The Invisibles


Forge the Sky:

The heart of all this is: in a woman’s mind, humans have three genders. Women, alphas, and betas. The problem is, it’s difficult to distinguish between the latter two as there are no clear biological markers; a few un-fakeable traits like height and muscularity give an indication, similar to how long hair tends to indicate a woman, but not infallibly so.

But women have different relationships with them. To women, betas are friends, helpers, co-workers, employees, servants; unless related by blood, they are practical beings only. There is no romance to them. They are useful, fun, maybe even someone to be a little affectionate toward so long as they remain useful, but they have no deeper self, no soul, no mystical thing to bind to.

Alphas are something else entirely. They are actually people – people drenched with desire, romance, spirit. Him, she can respect. In greater cases even worship. It matters little how well he performs objectively, so long as he does nothing to make her doubt her assessment of him as alpha. If he does perform, she admires and praises his performance – but she’s doing that about something or another regardless, even if she’s gushing about how he bought her a bag of skittles.

No woman will stand beside a beta as he faces, and succumbs to, death. Not unless it’s convenient, or she would be shamed otherwise. It simply would not make sense for her to do so. Would you hold your employee’s hand as they lay dying? Only if they had a fatal accident right in front of you. Past that, condolences to the kids.

Men see two genders. Men and women. Better and worse, more and less attractive, but no fundamental difference. Without being trained in a (for us) counterintuitive mindset, we will by default project our understanding of gender upon women. And so we try to improve our beta game, instead of flipping the script.

The blue pill is miserable because it is learned helplessness. From within, it is the cracking of an invisible whip, punishment meted capriciously and without time or reason. There is no pattern or method to the blue pill man’s pain.

FTS must’ve been reading my mind this week because his comment made a perfect segue into what I’ve been developing this week. The most salient part of this comment, I thought, was “Without being trained in a (for us) counterintuitive mindset, we will by default project our understanding of gender upon women.”

This was a good observation because there are intrinsic parts of the male psychological firmware that the Feminine Imperative picked up on long ago and deliberately co-opts to better aid in optimizing women’s control of Hypergamy.

From the utility-need side of Hypergamy, this mostly manifests in various forms of serviceable security. The Beta Bucks aspect of Hypergamy can be distilled to a need for security, protection, and a certainty that a woman and her offspring will be insured against any uncertainty. Every psychological and sociological dynamic that contributes to feminine-primacy keys on this need for existential certainty. The War Brides dynamic, the evolution from old-order chivalry to modern feminism, and now the social / legal handicapping of men to ensure that feminine-security certainty above all other considerations are all manifestations of this need.

The Feminine Imperative learned long ago that men’s innate protectorate instinct for the feminine was its second most valuable means of masculine control – the first being men’s ‘always on’ sexual impetus. Thus pairing the two as a means of control is a simple deductive proposition for the imperative. The rudimentary connection being, “protect the woman and I get sex.”

This is the unspoken exchange that’s part of our evolutionary past. Men are nothing if not deductive (yet creative) problem solvers, and women have used this to their hypergamous advantage since our hunter-gatherer beginnings.

This is what confounds modern men under the auspices of our present feminine-primary social order. We’re emphatically told that women “never owe men sex“, yet the latent message is, and has always been, “but, if you perform to her satisfaction, she might be more inclined to give you sex.” Carrot to pull the cart, I know, but this mental algorithm is a sociological buffer for women – exclude the sexually unworthy, but leave an acceptable caveat in order to leverage the possibility of sex with those who are still useful in providing security.

Bear this in mind the next time you read a story about a savior White Knight who was beaten to a bloody pulp for his effort to protect a woman from the “predations” of some Alpha(s) she likely wants to bang anyway. Men will project, by default, our own gender interpretation onto women, and sometimes pay the price for it. Betas believe the feminine-primary, equalist advertising that men and women are functional equals while still force fitting an expected, old-order, male-protectionism (completely based on an unequal state presumption) into that belief – often at their own expense.

Invisible Men

While I disagree that there are no distinct physical and cultural markers that women use (sometimes subconsciously) to distinguish Alpha men from the bulk of Beta men, I strongly agree with the distinction and characterization Forge the Sky makes with how women regard Beta men.

The vast majority of men are sexually invisible to women, but all males are visible in terms of their utility to women and the role those men are expected to play in deference to women’s solipsism.

There’s an important difference in that visibility with respect to men and women we need to consider.

I expect that female readers will trot out the “ooh, ooh, men do it too” counter that women are invisible to men who don’t see them as a sexual prospect. That may be the case, particularly for mature women convinced they should be sexually viable into their 50s, however, those women’s functional utility is never an issue for men. Neither is it an article of attraction for a man. As much as a feminine-centric culture would like to convince women of the opposite, men simply don’t factor a woman’s provisional utility into their attraction equation.

Invisible men never become visible to women until either those men intrude on a woman’s’ awareness or she has a specific utilitarian need of him. At this point, whether due to arousal / attraction awareness or her specific need (usually protection or security insurance), that man must perform to prove his maleness. He must qualify for her visual acknowledgment of him.

Over prolonged periods, this invisibility, and the fear of having his insistence rejected, can influence men’s overall perception of women and their intergender interpretations. Invisible men tend to confuse a woman’s utility interests in him as genuine indicators of interest (IOIs). The Feminine Imperative prepares for this ‘mixed message’ with a constant, self-perpetuating social narrative that tells the invisible men they are never, under any circumstance, owed a woman’s intimacy – it is always a gift, a reward, for her approval.

Despite this aspect of their social conditioning, the Invisibles still read more into those IOIs and perceive that a woman’s attraction is a genuine extension their own serviceability. This is the foundation of the Savior Schema. Much of what the manosphere considers sexual ‘thirst’ is a direct result of the scarcity mentality that results from an Invisible becoming an unexpected service-providing option for a woman.

Invisible men become more compliant when women’s utility needs make them visible. They confuse their use with genuine appreciation and desirability.

If we consider the 80 / 20 rule of the sexual marketplace and figure that 80% of Beta men are sexually invisible to women we get a broader perspective of how the gender landscape has evolved in an era where women’s security-side needs are planned for and met with a relative degree of certainty.

I had a teenage kid I used to consult who related this story about how one of his nerdy friends had somehow spontaneously generated the interest of a girl who was an obvious two points above his SMV. His initial frustration was one of wonderment about how this guy could be ‘dating’ so hot a girl while he wasn’t bumping the needle with even the girls he thought were a point below himself.

His nerdy friend assumed the predictable self-righteous Beta position that some “special” girls just understand and appreciate guys like him in favor of the brutish jocks “society tells them they should like.” All this came two weeks before that year’s homecoming dance (and after-party), where she promptly left him to go dance and party with her girlfriends and their jock guy-friends for the rest of the evening.

This kid had served his utilitarian purpose of fronting the money for the evening, a limo, corsage, photos (of their group) and the bit of risky underage liquor he could manage. In spite of all that he still refused to make the connection of his being used for her purpose. Invisibles feel validated in their own manipulation because that utility made them visible (“do my homework nerd”) even if just momentarily. As bad as that extortion was, that brief moment of visibility implies the prospect that another woman in the future (a really special one) will also appreciate his utility and reward it with her intimacy.

Needless to say, this visibility differential becomes an internalized factor in men’s approach to women. There are ways an invisible man can make himself visible; all require effort and risk. As I stated before, a man remains invisible unless his physical presence and arousal prompts make him unignorable, his performance is outstanding enough to draw attention or he simply asserts his visibility towards that woman. Physical bearing and performance recognition being the Alpha Fucks side of the Hypergamy equation is an easy follow, but a man asserting himself and his personality is where the Red Pill and applied Game come into play. This prospect will always imply risk of rejection until such a time that an Invisible’s confidence supersedes his self-image as an invisible.

We had a long discussion in the last thread about the mindset of the MGTOW contingent of the manosphere and the sentiment of men wishing to remove themselves wholesale from the sexual marketplace. I understand this sentiment and I know men, like Advocatus Diaboli, who have legitimately recused themselves from the SMP, but it seems to me this want is the result of having been invisible to women for so long. They get to a point where they become invisible by choice.

The Third Sex

I can’t finish this essay without drawing attention to FTS’s first observation:

The heart of all this is: in a woman’s mind, humans have three genders. Women, alphas, and betas. The problem is, it’s difficult to distinguish between the latter two as there are no clear biological markers; a few un-fakeable traits like height and muscularity give an indication, similar to how long hair tends to indicate a woman, but not infallibly so.

After I’d reconsidered this I had to dig out my copy of Plato’s Symposium and pore through it to read the part where Aristophanes proposed that there were, in fact, three sexes (in primal times) that their all-male discussion collective ought to consider:

 There were three sexes: the all male, the all female, and the “androgynous,” who was half male, half female. The males were said to have descended from the sun, the females from the earth and the androgynous couples from the moon.

A lot is being made of transgenderism recently and the fluidity with which people want to arbitrarily “gender-identify” borders on the ridiculous, but FTS’s observation has more implications than I think most are aware of. I’m sorry to go all philosophus on you, but I can definitely see parallels with the symbolism Aristophanes suggests and the female perceptions of the division of maleness FTS brings out here. Although Aristophanes would say that these primal beings split into gays, lesbians and heterosexual beings, I’d suggest that this primal awareness stems from a male understanding of the division of Alpha and Beta men and how women perceive them, visibly and non-visibly.

I covered this a while back in Queens, Workers & Drones:

Selective Breeding

So powerful is this sense of entitlement, so consuming and convinced of the correctness of their purpose is the feminine that women will literally breed and raise generations of men to better satisfy it. Hypergamy is cruel, but nowhere more so than in the relationship between a mother overtly raising and conditioning a son to be a better servant of the feminine imperative.

