Loyalty & Hypergamy

278 responses to “Loyalty & Hypergamy”

• 447
  January 28th, 2015 at 8:09 am

  “Since water seeks its own level, you should not be surprised to learn that maggots attract other maggots only. You get back from life what you put into it = what you deserve. It is a basic truth that should be somewhere on the top of TRP rules.”

  No offence- but that is a very common form of logically flawed thinking, it constitutes one of the primary forms of cultural propaganda keeping AFCs ‘in line’ for BB:
  The concept of *poetic justice* – one of the most dangerous forms of mind control ever developed. –> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poetic_justice

  You (and I) have been influenced by this structure (that is embedded in almost all cultural narratives, children’s stories, movies etc.pp.) all our lives – but it does NOT (in any way, shape or form) constitue a rational description of reality.

  In former times, this ‘white lie’ was a good thing, keeping communities together, enforcing/imprinting positive role models on children etc.

  But today – it’s pure posion.
  Because the structure of poetic justice can be filled with any *content* – cf. all the tall tales of heroic single moms, divorcees and sluts being rewarded with “Mr. Big”, nice guys winning the beauty in the end after much hardship and tons of supplication etc. pp.
• jf12
  January 28th, 2015 at 8:14 am

  @tribeofuno, re: “What does that say about me?” + “the loss of two teenage girls”

  I suspect there’s a more universal pattern to this relationship than youve been letting on.

  Girl is nice looking and has a lot of boyfriends. Some of them get her pregnant, some of which she keeps. Her pattern is to bond quickly, but it tails off quickly after a brief honeymoon period. She hits the Wall and tries to settle down, and finds a nicer guy than usual for her, specifically a family guy, to help raise her children.

  She gives him a real shot, the whole nine yards, really tries to give hm the boyfriend experience. But she kept her options open because her heart really wasn’t in it. You felt desperately in love, and treated her too nice, I’m sorry to say.
• jf12
  January 28th, 2015 at 8:17 am

  @447 re: poetic justice.

  I agree. Also called karma, in which the idea that you can expect such justice in this life is ridiculed, since it takes multiple lives apparently.

  Probably the single biggest red pill truth is that being treated well brings out the worst in many people, especially women.
• Omega Man
  January 28th, 2015 at 8:26 am

  An uncle who was a veteran of the German Army on the Eastern Front, related to me one of the bitter truths he and a lot of other German men learned about their women at the end of the Second World War.

  He said that while it took the Allies 6 years to defeat the German Army, the women on the other hand were conquered in one night. All it took was a bit of whiskey, some cigarettes and their legs were in the air.
• Glenn
  January 28th, 2015 at 8:52 am

  @ James – Take your anti-semitic shit and shove it up your ass.

  @ Rhett – Your incomplete account of Islam and its history is an old saw, ever educated western Muslim recounts the same horseshit. I won’t waste everyone’s time here with 5000 words on it, but for people who haven’t bothered to study a bit of Islamic history as I have, just note the following

  – Islam was an imperial project from the start, while Mohammed was alive. He was losing his Bedouin warrior followers and realized he needed continued conquest and booty for them or he was done, so he became a conqueror.

  – Last week there were 48 Jihadi attacks on innocents (this is separate from all the actual war/battles with military/police). 236 dead, another 440 critically injured. And that was a slow week. Many weeks there are as many as 200 attacks. And the dead are mostly other Muslims. Jihadis kill as many people each year as the entire 350 years of the Spanish inquisition. The body count from Jihad is staggering and something that cannot be excused.

  – Supposed Muslim tolerance – Living under Muslim rule was a mixed bag, but in the best of circumstances Jews and Christians had to pay the “Jizya” a tax on non-Muslims to their Islamic rulers. And they were ruled by Sharia law.

  – Islam launched 20 times the attacks on foreign, non-Arab lands as the “Crusaders” did. In terms of unchecked aggression, there is simply no comparison between the Wests incursions into Islamic lands versus their incursion into non-Muslim lands. That is if one knows the actual history of course.

  – Islam consciously rejected modernity about 200 years ago, before Attaturk even, he was the last gasp of a modernist movement within Islam. Rhett does typical Islamic slight of hand trying to get us to believe that it’s only Wahhabis. In fact, in the Sunni tradition is “Salafism” and there are many non-Wahhabi sects that are Salafists. Salafism calls on all Muslims to live in the way that the first three generations that followed Mohammed as these were the only “true Muslims”. As well, the Shia tradition has shifted to become much more political and warring. Ayatollah Khomeni invented the idea that he was handpicked by God and that his project was to bring about the 12th Imam – and changed Shiism from a practice that often was non-political intentionally.

  – Islam is fundamentally out of step with classical liberal ideas. It fuses what Americans consider secular society with the religious – there isn’t any distinction in Islam. It has no concept of individual liberty, beyond the state of being a slave or not being a slave (which is permitted under Islam and practiced to this day in some Islamic countries). It’s a totalitarian and authoritarian governing ideology that is utterly incompatible with modern, western values.

  – Islamic public opinion is not nearly as nice as Rhett would have you believe. At least 1/3 of the 1.6 billion Muslims around the world support Jihad . More than half want to live under Sharia. A significant percentage of young Muslims support the violent Jihad of Al Qaeda and ISIS. And the Muslim Brotherhood has the same goals as Al Qaeda, they merely disagree on the means to get there. Islamism is THE ideology most prevalent in the Muslim world and it’s widely supported. This notion that there are just a few radicals around that are perverting Islam is nonsense and needs to be dealt with as such.

  Rhett counts on westerners not actually knowing the facts as our media and educational system lie to us or simply never bother educating and informing us to begin with, quite intentionally actually. I’ll stop here and I will not respond to Rhett as I don’t want to take this thread into the political or religious muck.
• walawala
  January 28th, 2015 at 8:55 am

  The idea of “Loyalty” is really one of “Projection”. Guys believe in the idea of meeting a “soul mate” so if they offer “loyalty” they expect it in return.

  I find myself bouncing back and forth between believing it should be part of any male-female relationship and understanding that it can’t be.

  A man’s loyalty is rooted in the need to protect those around them…a woman’s loyalty is rooted in a need for self-preservation.
• SJB
  January 28th, 2015 at 8:59 am

  Rollo: Your correspondent, well it could have been my letter right down to being a stranger in the strange land of graduate school. I empathize: coming of age among men is excellent for becoming a man but does not prepare one for the onslaught of the FI.

  Fidelity and loyalty; this is how men love. The idealization is not in how a man loves, but that a man thinks a woman is a man but with soft skin, breasts, and a vagina. That is a mistake that will indeed kill you.
• Glenn
  January 28th, 2015 at 9:14 am

  @ Sun Wukong – My recent emotionalism and upset at seeing the RP world even more starkly has me come to exactly the positions you take on this thread over and over again. As for monogamy, today, the entire purpose of it is to preserve male provisioning for women. And the entire mindset is one that will cause you to have oneitis if you didn’t start out with it. A man who doesn’t spin plates will never be able to keep the upper hand with a woman, or deal with her with any kind of equanimity and sense of power. Never.

  Being angry at “third wave feminism”. You rightly note that being angry at an idea is silly and unproductive. But you seem to also let women off the hook, in that they’ve taken their own version of the “Blue Pill”. Really? How do you think third wave feminism arises? I mean, you know that Bette Friedan was a communist “writer” producing socialist propaganda for a “labor” newspaper, yes? For those not in the know here, Bette Friedan wrote “The Feminine Mystique” and that book is largely seen as the initiator of third wave feminism. She also was never a suburban stay at home housewife, and had live in help to care for her children, paid for by her husband of course. And oh yeah, she also beat her husband.

  I can certainly hold that vicious cunt responsible for her awful lies and terrible ideas. I can certainly hold any idiotic woman responsible for following her and Steinem (another actual Communist – but this never gets discussed) and the rest of these revolutionaries. And those women who just go along for the ride, and today don’t “identify” as feminists? How many of them are actually standing up against the insanity of RadFeminism as it rolls through our society, destroying everything in its wake. They lap up the privileges and benefits horrific monsters like Andrea Dworkin have earned them. Until I see women standing up against the likes of Amanda Marcotte (she bathes in “male tears”) I give them no quarter and hold them all responsible.

  Men have been lied to, woman have not. Women are destroying marriage and family as an institution, men are not. And any Red Pill woman here who thinks reading RP blogs is part of their fighting the good fight, well I laugh at you. Go fight the insane women in our society who are destroying our very social fabric with their idiotic ideas like rape culture. Don’t come here – we don’t need you. Just sayin’…
• Jeremy
  January 28th, 2015 at 10:07 am

  @Steve H

  C’mon. Bullshit.

  Don’t misunderstand me. I’m not trying to justify poaching a friend’s wife. I’m not trying to make myself feel better for stealing a friends girlfriend (Two things I’ve never done). Rather I’m coming to accept that 99% of the blame should fall on the woman regardless of what we may traditionally think.

