I received the following email from a reader this week:
Hi Rollo, I ran across the below thread on the TRP discussion on Reddit. I’m not normally a big follower of reddit but this one was good and is something that I’ve thought for a long time. Online Dating really, really, really sucks for men. And turns women into bitches. And has changed the world from an 80/20 market to a 95/5 market. The average male and actually for most above average males too … like SMV 6s and 7s have been completely shut out. And learning Game does little good for these men.
Was wondering if you’d care to discuss such things.
One of the founding Red Pill principles I explored over a decade ago was the tendency for men (and women) to create Buffers against rejection for themselves. I’ll still argue that men being the ‘initiator’ sex are subject to the consequences of rejection far more than women ever will be, but left unchecked, and if we’re honest, deliberately ignored, these rejection Buffers often develop into psychological schemas men internalize as a specific “preference” when it comes to interacting with with women:
Buffers are generally the paths of least rejection that become ego-invested “preferences.” Buffers aren’t so much about those “preferences” as they are about the motivations behind them.
At this point you might be thinking, “well, what the hell, I don’t want to feel rejection, why not employ buffers against it?” The main reason for embracing rejection is that rejection is better than regret. Scan back through this short list of buffers; how many of these have become greater, longer term problems for you than a briefly painful rejection would’ve been? Buffers also have a tendency to compound upon themselves in that one tends to dovetail into another, or more, until you no longer realize that they were originally rejection prevention methodologies and gradually become associated with your genuine personality. After a long enough period, these buffer become “just how I am.”
In the past Roosh has gone into some speculation that there will be a narrowing of the already harsh 80-20 rule of the SMP the closer western society gets to a total consolidation of feminine social primacy. Certain bloggers will debate the numbers, but I tend to agree with his proposition, though I’d say that a starting point of 80-20 might be a bit generous. However, considering the comfort with which women and popular culture are embracing open Hypergamy, I think I would actually step up his timetable for ‘Peak Hypergamy’.
For now, men are being presented with some very simple and pragmatic choices:
- Learn Game, stay in the Game. Make the most of what they have to work with in their given circumstances and focus on self-motivated self-improvement. In a sense it’s a form of MGTOW, but with the expressed purpose of actively engaging in the SMP as it’s accessible to an individual guy. In other words, don’t wish it were easier, wish you were better – play the game better but always with yourself as your own mental point of origin.
- Exit the Game. No one truly exits the Game, but they can minimize their active involvement in it. For the most part this doesn’t have to be a complete capitulation to one’s sexless, intimacy-less fate, but it does imply a degree of self-imposed indifference to women’s interest. Unfortunately this option seems the most pragmatic for men who either haven’t the patience or circumstance to opt for improving themselves and succeed at the Game, or they simply don’t see a commensurate reward for the investment they’d need to make in assuming the liabilities that come with dealing with most women these days.
- Continue on in a Blue Pill ignorance. Although this ‘choice’ is the most common (i.e. at least 80% of Beta men) it will be the one to disappear the most rapidly. Even without a growing Red Pill community, Red Pill awareness is becoming more difficult for even the most plugged-in of men to ignore. Women’s flaunting of Open Hypergamy and blatant admission to a sexual strategy of Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks combined with a widespread Red Pill awareness will challenge even the most ardent of White Knight’s and idealistic ‘average frustrated chumps’. Still, there are diehard self-righteous Betas who’s dedication to the path that the Feminine Imperative has set before them has made any deviation from it unthinkable. They build a life of dependency on the untenable Blue Pill goals and the means to realize them.
The problem inherent to all of these options is that to a lesser or greater degree they rely on a static state of a particular environment, condition or domain.
Domain Dependency
Just for the record, yes, I’m quite familiar with the anti-fragile doctrine proposed by Taleb with regard to domain dependency. I do see a parallels in this with regard to Red Pill awareness, but this is in no way an endorsement of the book – I simply don’t have enough familiarity with it.
For Red Pill purposes though, Domain Dependence is being good at what you do in one setting, but completely unable to transfer that ability to another setting. I think this dependence is one of the more overstated preoccupations Game critics have in really accepting the validity of greater Red Pill truths.
A cheetah is a deadly and effective predator when he can use his speed to run down prey on the wide-open African plains, but put him in the Brazilian rainforest, with its dense jungle, and he’s probably going to sleep hungry more nights than not.
Translated into predictable Red Pill critique, the idea is similar – “Yeah, sure, game works well for picking up low self-esteem bar skanks, but I’m looking for a Quality Woman.” What’s implied isn’t necessarily incorrect; the most ridiculed, stereotypical examples of Game came from the trials and errors of early PUAs making observations and applying what they’d learned in a contextual domain – night clubs, bars, etc. While those observations were, and still are, invaluable information to a greater meta-understanding of Red Pill awareness, for the most part those early successes were dependent on that specific (club style) domain.
Game has branched out from that beginning to be applied in broader domains. Thus we have specific areas of application dependency based on what can produce at least somewhat replicable results in those settings. Nick Krauser writes the book on day Game, Roosh the book on South America and Northern & Eastern Europe, while other authors ply their trade writing about Game in marriage or under the auspices of religion(s).
And while I have a great deal of respect for the most of them, a creative mind doesn’t work like this. The creative mind has the ability to migrate from one realm to another without even thinking about it. It’s what allows us to connect this dot with that dot. There is a certain applied reasoning and science behind a Red Pill awareness, but it’s important to remember what the ‘A’ in PUA stands for – Artistry.
Crossing Domains
I’ve known a number of guys in my time who swear that there’s nothing hotter than a woman 15 – 20 years their senior. Others love to explain to me how behind the times I am by pointing out the inherent dangers and liabilities of dating single mothers (for anything more than a one time bang). Still others tell me how enthusiastic a lay the obese women they regularly bang are. All of these guys express a preference for the type of women they can reliably get into bed with and will staunchly defend and praise their preferred type of woman.
Their domain dependency became their internalized, ego-invested preference.
I’ve touched on this dynamic in a few of my earliest posts, but I think it’s important to realize that domain dependency isn’t just about the type of woman you’ve developed a preference for, but rather how you’re predictably rewarded (in this case with sex) within that particular domain. You can semi-reliably do well with Goth girls, fat girls, older women, single moms? It’s important to understand the specifics and motivations of the women within that domain. You went on a sex safari in Southeast Asia or the Philippines, yet get flaked on by every western girl you approach? There are (obviously) specifics that influence those domains.
After all of this, the Red Pill is universally applicable, or it’s not. The same fundamental Red Pill dynamics, operating within the context of a specific domain, are applicable with the correct art necessary for that domain.
Red Pill truths are domain independent. Hypergamy is the same to a girl in Brazil as it is to a girl in Vegas. The domain changes, and with it the necessary art based on a woman’s incentives and the priorities for that given domain, but the underlying purpose and requisites of Hypergamy is unchanged. Yes, cultural, religious and familial limitations of that Hypergamy may apply within that domain, but root level Red Pill truth is still the prime directive for women.