But to breed a better worker, the feminine imperative’s queens can’t afford to have any corrupting, masculine, outside influence. On a societal scale this might mean removal (either by disincentives or forcibly) of a father from the family unit, but this is the easy, extreme illustration. There are far more subtle social and psychological means that the imperative uses to effect this filtering – via mass media, social doctrines, appeals to (feminized) morality, the feminine is placed as the correct imperative while the masculine is filtered out or apologetically tolerated as vestiges of an immature and crude reminder of masculinity’s incorrectness.

Yet for all of this social engineering Hypergamy still demands satisfaction of women’s most base imperative, Alpha seed. The queens need physically / psychologically dominant drones – if just for a season and at their ovulatory pleasure. While beta workers are endlessly vetted in sisyphean tasks of qualifying for the acceptance of the feminine imperative, the Alpha drones live outside this shell; their qualifications only based on how well they satisfy the feminine’s visceral side of  hypergamy.

The great irony of this social solution to hypergamy and long term parental investment is that the vast majority of the offspring of this arrangement would be raised to be better workers. Those betas-to-be boys must be insulated from the corrupting influence of the drones lest they devolve into the Alphas they crave yet cannot control. It may seem counterintuitive, to raise what should ostensibly be optimized genetic stock as a cowed, sometimes medically restrained, feminized beta males. However it is through this harsh conditioning that truly dominant Alphas must rise above. Essentially the genetic lottery isn’t won by women in such a social environment – it’s men, or the ones who rise above in spite of the conditioning efforts of the feminine imperative.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

500 comments on “The Invisibles

  1. Absolutely. Years ago, I did not believed there is anything like ‘beta’ and ‘alpha’ after all, but living with my friend who was a complete submissive to her apparently normal (not very dominant) wife was a valuable lesson for me – you might be able to work on being alpha, but you need to know what this means and also willing to participate in your own rescue. Alphas aren’t superhumans to me- they are just men who know what they want, they go after it and women are just an addition to their life and not the main meal. I’d say men got similar set up- 1. a girl who I would not fuck no matter what – which is often a forced relation like a colleague from work, unattractive gf of my colleague etc etc etc… 2. a girl that I can fuck once or twice and 3. one that I want to fuck for a good period of time. 😉

  2. Question Rollo:

    If Alpha seed (essentially the genes) is what a woman is looking for, then how can Alpha be viewed as you view it? Basically as a mindset instead of a demographic. It would seem the search for genes is what makes it a demographic, but the ability to learn the behaviors makes it a mindset. This confuses a lot of guys, I’m sure. Myself to some degree as well.

    Have you touched on clarifying this apparent contradiction before where I could read up on it, or could you do so if you haven’t already?

  3. Ummm Rollo. Do really think men see 2 genders – men and women? Or do they also see 3 – men, young bang-able women, old and un-bang-able women?

  4. A number of men out there who are fully RP aware–but have made the decision (for whatever reasons) not to do the hard work of becoming “visible”–head straight to the MGTOW camp. Often, we in the manosphere who’ve labored tirelessly to flip the script on modern day open hypergamy and can now unapologetically and skillfully enjoy the company of women on our own terms rank them as among the “incels” (involuntary celibates). They are undeniably an angry, bitter faction–whatever their personal reasons to remain invisible. None of them that I’ve witnessed comes across as placid or monk-like in their choice. I always feel a sense of tragic loss for these men, since they swallowed the pill and yet choose not to finally scratch the itch that still fuels their collective rage now that they know the truth. They’ve chosen a kind of living death, but seem to be stuck in the Kubler Ross stages of anger and denial–rather than what they continually claim as “acceptance.” In terms of the Red Pill, one can die and be reborn, or one can die and yet still remain painfully half-alive. I can’t imagine why a man would choose the latter if he had the option not to.

    A true acceptance would indicate an element of calm, peacefulness, and comfort with one’s chosen lot, and I just don’t perceive that mindset among the MGTOWs at all. They appear paralyzed in their RP anger phase and in complete denial of their electively stunted lives. It doesn’t have to be that way, and it’s a damned shame. I hope the MGTOW movement evolves to address this at some point, instead of boarding up the windows from the inside and waiting for an imagined apocalypse that will never come.

  5. Pretty young women are not invisible.

    Handsome men are not invisible. Men can stay handsome longer than women can stay young and pretty.

    Every pretty young woman becomes invisible eventually, after they hit The Wall (starting in the late 20’s typically).

    Ugly women are always invisible to men.

    Ugly men are invisible to women, unless they have other things going for them, like status, wealth, talent, etc., that they find attractive. Then pretty young women will be attracted to them, and then these men are not invisible to women.

    There are more invisible young men, then there are invisible young women.

    Most older women are invisible to men.

    There are more invisible older women, then there are invisible older men. (Men achieve status, wealth, etc., as they age usually, which women find attractive, which makes older men not invisible).

  6. @myrealitie

    No. They’re all women, just some of them fall below a man’s acceptable SMV threshold. Being fat, ugly, or old are all ways to lower SMV. They’re still women to a man in all cases.

    1. @Sun Wukong- I think you are as in the dark about this as women are about men who are not on their “radar.”

  7. I too think there are clear Alpha signs, from clothing to our chin size(test causes increased jaw size). I remember reading about a study in the military where they did nothing but rank graduates photos on their chin size–and those men ended up generally being the highest ranking officers. This would also be why men grow beards to fake that alpha quality.. Alcohol is a way of faking alpha too(how many men hit on a woman while drunk they would never hit on sober?)

  8. @The Diplomat,

    No many of us men choose MGTOW after spinning plates. We don’t ignore women it’s just that after awhile the effort it takes to deal with them is just no longer worth the reward. Though women are still an option, for me, I am fully prepared and happy to live without them and rather am simply making plans to try to find a better one. Unfortunately most women are extremely low value and never bother to develop their character so it’s quite difficult to find a decent one. The low value ones, which are most of them, will bring many forms of ruin to your life if you don’t guard against it.

    @bo jangles,

    You can get jaw implants through a plastic surgeon. I wonder how a woman would feel if she discovered her boyfriend/husband had gotten a jaw enhancement.


    What Sun said. All women are women, some of them are just too fat or old to be fuckable. In that sense I suppose fat or old women are possibly the beta equivalent. Since all women are going to grow old perhaps women should try to locate a good husband who can put on a pair of wife goggles and wear them even when the woman gains weight from pregnancy or gets old and wrinkled up. Would be good for children as well. Then we just need to figure out how to stop women from divorcing men and destroying children’s families.

  9. @myrealitie

    I expect that female readers will trot out the “ooh, ooh, men do it too” counter that women are invisible to men who don’t see them as a sexual prospect. That may be the case, particularly for mature women convinced they should be sexually viable into their 50s, however, those women’s functional utility is never an issue for men. Neither is it an article of attraction for a man. As much as a feminine-centric culture would like to convince women of the opposite, men simply don’t factor a woman’s provisional utility into their attraction equation.

    Invisible men never become visible to women until either those men intrude on a woman’s’ awareness or she has a specific utilitarian need of him. At this point, whether due to arousal / attraction awareness or her specific need (usually protection or security insurance), that man must perform to prove his maleness. He must qualify for her visual acknowledgment of him

    Reading comprehension dear.

  10. @myrealitie,

    Fat women can stop being fat and then they will be able to participate in the SMP. I have several fat women that I encounter routinely who have tried to date me and I have made it clear that I would consider this if they demonstrate that they can stop being fat.

    As far as old women should get married when they matter and cultivate philia and pragma forms of love with intermittent eros with one man. Instead women chase eros every moment they can, never bothering to think about the future for themselves or for their children. And never realizing that they are giving up two major forms of love so that they can have more and more of that one. Cause it’s powerful, like a strong drug, it will give you a big high. Philia and pragma between men and women are mostly dead.

  11. Here’s a picture of some jaw enhancement surgeries from a quick google search:

    Do you think if you had sex with a woman and after you told her that you have a fake jaw that she can claim rape?

  12. touche; I didn’t read the entire post.

    But I continue to disagree that modern men do not care about a woman’s status and earning potential. My sample is NYC upper-middle class to upper class men; they care VERY MUCH that the women they date be both hot and accomplished.

    People care about status. And they like other people who help them achieve higher status. This is gender neutral. It is currently considered high status for a man to have a wife who is hot and accomplished. I agree that it is not so much the provisioning piece as it is the status piece that is important.

    By the way, I don’t have a dog in this fight; I am married, and I married a high-status European who doesn’t care that I don’t have a fancy career. (I cashed out in time, phew). But before meeting him, I would regularly meet men who would grill me about my pedigree and accomplishments.

    Anyway, this rant belongs on a different comment thread so I will stop now 🙂

  13. Yes @ myrealitie

    Thats also what i was thinking!!
    We men just “see” young attractive women….we dont “see” the older women

  14. @StringsofCoins

    “Unfortunately most women are extremely low value and never bother to develop their character so it’s quite difficult to find a decent one. The low value ones, which are most of them, will bring many forms of ruin to your life if you don’t guard against it.”

    I can’t post a counter argument until I know what you are characterizing as “low value.” And why would you even let them in the door if they don’t measure up to your most basic parameters? Maybe you haven’t developed the proper internal screening mechanisms? Maybe there is still too much Blue Pill in your system that allows these women to gain access to the places that might facilitate “ruin?”

  15. I think this notion of the “invisible man” (or rather invisible until desperately needed) is extremely important for the modern man to understand. When men look past their romanticized expectations of inter-gender relations, I think it actually becomes quite obvious and easy for the beta man to see that it is his resources and commitment potential that makes him desirable, not his individual masculine appeal.

    I further think it is critical that these “safe” men wake up because they are actually part of the modern day problem. By cooperating with female hypergamy they essentially reward and justify modern female behavior to the rest of mankind’s detriment. In the modern world I feel it is the “safe” men who are responsible for the sad state of gender relations.

