Fuck, Marry, Kill (FMK) – The Game
This is a new parlor game and it’s not uncommon. As a parlor game, it serves to increase sociability amongst friends. The definition here sums it up nicely. I have never heard of straight guys playing this game but I’m sure it happens. The game illustrates quite nicely how the sexual market place (SMP) works and a person’s sexual market value (SMV). It’s a great insight into both how the feminine and masculine mentality works regarding the SMP and SMV. I am solely focusing on how women perceive and act regarding men in this context.
Here’s a video that shows a couple of chippies actually playing the game. The girls in the video is highly annoying so click on it knowing that tequila will be required afterward. Why is that young women are so annoying? Yeah, I’m old. Get off my lawn.
Here’s how it applies to how attraction works between men and women. The game is straightforward. Three names of the same sex are offered up. The person responding must assign a category of Fuck, Marry, or Kill. The Fuck category is fairly clear. It’s all about the sex. The Marry category gets a bit more opaque because a woman’s relationship goals are not fixed. A woman at 30 years old is looking at a man for more than just weekend of squishy passion. She’s thinking about father material. However, a woman at 45 and who has raised her kids may be looking back at the passionate weekend and consider the Fuck category more carefully. Hence, the “cougar” phenomenon. But a woman in her 50s might be considering the issues of financial and health security so is more concerned with the Marriage category.
As for the Kill category, these are the guys who have no chance at the other categories and so women would rather see them dead. Or, working invisibly to keep our culture running so that physical discomfort is avoided. Those would be your landscapers, sewer workers, miners, etc. These are also the guys with emotional of physical disabilities that render them totally unwanted by women. Short guys have this problem in spades. It works both ways. There are women in this category, as well. Seriously overweight women deal with this. But those women can lose weight. Short guys can’t grow.
In the graphic below (with fun captions!), I’ve summarized the FMK game and how it relates to the SMP. Note that are only 10% of men in the Fuck category. These are the green light guys. With looks, confidence, and charisma, they can plough (hehe) ahead with sexual conquests. The biggest category is in yellow, the Marry category at 70%. These are most guys. They tend to be safe, not particularly charismatic or affluent. They have child support to deal with, an insecure job to sweat over, and all the other stresses to deal with regarding ordinary life.
Given that attraction and dating is so challenging for so many after a certain age. There are things that both sexes can do to make it all a bit easier (this is aimed at the middle age crowd, you youngsters can go drink a Red Bull or something):
For men: Confidence, competence, charisma, and leadership. I know it sounds facile to just put this out there but these skills can be learned. To be put in the (Fuck) green category requires some seriously self-improvement. Physical and sartorial self-improvement is relatively straightforward. It’s the confidence and charisma that requires the most work. The purpose of such improvement is to move as close to the green category as possible. Bonus, this will also with life in general, including career. For the guys struggling with social skills, there’s a website for that.
For women: It’s much more easy. If a woman wants a man in the Fuck category, she has to be physically attractive… that’s it. That means appearing feminine and not being bossy and domineering. Flirty and pleasant women who are willing to dress the part can aspire to the green category. But there is one huge problem, the green category guys have options. They date younger women. Why? Because they can! No amount of shame or social expectation will change that. These are guys who do what they want with whom they want. The solution to that is to look more seriously at the guys in the yellow category. Here’s an excellent exercise for that. That requires effort and stepping out of one’s comfort zone.
I picked the colors for the graphic based on a traffic light. Green for go, yellow for caution, red for stop. I acknowledge that this is a very simply metaphor. I also acknowledge that when it comes to attraction and dating, humans can be very simplistic.
[If you liked this blog post, click the Donate button on any of my blog pages or support me through Patreon. Thanks!]
The Private Man 
How does a man move from the Red to the Green? Is it possible without a complete overhaul of personality and looks?
At what point do “alphas” go from Green to Yellow?
I’d imagine a man has to win the megamillions lottery and have good work done by a plastic surgeon. Of course, that man would also have to have psychopathic tendencies that keep him from bonding with others and keeps him from committing.
I think it should be noted that “fuck” and “marry” should be reversed for men and women. Women will fuck and Alpha anytime/anywhere, but consider lowering their standards for marriage. Men are the reverse. Men will fuck women they would NEVER consider marrying. A marriageable woman should be in the green “Alpha” zone when looking at charts like this from a man’s perspective.