Within a man’s lifetime he will have no choice but to cross into, and adapt to unfamiliar domains many times. These domains are not just locales or social settings, but the specifics of a particular stage of a woman’s life as well as his own life. Marriage is a domain. Single man sex life plate spinning is a domain. Online dating, a dependency on impersonal texting, really any of the Buffers I’ve elaborated on in the past are all examples of a domain men develop a dependency on, and later a rewarded preference for.
While it’s vitally important for a man to have a solid grasp of the elements of his own, temporal, domain it’s equally important to understand how and why he came into it. What rewards did he receive or hope to receive that led to his developed “preferences”? Were those preferences dependent upon a Blue Pill condition for reward?
This is key in avoiding domain specific dependency. That’s a pretty tall order for most men, and actually it’s one of the prime reasons most Blue Pill men never come to Red Pill truths. The Blue Pill is itself a meta-domain that men are largely conditioned to be dependent upon. Coming to Red Pill truths requires the self-realization of a domain dependency on Blue Pill idealisms, their promised rewards and then letting them go.
It’s important for a man to develop a fluidity of transitioning from domain to domain. Red Pill awareness prepares him for fundaments that will be applicable in all domains, but accepting that those domains exist and influence (sometimes adversely) his ‘preferences’ is the first step in developing the art necessary to excel in a new domain.
Isolation is dangerous. The presumption that conditions will never change and / or the preoccupation with security is a woman’s realm. Men must accept that they must adapt themselves to adequately perform in changing domains.
December 23rd, 2014 at 11:29 pm
@Hedda the head case, WTF are you talking about?
December 23rd, 2014 at 11:35 pm
Hedda
December 23rd, 2014 at 10:43 pm
For long term mating the IQ difference is no more than 20 points ( a little over one standard deviation) and the man’s should be higher.
Your available pool is slim. And all the other girls want him too. And they put out. Just to collect his juice if nothing else.
December 23rd, 2014 at 11:49 pm
A few comments with links and images about a study done using data from China about how women orgasm more for wealthier men.
It would be interesting to know if this is a cross cultural phenomena. From the study:
Their study used a larger set of data from China, and found a strong correlation between the mans wealth and the women’s frequency of orgasm.
Not exactly an alpha fucks/ beta bucks finding.
December 23rd, 2014 at 11:55 pm
You talk about Brazil and Hypergamy and I get the sense you’ve never traveled outside of the US.
December 23rd, 2014 at 11:59 pm
Re Game and domains
Frame is domain-independent. Confidence is domain-independent. Sales techniques and DHVs are domain-dependent.
December 24th, 2014 at 12:00 am
Oh, are we playing trump that study again?
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199601/the-orgasm-wars
December 24th, 2014 at 12:23 am
Rollo, I’d appreciate it you would answer my two questions before.
And I’m not understanding your replies to my comments lately.
I refute your claim that mate guarding is a beta behavior, and you come back at me with something like – oh, because you refute it it’s really just a sign that you are a beta. And because you are in SEA it means the behaviors that SEEM to be towards a high value man are not any sign of that at all, and are in fact all faked and negotiated.
And here you go again. A huge study, and you simply can not believe it.
Oh, those orgasms were all self reported and faked! That data CAN’T be true!
Because why? Because it doesn’t fit in with your alpha fucks beta bucks theory.
I point out that your theory is not inclusive and doesn’t make sense of all the data, and is only partially true, and therefore too stark and lacks contrast, and so is like a cartoonish charichature of reality, and you come back with “I know you are but what am I! You are a cartoon, not me!”
What the fuck man.
Are you losing it?
December 24th, 2014 at 12:39 am
@freshman
Hope you read this.
I had the same problems as you. But TRUST ME the girls get easier as you transition to an upperclassman. Just don’t be a pussy like some guys and not hit on freshman when your a senior. You will have plenty of freshman lol just wait I promise.
Also, learn how to drink and have fun….just saying
December 24th, 2014 at 12:54 am
A new study showed that in the Amsterdam red light district women had more orgasm when the client paid an extra 40 euro.
In another study in ISIS Islamic land showed Muslim women orgasmed with a suicide bomber (before he leaves for his mission and the for sure 70 orgasmic virgin).
Ps,
Sorry I don’t have the link yet.
December 24th, 2014 at 12:57 am
One thing I’ve learned from Aunt Giggles is that there’s a “study” to confirm or refute damn near any premise you like or hate, but what it really comes down to is seeing things in a meta-perspective.
I can just as easily present a case that women fake orgasms more for Beta men so as to preserve the provisioning those men believe is the source of their self-definition of their Alphaness.
It’s ironic that Roosh and Krauser are criticized for sticking to their respective geographical fishing holes to pull countless women, yet neither have an excess of provisioning and still do well.
I have no doubt that the necessity of women in less privileged domains prompts a sexual response for men with an excess of resources. But strip those resources from him, change the domain, and women revert to their genuine arousal cues for men.
The larger meta is Alpha Fucks, Beta Bucks. Women’s biology evolved for Hypergamy. That sexual dualism has two sides, but the simple fact is that women’s cyclic biology attunes them to being aroused by masculine physical features and dominance during estrus. And there are over a decade’s worth of studies that bear this out.
December 24th, 2014 at 12:59 am
Here in Nevada “sex workers” report orgasming more for an extra $50
December 24th, 2014 at 1:16 am
@Rollo.
A friend of mine who is LOADED and his wife gets whatever she asks.
He had an affair with a younger woman,he spent lots of lots of money on her. One day his dick started discharging yellow stuff ! .yes she gave him STD.
He couldn’t understand why this younger woman cheated in him despite all the money he gave her.
Any more proof for AF/BB.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:26 am
Rollo, you have lost control. Hedda has taken over the comments with a woman’s typical attention whoring (“Let’s talk about me me me!”) And of course your beta readers: “Wow, boobs, let’s listen to her and respond and engage in a dialogue and share our feelings about Christianity.”
December 24th, 2014 at 1:27 am
Rollo should do a post called, “MY PENIS IS HYPERGAMY!”
I would orgasm to that all over the place.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:31 am
@Hedda, re: “It’s so much work.”
“My yoke is easy”, Someone said. It’s actually harder work to be effectively bad, but it definitely can be effective.
re: “What’s a top alpha?”
Intelligent men get less women and less sex per women. Unfortunately.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:33 am
@xsplat re: women’s orgasms.
Women orgasm much stronger from caring loving ltr beta men. Betas service females; it’s what makes us betas.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:36 am
Women fake orgasm much more when they believe their partner to have been recently promiscuous.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:36 am
Rollo – “Here in Nevada “sex workers” report orgasming more for an extra $50″
If true that means Alpha status can be rented by the hour. Or purchased on a long term recurring fee basis ala xsplat’s contention.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:38 am
re: women self-reporting.
Every relevant study concludes that the older the woman the better the orgasms. No man believes the women’s self-reporting, and the men are correct.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:40 am
re: show me the money.