    I see it happen all the time with random men, sometimes, I even see my friends fall into it. They have no options so they settle for being a woman’s Plan B or “safe” option. For me, I play no part in it because I have options. I basically stand by the principal, and urge fellow men to, of expecting the same deal from a woman that was offered to every man before me. If you were a pump and dump then that’s what you are now. If your wife material, then your treated as such.

    On another note, there is nothing I find more insulting than a beaten vagina expecting commitment from me when no man had to offer that in the past. It is literally insulting to my manhood to think I’m going to be your chump.

  16. @myrealitie

    I think you are as in the dark about this as women are about men who are not on their “radar.”

    You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.

    This is an extremely common thing for women to say. They view betas not as men but not as women either. They are a third sex: beta.

    Men always view women as women. We place them on our HB scale. If they’re too low on it, we don’t want to fuck them. We still view and treat them as women, just women we don’t want to fuck.

  17. To add more nuance to why the female commenter is wrong and the others are right (men see even elderly and fat women): most men are beta. I’m one of them, I have to admit. Every day betas like me will notice old, fat, or ugly (or some combination of all three) entering office buildings and getting into elevators. Most betas, either out of true beta niceness or even because they are doing a self-improvement program that requires them to talk to every woman they see, will go out of their way to hold the door, hold the elevator, smile and say “hi.” On the other hand, I know for a fact that a beta will be walking down the street struggling with heavy, awkwardly shaped boxes, trying to enter a building (needs a door open), and a pretty young woman in front of him will literally not notice him, and the thought would never cross her mind in a million years to hold the door open for him. She will just enter the building and let the door slam in the beta’s face or the boxes he’s holding out in front of him.

  18. Even in my bluest of Blue Pill days internally I didn’t care about a woman’s provisioning ability. I always assumed that was my job, particularly if children came in to the picture. The only thing her education told me was that she was potentially smart, which would be important if we ever decided to have children.

    Men (even Blue Pill men) have interest in women for sex pretty much exclusively off cues that indicate genetic fitness for children. Where the plugged in BP veers away from RP men is in letting feminine shaming for that tendency dictate his standards for him. Left alone, a man will never consider these things. You don’t want to fuck her degree from Yale. You want to fuck her hot body.

    The only additional consideration a man will have without BP feminist shaming is if a woman demonstrates the proper charm and femininity to be suitable for long term commitment.

    Even after swallowing the pill, I still open doors and help women who I’m not sexually attracted to. Being kind and friendly doesn’t cost me anything. It’s actually the ones I’m attracted to that I’m less likely to do things more. It’s just another way of frustrating them and gaming them. Works, too. They complain about how I hate them and try to get my attention a lot more.

  19. @Sun

    The same could be said by me of many fat, old or ugly women. I don’t see her ‘like that’. She might as well have a dick.. Sure, I’ll still open the door for her, talk to her politely, not punch her in the arm, etc.. But I sure don’t see her like the chick who has a chance with me..

    The chick in your ref post probably treats the asian dude like a male in many ways as well, even though she’s not sexually attracted to him.

    Besides, beware how much weight you put on what she told the beau.. Chicks are masters of misdirection, and the harshness of what she said could be just that.. maybe she let the asian dude pokey pokey once or twice, and is just trying to crush the suspicion..

    seen it. been on the wrong end of it. bought it hook, line and sinker.

  20. @diplomat,

    Low value in the traits that are beneficial to long term relationships between the sexes. That being women who have cultivated personality traits that will serve them as wives and mothers. Even suggesting that women should cultivate these traits will see you met with howls of derision from women and how they do things for themselves (selfish and narcissistic traits) not for any man (altruistic and empathic traits).

    And let me just tell you that if you are alone with a woman she can make up any story she wants and you are then guilty of it and must prove your innocence. Once this has happened to you three separate times you become intimately familiar with the system and the lengths you have to go to protect yourself. I no longer wish to go to such lengths and would rather be alone. Though instead I am adapting to my environment and joining the strongest patriarchy I can find. It’s been interesting so far but is a huge commitment

    I soft nexted my two remaining plates last month. One of them had to be hard nexted a few days ago. So I am currently choosing to be celibate as the patriarchy I am joining requires such things.

    The reason they get let into my bed is because they are young and physically attractive. That is the baseline for entry into my SMP. My MMP, however, has much higher standards. As it should.


    Even basic niceness and caring are weapons women use in the SMP. There is a study that floats around showing that women will hold the door open for a beta man or another woman or an old person but only if they have encountered an alpha man recently. Having sex with an alpha on the mind causes women to exhibit caring and empathy. Without sex on their minds women are callous and uncaring in general, naturally.

  21. @TuffLuv

    See Rollo’s response to myrealitie. The provisioning aspect of men is the differing factor. Men as a general rule do not care about a woman’s provisioning independent of her sexual attraction. The same cannot be said of women looking at men. They separate our attractive and arousing qualities. This is how the third sex arises: provisioning independent of sexual arousal.

    The majority of men do not separate those qualities out. They’re just a continuum of woman. Like no woman could suddenly become so good at her job that now I want to marry her. Or suddenly become so famous that I want to sleep with her. She could lose weight. She could dress more attractively. She may be so hopelessly ugly due to unfortunate genetics that neither of those will make a difference. It doesn’t change that she’s still a woman being measured by a single set of feminine qualities.

    If I find a woman so unattractive that I don’t want to sleep with her, I don’t start treating her as a guy. I treat her like my mom: a woman I don’t want to sleep with.

  22. If I could add to that, throughout my life, especially my younger years way before I discovered anything resembling the teachings of Rollo, but even now, post red pill discovery, I have actively been nice to and have been platonic friends with fat women. I have even had them (not purposely by me) get led on and try to make out with me (and then they cried and begged when I did not do that–but they were not invisible to me). I have had women who are only marginally less attractive than my standard, with whom I have flirted, and I will actively seek to be polite, such as with text game (replying to texts timely, even though I am actually busy like an alpha as it relates to my career or being with my kids, going to the gym, whatever I’m doing). Very beta, I know. I actually think about not hurting the girl’s feelings or being rude. Even after I have been exposed to, and tried to learn, game, when texting with a new prospect who *is* pretty enough that I want to bang her, my inner beta (which really means “inner typical man pre-unplugging) causes me to have to have a big internal struggle to be a “rude jerkboy” and have good text game. I *want* to be nice, not in a supplicating way, with confidence (yeah she’s hot but I have my shit together to and I know we can have a good time together), and in every case, women will NOT tolerate any whiff of beta.

    Contrast: women texting with a beta (or a man who she has not decided if he’s beta or alpha) are straight up RUDE. Forget “girl game” or “playing hard to get” (the old fashioned way to describe girl game), I fully believe they literally have ZERO internal inclination to give a flying fuck about being nice to the man (of course), or even to simply follow what would ordinarily be basic rules of courtesy. I am convinced that women do not have even a tiny bit of the internal struggle that a beta man trying to unplug has in being a, well, a JERK to the other person. I don’t even mind ending a little text exchange without saying anything for a few hours, such as if you really are busy, such as texting at a red light, then you have to drive, get into some traffic, don’t text and drive. No, I mean like the woman will say she will text you when she gets home to confirm a date that SHE suggested, like with specifics such as she’s at her cousin’s house but will text when she gets home around 9, and … nothing. No text, at all. Silence. That’s rude.

    I have developed enough game to get dates, and sometimes I’m the one to “flake” or cancel, and each time I have literally not been able to avoid texting the girl as soon as I know I’m not going to be able to make it, sometimes 2 days in advance, or at least a day in advance. I literally think in my polite, male brain, that I should give her time to schedule something else. Like recently I had a date set up for a Saturday but learned by about Wednesday that I could not make it. I told the girl right away, thinking that she should be free to plan something else, as Saturday is one of the two best going out nights. Women, of course, have no such politeness meter. You can have a firm date scheduled with a woman for a Saturday night and she will flake and not so much as send even a single cancellation text more than 3 minutes before she’ supposed to be there.

    I’m sure some will now make fun of me and say I have only experienced this because I’m beta, but (1) it’s a known phenomenon–just like no-fault divorce horror stories, I’m not the only one… just look at the hundreds of “manosphere” sites chronicling this issue and (2) I am alpha enough at least with text game to get these dates scheduled for weekend nights. In my opinion, that’s a bigger deal than a “let’s meet for coffee” thing during the week.

    I think this comment is generally on-topic re: Rollo’s article because it ties in with women seeing three genders, and women’s general repulsion and utter lack of concern for betas. They have to know that it is simply rude to have set plans, not show up, and not even text. They would not do that if they were canceling a meeting or “date” with a girl friend, right?

  23. @tuffluv,

    Men don’t view an old or fat woman through a lens of utility though. Men don’t look at a fat woman and then think, “well she has a master’s degree and drives a nice car. I’ll hang out with her and maybe finger fuck her because later I might need to have her support me and my kids.” Men look at the fat woman and say she’s a woman who is a 1 or a 2 and hence of such low value that I would not buy that product even if it was free. Where as women will keep as many orbiters around as feasible for as long as possible.

    It’s not that woman see a fat man and think his SMV is too low to buy. Women don’t even buy they sell. But to not go into to great a tangent women view betas for their utility and alphas for their cocks. Men view women all for their sexuality. The fat or old ones just rate very low.

  24. @Sun

    How about her raising? Meaning, does she cook? Does she know how to keep a home clean? Would she make a good mother?

    Do any of these factor in when a man is looking for a potential mate? I’d say hell yes. But I concede it depends on how you phrase the question.

    You’re absolutely correct when I’m looking for a chick to bang (i.e. arousal), I could care less about those things. Same goes for women when on the AF side of the hypergamy equation.

    But in looking for someone to settle down with, skills, or intangibles do matter, for both sexes, I suppose.

  25. @Sun and Strings

    Maybe we’re hitting on an overlooked dynamic here. Sure, I agree, provisioning from a female matters not. But there are other intangibles men do find attractive in a woman besides hotness. It just so happens we ALL (men) want both, the hotness and the intangibles. But given the hard choice in desperation, we will opt for the hotness (arousal).. And I think women are the opposite. They will opt for the security (attraction).

