Women Studies

Last week Heartiste had some excellent play-by-play Game analysis of this video. The guy doing the approach in the video is Steve, who is a friend of Krausers, and before I go into today’s post I just wanted to take a moment to say that Steve’s confidence and Game savvy is impressive. Whether he’s consciously aware of how well he’s internalized Game or if it’s a practiced effort, just like Krauser he gets a lot of points in the Tomassi book for application.

I’m not going to speculate as to whether Steve tapped into some natural reserve of Alpha mojo, or if he’s got his Game down to the point that it’s been internalized into his personality, or that his choice of woman in this instance was more advantageous to his personality type. Nor will I speculate that it may have been his Look and physique that led to a 5 minute kiss-close. I don’t have to because all of this was predictably scrawled across Roissy’s post comments. I say ‘predictably’ because when we observe a process we do so in terms of how it fits our own internal narratives.

As would be expected, the accusations of fraud and the disqualifications of how hot Steve’s target was started the hit parade, but amongst the “it was a set up” and “how much did it cost her to go along with it?” were some very interesting (though equally predictable) responses from The Chateau’s host of regular female commenters. The responses ran the gamut between “that’s so disrespectful”, “He’s so desperate. He comes across as a stalker and a lunatic” and “wow, did I just watch video documentation of sexual harassment?” to “that would never work on me! I have self-respect” to “yeah he’s kind of cute and has good Game.”

Geisha Kate summed it up best:

Its a simple matter of perception. An onlooker cannot feel what the people in the video felt. To them it was an awesome experience. The onlooker can’t tap into that and so it appears silly, etc. (no offense). Girls can look at this video and say, “that wouldn’t work on me,” but it likely would, and guys can look at the video and say it was because of his looks, which may be part of it, but its not the whole picture.

Kate’s was far and away the most objective of the female input; the rest of which were mostly an effort in plausible deniability of women’s universal attraction/arousal cues (NAWALT and “we’re attracted to different things”) to their, now expected, self-important anecdotal experiences absolving women of the obviously effective results Game had on one of their sisters.

Women Studies

The rest of what followed was essentially a debate between women (and less Game savvy men) coming to terms with Steve’s close and the red pill community’s dissection of the social and psychological dynamics observed in the video. The feminine side qualifies, disqualifies and personalizes the reasons why Game works, while the red pill side builds workable theories upon concrete analysis. All of this comes as the result of observing a process.

Steve’s approach video has everything the community and women alike could ask for. In it’s shot-on-video, raw genuineness it appeals to feminine indignation, the likes of which even Cheaters or Tyra Banks pale next to. Yet at the same time it is titillating enough to women’s arousal process that they’re drawn into casting themselves in the role of Steve’s Columbian target (not unlike the Twilight Dynamic). For blue-pills and white knights, it’s easily dismissed as some girl who “has no respect for herself” and they’ll continue their quest for the Holy Grail (a Quality Woman®) with a twinge of self-doubt that all women are in fact ‘like this’ and Steve’s approach might actually have merit. And that of course leaves the red-pill community with a lot of red meat to consume in verifying proposed dynamics and how well this girl’s response aligned with what’s already been established in our own version of ‘women studies’.

The manosphere is prescient if it’s anything, and as if on cue Vox fired off a very relevant post in light of the video debate at the Chateau – The logical fallacy of female attraction. As per usual, Aunt Giggles is still soft-selling the ‘betas-are-the-sexiest-of-men’ trope that only women in their 50’s can afford to invest themselves in. I say this is relevant to the debate over Steve’s video because the women (and manginas) commenting about it are uniformly conflicted amongst themselves in defining what characteristics, qualities, physique, attitude, behaviors, etc. empirically constitute attraction/arousal cues for women.

As I detailed in the Feminine Mystique, from a social perspective, the feminine imperative can’t afford men understanding the methods behind the madness with regards to optimizing hypergamy. A persistent sense of feminine ambiguity and female unknowability must constantly be reinforced for men by women. Thus women (and less enlightened men) perpetuate the myth that “women just don’t know what they want”, but is that the truth of it? Are women really unaware of their own attraction triggers? Or is it that they are so preoccupied with optimizing hypergamy (in a short window of SMV peak) that they’re simply never bothered by an inquisitive thought about what factors contribute to their being turned on enough to fuck one guy, but conversely being attracted to another for a long term commitment? Are women ever really prompted to observe their own process?

Observing a process will change it.

From the end of Vox’s Logical Fallacy post:

“Showing no emotion and saying absolutely nothing is an excellent way to avoid interrupting the process.”

Vox mentions that more sociopathic men, being entirely self-concerned and outcome indifferent, are primarily the types of men women feel the most arousal for and attraction to. In other words, the sociopath, in his self-importance, can’t be bothered to observe the process of attraction in women.

That said, I can’t help but find a similar parallel in women’s cognitive ignorance of their own attraction cues. Women’s innate solipsism (further reinforced by fem-centrism), like the self-importance of the sociopathic man, predisposes her to be oblivious to her own pluralistic sexual strategy (Alpha vs. Beta attraction). A woman’s solipsistic nature suggests she can’t be bothered to observe her own process.

In fact I would argue that evolution and hypergamy has selected-for women who are more predisposed to being oblivious to their own attraction cues, thus allowing them more cognitive brain-space to be devoted to filtering for the best mating option and the best long term provisioning option among prospective males.

By its very nature, women’s strategic sexual pluralism – Alpha Cads and Beta Dads – creates an unresolvable internal psychological conflict. Women cannot consciously reconcile the sexual impulsivity that drives them to (want to) fuck the hottest genetic Alpha with the drive for the security that a Beta provider represent with respect to parental investment. This dichotomy is even hard-coded into women’s hormonal cycle, impelling women to the sexual prowess of Alpha dominance in the follicular phase, and to Beta comfort in the luteal phase of menstruation. The solution? A healthy female psyche pushes this irreconcilable conflict to the peripheries of her conscious awareness.

The rationalization hamster we know today was psychologically evolved to mitigate the mental anguish that results from women’s pluralistic sexual strategy.

One of the contentions women participating in the manosphere have with red pill Men is that those men are observing women’s process and bringing it to conscious light in a globalized, meta perspective. Thus the scramble back to NAWALT, or women mature into new ways of knowing what they want, or “silly man, don’t try to figure out women, you’ll never figure us out.”

Recently Professor Mentu had a twitter debate with a manosphere-aware female wondering if there were in fact ‘red pill women’. Naturally in her self-congratulatory solipsism she wanted credit as a woman figuring out the Men who’d figured out women. I got a good laugh out of this, as I do with bloggers like Aunt Giggles and a few select other manosphere women because in truth, all women are red pill women – it’s dragging the truth of the red pill out of them that’s the trick. On some level of consciousness, and as evidenced by behaviors and the construction of larger social conventions, women are aware of their own hypergamy. The Threat, again, is men looking under the hood for women and then overtly attempting to get women to confirm the realities of the observations they’ve drawn conclusions from. The problem is that the feminine imperative will NEVER allow a consensus of women to confirm men’s piecing together of hypergamy. Men observe the process and thereby change it.

81 comments

  1. Are women really unaware of their own attraction triggers?

    We are aware of the feelings of attraction but unable to put them into words. I was first introduced to game at Vox Popoli a couple of years ago. It took me a couple of days to get past the whole NAWALT thing and allow the information to sink it. When it did, it was like a slap across the face. It explained everything I remember feeling throughout the years and it explained so much.

    women are aware of their own hypergamy.

    Most definitely. I don’t know a single woman who hasn’t had some lament of “Why am I attracted to that guy who is absolutely no good for me? This guy over here is perfect for me. Why the hell don’t I feel anything for him? What is wrong with me?”

    it’s dragging the truth of the red pill out of them that’s the trick.