  Should it happen to me again, I can honestly say I’ll spend a lot more effort at keeping the male friend, rather than just washing my hands of it.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 11:43 am

  @Glenn

  Perhaps I should qualify a bit. We do have “Red Pill Women”, no? In my mind those are women who’ve managed to overcome a bit of the solipsism their version of the Blue Pill encourages and amplifies. The majority of women though honestly believe themselves to be powerless victims despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. Hence the get the hysteria of rape culture, etc. That’s where I say they’ve had their own Blue Pill. Your own daughter is unfortunately an example of that, I believe you mentioned her claiming you abused her when you (having survived actual parental abuse yourself) would never do it. Female Blue Pill right there. It’s largely composed victim mentality, often with a heaping helping of princess entitlement.

  Now much like I hold any Beta male made aware of the Red Pill responsible for their actions after exposure, I also hold similar women accountable once they’re made aware. And when an individual woman behaves like shit to me, you can bet I hold her accountable for a degree of human civility. But women as a whole? Not worth wasting my hate. I can talk till I’m blue in the face, and they’ll still honestly believe they’re victims.

  If I make a woman aware of the facts of the situation, and she still claims her victim status, you can bet I pretty much write her off as a solipsistic bitch and move on. I mean, if not proceeding to eat a bunch of time raking her over the coals is “giving her a pass”, ok. I’d just rather use my time more productively, you know?
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 11:45 am

  Example of female Blue Pill:

  Make a woman in your life aware that her career, status, money, education, and other traditionally male achievements actually do not count at all in a man’s attraction. She will be genuinely shocked by that revelation.
• Jeremy
  January 28th, 2015 at 12:04 pm

  I tend to agree with Sun on this one Glenn, women have been lied to just as men have. The painful difference for us as men is that the lies were far far less destructive to female sexual strategies.
• Steve H
  January 28th, 2015 at 12:25 pm

  Brody – since I’m the only other commenter in this thread to use the word “ethics” (3 times), as you put in quotes – where do you disagree with me? Do you have a moral/philosophical objection to a single man availing himself of female ‘professionals’? I prefer the concept of ‘ethics’ to ‘morals’, but I mostly agreed with what you wrote aside from that.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 12:26 pm

  @Jeremy

  True. It’s far less destructive to their early phase sexual strategy, but it’s incredibly damaging to their late phase strategy of provisioning. What man who’s come in to his own wants a post-Wall “I DON’T NEED NO MAN!” spinster burdened by an alpha’s crotch goblin already, when he can go after prime ass still in its prime with his new found attractiveness? Women have been sold the promise of lifetime success for their dualistic strategy, but it’s turning out to just be a short term gain, long term loss.

  Women do need their own Red Pill to avoid fucking themselves over, but unfortunately most of them won’t willingly take it till it’s too late because things look so awesome up until the last second. It’s honestly kinda like watching hoards of morons in an asset bubble. Men are, too some degree, prepared to take theirs as soon as their first genuine heart break or realization that they are generally repulsive to women at large and can’t figure out why. That could be as early as middle to high school. We’ve also got longer to get shit sorted due to our late peaking SMV.

  Women actually are in a more precarious position than men, but they’re in absolute denial of it up until the last second thanks to the female Blue Pill.

  @Glenn

  BTW half the reason to be aware of the female Blue Pill isn’t so you can give women a pass or be nice to them or anything like that. It’s so you can use the looming second half failure of their sexual strategy to your advantage. I leave the exploitation of this knowledge as an exercise to the reader; be creative.
• Dawg
  January 28th, 2015 at 12:31 pm

  Why NOT poach:
  Eskimo brothers and backdoor men always come in packs.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 12:37 pm

  @Brody

  It takes some hardass hypocrisy and nuclear-grade rationalizations to rag on women’s lack of morals and wax about “ethics” while engaging in and promoting immoral behavior yourself. Since supposedly TRP is “amoral.”

  Bull.

  Uh, some guys go on and on about that. I don’t. In fact most guys that truly view TRP as amoral don’t. TRP, much like science, isn’t about right vs. wrong in terms of morality. It’s about real vs. fantasy. It informs you what the real world is in fact like. It informs you about the realities of hypergamy and the SMV. It informs you about FI manipulation of traditionally male values and psychology. It informs you about all these things. Any ‘ethics’ or ‘morality’ applied to it are the opinions of people learning about it.

  I don’t wax poetic about any of that shit. I have the Dr. Cox view of people: “Lady, people aren’t chocolates. You know what they are mostly? Bastards. Bastard coated bastards with bastard filling.”

  A big part of what brought me to TRP was the question, “Why do other guys keep stealing the women I’m with? How the hell do they do it?” You see what’s going on there? I don’t hold men up as any “better” than women. We’re different, we prioritize things differently, our psychology can be wildly different, but we’re just as bastardly as women are if not more so some times.

  TRP is amoral just like the laws of physics are. It’s up to you to decide what you do with it and why. I choose to be selfish because I realized that being selfless will only get me screwed in a reality like this. If being selfless were the better strategy I’d go whole hog with it, but I spent the first 35 years of my life playing the selfless card. It got me fucked time and time again with 0 good results. I’m trying a different strategy to find happiness, because doubling down on the one that kept getting me fucked over seems dumb.
• Glenn
  January 28th, 2015 at 12:56 pm

  @ Jeremy & Sun Wukong – What is this, Red Pill equalism? Let’s see, I’m told my sexuality is innately bad – women are told, “you go gurl”. I told that my role as a father isn’t really necesary anymore, but mothers are more worshipped than ever. Women have conferences debating the topic “Are men necessary?” I’m hectored by Emma Thompson (who I want to fucking drown, what an entitled, elitist cunt) to be a “he for she”.

  Should I go on? I do agree that this strategy is backfiring on them because like many female plots, the are fucking inane. But the notion that we are both being equally I’ll served or deceived or repressed? But here is what I will readily concede and I think this is what you both mean. Much of this goes undiscussed and unexexamined in the culture and many women aren’t totally conscious of the extent of their perfidy. But you have to then ask how did we get here? Women put us here, not men.

  In this it’s like racism back in the bad old days of the South. Sure, most people didn’t lynch any blacks or own slaves, but did they object? Did they agree with the bigotry? Are they not accountable if they don’t decry it and in fact benefitted from it and played along because that was easier?

  At any rate, let’s leave this now. I get where you both are coming from and agree with so much else you have to say.
• thedeti
  January 28th, 2015 at 12:59 pm

  This thread suddenly veered off into the ethics of people, married or single, sleeping with other persons’ spouses. (A certain female blogger who, while she was single, pity-fucked a man engaged to another woman and when commenting about it on her blog, denied that she had breached any ethical proscriptions, could not be reached for comment.)

  Waaay up there, it was suggested that a person who has sex with a married person isn’t legally liable for that conduct. That’s not true. In some states, at least, such a person can be sued for intruding on a marriage, through the torts of criminal conversation or alienation of affections.

  Criminal conversation is just adultery, which is sleeping with a married person. All that’s required is that you knew the person you fucked was married to someone else. Alienation of affections is different and doesn’t require sexual conduct. What’s required there is evidence and proof that (1) before the intrusion into the marriage there was love and affection between the spouses, (2) the intrusion irretrievably destroyed the marital relationship; and (3) the person who intruded caused or contributed to the destruction of the marital relationship. Some states require malicious/knowing conduct.

  In some states the damages are limited to compensatory damages only – things like the court fees and costs of the divorce (which does NOT include the attorney fees or the property settlement – just the fees you pay the court to file your papers, which is about $200). You don’t get damages for pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress, etc. You also don’t get punitive damages, which are damages designed only to punish and deter – punish the offender and deter others from engaging in the same wrongful conduct.

  And in alienation of affections, many times causation can’t be proved. In lots of those cases the marriage is so far gone by the time the interloper shows up, there’s no way to prove the interloper had all that much to do with the later divorce. That marriage was going to break up long before the cheater cheated. Plus, in the case of women cheating, by the time she makes the decision to seek out a sexual affair and then does so, the marriage is basically over. She’s already checked out of the marriage emotionally, and she’s just icing the cake with it now sexually.

  All this, of course, explains why these claims don’t get filed very much. The only satisfaction someone might get from a lawsuit like this is to make them a defendant in a lawsuit, and thereby drag their name through the mud and smear them publicly for screwing someone else’s husband or wife. But, for lawyers, there’s not lots of money in flinging shit at people just for the sake of flinging shit.
• Steve H
  January 28th, 2015 at 1:02 pm

  Sun – ok, fair enough. I still don’t see why one wouldn’t then *choose* to embrace a consistent set of ethics, and therefore be trustworthy to his fellow men, all things being equal. If a man lives in abundance, this is so.

  We are animals, but we are humans. We may be bastards, but we may be better than that, a lot of the time. Why not be better? I agree with Brody there.

  If on the other hand one lives in scarcity, everything is zero-sum and every scenario can be distilled down to rabidly grasping for whatever you want, no matter who gets hurt. I say ‘harm none’ if you can. And if one has a life of abundance, it’s possible.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 1:08 pm

  @Glenn

  I get what you mean, and I think you misunderstood and my motivation for viewing it as I do. To spend my time angry at others is to set an external locus. To focus instead on myself is to set an internal locus for my thoughts. Realizing both sexes are deceived is not a way to excuse women as much as a mechanism to bring my focus back to me and what I can do for myself.