  26. From Taking Things Slow:

    If you encountered a woman who fit every ideal you ever had for a relationship – best friend, loving, 100% loyal, excellent mother, came from a great family, perfect HB 10, healthy both mentally and physically, emotionally available, intellectually stimulating, shared all your beliefs – who loved you unconditionally and wanted to marry you, but with one caveat; he/she would NEVER have sex with you under any circumstances, would you marry this person? You could have children together through insemination and they would always be platonically affectionate with you; knowing full well before you did, and pledging to be completely faithful yourself, would you spend the rest of your life in a completely sexless marriage with an otherwise ideal person?

    Remember this sexless state doesn’t come after having had sex before (due to an injury or disability), it’s a pre-condition for the relationship. That’s the underlying message of “taking it slow” – all the benefits and emotional perks of a relationship with no expectation of sex. It’s like men having a fuck buddy, all the sex he wants with no expectation of emotional investment.

    @Tuff, just as I said in this post, men want to project their understanding of gender onto women. This is the prime reason men dwell in Blue Pill idealisms for so long; they truly believe that men and women share a mutual concept of love.

    There may be value added attributes a woman possesses that make her aggregate attractiveness high, but if she doesn’t pass the boner test it wont matter if she’s a great cook or a brilliant careerist.

  27. @sun,

    I’ve stopped spinning plates completely and an making some deliberate massive changes in life that mean no more plates. Though I think I can adapt the bangle thing down to a more subtle level and still get away with it. Anything that gets a woman to associate you with sex seems to work no matter how blatant.


    I agree that women will choose provisioning over alpha fucks. Right now big daddy government gives them all the provisioning that they need by taking our tax dollars from us and further taxing the identified “fathers” of their children. Matriarchy. Children don’t have fathers, fathers can not exist, all men of the tribe are “fathers”.

    The tangibles of good character do exist for women but are not only overlooked but openly mocked by most modern women. All of them. Trust me here fat women are just as low value as non fat women, only they rate a 1 or 2 in the SMP. They are not only undatable but also unfuckable. No one cares about their personalities because their SMV can already be identified as so drastically low that even if they have the most agreeable character and fun personality they will never be above a 3. I’m sure they can find some guy who is a 3 to try to fuck. Though like all women they believe that their “insert trait here” makes them special and they deserve their Dorian Gray ripped-genius-crime fighting-billionaire. Fat women are still women, still hypergamous, still subject to Briffault’s Law, and their bodies are physically revolting to top it off.

  28. @Rollo

    Great. I get that.. but let me ask you something(s)..

    Does this not mean men are simply more superficial than women? Also, if, when it comes to LTRs, women are more apt to forgo AF in favor of BB, is this such a bad thing for men?

    I mean, since we can’t all be (the former) Brad Pitt, wouldn’t most of us be dead in the water, if it weren’t for the fact that women are less superficial than us? Shouldn’t they be commended for committing to a man who doesn’t necessarily pass their tingle test? And isn’t this also why some men who marry a once-hot girl who then turns fat and of course old, stick it out to the end with them, as an honorable way to say thank you to them for choosing me in your hot days, when you could have chosen Brad Pitt?

    None of this negates the destructiveness and grotesqueness of woman’s turn-on-a-dime hypergamy.. And I wholeheartedly agree that many women lack this type of honor, and much pain flows from that (my current life being a perfect example). But then we’ve seen men do it to. I really think a perceived SMV imbalance, coupled with a simple lack of honor, a lack of commitment-willpower, and good old fashioned self centeredness, are the driving factors, and I’ll gladly concede that women with their solipsism and freedom to shirk responsibility leads to them being the far more guilty gender nowadays. So the numbers show..

    1. Men are not necessarily more superficial than women. Most men in their SMV prime will choose to fuck a 4, whereas many women won’t fuck less than an 8. Though also remember that women always fuck for PURPOSE, men for PLEASURE.

      And men DO like women for their personality, however, this becomes irrelevant because women are repulsed by a man who likes their personality too much, nor does he take his personality into account when deciding if he is a viable AF or BB.

  29. How about her raising? Meaning, does she cook? Does she know how to keep a home clean? Would she make a good mother?

    Do any of these factor in when a man is looking for a potential mate? I’d say hell yes. But I concede it depends on how you phrase the question.

    But how you phrase the question doesn’t change if physical attractiveness is required. If I want to marry or just ONS, her SMV still matters to me. Either way. If you wanna marry a chick then she also has to have those things you mentioned, but she still must have a good SMV. I actually hold a higher SMV standard for what I’d marry than what I’d ONS. In both cases, she still has to be a woman I want to fuck.

    Put another way: a man will fuck a woman he doesn’t want to marry. A man will not marry a woman he doesn’t want to fuck. A woman will fuck a man she doesn’t want to marry. A woman will marry a man she doesn’t want to fuck.

    The provisioning aspect makes all the difference. Yes the things you mentioned count, but only after her SMV is high enough that you’ve started to think you’d want to keep her. Women simply don’t work that way.

  30. Women can have lust too. They choose the good looking alpha guy, even if he is broke, the village idiot or bad boy and a dumb ass, for flings when they are young and still in school. Women can hook-up with alphas when they are older, but will rarely marry a guy like that, even if they could. When women are young, their provider beta is their father paying her bills, so they have that half of the equation solved, so they just see and go after the hot looking alphas, and ignore the betas. But when they graduate college and are out on their own and need their bills paid, their hypergamy kicks in. They also see their girlfriends marrying rich doctors and lawyers and such, and they get envious too and want the same stuff.

    For LTR’s and marriage, women prefer the stable, beta provider guy with the good job over looks. Women will marry a rich guy even if they are not physically/sexually attracted to him – very few men understand this notion. Betas think: I have an MBA and a good job, gee, I make this girl wet! – she is really into me. Nope. Hypergamy is just women being greedy and lazy. They want someone to take care of them. Women are realists and practical when it comes to marriage. Men are the true romantics. Sadly, too few men, mostly betas understand this. Betas score a hot or former hot, post-wall woman and think they found one of Willy Wonka’s golden tickets. Nope, these older women are divorce time bombs.

    1. For LTR’s and marriage, women prefer the stable, beta provider guy with the good job over looks.

      It’s important to remember that this ‘compromise’ usually comes at the convenient time when a woman becomes less able to hold Alpha sexual attention. It’s not a preference for, it’s necessity of.

  31. @StringsofCoins

    Awww, too bad. Man’s gotta go what a man’s gotta do, though. Good luck with it. Maybe I’ll try it at some point myself if it feels like it fits.

  32. @Tuff

    I hate to see anyone get hung up on a “better or worse than” crusade when defining men’s imperatives vs. women’s. It simply is what is. Not evil, not good. Just “is.” Isn’t “provisioning with the expectation of sexual reward” a recipe for getting the biological shaft in the AF/BB paradigm?

    (See Rollo’s “Saving The Best.”)

    The more we know about the mechanics of how things actually work, the better off we all are.

  33. “Put another way: a man will fuck a woman he doesn’t want to marry. A man will not marry a woman he doesn’t want to fuck. A woman will fuck a man she doesn’t want to marry. A woman will marry a man she doesn’t want to fuck. The provisioning aspect makes all the difference.”

    Bingo. My point exactly.

    Women are a mercenary lot.

  34. Have you ever read something that kind of sparks so many connections in your head that you literally stand, start pacing and thinking out loud trying to make sense of all the connections coming into place?
    Thats me.
    Read this post and had that exact reaction. Damn, I love this blog.
    Damn Rollo, thanks!
    @sun wukong.. Great quote about men and womens marrying strategies. I’m really digging the clarity of your posts.
    Phenomenal comments your making. You also asked this question:

    “If Alpha seed (essentially the genes) is what a woman is looking for, then how can Alpha be viewed as you view it? Basically as a mindset instead of a demographic. It would seem the search for genes is what makes it a demographic, but the ability to learn the behaviors makes it a mindset. This confuses a lot of guys, I’m sure. Myself to some degree as well.

    Have you touched on clarifying this apparent contradiction before where I could read up on it, or could you do so if you haven’t already?”

    I would love to see Rollo tackle that as well, as its a source of deep ambivalence for me, and I hadn’t even put my finger on it until I read your comment. I hope Rollo and maybe some other posters can comment on this as well.

  35. TuffLuv – “women are more apt to forgo AF in favor of BB, is this such a bad thing for men?”

    You gotta be fucking kidding.

    Of course this arrangement works fine if the woman can successfully fake her sexual desire for the Beta drone. The ones who are best at it sell it as GFE, the Girl Friend Experience, and bill $200 plus an hour.

  36. @Tony and Sun

    I dunno guys, see my above post to rollo as to why that’s not necessarily an all-bad thing..

    But let me just point out to all of you that there is a middle ground, sorta.. This is my experience with my 19 year (near-ex) wife. She was, and still is pretty hot. You know, maybe a 7.5 or something.. Not the most beautiful face, but pretty.. smoking hot body, minus large breasts.. best legs you’ve ever seen. I am a (some would say strikingly) handsome man, but fairly lacking in shape and of somewhat slight build, though nicely ripped.

    Now, my wife is a psycho bitch, and she never made life easy for me.. Note, she was very much lacking in the intangibles I mentioned above. We married out of duty cuz I knocked her up. She was 20, I 23. We made it work for 19 years, and brought three really awesome kids into this world.

    6 months ago, she met some playa, who blew smoke up her ass and she decided she was better than me. I still look good btw, and have NEVER missed a beat as a provider. I’m also a natural non-beta (I won’t say alpha), cuz dad was a master patriarch. In fact I fucked up because I didn’t adapt to the times. I tried to do it just like him, and that shit don’t work (long run) in these times, so I’ve learned.