It turns out the woman merely has to be led to believe that he’s rich in order for her to orgasm more *easily* (not harder, btw). Secretly rich counts.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:42 am
It’s not true now, and never has been true, that women compete for the most intelligent men. The opposite is true.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:43 am
One last thought
Imagine a world where money is useless and everyone is free to choose, who would you think women would pick?
December 24th, 2014 at 1:45 am
re: “I’m probably too gullible.”
It’s part of your curse of being an intelligent woman, btw. Easily led astray, carried about by every wind … It’s one reason women should strive, really exert themselves, to put themselves under the thumb of a good man.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:49 am
@Hedda, re: “Well, great. They’re all mine.”
Yes, pretty much. Other women will not bother to compete with you for them unless you try to come across as slutty.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:09 am
re: homeschooled. I have to admonish you, remind you, that simple is better e.g. 2 Cor 11:3.
It … alarmed me when I first started gaming women, how easy it is to convince a woman to conspire to complicate things. How *thirsty* women were for turbulence, for the purported Chinese curse of “interesting times”. I already knew well how good women are at navigating the layers of relationships viz “he said she said David felt Mary thought Johnny could have told Marty earlier and …”; it took some trials on my part to learn how to turn that strength of women into a major weakness.
But not for stupid women, not for women who are too slow.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:17 am
re: Lively. Good choice. For some reason every main woman in my life has been exactly 5’4″: mother, sisters, wives, daughters, among others, but I’ve always imagined I’d prefer a woman who is as tall as me (or taller). I’m more into voices, though, so a lesbian crush for me would be more like kd lang.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:49 am
Rollo, your attitude is the very definition of confirmation bias. Now you explicitly stated that you will disregard all scientific studies that go against your premise.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:50 am
You have an unfalsifiable world view.
What a waste of a good mind, and a large audience.
Another man gone astray, by love of his pet ideas.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:51 am
@Rollo
I know you don’t like to moderate out opposing views, and I agree with that. However, I don’t think anyone on the planet would fault you for moderating histrionic trolls.
I mean I totally get if you think it would be too much work (moderating anything is always extra work) , but it’s shitting up the quality of dialogue badly. Like this is an obvious (and fucking annoying) degredation of s/n ratio.
December 24th, 2014 at 3:23 am
No moderation, please. A textbook example of rapid fire shit-tests going on in this thread. And some of you are actually qualifying to them.
Which presents an excellent opportunity. Can’t kill your beta unless you flip on the kitchen halogens and watch it skittering across the linoleum.
December 24th, 2014 at 3:30 am
I don’t always agree completely with Rollo, but I will confidently posit that this forum is one of the favored destinations where the Purple Pill goes to die.
December 24th, 2014 at 4:38 am
LOL @ women’s orgasms
December 24th, 2014 at 5:11 am
jf12
December 24th, 2014 at 1:31 am
Re: high IQ and low N.
Every man is different. And it is possible to beat the averages.
December 24th, 2014 at 5:15 am
xsplat
December 24th, 2014 at 2:49 am
I think Rollo has a point about Self Reported.
December 24th, 2014 at 5:23 am
jf12
December 24th, 2014 at 1:42 am
It’s not true now, and never has been true, that women compete for the most intelligent men. The opposite is true.
It may not be true on average. But I have seen it. Very helpful if the man is also a “BAD boy”. But that is a rare combination. High IQ bad boy.
December 24th, 2014 at 6:10 am
@Retrenched
“The sexual revolution benefited women and a few men at the expense of most men. But there are trade offs in everything. The average young man isn’t getting laid as much as his grandfather did 50 years ago, but he also has less responsibility and more freedom than his grandfather ever had.”
You seem to be seeing things through a frame where the maximum freedom with minimum responsability is presented as more desirable than anything else in life. And I can’t help but wonder how much of this percieved extra freedom is caused mainly by technological progress.
December 24th, 2014 at 7:31 am
I am British and have been actively improving myself and gaming women for the last five years. I find that when I am in a well-integrated emotional state I can approach any women and the rejection mostly bounces off me. Hell, I was in Mayfair last year, (the richest, swankiest part of London) and I made a cold approach on a Russian model (Blonde 20 yr old, definite 10). She rejected me flat, a rejection so cold it actually made me (and her friend) laugh. However a few weeks later I scored with two beautiful sisters half my age. I still pinch myself over that approach, to make sure I am not dreaming.
I have also read Taleb and at the risk of misappropriating him (that fella is smart, the book is difficult) I now think that approaches are about complexity, initially. There are lots of variables that you do not control, or even know. What is her emotional state and can you change it if you need to? The location and weather are important, as are your clothes, how you smell and your state of mind. Sometimes all the variables fall your way, so it makes sense (to me) to game as many of them into place as fast as you can.
I think the multitude of variables in play mean that successful approaches are harder than many Red Pill men suggest. However I think that is all the more reason to do them, the fails are always useful. As Richard Branson always says, “Screw it, let’s do something”. I am no oil painting (as my ma used to tell me) but I have been lucky with women under the most adverse circumstances. The more you approach, the less risky it feels. Where I agree with this article is that you cannot set artificial boundaries on approach types and use them as excuses.
Having said that I would never use Internet dating. I do not see how you can project Charisma, Humour, SMV, through a crappy website. How can you make an approach when the very tools you need are denied you?Internet dating sites are for women with issues, so that they can piss on pop-up targets. Approaches in the real world are far more successful, almost by definition.
This is a wonderful site, every article is golden wisdom, and I learn even more from the commenters.
December 24th, 2014 at 8:20 am
@ Rollo – My vote? Don’t block the trolls. She’s perfectly demonstrating what you stated in the comments on your last post. Christianity is no relief from the FI or women and their nonsense. What I find most amusing about her is that she doesn’t get how awfully she comes across. She could be an HB10 and prancing around in lingerie, but once she opens her mouth and that truckload of nasty-crazy falls out, yeah, I’d rather jack off. Hell, I’d rather rub my balls across a cheese grater than listen to her shit.
Nassim Taleb – Fyi, I have a strong background in finance, risk management and complexity science, so perhaps I could put it to good use here for our little claque. I’ve read all Taleb’s books, and really he’s an amazing thinker. His ideas about philosophy are quite compelling to, he’s a big devotee of the Stoic, Seneca, among others.
Fragility – Something that is fragile is damaged and lessened by disorder.
Anti-Fragility – Something that is anti-fragile gains from disorder. Example, to some degree your immune system gains by being challenged random ways – of course the degree matters.
Resilience – Resilience is about resisting disorder and not being lessened by it – it’s very different from anti-fragility.
This idea is a great way of compactly getting at some properties of complex systems in that it demonstrates how the reactions of independent agents in a complex system may self-organize or even randomly generate reactions to encounters with other agents, institutions, systems, boundaries etc. Put more simply, it accounts for and anticipates non-linearity.
Consider a laissez faire economy. It in fact encounters disorder continuously in the sense of business failures, yet a certain amount of “creative destruction” actually makes the economy grow, and can make it even more anti-fragile.
