If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles.
One of the more contentious aspects of intersexual competition the early PUAs hit upon was the phenomenon of the AMOG – Alpha Male Of Group – and how ‘that guy’s’ apparent social dominance focused all interaction within a peer group on himself. The AMOG was an easy parody of a guy to hate on for early Game practitioners because his archetype was so relatable for men looking to improve their chances with women they’d never been able to consider before they discovered Game. The nefarious AMOG was their worst cock-blocking villain.
For a recovering Beta experimenting with Game for the first time it was bad enough that the very real, in-his-face proposition of rejection by women was always to be considered, but to have to account for a guy that looked (in his mind) like the typical jock who regularly out-Alpha’d him back in high school seems like an unfair obstacle to need to overcome. I think that a lot of men’s competition anxiety focuses on a very overdramatized caricature of the Alpha ‘bullies’ they were familiar with when growing up.
This characterization is also the basis of the long-clichéd plot of every boy-meets-girl, boy-overcomes-shyness, boy-overcomes-bully-to-get-the-girl story ever told, and not just by Hollywood.
While female written romance stories revolve around multiple suitors for a woman protagonist to tame the most Alpha among them – usually ending with the one who’s a misunderstood asshole to everyone but her – male written romance generally centers on an underperforming Beta male (with a heart of gold) who, through extraordinary circumstance is placed in a position of outperforming all of his previous rivals for his dream girl, or the girl he ‘should really be with’ instead of the shallow girl he thought would be so great. Instead of selfishly abusing his newfound Alpha powers by kicking sand in the faces of lesser Betas, he fashions himself as the hero exemplar of how Betas should act if they find themselves in a similar empowerment.
The stories of Spider Man, Captain America and even Back to the Future follow these male-romance scripts to the letter, but in every case the Beta-with-a-chance has to teach the bully a lesson before he can qualify for the girl’s attention, much less her intimacy. This clichéd story arch is a manifestation of men’s internalized understanding of their burden of performance. And while I can’t entirely assert this is an intrinsic part of men’s own mental firmware, I have to speculate that the fantasy of fulfilling it is part of men’s ubiquitous need to adequately perform for women’s intimate approval.
Regardless, the objective purpose is still to ‘get the girl’.
Examples of this Alpha bully archetype are part of most men’s formative learning. Not all men learn the lesson of the bully (some play the role with relish), but if we hold to the 80/20 rule of the manosphere we’re statistically looking at around 80% of (Beta) men who do. From grade school to high school to college, that guy, the douchebag, the guy who can’t help but actively or passively draw attention to himself, becomes the AMOG – and damned if he’s not the most contemptible bastard (or type of bastard) you know.
I’m highlighting that guy because more often than not he’s less a real person and more a manifestation of the anxiety that results from men’s insecurity about performing adequately for feminine approval. It’s easy to poke fun at the guys you see on hotchickswithdouchebags.com because they’re representations of the bully you hate. They’re the Jerks that every woman loves and every ‘normal’ guy vainly tries to make women rationally understand are the worst possible romantic option for them.
One very difficult hurdle men have in unplugging is getting past what they believe is the emulation of the Alpha Jerk who so regularly outperformed them, if not bullied them – yet, his asshole ways were still undeniably effective with the women he wanted to get with. Thus, for men who come to Red Pill awareness there’s a natural resistance to become that guy.
This AMOG archetype impression is tough to confront for men, but it’s important they do so.
This impression for men is an incredibly useful tool to effect women’s sexual strategy later in life when the woman (or type of woman) he’s held in such high regard and pined to be intimate with for so long finally “comes to her senses” around her Epiphany Phase and accepts him. For men with this AMOG mental impression, that woman’s acceptance comes with a certain degree of (sometimes smug) vindication. He waited her out and finally she’s “realized” what he’s been trying to make her see for so long – he’s actually the ‘perfect boyfriend’ for her.
He doesn’t realize he’s just playing the convenient ‘savior’-provider role women’s sexual strategy has conditioned and prepared him for, but believing his Beta Nice Guy life track has finally won out over the nefarious AMOG in his head is a strong reinforcer of a belief women need him to strongly believe when it’s time to cash in their Beta Bucks chips and her SMV starts its decline.
And therefore those skilled in war bring the enemy to the field of battle and are not brought there by him.
I’m going to flip your AMOG impression upside down now. That AMOG isn’t the one you should concern yourself with.
Most of the first PUAs always suggested a process of containment and isolating your target woman in order to ‘poach’ her from that guy. I understand the proposed isolation idea is to remove a girl you like from her social group, but the effect is really similar to Mate Guarding – isolate her awareness of all other sexual competitors and focus her on yourself.
However, unless you’re making your approaches in clubs or loud bars it’s likely the context you’re working on a woman in isn’t one where an active, in-your-face AMOGing is happening. Isolation becomes a security measure to focus her on you being her best immediate prospect.
Roissy once stated that there are groupies for every male endeavor, I should also add that there are AMOGs in every male endeavor. Every group of nerdy programmers, geeks, chess club, your bowling team and even in your Bible study group, there’s an AMOG. Some are more significant than others, but rest assured, you know him, or you will.
Most men will compartmentalize themselves socially so as to best facilitate their chances of meeting, banging, marrying or otherwise interacting with women. This compartmentalization is really a form of Buffering against rejection, but it’s also a logical social positioning of a man putting himself into an environment where he can (hopefully) excel and be noticed for it.
All warfare is based on deception – Bear this in mind when you enter into a new social group dynamic or an unfamiliar social environment. You are an unknown commodity and therefore your strengths are novel to the group. Your weaknesses (your Beta-ness) will be more obvious than your strengths and thus more easily attached to you.
Playing to one’s strengths usually involves defining a man’s social environments. King Douchebag at a Vegas pool party is excelling in his environment, just as Bobby Fisher is at a chess tournament. One reason less ‘socially adept’ men enjoy more confidence at a ComicCon is because the environment buffers their social deficits, but emphasizes their particular talents. The first mistake most men make when considering an AMOG situation is underestimating the importance of that environment. In high school the environment was probably set for you, but as an adult you’ve got a greater degree of control over it.
Bear this in mind when you’re confronted with a guy “all the girls love”. There’s a tendency on the part of Beta leaning guys to think the AMOG is a ‘natural’ Alpha when in fact he’s really domain dependent on the social environment you share with him. Of course there will always be guys who excel in almost any environment because Hypergamy is universal to women and a ‘hawt guy’ is ‘hawt’ to all women, but remove him from his preferred domain to one you’re better adept in, or, outperform him in his domain with a particular strength or expertise you possess in such a way that he’s forced to acknowledge your skill.
To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.
The caricature of an in-your-face belligerent AMOG is really a social anomaly, and usually your experience of him is the product of an environment you’re not at home in. Far more common however is the AMOG who is unassuming, affable, and honestly a guy you probably can’t help but like. In fact this likability is his primary appeal. Obvious Alpha superiority combined with even a marginal humility makes for an irresistible AMOG to women.
One of my best friends to this day was a guy I despised when we were in high school. We ended up becoming lifelong friends, but initially I hated him for having such a natural Alpha affinity with the girls I wanted to get with. I actually attribute part of my early 20s sexual success (and if I’m honest some proto-Red Pill awareness) to many of the lessons women’s behavior around him taught me.
Both the nervous Beta and the PUA like to encourage the idea of an AMOG as being the drunk, loud-mouthed frat boy who pushes you aside to get to the girl at the bar you’re sarging (“Step aside McFly!”), but the Alpha Male of the Group to really consider is the guy women can’t stop talking about when he’s not even present. He’s the guy who leaves the room and girls giddily huddle together to agree about how ‘hawt’ he is. He doesn’t even have to be in the group to be the Alpha of it.
The best form of social proof is the unsolicited kind. The kind where women can’t help but talk about a guy, and ask his Beta-chump friends how they can get to know him better.
He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot, will be victorious.
In the immediate sense, unseating this AMOG would be a challenge only the most exceptional men could hope for. He’s established in his environment and his status and social proof is perpetuated for him within his social group. This situation may seem hopeless, and if your goal is to supplant him you’d have to really consider what the rewards would be in doing so, however there is much to learn from him within your shared environment.
Pose as a friend, act as a spy. Befriending the AMOG may be your best option as it opens you up to his social proof as a peer. You may not replace him in the short term, but if you’re spinning plates as you should, his confirmation of you as a peer will only benefit you. This confirmation will allow you an insight into the dynamics of that social environment. Your ultimate success doesn’t lie in destroying the AMOG, or becoming one yourself, but mastering a shared environment in which your strengths are best applied.
The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.
Pretend inferiority and encourage his arrogance. The opportunity to secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.
This tact is useful for both the in-your-face AMOG as well as the non-direct, status affirmed AMOG. Sometimes proving one’s superiority is simply allowing the mediocre enough time and opportunity to self-destruct. The trick of course is in being prepared to swiftly capitalize on that AMOG’s missteps.
Law 33 – Discover Each Man’s Thumbscrew
Everyone has a weakness, a gap in the castle wall. That weakness is usualy an insecurity, an uncontrollable emotion or need; it can also be a small secret pleasure. Either way, once found, it is a thumbscrew you can turn to your advantage.
In the early part of my career in liquor branding I worked for a very rich man in his mid 60s. This guy had quite the resume of “successes”, but for the greater part they’d come from his self-importance and borrowing money than any real talent of his own. He was the owner, but had a reputation for attention seeking and a love of flattery that bordered on arrogance. Usually this would come at the expense of whomever happened to be outshining him as the master.
He was a consummate AMOG, but with no real legitimacy. At one point we had an important negotiation with a Chinese distributor to get our brands into an Asian market and as he’d typically do he wanted to entertain the reps over dinner after a big trade show we’d met them at. They were impressed with me because I was responsible for the creative side of the company, but even with my own deferential credits to my ‘boss’ he took it as an opportunity to AMOG me in front of his new ‘friends’.
I actually saw this coming (it’d happened on other occasions) and I had a good prior knowledge of the sensibilities of the Chinese from my time in doing casino marketing, so I diplomatically let him hang himself with his self-aggrandizement and bluster at my expense. Predictably the reps were off-put by this and we lost the distribution. The good news was that about a year and a half later I was offered a string of very lucrative branding contracts for several of this Asian company’s holdings (2 of which I still front now) because of this patience and letting my boss implode. And all I did was see it coming and let him convict himself.
Every AMOG has a weakness to exploit. Sometimes discovering this requires a patience most guys simply don’t want to wait around for, but with a bit of tact and attention it doesn’t take long. I think the older a man gets the easier it is to judge the character of others (or it should) – you experience the “types” enough to gauge a predictable character action.
There’s an old, but fantastic breakdown of the classic Boyfriend Destroyer script on RSD Nation. I wont repost it here, but if you take a moment to read the script, the premise is one of breaking down a boyfriend’s reputation by indirectly whittling away at the most predictable areas of contention in most relationships. Emphasize his Beta attributes while leading (not telling) her to consider and appreciate your Alpha attributes.
Yes, it’s bad form, and yes, your efforts would be better applied to new prospective plates to spin instead of working on some girl with a boyfriend. However, it is an excellent study in understanding how to deconstruct an AMOG and learning his thumbscrews.
Amused Mastery isn’t just a technique to hold women’s attention, it’s also an effective tool in defusing an AMOG. Once you have an understanding of that AMOG’s weakness – a penchant for self-aggrandizement, a taste for booze or a kind of woman, lack of legitimate ambition, Beta thinking/behavioral tendencies, etc. – the plan then becomes one of emphasizing those character flaws indirectly by exemplifying counter-strengths to those weaknesses.
Women love a man who Just Gets It, and the best, playful way of expressing that is with Amused Mastery; but it’s even more sexy when that Mastery extends to men who she perceives are your intersexual rivals. This then, by association, compliments her ego for your Amused Mastery of her.
February 3rd, 2015 at 7:37 pm
Another possibility is that is part of a feminist disinformation campaign intended to nudge men towards MGTOW, or otherwise make them neurotic and dysfunctional so as to impair their ability to form relationships.
I have sensed that going on before.
February 3rd, 2015 at 7:38 pm
Now, Christie dear, there’s a man starving somewhere.
February 3rd, 2015 at 7:48 pm
Christie is typical. She’s your completely median club chick. And you feel the need to criticize her predictable clucking, why is that? You have to care less than the chick in every case. That’s the lesson with this little devolving conversation, anyway. Indifference is far more powerful than AMOGing or ‘trying’ to attract a chick in even the most effective ways.
And I apologize once again for beating a dead horse, but mens’ (writ-large) willingness to simply pay for it negates virtually all her power, including – inconsequentially enough – her power to elicit responses from the men on this forum.
February 3rd, 2015 at 7:51 pm
“I’ve stopped going to Return Of Kings as I feel the quality of articles has plummeted and there are a lot more bigots (race/religion etc) commenting there. Both Rollo and Christian make men of all backgrounds feel welcome, a hospitality ROK appears to lack on some level due to various prejudices in its core community.”
Bingo on all counts.
I wrote Roosh an email warning him his site was being overrun with cranks, and possibly even SJW’s posing as Red Pillers and part of the reason was the poor quality of the articles.
I told him I was worried his site was in danger of being degraded and infiltrated by Cultural Marxists and whack-jobs and he thought I made a strong case, even wanting to publish the letter.
His editorial staff then talked him out of it, and one of their editors completely misrepresented what I wrote in turning the article down.
I hate to say it, but I think you can expect RoK to turn into a neo-Leftist and/or crank site over the next year if it keeps up.
February 3rd, 2015 at 7:56 pm
I’m very relaxed, Jeremy. I can tell that y’all revere the guy, and I don’t – but fine if you do. Just review the thread though – something I wrote struck a nerve, prompting the long-winded written attack on me. Again, I get it. No worries. In fact I’m flattered that it had that much of an impact.