This is a large part of why women are so miserable in the modern feminist world: they want to fuck the way that men fuck. Men are looking for a “good woman” to marry. The slut with the n=50 notch count is disqualified as a “good woman”. No amount of wishful thinking is going to change the fact that it’s that woman who’s disqualified herself, as she’ll never be happy having to marry down to an “acceptable man”. Men know this. We don’t bond by fucking, we bond by bonding.
A normal man would fuck most women, but would only marry a select few (worthy of love). A normal woman would marry most men, but would only (indiscriminately, wantonly) fuck a select few. Those few Alphas are the only men they’ll ever love. Love has nothing to do with marriage for a woman. To women, marriage is strictly Utilitarian. Hot unbridled fucking is love. To a man, fucking is just fucking. Marriage is love.
At least under the old rules…
This is a good suggestion for a follow up blog post. Thanks!
Love has nothing to do with marriage for a woman? Perhaps in the old days. Not now. Marriages of utility are the last thing women want.
Marriage-for-divorce, in anticipation of alimony or child support or some other type of State-mandated free money for the woman, is utilitarian.
bull. ask her that when she is 38
Women are not marrying men in anticipation of cash and prizes. (Unless they’re marrying some first world guy to get out of a third world situation.) And I don’t know about state mandated money from the government. Around here, it works out to about 3 dollars an hour and is damn near impossible to get.
Most women wont put up with a utilitarian marriage. They want marriages based on love , companionship and compatibility. Personally, I think that a little utillitarianism would help in tempering some of the more unrealistic romantic types.
Women are marrying men in anticipation of cash and prizes. The man’s money is now her cash, and the man’s labor is her prize. Men are deciding more and more frequently to not-marry because there’s no longer any legitimate reason to do so. Sex is given freely outside of marriage, and if either party (which is really key here), if EITHER party decides to end the marriage, the woman is nearly guaranteed money from the man, by the State. The State mandates that he pay her. So why would most modern men agree to such a thing?
What women want is an Alpha to propose. What they settle for is a Beta. Women don’t LOVE Beta’s the same way they LOVE Alpha’s. Women love Beta’s the way they love their cat, or their new purse. It might feel like “love, companionship and compatibility” in the beginning, right up until they get bored. Alpha’s aren’t boring. I would argue that women will love any man that can keep them stimulated (and consequently aroused) regardless of compatibility.
If you want to know which man in a woman’s life she truly deeply loved, pay attention to whom she’s still pining for, years or decades later. I guarantee it won’t be the man who made her feel safe and provided for.
“Men are deciding more and more frequently to not-marry because there’s no longer any legitimate reason to do so.”
If a single woman wants to be honest, there’s no reason for her to either, unless she wants kids.
“…unless she wants kids”.
Aaaaaand there it is.
Lol, yeah. Of course, it’s true for men too since not many paternally minded guys want to be single fathers…but that wasn’t the topic of discussion. Having a large family support system for a child to grow up in generally means stability, discipline, care, better grades, love, etc.
While I don’t want kids, I’m in favor of families who strive to work together. Gods know mine didn’t.
We don’t live in 1955. Alimoney is as dead as the dinosaurs, and most couples who seek joint custody don’t pay the other spouse child support.
Alimoney is as dead as the dinosaurs
Um, what country are you living in? Certainly not either of the two in North America. Alimoney [sic] is very much alive and well here.
Changing the name to “Spousal Support” did not kill alimony. Regardless, Child Support is entirely different from alimony and is being paid primarily by men to women (who are often enough not spending that money on the children). Child Support is determined by Income, not by Joint Custody Agreements. Joint Custody dictates time-spent and “Primary Parent”. Child Support is determined by how much money each parent earns.
Not to mention the fact that of the money, property, and assets that man brought into the marriage, the woman is entitled (by the State) to take half. “Community Property” generally, today in 2015, means whatever the man brought into the marriage. Women also own property and money and assets, but any argument suggesting that women entering marriage are matching the contributions of men entering marriage is disingenuous on the surface. Especially when you’re talking about Betas; men save and build and anticipate provisioning, where women spend. And spend. And spend.
Saving is boring. Women hate boring.
The only people getting rich off of divorce are the lawyers. Seriously.
As for spousal support, must be regional. In my entire 45 years on this planet I have yet to meet one single women who gets it.
Anyhow, if marriage was all about utility, marriage 2.0 wouldn’t have died off when women perceived that they had other options. (IE, marriages based on love companionship and compatibility. And yes, that would include desire.)
woops ,marriage 1.0, lol
Men get married for love. Women get married for utility (unless an Alpha has married her). What killed Marriage 1.0 was when women realized they didn’t need to STAY married to keep access to the free resources.