Weight training is another great example. Your muscles actually gain from the stress you expose them too – you are better after encountering this planned disorder.
Christianity is fragile. Traditional marriage is fragile. Funny how there are so many Xstians here, thinking that ancient mythology is the answer, lol. The answers are in science. Not religion, not even philosophy (mostly religion minus supernatural stuff, actually). Look at how badly left and right political philosophy and ideology have gone wrong. But I digress…
Chaos theory – Is an outdated concept, but still useful for understanding some of the properties of a complex system. Chaos theory posits that even small changes in initial conditions in a complex system will yield wildly different results. This was perhaps best popularized by Jurassic Park, where the evo biologist births the velociraptors into a new environment and they develop and adapt different and new behaviors very quickly and the entire system becomes quite different from what evolved previously under different initial conditions.
December 24th, 2014 at 9:02 am
Hedda’s spam is what happens when the Hamster drinks too much boxed wine.
December 24th, 2014 at 9:11 am
@freshman
Ive read every article on this site but a valid point regarding pure af desire in women compared to the bb attraction. Im just saying theres too much of a gap in college, afterwards though I believe even the gap between af/bb gets smaller and thats when game comes into play much more.
@Annoyed Leaving
Agreed, I know moderating the comments section is probably a hassle but I only see one female craving attention on here so it shouldnt be too hard just to ban her. Theres enough shit tests and trolling outside of this site, dont need it on here too.
December 24th, 2014 at 9:26 am
Xsplat – ok, so your study shows women orgasm more for rich men. How does that disprove AF/BB? Those guys might be rich because they are alpha as fuck! Or, perhaps the added comfort of money allows women to relax more in the sack…
At any rate, I don’t see how it disproves AF/BB, it simply shows that there are some overlaps from Alpha to Beta behavior. But that’s nothing new, and in fact depending on your current domain, the same behavior could be seen as either alpha or beta behavior. And, from woman to woman what is viewed as alpha can change.
So what exactly are you trying to demonstrate? We are all aware that there are many variables at play, but overall AF/BB is a solid basis to build on. If you are trying to imply that a guy can get trim by the ton with money, well duh. Thing is, can he get trim that genuinely want his junk, or are they all hoping for a new diamond? I bet an orgasm or two might get her to the jewelry store quicker.
(Yes, I am implying that a woman may be able to “talk herself” into cumming for a rich guy, based solely on how excited she is to get expensive stuff from him.)
December 24th, 2014 at 9:29 am
In applying Anti-Fragility to men’s thinking, organizing and behaviors I think we should consider this in from two POVs, as follows:
1. Individual behavior – Blue Pill thinking is not dynamic nor adaptive. It has fixed ideas about how men and women “should be”. It resists the new information that reality is throwing at us. So, the question is, what kind of mindset/POV would make us anti-fragile? First, let’s look at a couple that are fragile.
Religious – Tradcons are finding their immutable ideas are being left behind. In way, the only thing less anti-fragile than Blue Pill thinking is the steroids version of it, fundamentalist religion.
Philosophy – Fixed ideas that we must jam reality into, but eventually all philosophies turn out to be heuristics at best, and their encounter with the disorder of the real, occurring world show their major limitations. Just consider our classical liberal ideas or Marxism – both. Some philosophies are more generalized and adaptive, Stoicism for example, but still they are fixed ideas that when closely examined are rarely universal. They are really stories we tell ourselves to justify our biases and enforce conformity. They resist adapting, the try to explain disorder, and do not profit from it.
Here’s an Anti-fragile POV:
Scientific mindset – Scientists essentially apply reason and refine reason. Adopting a strictly rational mindset that sets aside biases to the degree we can, that looks at all evidence honestly and follows the data to it’s conclusions is always helpful for men. In fact, I say a scientific mindset becomes stronger as it is exercised and challenged, new data and hypothesis make your critical/skeptical thinking skills stronger – making a scientific mindset anti-fragile. Key to this POV is accepting that all knowledge is contingent on better info coming along. Hell, even Newtonian gravity was modified slightly about 3 years ago. Such a mindset is also quite comfortable with large amounts of uncertainty.
I also think that there is a specific mindset that men can and should develop that helps them become anti-fragile. These are:
Being adaptive – Realizing that constantly changing circumstances means that we have re-evaluate our strategy and POV from time to time and align it with reality. In my case. the Red Pill has led me to becoming a selfish prick. I had an inflexible way of valuing myself, based on the FI and it didn’t help me be happy or effective in my life. Being a selfish prick is the perfect adaptive response to me to the RP world we live in.
Developing resiliency – If you can’t thrive under chaos, at least be less damaged by it. Recognize that overcoming adversity is what competing and winning and succeeding look like it. Develop that ability. You can do so by challenging yourself with things like fixing a car or rock climbing. But when the shit hits the fan, you want to have already developed the muscle of getting that your only effective move is to regroup and charge the hill again.
Pragmatic optimism – I learned this from the PTSD world. Essentially, what you do here is program your own biases to look for something good and what’s possible around you.
Entrepreneurial Spirit – Seeing the opportunity in change is what entrepreneurs do. Capitalizing on the new opportunities that change presents us with is how we become anti-fragile. Did Chrysler’s bankruptcy in the ’80s make it a better company? For a while anyway.
Conservation of energy – I learned from my back country exploits that using only the energy necessary to sink the next ice axe or take the optimal angle of attack up a hill that didn’t exhaust me so I could sustain the pace is crucial. This allows me to have a reserve available for an unexpected event. Example: I’m rock climbing and grip a ledge but there is a wasp resting there and it stings my hand. I now have to complete the climb to a place of safety with one hand not completely useful. I have the extra energy to do so because I didn’t waste a bit of energy on the way up, using all my large muscles, making small moves and using my skeleton instead of my muscles to rest frequently. You’ll notice if you look at some climbers, particularly older ones, that they almost look lazy as they make their way up a cliff. Sure there are some sport climbers who climb like monkeys, but one would never do that on say a 5 day expedition, 100 miles from help…
2. Collective action – To me, the real opportunity for men is to act collectively so we build communities that are anti-fragile which represent us. Consider the online Manosphere – it’s anti-Fragile in the sense that each attempt by the fembots to shut down masculine dialog seems to result in 10 new YouTube channels and even more Tweets. Careful though – don’t assume linear growth. AVFM has had their comeuppance, with their traffic peaking…I remember arguing this with Dean and Paul online as much as a year or more ago – they thought that chart on Google Analytics was just going to continue the trendline automagically. Nopes, but that’s okay because Paul alone has probably caused 10 YouTube channels to start.
Why is it anti-fragile? Because it’s self-organizing and leverages network effects to communicate and connect individuals to it. It has no central governance but does have central ideas that are constantly being tested and debated – it’s not a closed system like the feminists have where conformity is valued. This may be our greatest strength going forward.
To me, the real answer is for men to organize in many different ways to act collectively in the private and govt sphere. I’m currently working on creating a men’s collective with some other guys up here, it’s early days on that idea. But our only chance at taking on the huge, institutional advantage women have is by forming our own collectives that offset the. We have already lost the ones they dominate and I don’t see us getting them back.