  It’s simply a method of releasing my anger so that I can get back to focusing on me.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 1:17 pm

  @Steve H

  A consistent set of ethics? Did you miss the part last page where I laid part of mine out? I believe what you meant to say was “Why won’t you take up my ethics?” and I just explained that as well: because they didn’t work for me. They actively worked against me.

  Do not make the mistake of assuming those who don’t share your ethics never have. Many of us have. We just found that they would up simply being self-imposed limitations that routinely allowed others to screw us over and left us as societal losers.
• LiveFearless
  January 28th, 2015 at 1:23 pm

  @Deti, ethical proscriptions… intruding Insightful.

  All:

  To add to your understanding

  of “ETHICS”

  you’re robbing yourself

  if you haven’t read,

  at very least,

  pages 183-191 (Kindle edition)

  of “The Rational Male” by Rollo Tomassi.
• Atticus
  January 28th, 2015 at 1:35 pm

  @Steve H. …I still don’t see why one wouldn’t then *choose* to embrace a consistent set of ethics, and therefore be trustworthy to his fellow men, all things being equal. If a man lives in abundance, this is so. We are animals, but we are humans. We may be bastards, but we may be better than that, a lot of the time. Why not be better? I agree with Brody there.

  The whole idea of stealing and poaching assume ownership. Does anyone here believe “my” wife or “my” girlfriend is truly theirs? It used to be that way, but those days are long gone. Marriage vows are ignored, pre-nups are shredded, promises are broken and nobody gives a shit; not the courts, not the churches, not the media, not society, not even friends. No one. Not only does no one care, the consequences are ignored and the behavior is rewarded. Hold yourself to whatever standards you choose; however, the sad but true reality is it’s every man for himself.
• greginaurora
  January 28th, 2015 at 1:49 pm

  @Atticus Not only does no one care, the consequences are ignored and the behavior is rewarded. Hold yourself to whatever standards you choose; however, the sad but true reality is it’s every man for himself.

  ^This

  Let’s not forget, those divorce laws punishing men and rewarding women are being maintained and enforced by men. Women can also play at being “Real Police Too”, but when it comes to force, men are the ones providing that force. And it’s the penalty of force that keeps us in line with divorce laws that punish men and reward women.

  When normal everyday men start refusing to uphold the “Law” because its so grossly unjust, demanding and affecting changes to the law, then I’ll start regarding my fellow men as being worthy of my trust and loyalty. Until then, they’re the ones responsible for enforcing injustice.

  Caveat: Women created this disgusting modern culture we live in, and they ARE responsible for their own behavior. I don’t blame men for the ways in which women behave. I do blame men for allowing our current divorce laws to remain on the books, vigorously enforced. Men who shame other men about divorce-rape are foul and disgusting.
• Atticus
  January 28th, 2015 at 1:51 pm

  Not having served in the armed forces, I can only surmise that after years of honor, duty, and loyalty, the “Every man for himself” fact of modern America is what returning soldiers struggle adjusting to.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 1:53 pm

  @thedeti

  Was not aware of that, but then again it’s not a law specifically against adultery. It’s regional judicial precedent from the sound of it. I’d wager the reason I haven’t seen it (and most people haven’t) is because of the low damage/rewards and alienation of affections as you described it. It’s pretty much impossible to sleep with a woman in a good marriage. The only times I’ve had a chance and the only one that I took advantage of, in all cases the women were already checked out of the marriage for one reason or another.
• thedeti
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:04 pm

  Regarding this ongoing discussion of poaching:

  It isn’t possible to poach a spouse/BF/GF who doesn’t want to be poached. In my experience, spouses who get poached expose themselves and practically beg others to poach them.

  That’s not an ethical maxim; just a factual observation.
• anon
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:12 pm

  Dude this blog and some of the comments are so “good” (on point) that I need to take a break from reading here. I’m almost ready to go back to a blissful blue pill ignorance and just go back to my blue pill days where I was able to get one LTR at a time (with cute 7s) with greater-beta (almost alpha/accidental alpha on some days) game.

  I’ve been aware of Heartiste and red pill for over 2 years now. When I read an obviously new red pill discoverer like some of the comments here…dude the anger just comes back.

  This post is astoundingly on point and hard as a coffin nail.
• thedeti
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:13 pm

  Sun Wukong:

  Pretty much spot on. Except for the exceedingly rare high T woman who prowls and sexes hot men for the hell of it, happily married women (i.e., women who are sexually attracted to their husbands; there is no other “happily married woman”) do not cheat. Period. Full stop.

  And yeah, you don’t see those “heart balm” torts much. National mores have been changing with widespread recognition that women are their own people, and can easily get out of bad marriages. No fault divorce, women earning their own money, “Marital rape”, et al.

  Legislatures started limiting the damages people could get for this because the awarded and sought damages were grossly out of proportion to the actual damages suffered. And, it was decided that the remedy for a cheating spouse or a busted up marriage wasn’t to sue others for money, but rather to end the marriage and move on.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:17 pm

  @anon

  Learn to just accept that you only know how things are. Reality is what it is and you can do nothing about it no matter how much you rage. Bring your focus back inside on yourself. “OK, I know reality works this way. Now how do I make that work for me?”
• Rollo Tomassi
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:18 pm

  Deti’s right. Is it ‘poaching’ if a woman doesn’t tell you she’s married/taken?

  I’ve never knowingly banged a married woman. I have nailed more than a few guy’s girlfriends, but in every instance that fact was either made known to me after the fact or disclaimered away as “being on the outs” by the girl I banged.

  ‘Poaching’ doesn’t happen in a vacuum. If I didn’t see a ring or know anything better and a girl was DTF, it was on. I always read these horror stories on the TRP reddit about some girl who was on her phone talking to her BF while she was riding some other guy, but I’d say these are rare instances.

  More often than not women plan ahead to bang a new guy. They plan GNO’s to fuck other guys around their estrus phase. If you ask them about it they’ll genuinely say they don’t, but subconsciously it’s planned.
• Jeremy
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:21 pm

  @Sun Wukong

  Women actually are in a more precarious position than men, but they’re in absolute denial of it up until the last second thanks to the female Blue Pill.

  They also give the hamster a lot of speed to salve the pain of their life choices after the fact.
• Rollo Tomassi
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:23 pm

  This is illustrated by the recent events with Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. One could say that they are both 10 by their market valuation.

  And Brad Pitt has become the poster boy for the progression of a former Alpha becoming a supplicating Beta as a result.

  He went from being People Magazine’s sexiest man alive to being a dancing monkey chump of the feminine imperative.
• Jeremy
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:26 pm

  @thedeti

  Waaay up there, it was suggested that a person who has sex with a married person isn’t legally liable for that conduct.

  If anyone said that it would have been me, and I don’t believe I was saying that. I’m no law scholar, I have no idea what kind of nonsense resides on the books. I was, however, trying to make the point that I believe that male responsibility for poaching is almost negligible when compared to the SMP performance demands of men, the concentration of choice in females, and therefore the onus on women to essentially do all of the effort to remain faithful.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:27 pm

  @Jeremy

  Hahah, absolutely!

  @NNJ

  You religibabble types all sound the same. You’re also all easily dismissed as whack jobs that found a place where your mental illness is an asset instead of a hindrance.
• anon
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:31 pm

  @ Sun, thanks. Your comments and observations here are spot on, dude.
• anon
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:34 pm

  I’m a lawyer. There is no alienation of affections claim anymore. Even if some states have that technically on the books, you’d be laughed out of court by Judge Judy Feinstein, Esq. (lol) the second you filed such a claim. Also can’t prove damages.
• Rollo Tomassi
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:36 pm

  Moral to the Manosphere

  Putting angel’s or devil’s wings on observations hinders real understanding.

  I say that not because I don’t think morality is important in the human experience, but because our interpretations of morality and justice are substantially influenced by the animalistic sides of our natures, and often more than we’re willing to admit to ourselves. Disassociating one’s self from an emotional reaction is difficult enough, but adding layers of moralism to an issue only convolutes a better grasp of breaking it down into its constituent parts. That said, I also understand that emotion and, by degree, a sense of moralism is also characteristic of the human experience, so there needs to be an accounting of this into interpretations of issues that are as complex as the ones debated in the manosphere.

  […]It is as equally unhealthy to convince oneself that self-repressions are virtues as it is to think that unfettered indulgences are freedoms. There is a balance.