    But look.. my wife and I had consistent, and very fulfilling sex (at least that’s my perspective). I ain’t bitching. And from a sexual standpoint, I have always seen her as above me. Yes, there were times she used it as a tool. There were dry spells. But overall, she was a giver in the bedroom, especially toward the end, and holy shit if I could only relate the two months post-separation. Jesus man.. Talk about letting me down easy.

    So, this all goes right with what I was saying above. She’s a serious bitch for what she just did to our family, and especially for what she is doing to me now in the courts (which I don’t entirely blame HER for, society and FI and lawyers are largely to blame). BUT, with the SEXUAL relationship as it was.. I’ve got no complaints, no regrets. Sure she’s pretty much BPD (with the certified childhood trauma to cause it), and the psychological pain of our dysfunction was always there. But dudes, I’ve always been mentally tough enough for that, though it did bring me to my knees a time or two, last couple of years.. Good thing the sex was always there to pick me back up.

    It just seems to me that men here in the manosphere are asking quite a lot. It’s almost as la-la as the fairytale-prince-charming dynamic that many women nowadays seek (especially middle aged divorcee women, jesus).

    Do y’all really ALL expect to find a hot woman who fucks like a banshee, and also possesses all the proper intangibles, who is mature and well educated, and that very few men, superior to you or otherwise, has ever touched, who will also stay committed to your sorry ass for life, while simultaneously admitting that if she loses her hotness, you lose your interest? Ain’t gonna happen boys.

    You will pay one price or another. There will be some sort of shortcoming. Since we all seem to agree that sex is the apex desire for men, I guess I got lucky. I do have friends in sexless marriages. I can’t imagine. I would never, in a million years, have stayed with that bitch if she wasn’t fucking and sucking my brains out. I would have left, and almost did, many times. But, then I’d be the bad guy right?

  37. @badpainter

    So, are you saying every girl you’ve had enjoyable sex with has been of lower SMV then you? And if not, were the one’s who were higher SMV all faking it for you?

    Believe it or not, a chick can still get off on her chosen man.. Chicks can and do enjoy sex this way all the time.

    I may not have been the most alpha of my wife’s sexual partners (not sure really), but I guarantee you I did many things to her no man has ever done, and she enjoyed every minute of it.

  38. @Tuff, not to rub salt in the wound, but you and your ex’s story is a cliche now. It’s the “making up for missing out” story. Woman marries early, cashes her chips in before she knows better, lives vicariously through her single girlfriends until such time that the “Alpha” she knew at 20 is the hapless Beta she’s saddled with at 39.

    Divorce porn media convinces her to bail out and get with the Alpha she’s always missed for all that time. She did everything in reverse – Beta comfort and dependability through her party years, to be traded for Alpha excitement before it’s too late.

  39. Believe it or not, a chick can still get off on her chosen man.. Chicks can and do enjoy sex this way all the time.

    Said every guy who married the only girl he’s ever had sex with.

  40. “No woman will stand beside a beta as he faces, and succumbs to, death. Not unless it’s convenient, or she would be shamed otherwise. It simply would not make sense for her to do so. Would you hold your employee’s hand as they lay dying? Only if they had a fatal accident right in front of you. Past that, condolences to the kids.”

    Fourth pic down.

  41. It’s been a while but you seem to be headed in the right direction.

    There’s still many things I disagree with in this post but eh, the kinks will workout once you truly ingest the red pill without blue-pill “game theory” blurring your perception.

    Genuine desire cannot be negotiated and neither can it be fooled into a visceral response. Our evolution has encoded for male desire to be ravenous and less discriminating than that of a female’s.

    See: Eggs are expensive, sperm is cheap. Or as they say in the manosphere, “The Fundamental Premise.”

    For those wondering why there’s a disparity between Rollo’s “Alpha is a mentality and not a demographic” versus the whole “Alpha seed” observation, it’s simple when you can admit that Rollo is incorrect in his assessment.

    The correct assessment is: Alpha is a demographic and not a mind state. Bio-evolutionary speaking, it has to be.

    Alpha genetic stock is by nature, rare and valuable in a woman’s eyes. Masculine phenotype development is appraised highly in a woman’s eyes for many scientific reasons but let’s just say that women being the practical sex, and not the idealistic sex, explains the jist of it.

    1. Question, can women’s perception of Alpha status be deceived?

      If so, then Alpha is a state of mind, not a demographic.

      If not, women would never have had the need to evolve mental and social apparatus to discern a difference because that status would be self-evident.

    2. And as expected you once again take that out of context:

      Alpha is mindset, not a demographic.

      Alpha is as Alpha does, it isn’t what we say it is. There are noble Alphas and there are scoundrel Alphas, the difference is all in how they apply themselves. There’s a tendency to approach every “Alpha” argument from what a guy thinks is righteousness; ergo, his personal definition of Alpha is what appeals best to his sense of virtue. He earned his Alpha cred, played by the rules, and by God people (women) should respect that. However, the sad truth is that prisons are full of Alpha males who simply channeled their drive toward destructive and anti-social endeavors. There are plenty of examples of indifferent Asshole Alphas who you wouldn’t say are upstanding moral leaders at all, yet women will literally kill each other (or themselves) in order to bang them because they exude a natural Alpha-ness. Just as Corey does here. There are Alpha drug dealing gang leaders, and there are Alpha husbands, fathers and leaders of industry. It’s all in the application. Genghis Khan was Alpha as fuck, and a leader-of-men, but probably would be on most people’s douchebag list for that era.

  42. Ha ha @rollo.. Like I told you.. former rock star, just like you, my brother. I lived for pussy for many years. Met my wife my senior year in college. Yes, she was the best. Not the best looking, just the most giving. but I had some great shit before her my friend. Including full on porno sex. Nice shot across the bow, but way off the mark.

  43. @rollo

    Your assessment is correct.. except get this.. she’s now engaged to a dude, who by all measures, doesn’t compare to me, and is a super-beta. Go figure. Now maybe that first playa was something, I don’t know. From what she says, no, he wasn’t much and she dumped him and came back to my bed for a time.

    The overriding factor here is BPD. She’s a victim hunter now. But she straight up says I’m too mean, too bad.. and too unyielding and she wants a nicer guy now.

    But overall, yes, your assessment is correct. It was definitely soft porn, and the smoke the playa blew, which was total white knight feminist bullshit, that set this all into motion. I let my guard down, and she bought the bullshit.

  44. @Tuff, yet here you are, and there your wife is with the playa. I’m not trying to get a rise out of you, just saying that the 19 years between 23 and 42 you spent with the wife might limit your understanding about the female sexual strategy.

  45. That playa only played his role in the eat, pray, love script. The only smoke he blew was what your ex wanted to have blown at her. You are an Alpha Agent of Righteous Karma, don’t give her the benefit of the doubt.

  46. @Rollo

    I don’t think it’s deception if you’ve internalized the attitudes and Alpha is strictly a mindset. It is deception if the genes are Alpha and you’re not part of the demographic she’s biologically aiming for.

  47. I’m not sure I agree with this post.

    I grew up RP. I was Alpha, my gf (now wife) could not get enough sex. I was spinning 2 other plates at the time, but she thought it was 4. Baby 1 came and her sex drive dove and I BP. Eventually I got fed up and dread worked horribly well. She is SAHM and she got mad and left to stay at hotel (on my $). I told her to get home in 30 min or she can collect her stuff. Our kids freaking out. I took ALL of her shit and threw it on back porch and told her I am changing locks in morning and bank accounts.

    Resolved it and she has been good in bed, wanting it more, doesn’t turn me down and is turning RP.

    To my point:


    I got married at 22 with N count of 22, not including wife, so 23. I told her if I get alzheimers and it’s bad enough to not remember her, at that point she can ditch me in a home.

    It is hard for me to hear guys whine about possibly not being surrounded by wife and kids… You guys need to fucking watch some John Wayne and Steve McQueen. I would rather have my shooting/hunting partners be there than my wife.

    I’ve been to funerals of BP guys that are absolutely staggering how many people were there, including ex-wives balling their heads off. WHO THE FUCK CARES IF THEY VISIT THE GRAVE SITE LATER. My gawd you are sounding like the women who want their cake and eat it too.

    Go through RP stages, then read Ecclesiastes… it is all futile.

  48. Not every man who quits giving a shit about what women think goes MGTOW. Digesting the red pill changed me from a flaky and apparently charming and high achieving sigma into a more alpha and concertedly aggressive guy, charming when I want to turn it on but a little aloof otherwise. I am mostly pretty happy with myself but really have trouble caring what women might think about me, including my wife. This has pretty obviously ratcheted up her dread and corresponding efforts to please me. While I’m not thrilled about that (I’ve always found sheepishly submissive women boring, as if I was crushing the life out of them) it’s not like I’m going to drop my primary missions in life – making myself better in a lot of ways personally and professionally, and raising my son right – to make her happier. So there’s a sense of callousness or even numbness to her, and to other women like the the couple young girls in the office who give me IOIs, a couple flirty neighbors, etc. I think my own game has always turned on not giving a shit, so the irony here is the less I care and the more open about it I am, the more women seem to be interested in me. I don’t think this is MGTOW and I’m not butthurt about how women are (perverse for starters…), that would be senseless… But I can sympathize with the MGTOWs. Maybe we need another category for the attitudinally disengaged-in-place.

  49. Right you are.. she told the playa what an ass I was and he was all too happy to white knight for her.. but just for clarity.. not that it matters.. she’s not with the playa.. she’s engaged to a different chump. Actually an ok guy, thankfully. She’s whacked bro.

    And yes, I get that my opinion has limited worth because of my 20 year absence from the scene.

  50. @Sun, if you sift through some of the comments at Just4Guys or Dalrock or even Aunt Sue’s and you picked out the comments from women who were asked what it is they consider Alpha, every last one of them will relate some version of upstanding gentleman, to superman, to confident guy, to socially mobiley upward and basically what they think they should say to preserve the impression that they aren’t subject whatsoever to the impulse Siirtyrion just described.

