Women fit-test men all the time. If you've ever approached a woman, you've probably been fit-tested. The explanation is pretty simple: they need to make sure you're really alpha. Not just faking it. Even after getting into a relationship, they need to know you're still in charge.

What really confused me, though, is their pattern of deliberately trying to make boyfriends and husbands more beta.

I just figured it out, thanks to Blake55's comment on the recent marriage material thread:

"You're marriage material"

---translate---

You can be relied on to be there. You have limited options. You give no tingles. You might be a good provider one day.

This really clicked with me, and I want to articulate it:

Why do women actively ball-bust and immasculate their boyfriends and husbands?

Because it secures their male's long-term commitment by reducing his options.

Say your girlfriend really rips into you and destroys your self esteem for a whole week. That's an entire week in which:

  • It's harder to stay on top of your health.
  • It's harder to kick ass at your job.
  • You're less likely to hit on other women.
  • You're less likely to cheat.
  • You're more likely to stay.

Women know, on some subconscious level, that male attractiveness is about your mojo, or your overall attitude. If your girl destroys your self-esteem once a week, you'll never have enough mojo to even think about getting another woman. Then you're hers to drain of resources. Eventually, the relationship may end, but it will be on her terms -- the way she likes it.

The analogous male behavior would be deliberately getting your girlfriend fat in order to prevent other guys from hitting on her. "But leftajar, why the hell would I do that? Wouldn't that make ME less attracted to her too?" Yes, it would.

So why do women do it? Because, historically, a aging women without a beta was in deep shit. At best, she would have to live with her extended family and be a burden into old age. At worst, she would end up a beggar on the streets. Many female beggars in the 19th and early 20th centuries were simply widows. And these destitute women served as a visceral reminder to ALL women: you're lucky to have a provider, sweetheart.

So, in their subconscious core, women are fucking terrified of not having a mate to provide for them. This fear has been bred into them as a Darwinian fitness mechanism.

The grand irony of this whole thing is that, in acting to secure her mate's long-term commitment by lowering his value, she becomes no longer interested in him as a mate. This didn't used to be a problem, because she'd only have to look at the destitute women to see what happens if she's tempted to leave. Now, however, thanks to alimony and no-fault divorce, when she's thoroughly betafied her man, she just leaves him and takes his money.

Take-home lessons:

  • Build a lifestyle that keeps you attractive and in-charge. Never compromise it for any woman.
  • Hold frame in any relationship.
  • If she ever tries to betafy or ball-bust you, recognize it for what it is: She's insecure in the relationship. Handle it like any other fit-test.

Godspeed gents.

Edit: Johntookthepill provided this link in the comments: http://www.personalpowermeditation.com/forum/social-dynamics/the-betaization-process/

It's amazing further reading on the subject.