Think of it this way. Men are an insurgency. Insurgencies thrive on the chaos a war brings. Each attempt by the military/police to clamp down only recruits more insurgents. Dead insurgents become heroes that others want to emulate. When they are attacked in one town, they just retreat to another. They attack where you are weak. They harass and disrupt and raise the pain level of continuing a campaign to the point of making the invading power give up.
An insurgency capitalizes on the fact that it has no centralized command center or logistical system. It’s re-supply routes can’t be disrupted – because it doesn’t have them. In our world, consider how formal attempts by MRAs and others to create formal institutions in govt or academia are crushed by fembots – they essentially destroy the supply line of resources and the platform of an institution to their opponents via any mechanism necessary.
But we must take more power back if we are going to win something. Our attacks need to actually hurt them very badly. And I don’t think that men are up for what’s actually necessary. To be completely frank with you guys, I believe it will take men resorting to force to re-establish a social order that isn’t insane and suicidal. But remember, I’m asking this of Beta pussies who’ve had exactly one fight in their lives in the 4th grade, lol. And Alpha guys are benefiting from the current system. So who exactly is going to fight with me?
It’s clear to me now that women destroy democracy if they get the vote – essentially Nietzsche was mostly right about women. I’d start there. M. Simon talks about basic things like paternal certainty being mandated and changes to divorce laws. Those are rifle shots men can take that have a mulitplicative effect – but they require us to have power in the institutions the redfems/social justice warrior set already own. Hence why I have no interest in politics.
To me, we should each take decisions to hasten the downfall of our corrupt govts and societies. We are doing quite well on moving down that path, and a cataclysmic economic crash is a certainty within the next 10-12 year (if you want to argue with me, consider that I sold AIG their risk management system and some of their derivatives pricing technology, among other things in the field of finance). Our asset/liability mismatch already makes the U.S. govt and the Fed insolvent. Most Americans don’t actually get this, but our goose is already cooked. We just need the right shock and set of events and the dollar will collapse along with the U.S. federal govt.
At that point men will have a chance to change the power dynamics because women will no longer have their sinecures in health care or govt or education. As an aide, the “caring” professions now make up 31 million of our 110 million strong workforce, and those are mostly women and oh yeah, the number of those jobs in the workforce increased by 50% in the past 13 years from 21 million. While we actually reduced our workforce. And all those folks are living on the massive borrowing of our govts at the federal, state and local level.
But will men act when this time comes? Will we reform our laws and reconstitute a non-suicidal society? Nah. The FI is far to deeply embedded in our consciousness now. In fact, I believe what we will get when this happens is a more controlling and intrusive state. And it will be run mostly by women, and for women – enforced by men, just as it is now.
And I’m past it already. At 52, I just want to have a good time for the rest of my life. I grew weary of carrying the world on my shoulders and have stopped doing so – for my own personal happiness. It’s up to you young guys, and really, I look at the current generation of men and if they are our savior, we are fucked. Sure, a small number of them are great men – but the average guy? There is a consequence to sitting around in your fleece pants, gaming 35 hours a week – and I know that’s “gamer shaming” – nah, I’d shame you guys for sitting around and watching that much TV too. It’s the physical passivity of it. Men are kinetic creatures, we are social creatures – and gaming stunts the development of men in these ways.
We are no long a society of “rugged individuals” – that much is clear. Hell, I bet most young men on this site don’t even know that not 50 years ago, our nation was known the world over for our “ingenuity” and rugged individualism. American men were known for their “can do” attitude. We were a much more masculine society and the average guy was a hell of a lot more scrappy.
And in the end, the other reason I don’t care is this. Women choose. We compete for their choice and are bio programmed to do so. Nothing will change this innate power imbalance. So, my plan is to stick my dick in as many of them as possible and to have an enjoyable life along the way. Sure, it’s all coming down around our ears. It’s happened to every democracy and empire so far – why shouldn’t it happen to us?
December 24th, 2014 at 10:46 am
how to project charisma online?
My old profile said
Mid-level henchman in the direct action department of an international organization bent on world domination for fun and profit looking for henchwoman and partner in crime……. Must enjoy overly complicated plans for world conquest, pointless monologues allowing the hero time to save the day and maniacal laughs. Ideal 1st date? Armored car heist, afterward we ride off into the sunset on my motorcycle to start a new life drinking margaritas on the beaches of Mexico.
then come the photos: overhead pressing 325, 300 pound atlas stone on my shoulder, me on a bike, shirtless with a 50 pound tuna in each hand…. online dating comes down to photos
December 24th, 2014 at 10:47 am
A man must be master of his dominion. When you bring a woman into your world, make certain she knows precisely where Your World starts and Everything Else ends.
December 24th, 2014 at 11:04 am
John Dark mentioned “The more you approach, the less risky it feels.” That’s true. Also, being turned down for the twentieth time hurts less than the previous nineteen times. But, I think, in some way one should try to avoid concentrating on getting good at being turned down. If you know what I mean.
December 24th, 2014 at 11:06 am
@Hedda re: daughters. My youngest granddaughter got her driver’s license; the first female in my blood family, including my mother, that I didn’t personally teach.
December 24th, 2014 at 11:27 am
@Ton re: heist Game.
So, do you think that outré lawbreaking is a more arousing persona than more ordinary badness, or is it the conspiracy factor? Involvement in a strong-arm smash and grab, getting $37.32 from the register and a couple of Cherry 7ups for you and your henchwoman, is probably as arousing as anything for most women who would be up to it, but probably only if you took her into your confidences and made her want to be part of it.
December 24th, 2014 at 11:46 am
“Men believe that love matters for the sake of it. Women love opportunistically.”
http://xsplat.wordpress.com/2011/12/16/men-value-love-women-love-value/
I still emphatically agree with this comment.
December 24th, 2014 at 11:56 am
The connection between this article and the original e-mail somewhat escapes me. Not that I’m bashing your writing or the important thoughts presented, Rollo.
December 24th, 2014 at 11:57 am
Guys,
Looks are fucking 90%
Not 100%, but not less than 90.
December 24th, 2014 at 11:58 am
@Rollo . . .
> Goth Girls
Oh no! Don’t get me started on goths
A nicely tatted girl with tubes in her earlobes and black lipstick . . . instant boner!!!
I don’t even care what the brain reward system was that got me going on these girls, I just enjoy the ride
December 24th, 2014 at 12:19 pm
re: men liking polygyny and beauty.
I must admit I don’t have any experience in having sex with a woman to whom I’m not attracted. But most women are certainly attractive enough physically to me; more definitely if *sex* were the only concern then my harem would overflow with ordinary women and even unattractive women. The more the merrier. It’s not like I’m using up my semen; I’ll make more.
It is the provisioning that is the actual concern, that drives the preference for beauty. If you’re going to invest your hard-earned bananas in some one girl, you may as well ensure she’s young and healthy and good-looking and intelligent enough for your children to thrive.