  Humanism, Behaviorism and the Amorality of Game

  Behaviorism is the antithesis of putting angels wings on our backs and claiming we’ve evolved ‘above all of that.’ I haven’t, you haven’t and no one has, and our behaviors will make hypocrites of us whenever condition and opportunity facilitate it for us. It’s not that behaviorism would have us all living like animals in the bush as an ideal state, nor does it deny that people have very ennobling qualities; it simply accepts the whole of what prompts us to do what, why & how we do things and explores the reasons why in a far more fundamental way than a romanticized humanism. I’m sure this is akin to atheism for people invested into humanism, but nothing could be further from the truth. It’s simply a more pragmatic, efficient and realistic approach for explaining behavior.
• anon
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:37 pm

  And have no doubt, in any family law case, your case will be assigned to one of the following judges:

  – Judy Feinstein
  – Sarah Goldberg
  – Agetha Silverstein
  – Judith Goldstein
  – Lisa Reinhardt
  – Judy Spielberg
  – Lisa Rosenthal

  Catch my drift? Do you think these judges know anything other than radical feminism?
• Mr T.
  January 28th, 2015 at 2:53 pm

  Hypergamy doesn’t have time for loyalty.
  Women are 100% aware of their sexuality, from the way they behave or how they interact with men or the way they dress. The word liberating means : use your body to get whatever you want. You can put three layers of burka on them and they still can find a way to flirt. Feminists and sluts don’t like religions(I myself is an agnostic) it’s because it asks them to hide their bodies and not to flirt(gee they wouldn’t even like Satan if he asks them to do so). Look at how the ultra religious Jewish women dress and behave with men, look at how moslem women dress, look at nuns or women bishops/priests (I bet you one day the women priests or bishops would ask the church to allow them to wear short skirts because it’s liberating ) ,religions try to put a cap on hypergamy. Trust me folks women advertise/signal their sexuality while they eat . So yes, I am all for those men picking up married or unmarried women when you spot the sexual advertising and no there is no innocent sexual advertising.
• thedeti
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:00 pm

  anon:

  Oh, I think a woman could pretty easily prove up an alienation of affections claim or a criminal conversation claim. Thing is, she’d have to sue another woman to do it.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:03 pm

  @anon

  I’m noticing a distinct lack of hyphenated last names on your list, sir.
• Softek
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:15 pm

  For the record, I found out that that girl that blew me last month had (and still has) a boyfriend. She didn’t say a single word about this or let ANYTHING on about it at all. I thought she was single and just looking for some fun.

  Just a little poking around on Facebook and I see all these comments congratulating her on her new relationship (back from December) with a guy that SCREAMS Beta.

  As I’m reading through all the lovey-dovey comments and seeing all the “Likes” on the relationship update, all I can think of is her unbuckling my pants, pulling my zipper down and then after sucking my dick for a few seconds, stopping and looking at it and then just going “Oh, wow” before going back down. And the whole conversation leading up to that where she told me how attractive I was and how she couldn’t believe I was a virgin (my friend got drunk and made some joke while everyone was around playing cards that let on to everyone there that I was a virgin)…

  …she thought with the way I looked and dressed I was that kind of guy that just always got all the girls. Evidently I ticked all the boxes on her Alpha radar. Thinking she was single and picking up on a lot of IOI’s from her I was doing some pretty bold stuff, near the end of the night I had my arms around her just casually, right around her tits. And they were big ones. We’re talking torpedos here.

  Just like it was no big deal. When she asked for the bottle of champagne I thought of how I wanted to get a blowjob so it just came to me to tease her with it. I go to give it to her and then I pulled it back a little bit and then rubbed the tip of the bottle back and forth across her lips. And then looked her in eye and started smiling. She smiled back and started laughing.

  I was Gaming her without even realizing I was doing it. But thinking she was single and just wanted to have some fun I felt pretty uninhibited.

  Aka….GREEN LIGHT! GO GO GO

  So this has continued to be a lesson for me. Learning that she had a boyfriend….that’s a first. First time I ever physically did anything with a girl that was with someone (that married lady was all online and it was really only a very awkward deal lasting for a few days, and we didn’t even send ‘sext’ messages back and forth even once, it was mostly just her talking to me about how unhappy she was in her marriage)….

  Anyway, I didn’t even intend to. Again, she let on NOTHING about being in a relationship at all. Was just automatically assumed that she wasn’t in one. So finding that out a few days ago was kind of a shock.

  I’ve read that girls do this kind of stuff. I “know” it. But I never experienced it until now. NOW the picture’s getting a little clearer.

  Then there’s the case of people like my friend. He didn’t know this girl was married. He finds out because her husband finds out and calls him and tells him to stop seeing his wife.

  He said “Okay” and then went back out to his car and kept fucking her anyway. I think when the guy called him again and made a death threat or something along those lines he finally backed off.

  He’s also had stories of not knowing a girl was married. She said nothing. But then a car would pull into the driveway….one time the girl mentioned how he had to leave. “Oh, fuck, my husband’s an ex Marine, he has guns. That’s him. You need to leave now.”

  He was all WHAT? Okay — yeah….thanks for the heads up…. — jumped out the window into a bush and booked it out of there.

  Women are the gatekeepers of sex, men the gatekeepers of commitment.

  So if a woman is cheating, whose fault is it? If a guy forcibly rapes a woman that’s another story completely. But the vast majority of the time it’s the woman straying of her own decision. And luring a guy into fucking her. Which is not a difficult thing to do. And if it wasn’t that guy, it would’ve been another one, especially considering how easily most men will agree to have sex if a woman asks.

  Before that woman sent me a message out of the blue saying she wanted to blow me, I’d never experienced that before. A woman initiating anything — unheard of. I still have a hard time believing this exists, but only because I really haven’t had any personal experience with that.

  I’d imagine it’d be more common with housewives and the like that feel trapped in their relationship with a Beta that isn’t satisfying the Alpha fucks. Before that girl who was going to visit me blocked me, because she apparently was friends with that married lady, I was pretty sure I was also going to be able to get her in bed.

  She had a boyfriend she was “in love” with but going back and forth she would take jabs at him a lot and would indulge a lot of her sexual fantasies with me, tell me how wet and horny she was, etc. I have no doubt that if we did meet up we would’ve been going at it like rabbits.

  I wonder if that’s one reason she blocked me — because she knew she was acting the same way that married woman was, but with her boyfriend. And I could easily out her to him if I felt like blackmailing her, if anyone was giving me shit for that ‘episode’ with that guy’s wife.

  So over the past month I’ve gotten blown by a girl in a relationship, got a direct invitation for sex from a married woman, and also saw how readily a girl in a ‘committed relationship’ with this guy she said she was going to marry eventually, would talk dirty with me and talk about wanting to visit me.

  If I could do it over again I would’ve blocked the married lady and just zeroed in on the young girl in the LDR with this other guy. She was a much better prospect and also with them being so young and not being married — hey buddy, that’s life. From everything she was telling me and revealed to me too, we had way better sexual chemistry — i.e. Alpha fucks vs. Beta bucks. She said a lot about how he wasn’t aggressive in bed, was too gentle, how she wishes he liked sex more, and wanted it more, and got more into it, and would be rougher with her.

  Things of course that I just capitalized on. We traded a whole lot of fantasies and dirty messages galore. She even linked me up with him and I would talk to him a lot of times while I’d be trading dirty messages with her. She knew what was going on the whole time and apparently never thought there was anything wrong with that —

  — anyway, over the past month, yeah….some very significant lessons I’ve been learning that I never experienced first-person before. Read about it here, but….wow.

  I seen it with my own two eyes. This stuff all made sense but seeing it play out IRL — wow.

  I do have to admit that being on the Alpha side of the fence is obviously a lot better. I’d much prefer hookups with single girls and not get mired into any kind of love triangle bullshit.

  But I still don’t feel bad about it. I paid more than my dues as an incel, and I still continue to. Way more than most guys. Even the blue pill chumps get a girlfriend or two. I had nothing. Jack shit. For what felt like an eternity.

  It’s pretty hard to have sympathy for people in the same situation you were in when nobody had any sympathy for you when you were in it. I’m just acting the same way people treated me — indifference. I’m not doing it to spite anyone, but no one was there to pick me up when I was down. I had to learn to adapt, and that’s what I expect of other people.

  I’m simply holding other people to the same standards I’ve held myself to. The problem is they don’t hold themselves to those standards and will blame other people as much as possible to avoid facing the truth and taking responsibility for their actions and reactions. In my experience very few people ever do that. Even if it’s right, it doesn’t matter, even if it’s the truth, it doesn’t matter —

  “Don’t cast your pearls before swine, or they’ll trample them and then turn on you and tear you to pieces.”

  Anyway, the dust from all this seems to have settled (knock on wood). Very interesting past month for me. Seeing TRP in action.
• Jeremy
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:24 pm

  Nice comment Softek, I was going to chime in again but I’ve kind of exhausted the topic at this point.
• Just Saying
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:24 pm

  I was becoming more uncomfortable about the nature of women.

  A lot of guys go through that as they “wake up” to how women are. Nothing to be embarrassed about – women are disloyal, and pretty much everything a man finds disgusting. The key is to just accept the nature of the beast and use it to your advantage. Never fall for any woman – you are opening yourself for destruction – you have to always put yourself first – that is what women do. Learn from it. Everything you have seen, I see every weekend when I am performing – women with boyfriends, a husband, kids – doesn’t matter, they will betray them to get banged out by a guy that turns them on for a couple of hours.