Although I think it could be argued that men get married for sex. Maybe they’re coequal contributors; a man needs a woman with whom he can have both sex and love. With either missing the endeavor is a No-Go.
Again the only people getting rich off of divorce are the lawyers. Women don’t need to marry for security and resources. They’ve got their own. They wont endure the dreary boring stifling existance of being married to someone they don’t love for resources. In other words. WE aren’t marrying for utility.
If we’re marrying at all. As I stated above, if a woman is happy without children or a husband…what is the incentive to get married? There isn’t one.
Now, I’ll readily admit to disliking modern marriage because of how it can potentially screw up a man’s life. It creates inequality where none need exist, which is a poor foundation for any loving relationship. But I’ve been FwB with the same guy for almost 9 years at this point, and even if marriage wasn’t the way it was, I can’t think of a single reason I’d accept a proposal. (Thankfully, one is not forthcoming since my love and I are on the same page.)
@ Greg
I think that the institute of marriage is just sorting itself out. In the end, men are going to have to bring more to the table than a wallet, and women are going to have to bring more than sex and the ability to bear and raise children
I disagree. As an “institution”, marriage exists to pair up a man’s resources with …. a guarantee that the children are his. That’s just the “institution” though (Now dead, may it Rest In Peace). Plenty of people can have long-term, lasting, loving relationships without involving the Government in their lives (which is what modern Marriage is after all).
Any conversation about the future of Marriage as an institution would require women to acknowledge what it is they’re providing to men in marriage. Further, women would be required to acknowledge, among themselves, that they will never have that fiery, passionate, stomach-cramping, knee-weakening love they’re looking for without marrying an Alpha, and they’re not-likely to marry an Alpha.
Men want sex. Women bring sex to a relationship. The argument that “women need to bring more than sex” is not the argument men are making; to the contrary, most men are dissatisfied with how LITTLE sex they’re getting out of their “Institutional” relationships. Women bring one thing of value TO MEN into relationships, and if they aren’t putting out then they aren’t holding up their end of the bargain. Again, this is why so many men are opting out of “Institutional” marriage. Why commit time, money, and resources in advance when it’s very nearly guaranteed that (if you’re a lesser Beta) you’re going to end up with no-sex and still have to commit those same resources?
The result is not going to be pleasant. Either women accept that they aren’t going to have their perfect-dream marriage to their perfect-dream Alpha, or Marriage will continue to decline as men walk away from something so horrifically unjust. These men aren’t getting laid. Without the drive to get laid, where’s their impetus to try so hard at supporting our entire civilization? Why work harder than is necessary? Why not just do the bare minimum to survive and enjoy your life while you have it? Why make so much effort when it doesn’t result in sex?
Marriage is boring. Women hate boring. Betas are boring. But there’s a lot more going on, overall, than just daily stimulation in private lives. That yellow section in the chart up above? Those are the guys doing all of the actual work. It’s not glorious, it doesn’t pay that great, they don’t brag about how awesome their jobs are, but they do show up to work everyday and make sure that our world keeps functioning. All they want in return is some sex. Really, that’s it. Remove the sex and those guys aren’t going to keep going in.
So Betas need to keep doing boring, critically vital jobs, and women need to marry boring Betas and give them sex. The equation is simple. Feminism broke the women’s side of the deal telling girls that they can have it all: exciting jobs (which the men didn’t have), exciting men (which they can have, but only for one night), and everything that men have always had and women haven’t, provided that “Men” translates to “Alpha” and the boring Betas keep providing everything without asking for anything icky in return like exclusive-sex with a boring Beta.
Nailed it….well spoken brother
Bullseye.
The Carousel runs on Beta sweat just like the rest of civilization. When a third of them say “no rings for sluts” it’s over.
Fancy Feast for 10, Lean Cuisine for 1.
I don’t know. I’ve never bought into this whole beta/nice guy is boring” stuff. The white elephant in the sphere that nobody (especially women) are allowed to address is that a lot of the guys who blame their problems on being beta are actually socially retarded. More than a few times I’ve wondered if someone is on the spectrum.
By the chart above, 90% of men are “socially retarded” then.
And a very scientific chart at that, lol. It’s also why I don’t buy into the idea that only alphas are attractive or have social skills. 90 percent of the male population is not autistic.
I think that Vox has the best description of beta.
Just out of curiosity jv (I’m guessing that you’re a woman because you’re apparently denying that the Alpha/Beta/Omega dichotomy exists), would you have sex with most of the men you’ve ever met, or just a few?
