Let me give credit where it's due. TRP user "OverkillEngine" left a comment in a recent thread that resonated with me on a profound level. He said, "Women are loyal to their needs."

He is exactly right. The great mistake we make as men is to imbue women with the same sense of loyalty we feel as guys. The kind of loyalty where you'd stick out your neck for your best friend and take a bullet for him even if you hadn't seen him in months or years. The kind of undying loyalty a dog will have to its owner. Our masculine idea of loyalty is that it's something that's timeless and cemented in stone after certain checkpoints have been crossed.

In other words, I grew up with my best male friend and had the best of times with him. We had each others' backs growing up in elementary and high school. If a girlfriend left us or if some other dude tried to fuck with his, we'd stick up for each other. We hung out at each others' dorms and apartments in college. We played tons of video games together. We went to LAN parties. I was the best man at his wedding. And basically, after all of this, we have a knowing that we will ALWAYS be there for each other, no matter what. All of that time together and all of those shared experiences contribute to a timeless sense of loyalty that could only ever be broken if one of us did something truly and irrevocably fucked up.

And I feel this is the norm between heterosexual men (and their pet dogs). A brotherhood. A sense that I wouldn't even have to say the word. My best friends will have my back in an instant. Loyalty, trust, and honor, not up for dispute and not prone to erosion.

HOWEVER, this is NOT how women understand loyalty, at least when it comes to their dealings with men. As many men on this sub can attest, you can be with a woman for months or years, give her everything, and at the first sign of weakness, she will bail on you and then wipe your name from her memory banks as if you never existed. She can feel NO GUILT whatsoever about not answering your calls and texts. For all general purposes you are dead to her.

What, then, can we deduce about women's sense of loyalty?

We can deduce that women are loyal to their needs. As long as you are meeting her needs, you are not only useful to her, but you are genuinely valuable to her.

What else can we deduce?

We can deduce that women's needs are part of a shifting hierarchy.

What do I mean by this?

Let us say that a hypothetical woman has three "need" slots, each of which has a different maximum "value" threshold for her depending on its position in the hierarchy. For instance:

Sex: X/10

Emotional Coddling: X/5

Novel Experiences: (dates, gifts, travel, parties, etc.): X/3

We can then say that the MOST important factor when it comes to meeting this woman's needs is fucking her well. If you fuck her well, you gain a maximum of 10 value points. If you ONLY fuck her and do not tend to her need for emotional coddling and novel experiences, you lose out on 8 more possible points.

While the woman's hierarchy is aligned in this way, you can do nothing but fuck her well and she will be loyal to you, even if there are competing males who can fully meet her emotional coddling and novel experience needs, because it's your 10 versus the competing male's 8. Let's say this hypothetical competing male is a horrible fuck and gets 1 point in sex. Now it's your 10 versus his 9.

HOWEVER. Now let us say that this same woman has shifted her hierarchy of needs according to how she feels and where she's at in her life. Perhaps she has been fucking alpha dudes (including you) for years now and senses her biological clock is ticking down, or she's in a stressful period of her life. Her hierarchy might now look like this:

Emotional Coddling: X/10

Novel Experiences: X/5

Sex: X/3

What this means is that no matter HOW WELL you fuck her, you can only ever gain a maximum of 3 value points with her. If you ignore her need for emotional coddling and novel experiences, it now becomes very easy for her to discard you if another competing male makes the slightest effort to cater to her emotional needs, talk to her, and take her out to a party or some such.

A woman's hierarchy of needs is NOT STATIC. Her hierarchy can shift at any moment, and if we want to KEEP her in our life, then we have to recognize that her hierarchy of needs has shifted and switch up our role in her life.

EVERY one of my breakups happened because I failed to recognize the girl's shifting hierarchy of needs and always assumed that as long as I gave her great sex, she wasn't going anywhere (which was the subject of a recent thread on this sub). That's not so, and the REASON it's not so is because a woman's hierarchy of needs shifts according to how she feels and where she's at in her life.

This does raise up the question: are we as men supposed to live in a state of reaction to the women we encounter? Are we expected to change costumes in the middle of the movie to sometimes wear the alpha fuck machine costume and other times don the beta conversationalist costume?

You don't have to, but if you don't then you lose the girl. You can certainly get by making sex your number 1 static priority at all times, but the women will cycle in and out according to whether or not it's also their number 1 priority.

To keep a woman, I contend you must recognize when her values shift and do your best to meet them, because otherwise it becomes exceedingly easy for competing males to meet them. Since a woman is loyal to her needs and not to you, she will discard you the instant she perceives you are making no effort to meet her shifting needs.

-Stinger