  Just accept it, and enjoy. There are billions of women in the world – more coming on-line all the time. You can die without ever fucking the same one twice – if you want, and know how to play the game. But never think any one of them is “special” – they are a way to get your rocks off and enjoy life – that is all. Of course – that is all YOU are to them – well, that and an ATM machine. Never forget that…

  The only advice I can give you is to accept it and use it to your advantage – everything else is a waste of your time, and effort.
• thedeti
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:32 pm

  Rollo:

  Re your block quoting your pieces on “Moral to the Manosphere” etc.

  The point of your pieces is that discussing morality in conjunction with human nature impedes an understanding of human nature (and morality, for that matter). And that’s correct.

  That’s not what these guys are doing. These guys aren’t having trouble understanding the human nature underpinnings here. I’d say everyone here understands the human nature involved. What they’re doing is discussing how the moral principles which overlay that human nature affect the responses to the conduct. The human nature part is just what IS, what exists, and how people act and react based on who and what they are. The morality part is who’s right and who’s wrong, and to what degrees.

  No human being acts merely based on human nature –they also act and react based on whatever their moral codes dictate. And everyone – EVERYONE – has a moral code. It’s just that everyone’s moral code is slightly different. Some had one moral code and discarded it for another. Some are more restrictive than others; some more permissive than others. All that’s being done here is determining which moral codes “work” given what we know of human nature and of the prevailing legal and moral climate.
• redlight
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:38 pm

  “Pick up daddies at the playground
  How I spend my day time
  Loosen up the frown,
  Make them feel alive”

  Tove Lo

  So a few months ago I go over to a neighbor’s to pick up something. It’s mid-afternoon and the wife opens the door and invites me into the foyer. She is alone and wearing only a rope. I do a cost benefit analysis, and pass. She had plausible deniability since it was up to me to escalate. We had the couple over for dinner a few weeks later, and everything was nice.

  The husbands of the two couples we last had over would be happy to fuck my wife. The wife of one I flirted with a few years ago then had to back off when she became DTF due to anti-depressants mixed with drinks mixed with her husband having an affair. The wife of the other I would do.

  Many of the men in our social circles have made it clear to my wife that they are available. One of the men had no interest in my wife, but having some sort of cuckold interest made it clear his wife was available to me. Another friend banged her a few years later.

  I don’t see how it is possible to mate guard, that is try to prevent poaching by reducing your social circle to only the true and loyal and moving to somewhere without neighbors and co-workers. Likewise to not poach to help men mate guard is fruitless and seems based on romantic idealism that doesn’t recognize the facade of marriages and exclusive relationships in Western society.
• StringsofCoins
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:41 pm

  Eh I run game on married women. They will sleep with me and rationalize away how it’s not there fault. Though the rationalizations don’t even seem to occur until they are faced with some consequences. Even if it’s just me subtly threatening to expose. If I don’t ever give them any consequences they just keep cheating with me. I’ve got two unanswered messages that I may get around to responding to from married girls right now.

  Of course in my blue pill days I never would have done such a thing. I would have been aghast at such implications. Now I just don’t care. I don’t think about morality the same. I think about what works. And I have made no agreement not to sleep with any woman that allows it. It’s her responsibility to remove herself from the situation. Like half the married women I try to game do. That’s a pretty stark number to me though. Cause half of them haven’t.

  Not that I go seeking them out on purpose. I just ignore a wedding ring as it’s basically meaningless and hit on the women who are attractive. No reason to lock myself into an imaginary prison.

  I’ve flirted with my good friends wife as well. I would never escalate but I am now deeply aware that I could fuck her. This guy is a good friend of mine and this makes me worry about him and his future. I’ve spoken with another close friend about it who is red pill aware. He had warned the married friend to not get married but he didn’t listen. Now we agree the best we can do is to support him through his future divorce rape and hopefully we can prevent him from attempting suicide.

  Though I don’t think she is cheating on him right now or yet. It’s just so clear that she is going to at some point.

  I think it’s best to just assume that any girl you are with not only has cheated on you but is doing so right now. This way you are prepared for the worst and it keeps her off the pedestal.

  As far as branch swinging goes I’m now in full support of this. In three of my four LTRs the girls were single because they were dumped or fucked for a year but never given any commitment. In every case it became clear to me over time that should these guys come back with some game they’d be fucking those guys. In one case, my marriage, my wife was fucking that guy for our entire three and a half year marriage.

  Perhaps if I allow a woman to branch swing to me she won’t lust after the guy who dumped her or was pumping and dumping her and she’ll have more respect for me. Buy into my frame easier. And perhaps won’t list after the guy I poach her from as they all have with the guy who dumped them.

  I have never met any woman who breaks up with a guy having no options and relegating herself to the singles market. I just can’t find any woman who has the agency to break up with a guy before looking for her new branch.

  The attractive single women have all been alpha widowed to some extent.

  Better to poach them and have them branch swing up to me. So they always realize that they went upwards.

  This talk about, “you know she’s a cheater”, yeah. I know she’s hypergamous. All women are. And there just aren’t any single attractive women who chose to be that way while they search for a good boyfriend. It just doesn’t happen.
• Jeremy
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:47 pm

  @StringsofCoins

  That’s a pretty stark number to me though. Cause half of them haven’t.

  And…one has to wonder if the 50% that removed themselves were simply on the wrong side of their cycle. Yeah, kinda scary.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:48 pm

  @deti

  I’d say “yes and no” to your comment. The freshly unplugged do need that quote from Rollo. When they start to debate morality with me, I can often see that they’re still letting morality define reality rather than the other way around. I know I did that a few years back.

  Common societal morality more or less reinforces the Blue Pill for most people. To realize that the universe itself lacks morality is difficult, but is the first step to learning TRP truths and eventually rebuilding your own moral code in to something that works for you instead of actively handicapping you for absolutely no benefit.
• thedeti
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:52 pm

  @ Jeremy:

  “ I was, however, trying to make the point that I believe that male responsibility for poaching is almost negligible when compared to the SMP performance demands of men, the concentration of choice in females, and therefore the onus on women to essentially do all of the effort to remain faithful.”

  Yeah. There’s no real immediate penalty on a single man for knowingly sleeping with a married woman. What’s the worst that can happen? Hub finds out, says “don’t fuck my wife anymore”, and then beats the interloper to a pulp. But then if Hub does that, he’s going to jail and has exposed himself to civil liability for assault and battery. And he will go to jail, he will be found civilly liable, and he’ll at least have to pay the shitbag’s hospital bills.

  But then, why is that single guy a shitbag? Based on whose moral code? Well, based on mine he is, for knowingly sleeping with a married woman. And isn’t his wife a shitbag too? And why does Hub want to remain married to a shitbag? Don’t the shitbags deserve each other? And if you ask me, Cheating Wife is more of a shitbag than the single guy. So Single Guy is guilty, but not as guilty as Cheating Wife.

  Just my $ .02 on that.
• thedeti
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:58 pm

  Consider the case of conservative (former) darling Holly Fisher, married to a serviceman/vet. While her hero vet husband was deployed, Holly cheated on him with a journalist/Tea Party activist of some kind, named Joel Frewa.

  Holly’s a shitbag. So is Joel Frewa (he HAD to know she was married). But Holly’s a worse shitbag than Joel is, because Holly was married and Joel wasn’t.
• StringsofCoins
  January 28th, 2015 at 3:59 pm

  @deti,

  Women wanted the power to have full control over their sexuality no matter what and they altered the marriage contract to do so. When and where have I ever agreed, even if this is somehow implicit in some social contract, which I no longer believe it is, to not sleep with willing women?

  I never have made any such agreement.

  So why should I try to enforce an empty contract that someone else agreed to?

  There is no longer any social contract for me to not sleep with taken women. Nor you either.
• AlphaBeta
  January 28th, 2015 at 4:00 pm

  This looks like it could’ve been written by me. The only difference was that I got a lot of red pill education in the military from another woman I was friends with. She was pretty open about how her hypergamy worked and would explain her thought processes to me.

  One time she told me that she wanted to sleep with a guy because she was scared of him. Another time she told me that she didn’t like a guy, who she thought was attractive, because he didn’t have the guts to talk to her (the diff between arousal and attraction). After she got married, she was pretty open to me about her reasons why she was cheating on her husband. She even told me that she would make up excuses, and if the guy she was interested in believed it, she would lose respect for him.

  I always thought she was borderline evil. But no, she seemed to have been a normal girl, just pretty open about her hypergamy; at least to me.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 4:22 pm

  @Glenn

  Seeing as you’re our biggest market/economics geek, did you get a look at this:

  http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2txawk/how_tinder_facilitates_smvrmv_price_discovery_or/

  Amusing take on tinder as price discovery for SMV/RMV.
• Rollo Tomassi
  January 28th, 2015 at 4:44 pm

  @NNJ, alright you get one more, then it’s christo-spam
• redlight
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:01 pm

  “@NNJ, alright you get one more, then it’s christo-spam”

  make it a long one NNJ, the others are too short to read (if you make it 6 feet of text some woman may want to fuck with it)
• NNJ
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:01 pm

  If the bible predicts accurately the 1,260 year prophecy, the 2,300 year prophecy and other prophecies how is it not inspired?