    Yet 50 Shades of Grey takes the single largest February movie debut profit in history $94.7M. I actually agree with Siirtyrion in that respect. He simply thinks there is no psychological component to arousal & attraction.

  51. “women are more apt to forgo AF in favor of BB….”

    If you believe this, you haven’t been fucking.

    look around you at what is really happening. AF is primary in women’s sexual strategy BB is secondary. Women spend their youth fucking alphas then “settle down” with waiting betas after they’ve “sown their wild oats”. The fucking alphas phase is lasting longer and longer these days and women are slightly more openly expressing their activities. What you see in the media and public discourse about it, is like roaches. You only see about 10% of all the roaches. The rest are hiding behind the walls. You see only about 10% of what is going on “behind the scenes”.

    In reality, there are a minority of men fucking a lot of women. You are not one of these men if you even slightly believe or hope “women are more apt to forgo AF in favor of BB….”.

    Women optimize alpha fucking as long as possible and today they often tweak it until just before they “hit the wall”. Women’s power over this has grown so effective today that they enjoy a longer period of alpha sex than ever before in history.

    The only way for a man to enjoy his life, optimize his sexuality is to take control, not be controlled. He should never subjugate himself to woman in any way. He must wean himself from the mother while still young.

  52. @Rollo,

    It’s amusing on occasion to ask a woman to define her perfect man and then to discover all the things she didn’t even mention because to her those things simply define “man” and she was describing the perfect one of those. Fits in very well with the idea that alphas and betas are seen as two different species. Betas aren’t even men.


    There is a higher chance then not that the imaginary woman who exists in your head alone had cheated on you during the marriage then not. Get into the gym, work on that diet, download myfitnesspal and track your macros, keep reading books, and back into the game with you. Or MGTOW it out. Sorry for your divorce rape. Hopefully she didn’t use the classic false domestic violence charge on you. If you’d ever like to chat with someone about what really is going to happen and is happening in family “law” send me a message.


    The only reason a woman ever let’s a beta fuck her is to get some utility out of it. Beta is a fine sexual strategy when women need provisioning. We can trade that for sex. Doesn’t work when the government is forcing us to do the provisioning with our taxes or in family court.

    This idea that women ever actually want to fuck a beta is absurd. These men often leave the women confused about rape because deep down she didn’t want that sex. She just wanted the things that came with it. Lol as if women would ever have sex with a beta in a perfect FI society. Instead they would just work and toil for the women, like slaves, forced to pay taxes to support these women. Told in church that single mothers raising bastard children are “heroes” and fed a constant stream of bullshit about how we should date them.

  53. “He simply thinks there is no psychological component to arousal & attraction.”

    And if so he is wrong. I knew a couple guys in the college weight lifting club who were physically about as alpha as possible. They were real specimens of masculinity physically. But…they were total pussies when it came to women, shy, unsure of themselves, fell all over themselves to be blatantly nice to girls, holding doors, looking for excuses to be protective, “wore their hearts on their sleeves” and fell for girls with the slightest hint of interest. Both pinned away over girls they met and barley knew. They didn’t get many dates and seemed to never get second dates. They were pathetic. But they had everything physical a girl would want. A few hot girls attended the club from time to time. As soon as they found out what these guys were like they were done….DONE! Girls do not like pussy boys in any kind of body. This strongly indicates there IS a psychological component to attraction even if it is nothing more than turning attraction OFF.

  54. @Stringsofcoins

    “Beta is a fine sexual strategy when women need provisioning”

    NOT if you REALLY want to FUCK.

  55. “While I disagree that there are no distinct physical and cultural markers that women use (sometimes subconsciously) to distinguish Alpha men from the bulk of Beta men, I strongly agree with the distinction and characterization Forge the Sky makes with how women regard Beta men.”

    @ rollo
    In your opinion, what are all or most of the markers that women use?

  56. @Rollo:

    “Can women’s perception of Alpha status be deceived?”

    I don’t hint on “status” because status in and of itself doesn’t inspire a visceral response. Sure, women can and do spread for these men but again, just because a woman spreads for you doesn’t completely imply that she actually WANTS to be with you. This is key to acknowledging the primal desire that does exist in women, but only so few men have actually experienced. The fact that women actually favor different types of men during her varying menstrual cycle should give you a hint here.

    re: Alpha is a mindset, not a demographic
    You seem to imply that the application of game or “alpha behaviors” will override any (or most) faulty physical qualities that a man inherently has. What you probably can’t see is that you’re applying that same idealistic thought you acknowledge in your own post. Men will project, by default, our own gender interpretation onto women, and sometimes pay the price for it. Remember, women are practical in their mate selection.

    An increased amount of awareness, while useful in preventing getting scorned in the SMV by women, doesn’t necessarily imply they will be attracted to said awareness. Apart from women’s pluralistic sexual strategy, they have also devised ways to differentiate which men are alpha and beta by simple phenotypic quality. Why? See: Honest Signaling

    If you doubt any of this, one quick look at Tinder on reddit should silence your doubt.

    “He simply thinks there is no psychological component to arousal & attraction”

    There is a component but again, which comes first in short term mating? Psychological attraction or physical attraction? You already know the answer. I focus on the physical components of attraction because a man’s physicality is the primary factor with which women select for in this heavily r-selected culture of ours. In a society where the majority of her provisions are met, what else is left for her to select? Something tells me you also know the answer to this.

    I mean, sure, a psychological component to attraction does exist (especially in a long-term relationship) but you must first get foot in the door(or pussy), in order for it to take maximum effect in the first place.

    Again, I have no real qualms with what anybody thinks is morally correct when it comes to acquiring women (you could lie for all I care), but if you really want to get at the truth and find out what’s really going on, expand your knowledge in the sciences more and stop giving in to simply hearsay by subjective views and reports touted by PUAs and its supporters.

  57. Food for thought….please don’t gag on it.

    There seems to be (to me at least) a social-psychological dynamic that supersedes all of this, and may be the most basic driver of emotional reactions and behavior. My best example is an observation I made several years ago. I was completing the finishing touches on a home I built for a Houston Oilers football player and his wife. They had just moved in and we were completing a few paint touch ups. The movers had gouged a wall damaging the sheetrock and I scheduled the drywall company to repair it. We were in the home waiting for the drywall worker. They had a very large male Rottweiler, it weighed about 150 lbs. He was aggressive and most people were scared of him. The dog knew it. I was not afraid of the dog, played with it, petted it, took it for walks. I grew up around animals, horses, dogs, cows, etc. The drywall worker arrived and I answered the door. The dog came to within about 20 feet of the door and stood there looking very alert and intently at the man for about a second. The man saw the dog and was obviously frightened. At that point the dog went after him. It was all I could do to tackle the dog and hold him back while the guy got back out the door and closed it. The most significant observation I made was that the dog made no move to attack the man UNTIL AFTER THE DOG OBSERVED THE MAN AND DETERMINED THE MAN WAS AFRAID. it was very clear to me the dog was checking to see if the man was scared before advancing.

    If we fear pursuing a sexual relationship with a woman for any reason the woman knows it. Fear is not necessarily of the woman herself, but more often fear of rejection or more specifically fear of humility and the personal devaluation that we associate with rejection. If we devalue ourselves by placing women upon any pedestal or over value sex with any particular woman, then we are setting up this psychological dynamic within our own mind before the engagement begins. We are dumbing ourselves down before we make the first move and placing her in a position of control in our mind. Better to realize our own value and maintain that realization.

  58. Just wanted to chime in here my agreement with the post.

    Women see two kinds of men, alpha and beta. Or men and males.

    To women, “men” are sexual beings. “Males” are not.

    Men are for fun and fucking. Males are for the drudgery of every day life.

    Men are exciting and mysterious, and work at interesting jobs. Males change the oil, take out the garbage, fix the toilets, and make the computers work.

    Men are boyfriends, ONSs and fuckbuddies. Males are husbands, coworkers, friends, and the guys from accounting.

    Men don’t see two kinds of women. Rather, all women are women to us. It’s just that there are two categories of women: Women we want to fuck, and women we don’t want to fuck.

    But even with the few women we don’t want to fuck, we still see them as women, as female, as feminine in essence and character. As Rollo said, We men still perceive and understand every woman’s functional utility (i.e. their essential female qualities and character) in all realms: Relational, biological, emotional, cultural and political.

    Even the most unattractive, undesirable women still manage to find men. Every woman I have ever known who wanted a man could get one. Every. Single. One. Every woman I have ever known who wanted a husband could get one once she set her mind to it. I’m talking morbidly obese women. Bitchy women. Certifiably mentally ill women. Women with chronic STDs (herpes, HPV, Hep C, etc.) Women with no skills whatsoever. Dull, stupid women. Uninteresting women. Ugly women. Every one of them, down to the very last one, was able to attract the attentions of some man somewhere.

  59. I don’t hint on “status” because status in and of itself doesn’t inspire a visceral response. Sure, women can and do spread for these men but again, just because a woman spreads for you doesn’t completely imply that she actually WANTS to be with you.

    Hmmm,…you sure about that?

  60. Some guys here seem to be advocating that women do get off on betas, etc. and that Rollo is off here, but you have to remember every man is a mix of alpha and beta traits. Very few men are all alpha or all beta. Those times when girls were getting off with you were when they were primarily focused on your alpha qualities. I think this is why women can get hot for a guy with money or status because these things can trigger “alpha” cues in her mind.
    Sartyrion makes this mistake as well. He makes the mistake of an imaginary hard binary duality between alpha and beta. If this were the case we’d probably have an alpha gene identified at this point, but that is not how it works. Women do not have magic genetic sniffers or intuition. Every man exists on a spectrum of alpha-beta.
    A good looking, masculine featured man walks in the room and she immediately perks up, he procedes to whine and bitch like a pussy- her tingles shut down. Later she tells her friends “I don’t know, he’s handsome, but I just don’t like him like that, I think he’s gay”
    A less good looking man with less masculine feature walks in, she initially doesn’t tingle, but he walks up to her, confidence/swagger and dominant- her pussy starts dripping as she catches his alpha energy. She later goes on to tell her friends “I don’t know what it is about him, but he’s just got that something”.
    People are being way too simplistic and binary about this.

