# NMMNG and MMSLP - Haven't read them, is it worth doing so?



## Plan 9 from OS (Jul 13, 2012)

People throw those books around all the time, and it seems like a number of people have read them and felt their lives transformed by these books. I never read either one and my marriage is solid. I think to myself that I should at least check these books out, but I admit that I see them touted as gospel by enough people that I don't want to read them simply out of spite.

It seems to me that a lot of what is written in the books are life lessons that should have been learned while you are growing up (like people will take advantage of you if you let them, if you don't respect yourself how will others respect you, etc...). Maybe there is more to it than just that and I'm short changing myself.

If you don't mind, I'd love to hear from both sides as to whether you've read the books and they've helped your if you've read the books and they've hurt your relationship. 

I'd put this in the men's clubhouse except that it may be better out here because I'm sure there are a number of women who may have been on the receiving end of these books. I'm sure they would have an opinion on them too.


----------



## Plan 9 from OS (Jul 13, 2012)

Thanks. Yes we do have a good marriage and we have a good sex life. I know the phrases alpha and beta tend to be used in conjunctions with these books, and that alpha does not automatically mean "bad boy" or "jerk". I've also seen referenced the idea that a mixture of alpha and beta is ideal for a marriage. Sure, my life is not perfect but I can't complain about the marriage.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

I think NMMNG is a good read for most any man. It helps put into words good concepts for keeping yourself on track to being the man you want to be. 

MMSL has some good points, but needs to be read carefully and with awareness of your marriage. It works for many, but as FrenchFry notes, not everyone. Then again, nothing works in all cases.


----------



## kag123 (Feb 6, 2012)

They are worth a read if you've got time on your hands.

We did not read MMSL, so I can't comment too much on that. From what I have seen here though, its enough to give me a bad taste in my mouth. However, I am a woman, and I realize not the intended audience for the book. 

My H did read NMMNG. I did not read the book in full, only the parts that he either read aloud to me or chose for me to read because he wanted me to understand those passages. NMMNG is not truly a marraige book, it is a self help book for men, and a lot of the book is about improving every aspect of your life, with marraige being inly a portion of that. For my husband, who is the classical nice guy described in the book, conflict-avoidamt and a people pleaser, it was a good read because it opened his eyes a bit to some of the reasons why he may have become that way. For us it ended up sparking a few discussions of his childhood and how he was raised - things I never knew about him - that he felt had an effect on his personality.

Did it transform him? No. I didn't expect it to. You have to be willing to embrace the change and put in the work if you want it to happen. For us, we both read it more with a distance, as an interesting debatable subject not as the gospel that we should adhere to at all times.

We are both the type that enjoy taking in new concepts and theories and debating them though, so this was just something added to that pile. 

One thing it did do, however, was open my eyes a bit into the way my H's brain works and why he does certain things...which allows me to be more compassionate and patient with him.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 4thand11 (May 20, 2013)

I can say that MMSLP has helped me and my wife a lot so far (and I only read it a couple of weeks ago). I highly recommend it.

I will say that my main problems tended to parallel the problems Kay talks about in the book (too "nice", too "Beta", not enough Alpha male). While Kay does mention that for some men the problem is the opposite (too Alpha, not enough Beta), the book tends to focus primarily on tools for guys who need to up their Alpha quotient. If that happens to be your situation the book will definitely be useful I think.

I ALMOST didn't read it because I had the perception that the book was going to be a cheesy "pick-up artist" type of book with a bunch of cliche "moves" that will make you "score with the ladies". But rest assured the book is much more practical and not at all condescending.

It basically talks about what (most) women are looking for in a man, and how a lot of men self-sabotage by not realizing they are actually doing the exactly wrong thing (which they think is the right thing, because they misunderstand women). It also focuses exclusively on what the MAN can do to make things better. It is not about convincing your wife of anything. For example if your sex life is infrequent, the emphasis is on making yourself more sexually attractive to your wife so she will WANT to have more sex with you - not about ways to convince her to have sex with you. 

So far it is working for me, great book! I'd imagine a lot of women with "nice guy" husbands wish their husbands would read it!


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

Plan 9 from OS said:


> If you don't mind, I'd love to hear from both sides as to whether you've read the books and they've helped your if you've read the books and they've hurt your relationship.


I read MMSLP, ran the MAP, and saved my marriage.

Most of the objections I've seen to the book are from people who either didn't read it, or misinterpreted what they did read.

For example, preselection is probably the most frequently misunderstood tactic. Athol will advise men to let their wives see other women showing interest in them. People, usually women, will interpret this to mean that men should immediately molest the wife's best friend in order to make her jealous. But that's not it. It's about being attractive and having other women notice, and having your wife notice their noticing. Big difference.