    We don’t want to know the truth. It’s not easy to hear these things about yourself. On top of that, it makes you just like every other girl out there. No girl wants that. It completely negates female competition, which is exactly what NAWALT is.

  2. Eh, maybe. Maybe. As Stingray points out and as I have observed repeatedly, there are areas – vast realms, perhaps – that most women simply will not even attempt to examine in their own minds. It’s like the internal vision slides right off of it, when direct observation is attempted, and that attempt is precious rare. I suspect it’s the same reason that romance novels are very light on detail and heavy on emotion: to identify what causes the feeling is to negate it. Why? I haven’t the faintest. For me, the cause reinforces the effect, the details bring fantasy closer to reality.

    Naturally I find this willful disinterest rather silly, not to mention self-defeating. But then, I place knowledge well above pride, and do not have the disadvantage of decades of pedestalization and Precious Snowflakery. However, to repeat myself (and Stingray), it’s not entirely willful. Women really do ask themselves why they make deranged decisions, just as men do; it’s just that looking at the answers, or what will give the answers, is avoided as soon as it is attempted.

  3. ****By its very nature, women’s strategic sexual pluralism – Alpha Cads and Beta Dads – creates an unresolvable internal psychological conflict. Women cannot consciously reconcile the sexual impulsivity that drives them to (want to) fuck the hottest genetic Alpha with the drive for the security that a Beta provider represent with respect to parental investment.**** This dichotomy is even hard-coded into women’s hormonal cycle, impelling women to the sexual prowess of Alpha dominance in the follicular phase, and to Beta comfort in the luteal phase of menstruation. The solution? ****A healthy female psyche pushes this irreconcilable conflict to the peripheries of her conscious awareness.****

    One of the contentions women participating in the manosphere have with red pill Men is that those men are observing women’s process and bringing it to conscious light in a globalized, meta perspective. Thus the scramble back to NAWALT, or women mature into new ways of knowing what they want, or “silly man, don’t try to figure out women, you’ll never figure us out.”

    VERY TIMELY POST. I’ve been debating the heck out of this over at HUS the last few days. Question for you, do you believe it is possible that this preference does exist on some sort of spectrum, and that there are some women who are “wired” to actually be more sexually attracted to those beta parental traits?

    There are a few women there who really do seem to be genuine about their preference for more beta traits, and who don’t appear to be sexually attracted to more alpha traits either physically/visually or personality wise. I’ll admit I find it difficult to comprehend the amount and degree of self-delusion necessary to look in the mirror and say something that is at total odds with one’s true nature.

    It really gets tricky to square the circle where someone argues something that goes against one’s observable reality. For example, one point that gets made is that women are not wired to be immediately sexually attracted but that it needs to grow over time based on beta comfort parental traits as well.

    Yet, looking back over my own personal history I can think back to women that had sex with me pretty much right away, and I think it was based purely on a visual alpha appearance (this always happened when I was in basically top training shape around 10% bodyfat) and I wasn’t even Game aware at that time.

    I’ll admit when I have these discussions with women I sometimes wonder if they are being honest with me OR EVEN THEMSELVES.

  4. It’s like the internal vision slides right off of it, when direct observation is attempted

    Yes.

    to identify what causes the feeling is to negate it.

    Well? . . . No. To identify what causes a feeling brings those feelings screaming to the forefront and they are very rarely pleasant feelings. It brings pain and shame. It also bring memories of things one did and now one understands why one did them, and it only makes the feelings worse. The internal vision slides right off to avoid the painful feelings and to avoid the shame that will come from understanding past deeds.

  5. Calling out the process does change it, it’s why one of the most important things when a woman is falling for you is to not make her aware of it. It should feel ‘wrong’ to make the girl aware of what she is doing to herself. Got a text message, “That’s the problem. I don’t mind your “jerk” comments cuz they make me laugh so hard.” Didn’t respond to it. That’s one example, there will be a million more when you’re actually together. Don’t try and get “more.” Don’t get all smart and mansplain-y. Let it roll.

    Regarding the kiss, yeah it’s well known if a girl is giving you ‘the eyes’ when you meet her you can swoop in. I didn’t listen to the audio but just by looking at her he could have gone for the kill in like a minute. Girls will play the fucking game harder and more fun than you if they think a guy’s got it, this doesn’t happen to me but I have a friend who is 6’3 and jacked- he has girls grabbing his dick al the time as soon they meet. A blonde lawyer, a birthday girl and a college freshman- girl’s are down. (self-respect has nothing to do with it, girls always think they’re the shit.) I get it though, it’s a huge WTF moment the first time you see it. A long time ago I saw a tiny asian I liked get nonchalantly picked up by a track star and they made out. Huge WTF moment. The whole kiss close thing is really part of something bigger, which is giving yourself permission or Knowing that some girls WANT a stud to take what he wants. Bitch shield is bigger than shit-tests, some girls will tease, not act interested and resist submission all the way up until you throw her on the bed. Like, for a lot of hookups there is no comfort stage, or they’re not going to do the happy funny buzzy dance where random makeouts are natural, especially if she knows you’re a hookup guy. It’s serious flirting, its screening for someone mate-worthy. It’s her asking Are You Man Enough. Understand, girls do go to clubs to hook up. If you turn her on near the end of the night, drag her ass home. Don’t always try to make sure it’s copacetic with her friennds, her plannns, her brainnnn, take her hand and go home. This sounds rape-y but when you get how it all it fits together it’s really about having zero hesitation (fear) and not wanting to deal with her femmy bullshit. lol.

    aaannnnddd innn connclusionnnn regarding “oblivious to their own attraction cues,” it’s even worse than that. You can make a girl fully aware of what she wants and how she operates, you can establish firmly and logically your omniscience… but the second they lose that emotional state it doesn’t matter. It’s like that thing about studying for a test drunk then you should take it drunk too or you will forget. The logic doesn’t transfer between emotional states. Overall though, it’s better not to even have a red pill convo since like you said, observing what’s going on will fuck it up. Game community has gone Routines -> inner game – evo psych, but dont think evo psych is a good routine.

  6. *** all women are red pill women – it’s dragging the truth of the red pill out of them that’s the trick. On some level of consciousness, and as evidenced by behaviors and the construction of larger social conventions, women are aware of their own hypergamy. The Threat, again, is men looking under the hood for women and then overtly attempting to get women to confirm the realities of the observations they’ve drawn conclusions from. The problem is that the feminine imperative will NEVER allow a consensus of women to confirm men’s piecing together of hypergamy.”

    The money quote. This reminds me of the old saw that there is a sexual “secret society” that consists of two groups: (1) all women; and (2) men “in the know” who understand how women really work. The women are attracted to the men in the know The trick for women is to make sure they don’t have sex with men not “in the know”.

  7. MikeC, I didn’t want to go too long on this post so I edited down parts of how this “sexual unawareness” is modified by a woman’s conditions and her positioning in the SMP and various stages of her life.

    Case in point:

    There are a few women there who really do seem to be genuine about their preference for more beta traits, and who don’t appear to be sexually attracted to more alpha traits either physically/visually or personality wise.

    Without directly experiencing this in the existence of a woman, all we have to rely on is a woman’s self-reporting and how it aligns or conflicts with her behaviors and the behaviors of other women. An unattached woman on the downslide end of her SMV will logically be motivated to advertise her ‘preference’ for beta men who are observably more in tuned to agree to a provisioning exchange for sex. A woman subject to these conditions would necessarily have to convince beta men of her sexual desire for them in order for the beta guy to feel comfortable in committing to a woman after half a lifetime of witnessing women becoming aroused by exactly the opposite set of sexual arousal circumstances (i.e. spontaneous breeding with the Alpha).

    Behaviorally women don’t gather together at a Chippendale’s review because the men look comforting and sensitive to their needs. Likewise there is no ‘male review’ dedicated to beta men who put on a show about cuddling and promises of unending fidelity, because women don’t get off on that.