December 24th, 2014 at 12:23 pm
@jf12
I think though, that if you’re not trying to arouse some kind of response, you’re just not trying. A catastrophic rejection still succeeds in getting a response, and an animated response at that. To be ignored is the greatest insult.
December 24th, 2014 at 12:25 pm
re: “All of these guys express a preference for the type of women they can reliably get into bed with and will staunchly defend and praise their preferred type of woman.”
Love the one you’re with. I take this opportunity to re-highlight Rollo’s thought: men fetishize their successes as their “type”. It’s a lot more psychologically involved than merely drawing the bullseye around where the bullet went.
December 24th, 2014 at 12:26 pm
There’s a better way of saying it… “Rejection is less insulting than being ignored.”
December 24th, 2014 at 12:35 pm
@Jeremy re: catastrophic rejection vs ignored.
For me the two go hand-in-hand anyway; I get ignored after being catastrophically rejected. I don’t like either one, but you’re right that I always prefer some response to playing dead. An example played out on the ‘sphere a few months ago, involving me and, er, some one. I truly don’t know if she’s now posting somewhere I can’t comment on because I don’t know of it, or what. Suffice to say, for her if she ever reads this, please don’t put all your messages in one antique desk.
December 24th, 2014 at 12:41 pm
@ jf12
getting $37.32 from the register and a couple of Cherry 7ups for you and your henchwoman
Don’t forget the honey-roasted peanuts and nachos. And snowballs. lol
December 24th, 2014 at 12:58 pm
@ Ton
Great dark fantasy.
Reminds me of a simple one I did recently. “Let’s sneak out to drink beer in my truck like we used to do back in high school.” She left her cell and purse unattended at a table in the bar to sneak out with me, lol. 25 yo HB8. Kind of crazy, though, heh. She has a powerlifter bf, but he’s a chump and she’s tiring of him.
Other stuff followed from the fantasy. This woman’s the one who gave me a leg-hug one night in front of my social circle. She wanted a hug after I danced with her the other night, so I gave her one. She bear-hugged me. She’s the one who came over to my table (when I was with Mrs. Gamer) and put her arm around my shoulders and chatted me up, asking where I’d been for several weeks.
Create the fantasy, sell the fun, and be playful. Having a touch of badass doesn’t hurt. Even something as mildly bad as drinking beer when you should be in class.
Speaking of my badass days–in college I was a serial killer of cute white bunnies–seriously. I sacrificed them when the ophthalmology researchers had finished working on their laser surgery techniques and the bunnies were blind and in need of being consumed by the Japanese researcher.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:02 pm
@jf12
It takes emotion and effort to catastrophically reject a man. Even if she’s being cold to you after, the effects of her rejection to her are not zero. It’s still a net positive in terms of arousal, if she ignores you entirely from the beginning, that’s much worse.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:13 pm
@ Ton, jf12
Would the following ad be bad enough for online?
“Vampish seductress wanted to assist in seducing and sacrificing beautiful virgins on my devil altar as Wagner thunders in the air and our veins are filled with ecstasy. Whips will be provided. Will include riding on the back of my bike down gravel country roads. If you have tats, piercings, and like leather, you’re my henchwoman.”
Photos of a man with tats, piercings, and leather on a Harley could be done. Also photos of a devil altar and of books of dark magic could be posted. Maybe hire a couple of actresses to do a photo as well for the altar scene.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:30 pm
Rejection is necessary to become skilled. You can’t “learn” by reading books, you can only learn by practicing what you read in books. The experience of being rejected contains critical information that one can use to revise and improve one’s approach. As well, the sting of loss is a good motivator to improve. The embarrassment and the shame are worth avoiding, and motivate you to do better. As well, you won’t appreciate when you are good at if you never sucked at it.
@ Freshman – Your time of peak horniness is corresponding with a fairly low SMV, so I feel you. But you will see your SMV increase, and you can do a lot to improve it over time. You also are still fucking young – you can’t expect to be a master of pussy at 19, you aren’t even really an adult yet. Take a breath and take a longer view. Also see all that negative shit in your head as useless garbage which you should ignore and expiate. In fact, according to your own reckoning, you are getting laid some.
Consider the point of this article – you will not always be in the domain you are in. You could also expand your domain away from purely the college crowd in a myriad of ways. I have taken on being involved with my community kitchen, and that has turned into me doing musical gigs for several non-profits. It’s a great way for a 52 yr old guy to demonstrate high value and meet women. We have women of all ages volunteering at the kitchen and the network of non-profits in the community is run and staffed by women of varying ages. And now I don’t even have to serve food or clean up – I’m the talent, the music, the entertainment.
You could do the same. You could also think about ways of demonstrating high value in the many “sub-domains” in your school community. What orgs could you join that cut down the competition in that domain? Think about it, get creative and know you are in it for the long haul. 10 years from now, you will be banging some 21 yr old nubile hottie, treating her like a farm animal and her loving it – and when you pick her up and see some 19 yr old putz like you glaring at you as you drive off with her in your turbo charged Audi, and you’ll just smile. When you are 52 and doing so, you will feel like you hit lotto.
It’s a marathon, not a sprint. You are an artist, not a factory. Just focus on the next one and keep spinning plates and you’ll be all set. The way you sound, I bet by age 25 you will be doing quite well.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:46 pm
I think the Catholics are using the manosphere to promote their religion the way the Mormons do: “Hey, I just found this book of Mormon. What do you think it means?” It’s a sneaky Evangelism tactic.
December 24th, 2014 at 1:53 pm
@Freshman re: “nature hates to be fooled” + “If I could go back to when I first graduated High School”
Women, in contrast, love to be fooled. While it is true you will never be born alpha, you can “go back” to highschool and fish in that smaller pond for a bit. Fool those younger girls into thinking you are some college guy who’s had some sex with some more experienced girls and has some independence and some of his own money from working some jobs … oh wait, no fooling needed.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:12 pm
@ TAnon
Not necessarily that this freedom is the most desirable thing, per se; rather, it’s the biggest positive (for men) of living in an environment where sex and love are hard to find for most men. And it’s not a small thing, really, for men to have been freed of the burdens of the traditional patriarchy. It can be said that feminism freed men far more than it freed women, overall.
Of course, the benefits of patriarchy for men (families and children, a steady supply of sex from a loving wife) are gone as well, so…
December 24th, 2014 at 2:19 pm
@tasdg, re: online badness. I suppose your suggested profile is bad enough, but something’s off; it’s like it’s merely the appearance of evil. I’m the wrong person to ask, I guess, but I’ll say it anyway.
I know Upscale Badness is probably the single most effective approach, particularly for someone like … (looking around) some of us. I could name names. An upscale badness profile probably wouldn’t be so blatant and may include code words for certain activities. This can include high class pimping, laundering securities, moving freight trains of off-book medications, etc. Besides the glitz and glamour, there is the omnipresent extra degree of difficulty of being caught publically living in a stolen mansion, driving a stolen Ferrari, etc. The emphasis is on huge risks and huge rewards.