  Do you know of any religions of systems of truth that can accurately predict events exactly on the dot even 50-100 years into the future?

  This is how I know that bible is inspired.

  The devil is a god of force. He uses force to win arguments.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:03 pm

  Be nice if the comments system at least had an “Ignore this poster” for individual users to kick on. I’d have ignored NNJ’s first verse-vomiting crazyfest.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:05 pm

  Does anybody read all that shit anyway? I mean outside of the Judeo-Christian nuthouse echo chamber, of course.
• Glenn
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:06 pm

  @ Sun Wukong – Great link. But price/smv is set by others voluntarily, without intervention, and it is not effected by externalities. So it’s hard to have a “bubble” in SMV. Bubbles are when speculation fuels wild price increases – like our real estate market. Or govt debt – the entire world is in the largest debt bubble ever seen and it’s central banks that are pumping it up. It’s govt debt this time and of course the underlying assets (Europe, Brazil, China etc) aren’t able to justify the debt load. Only zero interest rate policies make this sustainable in the short term. The equivalent would be for women to actually make a 5 a 9 in our eyes – not happening.

  But what is salient here is the reaction and dynamics of the players in the Tinder “market”. Clearly it’s a tournament and the top players take home most of the cash and prizes – pussy. Women past their prime can get pumped and dumped so easily on Tinder so they are reacting.

  The question that I have is why any woman who wasn’t looking to be pumped and dumped would ever be on Tinder to begin with? What does some 35 yr old aging hottie think she’s going to find on Tinder? I mean, how absurd is it to put a “no hookups” warning on Tinder?
• Glenn
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:07 pm

  @ NNJ – God can suck my dick too.
• Rollo Tomassi
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:11 pm

  I’m too nice, even Dalrock doesn’t put up with dominionists.
• Jeremy
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:13 pm

  @thedeti

  But then, why is that single guy a shitbag? Based on whose moral code? Well, based on mine he is, for knowingly sleeping with a married woman.

  There’s no arguing with another person’s moral code, it’s like trying to convince someone their faith is misplaced. That might make it the end of discussion, except that moral codes are constructs of the environment we were exposed to while we were impressionable. And everyone here not over 65 definitely grew up with at least some significant blue-pill conditioning.

  Again, I’m not excusing or justifying anything. However, if the culture is changed (women have all sexual choice), then responsibility shifts with the power shift, and that side is the womans side. I’m saying that if someone cuckolds me now, knowing what I do, I might be a lot more likely to give him a high five and next her rather than punch him and listen to her hamster run.
• Glenn
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:16 pm

  @ Sun Wukong – Dude, your commentary is helping me get back on track so well. I had adopted the “selfish prick” mentality but somehow got sideways. Now I’m back and it’s all about me and what I want again. The anger and emotions take me out of that locus of control. I’ve talked here about how being abused as a child makes it second nature for me to allow a locus of control outside of myself to set in and this entire tantrum I’ve been having is exactly that. Thanks.

  As for these moral questions, I just have to laugh. I resisted fucking married women for most of my life. I remember rejecting one who I had admittedly lead on. But once back in my hotel room I really didn’t want to be party to it and told her so. She flipped out so ridiculously – as every woman I’ve turned down for sex ever has. I had to literally shove her out of my room.

  I don’t hit on friends or family members women – married or GFs. Everyone else is fair game. Like StringofCoins said, I didn’t make any social contract with anyone and post RP no longer carry the weight of the world on my shoulders. I do have a contract with my friends.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:21 pm

  @Glenn

  But what is salient here is the reaction and dynamics of the players in the Tinder “market”.

  I also found the concept of SMV to RMV currency mismatch to be interesting. It’s something we discuss here in a roundabout way (discussing a man’s floor for getting laid vs. what he’d commit to long term) but I think RMV would be a legitimate concept to consider. Basically “What constitutes my minimum ONS?” vs. “What constitutes a unicorn worth locking down for me?” Tinder does make that really clear to women, but they don’t understand what they’re looking at which leads me to:

  The question that I have is why any woman who wasn’t looking to be pumped and dumped would ever be on Tinder to begin with? What does some 35 yr old aging hottie think she’s going to find on Tinder? I mean, how absurd is it to put a “no hookups” warning on Tinder?

  All explained by them not realizing that SMV/RMV are in fact different currencies with values determined exclusively by the gatekeepers to commitment: men. A man’s SMV floor is lower than his RMV floor. Hard and fast rule. A guy might fuck an HB4 when he’s thirsty, but push come to shove he wouldn’t commit long term to less than an HB6. The HB4 now thinks her RMV == her SMV, but she couldn’t be further from the truth.
• Glenn
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:24 pm

  @ Softek – Dude, I read your comment about being suicidal and making an attempt recently and was so upset. I have been that bereft and the desolation and sense of helpslessness and sadness is something most people cannot fathom.

  I remember this when in that space. Suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem. And while it’s serious, ultimately, it’s basically just a loss of perspective.

  One has to hate themselves to kill themselves. Don’t you get how incredible you are? Can you muster up any compassion for yourself? Also, are you in the care of a good professional? When I got to that point I always sought psychiatric help and I think that’s a good practice.

  Also, I’d like to figure out how to communicate with your directly and be here for you. Not sure how but am open to suggestions here that keep me anonymous. Hmmmmmm. It’s just too easy for anyone to look up an email address and get the name of the person otherwise I’d just give my pussy email address here.

  @ Rollo – Can you help facilitate a connection if Softek wants to?
• NNJ
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:25 pm

  I am not a dominionist. I am totally opposed to united church and state in any fashion. It is against doctrine. The only churches who unite church and state are those churches inspired by Satan.

  And folks, this will happen, it is a matter of prophecy. It will happen in time.

  It won’t be the churches inspired by God that do this (unite church and state) it will be the churches inspired by Satan.

  The dark ages was full of torture and persecution. I heard the figure of 60 million killed during the 1,260 years of papal persecution. This started with 538AD when Rome Consolidated her spiritual power into temporal power, and ended in 1798 AD when the Vatican was invaded by general Berthier.

  God shut down the dark ages and the Mother of Harlots in his mercy.

  This is when the beast received her mortal wound (1798 AD). Rome and her daughter churches have been recovering ever since.

  It is Rome and (moreso) her daughters who are dominionist. The pope had Allodial title (and still does some places) to their properties.

  This means that they own them absolutely and are free from taxes. This is much in the same way native American reservations can operate as foreign jurisdictions. with casinos.

  The theory goes that Christ owns and created everything, then gave possessions to the church. Because the church is not a creature of the state, it is not subject to the law of man. Therefore the church does not pay taxes on land and has Allodial title.

  This is why Jesuits assassinate kings and rules (see Jesuit oath). They believe all are pretend kinds and rulers, even the US Constitution.

  They believe that the US Constitution is a heretical protestant creation.

  I support the Constitution and the separation of church and state.

  I am not a dominionist.

  Satan is a God of force(s) and this is what the bible calls Satan.

  God never forces you to come to him. If there is any force involved, it is Satan doing it, or masquerading one of his false churches.

  God respects free will. Satan does not. This is why in the mob, illuminati, and satanic covens, they will use force to keep their members in line.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:45 pm

  @Glenn

  Dude, your commentary is helping me get back on track so well. I had adopted the “selfish prick” mentality but somehow got sideways.

  I will always believe that there’s nothing wrong with anger in and of itself, but letting it get the better of us is when it becomes a problem. I’ve had it eat years, maybe decades of my life. When you feel like you spend a lot more time pointing fingers instead of considering or taking your own action, your anger has probably moved the locus outside. It just requires the self honesty and awareness to recognize it, which is difficult.

  Granted, to know what actions to take you must clearly recognize the problems you face. But once you’re familiar with the problem continuing to stare at it doesn’t make it any better. Taking action does. And lest you think I’m really good at this, I’m not. I’m awful at it, but I’m learning. I merely share my lessons here in the hopes that others like me can benefit from them as well. I’m really glad it helps, man.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:53 pm

  This is why in the mob, illuminati, and satanic covens, they will use force to keep their members in line.

  Confirmed for conspiracy theorist. Fucking idiot.
• StringsofCoins
  January 28th, 2015 at 5:56 pm

  @nnj,

  You should start your own blog no one comes here for proselytizing.

  @sun,

  Tinder allows women to reject so many men so quickly. It’s female sexual strategy on crack and has to be addictive. During my brief one month on tinder I found that the women were even flakier then okc, also harder to get a non fat, non single mother to bite. I also don’t like the game. I don’t enjoy hyper sexualizing conversation with a complete stranger and that’s tinder game.

  The women I meet during the day are so much better quality then online dating. I just abandoned online dating altogether around six months ago. Though I do have girls numbers leftover from that time. Two of them. They were the highest quality out of like twenty girls from online.

  Comparing them to my current plates is just a huge joke. And online there definitely have their relationship market value inflated beyond belief.

