Why Deti Owns

the bombshell that  M3 dropped on the sphere has finally started to settle. did i call it or did i call it? told you guys he was gonna be a star. over on The PrivateMan‘s site there was a lengthy  discussion where Deti dropped this gem. Spacetraveller and JustVisiting stepped into a minefield and had i been able to comment from work i’d have told them directly to sit this one out and just read. anyway, it’s worth your time to read the comment section on PM’s site. more than one person suggested posting it…..so here it is.


Spacetraveller offered this:“I try to imagine what it is like for a good woman to love a man and want commitment from him, only to have him reject her in favour of another woman. I believe it goes well beyond ‘boo hoo weepy sad’.”M3′s post was about involuntary celibacy and the incredible pain and frustration men feel with it.

Space was suggesting a parallel painful scenario in a woman falling deeply in love with a man and then failing to secure commitment from him, with him rejecting her for another woman.

I suppose this is probably the closest analogy to male incel status and repeated failures in that regard.

But let’s unpack this. There are a number of differences which cause the impact to fall much harder on men than on women. This will borrow heavily from Opus and Lost Sailor above.

1. Women learn early on what men like: good looks, youth and femininity. It is simply natural. Girls as young as 3 years old naturally flirt, giggle, play with their hair and respond positively to gentle teasing when around older men. This is constantly reinforced throughout her life. Her adolescence, teen years, college years and young adult years are one long validation/affirmation fest as she receives a stream of constant interest from men; as well as free drinks, meals, dates, vacations, and favors. She receives accolades and credit for her looks, youth, strength and independence.

But men start out at a disadvantage. Boys are constantly told to be quiet, sit down, shut up, and be gentlemen. They are bombarded every day with messages from parents, teachers, pastors, Scout leaders, counselors, and all others to “be nice” and be good little gentlemen. Roughhousing is dangerous. Talking out of turn is bad. Don’t run. Stay inside the lines. Don’t risk. Don’t touch. Put that down. Don’t go there. Don’t walk there. Don’t talk to her. Girls like good safe nice kind polite gentle, soft men. Girls want you to show your emotions and tell them all about yourself and how you feeeeeel. Girls want you to give them everything, pay for everything, and go all in right now.

Your sexual urges are not only bad, but perverted and immoral and sick and illegal. Don’t try to date anyone at work; you’ll get fired for sexual harassment. You get one chance to ask her out and if she says no you must never ever ever even look at her again. You’re a potential rapist. Let’s just be friends. I just don’t think of you THAT WAY. You’re such a nice guy; you’re gonna be a great husband for some lucky girl someday! I don’t really wanna get serious with a guy right now. Why can’t guys be like you? You’re so NICE.

2. A woman who loses a man from whom she sought commitment at least has the skills to attract another man. She has demonstrated she knows how to attract men. Most of the time, in order to attract male interest, any woman at a 4 or above need only exist. She need only look her best, go to a public place with one or two friends, and simply be there. Her very presence will generate male interest. In other words, ladies, all you gotta do is show up and look like you give two shits, and men will be there for the asking.

Opus cogently pointed out: She can cry for a few days. When she is done, she’ll dust herself off. With the help of her BFFs, she’ll dry her eyes, get made up, put on her little black dress, and head out to the bars for a night out. She’ll feel better because she can get whatever she wants. Want some attention? Hit the dance floor. If it’s validation she wants, men will offer her drinks. She can numb the pain from her breakup for free by hitting up chumps who will willingly buy her drinks and get her soused. She can go home with the most attractive man who presents himself, and get sex (validation. You go grrrrl — you still got it, honey! Fuck that loser ex-BF! Go for the hawwwwt, girlfrieeeeeennnnnd!) Or she can turn down the proposition and still get her validation dose (I coulda fucked him. Yeah, I still got it.) Or, if she doesn’t want any of that from men, she can just be with her GFs who will commiserate, cry, pat her head, coo, and say “Oh, there, there, dearie. It’s going to be all right.”