As my intent is to ‘help’ other guys on an online forum, I’m consistent in that I do that in real life, with actual human beings. One isn’t really trying to ‘help’ when they’re perfectly willing to tear apart families et al just to get their dick wet – and like I say, that’s entirely unnecessary anyways. And I have no family of my own, so that’s not just a selfish viewpoint. It’s a simple framework for a civil society in which hopefully some plurality of adults can mostly trust one another.
February 3rd, 2015 at 8:11 pm
@Steve H
I can tell that y’all revere the guy, and I don’t – but fine if you do.
We appreciate guys that actually demonstrate a knowledge of how shit works, and you demonstrate clearly that you don’t. He does. It’s really that simple.
February 3rd, 2015 at 8:14 pm
I’ve been reading the debate, above, and wondering why y’all haven’t figured it out, yet. Rollo gave it to you with all of those Taoist proverbs, but to put it simply, when you are the one setting your own victory conditions, the role of the AMOG is utterly relative. The AMOG is nothing more than a piece of the landscape which you may choose to exploit as leverage toward your own – self determined – goal. Like the Magical Negro, the Wise Funny Gay Man, and the Fairy Godmother/father Executive Billionaire, seeing the archetype of the AMOG instead of the subjective reality of the situation means you’ve already betrayed your victory.
All human social interactions are relative. The AMOG perspective is challenged by altering the conditions and re-testing. The advantage of doing so should be clear, concrete, and obtainable, however, and in fulfillment of the goal . . . otherwise you’re just another jerk pounding your chest.
A king once raced horses against a rival, but every time the king raced his three best horses, they always lost. Despairing of losing so often, he turned to a wise man who counseled him to race his third best horse against his rival’s second, his best against his rival’s second best, and his second best against his rival’s third best. The result was predictable: even though the king lost one race, he won two. By challenging his rival by changing his own perspective on victory, he overcame his total loss with the solace of partial victory. And likely a fat purse.
Just sayin’.
February 3rd, 2015 at 8:33 pm
@Steve H
Not revere, but based on what he says, I’m fairly certain myself that he’s in the field, and I’m not. That means when it comes to what actually works, I’d be a fool if I trusted myself over what he says.
If I were to attempt to speak for YaReally, I’d say the nerve that was struck was genuine concern that purple-pill beliefs were working their way into some people’s thinking here. I sincerely doubt that he’s ego-invested in making sure Rollo’s comment section reflects his thinking somehow. I’d wager that he was genuinely concerned that what was written demonstrated a lack of touch with reality.
February 3rd, 2015 at 8:39 pm
Work break time!
@Rollo
“@Steve, heheh, if she went off with YaReally, she deserves everything she gets.”
No one deserves ghonnaherpasyphalitis AIDS, Rollo.
“Check that, appreciate your answer. I think that mentality is exactly right.”
This is literally the exact mentality I’ve been describing. You’re agreeing with his tone because it SOUNDS like he’s insulting me but really you’re agreeing with everything I’ve written too lol
This right here:
“@Steve, heheh, if she went off with YaReally, she deserves everything she gets. I’d tell her thanks for revealing her true colors.
I’d regard him like every other man I know today – I expect them to do their worst, and I expect myself to do the best. If a woman (especially one I’ve been married to for almost 19 years) is that susceptible to that influence, I’m better off for knowing it.”
…is exactly what abundance mentality is. This is what the guys who know their value think and what I’ve been describing. This is why Rollo has kept his wife for so long. If his job didn’t involve being around cool social AMOG type dudes and hot girls, like if he worked in a quiet library or something, he might not do so well and his blog might have a lot of theory bullshit in it. But he’s in a position to observe this stuff in action, that’s why his blog aligns with what us guys who go out a lot experience.
@Steve h
“something I wrote struck a nerve, prompting the long-winded written attack on me.”
What struck a nerve is that you’re writing shit that doesn’t make sense with real-world experience, and that wrong shit you’re promoting will fuck guys up who are trying to learn how this all actually works and I know Rollo can’t bitch-slap you and other guys don’t necessarily have the experience to explain why you’re spouting nonsense. So I’m calling it out, in-depth, to explain why it’s wrong so that guys aren’t misled by your writing.
“We have no way of knowing if half the stuff you’ve written about your own experiences is true, and I doubt it is”
I don’t even care if you believe me. I’m not spouting theories and hoping everyone gives them a thumbs-up and getting butthurt if people disagree. I’m just reporting facts from the field. I don’t have any emotional investment in it.
Hell, I don’t WANT you to believe me. I want you to all go out regularly and try to apply those BF Destroyers and see what happens and learn. But most of you aren’t going to, and that’s fine as long as when you write about what will happen when guys try them aligns with what actually happens when we try them. If it doesn’t align then I’ll call you out as theorizing.
Nobody thought you could do HALF the shit PUAs have found out you can do by pushing the envelope and ignoring armchair theory to test actual results. There was a time where “cocky/funny” was controversial because a bunch of armchair theorists bullshat that if you were too cocky a girl wouldn’t be into you and you actually have to just mirror her body language and release your pheromones etc.
The thing guys like you don’t get is that pickup isn’t about “come up with a theory and go try to find evidence that it’s true”. We all WISH the world worked like the blue pill fantasy where you can just be a Nice Guy and the girl will be Special and it’ll all work out.
But then we went out in-field, thousands of us, day in and day out trying random shit out and comparing results and notes and looking for patterns until we simply found the consistent principles that WORK. Not that are “good”, not that we WANT to work, not that are politically correct or can’t be used to do bad things…all we did was find out what WORKS.
Now I don’t even care if you DON’T go out. You could sit in the back of a dusty library all day and blog about game just imagining it in your head, as long as what you’re saying aligns with what the guys who go out a lot have found from massive field experience. As long as what you’re saying aligns with reality, I’m cool with it and will support you.
On the flip side even if you go out 365 days a year, if what you say doesn’t align with the experiences of the rest of the community of thousands of dudes going out doing this, then either you’re lying about going out that much or you’re going out and not pushing yourself or thoroughly testing this stuff because if you were you would come to the same conclusions as the rest of us.
PUA is not THEORY. It’s backwards-engineered results-based observation. You’re saying “I think the earth is flat” and I’m saying “2 + 2 = 4″. I’m not emotionally invested in what I’m reporting because it’s simply fact. If you want to believe 3 + 2 = 4, that’s fine, your calculations will come out wrong, and I don’t even care about your calculations…but the point where I DO care and where I’ll step in like I did here is when you’re saying 3 + 2 = 4 and someone else is backing you up and no one is questioning you, ’cause that’s going to fuck up other guys who give your word too much authority and start approaching their calculations thinking 3 + 2 = 4 and it’s going to fuck them up.
“If you had financial abundance, then buying (at min.) 8s and 9s would be as easy as ordering a pizza.”
lol wut? What even IS this? Where did this come from? I don’t have financial abundance and even if I did I wouldn’t be using it to buy callgirls. If all I wanted was sex there are a lot easier ways to get it than cold-approach pickup lol Hell, cold-approach pickup is like the LEAST efficient way to get laid. We do it for the challenge and the knowledge…you’ll learn a shitload more about game cold-approaching a 9 in a mixed set, whether you get her or not, than you will from banging a 6 in your social circle who has a crush on you.
“Create financial abundance, and these things reveal themselves to be ridiculous wastes of time.”
I’d tell you about the rich dudes who’s wives/GFs cheat on them all the time for guys like me, but you can just go out yourself and see it in action.
That’s how anyone who doubts what I say can verify if I’m full of shit or not. I’ve said it to feminists and game-denialists and HUS Sue etc. If you want to see if I’m full of shit, be a dude and go out and actively apply this shit 3-5x a week 3-6 hours a night/day for like 5+ years. You’ll come to the same conclusions the rest of us who go out a lot do, because we’re not spouting theory, we’re just chipping away at the marble until the statue of truth inside it is revealed.
If we had found out that standing on your head will consistently increase your success, we would be teaching guys how to do head-stands.
@Rollo
“I work with guys like him, I see guys like him at every promo, product launch or gaming/cocktail event I front, and I understand the dynamics working under the technique.”
Yup. The thing is this:
Guys like Rollo know guys like me. And guys like me know guys like Rollo.
Guys like Rollo KNOW that guys like me know guys like him. And guys like me KNOW that guys like Rollo know guys like us.
Guys like Rollo know what guys like me think of him. And guys like me know what guys like Rollo think of us.
It’s all respect all around with us, because although we’re at different points/paths in our lives and have different value/belief systems that may or may not change through our lives, we’re all fully aware of the world around us and are far and above the general population of men in terms of achieving our goals and succeeding in life.
If Rollo wrote what Steve wrote, I would call him out on his shit not aligning with field experience…but Rollo generally DOESN’T write shit that doesn’t align. Because Rollo actually has experience and isn’t emotionally invested in theories, he’s objective and reports how shit is and it’s what the rest of us who go out a lot have found. So I don’t have to call him out. At most I just have to explain some details about specific PUA tech to add clarification for the comment section.
“He’s 100% right, and that’s what bothers most guys – they see the effectiveness of what he does and who women reliably respond to it, and it conflicts with the blue pill wish that it didn’t work so predictably.”
Yup. This is why I call it clutching to the blue pill by the fingertips. They’re fully on board with red pill except for that oooooonnnneeeee last fantasy of living happily ever after being able to stop putting in effort or gaming their wife. They can finally relax, whew!!! …but guys like Rollo know you don’t get to stop being the best you can be. If you do, then your girl may stray. You can’t control her, but as long as you own your shit and fully believe you’re the best option for her, “what you feel, she feels” and Hypergamy keep her from straying.
“I’ve done much of the same things, and I’m a keen observer of the behavior and social interaction, but I don’t have the same firsthand infield experience they do now. That said, neither do they have the firsthand experience of having been married for 18 years or that of being a father for 16.”
That’s why I don’t give out advice on making long-term marriage work or being a good father. ;) You older guys are the experts at that shit and anything I advise about those subjects comes from reading your guys’ writing.
I don’t sit here going “look man, lemme tell ya how to raise a 16yo kid”. If I DID, then as long as what I was saying aligned with your experiences I’m sure you’d be cool with it…but the second I stray into “wtf that’s not how it works, or how any of the guys I know who’ve raised kids have found it works either” territory you would rightly call me out on my bullshit keyboard jockey theorizing.
“Guys like Athol Kay and other ‘dating coaches’ don’t don’t even approach the breadth of my past and present experience. That’s just a statement of fact.”
That’s why you drop such good wisdom. Plus your promotional stuff puts you around the scene so you get to see a lot more than other guys married with a kid at your age.
Now you might not be as privy to the detailed nuances of what a 23yo girl’s phone looks like on a Saturday night at 3am specifically in 2015, but that’s okay, us younger guys that approach those girls right now are here to fill in those gaps and help link it all together and report on how shit has changed and make sure the universal principles are all still aligning consistently. :) If I decide to settle down down the road, the first thing I’ll be doing is reading everything you’ve ever written about your marriage, MMSL, etc. to learn from the guys who know their shit in that department.
@christie
If you’re actually a chick and not just a dude trolling (pretty sure you are, but I don’t care because I love having a chance to link these videos lol), then The Wall is going to be a rough ride when you pass 30. It’s legitimately sad to me that things work like that, women are just fucked by society and thrown off the ledge.
Here are two videos for you to watch (Rollo you might want to check them out for your own kid if she’s hitting “party” age soon. The first vid covers a lot of men’s issues about purpose and not making women your purpose etc. but mixed throughout it he talks about girls who’ve just fucked their lives up beyond belief with their bad decisions and how girls will meet guys who are just trying to fuck them and will happily feed them shit like drugs and alcohol and promises to fuck them and then discard them…the second vid is a personal favorite and specifically for women):
The saddest part is that these vids will never be posted on a site like Jezebel with girls actually listening to Tyler’s warnings.
@Jeremy
You’re dead-on again. PUA is a special little niche. We’re basically the frontline. Not everyone wants to be in the frontline. They can benefit from the information we pass to them from the frontline, but the guy sitting in a desk in the back of an office theorizing how people should respond when they’re shot at simply isn’t on the frontline with bullets whizzing past his face and his buddies beside him seeing first-hand how people ACTUALLY respond.
Reality > Theory
If you’re not on the frontline, that’s not a judgement of your worth as a human, that’s just saying that if you say stuff that doesn’t align with what we’re experiencing then you’re going to get called out on it.
“It comes when you try to consider why so many guys would rather go MGTOW than PUA.”
I have a lot of theories on this one (I watch lots of MGTOW stuff). I actually respect MGTOWs for making an adamant choice. I may not agree with their choice but they’ve decided what’s important to them and what their value system is and I can respect that THEY made the choice rather than letting society make the choice for them (like the guy who’s socially pressured into marrying a chubby girlfriend).
But I also think MGTOWs have the same view of PUA that a guy like Steve has where it’s “this offends my sensibilities so I’m not even going to engage it!!” Part of that is PUA’s marketing etc. where it just seems sleazy, and a lot of bad PUAs are easy to spot (you can only really notice the BAD pickup, the good pickup just looks like cool guys getting laid and being social lol).
Either way their view of PUA seems to be that 1) a lot of it is faking who you are and supplicating to women, 2) too much to consume, too many tactics, concepts, routines, ideas, training, etc. which just results in seeing it as 3) too much work for not a good enough reward.
And I can totally understand that, I don’t fault them. Because I know they’re smart and have just been handed bad information about what PUA is. I have no doubt that a lot of MGTOWs, if they could be properly taught how simple PUA *CAN* be and how their MGTOW lives would look exactly the same except instead of callgirls they could invest in a simple half hour conversation with a girl and have a free regular fuckbuddy to bang and just keep her at an emotional distance and cut her off if she tries to bring any drama, and live exactly like they want to.
But when PUA is presented to them the way it is, it seems like too much hassle and too much pussy-begging. Then there are the more hardcore guys who are just done with interacting with women in general, whether they’ve been burned or not, but they’re just like it’s not worth even chancing that a girl at work is going to get pissed off or some girl you date will cry false rape etc. and give them a wide berth entirely and I can understand that too.