I think Ton’s Downscale or Dirty Deeds profile could work as well or better, when backed up by the physicality. The emphasis is on the blatant pounding raw experience.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:23 pm
theasdgamer
December 24th, 2014 at 1:13 pm
Aleister Crowley books. Esp. “Magick In Theory and Practice” which is an aphrodisiac in some circles.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:23 pm
@jf12
re: “All of these guys express a preference for the type of women they can reliably get into bed with and will staunchly defend and praise their preferred type of woman.”
Love the one you’re with. I take this opportunity to re-highlight Rollo’s thought: men fetishize their successes as their “type”. It’s a lot more psychologically involved than merely drawing the bullseye around where the bullet went.
Well, yeah, that’s what the overwhelming majority of men throughout history have done, really.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:23 pm
jf12 – “Women, in contrast, love to be fooled.”
True enough, just so long as they aren’t being fooled to believe a beta is an alpha. Everything else can be fake, including her, but the man must be genuine. Otherwise the hypergamy machine might generate erroneous results, and would create a situation where the implemetation of her sexual strategy is called into doubt.
Which presents an interesting paradox for the FI currently. Women can be and often are fake. Or what they present is an illusion to bait the best men. The best tactical move for most men is to adopt the same, and “fake it.” I think it’s interesting the best tactical play (mindset) for men is to wholesale assume the FI’s methods right up to adopting a very harsh opportunistic approach to love, and relationships.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:27 pm
@Retrenched re: “he also has less responsibility and more freedom”
Well, yeah, but ONLY in circumscribed domains. If he is some single guy working part-time jobs when he feels like showing up, staying for cash in his mom’s ex-boyfriend’s basement, eating generic store-brand Cheetos while stealing the neighbors’ wifi bandwidth, then yes he has less responsibility: less responsibility to try, to strive, to do anything. But what, precisely, is he free to do other than stay in his little box?
December 24th, 2014 at 2:32 pm
@Badpainter re: “I think it’s interesting the best tactical play (mindset) for men is to wholesale assume the FI’s methods right up to adopting a very harsh opportunistic approach to love, and relationships.”
Yes, but even more interesting is why the vast majority of men do not do it! *Every* relevant comment I’ve ever heard or read by women, including good women, including True Women, wonders why men bother to be so nice. Women believe that if a man isn’t being harsh then there’s something wrong with him.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:37 pm
jf12 – “I think Ton’s Downscale or Dirty Deeds profile could work as well or better, when backed up by the physicality. The emphasis is on the blatant pounding raw experience.”
Ton’s profile is brilliant because it’s absolutely true at it’s core as well as smart and well concieved. It’s good storytelling. The only bit of fakery is the spin placed on the description, which I read as an honest bit of introspection.
Good storytelling is crucial, both off and online. I like approaching women with minor injuries, like an arm in a cast. I ask ’em if they have a good story to go with it. Since they never do we get to collaborate and create a good story.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:37 pm
@Retrenched re: “the overwhelming majority of men”
Yes. Most men pair-bond much harder than we are traditionally considered to, and women pair-bond much less (to ltr partners). When in love, what a man may like in other women, out and about, merely reminds him of his mate waiting at home.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:40 pm
Chaos theory – Is an outdated concept
Well no. It is very important in mathematics and weather prediction. In fact you have a veiled allusion to “strange attractors” in your comment. It is important to understand when you are doing Navier-Stokes fluid flow simulations and of course in aircraft design and fluid flow problems involving Reynolds Numbers.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:46 pm
re: “an honest bit of introspection”
The big reason I never joined is because I knew I could never take stupid orders willingly. That, and the whole “essential industry” thing.
December 24th, 2014 at 2:52 pm
jf12 – “Women believe that if a man isn’t being harsh then there’s something wrong with him.”
They should careful what they wish for. I am a nice guy, it’s who I am at my core. I realize this is a serious defect. When necessary I can be something else. I have two settings; nice guy , and the asshole. The asshole gets better results but I hate him and everyone that responds well to him. The asshole has no love, or appreciation, or gratitude for anyone else only a perfect indifference.
December 24th, 2014 at 3:24 pm
JF12,
I think it worked because #1 there are no other dudes with profiles like mine #2 it’s good for a laugh.
Then you show off through the photos, all of mine back the ability/ capacity to rob an armored car, demonstrate how I excel in areas of traditional masculinity and lead credence to the bad boy vibe.
BP wins the prize for picking up on the bit of introspection. Not something I am much into, but it is a humorous and accurate description of what I do/ who I worked for, but I think you over state how an asshole has no love etc and only a perfect indifference.
Women want to be ruled over ie shit tests. Harsh men pass shit tests, and like I said before evolution favors the bad boy…. The man who will go that extra mile to succeed.
December 24th, 2014 at 3:25 pm
ps story telling is an important skill and one I think Southron country boys have an edge on.
December 24th, 2014 at 3:35 pm
SfcTon – “but I think you over state how an asshole has no love etc and only a perfect indifference.”
I should have made it clear I only speak for and about myself in that instance. How that might apply to others I have no idea.
December 24th, 2014 at 4:06 pm
truingstar – ” What do you people want me to do?”
Shut. The. Fuck. Up.
December 24th, 2014 at 4:08 pm
re: beta orbiting other pages.
In one way I’m kind of glad I was forced to retreat here. My natural inclination is to mix it up wherever I go.
December 24th, 2014 at 4:14 pm
@bp
Being in control doesn’t mean being an asshole. You will be CALLED an asshole, you will make people cry, but in the end they will grow to love you for it.
I had a plate try to shit test hard last night, tried to quiz me about other women, asking how I would treat a woman that I found more attractive than her. I gave my initial response with amused mastery “When I meet a woman like that, I’ll let you ask her about how I treat her.” She decided to push the issue and insisted on a serious answer. I nuked in response. She cried.
I knew she would, regardless of the answer (or lack thereof) that I gave, which is why I nuked. I’m protecting her from her own stupidity by keeping it in check. I’m acting as the responsible adult in the relationship by putting my foot down. I held that from throughout the conversation, not budging even in the face of tears, because I knew I was acting in both our best interests.
If a child insists on having nothing but dessert for every meal, is an adult an asshole for staunchly insisting they eat a healthy diet? To hear the child tell it, yes they are. But to everyone observing and the parent, the parent is taking the right course of action. The parent is exercising their authority in the child’s best interests, despite their protests.
The plate, BTW, dried her tears and thanked me a few minutes later. You don’t have to be an asshole, just be an authority. A confident, cocky, arrogant, unmoving authority. They’ll call you asshole, but you’ll know what it really is. So will they, in the end.
December 24th, 2014 at 4:20 pm
Truigstar – “you just hate….”
I hate that you keep talking yet don’t say anything of interesting or of value, or even anything entertaining.
In fact I’ll ask a question that’s been raised here before with apologies to jf12.
What exactly do you think you’re for?
December 24th, 2014 at 4:27 pm
Sun Wukong – ” but in the end they will grow to love you for it.”