As for men, their disadvantages mean that generating interest isn’t nearly as easy. Most blue pill men get into relationships by simple dumb luck. They have no idea how or why they were able to attract the interest of some girl. They fell into it, and when it ends, they pick themselves up by trying to do the same things they did before, often to no avail. He has to do all the work and bear all the risk, for very, very little return. He is told exactly the wrong things to do: invest heavily immediately. Talk about his feelings. Lean in so he can actually talk to her and hear her responses. Pay for everything. Return her texts immediately. And he is simply invisible to most women, because he is an average man. His friends will offer an encouraging word, but not much else. He’ll go to the bars and nightclubs. Most of the time he will get no interest from women at all. He will try to meet girls but will fail almost all the time. Unless he is taught a completely different paradigm, he’s doomed to make the same mistakes over and over and over again.

3. Women don’t invest emotionally in men the way men invest emotionally in women. Once a man invests emotionally, he’s all in. He has his entire life wrapped up in her. It is probably a function of his sense of responsibility and his drive to achieve and succeed. Once he commits, he is responsible. So when the relationship fails it is intensely personal for him. He was given a responsibility and he either did not or could not carry it out. And what’s more, a man’s value is judged on his successes and failures. His failure with a woman or with a relationship is a profound one, because it means he failed on a very basic, personal, intimate level. It means he is a failure as a human being, a failure as a man. And if he has children, he has failed in his responsibility to care for and protect them. He cannot protect them if he does not live with them and can supervise their education, upbringing and training.

But a woman is not called on to invest or commit. She does do so, but it’s not her primary role. Her primary role is to give and grant sexual access. Sounds sexist, but her sexuality and sexual access is the primary thing of value she brings to the relationship. My theory is that she can get over a relationship or marriage failure in a few months at the outside simply because whatever she has invested or committed to the relationship, she can take it with her if and when she leaves. What is it that she invests and commits? Her body. Her sexuality. That is hers and hers alone, and can be withdrawn from an unworthy man and then conferred on whomever she deems worthy at that moment.

But a man invests his time, his money, his expertise and his resources. IMportantly, these are the main things of value he brings to the relationship or marriage. His time, once spent, is gone forever. His money? Same thing. He cannot recover time or money wasted and/or spent. His expertise and resources are given to the estranged woman, who benefited from them when she was with him; and now takes them when she leaves.

So these are the main differences, I think, and it’s why incel status impacts a man much, much harder than a failure to secure commitment from a worthy man impacts a woman.

i can’t say i disagree.

25 Comments on “Why Deti Owns”

  1. jacksparrah says:

    Powerful stuff man.. Couldn’t agree more. The saddest part of it all is that women don’t, and never will understand the gravity of this, and just how different it is for men.

  2. just visiting says:

    Danny, Deti crosses over from incel men and their pain to invested men in a relationship that breaks up. This clouds the point a bit.

    ST is trying to draw a parallel to a man who can’t get sex and a woman who cant get commitment.

    To say that all women know and can get a commitment is as obnoxious as saying that all men can get sex. This is a manosphere myth. Little girls may learn how to twirl their hair and flirt, but there’s a lot of other damaging teachings along the way where this will get her sex but not a commitment. Other deficiencies in personality contribute to it as well.

    As M3 pointed out, celibacy can twist a man. So does prolonged carouseling. Eating disorder, cutting, self loathing, medicating, just nasty things.

    Now, I can’t speak for ST, but there’s a reason why I came to this parallel as well. Even though I had spent some time in my marriage as incel, the experience is not the same. I couldn’t use the same life experience to understand M3 or other men, because I am not wired like a man. And most women will never be incel, so it’s going to take a parallel to better understand something that is out side of their experience. And as I’ve noted, even if they were incel, it’s not the same.

    The paralell lies in women who are constantly used for sex, but can’t make the leap in commitment. I suspect that such women have other things going on mentally. But the pain and twisting is the closest parallel to the pain related in incel stories. It’s not a perfect analagy. But at some point in life, most women have had a friend or a family member like this. And, usually that’s when we hear about the pain and the twisting.

    Which brings us to the next part. If men want understanding from women in an area that is beyond our scope of experience, they are going to have to allow for a few extra steps in processing. That doesn’t mean that we’re trying to make it about me, me, me, and me. Or that the men have to feel the pain over slutty women if we are thinking out loud. Or that we are making it all about the wimminz. It means that we have to add a few steps in the processing, to try and get to the final answer. And even then, it’s a guesstimate.

    • dannyfrom504 says:

      “And most women will never be incel, so it’s going to take a parallel to better understand something that is out side of their experience. And as I’ve noted, even if they were incel, it’s not the same.”