Part of the book is undoing societal programming for boys raised in the feminist, or post-feminist, age. We were taught that masculinity was bad. Don't be assertive. Don't be dominant. Those are bad traits that make women uncomfortable. We need to force boys to behave like girls so that girls feel more comfortable. And that indoctrination is difficult to break when the boys grow up and get married.

Part of the book is also about learning evolutionary psychology. Most women like certain stereotypical male traits. Masculine behaviors. Triangular torsos with wide shoulders and narrow hips. So it's about understanding what women want, rather than what they SAY they want.

In our post-feminist age, when most women talk about what they're looking for, they will list nothing but beta traits. Good listener. Nice guy. Good father. So many men will focus on those traits. Learning what they actually find sexy, and why, is freeing. It's like getting a womanese to English translation dictionary.

It's not a panacea. It's not guaranteed to take a wife who can't stand the sight of you and turn her into a loyal nympho. And not every single woman will respond in the same way. But it helped me stop making a lot of mistakes and turn my marriage around.


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

4thand11 said:


> I ALMOST didn't read it because I had the perception that the book was going to be a cheesy "pick-up artist" type of book with a bunch of cliche "moves" that will make you "score with the ladies". But rest assured the book is much more practical and not at all condescending.


That's a common problem. Because Athol co-opted some of the language on his site (alpha/beta) from PUA sites, many people miss the different way he applies the terms.

For Roissy, who is only concerned with short-term sexual relationships, there is no need for beta behaviors that only comfort and don't build attraction. For PUAs, it's all alpha all the time. That's the best way to quickly convince a woman to sleep with you. Therefore, beta behaviors are seen as negative. Chumps are beta.

But Athol recognizes the difference in a marriage. You can't go all alpha in a marriage. It will fail just as surely as going all beta. You need a mix. And beta behaviors aren't bad. They're just not sexy.


----------



## Trying2figureitout (Feb 3, 2011)

The reason these books sometimes show success is that CHANGE is instituted and tested by those who read them sometimes.

The secret though is authentic change that can be maintained for life.

All REAL solutions follow a similar path.

Realize what you have in the past caused built-up years of resentment/un-fulfillment
and digging yourself out of it by changing perceptions in both parties.


----------



## Caribbean Man (Jun 3, 2012)

I've never read all of MMSLP, just some of the reviews and have visited the blog.
So I can never honestly recommend the book to anyone.
But the fact that it is doing so well on it own probably means that if for curiosity sake at least, it should be read.
I don't believe in the " huge grain of salt" thing.
I think that people should be allowed to come to their own opinion about things. One should think for himself, take only what applies to your case.

I have read a few chapters in NMNG and I can say that it should be a must read for every single man , married or not.

Much of what I've seen in it applies to what's wrong with modern men's thinking relative to his relationships and how to fix it.
I don't consider myself a " nice guy" but some of what I've read in there is stuff I've struggled with at various points in my life, and overcame.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

MY husband is naturally on the "SOFTER" side....the genuine "Nice Guy" type....I say "genuine" cause he is not a Son of a B masquerading as a Nice GUY... he really is NICE, would give the shirt off his back type...and if he loved you... very sacrificial -to please those he cares about.... he is also dependable unto his every word, honest always, a great father, bla bla bla .... Beta has it's GOOD too....

I would just describe him like this....if there was a balancing scale, he would be tipped more BETA over ALPHA... (according to below) ....Though I can't say this has hurt my attraction to him ..as this claims... I've never been one who cared about Weath or Power...and I tend to be a little dominant myself . 



> The *Alpha Traits* are those associated with classic “manly man” strengths. Power, dominance, physical ability, bravery, wealth, cool and confidence. Oh and good genes. These are the things that attract women and turn them on sexually. The Alpha Traits are linked to the dopamine response in women.
> 
> *Alpha *= attraction building = Dopamine = In Love = Excitement





> The *Beta Traits* are those associated with the strengths of being a nice guy / “family man”. Kindness, being a good listener, the ability to help with the children, dependability, thoughtfulness, compassion and patience. These all create a sense of comfort and safety for the woman, and relax her because she feels that if she became pregnant, the Beta Trait male isn’t going to abandon her and the baby.
> 
> *Beta *= comfort building = Oxytocin / Vasopressin = Pair Bond = Calm Enjoyment"


So Alpha Traits create attraction and that “in love” feeling, and Beta Traits create the pair bond and makes her feel relaxed enough to have sex. You need a balance of both Alpha and Beta in a marriage to maximize her desire to have sex with you.

...IS ANY MAN perfectly balanced in these ??? Is any women for that matter ??? 

I feel he is near the *BEST* he can BE - for who he is.... and I am a part of that , accepting him & appreciating him for What he brings to my life/ our lives.... not trying to change him ..

So those Books... "*Married Man's sex life*" and "*No More Mr Nice Guy"*.... these would NEVER hurt someone like HIM ...though he is happy with who he is & our marriage...... so he'd never read them anyway...though I've talked with him & explored some of NMMNG with him in the past....