Really if MGTOW, TRP, Manosphere, MRA, and PUA all sat down and quit shitting on eachother, we’d all find out that a lot of our beliefs and attitudes overlap.
“Where is the influence that’s causing that decision in such large numbers coming from? I would argue that it comes from a combination of deeply, culturally instilled forms of male honor, many of which the FI arguably put there; Combined with knowing the truth that women just don’t play by that set of books anymore. When you know that your “opponent” in the game isn’t playing by the same rulebook as you, but you still believe that your rulebook is the correct rulebook”
Ya, this is what I mean. Like as PUAs we learn “dude, throw out the rulebook that was all bullshit, but here are the tools to understand and prosper with the REAL rulebook”. But I think a lot of MGTOWs watched their rulebook burn up and decided either they didn’t want to invest the time/effort to learn the new rulebook because the game wasn’t worth winning anymore (women don’t bring as much to the table now and are legal risks etc.), or they decided playing by another rulebook doesn’t feel right to them because a lot of their values and judgement of themselves is based on their rulebook and they want to stick to that even if it means not interacting with women as much. Like it’s not worth re-evaluating their beliefs/values.
If I’m some dude who’s watched his buddies’ GFs cheat on them and I got burned in a divorce and can’t see my kids and read about the UVA false rape case etc., I might be like “fuck all this shit” too and go full MGTOW lol
My life day to day looks a lot like MGTOW except that I replace jogging or playing xbox with going out and talking to girls and banging them. But I stick to fuckbuddies and casual sex, no commitment, I cut girls out if they bring me drama, I don’t spend money on them, etc.
“To me, this means that even though red pill men say “I don’t want to be a PUA,”… really they should still have all of the basic techniques and experience that a PUA might have. That does not mean they have to be regularly cold-approaching HB9s in a group and pulling them, but it means they *should* be regarding PUA as a toolset as important as carrying around a wallet and keys.”
This. Exactly. The analogy about people conning you out of money is exactly it. You should understand how to punch someone even if you never do it or only do it in self-defense, because other people may take a swing at you one day and you should understand the dynamics of what’s going on in that.
“I’ve said those same words myself, “But I don’t want to be a PUA,” a number of times to people”
PUA is a dirty word these days lol We just don’t care though. We know we’re the bottom scum of society to everyone, but we don’t care what people think because what we’re doing is important and we know most people could never wrap their heads around how NOT-scumbag what we do is because they just don’t have the reference experiences in life to relate to it. The same way you could never go on Oprah and say you choke women in bed, the audience will light you on fire, but that audience will go line up to watch 50 Shades of Grey. We don’t bother trying to get people to accept us anymore and it actually benefits us for people to disregard us because no one pays attention to what we’re talking about and we’re more free to spout truths without censoring it lol
“You can’t hold onto past mindsets simply due to your age bracket, religion, or economic situation and rationalize beta behavior now that you’ve taken the red pill. You can’t water-down the truths of what the PUA’s tell you out of a sense of honor. That’s the fastest way to poison your ability to deal with women into something their sexual-duality desires, and not what you need.”
Yup. Can’t be half a gangster. Like Tyler Durden says in Fight Club: “Stop trying to control everything and just let go.” Accept that everything you were taught was a lie and start from a blank slate with no preconceptions.
@Not born this morning
“Their real needs (desires) are never filled because there are too few men willing to fill those real needs (desires). The 6s believe (and they are usually correct) they can get away with bitch shield 9 behavior because so many men will succumb today. They are getting away with acting like they are more valuable than they actually are because men tolerate it. Too many men are letting women walk all over them. Women are just playing the game to their best optimal advantage, using the best opportunities available. There is nothing wrong with this. We all naturally do this.”
This.
“Here’s how bad things are. An 8 guy who thinks he has to settle for a 6 girl to feel secure is conceding to the whole FI thing. This is because the guy devalues himself and is insecure in general. If he is an 8 settling for a 6, then he is litterally lowering himself to the level of 6. He lacks confidence in his 8 ism and this devalues him to the level of 6. He litterally transforms himself and defines himself as a 6 by doing this. If you roll in shit, you will look like shit and you will smell like shit. He is reinforcing his insecurity, limiting his potential and succumbing to a fear of girls higher than 6. He is stifelling himself and missing opportunities. He short changes and cheats himself before he even makes a play. He should be increasing his caliber instead of lowering his sights. Consider how you compare yourself and others to potential mates. Everyone does this, especially when we are in the prime of it. Everything is on a relative scale. You can go up or down the scale….and the direction is your choice entirely.”
THIS.
@ianironwood
“when you are the one setting your own victory conditions, the role of the AMOG is utterly relative. The AMOG is nothing more than a piece of the landscape which you may choose to exploit as leverage toward your own – self determined – goal”
This. A big part of my game is just de-valuing what society says is valuable. Why do girls go for moody passionate starving artist types? Because those guys don’t value money and working in a suit, they value creativity not working for the man…because they 100% believe it to their core, girls around them fall into “what you feel, she feels” and they feel like those things have no value either. So the BMW guy in a suit walks into a hipster cafe and everyone scoffs at him even though objectively the BMW guy has high value by society’s value system. And to those girls he is lower value than the penniless hipster artist because they’re subscribed to that system where the victory conditions are different from the BMW guy’s victory conditions, so by that hipster value system that artist bum is triggering her Hypergamy.
So I don’t walk into that gym or join that sport and think I’m inadequate compared to the guys who are further ahead in it than me. In my mind I’m still higher-value than them overall. So I’ll approach their hot girls and legitimately believe I have a shot with them. And “what you feel, she feels”.
February 3rd, 2015 at 9:17 pm
@YaReally
That’s a trap of the matrix. Very hard to reverse the thinking that I’m somehow “evil” by pumping/dumping or even just having a FB. Hell, I’ve had women that I beta-orbited in my blue pill days for whom I was fully aware of their (regular) sexual exploits… and I *STILL* have trouble with the idea of behaving as they did, even though I watched them act like sluts. It’s so fucked up. They did it whatever they wanted sexually. Meanwhile I morally justified myself into a corner of undeserved self-respect just to keep myself from feeling like a sexual failure. From my perspective, it’s just unbelievable how society wonders why some men snap and shoot up the place. To me it’s blatantly obvious, men are being shut out of the sexual marketplace en masse, and at the same time being convinced/reminded daily of their (presumed) superiority for ignoring a hard-coded part of their biology.
It’s like convincing someone that they’re a better person for not eating, and seeing if the person will starve themself to death, or take up arms and commit violence to get food for themself. FUBAR.
February 3rd, 2015 at 9:26 pm
@Ya, “if they could be properly taught how simple PUA *CAN* be”
Teach it Ya. TOO many are MGTOW.
Teach it using an economy of words. If that is possible
February 3rd, 2015 at 9:44 pm
Ugh.
Those quotes are all from The Art of War, and when I was selecting them the only thing on my mind was how some reader was going to pick up on them and dissect the minutiae of what Lao Tzu ‘really’ meant by those words and how they’re right because they know exactly what he ate for breakfast the morning he wrote them into his ostrich leather bound rice paper memoirs.
Instead I got a lecture on the finer points of George McFly…
February 3rd, 2015 at 9:51 pm
@ Jeremy, good comment in reply to me, I basically undersign all you write. Everyone has a different conception of the red pill I’m sure, just as everyone has a different conception of reality. But I think it really begins as you say – with an alliance to the empirical truths discovered through lived experience. And the experience of PUA’s is the basically unfiltered discovering of how male/female interactions work, and any man rejecting such ideas based upon visceral, ethical, or idealistic impulses is likely not taking the red pill all the way. I’m not saying the things PUA’s have found are infallable by any means, but acceptance of the world as we find it is the essence of the red pill, even if some of our info turns out to need modification with new data.
Real information about how the world works is important, no matter what you want to accomplish with it. In the end we all play the game according to rules not of our choosing; might as well play it well, rather than playing to succeed by the standards of rules we make up for ourselves.
February 3rd, 2015 at 10:01 pm
Rollo: ‘Those quotes are all from The Art of War…’
I feel your pain. It seems whenever you want to incorporate classic writing into a discussion you either get swarmed with pedants or surrounded by a wall of oblivious open ears.
Classic literature isn’t very highly regarded any more. So most people who recognize it are a bit too involved in it – kind of like trekkies, before sci-fi became cool.
I, for one, really appreciated the quotes. I’ve never really felt I had the strategic acumen to really apply the Art of War well. Hazy stuff like the ‘I Ching’ suited me better. So I love reading things that discuss nuts-and-bolts strategy – it’s one of the few things I don’t have a good basic grasp on yet.
February 3rd, 2015 at 10:01 pm
I wasn’t trying to imply red pill digestion problems in you, forgethesky, I just wanted to point out that saying, “I don’t want to be a PUA,” (which I freely admit that I have said) is like saying, “I don’t want to do my physical rehabilitation,” after a major car accident. Rehabilitating ourselves from years of blue-pill lies is the actual goal, so ignoring the one activity guaranteed to build the survival ability that we lack is entirely self-defeating. Not saying it’s easy, not saying it’s smooth, but it must be done to some degree or we’re just wage-slaves with dicks.
February 3rd, 2015 at 10:04 pm
I confess.. I knew they were from The Art of War as I was reading them. I knew what was trying to be said with them. I fully appreciated them being put into the article because they’re great and completely appropriate for the topic….and I *still* tripped on trying to figure out how BTTF figured into the meme of “getting the girl”, because when I think of that movie’s romance, I think of Marty, and his gf is barely shown.
Sorry Rollo.
February 3rd, 2015 at 10:05 pm
@forgetthesky
“acceptance of the world as we find it is the essence of the red pill, even if some of our info turns out to need modification with new data.”
Like the kid paraphrasing Thoreau in Into The Wild says: “Rather than love, than money, than faith, than fame, than fairness… give me truth.”
February 3rd, 2015 at 10:16 pm
@Jeremy
” is like saying, “I don’t want to do my physical rehabilitation,” after a major car accident.”
This.
I don’t even bother telling people “seriously, you can “be a PUA” by just approaching girls sober in the daytime on your lunch break, you don’t have to go take over nightclubs and add bouncers to your Facebook and stay up drinking till 4am with club girls, you can just chat girls up on the subway on the way to work and try applying this stuff”, because the people who need to be convinced to apply this stuff won’t stick with it long enough to get good at it.
I worked a 9-5 during my first years of learning PUA and I just made it work because I wanted it bad. No one told me I had to go to nightclubs, but nightclubs offered the highest % of hot girls in a small room that I could approach and practice applying this stuff and gain reference experiences so off I went to the nightclubs.
If you aren’t getting the results you want with women, like if you see a hot girl at the gym or McDonald’s or some shit and you don’t know how to go up and approach her and get her number and very likely bang her, or you’re in relationships with girls you don’t like or who aren’t giving you enough value, or you’re trapped in a relationship with a shitty girlfriend, or you haven’t had sex in a year…time to start doing your physical rehabilitation. You don’t have to do it forever and you don’t have to hit it hardcore, but the exercises to get your legs working again are right there laid out in front of you when you finally give up and accept that you need help.
If you were fat you wouldn’t be ashamed of going to the gym or asking a personal trainer for advice or lifting weights. If you were poor you wouldn’t be ashamed of taking business coaching or educating yourself to learn an employable skillset. If you were scared of heights you wouldn’t be ashamed of learning to overcome that fear. If you were scared of public speaking you’d go to toastmasters or try an improv class.
…but when it’s “I can’t get laid”, suddenly everybody flips the fuck out like “OMG YOU GO OUT AND TALK TO GIRLS???? YOU ARE PUSSY-OBSESSED YOU FREAK OMG OMG MY SENSIBILITIES ARE OFFENDED!!”
That’s a societal construct, that shame that you’re supposed to feel for wanting to get laid. It’s retarded.
The biggest reason I got good fast (fast being a few years lol, I was a hardcase shut-in hermit nerd virgin when I started) was that I went in accepting “I have NO idea how to get women or how any of this shit works, I am an open book, I’ll try anything”. I think it’s harder for guys who’ve had some success to go in…like trying to teach a martial artist how to box or do MMA and they fall into their old habits and shit where a new guy could build good habits from the ground up.
February 3rd, 2015 at 10:19 pm
FWIW, I’m a Red Pill / Game advocate, writer, theorist, evangelist, whatever you want to call it.
I credit PUAs for breaking open Red Pill social and psychological dynamics, I sympathize and understand the motives of MGTOW, I applaud the organizational and political efforts of MRAs, I empathize with the spiritual conflict Christo-Red Pill men experience, but for all of these tribes of Game, there are aspects of them I either strongly disagree with or I understand that there will simply be no concession with.
I am Red Pill and I am Game. There will be issues I’ll put my voice and effort behind for all of these branches of the manosphere, but I will not spare them objective truths and warranted criticism.
February 3rd, 2015 at 10:23 pm
This is a great post with a lot of insights on AMOG destroying I had not considered but have employed “naturally” or intuitively.
A case and point, a dude who my ex gf had started seeing provocatively took her to a party I was holding for some visiting musicians. He was a brash, loud, overly confident idiot who overwhelmed people with his brashness and threw a lot of money around. He had bought my ex gf a ticket along with a bunch of other people. I was fuming but let it go.
They showed up and in the middle of a performance for a VIP in the audience, this idiot, my ex gf and a host of other people he’d bought tickets for walked out. It was completely inappropriate and disrespectful to me, the musicians and the people who were working with me. They were discouraged.
I wrote the dude privately and castigated him for his disrespect. It was a strongly worded text telling him basically not to come next time if he was going to treat the whole event as a joke.
This is where your strategy comes into play. I stuck to my message. Was firm and clear.
Typical AMOG, he thought he could humiliate me by publishing my private note on FB. In his warped mind he thought his AMOGING would put me in my place.
I immediately owned my note and reframed this around his total lack of judgment first at leaving at the inappropriate time and now publishing a private note making him completely untrustworthy.
People rushed to my defense. The people who defended him, could only say “he’s a good guy and didnt’ mean it”. But he’s shot himself in the foot.