      JV- you’re forgetting one of the cardinal rules of the SMP:

      women control the sex card, men control the time/commitment card.

      as a man i could NEVER relate to the “unable to land commitment”. i’ll leave it at that.

      • just visiting says:

        Then I will stand by one of my comments at PM’s. That seeking to understand is patronizing.
        Now, do these pants make my ass look fat?

      • dannyfrom504 says:


        seeking to understand is one thing. but this is something you’ll just never understand. having a son or brother might help you understand it, but you’ll never truly get it. you can empathize, that’s fine. i’ll NEVER truly understand the pain of childbirth, of what it’s like to carry a child inside you. i can empathize……but just to an extent.

        certain thing’s are uniquely male and female.

        if you had a son, and he was having struggles with women- would YOU try and teach him or ask a male relative who you KNEW was great with women to help him?

    • Emma the Emo says:

      Married to someone who is not having sex with you is a difficult situation, I’m not diminishing the gravity of it, but it’s not incel.

      • just visiting says:

        Yes, I’ve mentioned that it’s not comparable. Several times now.

      • Emma the Emo says:

        It’s just a nitpick, but here is what I was talking about:
        ” Even though I had spent some time in my marriage as incel..”
        It’s not just not comparable, it’s not incel. Incel is a purely sexual problem, the way I understand it. Having a husband that is uninterested in sex technically still leaves you with the option of seeking sex outside of marriage, which is a moral problem and sexual. The way I see it, avoiding sex outside marriage despite husband’s unwillingness to be intimate is still voluntary celibacy, as in “I’d rather choose celibacy than cheating”. It’s still a major problem and I hope it never happens to me, but I thought it was an important distinction. Disagree?

    • Stingray says:


      Sometimes seeking to understand something a man is going through is patronizing, even when we don’t mean it to be. When the pain is that deep, most of the time the men just want support from the women around them, not understanding. The best we can do is accept them at their word that we cannot understand and simply make it clear that we are there should we need anything. Seeking to understand when the pain is that raw is making it about us (even when we trying to be helpful) because we are concerned about our understanding and not their pain (I know that you were trying to understand so you could help the pain, but I just don’t think that’s what was needed there). Seeking understanding should come down the road when the pain is not so raw or from another man who could explain it but who is not hurting from it.

      It’s really, really hard sometimes to know what to do in these situations, especially on the internet. This is a place we come to learn and understand. M3’s blog post and all the subsequent links was one of the more rare situations where is was better to just sit back and listen and observe.

  3. pvw says:

    Hi, I have lurked here on occasion; I have seen you post on ST’s. I saw M3’s post as well. This was one instance where I thought I did not need to enter into the men’s locker room. So I lurked a bit and moved on.

    I think ST’s analogy was not as tight as it could have been. ST, I hope you see this, and JV as well.

    The better analogy is the female equivalent of a male incel, but not one who wants sex, but one who has adopted the traditionalist old school way of raising daughters, to be pleasant, kind, non-slutty, celibate, because they were told that is what men want. They want dates, boyfriends, fiances, husbands, but they are not getting any of that. The celibacy, if they think of it, is minor.

    They are told men want virginal women, so they remain virginal. Yet the men they want to date, mind you, not to have sex with, won’t date them, but they will date the slutty women and then marry them.

    So they men they want to want them and commit to them will give it to other women who are not as decent and nice girls, thus they feel pain….They feel they are not worthy, they were tricked, bamboozled, and for what purpose?

    Now we can say that they just don’t know their smv, they need to look in different markets, etc. But is that always the problem?

    • dannyfrom504 says:

      “They are told men want virginal women, so they remain virginal. Yet the men they want to date, mind you, not to have sex with, won’t date them, but they will date the slutty women and then marry them.”

      this is the Curandero part of me talking. those men deserve the beating they’ll take. and at least those girls will maintain some dignity. my sister stayed off the carousel by watching me bang a bunch of different girls.

      she didn’t want to be “on of those girls”.

  4. Senior Beta says:

    One of your best posts. Almost Rollo like and you do not usually come up with the heavy sociology. But M3’s post touched a lot of guys. Good job HM1. And you do have better recipes than the other guys in the ‘sphere.

    • dannyfrom504 says:

      1- Rollo doesn’t like me. lol.

      2- i think Deti deserves the credit here. i simply posted his comment.

      “…and you do not usually come up with the heavy sociology.”

      special ed class of the sphere, remember.

      and yes, i know i have better recipes. lol. thank you kind Sir.

  5. Spacetraveller says:


    First of all…

    “did i call it or did i call it?”


    I had already seen that M3 post on his own blog, and in fact had already commented there before, on many of his posts. He is indeed a very good Manosphere blogger.

    JV and I did step on a mine, but not for the reasons you think…

    Remember that I simply reacted in my own way to M3’s harrowing story.
    I did NOT claim to understand his story. I simply offered empathy, which M3 himself (and some other men) accepted at face value.

    Whilst I totally agree with you that Deti owns (he is afterall, one of my Manosphere ‘heroes’, just like you, TPM, M3, Dogsquat, Leap and Lost, to name a few), I think his comment that you refer to makes the (wrong) assumption that I claimed to ‘know’ what M3 was talking about in his post. But I also understand that it is aimed at women in general, and not necessarily me, but it WAS in reply to my question, so…

    In fact I think the whole thread blew up based on this wrong assumption.
    If you look again at my original comment, it includes the words…I might never understand…

    But that’s OK. I accept that I run the risk of being ‘misrepresented’ from time to time. It is a common problem on the internet.

    I also think that more people should have focused on posting their own reactions to M3’s sad story, rather than picking away at mine. But in many ways, I am glad this happened, because it allowed me to understand something about the male-female interaction. This is afterall, the aim of the game: to understand you men. So as you always say….winsauce!

    I had to post many comments explaining myself, sometimes reiterating the same message over and over again, to different men, because I would typically respond to someone, only to have someone else make the same point that the first someone had made, and I would respond to that someone else too.

    As you may have noticed on my blog, I like to address everyone personally as opposed to a ‘group’.
    This strategy earned me the title of ‘belle of the ball – look at me me me!/attention whore’ from someone who clearly did not understand the dynamics of the thread. Regrettably, I chose not to respond to that person because I detected malice on his part. It was an unwarranted and therefore unkind remark, and I react to it in the same way that men react when a woman calls them a ‘creep’ when this is undeserved.
    Not to talk of ‘false’. I was given attention on that post that I neither wanted nor needed.
    (And ST will not go where ST detects malice – ST’s rule number one. Why is it that I keep coming to your blog, Danny? Because you NEVER show malice even when you are pissed off with me. And I hope I never do that to you, of course. Mutual respect).

    I conclude by saying that I accept Det’s advice. It was delivered with plain and clear language which was devoid of anger, harshness or malice.
    That is language that a woman will respond to. So yes, again, I agree with you that DETI OWNS.

    Incidentally, the same message was delivered by another man, in the spin-off post that follows the now infamous one. That post included the phrase, ‘Women, STFU’.

    Needless to say, I switched off immediately.
    That man lost me at ‘hello’.
    He had violated ST’s rule number one, so I could not interact with him.
    (I am not saying men should not swear. I have no right to judge anything a man does, unless it is directly to me. But know that I might not engage with you if you use words that I know are designed to push my buttons. I simply won’t react).

    So, for example, Danny saying to his friends, “Stay the f**k up”, is very different from a man saying to me, “ST, STFU”. The first example will make me smile. The other one will make me run. Take it as you will.
    In fact, another guy got my cold shoulder at first, but when he came back to me with civil language, I responded in kind, and (I hope), we now respect each other’s views, even if we still do not agree.

    Yes, the cardinal sin of JV and myself was to try to use our own female experiences to help us understand a male experience.
    I find nothing wrong with this technique, personally. Because the simple truth is that I have no alternative strategy available to me in this sort of situation. But as I keep saying, the use of the female analogy was to help me to relate to M3′ problem. I did not go to TPM’s blog to complain about how women have it so bad. You know me better than that 🙂
    Once again, fellas, I only mentioned about the woman wanting commitment as a way of getting my female brain to think about how bad it must be for a man in a sexless, hopeless, loveless desert.

    But of course, as is common in Manosphere Land, once it is known that you are female, it is presumed (almost as a ‘default’) that you have no empathy* for the male cause, but instead focus on the ‘wimins’. Untrue in this case. I was *totally* focused on M3, even though my path to get there involved viewing things with female eyes.
    *And yet, confusingly enough, when I did offer empathy, it was rejected with the label of ‘patronising’. Whilst I did not find this a ‘ticking off’ per se, because the man who offered this did so in a way that tells me that he was telling me a male ‘truth’ – it was how he (and many men) ‘saw’ my comment, and it is of course up to me to take it or leave it.
    And I DO take it, but do you now see how this was, at least initially, a confusing situation for me?
    Especially as on the self-same thread, there were at least two other men complaining about how they never get empathy from women!