    The rationalization hamster we know today was psychologically evolved to mitigate the mental anguish that results from women’s pluralistic sexual strategy.

    A woman broadcasting her exclusive arousal for beta men is simply responding to her unconscious acknowledgement of her own conditions (SMV).

  8. “A woman broadcasting her exclusive arousal for beta men is simply responding to her unconscious acknowledgement of her own conditions (SMV).”

    Is this a way to turn off attraction to jerks? Like, if a woman feels really ugly or bad about herself, will she actually feel nothing/very little for jerks and much more about betas?
    Or is this effect simply a lie (to herself also if necessary)?

  9. I have no doubt this was a real pickup, the only question is how many attempts in was this?

    We only see the success, not the 5, 20, 100 fails leading up to this.

    Really, it is fallacious to draw the conclusion that ‘every’ girl on the street you could make out with (I think a realistic number of cute girls, single, and ready to make out in public with random guy is 1 in 20 or less), just like it is a dream to think girls are so perfect ‘they would never lower themselves’ to this.

  10. Women who are very carefull and very security seeking in general in life often are more drawn to beta men. Some seem to require a lot more comfort to be able to handle any sort of attraction dynamic. But they are still not sexually attracted by the beta traits per se. They just require a ton of beta to be able to be able to feel much attraction to the alpha traits that are there.

  11. Rollo,

    I think you made a mistake. There are “male reviews” dedicated to beta men who put on a show about cuddling and promises of unending fidelity. They’re called Couples Conferences and the women I’ve seen eat it up while the beta men promise to do better and the real men just about puke.

  12. It is the guys who have never had the privilege of witnessing true, raw female sexuality who are the ones claiming NAWALT.

    Society frames everything that is feminine as good and virtuous, so that is how men view women, that is until they experience hypergamy firsthand. Thing is though, it isn’t enough to see it form the perspective of the guy who gets shit on all the time- you have to be the guy who gets 5 minute kiss closes or has a fuck buddy who has half a dozen friends who blatantly want to fuck you. You have to see it from the side most guys never get a chance to see it from. THEN you understand how the game really works and it causes you to see it from the red pill perspective.

  13. So.. it’s self-delusion then? It isn’t true loss of attraction to alphas, just pretense?

    I think sometimes a woman can actually lose attraction to jerks and gain attraction to betas and it will feel as real as the former, and she’ll act according to it too. All due to feeling she has low SMV. But I don’t know how often this works. I even wrote about this in the past, and now you’re partially confirming it.

  14. “it’s dragging the truth of the red pill out of them that’s the trick.”

    This makes perfect sense to me. Anyone ever seen the film The Prestige? Once the method is revealed, all the mystery and allure (female mystique) goes out the window, and the magician can no longer capitalize by selling tickets to their show. It’s in the magician’s (female imperative) best interest to guard the inner workings of their illusion dearly, and if anyone starts getting close to comprehension…immediately discredit and marginalize those who would threaten to expose their secrets.

    Stingray said:
    “To identify what causes a feeling brings those feelings screaming to the forefront and they are very rarely pleasant feelings. It brings pain and shame. It also bring memories of things one did and now one understands why one did them, and it only makes the feelings worse. The internal vision slides right off to avoid the painful feelings and to avoid the shame that will come from understanding past deeds.”

    The strange part is that men do this all the time, voluntarily. The difference seems to be that we try to isolate the problem or catalyst for said unpleasant feelings, and analyse how to avoid such unpleasantries in the future. Are women not capable of this level of introspection/analysis/proactive change, or just unwilling?

  15. Rollo, if you don’t want to monetize the blog and you don’t make a mint on the book, I have another suggestion. An on line blog University. In Men’s Studies. Call it, I don’t know, U/Man. You teach psych. Roissy does the sociology studies; marriage (an option) by Athol/Dalrock. Street tactics by Roosh/Krauser. With an elective in Women’s Viewpoint by Sue. What could go wrong? Would be a lot cheaper and more instructive than the Ivy League.

  16. Emma, there’s a reason I coined the term ‘Alpha Widows’ – there are no beta widows – women simply don’t pine away their married mid-lives for the beta they left behind in college. Women have no impetus to trade-down. Hypergamy is always a drive to improve a woman’s socio-sexual status with what they perceive is the best position their looks and sexual agency can attract.

    Now, I have no doubt that there are women attached to a borderline abusive Alpha who wish he’d go a little beta and be a bit nicer, but even these women aren’t sexually fantasizing about a passive, sensitive, emotionally available beta. Even formerly heterosexual women in sexually fluid relationships with their late-life lesbian partners are still attracted to that same Alpha-masculine dominance from their lover. That’s why they called Doms and Subs.

    https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2011/09/01/sexual-fluidity/

    Ironically it was TedD who prompted Vox’s post response:

    We can go on and on about how most women LOVE good beta traits, but they simply ARE. NOT. TURNED. ON. BY. THEM.

  17. An unattached woman on the downslide end of her SMV will logically be motivated to advertise her ‘preference’ for beta men who are observably more in tuned to agree to a provisioning exchange for sex. A woman subject to these conditions would necessarily have to convince beta men of her sexual desire for them in order for the beta guy to feel comfortable in committing to a woman after half a lifetime of witnessing women becoming aroused by exactly the opposite set of sexual arousal circumstances (i.e. spontaneous breeding with the Alpha).

    I can see this. There is only so much you can know about someone online, but if you pay attention over time they reveal a quite a bit of personal history (I know I have and I don’t mind doing so).

    Thinking about some of the women who have a strong expressed preference for betas my sense is The Wall is in their direct line of sight or they are even post Wall. My sense is they are often 30+ and quite often probably mediocre looking physically at best. In contrast, the younger women who may be more physically attractive will still express some preference for alpha traits or alpha appearance.

    One of my favorite expressions I picked up from you here is this idea of “making necessity a virtue”. My sense is both beta males and beta females have a strong tendency to do that with the positions they articulate.

  18. Even formerly heterosexual women in sexually fluid relationships with their late-life lesbian partners are still attracted to that same Alpha-masculine dominance from their lover.

    Speaking of making necessity a virtue, it occurred to me that women “switching teams” late in life also points in that direction. How often does one hear about a woman between 30-40 switching from heterosexual to homosexual? I’ve never heard of it. At that age, their SMV is still high enough to at least pull a decent beta provider. Now a woman 50+ or 60+ has lost the majority of her SMV so what she can realistically get may be far below her expectations so she decides to switch to a relationship with a woman and then rationalize it otherwise.

  19. Women who are very carefull and very security seeking in general in life often are more drawn to beta men. Some seem to require a lot more comfort to be able to handle any sort of attraction dynamic. But they are still not sexually attracted by the beta traits per se. They just require a ton of beta to be able to be able to feel much attraction to the alpha traits that are there.

    Wudang, this is an insightful point. Thinking about it, I’ve noticed this as well

  20. What I was thinking was more about women who are ugly right from the start. They are post-wall at birth. Alphas aren’t attainable. What they can hope for is a beta or even an omega. Perhaps because those guys know how they feel, and because they subconscously know they can’t do better. Oh, and it could also work for a woman who isn’t actually ugly, just feels she is. Can anyone here confirm or debunk this? Are young low self-esteem women or ugly women more attracted to betas and confirm it with their actions?

    Roissy/Heartiste posted a study not long ago, saying nervous men are more forgiving to fatness in women, giving them higher scores. He linked betaness to nervousness (not sure I can agree entirely). He also posted a study on how the more options a man has, the pickier he gets, and older women need less game. Not sure if it means people’s attractions truly change or they just settle despite themselves. But it could be the former, even a bit. Kinda like a low SMV-induced Stockholm Syndrome of your attraction (meaning you love who your misfortune brought you).