Now? People respect me, their behavior at my events is much more respectful, far from turning people off, more people have come to my events making them more successful because of the awareness of what I had created. The ex gf meantime came out spontaneously to my NY Eve party near the end of the night to say hi and have a drink. She stayed to help clean up and kissed me.
The point to all this is AMOG’s are typically brash bullies who are generally Emotionally Tone Deaf. There is nothing “Alpha” about the loudmouth who puts people down or buys their friendship and loyalty.
Having a clear purpose in life, having a clear idea of who you are and where you stand is the only AMOG destroying strategy.
February 3rd, 2015 at 10:46 pm
Wow. A lot of solipsism going on here in this comment section on the blog article. Seems there are different frames of reference.
A couple of thoughts. Red pill truths are the framework of Rollo’s blogs.
they help men at any different level.
My frame is 53 y.o. married will do it all over again with fringe adult children and hoping not going to get divorced. Three elite acquaintances had bad economic experiences in the last three years with divorces.
At most my AMOG worries are with married guys who are interesting up to a point. But they are not stealing wives. Not much singleness or divorce in my crowd.
This misrepresentation of The Way of Men by ManpersonNumber 6762 has not much to do with game. Donovan’s essay is about being good about being a man rather than being a good man (a blue pill guy). Some of us Midwesterners go our own way and hunt, fish and fix our houses and have a metaphorical tribe of men we hang with. Within that tribe our hindbrains shit test, protect our borders and have strength, courage, mastery and honor. The book described masculinity as being good being a man. In other words don’t be a pussy. Go back a few eons and do what men were adapted to do in their hind brains.
That only helps us get laid if we have game and the spouse recognizes it (which is not automatic).
These days game can get me to have intimacy with my wife. I define this as when she states “thank you for f**king me. Game can get her to desire and appreciate me. But it is an always be performing mi·lieu. You are married for 24 years. Don’t wake up on your 25th anniversary and be told you are loved but your wife doesn’t have the desire. Frame of reference married man game.
@Kobayashiii1681:
Nightcrawler is not red pill. It is straight hard on Dark Triad. Machiavellian ism, Narcissism and Psychopathy.
Some of us civilized married man game guys would be hard pressed to see the value of that.
My Frame of Reference appreciates the YaReally and the Vegas lifestyle of Christian Mcqueen and Rollo. But it is at the end of the day more invested in controlling my vices and being better at being a masculine male.
Being a better husband to my wife and a better father to my children is still a value of listening to the guys in the last paragraph.
I already have integrity, fortitude and values. Game and Red Pill truths are added value. Blue pill problems only sink one into a hole that keeps digging.
I really enjoy who I am and don’t want to F**k Up. Don’t want to run off the tracks.
Rollo, Ian Ironwood, Christian McQueen, Roosh and Roissy are great resources.
I’m not down on Return of Kings. Even two dimensional creatures like Ayn Rand can be useful in their own time. She foreshadowed the Enjoy the Decline that started in 2008 but doesn’t have the 5 dimensions needed for sustaining a persons self in 2015.
You cannot argue about Roosh’s plan:
“ROK aims to usher the return of the masculine man in a world where masculinity is being increasingly punished and shamed in favor of creating an androgynous and politically-correct society that allows women to assert superiority and control over men. Sadly, yesterday’s masculinity is today’s misogyny. The site intends to be a safe space on the web for those men who don’t agree with the direction that Western culture is headed.
Women and homosexuals are discouraged from commenting here.”
The goal is unassailable and the execution my be flawed at times.
February 3rd, 2015 at 10:50 pm
Rollo: “I am Red Pill and I am Game. There will be issues I’ll put my voice and effort behind for all of these branches of the manosphere, but I will not spare them objective truths and warranted criticism.”
Thanks for that. I’ve been more than a little confused by things the past year or two, so even if you don’t end up being right on every detail (can’t really think of any major thing so far though) it’s been a great help to have a clear vision of how things work from someone more experienced. I’m not sure where I’d be without that.
My father is a great man, and totally alpha, but he married the first (very attractive) woman to catch his fancy at a young age. He doesn’t have the same experience.
February 3rd, 2015 at 11:05 pm
Jeremy: “I wasn’t trying to imply red pill digestion problems in you, forgethesky…”
Ah, but I may have them. I suppose I’ve come along quickly as these things go. But I though I was really red pill before, then last week came along and I saw how much I was still rationalizing stuff.
I told the long version last thread, but the short version – the girl I had been going out with, the first girl I had ever been serious with – she started going out with another guy, and I was in denial about how serious things could get. I thought I could still get her back. Then this past weekend I saw a text by accident that showed that she was having sex with him, when she had told me she was waiting for marriage (and I respected that boundary, lol). So I kinda broke down the past few days. Doing better now, but I hope that’s one of my last major red pill breakthroughs. Now, at the end of it, I realize – I could tolerate a lot of what she did with guys before me. She didn’t know me. But choosing another guy after me? Nah. I can’t be second fiddle, plan B. I realized I wouldn’t have her back if she asked me to.
I still like her as a person, understand. She even asked me to break up with her instead of just leaving, I think she believes I could do better than her, and she asked permission to start dating again. Ironically that kinda made it all even harder, but I see now kindess can’t substitute for a woman’s genuine desire. No man can be satisfied by just pity sex, after all.
I’ve learned a lot through talking and reading here, and through experiencing all this. I’m getting a lot more out of life already. Onward.
I think you’re right, Jeremy. Some degree of PUA is inevitable if you really want to understand things fully. I’ll see what I can do.
February 3rd, 2015 at 11:08 pm
The readership may be interested:
Generation of Vipers Paperback – September 1, 1996
by Philip Wylie (Author)
Generation of Vipers
February 3rd, 2015 at 11:59 pm
@Rollo
Yeah, I recognized all the Art of War quotes instantly. I’ve been working on memorizing it. It is, in truth, a treatise on human psychology in conflict. A brilliant one at that. Reading it is what started me on the way to thinking more strategically about every interaction with human beings in my life, no matter how small.
It’s a no bullshit assessment of how to deal with conflict, through and through. Completely appropriate for the topic at hand.
February 4th, 2015 at 12:12 am
[…] Then, for Aaron, the Art of AMOG. […]
February 4th, 2015 at 2:32 am
YaReally :”Yup. This is why I call it clutching to the blue pill by the fingertips. They’re fully on board with red pill except for that oooooonnnneeeee last fantasy of living happily ever after being able to stop putting in effort or gaming their wife. “
You called it man.
Up until a few months ago I thought I had two unicorns. For 3 years I had been running 2 concurrent LTRs with my live in and a mistress. One had been exclusive with me for 10 years – I was only the second man she had been with – the other exclusive with me for 17. (I broke spells of celibacy). They both obviously self mate guarded. I had this nagging feeling that the situation was making me complacent.
The mistress ended up hypergamming because her comfort/security needs trumped my AF function. It didn’t help that I didn’t go see her for six weeks I suppose. FWIW she did wait that long before fucking the new guy… It played out exactly as described in TRP, her love swung like a spotlight to a new actor. The hamster spun justifications. AWALT. Rikki-Tikki-Tavi mongoose is gone. http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/donovan/rikitikitavi.html
What pissed me off is that she insists that she is a one man woman and refuses to have me over anymore. I guess I can’t have it both ways.
The GF may be a unicorn in some ways, but she’s kind of ornery and thick skinned and I have to game her big time to keep her from getting too obnoxious. Since I have had a take it or leave it attitude for a few years, it freed me up to try what I used to consider more extreme game tactics including hard dread. I kept LOLing when I reread Roissy’s 2008 Dread post today because he is so right.
The fact that she is so thick skinned makes this relationship a good training ground for me because I really have to turn up the volume to manage her.
BTW, this is part of my context in making comments that may appear mauve at best. I have had 40 years experience with women. My N is 7-10X avg. My third woman when I was 17 was the 21yo married sister of a friend, we had a torrid 6mo affair, her married friend took me home one night, have had 4 other married lovers, lived with 8 women including my ex, spun plates after my divorce, had sex with 3 different women in one day etc. I spent a good 1500 hours in the last couple years reading TRP, mostly Rollo, my first introduction was Deida’s The Way of the Superior Man back in 2003 and so on.
It is true that I used to be a feminist indoctrinated beta-acting SNAG. I have come a long way and I’m still working on it.
The thing is, I’m getting rather jaded by it all, and I don’t need another notch on my dick, but my TRT won’t let me rest heh. I’m trying to fit TRP into my personality and circumstances. Bear with me.
February 4th, 2015 at 4:05 am
Hey there, I’m a girl.
I know, but hear me out. I read Red Pill sites from time to time since I am genuinely fascinated by the dogma of others, even if I may not subscribe to it myself. That being said, I do have a couple of questions for you guys. I find Return of Kings to mostly be a bunch of whiny, butthurt children, but this site seems to have a more mature approach, so I’m posting this here.
I can understand finding Alpha men attractive, since I certainly do, but I’m having trouble seeing the link between wanting to fuck someone and essentially giving them control over your life. You talk about how the woman should conform to the man’s “frame” but what exactly makes this hypothetical guy know so much more than me that I should let him direct the whole relationship?
Sure, a part of me may find that idea sexy, but that doesn’t mean it’s a logical move for me to make. I’m sensing a bit of a disconnect here, I don’t generally believe people should run around making serious life decisions based on what gets them off. There’s simply more to it than that. While I’m sure some guys are incredibly intelligent and capable of heading a household, I bet it’s a bit of a rarity since most people of both genders wouldn’t know common sense if it smacked them in the face. I guess what I’m trying to say is why should I, as the woman, trust a man (or really any other human being) so implicitly that I relinquish that much control?
Curious to hear your thoughts, Red Pill Community.
February 4th, 2015 at 4:06 am
Let me rephrase that.
I’m trying to adjust my personality and circumstances to fit TRP reality.
February 4th, 2015 at 5:10 am
@ Rollo – each & every post means so much to me – thank you.
@ YaReally – I’ve missed your comments on CH & RM of late. Your comments in this thread have been epic – thank you.
Internalising Rollo/Roissy/Roosh/YaReally = total all-round RP awareness
February 4th, 2015 at 8:57 am
If there’s anything I’ve learned from a few select posters here and on another couple of sites it’s that I surely would not trust some men, ostensibly on my side, in a foxhole next to me.
Howitzers are a value neutral weapon, they are in and of themselves value neutral, however if you use them to wipe out orphanages and nursing homes, intentionally, for no other reason than “hur hur, it’s war, fucking destroy shit this is fun, you should thank me bro, hur hur” then you are using the tool in an evil sense and absolving yourself of responsibility for your own actions.
Amorality may work as a great excuse for chicks when it comes to the *application* of specific tools and methods, but I had figured that men might have a bit more to them than a simple female rationalization mindset. Given how the FI has programmed men to think and feel as women for generations now, it’s not surprising to see amorality in the *application* of a tool being celebrated with much cheering and internet chest thumping. In fact, it’s rather not surprising at all.
Just as the socialists and feminists desire of course, an amoral man without honor who will betray anything and everything, even his fellow man whom he openly acknowledges is a victim of the FI in society, all for his own atomistic goals, and sadly, for such a limited and rather pointless achievement at that (getting your dick wet, yay, you’ve just ascended to the moral plane and ability of a chimpanzee). It makes taking over society and eliminating the family that much easier really, for the feminists and socialists. Congrats on your work on their behalf (the few of you I’m speaking about).
Further sneering and justifications and internet-alpha “Machiavellian tough guy game” not required, this is just an observation and nothing said to the contrary will make me change my mind.
Slainte
February 4th, 2015 at 9:07 am
“I’m sensing a bit of a disconnect here, I don’t generally believe people should run around making serious life decisions based on what gets them off. There’s simply more to it than that. While I’m sure some guys are incredibly intelligent and capable of heading a household, I bet it’s a bit of a rarity since most people of both genders wouldn’t know common sense if it smacked them in the face.”
There is no disconnect if you have read Rollo’s other 400 essays. If you are a woman you might want to read Athol Kay’s or David Deida’s books which are more feminine kindly.
Quite simply, your disconnect is an AF/BB dual strategy ignorance. (There is a reason why every essay in Rational Male is tagged with Alpha Fucks/Beta Bucks.) 50 years ago you might have found a male walking around that was intelligent and capable of heading a household. But thanks to the Idiocracy (watch the movie), you might not find an Alpha male capable of doing such today.
A man capable of running a household well in today’s society is generally a Beta. You’ll have to settle to get one. That is a red pill reality. That may be an apex fallacy I just stated. Or not.
Demographically you might find ROK writers to not consider marriage and RM readers to be once divorced. The moment a man get’s married, he might as well tattoo the word Beta on his forehead. He just became a provider.
Heheh, men talking among men like they belonged to the same gang. Go figure.
Sometimes it’s best not to listen in if you don’t want to hear red pill realities. Understand there is a hind brain that developed/evolved over 100,000 years and then civil society tried to shape the fore brain over the last 2000 years. And then Feminism stripped the gears over the last fifty years. Yes is seems disconnected, but that is the point.
February 4th, 2015 at 9:20 am
@Kristine Rose
I’ll give you my own opinion to answer your question, though others here may disagree.
You ask why a woman should give up control to a man regarding her own life, and adopt his frame rather than her own. That is a very very good question IMHO. Why should ANYONE adopt the frame of anyone else in a society that values independence? Yet, when considering relationships (and especially marriage), someone has to be the leader.
I know what you may be thinking – no one HAS to be the leader, the couple can govern the marriage democratically – each one has their say. Yet this simply isn’t how things work, in spite of society (and feminism in particular) stating that it is how it SHOULD work. When one person wants something and the other doesn’t, someone will win and someone will lose. Someone will get their way, and someone won’t. Compromise is not always possible.
In today’s culture, it is most often the woman who gets what she wants. Her frame is the one that is usually adopted. There are several reasons for this. First, society has, by and large, adopted a “feminine-as-correct” mentality. Feminine priorities are judged by society as mature and correct, while masculine priorities are judged as immature and incorrect. Thus, a wife arguing with a husband will state that of course she is right, society agrees with her.
She wants the house cleaned and he wants to watch baseball? Get cleaning! Society says that cleaning should be the priority, and further that the man should do 50% of it. He wants sex and she doesn’t? She gets her way and he doesn’t.
Further, men are raised (even in this day and age) with a sense of chivalry – to give women what they want as a matter of course, even if it costs the men something to do so. Women are not raised with any such notion toward men. How many breadwinning men support wives and are happy doing so? How many breadwinning women support husbands and are happy doing so?
I realize I’ve gone a bit off-topic. Your question was why should a woman adopt a man’s frame instead of her own. My answer – SOMEONE’S frame has to be adopted in a relationship. If the woman’s frame is adopted, experience and statistics show that she will come to resent her husband and view him with less respect (and hence, less attraction). In spite of that fact that women will SAY they want a man who does what they want, they are attracted to men who are dominant and independent. Thus, if a man adopting a woman’s frame will make that woman less attracted to him, it behooves her to instead adopt his frame. This will lead to her continuing respect and attraction toward him. Of course, if he is not worthy of her attraction, she is free to leave. If he is abusive she is free to leave. This is not about slavery, it’s about power. The fact is that women are attracted to men who are MORE powerful than themselves, not less (and not equal). When the man’s power wanes compared to hers, attraction is lost. And realization of that sad fact is what brought many men here to the manosphere.
February 4th, 2015 at 9:22 am
Demographically you might find ROK writers to not consider marriage and RM readers to be once divorced. The moment a man get’s married, he might as well tattoo the word Beta on his forehead. He just became a provider.
“Providing” is not the sole determining factor of “beta”. We call lots of non-married men, in fact most of them, “beta”, so clearly there are other defining traits that apply to make the whole of the definition with no one exclusively “the” trait. And “providing” is not a bad deal IF the woman is traditional, non-feminist and adheres to traditional behaviors in return, it becomes an agreement instead of a supplicating strategy. You do X, I do Y, we both get what we want, end of story. As I hear tell, there is the rare male “unicorn” of alpha who manages to provide as well.
If “providing” IS the sole determining factor to “beta” that basically makes all males in history who have reproduced and not run away like weasels “alpha”, which is silly, since “alpha” is about fucking according to the manosphere which used to be almost exclusively about reproduction (prior to the pill). A “beta” from WW1 would fuck his wife, have a mistress on the side, lead his sons in life, lead men in battle, protect his family, know a thousand useful skills and not take shit from anybody, be his own man, and be in all ways independent in the classical definition. Calling that “beta” is stupid, frankly. A modern “douchebag player PUA” is about as alpha compared to that as a wee helpless baby is “tough” to a predator wolf.
February 4th, 2015 at 9:23 am
Sorry, meant “reproduced AND run away”
February 4th, 2015 at 9:48 am
Ok, sorry I meant a Beta Bucks Provider tattoo on the forehead. Not solely and exclusively Beta.
February 4th, 2015 at 9:50 am
@YaReally, Rollo, Jeremy, Steve,
I was alpha with sports and fighting, but a lifetime of mom-advice and feminine programming on media caused an odd chasm in my mind regarding social/sexual interactions. I remember being in bars in my early twenties and having my natural friends constantly interrupt me when I was talking in mixed sets and saying to myself, “Why is my buddy always interrupting me when we’re talking to girls? He’s being a dick. Doesn’t he know if he pisses me off I’ll kick his ass?” What I didn’t know back before the Red Pill was how uncalibrated my game was. They understood that my contributions to the conversations were not helping anybody get laid. I always felt like I was Neo in social setting – so close to understanding, but still something missing. Hell, I laid 26 women my freshman year of college, so I was no chump sexless beta. But, I had no clue as to why I got some and why I didn’t, or why I always felt a generalized anxiety and uneasiness in social settings and got punked by my friends who did well with the ladies. I can tell you that finding game, and especially YaReally and his archive was what finally turned me into Neo and seeing all the zeros and ones of the game matrix so clearly.
Now I can go to a bar and feel at complete ease and peace standing like an oak instead of fidgeting and holding my glass high like a woobie. I don’t have to talk just for the sake of making conversation to fill silences. I don’t have to laugh at shit that isn’t funny like I used to. And I don’t even have to drink at a bar any longer to have just as much fun. I see every dynamic going on in the bars now. I see all work relationships so clearly now. I’ve gotten multiple raises due to my attitude adjustment.
I can’t thank the Red Pill dudes enough (regardless of what faction they belong to).
Steve, I had the same reaction to people like YaReally in the beginning. But if you push through your initial perceptions, you will see the truth.
I will be teaching my son how to avoid all the hardships I went through. That knowledge came from YaReally and others.
February 4th, 2015 at 9:53 am
Bro Knights just coming out of the woodwork around here.
February 4th, 2015 at 9:54 am
@sjfrellc
Ok, sorry I meant a Beta Bucks Provider tattoo on the forehead. Not solely and exclusively Beta.
Cool, we’re both on the same page then.
I know it seems like I get pedantic with definitions and observations sometimes, but accuracy in concepts and statements seems critical to me. The Left makes great use of our loosely defined concepts and statements to our detriment, so I prefer not to give them any rope to work with in trying to hang us, heh.
Slainte
February 4th, 2015 at 10:02 am
@ sifrellc – “Nightcrawler is not red pill. It is straight hard on Dark Triad. Machiavellian ism, Narcissism and Psychopathy.
Some of us civilized married man game guys would be hard pressed to see the value of that.”
I think the character, though dark and machiavellian, displays a lot of RP cues, especially, I think, when it comes to maintaining frame, and focusing on bettering ones self, being able to set goals and acheive (murder and cold…I dont know what this has to do with being married, or civil, being using game in marriage. Maintaing frame and bettering ones self, among other things necessary, at some level, to manhood, are indispensably integral to one’s journey as a man, regardless. in my honest opinion
February 4th, 2015 at 10:12 am
@ maestro — February 3rd, 2015 at 3:37 pm
“Now this guy drunk as he was starts talking with us and eats his kebab and he said something like oh this kebab is so good you must try it and put it in front of my girl. She started to move closer to take a bite and looked at me. i just said hey hey and she stopped. after that i took her by the hand, we said goodbys and left.
How would you react in that situation?”
My reaction would be say nothing to her, give her no indication one way or the other, and see if she’d take a bite or not. This is a loyalty test for me. If she takes a bite, our relationship ends there. I’d break up with her when we got home, but I’d give no reason or explanation (that’s for her to figure out). If she’s willing to flirt and exchange with another man right in front of me, she’s willing to do everything else with him when I’m not around.
February 4th, 2015 at 10:28 am
@Kristine, I don’t disagree with what others said above, I’ll try to add a bit to it by backing up still more.
I wish humans could act more logically than they do. That would allow us to avoid all sorts of biases, errors, tragedies of the commons, and so on. But the fact is that logic follows emotions, not the other way around. The human brain is wired to feel something, and then find a reason why it is feeling that – i.e, to rationalize. Humans do this constantly, to a one. People who are good at acting rationally get that way by realizing they can only listen to thoughts that happen in the absence of strong emotion about the subject, or that recognize biases and try to compensate for them.
That’s all a bit dry, but it’s important to understand it to understand where we’re coming from here. Because few things involve such strong emotions, and such constant instincts, as our mating/childrearing behavior. It involves visceral, uncontrollable reactions and emotions and impulses, especially if you’re doing it right. You need to lead with your instincts or things will fall apart. I remember when I first started trying to be sexual with women, I tried to reason my way through the whole process (I tend to be a thinker in everything, lol). It took me a long time to learn that that inevitably destroyed the process – I just needed to feel it, and act accordingly. The result is what we commonly call ‘chemistry.’
That’s not to say you need to just let yourself be ruled solely by emotion and instinct. Humans can override, ignore, or suppress their feelings. But it takes a lot of effort to do so, so it’s not really feasible to keep on overriding your instincts longterm. They’ll catch up to you, wear you down, eventually start breaking out of you. If you’re unattracted to a man, you can have great intentions and willpower and spirit, and it will still break you down in the end. You can only fight against visceral dislike for so long. And hiding such negative feelings constantly hardly does wonders for closeness and intimacy and working well together.
I would have loved it if an equal type partnership worked between men and women. Yes, you do need a system to resolve disagreements, but that’s not insurmountable. I tried to create such a relationship, in fact, and though you shouldn’t believe one data point we have so many men saying similar things we’ve come to see this as being a fundamental way most everyone is wired. So, in brief: I observed over time how she became stressed out and wouldn’t give a straight answer when is tried to make a decision on an equal basis with her. And I saw how she became happy and almost child-like when I made a decision and just instructed her to follow me. I saw how frustrated she got, even as she tried her hardest to be kind, when I tried to show her my negative emotions and vulnerabilities. I saw, over time, how she started being mean to me when I did everything to make her happy and comfortable, even as she tried her best to not and kept asking for me to forgive her after. And I saw how that would stop when I found some purpose beyond her, and her eyes would glow with pride as she watched me work.
I would have loved to have an equal relationship work, because becoming a good leader is a lot of hard, usually thankless work, and it’s an intimidating responsibility. It doesn’t come naturally to me. But the observation of many men has led to a consistent picture we call red pill theory – basically, the observation that women need a man who seems at least in some important ways to be her superior for her to maintain happiness and desire in a relationship. Absent that, she becomes unhappy, anxious, unfulfilled.
I know women didn’t ask to be wired this way. No more than I asked to be wired to find young, shapely women attractive, regardless of how good or bad her personality may be. It’s not pleasant for me to think that I could really love a women and still not be able to be attracted to her once she nears 50. That sucks. But it’s best we learn our wiring and find the best way to deal with it. Sometimes there can be a pretty good compromise – I’ve heard, for men, that if you marry a girl young and stay attached to her, you can actually learn to look past her aging quite a bit. For women, there are men out there who don’t dominate or abuse – who can be close and loving to you – but who stay attractive regardless due to a great passion, charisma, and mission. Unfortunately, such men are unusual and are becoming rare.
As a woman, you don’t have to put yourself in a subordinate position to a man if you don’t want to. But I think you should see your options – that if you don’t, things may not work well emotionally and sexually in the long run.
This isn’t about a power trip. This isn’t about men wanting to feel in control, to lord over others. Some men may, most don’t. It’s really being honest about what we desire, and acknowledging what works and what doesn’t.
Finally, I recognize that this is quite difficult for women too. It’s impossible to tell, if you give a man power over you, what he might do with it. I think that’s where a lot of resistance from women comes from – an anxiety about relinquishing control – an anxiety made stronger by a deep, sometimes preconcious, desire to do so. There’s no good fix for this. You just need to let go slowly, cautiously; and as you do, try to watch and see how he reacts. Does he work harder on his mission, inspired by your femininity? Or does he start letting go of it, figuring he’s all set now? Does he start to protect you and your interests? Or does he start to abuse you?
It can be hard to tell, of course. Humans are excellent rationalizers, and if he’s hot enough you can rationalize it all away. This is where brothers, fathers, uncles, etc. can be useful. But not all women have their support, and many fathers and brothers are hardly men themselves these days, and it takes a man to know a man. It’s frustrating to see.
In the end, we all have to make choices and compromises of some sort. But best to know the nature of them all first.
February 4th, 2015 at 10:47 am
Kobayashii, I wish there was an edit feature like on vbulletin forums. I keep mis-speaking.
I should have said
“Nightcrawler is not ONLY red pill. It is straight, hard on Dark Triad.”
I have no doubt those that score nearer 5 (on a 1 to 5 scale) would have better game and swallowed a bigger red pill. I’m not sure how the Jake Gyll. character Louis Bloom would fare in a LTR or Marriage.
Man was the ending cold: “I wouldn’t send you in to do anything I wouldn’t do myself”. Very Dark Triad.
February 4th, 2015 at 11:08 am
@Rollo,
So what would your disagreements with PUAs be?
@Kristine Rose
You’re making two mistakes here. One, you’re presuming that you’ll accept dating men who are dumber than you (most women do not). You’re also making the mistake of presuming that the most intelligent people make the best leaders.
Leadership is a role, not a qualification. In general society, we mix the two and generally force people to qualify themselves for leadership positions. We do this in general society because the organizations we have are usually very large, consisting of hundreds, if not hundreds-of-thousands of individuals. There are pros and cons to this, but generally you can’t run a meritocracy without such a system.
Marriage or a male-female long-term-relationship is not a meritocracy. It’s a partnership. There are enormous differences between a meritocratic structure and a partnership, most of which you’re entirely glossing over by presuming that you would be “competing” with your future male SO for “leadership” of the relationship.
Leadership comes from and consists of well-performed audacious action, pure and simple. No one accepts a leader who sits in the back and does very little. No one accepts a leader who talks and talks and talks about what should be done, but does very little. No one accepts a leader who is incapable of making decisions. No one accepts a leader who gives orders but is unwilling to accept the risk/pain of the team. Leaders lead by doing, not by knowing. Men fit this role better because life requires them to be human doings, rather than human beings. Life does not require this of women like it requires it of men.
You’re also using (whether you know it or not) a classic female argument tactic which is to pretend that you have no power over the direction taken. You’re presuming that if you let a man who is less intelligent lead you, that you’ll have no voice in what happens. This is entirely false. Realistically, if you marry a man who is less intelligent, and let him lead, you’ll have significant power over the decisions he makes without ever making those decisions yourself. This happens *all the time*, and is especially obvious when a couple has “that extra kid they did not intend on having.”
February 4th, 2015 at 11:24 am
Good way to frame that Jeremy. It’s a good point that leading is more about directness of action than anything else. It’s not about superiority or inferiority, just who acts when and in response to what. In relationships, men act first and women calibrate their action based upon that action. He initiates, she responds.
It’s a good thing if the leader has intelligence and ability, but that’s a secondary issue so far as the bare dynamic is concerned.
February 4th, 2015 at 11:26 am
@forgetthesky
Excellent and well thought out comment. I agree with you 100%. It’s the mistake that too many women make when they read red pill theory. It isn’t that men want to lord it over women, manipulate them, or rule them. Some might, but most don’t. It’s that we’ve seen what equalism does to relationships – particularly to WOMEN in relationships – and we know it doesn’t work. It is amazing to me that more women haven’t figured it out. But then, what would their motivation be to do so? Men want women, but women want power (power being the ability to make choices according to their own imperatives, usually funded by the man’s money and abetted by his status). Once they have the man’s power, they have significantly less need for him, and less motivation to make him happy.
February 4th, 2015 at 11:26 am
@Yareally:
“Ok I’ll be the asshole since I get the impression no one else is going to call this out:
@steve h
@447
Good god the mental masturbation. Try not to slip on your jizz, guys.
Anyone who thinks the BF Destroyer stuff doesn’t work is someone who either doesn’t go out or has just never tried it extensively. It’s killer. Lethal shit.
This nonsense?:
“Don’t get me wrong, that M.O. will work on chicks with weak boyfriends/husbands just fine – but if an aspiring PUA operates that way with a gf/wife of an alpha who just basically shrugs and/or regards the poacher as a creepy pursuer, it’ll backfire.”
“If somebody tries to poach “your” woman/women right before your eyes/in your face, you stop that. (Baring a situation where you definitly know it would get you in trouble with the law/CCTV etc.)”
Did either of you even read “Papa”s post?”
Working on reading comprehension could increase your chances of understanding posts.
One example from your post:
Who stated that a BF destroyer does not work? Nobody was talking about that. (Of course they do, everybody knows that)
Mental masturbation and slipping in the resulting jizz – yupp, got that right there.
Another example: General statement about not recognizing/”buffering” immoral tactics, denying the reality of poaching – who wrote that? Where?
In what context?
Nobody fucked above 6…
…ok.
I’ll just stay with “ok”.
February 4th, 2015 at 11:29 am
@YaReally
Awesome stuff. Checking your archives out.
My take has always been that I’ve allowed anxiety to overtake me, and that’s the only reason I’m in the position I’m in. Good Looking Loser has a whole series on Approach Anxiety that I’ve been considering doing.
The Fight, Flight, or Freeze response. This is the kingpin in PUA problems. What’s really going on when we feel anxiety is our mind is telling us,
“This is going beyond what we know and are comfortable with. This isn’t safe.”
I had panic attacks during the last two hookups. I was horny and confident when I initiated them. Flirted boldly and flawlessly, no anxiety. Just excitement. And it took me a LONG TIME to get to even that point, and keep in mind I’ve only done that a handful of times.
But when I found they were actually DTF I freaked out. Because I’d never experienced that before. I knew I wanted to hook up with them — but I didn’t think it would actually happen. When push came to shove I freaked out.
I managed to pull myself together enough to follow through. I’m still a virgin but I did get some action out of it, and when I got into the groove of it I managed to redeem myself a bit. Both girls knew I was a virgin but said “you could’ve fooled me.”
But the anxiety also freaked them out enough, apparently, to not want to hook up with me again.
It’s a Two Step approach:
1) Figure out what the fuck is actually going on with women (Red Pill knowledge, how Game works, clean up your act with how you dress, grooming, etc. – don’t have to go crazy, but be aware of it, and most importantly HAVE FUN with it)
2) Pavlovian conditioning in reverse: desensitization, elimination of the Fight, Flight or Freeze response to the stimuli that are triggering it
I’ve mentioned Faster EFT a number of times. A lot of this is based on NLP. A great book is “Monsters and Magical Sticks: There’s no such Thing as Hypnosis?”
Basically, you can IMAGINE being triggered by stimuli, such as getting rejected. We have proof that we feel this way: memories. We know what it feels like to be rejected, or we wouldn’t be afraid of it happening. Because really what we’re fearing is our RESPONSE, which is SELF-CREATED, but we blame on the STIMULUS that causes it.
Online dating has helped me a bit in overcoming anxiety. I kind of half agree with “exposure therapy” — getting out and repeatedly doing something that causes you distress, until it doesn’t anymore.
But this reminds me of Larry Nims and his work with this girl who was terrified of water. She had no idea why. But no matter how many times he took her to the edge of the pool she would have panic attacks. It wasn’t working to just expose her to it over and over again — for her, actually, it was making it worse.
So he figured out that he could simply sit her down in a chair and have her IMAGINE water and her fear of it. He got her to FULLY ASSOCIATE to the fear in her own mind. Ultimately it is SELF-CREATED and is actually, technically speaking, a HYPNOTIC TRANCE.
He was able to eliminate her fear of water, ultimately, without having her go near it. I’ve heard the same kinds of stories with fear of heights and ladders — and actually experienced this myself, as I have a history of being deathly afraid of heights.
The most interesting part here is this: how much RESISTANCE there can be to thinking about rejection, approach anxiety, etc. IN THE PRIVACY OF OUR OWN MINDS.
We have the ability to do this. You can sit down and close your eyes and imagining (or remembering) some girl shutting you down. Or making fun of your height. Or your dick. Or her cheating on you. Finding her with some other guy. Imagining that she’s making fun of you behind your back, talking to her girlfriends about how much of a loser you are, etc. Or how much of a loser you are for being some ‘creep’ that tried to hit on her and looked like a retard.
The list goes on and on. But we can IMAGINE these in our own minds in complete privacy, and guess what? It FEELS AS IF IT WAS REAL.
I’ve worked on a guy that knew his girlfriend cheated on him. I asked him if he could imagine her having sex with that guy — and he could. They were in another state at the time. But in his own mind he had an INTERNAL REPRESENTATION of how this affair played out, and he had a lot of emotions attached to it.
When I helped him to release the emotional charge attached to these images he was creating in his mind (they could be memories too – memories are also self-created and even though the events REALLY HAPPENED, the memory of the event is not the event itself – it’s our reaction to it and how we represent it)……
…he was able to let it go. When you change the pictures in the mind and release the feelings, the stimulus loses its ability to elicit the negative response — and it’s no longer a stimulus. It just is.
Alpha guys, on top of probably having high levels of dopamine and low levels of cortisol, do not have this fight, flight or freeze response to women. That’s why they’re “naturals.” Nothing is obstructing their ability to interact with women and they’re able to run on pure male instinct and their personal intuition. Which I believe every guy has access to, even if a lot of them, like me, will have to take the time to read and learn about how to Game women, and practice —
— but if women are hard-wired for hypergamy, why wouldn’t men be hard-wired for Game? I think we are, and most of TRP is simply removing the superfluous layers that have been brainwashed into us that COVER our instinctual Game and know-how as far as interacting with women goes.
When I was flirting with the last girl that I hooked up with, I wasn’t thinking about ANYTHING having to do with Game. I was just doing it. I was interested in her and thought I had a good shot and it was just auto-pilot until we were on the couch….which is when I started panicking.
Heh.
But yeah. The interesting thing to me is how even in the PRIVACY OF OUR OWN MINDS, we can be resistant to thinking about these fears.
That’s why I like starting out with Faster EFT. If you can’t even face this stuff in the privacy of your own mind, and can’t tolerate the emotions that come up when you imagine fucking up with women — how are you going to handle it in real life? Good Looking Loser mentions a story about a guy like this that flat out gave up after he tried to “Game” a girl and got a beer splashed in his face and humiliated as a result.
I’ve said before that “Learning Game is hardest for the guys who need it the most.”
I fit that demographic. It’s important to remember, as YaReally said, that WE’RE CHEATING OURSELVES by not learning Game and not getting out there.
Just like we’re the ones who are self-creating the approach anxiety and all the other fears. I’ve spent close to a year working on this so far, and initiating two hookups with a history of initiating ZERO is not bad at all. It was a huge step for me.
And a lot of that was imagining getting rejected and using Faster EFT to tap out those fears. To fully associate to them and then work them out until I could imagine anything as bad as I wanted, but it lost the ability to make me feel bad. That is revolutionary stuff.
Anyway, still more work to do. The temptation to drop out of the Game is extreme. But again….we have to remember that we’re cheating ourselves when we do this. Denying our desire for sex, pretending that it just isn’t worth the effort to us, that “women aren’t worth it”….in reality it has nothing to do with women; it has to do with our attitude about ourselves.
At least until you’re talking about commitment. I’m talking about ONS’s and fuck buddies. Commitment is a whole nother realm I don’t even want to think about right now, and I don’t think I have to until I’m at least in my 30’s, per Rollo’s advice.
The resources to help ourselves are out there. We just have to remember we’re doing this for OURSELVES.
One last note:
Choosing not to have sex with women when you have the option to have sex with them (MGTOW) is completely different from giving up on trying to have sex with women because you feel like you don’t have the option to. MGTOW =/= incel
And I’d go so far as to say that every man should have solid Game and have the confidence that he can get laid before he can make a rational decision about what to do with women in his life — whether that means having anything to do with them at all or not.
If you’re afraid of putting the work in and don’t have the ability to do with women what you really want to do with them…can you avoid them for the rest of your life and truly be at peace with yourself? I think you can only do that when you have the true freedom to choose, which requires that you understand Game, and can apply it, and have successfully applied it plenty of times in the past.
I’ve been in denial for a long time, and a lot of guys I’m sure are with me on that. The scariest part of TRP isn’t the knowledge — it’s APPLYING IT IRL for your own benefit.
That is where all the programming and conditioning rears its ugly head: the guilt, the shame, the hesitation, the moral confusion, etc.
Meanwhile all the girls are generally slutting it up without giving a second thought to any of their behaviors, while sex-starved men are giving themselves 100 lashes for having impure thoughts about some girl they like that has a boyfriend, or they know some other guy is into, while the media tells them that they SHOULD feel guilty for that — and don’t worry, your princess is on the way. With a guy as good and nice as you, there just HAS to be a happy ending waiting for you….
(sarcasm)
(re: Poe’s Law, lol)
February 4th, 2015 at 11:35 am
@Jeremy:
“Once they have the man’s power, they have significantly less need for him, and less motivation to make him happy.”
I agree.
And if you block/prevent this situation by not being needy – the only source of *applied* female social power vanishes into thin air.
*poof*, there it goes.
Cue standart quote about what males are attractive to females…
“It isn’t that men want to lord it over women, manipulate them, or rule them.”
The second you arrive at an elimination of needyness, that state is achieved indirectly with even greater force – even if you have absolutly no intention at all of “ruling” or “manipulating”, the effect on the women will be the same.
You recognize it when you see it – the females start using direct communication, start to activly seek for ways to please you, asking in direct communication, because the mythical power of “puzzling out the man” fails (where there is no true need, there simply is nothing to puzzle, no matter how great her ‘pozzling skills’ etc.pp.)
February 4th, 2015 at 11:39 am
“The temptation to drop out of the Game is extreme. But again….we have to remember that we’re cheating ourselves when we do this. Denying our desire for sex, pretending that it just isn’t worth the effort to us, that “women aren’t worth it”….in reality it has nothing to do with women; it has to do with our attitude about ourselves.
At least until you’re talking about commitment.”
Simple solution (the way there is hard, not the solution itself):
What if you (even) commit, but feel no need?
Getting sex (just sex) is not a problem anyway.
But commiting (by just going through the moves/saying the words, but feeling no need or even greater inclination to do so) results in
a) subcommunicated dominance
b) an equilibrium state of free happyness
because
c) “idealizied love” (as has been analyzed here and in other discussions over and over again) is a (evolutionally & socially useful, but individually harmful) illusion.
February 4th, 2015 at 11:48 am
http://therationalmale.com/2014/09/29/a-new-hope/
February 4th, 2015 at 12:12 pm
@Rollo, agreed.
Even as a married man (especially as a married man), one can not stop gaming one’s wife and expect attraction to be maintained.
It’s funny – men get married in order to secure frequent, passionate sex and not have to constantly expend energy to do so. This is the theory – it is what most blue-pill men believe about marriage. Women marry for children, for security, for status, for physical touch, for companionship. Men marry mostly for the idea of frequent, effortless, passionate sex. Women usually get what they want, men usually don’t. Women feel entitled to get what they want out of marriage, but are quite vocal that men are absolutely NOT entitled to get what they want and have to work for it.
Women expect to be romanced even after (especially after) marriage. They want their husbands to continue dating them, to continue expending energy on them, continue romancing them (romance, of course, being defined as things men do for women, not vice-versa).
Men marry to stop dating, and women marry to continue dating. Women expect men to continue putting in all that effort, in spite of men believing that the whole point to getting married is that they can stop all the effort. Men hope their wives will love them for who they are, women hope that men will continue showing their love through constant qualifying action, through constant jumping through hoops.
So men jump through hoops. And the more hoops they jump through, the more hoops women set up. That very act of jumping through hoops, that act that women say they want, that romance, will ultimately kill any semblance of attraction if given in excess. The more the man tries to qualify for love, the less worthy of love she will view him.
The only way to pass the test of fitness is to fail the test of affection. A hard pill to swallow.
February 4th, 2015 at 12:36 pm
@steve H….
“And I apologize once again for beating a dead horse, but mens’ (writ-large) willingness to simply pay for it negates virtually all her power, including – inconsequentially enough – her power to elicit responses from the men on this forum…..
You fool yourself.
Paying for it is a cop out Steve. Paying for it is a “buffer against rejection”. Paying for it is avoiding game. Paying for it Does NOT “negate virtually all her power”. Paying for it avoids courtship and courtship is a battle. Paying for it is surrender before the battle has begun because you consider yourself not battle worthy. Paying for it proves you are so overwhelmed by her power that you avoid dealing with it. Paying for it is no more rewarding than masturbation, in fact paying for it is less rewarding than masturbation because it is like paying someone else for you to masturbate. You loose, you cheat yourself. Why pay your opponent for your loss while you cheat yourself?
Don’t pay for it.
Go to battle.
Win it.
February 4th, 2015 at 12:57 pm
@Softek,
Men are not hardwired for Game. They probably are hardwired for rape and dominance.
Once gut level violence is tempered, men want to be the hero, the doer, who is rewarded for his deeds by a woman or women. Game is inherently feminine, an admission that women have won. Game involving talking and “communication” – does that sound masculine?
If we return to patriarchy I can’t imagine Game being a big part of life. Men have better things to do.
As far as whether Game is necessary, any sex that doesn’t produce surviving offspring is just recreation. If your n count is 100, and no babies are produced or all potential babies are aborted, then it’s the same as n count 0 except for how it makes you feel. If women choose to sleep with the alpha players, then have babies with the beta shlubs, that’s the COMPLETE game.
Sorta OT, but I just remembered that Fonzie ended up in a LTR with a single mom, didn’t he? Blech.
February 4th, 2015 at 1:01 pm
Yet… I see more men trying to do that than I do men trying to play by the second set of books.
February 4th, 2015 at 1:18 pm
In regards to the threads in this comment section, Rollo’s essay on Dream Girls and Children with Dynamite.
I managed to fully swallow the red pill 18 months ago and also would like to say a big thank you to the red pill pushers, esp. Rollo. As Rollo says” game is even more important in a LTR or marriage than being single.”
Thanks to my skill level I only sustained a few minor injuries from the dynamite. I turned the ship around after 24 years of marriage and took over as captain.
@forgethesky
February 4th, 2015 at 10:28 am
“Sometimes there can be a pretty good compromise – I’ve heard, for men, that if you marry a girl young and stay attached to her, you can actually learn to look past her aging quite a bit. For women, there are men out there who don’t dominate or abuse – who can be close and loving to you – but who stay attractive regardless due to a great passion, charisma, and mission. Unfortunately, such men are unusual and are becoming rare.”
Heheh, mine’s turning 50 in three months. Lately I just came to realize she’s the best person I know (quality of character-wise) for a woman. And if she were in a large group of women I would chose to have one-itis for her attraction wise. But I’m doing well to sublimate that emotion. Good thing I’m very unemotional by nature. It puts a smile in the back of my mind when I’m at the country club and flirt with someone’s very attractive wife (without appearing to do so) and she’s telling me how attractive my wife is (a couple feet away).
I almost let a good marriage slip away 18 months ago but I feel like I am on solid ground and just where I want to be. But I most definitely won’t settle for stasis. I will always be performing.
February 4th, 2015 at 2:02 pm
Not Born This Morning – “Don’t pay for it.”
You always pay for it.
There’s no such thing as free. The only question. Is whether it’s better to pay with labor in exchange for money, or pay with the time and the energy needed for game. Either way sex is sex. There’s nothing special or meaningful in the experience. Anyone who believes there is suffering a blue pill dilusion.
February 4th, 2015 at 3:56 pm
“Bro-Knighting” is what made civilization possible.
Civilzation is also about the betas organizing to keep the alphas in check.
It’s not surprising that alpha types would want to promote ideas destructive to civilization.
February 4th, 2015 at 4:40 pm
““Bro-Knighting” is what made civilization possible.
Civilzation is also about the betas organizing to keep the alphas in check.
It’s not surprising that alpha types would want to promote ideas destructive to civilization.”
And the Betas got wealthy enough that they turned to their subordinate in hubris and said “we like you women, so we are going to give you a promotion to be by our side.” And the women returned the promotion not with gratitude but instead stabbed them in the back and left them to die.
And reality said,
“Since you listened to your wife and ate from the tree
whose fruit I commanded you not to eat,
the ground is cursed because of you.
All your life you will struggle to scratch a living from it.”
A Cherokee Legend
The little boy was walking down a path and he came across a rattlesnake. The rattlesnake was getting old. He asked, “Please little boy, can you take me to the top of the mountain? I hope to see the sunset one last time before I die.” The little boy answered “No Mr. Rattlesnake. If I pick you up, you’ll bite me and I’ll die.” The rattlesnake said, “No, I promise. I won’t bite you. Just please take me up to the mountain.” The little boy thought about it and finally picked up that rattlesnake and took it close to his chest and carried it up to the top of the mountain.
They sat there and watched the sunset together. It was so beautiful. Then after sunset the rattlesnake turned to the little boy and asked, “Can I go home now? I am tired, and I am old.” The little boy picked up the rattlesnake and again took it to his chest and held it tightly and safely. He came all the way down the mountain holding the snake carefully and took it to his home to give him some food and a place to sleep. The next day the rattlesnake turned to the boy and asked, “Please little boy, will you take me back to my home now? It is time for me to leave this world, and I would like to be at my home now.” The little boy felt he had been safe all this time and the snake had kept his word, so he would take it home as asked.
He carefully picked up the snake, took it close to his chest, and carried him back to the woods, to his home to die. Just before he laid the rattlesnake down, the rattlesnake turned and bit him in the chest. The little boy cried out and threw the snake upon the ground. “Mr. Snake, why did you do that? Now I will surely die!” The rattlesnake looked up at him and grinned, “You knew what I was when you picked me up.”
February 4th, 2015 at 4:53 pm
Heh, that’s an interesting take on Genesis, punishment for no game.
February 4th, 2015 at 4:57 pm
“While female written romance stories revolve around multiple suitors for a woman protagonist to tame the most Alpha among them – usually ending with the one who’s a misunderstood asshole to everyone but her”
this is so true. indont know why people like atlas shrugged so much. i couldnt even read the book after she “falls in love” with the main guy after fcking 2 other people. b
February 4th, 2015 at 5:16 pm
Keep in mind that Atlas Shrugged was written by a woman. An old, somewhat colored-history woman, but a woman nonetheless. The romance in the story definitely reflects that fact.
February 4th, 2015 at 5:35 pm
Bro Knighting may have benefitted society in the past, but here’s the fact: it only benefits women and alpha males in modern society. It actively damages the males that practice it while helping the males that don’t.
I hope you Bro Knights avoid acting on this knowledge. I appreciate your making my Game easier.
February 4th, 2015 at 5:43 pm
Ayn Rand was a far stretch from being feminine. She had a straightforward masculine bent when philosophizing. Very logical and not ruled by her emotions. She was a MBTI INTJ type pretty damn rare for a female. I don’t know about you but she was pretty damn red pill aware. And possibly anti feminist.
Here’s a quote from her:
“For a woman qua woman, the essence of femininity is hero-worship—the desire to look up to man. “To look up” does not mean dependence, obedience or anything implying inferiority. It means an intense kind of admiration; and admiration is an emotion that can be experienced only by a person of strong character and independent value-judgments. A “clinging vine” type of woman is not an admirer, but an exploiter of men. Hero-worship is a demanding virtue: a woman has to be worthy of it and of the hero she worships. Intellectually and morally, i.e., as a human being, she has to be his equal; then the object of her worship is specifically his masculinity, not any human virtue she might lack.
This does not mean that a feminine woman feels or projects hero-worship for any and every individual man; as human beings, many of them may, in fact, be her inferiors. Her worship is an abstract emotion for the metaphysical concept of masculinity as such—which she experiences fully and concretely only for the man she loves, but which colors her attitude toward all men. This does not mean that there is a romantic or sexual intention in her attitude toward all men; quite the contrary: the higher her view of masculinity, the more severely demanding her standards. It means that she never loses the awareness of her own sexual identity and theirs. It means that a properly feminine woman does not treat men as if she were their pal, sister, mother—or leader.
“An Answer to Readers (About a Woman President),” The Objectivist, Dec. 1968, 1
February 4th, 2015 at 5:59 pm
* “(murder and cold blooded self serving machinations not withstanding)”
Fuck, long day….
February 4th, 2015 at 6:02 pm
@sjfrellc – Haha…I hear you man…agree on the dark triad bit.
February 4th, 2015 at 6:05 pm
Haha!!!
“Heh, that’s an interesting take on Genesis, punishment for no game.”
Well said Jeremy, well said!
February 4th, 2015 at 6:23 pm
@sjfrellc
You can be all those things, and still ruled by hypergamy. The romance she wrote in Atlas does actually read as if she wasn’t trying to disguise the hypergamous influence in her characters mating decisions.
Men can be blue-pill-dyed-in-the-wool-feminists… and still feel the biologically coded desire to screw everything that moves. It’s just biology, not a knock on Ms Rand.
February 4th, 2015 at 6:25 pm
We are at cultural crossroads and transitioning from Monogamy to Serial Polygyny, the vestiges of Monogamy still exist (it’s to the FI’s advantage to maintain the Monogamy illusion to facilitate the dual BBAFs strategy) but it is slowly eroding as men become more aware.
Most of the men on this board are reasonably mature (I would doubt whether many Millennials are reading here) and heavily enculturated in the Monogamy paradigm, these are the types struggling the most with the new rules (hence MGTOW and PUA animosity). The younger generations will have no need for game as they will be living and breathing it daily.
Rollo and YaReally are way ahead of the curve (early adopters), they’ve seen the future script and are optimising under the Serial Polygyny paradigm, much to the chagrin of the FI.
What seems to bother men the most is the perception that women are getting away with murder, that they can have their cake and eat it too. This is a misperception.
It has to be remembered late Boomers, Gen Xs and early Ys were part of a population anomaly, sharp drop in birth rates, which heavily screwed sex ratios in favour of females. Add to that the Monogamy enculturation of males while females were playing the Polygny script and these generations bore the brunt of the cultural transition.
When full blown Serial Polgyny kicks in it will be a disaster for females, they’ll be passed around like doobies with very little male investment. Hence the dramatic rise is social welfare spending, single mothers and seeking empowerment by ‘working’.
We are already seeing the early signs, highly sexual displays aren’t a sign of female empowerment but the exact opposite. In the animal kingdom females are the drab sex, they only engage heavily in sexual displays when they are faced with heavily skewed sex ratios, i.e. when they’re desperate. Increased female sexual displays also creates a negative feedback loop, the more they do it the less effect it has.
Increased sexual displays, empowerment by working, single mothers, pornography, low birth rates, increased promiscuity, childless women etc. only leads to one conclusion, a drop in the societal value of females.
February 4th, 2015 at 6:30 pm
Couple of things about dear old Ayn. One, she had a decades long affair with Nathaniel Branden, a much better looking fellow than her husband. Two, some work of hers was reviewed/commented on by some famous economist (or something), and he said of her that she was the (something like) “the strongest man he knew.” When told of this, Ayn asked, “Did he really?” When answered in the affirmative, she went for days smiling smugly (even more so than her usual) and recounted the story to all who would listen, and most likely many that wouldn’t.
Ayn was NOT a feminist, and red pill as fuck.
February 4th, 2015 at 6:38 pm
@KRose
You should probably read Equalism and Masculinity first. There’s an interesting link in that article:
It is literally written into your genetic and neurological makeup to prefer more physically masculine, dominant, unfamiliar Alpha men during the estrus phase of your menstrual cycle, and to prefer the comfort, security and familiarity of more feminine Beta men during the luteal phase. These behavioral, emotional and motivational manifestations are aspects of a phenomenon called Ovulatory Shift. The conflict you, and the author of this article feel, is the want to rationally reconciling these aspects of your innate arousal and attraction cues within the confines of a social conditioning that’s taught you to think mutual gender equalism is the only valid state of relations between men and women.
This is the fundamental conflict all women face in confronting their own Hypergamy.They readily, and naturally submit sexually and emotionally to a man who’s sexual market value (they perceive) exceeds their own SMV. Optimization of Hypergamy is always an ‘SMV +1′ prospect – balanced SMVs is not a genetic or provisional benefit. Thus, when a man’s SMV and performance in proving it is perceived to be equal or lower than a woman’s, the hindbrain subroutine which filters for Hypergamous optimization makes her discontent with that man.
In a feminine-primary social order that emphasizes the equalist dogma that all people are functional equals irrespective of gender, a woman is prone to the rationalization that the suboptimal man she’s paired with has no effective “right” to control the frame of the relationship with her. When paired with a man she considers an SMV equal or lesser, her indignation is the result of submitting to the frame of a man her Hypergamous psyche tells her is suboptimal to her own.
Thus, her rationalization becomes one of “why should I allow this man (by association ALL men) control the direction of my life and relationship?” And in an equalist social framework that indignation becomes more amplified. The truth of that rationalization however is one of resisting the submission to a man’s frame and relational control whom she neither respects nor is sexually excited by. The subconscious filtering aspect of women’s Hypergamy knows that by submitting to that SMV-suboptimal man’s frame control she limits her capacity to optimize with better prospective men. That resistance to his frame is the result of her frustration in being unable to optimize Hypergamy within the confines of a relationship with a suboptimal man.
This is a good illustration of why making appeals to a woman’s reason is always counterproductive to men when they wish to influence a woman’s genuine desire. Genuine desire cannot be negotiated, and what you are doing Ms. Rose is attempting to negotiate your genuine desire for a Hypergamously optimal man with an equalist mindset you’ve been conditioned to believe. It’s better to ask yourself what type of Man would you submit frame to? What type of Man would you trust to relinquish control to? What type of Man have you given it all to in the past? Why did you do so?
February 4th, 2015 at 6:41 pm
@Kristine Rose: I’ll keep my answer short and simple: it’s a matter of practical hypergamy and the fact that female sexual desire is responsive in nature. In other words, if you find yourself the leader of your marriage, as a wife, odds are you will eventually lose respect/attraction/arousal for your husband, leading your innate hypergamy to kick in. If he doesn’t lead, you don’t follow; if you have to lead, he’s not the man you thought he was, no matter what you tell yourself.
It’s not a matter of capability. Women mate upwards, and if you are not shown demonstrable signs of his dominance, then all the clean dishes and folded laundry in the world are going to make your nipples hard. And once the nipples stop getting hard, the eye starts wandering.
A smart girl like you should be able to see that.
February 4th, 2015 at 7:07 pm
Yeah, I couldn’t really care less about who does the laundry and things like that. I certainly wouldn’t want to be with someone who I feel kisses my ass or is intimidated by me in any way.
I’m talking about things like…being better with money. If the guy shows me that he is more capable of handling our money then I’m of course going to let him handle it, because I’m not an idiot, I’m just saying he has to show me that. I’m not gonna relinquish control to a guy simply because he has a dick, he has to show me he is actually superior in that skill. So I guess what I’m asking is if the guy in question isn’t actually superior at that skill, or is even just lacking intellectually in general, what happens then? Am I expected to just give in anyway, because that’s not smart. Because I can totally ignore my feelings/attractions and do the smart thing. Maybe not everyone can do that, but I can do that.
February 4th, 2015 at 7:08 pm
Sun Wukong seems to posit a false dichotomy. It is possible to advocate honor from a position of abundance.
What, you say that getting that abundance requires dishonorable behavior?
Am I desparately clinging now just by my nails by believing maybe not?
“Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice”
I find it distasteful that the hardcore PUA doctrine is effectively aligned with the mission of the feminists. Since I have seen for myself the truth of the RP, am I also in bed with the feminists? Or can I apply RP in a way that is overall of benefit to the society and the women I get involved with as well as myself?
February 4th, 2015 at 7:20 pm
“My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.”
— Ayn Rand, Appendix to Atlas Shrugged
Sounds good to me. The only problem is that the script was flipped in 2008.
Stephen Moore’s editorial in Jan 2009 “‘Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years”
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB123146363567166677
Only exactly 0.8% of women think like Ayn Rand.
I know what you are saying Jeremy by Ayn Rand was merely red pill observing and telling a fictional tale rooted in reality, rather than optimizing her own sexual strategy (which she no doubt did anyway in a masculine way).
And on the topic of a masculine way of thinking in females, did you see what Jillian Flynn did in Gone Girl? She made the female protagonist a logical, straightforward thinking individual (a masculine direct thinker). In the book she had the protagonist go off on a rant about “cool” girls who fake their personalities to be like the cool girl their male partner wants them to be . The significance of that last sentence is that she flipped the script and the cool girls rant was really what the red pill community would describe as what beta males do with their partners. This flipping of the script of a male:female dynamic is the literary tactic Flynn used to make the book intriguing (notwithstanding the unreliable narrator tactic.)
February 4th, 2015 at 7:23 pm
Thank you for thoughtful response. I absolutely don’t want to live in a world where I am constantly coddled and condescended to, that sounds like a nightmare. I basically want us as a couple to always do whatever the smart thing is.
If my boyfriend presents a logical argument that makes sense, I am of course going to follow him. He does have to earn that through actually being right though. And while I have looked for someone (I’m currently in a relationship) that will bring things to the table that I don’t have, more often then not, it doesn’t seem realistic that either of us can be right all of the time.
I might be the odd one out here, because I’m not by nature a person who’s lead by emotions. I’m very logic driven and try to make choices intellectually. Doing otherwise is something I see as weakened is both genders.
In my relationship if I have ever felt like my boyfriend isn’t living up to that role, I have no problem giving him a little push about it. For example, he used to be a very deeply conflict avoidant person. This was leading to personal and professional problems for him as well as lack of attraction on my part. Instead of cheating on him or breaking up with him I frankly told him it was something he had to work on and helped him work on it. He did and is now much more in control of himself and his life. He’s happier and I’m happier. Do you guys think that’s ok in a relationship? Cause I read a lot of generalizations on sites like this and so I’m curious about more of the nuances. Thanks!
February 4th, 2015 at 7:31 pm
Thanks for the response! You ask what type of man I would or have given all to and the only answer I can leave you with is “someone who knows better than me in every way”. If this was a person who existed, I would happily defer to them. The problem is that that’s not really a realistic thing, and since it’s not, I don’t think I could ever totally give in to anyone.
I’m not an emotionally driven person or a person who is lead by desire. Those things have their place, but are certainly not my main decision making factors.
The happy medium seems to be to find a guy who fulfills most of these needs and counsel him on the things that naturally come easier to me when they do in fact come up.
February 4th, 2015 at 7:37 pm
Wow. Just Wow. A newcomer that either never read anything said in the last four years or someone who couldn’t understand it. I can tell she’s trying. But those are few posts that are painful to read.
February 4th, 2015 at 7:40 pm
@Kristine Rose
You’ve essentially validated the entire Red Pill praxeology with your responses. You’ve also spelled out, subcontextually, the inherent dilemma between the feminine imperative and feminism, and why modern women are kinda screwed. Thank you.
February 4th, 2015 at 7:41 pm
jacklebear – “Or can I apply RP in a way that is overall of benefit to the society and the women I get involved with as well as myself?”
Yes!
BUT….
…you might have to consciously delay or deny personal gratification in favor of your goal for society, or a greater good. Now that sort of old fashioned behavior is the essence of being a chump, and not Alpha, but don’t let that stop you.
February 4th, 2015 at 7:51 pm
I think modern everyone is totally and completely screwed. I find you guys fascinating because the problems you highlight ring true to me, I’m just not sure your suggested solutions will work because sometimes it seems that there are no solutions. Maybe the push and pull you’re describing is just an inexcapeable part of life :p
February 4th, 2015 at 7:52 pm
Kristine Rose,
I recommend the work of David Deida to you. He wrote it for a new age audience, feminine friendly so he skirted directly stating the hard truths, yet women were saying things like “finally a man who understands how we women are” while at the same time it was considered a bible of sorts by the PUAs of the time.
Some of the language used here like” submitting to a dominant man” sounds harsh to the modern ear, but realise that this is code for more nuanced concepts. It just makes it more efficient to build and discuss ideas. Deida manages to avoid that discomfort by using feel good code terms.
David Deida’s work was my first intro to RP, who gave me the idea that my masculinity is good because of the polarity of attraction between masculine and feminine being like the north and south poles of a magnet and so on.
In answer to your original question, Deida would say that a woman tests a man to determine if he is trustable, and if so, she is willing to relax into his masculine frame, enjoying him dealing with planning and logistics so that she can relax into her feminine and do womanly stuff according to her true nature. He is acting out of his predominantly masculine essence, she is acting from her predominantly feminine essence.
In the local language, if the man is alpha enough to pass her shit testing, she will submit to his dominance, and they both do these things because it is their evolved nature, hardwired into the brain.
February 4th, 2015 at 7:54 pm
Fascinating how Kristine, LivingTree, Alpha Female, Trunig Star, and Kryptokate all have similar writing styles, common problems and similar “fascinations” with “Red Pill” guys.
Just saying…
February 4th, 2015 at 7:57 pm
Kristine Rose please do me a favor. Have you and your boyfriend read Rollo Tomassi’s and Ian Ironwood’s books and blogs (Ian’s the redpillroom.blogspot.com). Then re-ask your questions. And then thank me for suggesting it.
February 4th, 2015 at 7:58 pm
Jesus, it’s taken me this long to see that most female comments here are just shit tests? I’m an amateur.
February 4th, 2015 at 7:59 pm
Interesting! Yeah, I will check that out. I’m of course only comfortable speaking for myself here and my own wants and needs. I mean I have a hard time relating to the things a lot of other women (and people in general) say, so I don’t feel right speaking for anyone else.
I personally need a strong man because I myself am a really strong person who takes no shit. If I am with a guy who’s not at least totally in control of himself and his life, I will totally eat him alive and that’s not good for either of us.
February 4th, 2015 at 8:00 pm
Rollo – “Just saying…”
AWALT?
Seriously if they are all the same person I find it a crying shame he/she/it can’t find more productive outlet like….macramé perhaps.
February 4th, 2015 at 8:05 pm
There are certain kinds of women who want specific things, yeah. Not contesting that in the least.
My “writing style” right now could be appropriately titled “On Codiene Cough Syrup”, if that’s also the case for the other writers you mentioned I will be quite amused.
I’m not saying I don’t find dominant men attractive for reasons I’ve already expressed, but I also have an intellectual fascination with serial killers and the Nazis, just to keep it all in perspective haha.
February 4th, 2015 at 8:06 pm
Kristine Rose – “I personally need a strong man because I myself am a really strong person who takes no shit.”
…Yawn.
So how do you benefit the man? What do you bring to the relationship? Perhaps more importantly can his strength diminish as your weight and age increase?
February 4th, 2015 at 8:10 pm
I will check that out. People keep pointing it to me that I’m not familiar with every sentence ever written about this subject. I’m well aware of that, my whole life is hardly devoted to this subject. If I sound like a casual observer it’s cause I am. I’m just sick and bored and shouting into the abyss over here.
February 4th, 2015 at 8:10 pm
Good one Rollo.
Just saying….= I TOLD YOU SO.
@jacklabear
February 4th, 2015 at 7:52 pm
Good comment in mentioning Deida for the woman. I personally read The Way of the Superior Man many years ago and it made me want to puke at the suggestion to just belly up to my wife when she was shit-testing me and have a good amused mastery moment. I always felt at that time, that yes I could do that if I won the lottery, was independently wealthy and had no worry about the work, the taxes and the emotional investment involved in a high maintenance woman.
Deida was too feminine to me also, so good you recommend him to her.
Turns out I wasn’t the best person I could be. Now I nearly am. Deida had some concepts right. I gave him a 80/20 pass.
February 4th, 2015 at 8:15 pm
“I personally need a strong man because I myself am a really strong person who takes no shit. If I am with a guy who’s not at least totally in control of himself and his life, I will totally eat him alive and that’s not good for either of us.”
Heheh….you be just saying.
February 4th, 2015 at 8:17 pm
I know that since you don’t know me, that sounds like bullshit, and since you probably never will know me I can’t convince you otherwise. I could name a bunch of good qualities but you’re already set to not believe me about those either. So…?
It is highly unlikely I will gain weight or age badly cause it’s just not in my genetic make up.
February 4th, 2015 at 8:19 pm
I mean…self awareness?
February 4th, 2015 at 8:23 pm
“Perhaps more importantly can his strength diminish as your weight and age increase?” good reality slap
But Badpainter, surely you’re not suggesting that a man can relax his game long term?
I have seen a 65yo 240lb woman with an unreconstructed total mastectomy branch swing.
So no, he must continue to perform.
That makes the question to KR that much more important :
What are you offering him to motivate him to perform for you in a superior manner ad infinitum? Are you sure it is actually of value to him? Would you call yourself feminine?
February 4th, 2015 at 8:29 pm
“I mean…self awareness?”
Otherwise acknowledged as solipsism.
“Thank you for thoughtful response. I absolutely don’t want to live in a world where I am constantly coddled and condescended to, that sounds like a nightmare. I basically want us as a couple to always do whatever the smart thing is.”
There is a misunderstood thing about game. If coddled and condescended to means being manipulated, that’s not where red pill awareness and game end up in a male partner.
Sure, you cant legislate intelligence in a mate, but for the most part if a reasonably intelligent male would peruse the so called Manosphere and pick up collected knowledge from other men what could happen.
In contrast to thinking he would be a manipulating weasel, No the actual fact would if he had integrity and ingenuity and a passion he would end up as a…..Guess What? A Better Man.
February 4th, 2015 at 8:38 pm
@ jacklabear
You and I and all men are free to do as we want. So yes we can dial back the game in an LTR. But, unlike women, we can’t escape the consequences of our actions, nor do we expect to be the beneficiaries of one sided non-reciprocal relationships. Even bluepill guys still understand they have burden of performance, just an incorrect understanding of the burden.
February 4th, 2015 at 8:40 pm
Everyone really wants a list? Sure, why not.
First of all, I don’t want someone to perform for me. I never wanted that. I want someone who does all of those things for themselves and I just happen to be around. I think everyone should be the best version of themselves for themselves, not a partner. The things I’m expecting from a guy are things that benefit him in his career and all of his interpersonal relationships, not just ours.
That doesn’t mean he can never have a moment of doubt or vulnerability. I am a really supportive person, if my boyfriend is going through a tough time I don’t begrudge him that at all. There’s a large spectrum between being a weak person and being a robot. I encourage him to pursue whatever is important to him and make that his priority, I have no desire to be someone’s priority in that way.
Would I say I’m feminine? In a lot of ways, yes. I’m a make-up artist, I love dresses and fashion. I’m really caring and loving. I’m totally submissive in bed. I can be really selfless with people I care for. So yes, I’m more of a girly girl than not.
As for what I bring to a relationship: I’m gonna stick with things other people have told me here. I’m completely honest and loyal, I would never dream of cheating. I am absolutely up front about everything I think. I’m the least jealous person ever, I encourage my boyfriend to have female friends, go to strip clubs, watch porn, whatever. I’m a really sexual person, I’m very adventurous in that way. I pretty much will never say no to sex unless I’m really physically ill. I have no gag reflex. I’ve been told I have an amazing body. I am always willing to listen to any of my guy’s problems. He credits me with pushing him to write more and now he is writing for a very successful metal magazine. He doesn’t seem to have many complaints about me. We have been together for five years, and are very in love and happy.
February 4th, 2015 at 8:47 pm
@Kristine Rose
You realize, of course, that there’s absolutely no difference between… “Someone who just does all these (awesome?) things while I’m around”
and…
“Someone who just does all these (awesome?) things while giving me attention.”
One you (I’m guessing) would call “performance”… the other you’re somehow deciding is “not a performance”.
Women crave the attention of a high value male. You seem honest enough to at least admit that much. Now how exactly is a male supposed to demonstrate high value to you if his presentation of himself reads like a dictionary and conceals his value?
Your dual request is laid bare. What you want is a high value male that is independent from you, but also pays attention to you. Those are conflicting requirements, and the solution that guys came up with is essentially a performance art that PUA’s practice.
February 4th, 2015 at 8:53 pm
I get what you’re saying, but I think there’s more to it than that. I think that a guy can pay attention to me because he enjoys having me around (sexually, socially, etc.) and so yes I am getting his attention, but he is reaping a benefit from it also. It’s not done to make me happy, me being happy is bi product of him making himself happy. I mean that’s why I give my boyfriend attention, being around him makes me happy. I don’t do it as a show and a favor to him.
My boyfriend has made it clear that he spends time with me because he feels I add something to his life. And conversely if he ever felt like I stopped adding to his life in a positive way he would no longer spend time with me.