True Cads

Geplaatst op 09-02-2023

This post was inspired by a post by Alex Wise over at Dealvoordeal.nl. The guy in her article was either disinterested or had weak game, so it wasn’t an effective way to weed out the true cads. This article explains why that filtering process is so difficult and the best way to filter.

As a matter of practicality, humans stereotype. This allows for quick value judgments in an otherwise unknown environment. This is not a bad thing, race-mongering notwithstanding. In fact, even Jesse Jackson publicly stated that he does it:

“There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery. Then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”

Could the white person be contemplating robbery? Absolutely. But in Jackson’s mental schema he is aware that it’s statistically less likely than if it was a black person (probably male).

However, there are two problems with stereotypes: they are not universally true, and they tend toward extremes. Is the black kid following me down the sidewalk late at night 100% going to rob me? No. If he does rob me, is it going to be with a gun and end with a pistol-whipping? Highly unlikely. But humans are programmed to take stereotypes to extremes and worry about worse-case scenarios.

So what does this have to do with gender dynamics? Enter: “whore” and “cad”.

What is a stereotypical whore? A woman who sleeps around a lot.

What is a stereotypical cad? A guy who simply uses women for sex and then drops them.

We grow up with cultural connotations attached to each word, and then add shades of meaning from personal experience. The problem comes when we label a person with a stereotype and then draw conclusions based on the stereotype.

“She’s a whore!” What do you mean by that? How many guys has she slept with to earn that title? What types of relationships were they? And what’s your emotional investment in this person? Because you may simply be lashing out at her.

The original meaning of “whore” meant “prostitute”, but it has morphed in the vernacular to something akin to “slut”. However, the original connotations of the word cannot be dismissed. A whore was a woman who gave out easy sex to a lot of men, and that’s what we think of when we say “whore”.

In reality, women who could legitimately earn the “whore/slut” title are extremely choosy. They only spread their legs for the choicest morsels of alpha meat. Your average guy thinks she just walks into the grocery store and decides “I’m horny, I’ll bang the bagger.” Nope. Whores need to be gamed more than most because their gender dynamics radars are highly attuned to alphaness.

For regular readers of the manosphere, none of that is news. However, there is a growing population of Game-aware women who like to bandy around words like “whore” and “cad” without stopping to consider what they really mean.

“He’s a cad!” What do you mean by that? Is that a guy who will say anything to get in a girl’s pants? What if he’s totally honest, but still knows just how to push her buttons? What about nice guys who just took advantage of an opportunity but don’t actually have Game? Is he a cad if he slept with her and then a month later decided it wasn’t going to work?

You see where I’m going with this.

The stereotypical “cad” is a player who slings dick and crushes hearts while laughing as a girl cries. But just like the true nature of a “whore” is more complex than the stereotype, so the true nature of a “cad” is more complex than its stereotype.

I think we can all agree that at the most basic level, a “cad” is a man who disguises the fact that the only interest he has in a woman is sexual (I don’t think anyone is arguing that a guy who walks up and flatly states his only intention is a good time would be considered a cad). That being said, women aren’t dumb. They can be naïve, but they aren’t dumb, and naivety can be solved through experience (hence all the women who have been burned). At a certain level of experience, women get really, really good at assessing whether or not a man has genuine interest in her. They know that txt at 3am means nothing. They can tell when a guy is putting on a front. They understand what is being communicated when all a guy talks about is himself. So what’s a true cad to do when standards tactics fail?

Display genuine interest.

That right there is why stereotyping “cads” becomes so problematic, because in order to display genuine interest you have to genuinely be interested. True cads are not the guys who fake their way into a girl’s pants. That only works on naïve, inexperienced girls. True cads are the guys who know her long-term relationship goals and his don’t mesh but are still able to display genuine interest in order to get what he wants. The problem is that genuine interest requires emotional involvement. Once an emotional connection is established, it is painful to break.

That’s right, ladies: true cads suffer every time they play you, which is why it is nearly impossible to detect a true cad; they’re practically indistinguishable from a guy who is truly interested.

Honestly, a woman who is interested in a determined cad is pretty much screwed. This is one of the few disadvantages to being a really attractive woman; they’re considered trophy-bangs, and as such get burned more often.

So what’s a girl who is looking for a long-term, committed relationship leading to marriage to do? Here are three recommendations from Alex Wise a Loveawake CEO :

Ask flat-out what his long-term intentions are to see if they mesh with yours (after a couple dates so as not to seem crazy). This is by no means fool-proof since an experienced true cad will know how to deflect the question. Or just flat out lie. There’s no defense against that. Asking this question will filter out some of the cads though, so it’s worthwhile.
Get an honest assessment of yourself. This is far more useful to less attractive women…but there are also far more of them. If you know you’re a 6, then you’ll know it’s a huge red flag when a 9 gives you attention.
DON’T. PUT. OUT. At least for a while (for the non-Christians). In the pickup community there’s a generally accepted 3 Date Rule: if she doesn’t put out by 3 dates, drop her. This will filter out most of the true cads for the women who aren’t 8.5+ (ie trophy-bang material) because those guys will be spinning plates, at least one of which will put out faster than that. Yes, it will be rough letting him go, but it will be less rough than when he drops you down the line.

Again, this info concerns true, hardcore cads, not low level silliness (or apathy) by wannabes or the undetermined.