Agree, but I am indifferent to that love. I don’t need it or want it. It has no value to me.
December 24th, 2014 at 4:47 pm
@ Sun Wukong
I should explain that the asshole only comes out when my authority is challenged. If it happens more than once I’m done. I haven’t the desire, time or patience to deal with trivial bullshit. It’s unrewarding, insults my dignity and intelligence, and is a clear sign I chose poorly.
December 24th, 2014 at 4:54 pm
@Sun Wukong
Great explanation of what it means to be the adult in a relationship. In my experience, almost all children (and a very large percentage of women) will be utterly relentless in their quest to break down your will and/or test the fences on a corral. You don’t have to be blatantly obvious in your exercise of authority at all.
My approach is always to give them a comforting amount of choice in the form of, “would you like six carrots or ten carrots with your meal?”
Illusory choice still feels like free choice to most humans.
December 24th, 2014 at 4:59 pm
@truingstar re: “I did everything you all said”
I seriously doubt that. I have read what you’ve written and advice to you elsewhere for quite some time, and fairly uniformly the male Christian advice has been for you to exhibit more fervency in faith and a great deal more demureness and intentions of subserviency towards a good man (or two). Try wiping some feet with your hair, in other words. Have you done?
December 24th, 2014 at 5:04 pm
re: “What exactly do you think you’re for?”
I’ll answer as a woman should. “What a man should think I’m for is to be his help meet: doing the easy things like cooking and cleaning so he doesn’t have to waste his more valuable time and energy doing them, and helping his masculinity grow so that he will use me sexually early and often.”
December 24th, 2014 at 5:19 pm
raving ≠ demure
Demure is coveredupness and shamefacedness.
December 24th, 2014 at 6:34 pm
Studies show that women are more likely to orgasm if the man is wealth or handsome. Looked at another way women are more likely to orgasm for men they find desirable. So if your woman orgasms during sex (and it’s real) she genuinely finds you desirable.
December 24th, 2014 at 6:49 pm
Let’s go over this for the sake of fun:
1. Hypergamy is totally independent of religious affiliation.
2. Hypergamy always (temporarily) finds its most optimal (available) host
organism(s).
3. Hypergamy feeds primarily on rationalization from all participants.
December 24th, 2014 at 8:01 pm
@bp
You make a valid point. Overly frequent challenges to your authority become tiresome and no longer worth the effort, but that falls under one of the most important ideas of enlightened self interest: with each person in your life, subtract what they take out of your life from what they add to it. If what remains is negative, excise them like a cancerous tumor and move on.
By the way, when I say “love” I mean it in the more general friends, family, or partner kind of way. I’d be surprised if you eschewed that entirely. Enough exposure to TRP can sour anyone on the romantic version of love though, so I totally get that.
December 24th, 2014 at 9:13 pm
Indifference doesn’t an asshole make. Often it is merited. Recently Girl#2 was pissy @ my indifference to her nail polish….. somehow that was more pressing then figuring out the strange transactions in my checking account….
Point being indifference is often the correct response to the world at large
December 24th, 2014 at 11:48 pm
To be clear, for this purpose Domain Dependence does *not* mean that one’s success strategies change while moving from one domain to another. It means that one depends on staying within a sole domain to function successfully.
December 25th, 2014 at 2:08 am
From the Danimal archive…
An essential part of being a good lay is being a lay. If a woman does not want to fuck me then she is not, from my perspective, a good lay. In fact she is provably inferior to every sex partner I have had.
I get what Rollo is saying though — it’s very easy for a man to get too comfortable banging a certain rank of women and become content with them, when he could improve his sex rank with some time and effort and improve the quality and quantity of the sex he gets. Still, if a man for some reason happens to be truly happy banging fatties, or playing beta bucks guy for a former alpha fucks girl… well that’s his business.
Oh, and Merry Christmas to all you fine folks.
December 25th, 2014 at 9:23 am
@ jf12
It means that one depends on staying within a sole domain to function successfully.
What if a man stays exclusively within two domains and eschews others? Isn’t it more about having too narrow of a focus rather than domain count? Too much specialization?
December 25th, 2014 at 9:30 am
@Badpainter re: storytelling.
I really really like the idea of collaborating with a woman to help her make up an interesting story (and life!) about herself as a pickup technique. However, it should immediately segue into making up a story about the two of you doing sexy things together, in order to work.
December 25th, 2014 at 9:42 am
btw, contrary to what all women say, a man being The Guy and saying “I Got This” does not make him alpha at all. It almost certainly means he is doing for for women, serving women, thereby defining him as beta. “Am I being serviced?” is the alpha-defining question every man should ask himself.
I repeat, it is purely *beta* for a man to sit calmly in the passenger seat to comfort the young female driver as she anguishes. I’ve never met a competent woman driving instructor, btw. The ability to simply be there saying slowly and carefully “No, you’re fine, all you have to do is …”, while she jumps a curb, seems to be a purely male trait, but that doesn’t make it an alpha trait. Bringing bananas to a female and scratching her back in exchange for sexual contact is also a purely male (beta) trait.
In fact, you can take it to the bank that everything I personally would naturally-nice-guy do is beta. I’ve not taught many males to drive; one of my brothers, my son, a nephew, that’s maybe it. But who do women nigh universally choose to sit in the passenger seat applauding her every tiny success “You go, girl!”? The beta; the same The Guy who will hold her purse “I Got This” for her at the shoe sale rack.
December 25th, 2014 at 9:46 am
@tasdg re: “Isn’t it more about having too narrow of a focus rather than domain count? Too much specialization?”
No. For example if a narcissist specializes in making his narcissism work, then that particular narrowly-focused specialization translates extremely well across all kinds of domains.
December 25th, 2014 at 10:19 am
Once upon a time. The second brand-new car I bought, paid cash for outright at age twenty five, was for my mother. The first of course was for my (first) wife, neither of which had ever had driver’s licenses at the time of purchase. Their sitting behind the wheel(s) in their own car(s) gave special impetus to their finally learning, and learning safely. These shaky-nervous two were probably my most hair-raising students, although a carefree laughing niece was a far worse driver.
My sisters were the easiest to teach; enthusiasm without sniveling. My youngest sister learned to drive from the back seat, believe it or not, at age fourteen, which is also the age I taught my other sister to drive nine years earlier. She raptly observed my mother’s mistakes, as I patted her shoulder, over the week of instruction. I was having to leave again, and my mother was competent enough in execution but too tentative in making decisions. My sister, the only one left at home, took it upon herself to be the chauffeur.
She, Mom, and I were outside discussing what to do about the car situation when she volunteered “I think I can drive.” We climbed into the car, Mom into the back seat, and she drove off, her first time driving, and we drove, slowly at first,for almost an hour. She was by far the coolest kid in ninth grade.
December 25th, 2014 at 11:33 am
Specialization is the key to success.
One of the reasons I stress “Bad Boy game” is because it’s near on universal, near on infinitely adaptable and it’s a shit ton of fun
Merry Christmas y’all.