  If you are going to use tinder set up a fake Facebook account and lie about your age. Late twenties opens up the doors to many more women.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 6:07 pm

  @StringsofCoins

  Yeah, I’ve been in and out of online dating, but this time I’m out for good as I’ve realized how the market there works regardless of the site. Tinder is just the realist of the bunch. It acknowledges that people go on dating sites to look at hot people and try to hook up with them. Only women and HG9-10s can make this strategy work though, so it leaves a huge part of the male population out of the game.

  I’d say at my absolute best I’m a 7 possibly 8 on looks if I get my fashion together. It’s a losing game for me. My verbal game isn’t bad it just needs refinement and (as you guys on here have been keen to point out) I just need to try associating with a wider swath of people and learn to seem (perhaps even be) interested regardless of how boring the conversation seems.

  Online game is just “How hot are you?” for both sexes. As a guy if you don’t inspire tingles just by your mere existence, you’re in the sub HB5 ghetto. Might as well run game instead. At least bitches can’t try to fool you with a myspace angle that way.
• Badpainter
  January 28th, 2015 at 6:54 pm

  Stringsofcoin – “I never have made any such agreement.”

  While I get your point I am bothered by that logic. What are thr limits of that sort of reasoning? I never agreed, nor was I allowed to negotiate an agreement that obligates me to not steal, defraud, rape, or commit other acts of violence for fun and profit. It seems the only difference between getting caught participating in an adulterous affair and say the husband assauting the wife and the poachet is the lack of any consequences for the former.

  I only bring this up because until marriage is successfully killed off, and scrubbed from society there is no recourse for the husband. I’ll bet there people here who would judge very harshly a husband who decided to use violence against the poacher, and the wife saying such is wrong in an absolute moral, and ethical sense. Revenge would seem to be every bit as ingrained in human nature as lust and yet one is deemed immoral and the other ammoral. Boggles my mind to be honest.
• StringsofCoins
  January 28th, 2015 at 7:10 pm

  @bp,

  Those other things you list, the forms of violence, I have signed an implicit social contract not to do as they are illegal. I’d love for society to create a new social contract where infidelity was actually punished. All I see are people who refuse to abide by that outdated old social contract being rewarded over and over. And the people who follow that no longer existent social contract being punished for their foolishness.

  Don’t get me wrong I am deeply unhappy about the state of affairs and often desperately wish they were different. But they are not. Just have to accept that and play according to the real rules.

  If I sleep with your wife and create massive harm into your life and the lives of your children I will not be punished. But you will suffer greatly. And any recourse you take will only result in society punishing you.

  It’s sick. Very sick.

  I guess there is this;

  http://www.cheaterville.com

  As an attempt to create some kind of digital social shaming. If you Google my ex wife’s name you’ll get a story that includes her fucking her married boss. It’s on the first page when you Google her name.

  It’s a small step.

  Oh if you Google her bosses name you also get a story of him sleeping with his married subordinate along with a story of his three kids.

  I like to believe that this may harm them in future employment opportunities but that’s just my wishful thinking for some kind of karma. And it isn’t real.
• Jeremy
  January 28th, 2015 at 7:26 pm

  @StringsofCoins

  …I have signed an implicit social contract not to do as they are illegal. I’d love for society to create a new social contract where infidelity was actually punished. All I see are people who refuse to abide by that outdated old social contract being rewarded over and over.

  Ultimately, life is what you make of it. The manosphere could just be a place where we all sob together as men in a testicular cancer support group about the broken social contract….

  or…

  It can be a place to reorient our strategy based on how women are behaving.

  One of those choices is not effective at helping people live happy lives.

  Again, Women have decided to take all the power over when/where sexual intercourse will take place. So as men we should stop holding onto the responsibility for their decisions. If women want open hypergamy (which is what they have), then your best bet is to treat them accordingly.

  Admittedly, this choice is not good for civilization, but the choice of which century to live in was never thrust upon you, so make the best of the time you’re given.
• Badpainter
  January 28th, 2015 at 7:28 pm

  Jeremy – “One of those choices is not effective at helping people live happy lives.”

  Would that be one that involves trusting women to be decent human beings, and not duplicitous fuck toys?
• eon
  January 28th, 2015 at 8:33 pm

  “All that’s being done here is determining which moral codes “work” given what we know of human nature and of the prevailing legal and moral climate.”

  And don’t forget that only a tiny subset of such moral codes can enable the creation and continuation of civilization. For an excellent introduction, see: http://no-maam.blogspot.ca/2012/06/keynesian-sexual-marketplace.html

  Those who have created nothing, and cannot even maintain what they have been given, often talk gleefully about riding civilization down as it crumbles, as if they will end up in some kind of pastoral sexual utopia, even though the infrastructure and knowledge for life without electricity no longer exist in the civilized world to any relevant extent, and Og With A Big Club isn’t going to let some PUA cuckold him. “Behold! I stand in contrapposto as I run a set to pump-n-dump your woman and AMOG you, by being cocky and funny!” Grunt. Splat.

  I am not saying that not fucking another man’s woman is some kind of miracle cure, but all of the pieces will fit together, in one way or another.
• kobayashii1681
  January 28th, 2015 at 8:54 pm

  “I’m back to spinning plates, and I really do think it’s the best option for any male in today’s society.”

  Truer words have never been spoken….
• kobayashii1681
  January 28th, 2015 at 9:00 pm

  @Sun: “The only way for women to stop participating I that system is if being straight with men would optimize her hypergamy better than earning points with the ladies will.”

  Well said. No point in fellow men getting jaded and bitter…go through the motions (bitterness, pain, withdrawal…yes, takes time), learn that certain things, with women, are that way for very specific reasons, then move on. Everything else will fall into place.
• Seraph
  January 28th, 2015 at 9:12 pm

  “10×10, you are so close. Now take the logical step and name the true enemy of the West. He lives among us, shapes the minds of young and old alike, you call him NeoConservative or the Frankfurt School but I call him the Jew. Every perversion introduced to our culture;feminism, Marxism,Modern Art, immigration, etc. is fathered by the Jew. Part of Red Pill Truth is naming the true enemy.”

  I am SO FUCKING TIRED of the fucking infiltration of Red Pill sites by racist whack-jobs peddling their sewage. Go to fucking StormFront or whatever and peddle that shit. You’re the same as the SJW’s, trying to co-opt movements and organizations because you can’t sell your garbage otherwise.
• sgtted
  January 28th, 2015 at 9:12 pm

  The military instills a great deal of military solipsism in men; this strengthens the incredibly important bonds among the military, but creates a massive blind spot when dealing with women or anyone else that plays political games.

  Not if you serve with women in your unit. Their games get exposed and the tactics become an open book and quite predictable.
• Sun Wukong
  January 28th, 2015 at 9:44 pm

  @sgtted

  I’m sure. However, I was referring to the return to civilian life. I honestly don’t know of how you guys could handle this shit in an active war zone even if you were aware of it. I’d be too tempted to throttle a bitch. Maybe let her have an “accident”.
• em
  January 29th, 2015 at 5:04 am

  The military guy should at least be aware what he is to the world. US soldiers fight for the most reactionary causes that benefit only a very small slice of the super-rich. The last cycle of degenaration is openly supporting swastika-toting fascists like in Ukraine and the Islamists in the middle east.

  Yes gangs have a manly code of honor too, but is that any good?

  So the other side of this situation is the kind of women you’re going to see in this kind of society. Frankly I don’t eny US-Americans or Anglos at all but blogs like this are interesting because they point out extremes of human behaviour.
• Redpilled
  January 29th, 2015 at 5:27 am

  I don’t think i can love a woman.The best option is turning psychotic and not giving a fuck about the outcome.Men need to realise they are TOOLS.Am currently watching spartacus to reinforce what men stood for…protectors and providers.Fail at that and you will not PROCREATE.
• heyjay
  January 29th, 2015 at 6:23 am

  That’s not true, Redipilled.
  You can be a thug and pump and dump and still procreate…
• Striver
  January 29th, 2015 at 7:16 am

  @eon

  I agree with you on an elemental societal level. Wives were property. If you tried to poach you got killed. Wife may or may not be killed depending on her remaining value and whether the owner could replace her or not. You don’t kill the cow for breaking out of the pasture. The commandment was do not covet the neighbor’s wife. The wives weren’t given a command, maybe it was expected that they would stray if they could. Like Softek said, men are the gatekeepers of commitment. The men come up with the laws to reduce violence between men.

  So poaching without penalty may be “red pill” in the current framework, but it’s not red pill in the larger social sense. It arguably isn’t sustainable because it ignores certain human realities and emotions.

