simply not good enough for her? What if she found a man more intelligent than Galt, would she just swing over to the new man? And in this quote, when it is said that a woman worships a man's masculinity, what does this mean? That she worships his competence, or his ability to lead.

I understand that it would be ideal for a woman to find a man who she could look up to, but I now have a very specific question: Do you think that my solution to hypergamy, of not comparing the man to her, and to instead compare the man to what is "good enough" is asking the impossible of women. Is my solution possible, or is it like asking men to fuck unattractive women?

Thank you for your response. This part confuses the absolute hell out of me. Does this mean that a woman is only with me until or unless she finds someone better? Is a man's only hope for a long-term relationship that the woman doesn't find a better man? Is a woman supposed to just "monkey-branch" from one man to the next until she finds the best man possible? If this is properly feminine, then I would say that a properly feminine woman is irrational. Dagny could have lived an extraordinary life with Rearden, he possesses every trait that she desires in a man, and she has been through so much with him, I don't see what is rational about monkey-branching over to Galt. Is no man safe unless he is the absolute best? Do you agree with Rand's conceptualization of femininity?

I wrote a script about hypergamy and I would like to know your guys' thought about it. More specifically, I think that hypergamy is bad, and I want to know if you agree that hypergamy is bad, and if my solution is practical. To begin: Hypergamy is when women only date men who are superior to them. For example: A hypergamous woman who makes $250,000 a year, would only date a man who makes more than $250,000. If he makes $150,000, that's not good enough. Hypergamy is when a woman only dates men who make more money than her, or who are more educated than her, or whose social status is higher than hers. Now being hypergamous is often confused with having high standards, but those are two completely different things. Having high standards, means that you only date men who are high value. Being hypergamous, means that you only date men who are a higher value, than you. Hypergamy denotes relative standards, not high standards. Or to express this differently: A woman with high standards will ask herself, is this man great? A woman with hypergamous standards will ask herself, is this man greater than me? Now let's get into my problem with hypergamy and afterwards my proposed solution. Hypergamy causes women to pass up perfectly good men, who could have given them an extraordinary life, just because the men are not superior to them. For example: If a woman makes $250,000 a year, but only needs $100,000 a year to live the type of life that she wants to live, then if she were to reject a man, simply because he only makes $100,000 a year, then she would be passing up a perfectly good man, that could have given her the type of life that she wants to live. Hypergamy is bad, because it is an irrational method of evaluating men, that leads to women passing up perfectly good men, that could have given them the type of life that they want to live. And the solution to hypergamy, is very simple: The solution is to stop comparing the man to you, and to instead compare the man to who he needs to be, in order for you to live the type of life, that you want to live. So instead of asking, is the man smarter than you, you should ask, is the man smart enough. And what is smart enough, is not based on your intelligence, but based on what level of intelligence the man needs to have, in order for you to live the type of life that you want to live. In which if you want to live a simple life, with simple pleasures, and simple conversations, then the man doesn't need to be smarter than you, he simply needs to not be an idiot. And when it comes to money, instead of asking, does the man make more money than you, you should ask, does the man make enough money. And what is enough money, once again, is not based on your income, but based on what level of income the man needs to have, in order for you to live the type of life that you want to live. In which if you are making $250,000 a year, and the type of life that you want to live, only costs $100,000 a year, then the man doesn't need to make more money than you, he simply needs to make more than $100,000 a year. Women should ask themselves, what do they want in life, and can the man offer it.....at no point should the man's value be compared to their own. Instead of asking, is the man better than you, you should ask, is the man good enough, for you to live the type of life, that you want to live. That, is the solution to hypergamy. Please let me know if you guys agree that hypergamy is bad, and if you agree with my solution.

I hear people say that women will always look for a better man, and will leave a perfectly fine relationship in order to get with a better man (I think this is false), but this idea lines up with my understanding of why Dagny left Rearden to be with Galt. Maybe I missed a chapter in Atlas, but I can't figure out why she left Rearden. I am asking this question as a question of female nature. Are women always on the lookout for a better man, and willing to leave to instant a better man is available?