    If the biggest complaint against JV and me is that ‘we are acting like women’, then we really have nothing to worry about, given that we are women. 🙂 And in fact, we are not required to understand M3’s plight anyway. But we tried, because we wanted to. And part of empathy is trying to understand the problem you are empathising with in the first place. The fact that we failed is not a tragedy. And we don’t see it as such.

    I shall take my thoughts on this onto my blog now.
    To explain myself fully and outline the lessons I learned from this whole episode would require me taking this away from the male ‘space’.

    Yes you are right about something else: whenever I have clashed with men (online, that is), it is because I have stepped into their locker-room on an issue which is inherently male.

    Remember the furore regarding vasectomies and the military (when I called you ‘doc’)? And my earlier troubles with MGTOW?

    In the first two cases, you were not appeased until I literally said to you, ‘OK Danny, I back off slowly away from you, hands in the air where you can see ’em’.

    I am doing that now…

    PVW, JV, I reply to your comments on my blog.
    See you there.

    • dannyfrom504 says:

      dear God do you get long winded. lol. i adore you and you know that. but sometimes you’re curiosity get’s the best of you. M3 posted on a sensitive subject; and while i understand you want to comprehend and empathize…..

      this is a case where you need to sit back and just observe. that or call me and i’ll try my best to explain. lol.

      you’re an Angel, and i acknowledge that, just like JV. don’t really know PVW.

    • Emma the Emo says:

      you’re right. Using parallells to understand how someone might feel is the only way we can understand anything. Were they asking you to imagine a color you’ve never seen before? Of course you can only imagine something with things you already know about/experienced.

  6. Sean says:

    I loved his posting and felt a lot in tune wiyh what he said having gone through extended periods of incel myself. You can tell when someone hits a nerve when they nitpick his posting as violent or whatever instead of addressing the underlying issue. MGTOWforums deleted all reference to it because of that reason.

  7. Richard Cranium says:

    Thanks for commenting on this Danny it’s a hugely important writing and the more legs it gets the better. There’s literally thousands of guys like M3 (and myself as I posted there) that live through such circumstances and it’s a difficult thing to discuss much less post about.

  8. deti says:

    thanks for the shout out Danny.

    The key takeaway from this (at least for me) is the difference between the type and level of investment and commitment men and women make. What a man invests is intangible, is gone the moment he invests it, and cannot be retrieved. Time, money and resources? Gone once he invests them. The woman reaps their benefits. But he also invests his emotions, and, I submit, invests more deeply. I submit this is so because once he invests and commits, he has to go all in, and unless there’s cheating or extreme abuse, he’s not going to pull himself out.

    But for a woman, what she invests, her prime contribution, is her body and her sexuality. She can take this with her and completely withdraw her investment if she desires. And if she is married to him and then divorces him, she can require him to continue investing in the form of alimony or child support. The ex husband must continue investing money and resources in a woman who no longer wants him. She, on the other hand, can completely withdraw her investment — she no longer has to sleep with her ex husband.

    So she can take her investment with her if she leaves the relationship. He cannot do the same. My theory is this is why women can get over men much easier than men can get over women.

    • Stingray says:

      My theory is this is why women can get over men much easier than men can get over women.

      I don’t know, deti. I think it has more to do with a lack of respect. A woman who has deep respect in her man and has fully submitted to him is not going to have an easy time getting over him. A woman can give her body respect or no respect, but once she’s his, fully his, there is no *easy* in getting over him.

      • Sis says:

        Completely agree with your statement, this is what they don’t seem to understand.

      • dannyfrom504 says:

        the current SMP has led men to be more cautious.

        “A woman who has deep respect in her man and has fully submitted to him is not going to have an easy time getting over him. A woman can give her body respect or no respect, but once she’s his, fully his, there is no *easy* in getting over him.”

        i can appreciate this statement, but as a man….i’m primarily survival minded. to me, personally…..i’m bowing out. the danger’s are too great. marriage just isn’t a good idea for me.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s