  I don’t want to get into predicting collapse, though. Societies can take a long, long time to decline.
• ManPersonNumber6762
  January 29th, 2015 at 8:14 am

  I can easily see a breakdown of relationships between men and woman and of society:

  1. With online dating sites, like Tinder, OkCupid, etc., women, even average-looking women, only give attention to the teensy-tiny fraction of men at the tippy-top SMV (height above 6 feet, ridiculously high appearance requirements for men, etc.), and ignoring the rest. Sex and attention from above-average men is easy to get for even average-looking women, causing women to have an inflated sense of what type of man they can expect to get for commitment and marriage. Even with just dating and casual hookups, women have ridiculous standards for what they demand in men, the proverbial 500 bullet-point checklist (e.g., he as to be a minimum 6″8′, GQ-model good looks, a Harvard MD-brain surgeon, an astronaut, etc.). Men are generally happy if they can just get 50% of what they want in a woman these days. Even for top men if their managing to score with these women, your just a “place-holder” in her mind until she finds her ideal man, which really doesn’t exist (also remember hypergamy). With women these days making more money than men, a man’s appearance is more important to them than in the past, which excludes even more men.

  2. Women don’t shame one another for cheating behavior – they actually seem to support each other. There is more of a “You go Girl!” supportive attitude among young women these days. Being divorced is not seen as a bad thing as in the past, but women even trade advice on tactics to optimize divorce settlements for themselves. The legal system is overwhelmingly biased in favor of women, which actually incentivizes divorce.

  3. The inherent nature that women already view men: cold and callous with no empathy, and as disposal and replaceable utilities. Woman have an entitlement attitude towards relationships, it’s all about her. Women seem to never think of what they can give a man (other than sex) and how they can care and love him. They seem to think that giving a man the honor of serving her and being her slave essentially, and he should just be happy with this. A man’s life greatly increases in stress, responsibility and liability when he marries, for women it is the opposite, she gets an income slave (and her option not to work, or just work at a “fun” job), security, increased social status, a retirement plan, and fallback insurance (favorable divorce laws) if the the marriage doesn’t work out for her. A married man always has the Sword of Damoclese divorce threat hovering over him.

  4. Womens’ fertility starts to fall rapidly at 27-29, much earlier than what most women think. Even if they can get pregnant after 30, there is a greater risk of having a defective child (Downs syndrome, etc.). If a woman cannot bear healthy children for a man, she is essentially worthless to a man who wants a family.

  5. Older men (30’s and above) who are successful and considered “catches” do not date women their own age. When these men are ready to do the “marriage, wife and baby thing,” they want a younger woman with years of healthy fertility ahead of her to give him a couple of kids. Nothing strokes the ego of a man more than having a pretty, young woman on his arm. A woman at 30 for the most part cannot pull the same men that she did at 20. There is a smaller cohort of women who understand that their window of optimal appeal to men is about aged 20 – 25, and understand that men really don’t really give a shit about a woman’s college degrees and achievements that do nothing for sex appeal. No (or very, very few)) run down, aged woman over 30 can compete with a young, nubile 21 year old who “gets it,” is on her A-game with her Girl-Game who is on her kamikaze mission to lock down her boo for marriage.

  6. Alpha-widows. Many women wrongly think they can date and ride the CC with the better looking guys (not always understanding that they could never get commitment and marriage from these men), then their man will be waiting for them when she’s ready for marriage. They then have to settle for a man that they aren’t really into. Eventually she will grow to resent and despise their husband. No wonder there is a 50% divorce rate for first marriages, and the rate increases for second and third marriages.

  7. More men are learning about the true nature of female psychology and the legal system. Any man that marries these days is either really naive and ignorant, or just stupid.
• Glenn
  January 29th, 2015 at 9:02 am

  I think JF12’s ideas about Sexual Conflict theory play right into women’s rejection frenzies on Tinder. Remember, they are about resisting our approaches and Tinder gives them the ability to do a huge amount of resisting, if digitally. I bet if you hooked women up to some kind of brain monitoring apparatus, you’d find they get similar amounts of pleasure from swiping right or left.
• Mark Minter
  January 29th, 2015 at 9:25 am

  (I don’t know if anyone else is getting this message when they use a wordpress account to log in, but a box popped up telling me “My connection was unsafe”. It mentioned that Rational Male is unable to verify its certificate as a WordPress site. I ignored it because I use a Chromebook. Anyway just thought I would mention it.)

  I have a request for a post. It is for a rework of a Rational Male post sometime back about sons of divorce that try to be “better than dad”.

  I would think you might have more to say on the topic since a couple of years have passed since you posted it.

  Or perhaps how a newly red pill divorced father might approach his son, especially if there has been a period of estrangement.

  I have a “date” for a phone call with my son after quite a long period. You might imagine my relationship with my “old family” is sort of “interesting”, to put it euphemistically. My daughter has dropped my last name from social media accounts. My son calls himself “Younger Minter”. And his assumed “middle name” is “Fucking”. Sort of a throwback to mine back in the day. But he seems quite pissed though.

  I have been told these things can be quite emotional, and then a flurry of contact, but then a “backsliding” away from contact. Inevitably and probably rightfully so, he has innate loyalty to his mother. And he grew up in one of places that is so liberal it is often referred to as “The People’s Republic of …”

  So the question is “How to bring him along?”

  A post with suggestions and some update on the previous post would be helpful.
• sgtted
  January 29th, 2015 at 10:14 am

  US soldiers fight for the most reactionary causes that benefit only a very small slice of the super-rich.

  What is this, the kook thread?
• No to SJW and feminist bullting
  January 29th, 2015 at 10:19 am

  SJW harrasment, which leads to inability for employment (noone wants to risk provoking their anger) and social death, is a kind od discrimination.

  It’s very similar to STASI East German secret police bullying tactics, Zersetzung.
  It is a process of character assassination and threats developed to persecute dissidents, a more sophisticated Orwellian form of torture that was developed to cause “severe and prolonged suffering” without leaving marks.

  In fact, it seems as if they studied it after it was publicly disclosed (the fall of Berlin Wal in 1989).

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zersetzung
  http://zersetzen.wikispaces.com/
• Sun Wukong
  January 29th, 2015 at 10:53 am

  @Striver

  So poaching without penalty may be “red pill” in the current framework, but it’s not red pill in the larger social sense.

  If the reality is that not poaching means you’ll be stuck with bottom of the barrel quality women, then red pill reality is that the only way to get attractive women is to poach. I don’t know where you get this “larger sense” ideal in TRP. It’s about seeing how things are, not how you wish they were. If you have conservative/traditional values that is where you’re getting the idea from.

  The Red Pill is not about how things “should be”. It’s about being enlightened about how things actually are.
• BuenaVista
  January 29th, 2015 at 11:10 am

  Women have sexual strategies and married women know exactly what they are doing if they step out.

  They may say “it just happened” but it doesn’t “just happen.” If anything it’s the credulous man who needs to put his head on a swivel, have a clear set of rules for himself that a woman cannot influence, and know well how much of his heart he’s willing to put on the table.

  As Jeremy notes, “sexual choice” (SMP primacy) is owned by women now, they know it, and they act accordingly. This presents problems to any man with traditional expectations, and it presents noise and confusion to what formerly was a cut-and-dried situation. There is no social pressure, in the main, that would restrict female sexual hypergamy. Therefore there is social pressure to maximize female sexual hypergamy.

  Deti mentions Holly Fisher. She even wrapped herself in Christian platitudes when she was outed for her affair — she actually presented herself as a faithful woman (to boyfriend Jesus) in her bid for public sympathy and support. (And by way of calling her critics victim-shamers.) I’ve no doubt she received it, as well.

  It’s my opinion that adulterous women have already checked out of their marriage; they use an affair to punctuate the end of the marriage sentence (and shame and belittle their husbands, who now disgust them). Married fuck around with a *purpose* in mind. Any guy getting mixed up with one had best find out what that purpose is, before things go all Body Heat.
• anon
  January 29th, 2015 at 11:20 am

  Seraph nailed it
• em
  January 29th, 2015 at 11:23 am

  sgtted, no kookery. It’s what you see when you overcome imperial solipsism and narcissism. Exceptional leader of the free world :)

  Women are like that but the failure of anglo men to see beyond the coast of their lands has also created a new kind of internal extremism between the sexes. Divide and conquer everywhere.
• Sun Wukong
  January 29th, 2015 at 11:26 am

  @em

  Let’s try not to get in to a discussion of the geopolitics of the modern military industrial complex. It really doesn’t advance the discussion here.
• Sun Wukong
  January 29th, 2015 at 11:28 am

  @Glenn

  I would actually be interested to see that study. I should suggest it to my buddy who’s gonna be heading in to grad school for neuropsychology. I’m sure it would be pretty enlightening.
• Sun Wukong
  January 29th, 2015 at 11:35 am

  Actual conversation that’s gotten me a date:
  “I have a boyfriend.”

  “He’s not invited. I’m not in to dudes.”
• johnnight
  January 29th, 2015 at 11:59 am

  Blue Pill Alphas.

  That should be a term.
• TuffLuv
  January 29th, 2015 at 12:14 pm

  @Sun Wukong

  “So far as I know it’s never in our history been illegal to be the other man ”

  Actually in several states a paramour can be sued for what’s called Alienation of Affection, even if there was no breach of fiduciary duty on the part of the wife. Too bad my state is not one of them.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Enter your comment here...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Email (required) (Address never made public)

Name (required)

Website

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

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

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

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

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Notify me of new comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.