Even after all he learned, I asked him one day...if he could go back in time and relive - telling me "WHAT FOR" / being more assertive to his own Needs & Wants... would he have? He looks at me and says..."Probably not" -then adds he wouldn't do anything to hurt me... I just threw my hands up in the air & said ..."Your're HOPELESS!".. but I love him anyway! What can I do! 

In reality.. I am the stark opposite of him...where he needs to tone it UP a notch in some areas ... I Need to tone it DOWN ....(I could use more patience, be a little more sacrificial).. 

Because we understand and  each other for being a little tipped in these opposite directions...even *respect* it.. allows our marriage to flourish... in spite of a little unbalance. This is how I see it anyway...where he is strong, I am weak...where he is weak, I am strong... so when we come together as a "team".... we can conquer anything together. 

I am attracted to the sentimental Romantic Gentleman type...and he's always been attracted to the rougher chicks....a little wired, feisty....hey, he can HANDLE THEM! Though...I have a very sentimental side as well. This surely helps!


----------



## anchorwatch (Mar 5, 2012)

Plan 9 from OS said:


> It seems to me that a lot of what is written in the books are life lessons that should have been learned while you are growing up (like people will take advantage of you if you let them, if you don't respect yourself how will others respect you, etc...). Maybe there is more to it than just that and I'm short changing myself.


I was always amazed and still shake my head at the amount of clueless men that I came in contact with in life. I wondered if their fathers taught them the simplest things. Like getting up in the morning and going out to make a living. Forget what it takes to be a man. 

Well just to say we all don't have the same experiences. There are many fellows that have not been around confident male role models and could use one speaking to them through a book.


----------



## Plan 9 from OS (Jul 13, 2012)

anchorwatch said:


> I was always amazed and still shake my head at the amount of clueless men that I came in contact with in life. I wondered if their fathers taught them the simplest things. Like getting up in the morning and going out to make a living. Forget what it takes to be a man.
> 
> Well just to say we all don't have the same experiences. T*here are many fellows that have not been around confident male role models and could use one speaking to them through a book.*


Hmmm. Logically, I agree with this point. Based on my life experiences, that isn't nearly as clear cut. My dad was a weekend dad because of the job he had for much of my life growing up. The few things I did pick up from my dad was mostly the example he led by going out to work to bring in money for the family. He made a great living at the time, but he sacrificed his time with his family to do that. Plus there were other parts to him that were not exactly stellar without getting into too much detail. Now my we lived close to my grandparents, so I saw may grandfather pretty regularly. I think of him as a very good man. But Athol Kay would have called him a beta male. I learned a lot from him too. But somewhere along the way I picked up a decent amount of alpha traits. Unless I can attribute that to almost exclusively to basic and AIT training as a member of the ANG (plus at university full time), I would say I picked up a lot of my qualities on my own when it came to learning how to be a good husband and father.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

I've read about half of MMSLP and I'm a big pusher of it. It's not the be all and end all and I don't necessarily buy into all of it (the Sperm Wars references on attack semen aren't widely accepted, but that doesn't necessarily make it wrong), but it's a great phenomenal resource for guys who were brought up in that great bastion of feminist BS, the American Church.

Concerning the Greek alphabet soup, it's just a shorthand that one may or may not find useful. It's a distraction that people who do not like the "truth of game" seize on to muddy the waters of the discussion. However, I like Vox Day's "socio-sexual" amalgamation, but even he admits there are some men who are social alphas and yet are not sexual alphas, for whatever reason. Petraeus is a prime example of a man who has been revealed as a needy sexual Gamma (very low sex rank and probably "raped" by Broadwell) who would seem to non-military people to be a King Hell Alpha in the social heirarchy. In fact, he's an apparatchik ring knocker, considered to be one of Hackworth's political "perfumed princes" according to some in a position to know. Vox also has a category called "sigma" for high number sexual alphas who are not at all a part of the main male social structure (think "Man With No Name"). 

The fact that there is not full congruence between sexual and social classifications is a source of endless confusion. You'll see a lot of social alpha guys who are physically fit, draw female attention, and in are in authority positions with much male respect, who consider themselves to be "sexual alpha" as well, yet they are practical monogamists (Alphas are constantly offered sex and don't decline it - Steve McQueen used to do the cleaning ladies wherever he was staying). Some of these imagined Alplhas even choose to reconcile with adulterous wives without opening up the marriage. This absolutely is not alpha sexual behavior. Just the fact that a man would R with an adulterous wife is proof that he has limited options (for whatever reasons) and is clearly probably no more than sexual Delta, to use Vox's ratings. A hefty dose of Dark Triad Traits are required to be classed as alpha, both in social terms and sexual terms. These are not nice people.

As for Athol Kay, by his own statements, he is heavily "Beta" and would fall in the "Delta" zone of Vox's labeling system, along with the vast majority of under 55 married men.


----------