Men would consider fucking most women. Of those, fewer are marriageable.
Women would consider marrying most men. Of those, fewer are “special”.
Most men have no idea that women are sexually uninhibited and carnally voracious … for those few special men. Total strangers, socially unrespectable, financially disgraceful… who the fuck cares he’s so HOT!
Those few men are as attractive to women as women are to all men.
Do women consider marring most men? I have to say, that since my divorce, I’m not sure if I want to again.
If most men are not aware that women can be sexually and carnally voracious, then I just don’t know what to say. There is no excuse for such self absorbed naiveity. Women learn early on that any man can be seduced, not just alphas. (Hence any man can have his inner bad boy activated.)
@jv The question was, would you have sex with most of the men you’ve ever met, or just a few.
Loaded question to ask a woman. Unlike men, there’s a societal standard in the way. I dare say that there are far more men that I’d want to sleep with than I would want to marry.
jv
You are not answering greginaurora’s question. It is a simple yes or no answer. Answer it, please.
I did answer it. And the answer was rather revealing. Sorry if it wasn’t literal and black and white enough for you.
Look, sometimes, beta isn’t the problem, and if that’s the case, I’ll try to be patient and explain a little better.
Black and white answer, no, I’m not going to sleep with most men that I meet. I live in a world of std’s, double standards and my children. But that doesn’t answer the question fully. I answered that there are more men that I’d want to sleep with than marry to also respond to greg stating that most women will lower their standards to marry. I’m not sure that they do. I’d be a lot pickier about accepting a husband into my life than I would a lover.
There is actually a minor difference in how younger or less mature women play it.
“Snog” is literally just kissing and fondling. “Marry” is having sex with that guy for the rest of your life. “Avoid/Kill” is just that.
So young women would put the “Sex” men into the “Marry” category and the “OK” men into the “Snog” category. Whereas for an older woman “Snog” means “Sex”, so the order is as you described.
And the real fun of the game isn’t in getting other women to say which attractive guy they like least or most. The real fun of the game is to play “Kiss, Sex, Marry” and come up with things like “(Old) Stalin, a three week dead pig and a piano-wire-strangler.”
@ssw, that order sounds like the one I suggested for men above, although I wouldn’t want to award “kiss” to the losers in that game.
That’s the fun of it. Gross-out games are the best way of making the sort of friends you can watch rubbish movies like “DeadTime” with.
‘The green category guys have options. They date younger women. Why? Because they can! No amount of shame or social expectation will change that’.
Yep. And you can be a green category guy for yeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrsssssssss.
Women have got the old tickety tock tickety tick hahahaha.
I know a few girls who have hit 30 and shit themselves, suddenly start being ultra nice to men.
But tee hee – all the good ones aren’t looking at fat at 30.
They must not be that nice, because even browsing Match.com, I see more than enough mid-late 30-somethings who are solid looking but can’t seem to get off the site.
Here’s one who has both a Match and POF profile with some seriously sweet soundbytes:
“I am looking for a guy who can help me carry mulch (those bags weigh 50lbs) help me do yard work, and lift heavy things. Someone who likes to go out on dates, and or be happy to just sit at home with the dogs!”
“So if you are the type of guy who likes a strong, independant, hopeless- romantic, stop your search. I’m right here, just be prepared to work for it.”
It’s nice to know that in return for an over-the-hill woman who is divorced, drinks “often” (now just “socially” upon an edit on her part) and indeed does “believe in love at first sight, and happily ever after.”, I get relegated to being “Manuel Labor” who has to panhandle for her emotional connection.
Nice. Where do I sign up?
I like the bit where she says ‘so if you like a strong independent woman’… strong and independent aren’t two words that sell women to men.
If I was selling a car, I’d avoid words like ‘lemon, slow, leaking, blue smoke, squeaking, rattling’.
And yeah, if I’m prepared to work for it, I can have her…. or I can just date my insanely gorgeous, light-hearted 23 year old girlfriend who thinks a rleationship works both ways.
Western women have spent a generation ruining themselves for the dating market, they’re now paying for it.
I’m actually tempted to create a profile just to be able to respond to such ads with red-pill suppositories. The fun part would be in seeing how quickly they ban me and/or revoke my membership.
@jv, that makes you an uncommon woman.
Pingback: Things I Hate | The Private Man
Pingback: Ladies, Compliment Him | The Private Man
Pingback: Guys, Prioritize Your Efforts On Yourself | The Private Man