  61. They get to a point where they become invisible by choice.

    The choice of defeat seems so ugly in a man. You may in fact be defeated. But to choose it? And men who choose defeat think they are defying the FI. No. You just make the winnowing by the FI less arduous.

  62. @ M. Simon


    I have almost no sense of smell. But I can smell, almost taste in the air a sexually aroused woman. If other women pick on that it would explain some of the feeding frenzy aspects of preselection, especially if there’s a pre-arousel element that signals the possibility of full arousal.

    But I think that it in terms of man emitting a pheromone it may well be situational, like the so-called smell of fear. A smell of dominance might be the opposite response. Since nothing succeeds like success it might be self reinforcing. So any man would be physiologically capable of such but skill, training, and pre-disposition would affect the effects as a sort of adjustment to the actual.

  63. Badpainter is correct- your pheromonal signature will change- even working out will increase the levels of pheromones emitted. Here is an interesting tidbit- celery actually increases a mans pheromones.
    Your immune system type can also be picked up through scents. There was a study I read about that showed that people tended to pick mates with complimentary immune system types.
    Men are pheromonally sensitive as well- but do we come on here and argue that men have special pickers for quality women? Of course not. Much as people want to simplify all the things that go into attraction, it’s all pretty complex.

  64. @Rollo

    Yet 50 Shades of Grey takes the single largest February movie debut profit in history $94.7M. I actually agree with Siirtyrion in that respect. He simply thinks there is no psychological component to arousal & attraction.

    It sounds like your focus on Alpha as a mindset rather than a demographic is more about a man changing the part that he has a lot more control over. You can’t change how tall you are or your basic genetically determined looks, but you can change almost everything about the attitude you present.

    Further, what’s more important in a man getting what he wants is that a woman perceives him to be what she wants, without regard for if he actually is. Also certainly part of the mindset. Even if someone believes Alpha is largely a physical thing, it behooves them to focus on the psychological model of it simply for the greater potential for change.

    At least that’s my take on what you’re saying.

  65. @ Hobbes

    Not to simplify but to find explanation. The shifting pheromones would go some way to explaining “fake it till you make it” as being more than just psychological trick on one’s self and would reinforce the notion of frame/inner game as being the foundation to everything else. Also, if such could be tested in a rigourous experimental way it would go far to proving game is more than a mere trick. It’s not about having pickers for quality but gaining effective attractors to cast the widest net and reaping a larger catch.

  66. jeff
    February 24th, 2015 at 7:34 pm

    Go through RP stages and then read Aleister Crowley. It is all joy ineffable.

    Thelema is RP religion. “Be strong so thou can bear more joy.” and “Take your fill of love and will.”

  67. @Badpainter- most definitely- physiology and psychology effects biology and the reverse is, as we all know, true. We tend to focus on changing the physical to force changes all the time- its the basis of anti-depressants. Change biology to change psychology. But changing psychology will effect biology as well. Muscle tone, facial cues, hormones etc. The most obvious is fear- everyone knows fear can be smelled by animals but by people too. having cancer can be detected via smell as well.
    The greatest thing Game does is it makes men face their fear- this reduces the amount of cortisol and stress hormones with repeated exposure. I’ve had a theory that high cortisol levels can be a turn off to women for more than just the stressed look/behaviors. If they can smell fear they can smell anxiety etc.
    There was a study done on people who were told to take a powerful or victorious stance and measured confidence levels and performance after holding these stances for some time and they found that peoples perspectives and emotions changed, they were more confident and did better on tests. Fake it til you make- while a somewhat abused concept- is definitely valid.

  68. Sun Wukong
    February 25th, 2015 at 1:44 am

    I have a very close friend. About 5′ 8″ maybe a little less. And he just exudes Alpha. So intense that a formerly gay chick (closet bi?) has been hooked up with him for about a decade. And she is taller than he is. But in their presence you don’t notice.

  69. @Rollo: Question, can women’s perception of Alpha status be deceived?

    If so, then Alpha is a state of mind, not a demographic.

    Hence the need for “Shit-tests”…ok, it all makes sense now.

  70. @ Hobbes

    Everything ties together. The body language, to mental state, to emotional state, to pheromones and other chemistry it’s all important.

    One of the worst mangers, and biggest pussies I’ve ever worked for was at one time, briefly, an NFL player. Guy was well built, big, but terrible body language. He had no confidence, hated confrontation, and could neither command, nor demand respect. A real pushover.

    He replaced one of the best mangers I’ve ever worked for. This guy we called The Emporer because walked around like Napolean hands clasped at his back him chin up and in complete control. He was also short and pudgy, not a hawt guy and the women kissed his ass all day long.This was unlike NFL, to whom they openly derisive, and constantly making excuses.

    Other than competence the biggest difference between the two was how they each displayed their respective frames.

    I suspect that game works largely as a crutch to improving frame, maybe a bit more placebo than cure. Maybe, as well, because it immediately answer the question about what to do by giving the would be player a sort of script to concentrate on rather than concentrating on his own anxiety. That would be the masculine response; to act rather than feel, to do rather than lament.

    While not a panacea it’s the best imperfect solution for betas who are conditioned to follow rules, and take orders from there so called betters. The difference here is by following these rules, scripts, and directions eventually the beta can make up his own rules with increasing complexity and challenge as his frame strengthens.

  71. An exemplar of the conscious or unconscious ruthlessness of the female imperative can be seen from James Sama’s blog (and its supporters).

    His blog is a hymnal to beta white-knighting shlubbiness (just watch the accompanying video) and endless chivalric supplication to womens needs, but his recommendation by the Indiechicks as “Best Male Blog” is more revealing. The Indiechicks are edited by a good-looking 29 year old “badass” single mother named Chiara Mazzuccobut but founded, financed and run by an ageing and proud slut named Chrystal Rose. Chrystal’s main claim to fame is writing a raunchy memoir named “Unfaithfully Yours: Confessions of a Cheating Bitch” in which she gaudily boasts of her multiple affairs and one night stands whilst engaged to her boring nice guy. Or as one reviewer breathlessly stated:

    ” She has multiple one-night stands and short term relationships while simultaneously stringing along her boyfriend / fiancé. I’ve suggested this release to several girlfriends and everyone is loving it.”

    Yet here is a riotgrrl glamour-site heartily endorsing a man desperate to encourage young men to become the very image of the chivalric nice-guy that Chrystal cheated on repeatedly and then humiliated in print. This is as stone cold as it gets.

  72. @hobbes

    “People are being way too simplistic and binary about this.”


    Most accurate post in this thread. Any man who has fucked a girl with a higher SMV than his own should know this.

    And as far as invisibility.. this cuts both ways folks. There are girls in my office building I see regularly who have given me consistent IOIs, who I’m just not interested in romantically. They’re sweet and intelligent, but I ain’t feeling it. It’s called chemistry, and we ALL place a high value on it.

    Invisible men.. suck it up and pick your path. I personally think it’s more important to accept and love who you are, rather than try to change yourself drastically to become more visible to certain women. The former path, alone, can make you far more alpha. But if change is what you want, then do what you can. It’s no different than the fat chick getting serious about dropping pounds because she’s tired of being ‘invisible’ to the men, or man she wants.

    There are those one wants to fuck, and there are those one does not want to fuck. This is not a trait exclusive to either gender.

  73. Side note/ OT:

    I find it to incredible (and unbelievably stupid) that any man who has taken TRP and was not a natural alpha before could do or think things like:
    1. Still be friendly/give attention to women who dont offer themselves sexually
    2.Still be useful or helpful to them as in 1.

    Of course appearing alpha to women via game works – but that changes nothing about their inherently animal-like and deceiving nature.

    How one can sustain THE OLD SET OF RULEBOOKS *DESPITE* knowing better
    Especially today and especially after acquiring game, there is only one way to go, for the greater good of men AND your own game prospects: Treat them like disobedient dogs to the full extent you can in a given situation, barring social sanctions that would do permanent damage to you.

    Take the seat on the bus, go first in line, never ever help with the boxes/computers. And say so whenever appropriate and possible.

    The manosphere cries on and on about all the shit all women do today – and still they be like
    “Hey, lets all be good sports about those kicks to the groin! + /chumpsmile”? … I dont get it.

    You want to push your game MASSIVLY and do something good for the other guys out there?

    Switch off emotional needyness, dont put women of the pedastal put blow the pedastal up – and never ever say a word about it. Never be verbally “mysogyniiiissst”.

    1. To see that it IS about mindset and not demographic, consider this:

      Women want to be with the guy with the highest pecking order, if possible. They want to be with the guy who other men are deferring to. This means that they will have the highest chances of having offspring who themselves will be high status and have a lot of mating opportunities. Genes are actually secondary. This is obvious once you observe that women will completely lose interest in a man who falls in the pecking order in favor of the man who is higher in the pecking order.

      It is true that your projections, both physically (pheromones, testosterone level, which is variable) and psychologically, change when you ascend in status and personal effectiveness. Women are highly susceptible to this.

      I am a very introspective woman, and I will tell you that it is VERY powerful for me to observe people respecting my husband and women being attracted to him. Conversely, if we are homebodies for a while and I do not observe any of these signals, I do start to have less attraction. It can go from THROUGH THE ROOF to MEH based on A) how I perceive his outside status, B) how he perceives his outside status, C) how much he is going to the gym, etc. etc.

      In conclusion: Women get more out of being with the current “winner” than they do out of marginally better genes. In pre-modern times, the “winner” might change over and was not a secured spot. A tribe might be conquered. You can bet your bottom dollar that women have evolved to re-bond with the new “winner.”