  21. Are women not capable of this level of introspection/analysis/proactive change, or just unwilling?

    I think they are capable, but they don’t have to. Women are not held accountable these days so, not only are we not taught to do this, there is no reason to. We can get what we want without having to do any of this. Basically, there is no reason to face the painful feelings to avoid any future unpleasantries because, really, what for? We aren’t expected to woman up in any way, shape, or form.

  22. Stingray beat me to it! I was just pulling out that exact quotation.

    @AlphaWhiskey: “Are women not capable of this level of introspection/analysis/proactive change, or just unwilling?” They are unwilling (as some men are too) because it means changing their worldview. It means coming to terms with the fact that not everyone is nice. It means taking responsibility for oneself and one’s life. A good friend of mine talks quite a bit about how our behavior is guided by four needs: certainty, variety, significance, and love. Depending upon which of these needs drives us, we may hold onto false beliefs because they are serving our needs, even if they are doing it in a negative way.

  23. Some excellent stuff here. This is the only blog I read that actually has well-thought commentators as well as a nicely edited, concise post-poster (Rollo).

    I recently saw this advertisement for someone selling his new Game PUA secret shit via youtube-link (I didn’t know until last night actually how big PUA was; I mean conferences and all…it’s like Snake Oil Salesmen 101) for $67.00.

    It was, psychologically speaking, effective. Seemed accurate. Was unsettling though.

    He talked about looking at a girls lips. Simple tricks like that.

    I guess what’s confusing is how this is now something we must learn, or be aware of, all of it. Otherwise we’re fucked. I’m going off topic here, as I don’t know exactly how to compose what I’m thinking, or translate it into words.

    However, I’m grateful that during times like these I have stuff to read that validates my existence too.

  24. Top notch post once again.

    “The sociopath, in his self-importance, can’t be bothered to observe the process of attraction.”

    My friends and I chuckle about our friend who has no appreciation of social norms whatsoever, the guy is genuinely is a little bit slow in that regards, something like this blog would be totally beyond his ken.

    And yet he gets layed like tiles, he simply pushes through women’s shields (totally oblivious to their reticence) until he gets what he wants. This guy genuinely lands 10s from all sorts of professions and backgrounds.

  25. Women want whatever they preceive to be lacking in their lives at any given moment.

    The same woman who has a secure job in the morning and is attracted to an alpha, will be attracted to a beta if she loses her job in the evening.

    This is also the reason why its such a bad idea to get married. After marriage her preception changes because of security and goal of marriage already accomplished.

    With financially secure women, its Alpha game, with finacially insecure women, its Beta game. Welfare State has made most women financially secure so beta is usually not a good idea.

  26. MikeC,

    “There are a few women there who really do seem to be genuine about their preference for more beta traits, and who don’t appear to be sexually attracted to more alpha traits either physically/visually or personality wise.”

    I actually do think that there are some women like this, although they are very very rare in the “attractive woman” population. I can attest to this as this was my first gf’s character, whole heartedly. I started out beta with her (little gifts, dates, always calling, sweet gestures and notes, etc.) and she ate that stuff up while also exponentially reciprocating.

    A few ways to explain this though was that she is Asian, raised in a traditional household, she held on to Buddhist beliefs and possibly most important, she didn’t start to blossom until 17 or 18. From seeing pics of her at the start of hs, she was very plain looking in her dress and demeanor, had braces and glasses, etc. and she grew into her looks amazingly.

    Like I said though, this is extremely rare to find and I’m probably an idiot for tossing it away for strange.

  27. “Ironically it was TedD who prompted Vox’s post response:”

    Glad to know I’m generating a little buzz. But I don’t get why it is ironic.

    “I actually do think that there are some women like this, although they are very very rare in the “attractive woman” population.”

    My first LTR mate was like this, but she was indeed behind the curve in terms of looks because she “bloomed” rather late. When we were together she constantly underestimated her SMV until she turned 21 and hit the club scene. To the best of my knowledge she didn’t go full on princess bitch, but she certainly changed her attitude a bit.

    I was two years younger than her and worse than clueless. Looking back I’m embarrassed at how I behaved.

  28. Kate, Stingray – thanks for the illumination, the answer is obvious now in it’s simplicity: lack of incentive.

  29. “What I was thinking was more about women who are ugly right from the start. They are post-wall at birth. Alphas aren’t attainable. What they can hope for is a beta or even an omega. Perhaps because those guys know how they feel, and because they subconscously know they can’t do better. Oh, and it could also work for a woman who isn’t actually ugly, just feels she is. Can anyone here confirm or debunk this? Are young low self-esteem women or ugly women more attracted to betas and confirm it with their actions?”

    Emma, start looking at couples you observe. Really look intently. Try to see how attracted to each other they are. This is revealed fully in their body language and interaction. What you will find is that more attractive couples show clear signs of higher attraction on average. You will also find people with very low SMV that show clear signs of being highly attracted to each other. You will see 3s that are clearly strongly in love. But you will find a lot less of them. Generally I find that lower down the scale a lot of couples look like they are quite happy together in a comfort type way. They seem like they have good friendships, decent pair bonding and modest attraction.

    The way I think it works is that people will feel more strongly for someone higher up because there needs to be strong incentives for people to try to get them. But because realistically people will have to settle in their range nature has ordered it so that people with lower rank still can feel a lot for what is in their reach otherwise they wouldn`t pair up and their relationships would be too dysfunctional. I think their ability to feel more from less is combined with an ability to be happy with less feeling. Their expectations for what they are supposed to feel attraction wise are far lower. It is very much the same as peoples expectations for income or how exciting their jobs are supposed to be etc. I would get seriously depressed having on of the low end jobs that are common in the small town I spend my summer vacations in. But the people there are probably not that much less happy with their jobs than I am with my more exciting higher status one in the big city because they are working class country side people with low expectations.

    This general pattern of an ability to feel more from less and feel happy with less attraction is combined with a lot of people that clearly don`t feel much for their lower ranked partner or the people within their reach. Some people expect too much and are unable to feel much for what they can get.

    I think a lot of this ability to feel more from less is subconscious and partly conscious adjustments in response to what you can get. I remember learning in middle school and high school that the one or two prettiest girls in school and girls form other schools that where as pretty did not give me any IOIs or any sexual response when talking to them. Girls that where just slightly less attractive than them however did so frequently. So I learnt to instinctively identify women at a certain level as out of my league. Interestingly no woman 4 or lower has ever given me any sign of interest. Not a single flirty direct look. I`m sure they have looked but they have never given me clear IOIs and approach invitations through body language. 5s almost never do in daily life, only when drunk in night clubs, 6s do some of the time but mostly I get 7-9. So women have filtered accordingly and to women below a certain range I don`t seem to exist. I`m just filtered out because of their expectations.

    I think that the environmental feedback is mixed with genes. I think some genes make women a lot more hypergamous. Thrill seeking personality seem to correspond with higher hypergamy and security seeking personality seem to correspond with lower hypergamy. ugh social intelligence corresponds with hypergamy while low social intelligence lowers it a lot. Socially smooth women have a hard time dealing with bad game. Introversion seem to lower hypergamy in a lot of cases but far from all.

    The genes that correspond to high hypergamy IMO corresponds a lot with looks. I think that genes that correspond to SMV and genes that lead people to take advantage of high SMV have coupled up over time. Anything else would just be idiotic and counterproductive evo wise. For example, high T corresponds both to alpha behavior, and to muscle strength to back up to attempt at gaining alpha position. It also corresponds to the high sex drive and promiscuous inclination that let you take advantage of an alpha position. High estradiol in women correspond both to very good looks and to becoming easily dissatisfied with romantic partners, cheating and serially monogamy. These are things hotter women can do more of without being punished and since they are better of with the babies of different high value men than only babies with one high level man (a diversified portfolio is far safer in terms of having someone survive, this goes for ability to withstand decease as well as cards to play in terms of eve competition such as high T man vs good looking vs smart and social etc.) and women are better of changing men whenever their value changes and it is highly normal for a mans value to fluctuate over a lifetime. High estradiol also corresponds with catty feminine behavior and feminine competitiveness. Hot women become queen bees and the estradiol gives them the abilities to be a queen be and fight hard in female competition.

    High sociosexuality, the degree to with one is willing to follow short term sexual strategies, corresponds with good looks in women. Good looking women can be promiscuous and be punished little for it. Less attractive women sell chastity in the same way betas sell comfort and safety. If you don`t have what is attractive to begin with you sell to security of that which you can give.

    To me it is self evident for anyone that bothers to look twice and think it over that people with good looks are on average far more socially intelligent than people with lesser looks on average. They also tend to have a far higher ability to be “cool” and they are loads more socially competitive. I`m sure those genes are coupled up as well to a large extent although certainly socialization plays a role here.

    When I look at more attractive women they also strike me as one average far more willing to take social risk. Women 5 and below generally are very careful and unassertive socially and just seem to be more careful in everything they do. A fairly high degree of social risk tolerance is necessary to handle both the battles at the top of the social hierarchy, handling cheating and handling being an alphas woman as his life definitively will contain a lot of risk. It makes sense that good looking women have at least fairly high risk tolerance genes to play the cards they are dealt well.

    Most, maybe all, of the genes that I believe are connected to degree of hypergamy are genes that attractive women have a lot more of on average. But obviously a lot of less attractive women also often have these genes and can be as socially intelligent, catty, thrill seeking, in the moment etc. as hotter women. I think the degree to which the genes I have mentioned are had by less attractive women plays a huge role in how high their hypergamy is. It also works the other way around. A very attractive woman with a high aversion to all sorts of risk, with dislike of and poor ability to handle female competition, not too socially smooth, very high future time orientation to the degree of being boring, low sex drive etc. will be much more likely to have less attraction for alphas. Certainly for the rougher and riskier types of alphas. Such women will probably be more drawn to very good looking and successful, socially respected and confident men with some dominance but not a lot and tons of comforting beta traits.

    Start observing people more intently, look closely at body language and look for the factors I mentioned and grade people on SMV and see how stuff corresponds. If you compare the average for people 1-5 with 7-10 the picture is crustal clear IMO.

  30. I actually do think that there are some women like this, although they are very very rare in the “attractive woman” population.

    I think you’ve nailed it here, and I noticed that Wudang covers this in his detailed comment. I noticed the discussion you and Zach were having and one of you mentioning fishing in the 8+ lake. Before I became exclusive with my fiancee, I’d say I was only considering physically attractive women as well. I’m relatively confident that if you sorted women into either attractive, mediocre/average, or unattractive, you would see clear patterns of desired alpha traits and attraction triggers based on where they fall in that division.

    Like I said though, this is extremely rare to find and I’m probably an idiot for tossing it away for strange.

    Funny to hear you say that….and I’ve been following Zach’s comments regarding his casual sex activity with interest. I’m just speculating, but I suspect there is a point where most guys really have had enough variety to satisfy that craving, and anything more is kind of like eating more cake after you are already stuffed. I’ll admit…I don’t know as I never hit that point. My N is well below you, Zach, Rollo, and probably a lot of guys who comment here. I divorced my wife at 31 and by 32 I was back to top physical shape in terms of muscularity and bodyfat and I had learned a lot about Game and had started having some really serious success. I met my now fiancee a few months before my 32nd birthday. I had already been bouncing about 7-8 months so I had a pretty good idea what was out there in terms of quality women (which I define as feminine, loyal, sweet, devoted, etc. AND ATTRACTIVE). Quickly, I realized she was different from about 99% of the women I saw on a daily basis bouncing. I had to decide whether to lock it down, or try and see what I could rack up in terms of casual. It was a tough decision and sometimes I wish I had met her just a year or two later. But when I read a comment like yours or what Zach is saying, I think the grass isn’t greener on the other side.

  31. “I’m relatively confident that if you sorted women into either attractive, mediocre/average, or unattractive, you would see clear patterns of desired alpha traits and attraction triggers based on where they fall in that division.”

    There is research which very clearly shows this. Women desire more and more the more attractive they are themselves and the less attractive they are the less alpha traits and looks they desire but core beta traits must remain to a greater extent because without it the relationship just could`t work. But as I said it isn`t the whole story. There are really hot women who go for less alpha but more physically attractive, high status men with a high degree of beta. They are just rare.

  32. Rollo, this is a very interesting discussion. You’ve been talking about just about every angle of the SMV marketplace, so I wondered if you were looking for an idea for another post, let me suggest one to you: red pill betas.

    I’m a beta, I know this. Even with top game, I’ll only rise to a higher-beta from a lower-beta (according to Heartiste’s test). Be this as it may, and given what I know now, it puts a very different perspective on my relations with women, and the decisions I will make.

    But still, it causes me to wonder: Which is better, to play fuck buddies with marginal ( or less) HB’s? I’m 30 who has sex with 5’s and 6’s (okay, exactly one 5 and one 6). Or to wait for an HB post-wall, who finally tires of her alpha, and settles for me?

    Or, ultimately this is the answer I like, to just forget about women and go it alone? It seems to be the most dignified alternative. I also feel that women can’t actually make you happy. The alphas in the HB’s lives I know don’t actually seem happy. I’m better off, and happier, than most of the guys who have “won the girl”. As long as you’re not pining after women, and have your feelings under control, you can be happy with or without women.

    But it seems that red and blue pill betas would make very different decisions in life, like whether to marry in a desperate attempt to “keep her”.

  33. @Kevin Anon,

    I like that idea for a post. However, I think it is pretty simple to answer and for the most part, you’ve gotten to the answer yourself. By ‘going it alone’ it doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy women physically or at an arm’s length emotionally, but rather that is the extent of it. I’ve been using this comment that a commentator over at CH made, which is ultimately addresses the concept of the red-pill beta (I think the commenter went by ‘gramps’; not verbatim but the point is still the same): “I think the real takeaway from the manosphere is that while not everyone can be alpha, no one has to be a victim”. This is something I’ve had to learn too, and accpet. Girls who I’d probably rank lower than me on the spectrum (where I am on the male spectrum vs. her on the female spectrum) can get sex from a very high status male. Sure, some people say “yeah but they can’t get commitment”, but let me ask you this: If your dating a girl and she fucks a guy who she can’t get commitment from, you’d still consider that cheating right? All I’m saying is that cheating is vastly easier for women to accomplish than the “typical” guy as it doesn’t require her to obtain a commitment from someone else, just their dick. So even if I’m higher value than anyone else she can get a commitment from, if she just wants to get plowed she’s pretty much boundless.

    I remember seeing this on spring break in Mexico, all the guys were pretty much jacked, great shape and what not. The girls, while a good few were in great shape as well, many had some noticeable thickness to them. Yeah the weren’t fat, but relative to the shape of the guys the might as well have all be the girl from “Precious”. And these girls were gettting tons of attetion. The game is rigged, it’s fixed. Who on earth would place a serious bet (financial, emotional/mental well-being) on a game that’s fixed. Don’t play their game. Play your own and, oddly enough, you’ll get some to play yours too.

    Ultimately here’s my bone to pick with the feminist movement. As demonstrated by my spring break example, they already have SO much power just by being women. What the average feminist is upset about is the fact that they don’t have ALL the power. And the closer they get to total power, the louder they scream to get it.

    It sucks we live in a world where we can’t trust one another and treat each other with some dignity, or dare I say, “nicely”. Referring to the “Play Nice” post recently regarding the validity of the niceness of some guys, I think alot more nice guys are truly nice and the motivation has to do with this: The world and life is already tough in and of itself, why add being shitty to each other on top of that? Why can’t we be a source of relief to one another instead of adding more discontent in a life that’s already difficult for the vast majority?

    Just some things to think about…

  34. Rational, analytical people find it almost impossible to understand the mentality of those who operate in the realm of persuasion, and of power. Women, politicians, marketers. We think that if we could just get into the good graces of one of these people, we could sit down and say “hey, I see what you did there. Good job on selling that fizzy water/covering up that nosy intern’s disappearance/advancing your hypergamous agenda” and they will chuckle because we have cast aside the facade to get to the core. But there is no core, no admission of the pursuit of naked advantage. In the movies, the hitman says “I’m sorry” as he pulls the trigger on his estwhile buddy. Is he sorry? The words of truth will never be spoken, ever, not even thought, because power simply does what it does.

  35. Geisha Kate summed it up best:

    Its a simple matter of perception. An onlooker cannot feel what the people in the video felt. To them it was an awesome experience. The onlooker can’t tap into that and so it appears silly, etc. (no offense). Girls can look at this video and say, “that wouldn’t work on me,” but it likely would, and guys can look at the video and say it was because of his looks, which may be part of it, but its not the whole picture.

    “To them it was an awesome experience.” Isn’t this conclusion also a conclusion of the “onlooker” Geisha Kate?

    We don’t hear from the woman. Luckily, we did get to hear from Steve in Roissy’s comments. On what basis do we conclude it was an “awesome experience” for that Maria-Shriver-looking foreigner in a micro-mini?

    The real teachable takeaway from the video is the subtlety of force. The Colombian girl was not completely on-board with the street attack. That’s not to say (with the asexual regulatory harpies) that verbal consent is the bright line from which we must gauge the propriety of all sexual interaction. An Antioch Policy tyrannizes amour, suffocates it dead.

    At the same time, her discomfort was unnecessary and probably contributed against closing her strong. What was evident in the video and troubling from a pick-up standpoint was Steve’s lack of calibration over how much/how far to push, and this clumsiness is the product of being inattentive to her cues. His deficiency gave him only one option — to go for the short, forceful game rather than the long, more certain seduction. This is fine, if it is a deliberate choice of strategy. But was it a choice? Or is this just one more instance of deus impeditio esuritori nullus?

    No god can stop a hungry man. But a man can stop himself and master his desires. This Roman discipline is game on another level, and so there is always room for criticism. Do we act out according to hunger’s bidding, or do we establish patience to make that hunger work according to our will?

    Steve had just masterfully demonstrated how to get the sole attention of a(n admittedly soft) target on a street full of distractions. But the thrill of the hunt got the better of him, and he didn’t or was not able to dial it down in time to confirm his accomplishment with anything but a fear kiss preserved on video. That documentation is the primary goal for some PUAs, I suppose, to demonstrate their fearlessness, and that in itself is a laudable goal. But approach courage is just the start of a proper seduction, and without follow-up, Steve gives the impression to the impressionable that pick-up is 100% accelerator and 0% brake.

    Matt

  36. Yes, it is the conclusion of an onlooker, but an onlooker who knows that everyone thinks their game/flirting/etc. somehow looks different or better than someone else’s, when, in fact, we nearly all look foolish (to other people) when we make these attempts 🙂 An onlooker who knows that everyone thinks their love story is better than another’s and no other couple could possibly feel the same sorts of feelings that they feel. Its the egocentric, personal fable way of looking at things. When the fact is, very few, if any of us, are any different psychologically or biologically than anyone else. We only think we are. I don’t know what the purpose behind the way we think may have been, but with the incredible availability of connection with others modern life offers, we’d really be fools not to eventually pick up on our unity/humanity.

  37. Oh, now I get what you’re saying. That she wasn’t enjoying herself. Well, again, that is where we can be deceived as the onlooker. She does indicate in some ways that’s she’s uncomfortable, but, overall, I don’t think she is. She doesn’t appear to kiss him in fear as in she feels he’s dangerous, so she’d better bring him over to her side. To me, that’s not what fear looks like.

    Is anyone else old enough to remember the Peurto Rican Day Parade raping incident? Well, I happened to be in New York City that weekend helping my best friend from high school move into his new apartment after we’d graduated from college. We were in Central Park that day, and, after watching the news the next day, we realized we had seen one of the gangs responsible and a minor incident. I had seen a woman swearing and making a fuss with someone she didn’t seem to know and she threw a water bottle at him, etc.

    Now, honestly, from what I’ve witnessed travelling in major cities, it didn’t seem so out of the ordinary to see some bad behavior, so I didn’t think too much of it. However, that is the more likely scenario of what a woman will do when she feels truly threatened.

  38. King A gets the buzzkillington award this week.

    Critizing for going in for a kiss? Really? It’s not like he tried to finger bang her.

    I’ve gone in for a kiss and have gotten rejected and have backed off. He didn’t violate this poor girl.

  39. Another thing, who cares if she was uncomfortable?

    Should we never ever do anything that might make precious uncomfortable? If she is uncomfortable about having guys approach her, then she shouldn’t go out to any social events.

    Women have no problem destroying men’s egos in public. Having the annoyance of someone finding you attractive and approaching is the just a fact of life that they have to get used to.

  40. Basically, there is no reason to face the painful feelings to avoid any future unpleasantries because, really, what for? We aren’t expected to woman up in any way, shape, or form.

    A woman simply “is”; a man must become.

    Thing is, I don’t necessarily want a red pill woman. Part of the feminine charm is blissful ignorance.

    If women weren’t masculinized, there would be neither need nor benefit for women to “open their eyes”. The only reason we need to try to pry their eyes open is because chicks these days are nowhere near sufficiently feminine.

  41. thanks for posting the video, rollo. seeing it posted a third time made me actually watch it. looking forward to reading the interesting debate you write about.

  42. Well, I suppose qualifying my criticism every other sentence didn’t help clarify a subtle point. GeishaKate and FuriousFerret will draw lines of opposition rather than exploring the far more intriguing interstices of an encounter, no matter how many times I emphasize my intent.

    She was not gang-groped and raped like a tube-topped tart on Puerto Rican Day. Conceded. Also true: her discomfort is not the factor to override all considerations as feminism would insist. (“An Antioch Policy tyrannizes amour, suffocates it dead.”)

    She does indicate in some ways that’s she’s uncomfortable, but, overall, I don’t think she is.

    “Overall,” she fled the scene. No, we are not inside their heads. Yes, we can only speculate how it “felt.” No, we do not know what, if anything, happened after the documented encounter. But based on the limited evidence we can make a certain conclusion: he failed. She scurried away. Rather than conjure up states of mind, assert them as true, and debate those who disagree, it makes more sense to work backwards from what we know and learn from it.

    And my suggestion was, given her quick exit stage right, that he perhaps overplayed his hand a little. And he perhaps came on too strong because he didn’t detect (or unwisely ignored) the signals we all saw on the screen.

    I have no doubt Chiquita was flattered by the attention! Duh. Further, “discomfort” is not always easy to distinguish from exhilaration. But what was the mission here? A kiss-close against the clock? A demonstration of approach courage? Both victories. But she wasn’t picked up. We learn from this encounter by asking, “Why wasn’t she picked up?” And that’s where I suggested a little fine-tuning might have parlayed his excellent beginning into an immediate continuation.

    He had a killer drive off the tee. But his short game needs work to get it in the hole. I wouldn’t criticize his swing; in fact, it was near perfect. So take the good and take the bad and take them both and there you have the facts of life.

    Matt

  43. Good Luck Chuck wrote:

    I don’t necessarily want a red pill woman. Part of the feminine charm is blissful ignorance.

    If women weren’t masculinized, there would be neither need nor benefit for women to “open their eyes”. The only reason we need to try to pry their eyes open is because chicks these days are nowhere near sufficiently feminine.

    Very perceptive and well said. I would take it a step further and say there really aren’t any “red pill women.” Women are interested in the behind-the-scenes work of masculinity like we are interested in the secrets of make up and female fashion: fascinating from a spy-cam perspective, but demystifying and vaguely repulsive. What straight dude wants to watch a woman putting herself together?

    The women who stick around here remain for the dose of frankness and truth, not to deconstruct the mystery of female attraction. She quickly tires of the details — they are as interesting to her as box scores are to someone with zero interest in sports. But for men? Those details are tools we can use to practical effect tonight, rather than the debatable and irrelevant abstractions they are to women.

    We need to “pry their eyes open” to the extent that they can recover from the ravages of feminism, which aimed to eradicate girl game as beneath a woman’s dignity (SHAVING ARMPITS IS OPPRESSIVE AND PATRIARCHAL). After they relearn the truth of the sexual marketplace — and really, not much more than a hint will awaken the vestigial memory — let the rituals be forever apart and mysterious to the other.

    Matt

  44. Oh my goodness are you high maintenance. 🙂 We do know what happened afterwards. She had a “paarty” to attend and she contacted him at some point later but he was then dating someone he liked. He posted as much at Heartiste.

    I think you’re assuming he wanted more out of this. She’s a girl he just met on the street. What reason does he have to be invested in her to want more than what he got? If your goal is kissing someone on the street, your actions will be different than if you’re attempting to have a fulfilling relationship with someone, of course.

    As always, we are in agreement, but it is jolly fun to argue as if we weren’t 🙂

  45. Rollo wrote:

    “”Are women really unaware of their own attraction triggers? Or is it that they are so preoccupied with optimizing hypergamy (in a short window of SMV peak) that they’re simply never bothered by an inquisitive thought about what factors contribute to their being turned on enough to fuck one guy, but conversely being attracted to another for a long term commitment? Are women ever really prompted to observe their own process?””

    After reviewing this and other videos and then trying the techniques out on my own with relative success, this statement rings very true.

    I think that if and women become aware of the attraction triggers, their forebrain takes over and you get ASD and Last Minute Resistance.

    The girl I met and made out with within an hour of meeting got spooked when I suggested she come over.

    Not enough “comfort”… so the spell was broken.

    The non-believers and game haters fail to take the time to either learn the process and gain a deeper understanding, or buy into the “Just be yourself” meme.

    Great post Rollo…

  46. I made a post about how and when women choose beta males and I think it’s when they are making a clear move up on the genetic scale in terms of looks or creativity or intelligence. A woman who is a 6 or a 7 in terms of her value who locks down an 8 or a 9 with a beta personality is somebody who is essentially winning the lottery.

    I’ve met confident, attractive beta men before and they get away with it because they are supremely high value in other areas of their life. But how they get away is very specific – they marry beneath them or deny themselves quantity and quality of sexual experience for LTRs.

    While most feminist’s version of an ideal man looks something like the 8,9/10 poet SWPL beta man, something which they encourage, what they fail to do is understand that if the beta man was an alpha he would no longer give them the security, comfort, and chivalry that a beta can provide. In addition, the reason why they like him is because it gives them an opportunity to still reach higher for a more attractive or more alpha man while in the throws of beta comfort.

    Fem-Centrists understand this dichotomy but don’t want it mentioned because it suggests a culling process (the beta 8’s marry 6’s, the beta 6’s marry 3’s, the beta 4’s marry nobody and cheating goes on all the while). Fem-Centrists are the first to suggest universal humanism but the last to want to grant reproductive access in any sort of egalitarian fashion. The “liberated” 60’s and the “repressive” 50’s were egalitarian in that they suggested reciprocity between the genders.

    I hate making generalizations and honestly this is what too many people do on blogs; but I’ve tried to break down my own thought process from my observations on human relationships. I guess the point is that if all things are considered in the mating market 21st century it’s that being a cad is simply a better way to fulfill your needs than by being a dad.

  47. Crikey some of you lot surmise so much from my approach in this video! Pages and pages of it!

    Point 1 : It was my 1st approach of the night, I had a few drinks and I was a little half cut to be honest. I’ve seen the criticism that I had to appoach tons of girls to get the footage, well that’s just not true.

    Point 2 : I wasn’t that bothered about whether I saw her again or not, but in that moment we had something of a connection. I’ve written extensively about this, pages on it.

    In my view the notion of attraction / comfort is critically flawed. In reality they both occur simultaneously. If you look at my Youtube videos, EVERY SINGLE ONE of the girls on it stayed in touch and was interested in meeting again, after 2-3 minute interaction. I didn’t pursue it because I am now seeing a girl who is much hotter than any of them and who really interests me.

    So this deals with the notion of lack of comfort / my style being too “fast”. I know what I am doing. I could tell very quickly that she was into it, and was throwing bait out, then testing, then going for it. I actually described what I was doing on my site.

    Bascially, the old PUA paradigm of comfort and attraction is just wrong, frankly. You calibrate to each approach.

    Point 3: This is only the 6th or 7th Pick Up video i’ve done. I’m still a little unused to being filmed. Soon, if I can summon the desire and inclination, I will be filming tons and tons of these and will lift the lid off what real pick up looks like…..:

  48. Bascially, the old PUA paradigm of comfort and attraction is just wrong, frankly. You calibrate to each approach.

    I emphatically agree.

    Desire is a spontaneous, chemical arousal between people, not a pre-written contract. By placing preconditions (comfort) on what will or will not qualify for a woman’s intimacy, she essentially rules out any chance for genuine, organic desire. You’ve basically by-passed the arousal stages and moved directly into comfortable familiarity – comfort, rapport, familiarity, are all anti-seductive.

    Sexual tension is by definition is uncomfortable; it’s supposed to be in order to prompt desire.

    From Wait For it?

    First and foremost, sex, by it’s nature is uncomfortable. Sex that is motivated by mutual, genuine desire is a tense affair, fueled by testosterone, anxiety and urgency. When two people get together for a first dance ( a precursor to copulation), it’s rarely if ever an intimate slow dance. It’s salsa, it’s grinding, it’s pumping, it’s heat and it’s sweat. What it’s not is comforting and familiar. It’s not a nice warm bathrobe fresh out of the dryer. Don’t take this the wrong way, but sex is threatening. It needs to be, and you need to be considered a sexualized player in her personal sphere. Overtly agreeing to wait for her to become sexual is anti-seductive. It confirms for her that you aren’t a sexualized player to her; an Alpha wouldn’t wait for sex and she knows this. Worse still, it devalues her SMV as being worth less than of your utmost urgency.

  49. A red pill woman is one who is aware enough to use her low notch count and femininity to secure marriage with an Alpha Male.

    Women these days are being taught to be slutty co-workers and that they can have it all.

    So the hidden knowledge or red pill wisdom is just old wisdom of being a feminine virgin(or close to it.)

  50. Oh, I think I’m probably one of those women who you cited as saying “we’re in to different things”. I wasn’t trying to pull NAWALT on it or deny that these things exist and have power. Rather, I was trying to state that some of us (not all, some) have a different set of experiences/likes/dislikes that inform the way we’d handle a situation like this, or in general, how such reactions are triggered. The same mechanisms are definitely in place, but don’t necessarily operate in the same manner, or perhaps malfunction entirely.

    This, in me at least, is a result of damage (brought on by a disasterous first sexual encounter that’s left something of a permanent fear of this sort of thing in me). Can’t say what it might be for other women – a lack of self-awareness, I’m sure, is present in some of those NAWALT denials. Others may have similar stories to mine, or other damage from other things, and just not know how deeply/seriously they’ve been affected by those experiences. Just a thought.

    Some of us would just like to think we’re special snowflakes. Some of us are actually broken in critical ways that cause us to behave in atypical ways. But in general, I would agree that this sort of thing, for an average girl, is going to hold out.

  51. Holy shit! This is the most inspiring video I have ever seen! So it is really possible!! It works!! Now I just need to figure out how the hell can I get to this point.

  52. All of this so called PUA “in field” videos are fake. Notice how she keeps looking into the camera and doesn’t ask about it. (Because its pre-staged).

    A woman in a real spontaneous street situation like that would be asking about the camera, avoiding it, telling them to turn it off.

    There’s a few in field videos making the youtube rounds; one where a PUA is claiming a pick up in a bar but the bar is mysteriously empty except for him and the girl he’s supposedly “picking up” and it looks like someone’s basement bar in their house.

    Then there’s another one of a PUA supposedly “picking up” a girl in a park and again, they are the only two people in the park and the camera is really close.

    Basically they pay their friends’ female cousins to pretend to be picked up.

  53. Got a question for all.
    Is this level of pick up attainable for an average AFC in the mid 20s like me or is it like aiming for an olympic medal in crawl?
    I have to say I am a bit lost on how proficiency is measured in this world (what is reasonable to expect for an average person and what would be rather considered as professional)

  54. Sitaram, I already did, but none of them seem to answer my question.
    Rollo says in other posts that alpha is a mindset.
    Is it possible for a 26-just-unplugged beta like me to end up banging hot girls in such a way or am I doomed to a somewhat mediocre sexual life?

    I just want to know what are reasonable short-term and long-term goals for me not to put an unbearable frustration on my shoulders that makes me go back to the matrix (this has happened to me already)

    For instance, if you would like to gain muscle weight, a reasonable rate would be around 1 pound per week. Much more than this will bring you to frustration, much less than this is underestimating your skills.

    I simply have no idea how the measures are in this world.

  55. Djeed, the comment above your other one points out the video, like other PUA “in field” videos, is pre-staged. The PUA industry is a parasitical one that preys on and feeds off the anxiety and insecurity its host – desperate young and middle aged men.

    You are feeling PRECISELY the way the video was made to make you feel – confused, insecure, self-doubtful. This prepares your feeble mind for product consumption; dvds, workshops, lairs, etc.

    Don’t fall for it.

    As for muscling up, if you work out and improve your looks and social skills you probably will do better with women, however the quantity or quality of those women can’t be guaranteed.

    I’d also stay away from building too much muscle if you are under 6 feet tall because shorter men tend to look bulky and strange if they build too much. Shorter men look better with a lean, toned look.

    Try online dating, perhaps.

  56. @Hopeless Troll, nothing in this video was staged.:
    http://krauserpua.com/2012/08/21/street-kiss-close-video-of-my-friend/

    Djeed yes, you can.

    The first step is to unplug and understand the desperation of feminine imperative proselytizers like Hopeless. It is vital to her ego investments that you stay plugged-in and encourage other men to do the same.

    If you’re looking for a more intensive focus on PUArtistry I suggest Krauser’s site to begin with, then hit up YaReally for some good forums.

    Finally, you may be encouraged by the story of a friend of mine BeginningDJ:
    http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=198079

    Also, The DJ Bible:
    http://www.mts.net/~bpony/djbible/

  57. “The first step is to unplug and understand the desperation of feminine imperative proselytizers like Hopeless. ”

    Puh-leeze. What the hell is a “feminine imperative”?

    [Lazy is what I’ve come to expect from female solipsism, but,..The Feminine Reality & Fem-Centrism. Try to keep up.]

    Hugh Heffner wrote way back in the 50s that women were always trying to thwart the “free love ways of men”. Well since then women have jumped on board with the “free love ways of men” and men are still complaining! What gives?

    As far as that video, its not proper etiquette to call a blog host a “fool” but if you can’t tell its staged then I’m sorry but that is what you are.

    You mean to tell me you can’t see the way she keeps looking into the camera? Dude, you’ve got to be kidding.

  58. I wonder how they got a totally unknown foreigner to agree before hand to pretend to get “picked up” with a supposedly “stranger’s” camera in her face, and allow it to be posted to youtube?

    What’s your take on that, Rollo?

    [Why don’t you go take that up with Steve yourself you dumb cunt?]

  59. It is true that the girl looks directly in the sight of the camera at least two times (2:36 and 3:05).

    Rollo, what do you have to say to this? Your link to krauserpua doesn’t prove anything. Also, how come their voices are so much clearer than anyone else’s in the video? Does Steve have a hidden ambient micro?

    [http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2012/08/31/street-kiss-close-analysis/#comment-364366]

    Hopeless Troll, I have never spent a cent in dvds or workshops and don’t mean to do it until I have first proved myself that this actually works for me. I may be a beta, but I’m not stupid.

    On the other hand, I have personally seen friends of mine in a disco getting a girl on their knees in less than a minute, so whether or not this video is a fake, I already know that this is somehow possible. The only thing I meant to question was if one such me could make such a huge transformation.

    Rollo, thank you for the links.

    [Reality vs. The Internet]

  60. Ok, just checked the last link right now from Rollo’s response. They could have been using a camera like this one:

    There is no reason now to think it is pre-staged.

  61. @Djeed, read Reality vs.The Internet.
    https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/08/13/reality-vs-the-internet/

    It’s entirely possible it was staged, and it’s entirely possible it was organic, but that’s not the point. What IS important is understanding the principles behind what Steve’s video is illustrating, and weigh them against what you experience yourself.

    Do you not think that a guy with Steve’s background in Game wouldn’t have thought that anyone one would challenge the genuineness of this video? And yet he posts it anyway knowing that even a sympathetic manosphere (not to mention feminist cunts) would still doubt it.

    It’s easy for trolls like Hopeless to disparage Game in whole by using this isolated example because it grates against the feminine centric believability of a mid-forties housewife with too much time on her hands in Azerbaijan.

    She and the rest of the Matrix want you to stay plugged in. Read my blog, read Dalrock, read Chateau, Roosh, read Krauser, and then ask yourself if any of us are relating ideas that are out of the realm of logical reason. Yes, Roosh and Krauser have materials for sale, but all of their ideas are freely distributed, as are mine and many others.

  62. Rollo, thanks for your thoughts. Although I still need to read some more articles, I would rather say I am in an un-plugged state.

    I feel now in the Matrix scene where Neo has to jump that building and tells himself “great… no problem… free my mind…”, but keeps falling to the ground.

    What I need now is a good plan with some reasonable short-term goals to start with and go out to try and fail.

    This is going to be a titanic task for me, but I am committed.

  63. “I feel now in the Matrix scene where Neo has to jump that building and tells himself “great… no problem… free my mind…”, but keeps falling to the ground.”

    As long as you’re quoting Hollywood films, you are still very much plugged into the “matrix” of mainstream American culture.

    Don’t feed the beast.

  64. “On the other hand, I have personally seen friends of mine in a disco getting a girl on their knees in less than a minute, so whether or not this video is a fake, I already know that this is somehow possible. ”

    Dude, you are just now finding this out about Americans? The rest of the globe has known about your cheap promiscuity for a couple hundred years now.

  65. Hopeless, yes I liked that film. I am quoting it because it represents a good analogy of the famous Kübler-Ross’ main stages a person experiments when changing a strongly hard-wired belief (denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance). Also because Rollo uses this film to illustrate some of the concepts he’s talking about. This way it’s easier for everyone to understand.

    Dude, I am not American. Your “cheap promiscuity” exists everywhere in the globe.

  66. Got another question for all

    It is claimed in this video that attraction occurs in the first 10 seconds only with appropriate body language. But I assume this confident body language is a result of many success stories.

    If one has never had any success whatsoever, how can one genuinely show such a body language? How can I fake the correct body language if I never had a successful pickup? Do I have to expect some luck before I get confident enough or should I build first enough confidence through other means?

Speak your mind

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s