      This might sound terrible, but the bottom line is, you can control how attracted a woman is to you. So that is good news.

  74. @447

    You’re ridiculous man..

    Do you really think your advice will help these invisible young gents?

    Are you telling me you don’t hold the door for a hot chick you just saw for the first time, to set the stage for the elevator ride you’re about to share, in order to gain a little edge in qualifying for her interest?

    You’re full of shit, man.

    Boys, you WILL qualify for her affection, whether you like it or not. You WILL perform. Being an asshat in a one on one scenario will never get you the girl. In a social scene, maybe.

    Furthermore, anyone who thinks PUA is for the benefit of ‘other men’ is delusional. Part of the whole mindset of women nowadays is a direct result of PUA. Not that PUA is unwarranted, but to think more PUA, and less chivalry, and more callousness will somehow bring them back to where we want them, or make it easier on ‘the invisibles’, is insanity.

    You’re suggestion puts the cart before the horse. If your purpose is to disqualify yourself immediately, take 447’s advice.

  75. Wait. I was taking demographic to be a proxy for genes. It seemed like people on the thread were essentially saying that you are either alpha or you are not and that no “tricks” will work. I disagree with this.

    But if by demographic, you mean status in the community, then yes, that is important too.

    But you can REALLY manipulate the way a woman views your status. Either in your favor or not in your favor. This is why women who are married to CEO’s can still behave like hen-pecking monsters; if they only see the guy a few hours a day destroyed and plopped down on the couch, she is not going to give him credit for the way he is the other 22 hours a day.

    Conversely, you can be very average outside, but if you craft yourself to be the leader of your small social circle and expose a woman only to this, she will have some tingles for you. You’ll feel good in that circle, which you will project and she will notice, and the social cues she’ll observe are also huge as far as attraction goes.

  76. @Sirtyrion 2.0

    I am with you on this one. From a biological standpoint, females are able to sniff out alpha genes through smell, and visual alone (perhaps even other sensory cues). They can determine alpha without ever communicating with the male verbally.

    We can not just make assumptions, we need to take the side of science were facts are proven in terms of female innate attraction.

    Alpha is a demographic, there are zero natural alphas on this site.

  77. The knowledge Rollo imparts makes all kinds of rational sense, but I think it breeds a just a little bitterness and fear, especially for the younger, more impressionable, and less sexually successful men. So, please allow me to make a point, despite my being mired in marriage the past twenty years. Believe it or not, my 7 or so years of hayday prior to my marriage taught me a lot of truth about getting laid, because, as a skinny kid, I had to find ways to get the hot chicks I wanted, and get them I did. I did so with performance, and I think that is the positive in all this, for the male gender.

    This is the bright side. That chicks can and do get aroused by male performance and uniqueness, and this goes right back to @hobbes previous post. Gentlemen, put yourself in the shoes of a woman for a moment. THEY don’t have this luxury. They’re either hot enough for us to want to fuck ’em, or they’re not. No amount of performance on her part will change that. Is it any wonder they focus so much on their looks, and we don’t?

    Quick story from my youth, then I’ll shutup..

    Invisible to –> Alpha, in 3 minutes

    Summer of ’93, I’m home for the summer working for my dad, wearing a suit everyday. That suit gained me the interest of a pretty cute waitress chick who became my GF for the summer. My college bud came with me and stayed the summer. He worked for a tubing outfit on the Guadalupe river (Comal county TX). Through his escapades we met a few friends, and a very fun summer it was.

    We went to San Marcos (Southwest Texas State, now Texas State) to a party one night at some dude’s apartment. Dude had a drum kit in his living room, with a guitar and amp sitting nearby. The apartment was filled with people. I started talking to the dude about what he liked to jam out to. We both liked Metallica, so we settled on “No Remorse”. Cranked it up, jammed it the fuck out for the party.

    Now, I’m a shy guy, not the most social animal. Never was I the guy at college parties that all the chicks wanted to talk to. Never, that is, until opportunities such as this presented themselves. That night, I’d have sat there hanging with my girl, and friends, all night, probably only meeting a couple of new people. Here’s what happened when we finished No Remorse.

    When I put the guitar down, and high-fived the drummer dude, I turned to look at my GF, and no less than 8 SWTX hotties were gathered around her asking her about me, and all of their eyes were cut in my direction. It felt really good. She told me some of the shit they said later.. Where’d you find this one? Are you two serious? Where’s he from?, etc.. Of course I’m noble and shit, so I stuck with my chick, but the rest of the evening was just one huge ego boost.

    That one song performance dramatically increased almost every girl’s interest level in me, in three minutes, regardless of her SMV. Experiences like this validate much of what Rollo and the PUAs write, for me anyway.

    It goes hand in hand with much of what the PUA community tries to drive home.. be bold.. be male.. stand out.. That’s really all it takes guys. Gym rats are just gym rats. Sure that’s their thing and it’s effective.. Work on something that sets you apart, and the chicks will notice you.

    But the overriding point I’m trying to make is, be thankful you’re a man, and you have this performance option. @myrealitie has laid it bare for you just above.

    Women don’t have this option, as most commenters here seems to agree.

  78. One of the most interesting things about my career in the Military was that you could identity the women who enlisted in order to find and secure through marriage the Men with Status in the Officer ranks long before they actually did so. Once you saw it happen, you could always pick them out.

  79. …I expect that female readers will trot out the “ooh, ooh, men do it too” counter that women are invisible to men who don’t see them as a sexual prospect.

    This would be hilarious. I haven’t read the above comments. Has it happened yet?

    This is hilarious for many reasons. But consider the previous section of Rollo’s post… Women don’t see all men as potentially attractive, they see betas and alphas. Beta’s are guaranteed to remain invisible, alphas by contrast are what women are after. Despite the fact that men of all kinds exist, alphas are all that women are really looking for. No woman in her right mind would be upset at being sexually invisible to men she considers beta. So right off the bat, when a woman says, “ooh ooh, men do it too, men have not been attracted to me…” What she’s really saying is, “Only men I considered to be sub-human were attracted to me, therefore men treat me as invisible just like women do.”

    She’s pre-selecting for alpha, and then complains she’s invisible to alpha and therefore invisible to all men. Hilariously solipsistic. This is only amplified by the tremendous SMV inflation seen in the developed world.

    This also fails to consider the “always on” part of male sexuality. Men are sexually easy and shameless. When it comes to it, men are the ones who can and will sacrifice their standards for a lay. Women will not do this except under extreme biological pressure (i.e., late 30s baby rabies). So realistically no woman is completely sexually invisible to all men. That is not to say there are not forms of “sexual invisibility” for women… but it’s not true invisibility, it’s simply that you’re not the most attractive woman in the room at the time. You’re not invisible, you’re simply being drowned out by the all-legs blonde over on the barstool. I believe the FI inherently understands this, which is why attractive women often try to find themselves fatties as friends to go out with and surround themselves with. Females instinctively attempt to create a sort of “beauty contrast” for themselves and their group to maximize their chances. This behavior alone should demonstrate that women are actually all-too-aware of how non-invisible they are, and their real goal is simply to maximize how visible they are, to stand out in a crowd.

    Women do not know sexual invisibility like that experienced by most men, not by a longshot. I don’t fault them for trying to pretend they do though, they’re just solipsistic by nature. Frankly, if women experienced sexual invisibility like men do their suicide rate would doom the human race, and even if it didn’t their frustration would harm them so much they wouldn’t be women anymore. It’s better that women are lusted after, It’s better that they never experience what men experience because it keeps them women.

  80. @TuffLuv – yeah, I’m thankful that I have options. But also as a married guy having spent a while thinking about the sausage maker, the unhappy truths have sort of deadened me in a lot of ways and I don’t think it’s good for the relationship, though I don’t think I’d want to undo what I know either. It’s too much information in a lot of ways, right? It’s a bit like the slightly older woman who looks awesome in the French restaurant at 10 PM, in dim light after a bottle of Bordeaux, but you see her at 6:00 AM and the crows feet paint a map of France on her face, her hair is a mess, mascara smudged and her breath stinks. It’s not as much fun. I can handle time and bright light exposing women’s physical artifice, that is fine and it’s something I’ve always been aware of and it has not bothered me. The Red Pill exposes the psychological artifice behind women’s illusions and that is a much uglier set of gears to be looking at than a dozen pieces of lipstick on the bathroom sink.

  81. Also, random thought here…

    Would the reason that women do not like the script being explicitly told to them (i.e., women want a man to “just get it” rather than having to discuss it)… be because women are not fully aware of their own strategies?

    See, awareness brings responsibility. You can’t say, “Yes, I was aware there was a drowning child 5 feet from me, but I kept watching the superbowl anyway.” Likewise, if women were ever fully confronted with the coldness of many of their sexual strategies, their plausible deniability is shattered. Even if the man telling them all about what he knows about women is a pure alpha, he’s forcing the woman to confront past hamster-justified behavior by being explicit and destroying important parts of her strategy in the process. Large parts of female strategies involve washing herself of responsibility for her own actions, and you can’t do this if people know that you know that what you’re doing is unethical.

    Most woman are wholly incapable of taking full responsibility for their actions, and they would never have it so because somewhat-“loose” integrity (to be kind) is a requirement for satisfying the dual strategies. Bringing to female attention what you know about female nature destroys any pretense they may want to bring out later to preserve themselves if a relationship with you (as a man) doesn’t work out. By telling a woman all the nitty gritty rather than “just getting it”… you are leaving her no exit strategy… and a woman with no exit strategy is cornered.

  82. “expand your knowledge in the sciences more and stop giving in to simply hearsay by subjective views and reports touted by PUAs and its supporters”

    given the extent of PUA videos and field reports, and the frequent opportunity to see them live doing pick up, it is distinctly unscientific to deny they are getting laid lots

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: