The Political is Personal

personal

Dalrock had an interesting post this morning – Black Fathers Don’t Matter – that mends nicely with a topic I was poking at in Obesity Culture:

While HHS (Health and Human Services) says any man currently shacking up with mom counts as the father, the Census says any man currently shacking up with mom counts as the father so long as mom says so.  Either way, fathers clearly can’t matter that much to the US government if distinguishing between the actual father and the man currently banging mom isn’t important.

There are other ways we can tell that fathers don’t matter (and therefore Black fathers don’t matter).  Under our current family system fathers are a sort of deputy parent. Just like a sheriff’s deputy serves at the pleasure of the sheriff, a father in an intact family serves at the pleasure of the mother.  Our entire family court structure is designed to facilitate the removal of the father should the mother decide she no longer wants him to be part of the family unit.  How important can fathers really be, when we have a massive and brutal bureaucracy devoted to helping mothers kick them out of the house?

What Dal is pointing out here has a far broader implication than simply how various governments define fatherhood. Many critics of my defining the Feminine Imperative like to think it’s a work in conspiracy. However, as I’ve explained before, there really is no need for a conspiracy; the Feminine Imperative has no centralized power base because feminine-primacy is so ensaturated into our collective social consciousness. It needs no centralization because feminine social primacy is literally part of women’s self-understanding – and by extension men’s understanding of women and what women expect of them.

Thus, on a Hypergamous social scale we see that Protein World’s male focused ad gets no such vandalism. The message is clear – It is Men who must perform, Men who need to change themselves, optimize themselves and strive for the highest physical ideal to be granted female sexual approval. Women should be accepted, respected and expected to inspire genuine desire irrespective of men’s physical ideals.

[…]

On more than a few occasions I’ve made the connection that what we see in a feminine-primary societal order is really a reflection of the female sexual strategy writ large. When we see a culture of obesity, a culture of body fat acceptance and a culture that presumes a natural evolved order of innate differences between the sexes should be trumped by self-impressions of female personal worth, we’re viewing a society beholden to the insecurities inherent in women’s Hypergamy.

A feminized, feminist, ordered social structure is one founded on ensuring the most undeserving women, by virtue of being women, are entitled to, and assured of, the best Hypergamous options by conscripting and conditioning men to comply with Hypergamy’s dictates.

I’m quoting this again here because, in light of Dalrock’s observations, it’s important for men to really understand that the power struggle women claim to be engaged in with men has already been settled on a meta, social scale. When a father is whomever a woman says he is, that’s a very powerful tool of social power leveraging.

  • A father is anyone a woman/mother claims he is
  • A father is legally bound to children he didn’t sire
  • A father is prevented at great legal and social effort from access to DNA testing of children he suspects aren’t his own
  • A father is legally responsible for the children resulting from his wife/girlfriend cuckolding him
  • A father is financially obligated to the support of children that he didn’t sire or he had no power in deciding to sire

These aren’t just examples relating to men’s lack of power in parenting; these are examples of determining the degree of control a man can exercise over the direction of his entire life. From Truth to Power:

Real Power is the degree to which a person has control over their own circumstances. Real Power is the degree to which we control the directions of our lives.

The inherent insecurity that optimizing Hypergamy poses to women is so imperative, so all-consuming, to their psychological wellbeing that establishing complex social orders to facilitate that optimization were the first things women collectively constructed when they were (nominally) emancipated from men’s provisioning around the time of the sexual revolution.

Ensuring the optimization of women’s biologically prompted Hypergamy is literally the basis of our current social order. On a socio-political scale what we’re experiencing is legislation and cultural mandates that better facilitate Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks.

Driver had a good comment from the last post that illustrates another aspect of this feminine-power consolidation (emphasis mine):

“All the “feeling good about your body” that a fat woman can muster is NEVER going to be an aphrodisiac or a substitute for having a great body that men are aroused by.”

It’s funny how women are very attracted to a guy who works out, eats rights and takes care of his body but they fully expect men to love them (or be attracted to them) for “who they are” – thin or big. You would think that these overweight women would get the memo by now but women (and more of them) keep getting bigger each year.

Feminine-Primary Social Doctrine is the Extension of Women’s Hypergamy

In a feminine-primary social order women presume, without an afterthought, that they are entitled to an attractive guy who works out and meets or exceeds women’s very stringent and static physical ideal. At the same time they expect an entitlement to absolute control of that attraction/arousal process regardless of, and to the exception of, any influence or difference in men’s control of that process. And they expect this without any thought to meriting it beyond appeals to a nebulous and inflated concept of their personal self-worth.

When we consider the present, ambiguous state of sexual consent laws we begin to understand the latent Hypergamous purpose those laws serve – absolute consolidation of women’s Hypergamous strategies as the motivator of any sexual encounter.

Furthermore, they expect an entitlement, either directly or indirectly, to the material support and provisioning of men for no other reason than they were born female.

Any deviation from this is on the part of  men is met with a cultural reprisal designed to convince or coerce men to accept their inevitable role in providing those entitlements to women. When those social contingencies fail, or become played out, the Feminine Imperative then appeals to legal legislation to mandate men’s compliance to what amounts to women’s social entitlement to optimized Hypergamy.

Legislating Hypergamy

From the Alpha Fucks side of Hypergamy this amounts to socially shaming men’s sexual imperatives while simultaneously empowering women’s short-term sexual strategies and fomenting men’s societal acceptance of it (i.e. the Sandberg plan for Open Hypergamy). This is further enforced from a legal perspective through consent laws and vague “anti-harassment” legislation to, ideally, optimize women’s hypergamous prospects.

When we read about instances of the conveniently fluid definitions of rape and harassment (not to mention the pseudo-victimhood of not being harassed), this then turns into proposed “rape-by fraud” legislation. Hypergamy wants absolute certainty, absolute veracity, that it will be secured in its optimization. And in an era when the only restraint on Hypergamy depends on an individual woman’s capacity for being self-aware of it, that Hypergamy necessitates men be held legally responsible for optimizing it.

Even the right for women to have safe and legal abortions finds its root in women’s want to mandate an insurance of their Hypergamous impulses. Nothing says “he wasn’t the right guy” like the unilateral power to abort a man’s genetic legacy in utero.

Feminist boilerplate would convince us that expanding definitions of rape is an effort to limit men’s control of women’s bodies – however, the latent purpose of expanding the definition is to consolidate on the insecurity all women experience with regard to optimizing Hypergamy.

The Beta Bucks insurance aspect of Hypergamy is evidenced by cultural expectations of male deference to wives’ authority in all decision making aspects of a marriage or relationship. And once again this expectation of deference is a grasping for assurances of control should a woman’s Hypergamous choosing of a man not meet her expectations. This is actualized covertly under the auspices of egalitarian equalism and the dubious presumptions of support and feminine identification on the part of men.

Beyond this there are of course the ubiquitous divorce, support, child support and domestic violence legalities that grossly favor women’s interests – which should be pointed out are rooted in exactly the same Hypergamous insecurity that her short-term Alpha Fucks mating strategies demand legislation for.

As Open Hypergamy becomes more institutionalized and made a societal norm by the Feminine Imperative, and as more men become Red Pill aware (by effort or consequences) because of it, the more necessary it will become for a feminine-primary social order to legislate and mandate men comply with it.

Going Mainstream

I’ve addressed this before, but I’ve never done politics on TRM. I will never do screeds on race or multi-culturalism or religion on TRM for a very good reason – it pollutes the message.

We now are seeing the results of this pollution as the manosphere is attacked from both sides of the political spectrum.

I’ve given this example before, but if you put Gretchen Carlson and Rachel Maddow on the same show and confronted them with red pill truths and Game-awareness they would eagerly close ranks, reserve their political differences and cooperatively fight for the Feminine Imperative.

This is the degree to which the Feminine Imperative has been saturated into our western social fabric. Catholic women in the Vatican may have very little in common with Mormon women in Utah, but let a Mormon woman insist the church alter its fundamental foundational articles of faith with regard to women in favor of a doctrine substituted by the Feminine Imperative and those disparate women have a common purpose.

That is the depth of the Feminine Imperative – that female primacy should rewrite articles of faith to prioritize women’s interests.

Religious doctrine, legal and political legislation, cultural norms, labor and economic issues; all are trumped by the Feminine Imperative. All have been subverted to defer to the Feminine Imperative while maintaining a default status of victimhood and oppression of women and women’s interests necessary to perpetuate that covert decentralized power base.

It doesn’t matter what world view, ideology or political stripe the opposition holds; men, masculinity and anything contrary to the feminine-primary social narrative will always be a common enemy of the Feminine Imperative, and both liberal and conservative will climb over one another to throw the first punch if it means defending women and defending the feminine social order by proxy.

This is why anything even marginally pro-masculine is vilified in mainstream society. Anything pro-masculine is always an easy, preferred target because it’s so hated, so incorrect, in a feminine-primary context that it can unite people of hostilely opposed political and ideological differences.

It’s my opinion that red pill awareness needs to remain fundamentally apolitical, non-racial and non-religious because the moment the Red Pill is associated with any social or religious movement, you co-brand it with an ideology, and the validity of it will be written off along with any preconceptions associated with that specific ideology.

Furthermore, any co-branding will still be violently disowned by whatever ideology it’s paired with because the Feminine Imperative has already co-opted and trumps the fundaments of that ideology. The fundamental truth is that the manosphere, pro-masculine thought, Red Pill awareness or its issues are an entity of its own.

This is what scares the shit out of critics who attempt to define, contain and compartmentalize the manosphere / Red Pill awareness; it’s bigger than social, racial, political or religious strictures can contain. It crosses all of those constructs just as the Feminine Imperative has co-opted all of those cultural constructs. The feminized infrastructure of the MSM that’s just beginning to take the manosphere seriously enough to be critical are discovering this and trying to put the genie back into a bottle defined by their feminine-primary conditioning.

The idea that one of their own, whether in a liberal or conservative context, is genuinely Red Pill aware and educating others of that awareness is unnerving for the Feminine Imperative that’s already established strong footholds in either ideology.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

676 comments on “The Political is Personal

  1. @ lone

    What would you do if you were involved in a terrible skee ball accident, and you had to live off of disability and had a pronounced limp for the rest of your life?

    I’m not sure hookers offer a payment plan.

    My point is that a man is more than the measure of his overall power. The measure of a man is the power he has over his own life. I won’t go into fiat currencies and all that ( a much broader point for the money lovers ) but men prove every single day that they can achieve things and get laid without the benefit of money, power and societal status.

    The mindset you’re displaying is a recipe for great mental anguish if you don’t hit your perceived bullet points on your life list my friend.

  2. @Lone Survivor

    It is adapted to sick environments (clubs/parties/bars). Over time, your game becomes you, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: you only find shitty women because it is the only thing you can attract and retain in your life.

    Know this from experience do you?

    All women (just as all men) operate with the same base instincts. How you use game, and to which women you decide to apply it to has absolutely no bearing on it’s capabilities.

    What form of arrogance allows you to judge women (much less any human being) by how effectively they can be persuaded by a good sales pitch? Do you not know your own weaknesses as a human with desire?

    1. @Jeremy
      “Do you not know your own weaknesses as a human with desire?”

      That precisely why I am here.

  3. ““I had marginal social proof from playing in some semi-pro bands”
    That explains a lot. Despite the absence of money, you were “someone” in the eyes of those girls. Probably they thought of you as the next Dave Mustaine.”

    The battle cry of a gamma. But he is (insert rationalization here)!!!

    Better looking, more alpha, taller, bigger meat popsicle, richer, poorer, etc, etc, etc.

    Bleh.

    Come on dude.

    “you only find shitty women because it is the only thing you can attract and retain in your life.”

    Me thinks I read something about “the myth of the quality woman” somewhere around here…

    She’s only shitty in the club. Put her in the yogurt section of your local higher priced grocery store and she becomes a much higher quality woman.

    @blaximus
    “… Someone had a large glass of Haterade this morning.”

    Reminds me of the waterboy:

    Red pill sucks…Haterade is better!

  4. ” But this shouldn’t dissuade you from recognizing a very important truth — for all their bluster and trumped-up demands, women will surrender rather easily to a dude with a righteous tattoo. ”

    Classic truth.

  5. “The majority of males I interact with that are younger than me were raised by single moms. It is rare for them to break out of how they were reared. My current woman is a teacher at the pre-K level, and she tells me that every boy in her class sits down on the toilet to pee. Every. Single. One.”

    That’s really fucked up. With single motherhood increasing, I predict a massive increase in the number of betas in the coming years in the general population. More women will be disinclined to marry or seek relationships with these feminized men. The remaining alphas will have less competition.

  6. I live in Canada. I want to buy preventive medicine in a real store and not on the internet.

    where can I find it?

  7. @ Excalibur

    This has been something that has, and continues to fascinate me as I witness it.

    Funny thing is, I’m not certain that most of these kids grow into Betahood. Don’t get me wrong, some give up and take large gulps from the fem-keg, but I’ve witnessed a strange group of boys in the 17-20-25 year old range who are as female acting as the females, not in a gay way, but they are extremely emotional, fashion conscience and bitchy.

    Then there is another “type” that pursues chicks for sex, but neither the chick or the guy really knows what to make of what happens short of ” it’s sex, it’s normal, it feels good”. The chicks turbocharge the carosel, and the men-chicks kinda flounder about until they basically lose interest.

    And there they are. They have no true masculine qualities and their female peers basically use them as walking dildos until they lose interest and next them.

    It’s all very aimless and damn near formless.

    All I know is that I want to make sure I live another 20 years so I can see if the NFL can still field any teams.

  8. PS: Women are disinclined to marry already.

    They still like the formality of the princess wedding, but the idea of marriage as an end goal doesn’t start to sink in until they reach their late 20’s to early 30’s. That’s not as much a problem as the dick count they amass by that time warps their brains ( among other anatomical parts ) making them shitty wives and mothers.

    I have a particular goddaughter who married at 18. Her husband is in the air force and she moved just off base in a home with him.

    Funny thing is, everyone always considered her a bit ” slow ” because she didn’t party, drink and fuck every swinging dick that came around. She was labeled a social misfit be all the cool peers. ( For now ) she is learning to cook and clean and make a good home for her hubby. No one knows what the future holds, but I will always marvel at the fact that her ideals are considered unrealistic and a mental defect that she has.

    1. @blaximus
      “No one knows what the future holds, but I will always marvel at the fact that her ideals are considered unrealistic and a mental defect that she has.”

      That sounds so sad in a social way…

  9. @Blaximus: My nephews’ high school lacrosse team recently played a game wearing pretty pink jerseys for breast cancer awareness. Fuck.

    I doubt this made any of the cheerleaders, or any of the hot, young female teachers, wet.

    Teaching young boys masculinity is going to be an uphill battle. Manliness traits are not encouraged or valued. Young boys, especially those with single mothers, are at a loss. What happened to the strong, masculine fathers like in the shows “Leave it to Beaver” and “Father Knows Best”? Where are the strong male role models that our society needs?

    I need to remember to give him Rollos’ books.

    1. @excalibur
      “Teaching young boys masculinity is going to be an uphill battle. Manliness traits are not encouraged or valued. ”

      Ever since I was born I have been yelled at forceven attempting to mention that.

  10. @Excalibur

    Where are the strong male role models that our society needs?

    Last one I remember seeing was Michael Landon’s character in Little House on the Prairie. Every father after that has been a rehash of Homer Simpson.

  11. “PS: Women are disinclined to marry already.
    They still like the formality of the princess wedding, but the idea of marriage as an end goal doesn’t start to sink in until they reach their late 20’s to early 30’s. That’s not as much a problem as the dick count they amass by that time warps their brains ( among other anatomical parts ) making them shitty wives and mothers.”

    It amazes me that many women do not understand that they have a shelf-life. These women aren’t going to have the same appeal to men at 30+, that they did at 20. Jesus Christ, I’ve seen some pretty drastic changes in appearance for the worse for quite a few previously attractive women in the time span of only a decade. Feminism has taught women that they can live and manage their lives like men, but they cannot.

  12. @ Excalibur

    ” Feminism has taught women that they can live and manage their lives like men, but they cannot.”

    Exactly. Women can ” have it all “. Women should expect men to ” love them for who they are inside “.

    It’s hard for a 19 year old to see their shelf lives with all the dick being waved in their faces, and all of the constant complements and adulation.

    Feminism forces civilized society to bend over for women. It cannot end well this way.

    Call me an optimist, but I still hold out hope that everything won’t end in utter catastrophe. All these idle young men….they just need a large enough, underground ( or above ground ) spark. In a perfect world, boys would get hooked on manosphere ideas the same way the got hooked on PS4…or 5…or whatever ( I’m old..). I’m convinced they’d love manhood the way it was meant to be.

  13. Had an argument with a friend today. A woman who was a single mom had claimed “Well my mother was a single mother too and I turned out fine”, and I replied to her that the fact that she had turned out as a single mother as well was by definition not a “fine” result. He (yes he) told me I was being overly harsh in judging single mothers that way.

    My family with an abusive single mother who divorced my abusive father: I am a beta loser clinically diagnosed as a manic depressive struggling to recover at 38 years old, and finally starting to see some success in life. My sister is now divorced at 35 and raising my niece alone; yep single mom begets yet another single mom with the spawn of her idiotic high school alpha quarterback ex. Betting she tries to fish up one of the many betas that wanted her back in the day. I’m also putting $20 on my niece becoming yet another single mom one day.

    I’ve seen first hand how single moms work. There’s always a reason she’s a single mom instead of just a mom. Whether it be that she tried to follow the AF/BB script or that she just “picked the wrong guy” because she learned nothing about how to select men (the female analog to a man learning to perform for women), there’s always a reason. Always.

    1. By claiming that single mothers are the results of socialization and not perhaps a stand taken because of socialization is to completely miss what has been happening in the West for millenia. Marriage and family is a lousy arrangement. Love or attraction is not enough. The only possible reason for acclaiming it is because you happened into parents who had great personalities and some degree of wealth. If your parents did not have a great personality, then you got fucked by their shitty beliefs and attitudes about raising kids and communicating generally. You can reflect on how you were disciplined and what your chances of making it in high school & college were to assess that. Odds are that most people are raised by parents struggling to balance the checkbook or credit cards, so there you are fucked over again. You were probably not brought up to read and learn what really mattered since parents are typically anti-intellectuals, for college level success but you may have gotten lucky and just read everything thus hitting the target but not close to any bullseye – hence not a valedictorian or considered for a top-notch college, and you probably sucked on the SAT – did you even try the ACT?! AND, you probably did not receive any coaching in any sport and simply learned by imitating pros and therefore played lousy.

      The point is that humans need better arrangements than the nuclear family: children need several males and females to raise them because one man, regardless of what or how many he carries, cannot protect his kids from the thugs, including those in his own family! The solution of the liberal state has been public education where the kids get substitute parents called teachers (and you know how they get treated!) for a few hours a day, and the mother can divorce if she finds a better resource person or gets fed up with the dominance factor.

      If each mother had several fathers taking care of them and her kids, the resources would be much greater. Today, we have massive wealth accumulation because most people simply have nothing to spend it on and have invested it all. Consider, that 1/2 of all rentals in cities are to single individuals, or should I say solo’s. And, look at the cars, everyone has their own. Thus, it is clear that concentrating resources on the next generation is a low priority which could be relieved by permitting mothers to have relationships with several others, men and women, who provide resources. The cost of raising one child is very high in terms of both $ and time, so after one why have another. Thus, the birth rate or fertility/natality is quite low. What reason could there be for having more: to produce laborers and soldiers!?

      One implication which is hardly a change, is that the sexual relationships that are considered extramarital or adulterous or cheating would become irrelevant. Love and liking comes and goes, circumstances changes. Today, a women has to get a divorce to get remarried, so there is a legal hurdle to get fresh resources and a new relationship for herself and her offspring. The so-called father is always in the picture anyway and the only thing that prevents actual social interrelationships, human interrelatedness, is the jealousy nonsense which is perpetrated by both the state, its laws,and religions. Other cultures have solutions to the resources problem for youth and it involves the mother having more than one other parent to help. Single mothers have figured something out.

  14. @ Sun

    Correct. There is always a reason.

    Let me tell you something though, with all that you’ve gone through, you have figured it out. You have broken those past limitations for the better part. The first step in resolving any problem is always IDENTIFYING what the problem is.

    In today’s society, single mothers approach Sainthood. There will be no questioning of single motherhood lest ye be laid waste.

    The damage is reversible.

  15. Talk about the political being personal…a Kentucky gubernatorial candidate is being accused by his ex-girlfriend (from college, 20+ years ago) of being physically abusive to her back then & of driving her to a clinic to have an abortion. There’s just one teensy-weensy problem…she has not provided one shred of proof to back up her allegations.

  16. Frederick Welfare – “Other cultures have solutions to the resources problem for youth and it involves the mother having more than one other parent to help. Single mothers have figured something out.”

    Examples please.

    1. Female strategies for acquiring resources of all kinds (consider all of the forms of capital) around the globe which are non-western include polyandrous relationships where the mother has several male friends including the father(s) of the child. In almost every non-western culture the woman works outside, not confined to household unpaid labor which as you know has been under the gun for some 50 years. From a cultural and biological perspective, this mode of human interrelatedness maximizes resources for the offspring. To get anything similar in the West, serial monogamy (divorce and remarriage) or extramarital relationships must be engaged. How do the mothers get the necessary resources for their offspring? is a key issue and it is not all provided by one male breadwinner.

      In 1965, Moynihan exclaimed that the 25% single mother phenom among black families was a disaster. Today, 75% of black families, 50% of Hispanic families, and 25% of white families present as single mother households. Now you can claim that this is just a big disaster, but you could look at the facts of fertility rates, marriage rates, divorce rates, childhood abuse problems and children in poverty, etc and conclude that the nuclear family is the disaster. As I stated, the liberal state figured this out 200 years ago and started public schooling primarily as a relief from family inter-relationships. And, then they permitted no-fault divorces. Do the math!

  17. @ Frederick Welfare

    What a great example: mud huts, dirty water, corrupt governments, AIDS, civil war, a functioning real rape culture, and starvation. Where do we sign up?

  18. @Badpainter

    In my mind, if you’re concerned with the politics of the situation go join the MRAs. You’re going to get laughed at, ridiculed, ignored, and snubbed but you can go try to deal with the politics. It’s a lost battle at this point, hence the reason I don’t particularly care about it.

    My concern with the politics side is strictly which laws affect me. When I no longer consider the legal climate tenable, I’ll leave. YMY is pretty much the breaking point. If that becomes the law (or precedent) of the land outside of college campuses, I’ll make for the door. This is simply a natural consequence of long term 1.0+ male:female ratios. When that happens, the politics of femcentrism will always become dominant. I’m pretty much convinced of this now.

    When your country hits that 1.0 number and you’re a male, start looking for the exits. You won’t be able to prevent the accumulation of power among females and their subsequent enforcement of hypergamy by law. It’s a force of nature. You don’t fight a hurricane or a tornado. You just get the fuck out of the way.

  19. Sun Wukong,

    I don’t disagree.

    Further I’d hate to see this site become a partisan politcal shittorm. BUT I do think some political discussion is of value when looking at how Rollo’s foundational teachings are made manifest in society and how they influence politics. So when YMY comes up for discussion it’s not talking about political process that matters but how to work with the new reality beyond the political.

  20. @RedBaron – Please, spare us the BarBar pseudo-intellectual horseshit. Between his real hatred of women, his imbecilic reliance on biological determinism and his mostly speculative hyperbole on our social condition, particularly when he discusses economics, it’s quite clear that he’s about half as smart as he thinks he is. He also fucks women.

    But seriously, let’s set aside that jackwad with the good microphone (you’ll notice that smart YouTubers invest in a good mic, it’s makes a huge difference in how you perceive them) and just look at what he’s positing. You see, he’s actually fallen into a Blue Pill, equalist mindset but refuses to acknowledge it. He seems to believe that female sexual choice is something he can opt out of, or if men just think hard enough they can free themselves from female dominance sexually.

    Uh, horseshit. Men are bioprogrammed to love sex and to get aroused regularly and at high levels and by a variety of women. Women choose and men compete for that choice (men also have threshholds and select but in the main, to understand sexuality it’s good to just say that women choose). That’s helped our species succeed and it’s not socially constructed in the sense that one can just undo it by changing ideas in one’s head. He, and many other MGTOW nimrods, believe you can just choose to be asexual, and that if you just have enough discipline, you’ll do so. They ignore all the data on the benefits of sex and sexual/romantic interactions. Ever wonder why we all like cuddling so much? We have a huge hormonal reaction to it, and it’s very good for us. Sexual contact does wonders for men. And a man who is outside of all this, who has resigned from it, is cutting himself off from his very nature.

    An actual Red Pill view would see the world as it is and accept it. I’m designed to love sex. The world has chucked traditional values in the dustbin – great me too. Now I can be the libidinous pig I’ve always wanted to be but was ashamed of being. If I want to have sex, I have to adjust. I mean, if I want to eat steak (which I do a lot), I have to earn the money to buy it. Does that mean I’m dominated by steak? Women can only dominate me if I’m playing by the old set of books. Game actually gives men real tools to be released from the misery of female dominance via FI informed conventions like chivalry, courtly love, romance, marriage and monogamy.

    In fact, the secret to dealing with women with equanimity is to spin plates. If you have multiple women, you will quickly realize how interchangeable they are. And when one causes me heartache or aggro, the moment that I turn my focus to another women that bad feeling begins to dissipate. That doesn’t mean they aren’t individuals, it just means that I can be happy fucking many different women, there is no “one” for me. Spinning plates in this way is the cure for OneItis, which is why most men can’t get laid. They imbue their desire to fuck some chick with all this meaning and when it doesn’t go this way they are crushed, sometimes for years. And oh yeah, let me repeat, Bar Bar fucks women and takes them out on dates, so yeah, sure Bar Bar.

    If guys like him and say a Stardusk on YouTube would be a bit more openminded about game, they would understand that in fact it’s is a great way to help incels and other sexual cast asides. But no, these guys encourage men to sink deeper and deeper into rage and cynicism and hopelessness and leave them with no tools. For almost all men, asexuality is not a positive thing.

    MGTOW is self-destructive. The Red Pill is ultimately about a man grasping his full power and taking true ownership of himself. How can one remove sex from that equation? In fact, now that I’m much more sexually active again (yay) I feel more virile than ever. Turns out getting laid increases my T. Talk about a positive feedback mechanism.

    My advice to all men struggling with this? Start with low value women, the not so good looking, the loners, a bit chubby if you can deal. Or a fit girl with acne. Fyi, you can close your eyes and fantasize you are fucking another women when you are with them – it’s more fun that you think. But most men need to learn about what it’s like to be wanted. You still have to create the fantasy for them, you’ll still have to maintain your own frame and actually create a frame that is welcoming to women and once you guys get some practice with lower value women you will begin to notice that sometimes higher SMV women show interest too. Female attraction is weird and sometimes in some circumstances, a lower value guy will get a shot with a hottie. That’s if you are ready to play. I won’t even get into why it’s also great for men to work on improving themselves, which also makes women much more attracted. I do think that some MGTOW do get that intrinsic nature of men improving themselves and how they see themselves, acknowledging that we are in competition as living beings, as all living beings are.

    But otherwise, what are you going to do? Jack off to porn and play video games for the rest of your days? And be depressed and angry when you see hot women? Hey, that’s a recipe for success, and quite admirable.

  21. Fred Welfare – “Boil it down: consent is not a preliminary to the act, it is an evaluation after the fact. Consent must be achieved before and as a result.”

    Between this and your deep concern for women maximizing resources at all costs (civilization) I can only assume you’re a feminist.

    1. @blaximus
      “I’m convinced they’d love manhood the way it was meant to be.”

      That would be my son talking to me at my age.

      @Sun Wukong
      Two new seasons of the Simpson coming soon….
      I am tryin to get the fuck out of the way. Just keep getting pulled back by the word “Love”

    2. Consent is a legal and logical concept, involves ideas like implication and entailment. You thought you had consent at time 1 but did not have it at time 2, wtf.
      How many people you run into that you think are feminists?

  22. Nice post Glenn.

    “Female attraction is weird and sometimes in some circumstances, a lower value guy will get a shot with a hottie.”

    Yup, that’s “pre-selection”. You will almost always get more attention and indicators of interest when you are with another women.

    @ Lonestar, MYG & Red Barron

    I’m not against prostitutes at all. I think they are a necessary part of society. It’s not called the ‘oldest profession’ for nothing. In fact, if it wasn’t for pro’s there would probably be a lot more mass shootings, suicides and rapes. Pro’s are there for the incel. The beta. Two friends of mine have fucked nothing but pro’s their entire lives. One married up the first chick who let him fuck her without having to pay. But both guys are overweight schlubs and SMP losers (suffice to say zero game). So for them, I’m all for pro’s, because otherwise, they would be miserable and maybe do something stupid.

    You see, I think regular use of pro’s is for guys that are just scared & lazy. Scared of rejection when approaching women, and, too lazy to stay in some form of shape.That doesn’t mean being ripped or buff, but just in the normal weight range.

    As for you guys preaching that money is the be all and end all with women; well I’m the same as Rollo, Blaximus and others – the most intense sex I had with multiple women was when I was a penniless club musician and part-time bartender living in a shitty share house.

    1. @stuttie
      “You see, I think regular use of pro’s is for guys that are just scared & lazy. Scared of rejection when approaching women, and, too lazy to stay in some form of shape.”

      That used to describe me to the tee…

  23. Here’s a postcard from the edge. A POLITICAL philosopher commenting on how the family is the engine of inequality in society. http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/philosopherszone/new-family-values/6437058

    Take the time and read it. And oh yeah, keep in mind this is political and social commentary. Tell me, guys, do you think such a thought arises purely from the FI? In part? How much? You see how gooey all this gets when you rely on a new term I just coined, “FI determinism”?

    I will give a short analysis for you to consider on the holes in this incredibly vapid man’s thinking. As I’ve said elsewhere, GROUP SELECTION may be the most powerful driver of human progress. Nation, state, religion, town, school attended, political beliefs, team, local hunting club – humans form groups. As an aside, Jack Donovan points out how central being part of a group is to being masculine in The Way of Men, but that’s an aside.

    Family is the smallest social group in human civilization, and families are in competition with each other and in this way, groups with traits that increase longevity, defensive abilities, hunting skills/tools/techniques or reading at bedtime – ti’s a part of the engine of human progress, which is always going to be uneven.

    Even worse, he doesn’t seem to understand that all life is in competition with each other. Competition for resources and wealth and pussy and everything is the essence of the human condition. Yet his commentary proceeds without regard to any of this.

    Last. You guys who are interested in perhaps learning a bit about the history of communism in the U.S., check out this video of author/journaiist Diane West talking about her book on the topic. I bet almost none of you know any of this. Again, your politics don’t matter, she’s just recounting what actually already happened. She also talks about Islam a bit, which is interesting too. http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/philosopherszone/new-family-values/6437058

    But hey, politics aren’t how we got her. We don’t live in a society saturated with Marxist framed social analysis, hundreds of socialist govt programs, and becoming more and more riven by class/race/gender struggles by he day – just as they sought to foment. It’s women’s pussies who have done all this and all these people who did all this silly political stuff, yeah, they were just really acting out of the FI. Marxism, social justice, progressivism – sure, they emanate from the FI. Right…Sure. Okay.

  24. @ stuttie

    The money thing is a real sore spot for me. I guess it’s a pet peeve of sorts. Now, we all need money to live and to progress in American life. That’s a given. But when guys start thinking that the power money holds over some people is a GOOD thing, that speaks to character in my mind.

    Drug dealers think like that.

    Wall Street guys that drain pension funds and wreck housing markets think like that.

    I too don’t have a problem with prostitutes as a whole ( or Hole ). But as you state, they are a short term solution to a problem some men are facing. Or, they are ” higher classed ” pro’s who present an adult E-ticket ride.

    Many, many years ago, I considered using an escort service because I wanted sex with an Asian girl. I lived in an area where there were plenty of Asian girls, but I was feeling lazy and wanted what I wanted quick and easy. The only thing that stopped me was some Asian girl virtually falling in my lap. If it hadn’t happened at that moment, I was gonna make the call ( although I would’ve never told anyone..).

    On another note ( trying to wrap this up nicely ) that girl wouldn’t have fallen in my lap if I’d not talked to her almost daily and dropped hints that I was interested in sexing her. One day a light bulb went off in her pants and I was in. You gotta ..approach..for lack of a better term. I don’t give a shit about how your day is going, or the weather, or the newest dance moves. I wanna have sex and I make that known.

    I get the ” you so crazy ” or ” I can’t believe you said that “, but it’s on the table.

    So, Pro’s as a way of life? Nah. Better options. There are a lot of sluts out there who will do anything you want for free. And they might even make you a sandwich afterwards.

    1. @blaximus
      “And they might even make you a sandwich afterwards.”
      Well that sure as hell happen to me than I went to a bathtub with her.
      Didn’t realize she was who she was because I didn’t pay her anything
      I still miss her lips…

  25. Thinking back, women are indeed fickle as hell. Rollo is onto some good stuff…menstruation is your friend.

    Sometimes, you never really know when a chick is just gonna randomly screw you. Any chick.

    1. @blaximus
      “Sometimes, you never really know when a chick is just gonna randomly screw you. Any chick.”
      What a wonderful fucked up truth.

    1. You are either sarcastic or embracing a leftist model of consent and force. Communicative agreement or reason involves securing that agreement before the deal, during the deal, and after the deal. Basic Contract Law 101. Of course, there are instances of fraud and deceit, humans are what they are, generally however, consent is a function of satisfaction not of the appearance of wilingness.

      I have raised a point that is historical and cultural, not ideological. The facts are what they are, you can make any conclusion you want but if you want to understand what is going on today, that the 2015 Almanac is pertinent.

      Surely, you recognize that something is wrong otherwise why would you be on this blog. Just pointing out some basic facts.

  26. ” So, Pro’s as a way of life? Nah. Better options. There are a lot of sluts out there who will do anything you want for free. And they might even make you a sandwich afterwards.”

    Clarification.

    When I say ” sluts ” I don’t mean the brazen half naked chick that everybody sees as a slut. I’m talking about the cute, quiet chick who is probably…a 7 or 8…maybe. Most likely a soft 7. The ones that have that little fire burning inside and on the right day, they’re ready to give it up anyway you want it. They’re making a memory for themselves. They’re betting you won’t put them on blast and tell all your friends she swallowed.

    Ha ha

  27. @Glenn – thank you for not indulging in ad-hominems, gynocentric shaming tactics, appeals to female validation, burning strawmen and naturalistic fallacies.

    MGTOW Celibacy. Bar Bar’s investigation of gynocentrism, male disposability, antiquated traditions (The expt. where monkeys were sprayed with cold water), male mother need (Rhesus monkey with wooden mother expt.), the yoking of male utility to the point that men are shat out of the system in even tradcon cultures are all groundbreaking and the analysis is squarely missing in the tradcon/PUA section of the manosphere which is mainly focused on getting your dick wet and spinning fairy tales about the good old days.

    His and Rollo’s analysis complements “The Manipulated Man’ book nicely. Also Stardusk and other YT content creators have talked about learning game for MGTOWs who do want to experience getting laid, they do have differences of opinion there.

    While I don’t agree with all cookie-cutter MGTOW views – there is more disagreement than you are led to believe in the forums (I regularly read this blog for having my views challenged so that I can get a complete picture and not be exposed to one perspective) – one cannot lightly dismiss MGTOW without missing out on a vital perspective and an unsanitised view on basal female nature.

    When I first was introduced to the manosphere – all writers were ridiculing MGTOW and telling readers to avoid it. (The sort of “Do not look behind the curtain” Spiel) – when I did, I realised why..it would hurt book sales – there was a major conflict of interest.

    The so called ‘incel’ MGTOW is a strawman argument PUAs are using to unintentionally describe TFL-ers whether due to deliberate malice or sheer ignorance. The MGTOW HQ forums aren’t against the young members getting laid for the experience and demystify that allure of women although they don’t judge the ones who are celibate/virgins – female defined metrics do not matter in someone’s self-worth. The divergence between SMV and AV (Actual Value) keeps increasing.

  28. “Communicative agreement or reason involves securing that agreement before the deal, during the deal, and after the deal.”

    Bullshit.

    Consent to an act that cannot be reversed cannot be held to a post facto withdrawal of consent that results in criminal charges. You can’t get a refund at the theatre if the movie sucks. Something’s you just have to suck up and move on from.

    1. I won’t belabor the point and won’t say it again, but you are absolutely wrong and will not win in court. Consent, consensuality, consensus must be maintained through a transaction or the deal is fraudulent. Good luck with the judge.

  29. “Thinking back, women are indeed fickle as hell. Rollo is onto some good stuff…menstruation is your friend.
    Sometimes, you never really know when a chick is just gonna randomly screw you. Any chick.”

    Rollo gets my thanks of the the day. Red pill awareness an a bag of skittles, an anniversary card from Target and some Costco flowers got me a good lay tonight. I thought a good lack of beta tell was when my she initiated when she was ovulating. Menstruation game indeed. But when she says sure thing at the end of the luteal phase, Red pill game is a thankful thing.

    What is it that the 27 to 34 year old guys don’t have respect for the knowledge and fortitude of the 52-56 year old guys. This thread is a prime example of young guys projecting bullshit, whereas the old guys have been there an done that. Skip the binary thoughts, the absolutes, the baseless assertions. Red pill game is about being better and better, and being even better.

    Some of the commenters in this thread need a good ass-kicking. A wake up.

    Don’t be suprised that when a regular commenter disses a not so regular commenter because the former has read lots of Rollo and the latter has not.

    I find it disrespectful for someone like Lone S to dismiss game as not valuable. Game is valuable.

  30. @stuttie – we will have to agree to disagree on prostitutes and money for the time being, for you to see my perspective it will require a paradigm shift in thinking involving getting rid of gynocentric hardwired jargon like ‘loser’, ‘lazy’ etc.

    Imagine telling someone predisposed to alcohol when he was a kid that the warm and fuzzy feelings alcohol creates are magical instead of telling him it is just a drug. This is what is told to young boys about women. In Eastern cultures/BP worldview this is ‘LTR’, ‘Marriage’ and ‘Soul Mates’. In the US they get young boys addicted to sex – the goal is the same –> to weaponise your hindbrain in order to extract your male utility given you produce more than you consume especially if you are doing so for chasing females and getting their sexual /marital validation.

    Civilisation was built on this through trial and error (no monolithic conspiracy) – which is why prostitution and even homosexuality was banned historically. By stigmatising prostitution women and the Kings would keep power over men. (Single men are a huge threat to the status quo). In the US and the West in general – people are living in debt and dying in debt as a result of following this rat race for female validation whether sexual or marital.

    There was the prior discussion a month back about how TRP is a clearinghouse of ideas with everyone sharing their partial views to form the whole picture. I have already heard these perspectives that you and others have brought up – I have grown up in different countries and the way the get boys addicted to these lies is the same everywhere despite differences in degrees of magnitude of cuntishness in women amongst countires.

    Also – no hard feelings mate. I was at work and 5 mins of conversation with BP coworkers was enough for me to realise that despite my disagreements and bantering with other commenters on this blog – how much i enjoy reading everyone’s perspective in the manoshpere. It is like heaven compared to dealing with gender relations with the folks that are still plugged in the BP world.

  31. Man Table question: how many folks would we have available to talk this Sunday afternoon vs. next? I remember Glenn wanted to show up but was going to be busy this weekend, so wanted to see if we could move to next to give him a chance to join but still get some other guys in. This time we’re gonna try to record and see how the format works and what we need to tweak.

  32. How is saying someone is a ‘loser’ in the SMP (he would be the first to admit it too) and ‘lazy’ for not staying in good shape gynocentric?

    I don’t think I need a paradigm shift in thinking – I believe that happened when I took the red pill which is how I roll now.

    Like I said, I’m not against prostitution, or the MGTOW movement (in fact some of the stuff on the no-ma’am site is great to read). There was a commentor (Vulpine) from Rollo’s The Isolationists post who had a good explanation of MGTOW.

    I stand by my comment that Men who need pro’s are just scared of being rejected (understandable) and too lazy to run/lift/box/etc.
    Interestingly, pro’s did cross my mind whilst I was going through a dry-spell – but I still couldn’t escape inner thoughts of “Is this what it’s really come to.” And it’s got nothing to do with the cost either; it’s the thought of pumping a warm hole minus the real desire and enthusiasm. Or should I just pay more for the “girlfriend experience”?

    This is the paradox of the ‘sphere’ and why it will probably never become a more mainstream movement with men; there is too much factional arguing over who is more red pill and which is the better RP path to take.

    So there’s no hard feelings; there’s no feelings at all.

  33. @stuttie – thanks for claryfing. I remember the post you are referring to now.

    Someone even said that there is this ‘Universal Experience Fallacy’ – wher e one thinks that if he likes skiing and works hours practicing it everyone else should like it as well and if they don’t they are just lazy or have given up on skiing unlike him. Everyone has different interests and is into different type of women. The same seems to be true for preference for sexual experience or lack of thereof for the celibate types.

    I have even seen in MGTOW communities the level 5’s showing off to level 1’s that they are more MGTOW than the others…it is not just unique to the TRP/PUA community.

  34. “Consent, consensuality, consensus must be maintained through a transaction or the deal is fraudulent.”

    I’ll agree to that, and nice job moving the goal posts.

    BUT after the act/deal/transaction is complete consent cannot be retroactively withdrawn. So the next day, next week, 20 years later, bad feels don’t, after the fact, constitute bad faith on the part of the other party who has no obligation to continue maintain consent.

  35. Stuttie, “Keep telling yourself hookers are the answer”

    Hookers or escorts ARE the answer for some men. Self-improvement, mentorship and game can work for plenty of men, but there is a non-trivial amount of men for whom those things won’t work to any significant degree because they have serious mental, emotional or even physical issues.

  36. Lone Survivor,

    “Game by itself is a contradiction, it is an attempt of people with no resources, no money and nothing to offer to be at the same level of people who live exciting and fulfilling lives. In other words, PUA are themselves the “betas” they point their fingers at.”

    – Bar Bar elaborates on that in his video and to some extent its true. Of course commenters here will protest because their idea of game is self-improvement along the lines of an Anthony Robbins’ “Unleash the Giant Within” seminar where one is “trained” in “becoming your best self”, but there is plenty of evidence on the countless PUA sites, forums, videos and workshops of “fake it til you make it” or “fake it even if you never make it” advice.

    Also this numbers game of cold approaching is something that a great number of people just cannot do. Walking up and talking to complete strangers like the Hare Krishnas do in airports? Yeah, no. That is totally unnatural for everyone who is not an extreme extrovert and something a great many people have issues with and even find ethically questionable.

  37. Blaximus,

    “What I’m talking about is the scenario of the husband losing his employment ( and maybe running out of unemployment benefits. There was a time when unemployment bennies did not go on for years ) and the family deciding that they needed some help. If the man was present in the home, help would not be forthcoming.”

    Please refer me to a documentary or a study regarding this. Thanks.

  38. Frederick Welfare,

    You are correct. The reason why African, South Asian and East Asian immigrants are “model minorities” is precisely because of their family cultures. Many of them grow up in multi-generational joint family homes that focus on education and discipline. They socialize with their elderly and very young family members, not unrelated “peers”. This type of family oriented culture provides a great foundation for them.

    We don’t have that in the US since the isolated “nuclear family” became the ideal and norm during the industrialization era. In such a broken scenario unrelated peers take the place of your grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins and siblings form your social group. Now, the internet forms the social group.

    1. The multi-generational home however was not strictly a combination of lineages, many other people could also be found in these small “villages.”

      What I am trying to describe is a possible underlying basis for the reaction to the nuclear family form by the head of household or single-parent family form. A cultural-biological perspective is called for. Mothers are concerned about resources for themselves and the offspring. The nuclear family is an arrangement where two parents manage resource acquisition which includes financial capital, social capital (acceptance), cultural capital (education, training, skillset), etc… Clearly, the nuclear family form is too often dysfunctional especially in the 20th century where economic crises were severe and common, a regular cycle of crises!

      In many other cultures, the problem of resource acquisition for mothers is determined by legal forms of family arrangements: polygyny, or one-man and many wives, is the predominant form although usually accomplished only by those wealthy enough but it is permitted for everyone; only in the West is monogamy enforced but having undergone a loosening via divorce and serial monogamy which includes a similarity with polygyny. However, some cultures practice forms of polyandry where the mother negotiates relationships with several men to acquire needed resources. Perhaps, this is understood on the analogy with ‘networking.’ One of the discoveries recently that is being incorporated into our understanding of sexuality is the factor of probability. Without “relationship” a man and a women may engage in a sexual event. The biological explanation for ‘any given day’ a female may suddenly want to engage in sexual abandonment has to do with the need to get pregnant and the need to acquire resources.

      But, this is one-sided, on the other hand, the natality rate is low; for every 1000 eligible fertile females (18-42) only 76 had a fertility event last year. Other statistics about fertility and healthcare and poverty are similarly dismal. Moral of the story: the nuclear family form including courting is no longer effectively reproducing and this has been a labored point since the middle 1800’s. For example, Germany’s population was always double that of France much to their chagrin. There was little understanding of the family forms in Germany due to its cultural and religious diversity, but France was Catholic and usually had the lowest fertility rate!?

      Anyway, my key point is that the nuclear monogamous family arrangement contains several flaws: it is competitive where “rank” is achieved by establishing a marriage, then a child(ren), then the children get married increasing the parents social status, and if they have children and the parents become grandparents, then they have won the game.

      Amiss in the morass are the problems of sexual abuse of the wife/mother and children and the failure to earn any significant social capital or cultural capital. Incest, abuse and poverty, and later rape accusations are all a part of this scenario. But, the nuclear family has no way of knowing who may be selected as appropriate mates for their children, it’s a selection process children or teens and young adults go through entirely blind – there is no useful guidance that the older generation can give other than issuing orders that courting be performed and marriage ceremonies celebrated even though many of these young people are clueless that the strength of the order giving is related to whether the parents can afford a wedding much less afford the courting costs, and the impact of the order giving is related to the dutifulness of order taking. Result: today, marriage rates have been cut by 30% since 1985 when no-fault divorce was available in all 50 states, and divorce rates are holding steady at 60%
      of the 60% marriage rate.

      Many other cultures solved the problem of who was an acceptable mate thus reducing negotiation stress. Clear lines were drawn between groups as to who could be courted and who not. There are relationships based on convenience or wealth where the mate who is wealthier controls the commitment of the other person. In stances of brideprice or dowry, which we do not discuss in polite society as the cost of the wedding and the gifts, like a house or job, the marriage is sealed through these accommodations. And, of course, there are marriages based on attraction.

      Today, the more successful relationships are assortative: between mates who have similar backgrounds and interests, namely, similar educational and socio-economic backgrounds or occupational similarity. This is similar to a social class differentation, or a caste system. Cross-cultural, interfaith, and inter-racial marriages are usually governed by exogamous rules or limits where only exceptions are permitted. Marriage rules like this are found in primitive societies. Levi-Strauss’ major work, Elementary Structures of Kinship identified simple and complex systems for mate selection, with exceptions but all governed by an elder system where everyone was married.

      The Western culture is quite different from most oriental, indian, middle eastern, african, and non-white hispanic cultures in having a confused distinction between love relationships and marriage relationships. Some relationships are loving, but marriages without being-in-love are not necessarily otiose and marriage need not fold upon extramarital relations. Obviously, polygyny would mitigate feelings of jealousy because sexual needs would be fulfilled in a more diffuse manner than in the nuclear one man-one women scene. But, the West also has no preferred marriage relation. One of the drivers in many cultures to reproduction is to fill all the spaces/positions for future mates: first cousins, second cousins, etc. For example, the preferred marriage in Islamic (used be called Mohammedan) cultures is between the offspring of two brothers, called first cousin marriage. So, it was important to reproduce brothers and for them to have children to celebrate this preferred arrangement. Since genetics and circumstances vary, other arrangements can be made, but there is this goal to the reproducing. No such form is found in Western culture and the situation is so incomprehensible the anthropologists have given up on western kinship.

  39. Stuttie,

    “I’m not against prostitutes at all. I think they are a necessary part of society. It’s not called the ‘oldest profession’ for nothing. In fact, if it wasn’t for pro’s there would probably be a lot more mass shootings, suicides and rapes. Pro’s are there for the incel. The beta.”

    – Nope. Girlfriends and wives are there for the beta. Prostitutes are there for the omega. Guys so down and out, mentally off, whatever, that they can’t get gf’s and wives.

    Sometimes you’ll find ballers, celebs, alphas utilizing high end escorts.

    “You see, I think regular use of pro’s is for guys that are just scared & lazy. Scared of rejection when approaching women, and, too lazy to stay in some form of shape.That doesn’t mean being ripped or buff, but just in the normal weight range.”

    – Can be. But there are guys with extreme ADD, OCD, Turretts, Autism, etc, that need some type of human sexual interaction also and they are not going to get it from non-pros because they are too damn weird.

  40. @ MYG – I agree with you. Read my post again. http://therationalmale.com/2015/04/30/the-political-is-personal/comment-page-6/#comment-99736

    “Also this numbers game of cold approaching is something that a great number of people just cannot do. Walking up and talking to complete strangers like the Hare Krishnas do in airports? Yeah, no. That is totally unnatural for everyone who is not an extreme extrovert and something a great many people have issues with and even find ethically questionable.”

    Can you explain ‘ethically questionable’ in this context?

    It’s interesting you you the analogy of the Hare Krishnas. The Hare Krishnas started using flower-giving as gestures to play on peoples feelings of reciprocity. And that one thing turned them from an almost broke charity into a multi million dollar charity.

    From Robert Caildini’s Six Principles of Influence;
    “As humans, we generally aim to return favors, pay back debts, and treat others as they treat us. According to the idea of reciprocity, this can lead us to feel obliged to offer concessions or discounts to others if they have offered them to us. This is because we’re uncomfortable with feeling indebted to them.”

    So, not unlike many men, we find it unnatural to simply cold approach a woman with the intent for it to eventually lead to sex. And this instinct can be traced back to our tribal days (rejection in the tribe could lead to being completely ostracized or even killed). And yes, you will get knockbacks, ignored, frowned at, laughed at, and even screamed at, BUT, from my experience cold approaching women (especially during the day), if you approach with ‘outcome independence’ it’s just another verbal interaction with a person – no big deal. You’ll soon know if she wants to engage or not.

    I think you need more field experience and less theory based hypothesis.

  41. “Can you explain ‘ethically questionable’ in this context?”

    Bothering someone, invading their personal space.

    “It’s interesting you you the analogy of the Hare Krishnas. The Hare Krishnas started using flower-giving as gestures to play on peoples feelings of reciprocity. And that one thing turned them from an almost broke charity into a multi million dollar charity.”

    I don’t recall flowers but they are still in airports and at a number of festivals approaching people with their books/literature and asking for donations. They also sell stickers at football games. One of my best friends from high school joined them. While we were in college he was doing that. He’s currently a top salesman for a very successful company and he attributes it to his days cold approaching with the HKs. I’ve also heard that a few PUA gurus come from an HK background.

    “I think you need more field experience and less theory based hypothesis”.

    I’ve never had to cold approach a stranger to get laid, thank god. But I have tried to mentor some aspie friends and one friend with some sort of personality disorder and those guys simply could not be helped. There seems to be a lot of mental problems with people these days. I’m not getting a lot of eye contact with people and it seems social skills are no longer a thing in the general populace.

    1. @MYG,

      Also this numbers game of cold approaching is something that a great number of people just cannot do. Walking up and talking to complete strangers like the Hare Krishnas do in airports?

      Common mistake about Game. It’s not about numbers it’s about consistency and the insight necessary to learn from it.

      Any idiot can go make the infamous 1,000 approaches in 2 weeks if he tried, but very few men can make 1 approach per week for a year.

      52 approaches is more than most men make in a lifetime.

  42. Glenn,

    The left has made a HUGE tactical error in opposing Prohibition and the government power behind it. They thereby call into question ALL government power.

    Not only that, Prohibition is in the main used to oppress men. And more specifically poor men and young men and men of color.

    “Look, we understood we couldn’t make it illegal to be young or poor or black in the United States, but we could criminalize their common pleasure. We understood that drugs were not the health problem we were making them out to be, but it was such a perfect issue…that we couldn’t resist it.” – John Ehrlichman, White House counsel to President Nixon on the rationale of the War on Drugs.

    And yet every time I bring up Prohibition elsewhere it gets censored. (Thanks Rollo for being open).

    One thing left out – I may have missed it jumping in at the end – is that socialism is inherently women’s politics. Just look at the numbers. The Democrats are the woman’s Party. The Republicans are favored by men.

    On top of that look who is taking on Prohibition directly. Rand Paul. The woman from the woman’s party is just hinting.

    It is not just the welfare and social services that are set up to oppress men. Criminal justice is in on the act as well. More women than men support Prohibition.

    The good thing? If we can break Prohibition a LOT of the other structure will be called into question. Government power in general will get a question mark.

  43. I leave this on anti-Prohibition leftist sites to good effect:

    Every tax, every regulation comes with it an army of bureaucrats and behind that an army (with guns) of enforcers.

    He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

  44. “Blaximus,
    “What I’m talking about is the scenario of the husband losing his employment ( and maybe running out of unemployment benefits. There was a time when unemployment bennies did not go on for years ) and the family deciding that they needed some help. If the man was present in the home, help would not be forthcoming.”

    Please refer me to a documentary or a study regarding this. Thanks.”

    Cohabitation and Marriage Rules in State TANF Programs:
    http://www.aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/09/CohabitationMarriageRules/index.shtml

    Our surveys show that the incentives of TANF-eligible women with children to cohabit or marry are affected by TANF program rules. The way in which incentives are affected depends on the financial resources of the male with whom the woman might cohabit or marry and on the male’s relationship to the children. The relevant TANF rules that affect these incentives are those governing eligibility, how the basic grant is structured, how blended families are treated, how unrelated cohabitors are treated, and work rules.

    Concerning eligibility, our main finding is that if a male has financial resources, TANF provides the greatest disincentive to form and/or maintain a biological family, and the least disincentive, if not an incentive, to form an unrelated cohabitor family. In a biological family, where the male is the father of all the children, he must be included in the unit and his resources counted. In an unrelated cohabitor family, where he is father of none of the children, he is not included and his resources are not counted. In addition, most states disregard unrelated cohabitor vendor and cash payments to the TANF recipient and her children.

    Step-parent and blended families fall somewhere in between these two cases, with rules varying from state to state. For stepparent families, where the male is unrelated to any of the children and is married to the mother, a little less than half the states require that the stepfather be included in the unit and about an equal number require his exclusion. If included, his resources are fully counted and, if excluded, only a portion of his resources are counted. For blended families, where the male is the father of some of the children the majority of states (65 percent) treat such families as biological and require the male to be included in the unit and his resources are counted. In most of the remaining states, marital status does matter, and blended families are treated more favorably if they are unmarried than if they are married.”

  45. @Stuttie

    “I stand by my comment that Men who need pro’s are just scared of being rejected (understandable) and too lazy to run/lift/box/etc”.

    Well, that is not an universal truth. Yes, some guys use prostitutes as an escape from their fear to ask a girl out. and there are others (like me) who used to go out alone, do cold approach for a year and simply got tired of trying just for a one-night hookup.

    From a certain age on, men go to prostitutes simply because time is more limiting as commodity than money. If you don’t work, then it is reasonable that you hit bars and stuff as you have plenty of time and scarce money. If money comes to the table and time becomes limited, a man starts prioritizing time over money.

    Furthermore, when a man is engaged in a career/project that offers him an emotional reward (loving what you do, feeling happy after work), you no longer deposit “happiness” in penetrating a girl. Sure, if a girl is available and she opens for penetration, the man will gladly go in. but if the legs are closed, then the man will continue pursuing happiness in his daily endeavors.

    Some people are happy learning to have sex with women. Others have learned to find happiness in other things and assign sex the value/reward of fulfilling a physiological need.

    @MaleYaleGrad

    “Also this numbers game of cold approaching is something that a great number of people just cannot do. Walking up and talking to complete strangers like the Hare Krishnas do in airports? Yeah, no. That is totally unnatural for everyone who is not an extreme extrovert and something a great many people have issues with and even find ethically questionable”.

    Indeed. Not only that, there are countries where it is not well seen and women will turn you down politely yet firmly.

    In the Netherlands, it is very rare to socialize with strangers in bars or even in the street. People socialize in activities such as sports, and courses. Nightclubs are off the grid and rarely work, unless it is a college night in which people at the club is from your class and you already know them. Same goes in the Iberic Peninsula.

  46. @TheRedBaron

    “Someone even said that there is this ‘Universal Experience Fallacy’ – wher e one thinks that if he likes skiing and works hours practicing it everyone else should like it as well and if they don’t they are just lazy or have given up on skiing unlike him. Everyone has different interests and is into different type of women. The same seems to be true for preference for sexual experience or lack of thereof for the celibate types”.

    This.-

  47. Fredrick Welfare: “Boil it down: consent is not a preliminary to the act, it is an evaluation after the fact. Consent must be achieved before and as a result.
    (snip)
    “Communicative agreement or reason involves securing that agreement before the deal, during the deal, and after the deal. Basic Contract Law 101. Of course, there are instances of fraud and deceit, humans are what they are, generally however, consent is a function of satisfaction not of the appearance of wilingness.”
    (snip)
    I won’t belabor the point and won’t say it again, but you are absolutely wrong and will not win in court. Consent, consensuality, consensus must be maintained through a transaction or the deal is fraudulent. Good luck with the judge.”

    I must admit that I’ve never taken basic Contract law 101. By the sound of things, neither have you if you don’t know the difference between criminal litigation and civil litigation. Fraud litigation, for example, is a term used to describe a civil lawsuit that involves one party suing another party for engaging in fraudulent conduct. If we are speaking of lack of (sexual) consent the issue wouldn’t be fraud but sexual assault/rape.

    Basic protections for defendants accused of a crime:
    1) No ex post facto law. Art. I, §9 and 10 (Constitution, yo!)
    “If an act was lawful when it was performed, the performer can not be convicted of a crime as a result of a law enacted after the performance”

    2) Mens rea, must be established. This is an essential factor in whether they will be declared guilty or innocent of the crime.

    1. snippity snap snippity snap I am not talking about a grandfather clause. Contract 101 means simply two people agree that one will do X for the other and the other will doY in exchange. If either reneges, the contract can be enforced for damages! Snip on over to dating, courting and sexual actions. Person A gets consent to do an action to the body of person B = consent. Person B claims that Person A did not comply with the consensual agreement and violated her/him. Go to court, and the judge will say, today, that Person A is wrong because Person B did not like what was done, details details details, and therefore consent was not established and maintained. Arguments 50 years ago went in the reverse direction: if person A secured consent, that was final, whatever the result, person B could not complain because they had “consented.” But, times have changed, and the legal definition of consent covers the entire duration of the relationship, not simply a gate-opening. Hell, someone can come back years later and claim non-consensual conduct, etc etc. Probably won’t win, but look around you and note who is getting called out for ancient ways. Of course, if someone does not pronounce foul quickly after an event, then ulterior motives are active, but the point is that consent is part of a contract and satisfaction is the result of a fulfilled contract. Consent is not license!

  48. @Sun Re; Your question about how understand how left vs right helps men is besides the point. I’m talking about the truth versus the abstract, fantasy narrative presented about politics in these conversations. Tell me, how does seeing the FI as deterministic of the political help men? And I’ve been teaching this whole thread, explaining the many problems with Rollo’s ideas about politics and citing many, many facts that support my contention as to how crucial the political is to where we find ourselves now – with almost no substantive engagement in return. Why? Because most westerners are never taught the history of the left, particularly in the 20th century.

    You ignore all that and present a trivial left vs. right dichotomy for me to justify, and you wonder why I conclude you aren’t informed at all on this subject? And ignore everything I’ve already said? Do better, Sun, really.

    The truth of the history of how we got here is what I’m presenting. I’m not taking sides nor advocating for the right at all. Read my comments, I never do that. I’m merely laying out the incredibly clear record of how the policies and social changes we are experiencing were directly designed and implemented by leftists. That they are in part driven by the FI is something I concede, but to claim politics is subordinate to the FI? Horseshit and such a statement ignores huge swaths of evidence to the contrary.

    @Rollo – My comments are not designed to impress you or anyone here. But yes, I’m intensely frustrated by how ignorant many in the manosphere are about the recent political history and how politics gets us here. Your breezy dismissal of the political as driven by the FI is the same kind of crap you can hear from Stardusk or Bar Bar or political dingbats like Roosh et all. You don’t like that I classify them that way? I’ll debate anyone of them on these topics – hell, I’ll debate all of them as the same time and reduce them to bumbling idiots in 15 minutes. I’ve already done so on their channels and I can tell you, they have nothing more to offer than your repetitive whining about how you don’t want to do politics or get into a “left vs. right” argument. I’m doing history, you’re doing hyperbole. ‘

    But let’s try and get more precise here:

    1. Essentially, you claim that the FI is an ultimate cause and see politics as a proximate cause. Then why did the state all of the sudden only set out to destroy the family and adopt incredibly masculine hostile policies 60 years ago? Why did academia become overrun by Marxism and Social Justice Theory and basically abandon “the classics”? These were the necessary conditions for the leftist takeover of the elite institutions of our society – how did the FI give rise to these specific developments?

    2. It’s unprecedented for a social structure like the nuclear family to disintegrate in 2-3 generations. Why didn’t the FI do this sooner?I mean, it’s been there all along. My answer; Gosh, it was the express policies of the left that instrumentalized it. And the politics of the left emanated from a much broader set of drivers than the FI, as I’ve tried to explicate here.

    The thread of thought that gets us here includes Bentham, Mills, Condorcet, Hegel, Marx, Engels etc – that happened because of the FI? They told us what they wanted to do to society, and now they’ve finally gotten it done. When the political drivers are so clear and the historical evidence is so clear as to how the ideology and use of state force created the disaster we are living in, I’m loathe to instead lay it on wooly, abstract ideas that don’t seem to leave the same pile of evidence.

    2. Rollo – “FI Determinism” – It’s you who has the high mountain to climb here. You invented this concept of the FI and now imbue it with all these amazing powers. First off, just so the audience here is clear, there is no academic agreement on the FI so you are all on your own here Please, flesh out the mechanics of how it works, and please separate the FI from other biological drivers like the sex drive and the urge to reproduce.

    Others here conflate the FI with all biological drivers, and that’s probably the problem with this dialog. Please, also put some boundaries on the FI – like what other forces are at work alongside it. If you conflate all intersexual dynamics with the FI, that’s ridiculous.

    In the end, you aren’t listening Rollo. I never said that the FI isn’t a driver of some sort. But what’s implied in your commentary is a hierarchy of these drivers and that the FI is really what’s giving rise to the politics. Society and complex social systems don’t work that way.

    A rational statement that is based in reality goes something like this. The FI is opportunistic and the politics of the left gave license and power to it because it was very helpful for leftists to achieve power. That’s an intelligent statement which sees the politics and more basic human impulses as relevant and interacting in ways that harm men. Why you and many here are repulsed by understanding the history of leftist politics and how it is responsible for the cultural cataclysm the West is experiencing is a mystery to me. But don’t take a superior intellectual pose while rejecting tons of evidence, really, that’s fucking ridiculous.

  49. I find no small amount of humor in people arguing with the Eliot Rogers troll Lone Survivor.

    Knee slappingly funny really.

    I mean, what the fuck does he know about game, let alone be qualified to denigrate it? The man can’t get laid if he doesn’t offer money up front to a whore on the side of the road, fer Chrissake. There’s nothing wrong with going to a whore, but that doesn’t make his advice on women or his criticism of men who can get women without having to solicit their services on Craig’s List relevant..

    Arguing with him about PUA is pointless. He literally has no frame of reference that confers any level of merit to his words. He’s the art critic who cannot even draw the goofy mouse on the bubble gum wrapper.

    TL;DR – when you want relevant advice or instruction regarding painting, talk to an artist. Any man can buy a painting, but few can create one. Buying that painting does not make you a talented painter.

  50. Glenn
    May 6th, 2015 at 7:45 am

    I’m not so well versed in the politics as you and a lot of what I used to know I have forgotten. I have other interests. But you are quite correct in all you lay out. I came at it from the other end. Living it. Being a “revolutionary.” My former self (of 40 years ago ) disgusts me. But the plan was all laid out. SJWs were manufactured en mass. And so here we are.

    And the most damaging of the efforts is something that neither right nor left care to contemplate. The divorce laws. The marriage contract. And it barely gets touched on in these forums except as a lament. That really is the core of the issue. Most of the rest is window dressing.

    For those of you who like Jesus (not my cuppa) he got it right in his admonitions about divorce. Not even the Christians care to look at that one too closely (at all). The one thing the Catholic Church does right is to forbid it. The main thing American Catholics do wrong is to ignore the Church on that one (well they are wrong on quite a few other points).

  51. @ Rollo – interesting how this thread has gone from Political is Personal and ends up more ‘Game Works’…

    @ lone

    “Well, that is not an universal truth. Yes, some guys use prostitutes as an escape from their fear to ask a girl out. and there are others (like me) who used to go out alone, do cold approach for a year and simply got tired of trying just for a one-night hookup.

    I’ll bet you didn’t really get tired. I’ll push all-in that you tried a few awkward cold approaches and simply gave up if you didn’t get anywhere. Why didn’t you get anywhere? Because you are a Game & PUA denialist that refuses to learn the basics. And, why does it have to be a one-night hook up? You don’t “hook-up” unless you have a plate to spin. Most women I’ve picked up end up being mini LTR’s / plates for a few months.

    “From a certain age on, men go to prostitutes simply because time is more limiting as commodity than money. If you don’t work, then it is reasonable that you hit bars and stuff as you have plenty of time and scarce money. If money comes to the table and time becomes limited, a man starts prioritizing time over money.”

    From a certain age? Hardly. I’d say younger men visit pro’s to pop the cherry way more than older established men.
    Dude, if you hit bars (and have a few drinks), you need money. Try going out 2-3 times a week and paying $7/8 per drink.

    “Furthermore, when a man is engaged in a career/project that offers him an emotional reward (loving what you do, feeling happy after work), you no longer deposit “happiness” in penetrating a girl.”

    Sure I fucking do. Regardless of money and time, I always have time to fuck a new hottie. One of my hobbies IS fucking women.

    “Sure, if a girl is available and she opens for penetration, the man will gladly go in. but if the legs are closed, then the man will continue pursuing happiness in his daily endeavors.
    Some people are happy learning to have sex with women. Others have learned to find happiness in other things and assign sex the value/reward of fulfilling a physiological need.”

    This paragraph alone tells me you have issues that we here at TRM just can’t fix. I’m out.

  52. Fredrick Welfare
    May 6th, 2015 at 8:03 am

    Mixing up the gene pool has some advantage over inbreeding. Social structure is not one of them.

    1. Tis true, but rare is the culture that permits diversity and does not practice exogamy. As you have experienced, social disapproval, noncooperation, rejection or non-acceptance is not entirely political, but it is that too, it is also biological and historical. The preferred matings are always very close and this causes the inbreeding or genetic problem. First cousin marriages is a form of inbreeding that may lower intelligence (however, intelligence is modified by financial capital also). Certainly any form of incest between immediate family is inbreeding, but several myths (think religion) advance sexual relationships between immediate kin – is there a role model problem. Some religions have gradually eradicated degrees of relatedness from acceptable pairings, but the sheer fact that people often marry within their religion is a form of inbreeding, that is, inter-faith marriages are prohibited…with exceptions. The inter-racial divide is too obvious to restate, but it is not preferred by any cultural group, but it may be tolerated. Cross-cultural or inter-ethnic pairings are by far inferior to pairings where the mates are from the same ethnic group. I do not want to seem racist or ethnocentric, but this is the history and the social climate and there are many exceptions. But, the point is that there are preferred matings and there are exogamous rules prohibiting many pairings. AND, we find this out by trail-and-error instead of knowing this as common knowledge.

  53. stuttie
    May 6th, 2015 at 8:25 am

    Yes. The two week plates. The six months plates. Six months is the usual breaking point – she will only go beyond that if she is very determined on you. Rare. You have to go through a lot of them to find that one. And she will be loathe to admit it. It greatly reduces her power.

  54. @GhostOfJefferson

    Hey, buddy… don’t get mad at me. I am just a messenger.

    On the contrary, you should be happy that there is one guy wandering around who has sex with prostitutes and cannot compete with your game and PUA skills.

  55. @ ghost

    The problem with the wholesale ignoring and dismissing of Game denialists such as Lonestar is that if one person sets up camp in a unique & highly respected RP blog such as TRM, then some newbies may get discombobulated about RP truths. Most newbs will probably land on Rollo’s home page, read one or tow posts and start mouthing off, not having bothered to read year 1-3 or any archives. As frustrating as it is, we should always argue/debate/take down anyone trying to pull the crabs back in the barrel; and not let them steer the narrative in any thread.

  56. I find weird that aside from the people who share their opinion with me and Rollo (who is standing in the other side of the fence, but has been centered and polite), all the supposedly alpha-winning-PUA-superdupermastersofpussy have ran wild on my opinions.

    This kind of puts their worth and expertise in doubt.

    If I discovered the ultimate formula to bang any pussy I wanted, I would not reveal it to anyone. On the contrary, I would keep it as a secret.

  57. “Contract 101 means simply two people agree that one will do X for the other and the other will doY in exchange. If either reneges, the contract can be enforced for damages! Snip on over to dating, courting and sexual actions. Person A gets consent to do an action to the body of person B = consent. Person B claims that Person A did not comply with the consensual agreement and violated her/him. Go to court, and the judge will say, today, that Person A is wrong because Person B did not like what was done, details details details, and therefore consent was not established and maintained.”

    The above would apply to a business exchange, NOT a sexual exchange/encounter. It might apply in the case of an engagement ring or some sort of communal property…all of which are civil litigation also, btw.

    Noncommission of a crime can never equal the commission of a crime. That violates the spirit of Constitutional law. The ONLY grounds for criminal charge for nonconsent would be if consent was NOT given or withdrawn BEFORE the completion of the exchange. And mens rea (criminal intent…iow, the accused would have to be aware that consent had been withdrawn/not given) would have to be proven in court also. That’s the reason those university kangeroo courts for sexual assault accusations would never hold up in a real court of law.

    1. I recognize your disbelief. But, the definition of the sexual scene involves an ethical awareness. Consent is like a contract, it is not like a license. You want to believe that one an agreement is formed, you can do whatever you want without consequences, but no businessman would agree to that line of conduct. Firstly, the contract is enforceable (if it is in ink you must do it, clear) and secondly a contract that is not complied with is actionable. Same with consent and you can see the effects of this in all of those family court cases where so-and-so loses custody! Catch my drift. Marriage is a contract. Sexual behavior requires consent, like a contract. And you can bet those college cases of sexual accusation/assault, like the one’s in the military, will be assented to by state and federal prosecutors and judges…with exceptions!

  58. TRB,

    In the US they get young boys addicted to sex

    No “getting” required. All it takes is a lot of testosterone. I have the good fortune/curse of coming from a high testosterone family. It keeps you interested in sex for a very long time. Obsessed.

    You can shut it down. (some) Become a Beta. Be a loser. That lowers it. There are studies.

  59. @ M. Simon – Thanks. And leftists almost never argue with me about my account of the political history as they know I’m correct. In fact, educated right wingers don’t either. The only arguments I get are from people “who don’t do politics” or who are “sick and tired of the left-right divide” or who say “both sides are evil”. These kind of positions are actually cop outs. Even worse – again something you guys don’t even begin to understand – such a position empowers the left. You see they know that what they are really in a battle to control is the global “memeplex” and the institutions that control it. But most right wingers and “independents” or people who reject politics don’t even know what the memeplex is. Yet leftists have been using that mechanism as a vehicle of change for decades, counting on your ignorance.

    And you of course home in on the crucial aspect of what the left has destroyed – the family and marriage. Yes, the “lament” is common but then we get handwaving on how it happened and a reflexive rejection of disgust left vs. right arguments (which I’m not even making).

    This will be my last post on this thread. I’m just going to lay out some more bullets for you guys to consider.

    – There were 500 Soviet agents in the FDR administration. At least two direct aides were GRU operatives.
    – After the collapse of the Soviet Union, they opened their security archives for a time (Putin ended that). As an aside, Brezhnev did an amazing memoir too that validated many things. But the archives showed the Senator Eugene McCarthy was correct in every accusation he made. The entire idea of “red baiting” and “McCarthyism” is a leftist meme to silence critics of the left. Just as misogyny is used to shut men down and say, “Islamophobia” is used to shut down criticism of Islam.
    – Stalin was the head of the Communist party. Those who were communists at that time swore allegiance to Stalin – making them traitors.

    Perhaps the biggest victory of the left has been hiding their victory. In fact, they’ve gone so far as to sabotage the U.S. National Archives as there are many historic documents and artifacts of all this. But when the rare researcher actually attempts to access these documents – referenced in directories published by the govt – they often find that documents which were damning to leftists are damaged or missing. And at the same time, the left complains about how the country is sliding away from their ideology. Gosh, how does that square with 94 federal welfare programs? With a vast state that has exploded since the 1930s in exactly the way leftists wanted it to? Or how Marxism has overtaken the humanities?

    It doesn’t. You’ve been lied to for your entire lives about our current politics as the left can really go about their agenda in secret as it doesn’t have popular support. And of course, they don’t care because they think “the people” are a bunch of morons who they need to fix and manage in the first place.

    No more politics from me. Let’s get back to empowering ourselves, getting laid and being amazing and powerful men.

  60. Lone Survivor
    May 6th, 2015 at 8:49 am

    You have the wrong conception of Game. It doesn’t give you access to any woman you want (she might be a lesbian). It gives you access to some women. As opposed to none. Which is why teaching game is not much of a loss. You can’t get them all. She might prefer short guys.

  61. @ M Simon – yeah, my plates spin on average 3-6 months. I simply get bored/sick of their presence, pussy or personality (the PPP effect? lol). It’s frickin ‘work’ pretending to enjoy a women’s company when you really only fleetingly enjoy her wet hole/s. Maybe the same way a whore pretends to enjoy a John??

    The routine/mundane/predictable bang just doesn’t do it for me anymore. I like being hungry and having to hunt; and I get a certain satisfaction from conquering new pussy, even if it is a tag and release.

  62. Glenn,

    I’m kind of a meme guy myself. Short pithy phases that encapsulate a way of thinking. Thus my:

    Every tax, every regulation comes with it an army of bureaucrats and behind that an army (with guns) of enforcers.

    Mentioned up thread. I have lots of others. I think that way. In part because my typing is one handed. I like expressing myself in as few keystrokes as possible

  63. @Lone Survivor

    If I discovered the ultimate formula to bang any pussy I wanted, I would not reveal it to anyone. On the contrary, I would keep it as a secret.

    That is what is known as a hasty generalization fallacy. While game websites and blogs may use phrases that might infer substantial success with women, only a fool would actually believe that game is about some “ultimate formula to bang any pussy.” Even women cannot legitimately bang any man they want (nor would they), and they have substantial eons of evolution on their side.

    You also say that you would keep “the ultimate formula to bang any pussy” a secret. This is revealing because it says that you actually have follow-on thoughts in your mind as to what you would do if you actually discovered such a mythical formula. Since you have follow-on thoughts, I can only conclude that you still harbor fantasies of finding some ultimate secret of women that will let you fuck any one of them you wish.

    This means that, either you’re a woman poorly pretending (trolling) to be a man. Or, you still haven’t swallowed the red pill and realized that there is no such thing. You’re choking on the red pill. You can’t actually accept the truth you claim to know, and instead want to believe that there is some easy path towards getting women to pay attention to you.

    Know this now, there is no easy path, there are no magic words, there is no “ultimate formula to bang any pussy” you want.

    For the trolls among us, or those wondering why bother responding to trolls like this. I respond here because this is worth repeating. There’s undoubtedly a lot of guys who come here and actually have the absurd nonsense in mind that “game” is some “magic” that gets women wet. It’s not, it’s simply the recognition and proper application of social dynamics for the benefit of you as a man. It is not easy for most men to come by on their own, since men are not evolved social creatures.

  64. Fredrick Welfare
    May 6th, 2015 at 9:07 am

    Not guilty is not the same as not true. All not guilty says is not enough evidence. Now in that particular case it may be that an error was made. But overall Joe was correct. As the Soviet archives showed.

  65. My boy Glenn going off! lol, I have limited knowledge of the politics being discussed but some of your points are pretty clear.

  66. “I recognize your disbelief. But, the definition of the sexual scene involves an ethical awareness. Consent is like a contract, it is not like a license. You want to believe that one an agreement is formed, you can do whatever you want without consequences, but no businessman would agree to that line of conduct. Firstly, the contract is enforceable (if it is in ink you must do it, clear) and secondly a contract that is not complied with is actionable. Same with consent and you can see the effects of this in all of those family court cases where so-and-so loses custody! Catch my drift. Marriage is a contract. Sexual behavior requires consent, like a contract. And you can bet those college cases of sexual accusation/assault, like the one’s in the military, will be assented to by state and federal prosecutors and judges…with exceptions!”

    Starting at the end first. Yes, the university kangeroo court process imitates what has become the military courts martial process per sexual assault claims. It hit the military first. I could go on about that topic for a long long while it is complicated and unnecessary…suffice it to say what washes in the courts martial process would be a violation of the constitutional rights of the average US citizen outside of the military court martial law. Universities are encountering difficulties in civil court and will likely be sued into the ground for doing same. Neither the extralegal university court nor the military ones would pass in a civilian court of law.

    The rest is just a repeat of the same. You’re mixing civilian law with criminal law. They aren’t the same. Marriage law is civil law.

  67. “You’re mixing civilian law with criminal law. They aren’t the same.”

    Excuse me, that should have been “you’re mixing CIVIL (not civilian) law with criminal law”.

  68. Fredrick Welfare
    May 6th, 2015 at 9:07 am

    Even setting aside all questions of spying, Lattimore had a quite public paper trail as a defender of the Stalin purge trials. In an infamous statement made in 1938, the expert on China, Mongolia, and Turkestan declared that the judicial massacres in Moscow “sound like democracy to me” Thus, it appeared to Lattimore that the arrest, beating, drugging, forced confessions, and summary executions of thousands of Soviet political and military leaders demonstrated that the political elite could be held accountable by their subjects.

    As pointed out not long ago by the historian Ronald Radosh, none other than Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., among the most famous liberals of our time, commented acerbically on his endorsement of “Stalinist justice.” Mr. Schlesinger said it “sounds to me like fellow-traveling.”

    http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=14546

    ================================================

    But all that is history and of little interest except to those who lived through those times. But the result is obvious. Bernie Sanders – a straight up Communist – is contemplating a run for President as a Democrat. Something unthinkable 50 years ago.

    But the crux of the matter is this:

    “Political tags–such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth–are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.” – Robert A. Heinlein

    Our country was founded by anti-Statists. A rare occurrence in history. The question now is can that idea be revived or will it be:

    “All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.” – Benito Mussolini

  69. @ Jeremy – totally agree. I’d even go so far as saying that learning & internalizing Game is, and has been, more important for my quality of life overall than the ‘better understanding’ of women.
    I’m finding that viewing & living life via a Red Pill lens has improved everything significantly (which is why I can’t comprehend Game denilists).

    It’s funny because no matter how many trolls appear here spewing up “it doesn’t work” bullshit – I know that it does; because I put it into practice and had positive results.

  70. @Frerick Welfare

    You have thoroughly outlined as to ‘why’ the nuclear family has out lived it’s usefulness in a modern day context.

    The so called intolerance of the monopoly of the ‘Patriarchy’ as possibly one or the main contributing factor. A sort of one best way at the expense of all other orientations. Okay.

    It seems to me that the implicit understanding of male (feral) polygamy and complete ignorance of female (feral) hypergamy, or the default women good man bad epistemology is not enough to through away all of the benefit of millennia of Western Society.

    Hasn’t it been demonstrated in a number of sociological studies that a strong mother father bond is ‘best’ for upbringing children?

    Isn’t the zero sum game that the philosophical underpinning of relativism of the our time and the hypergamous infused raunch culture that we have today is just as intolerant?

    Couldn’t tolerance be achieved without such a harsh disregard for the past, (Post-modernism)? Perhaps, even gay couples that are rearing children are offended. Another words all experiences, perceptions and utterances are equal. Except of coarse for the notions of the old gaurd.

    Or aren’t advances in Individual freedom, science and technology, unequaled achievement in wealth creation or a high standard of living, life expectancy, infant mortality rates etc., is not consequential or relevant to proven ideas beneficial to man kind?

    Isn’t there a greater morass impending?

    Do we not care about the economic implications of the provisioning (or socialist wealth re-dsitribution of collectivist models) that the hard working ‘beta male’ is being greatly discouraged? Especially when you add in the demographic ‘doom’ of the aging populations.

    Another words the awakening of men that the marriage check has bounced has no negative effect.

    It is my observation that bitches don’t like to work hard. And now they don’t want to have children when a lap dog would suffice.

    thanks

  71. @Mad Yale Grad

    “Game by itself is a contradiction, it is an attempt of people with no resources, no money and nothing to offer to be at the same level of people who live exciting and fulfilling lives. In other words, PUA are themselves the “betas” they point their fingers at.”

    – Bar Bar elaborates on that in his video and to some extent its true. Of course commenters here will protest because their idea of game is self-improvement … but there is plenty of evidence on the countless PUA sites, forums, videos and workshops of “fake it til you make it” or “fake it even if you never make it” advice.

    That’s just shit piled on shit. Alpha and Beta are states of mind, not finance. Oftentimes the men with the least amount of resources are doing the most fucking of random women. If this were not true, how exactly would you propose to explain the 70% illegitimacy rate in the black community in America? Are those all immaculate conceptions? Poor men get tons of women. The men of the black community, being raised by women, tend to have the greatest population of men who understand how to game women. If you actually believe that there are no learnable social dynamics involved in getting women to want you, then please explain those facts.

    Also this numbers game of cold approaching is something that a great number of people just cannot do. Walking up and talking to complete strangers like the Hare Krishnas do in airports? Yeah, no. That is totally unnatural for everyone who is not an extreme extrovert and something a great many people have issues with and even find ethically questionable.

    Just because you embrace your particular flavor of asperger syndrome does not mean it’s normal or healthy.

  72. Jeremy
    May 6th, 2015 at 11:00 am

    Yup. I was spinning plates like crazy (about 5 a year for 10 years – I was kinda selective) when I had near zero resources.

  73. Back to “Obesity Culture”

    I am a fat slobby disgusting repulsive unhealthy woman.

    All men are required to be sexually attracted to me regardless if I am a fat slobby disgusting repulsive unhealthy woman or not….because I am entitled to it.

    Any man who is repulsed by my fat slobby disgusting unhealthiness is repulsed because he is a bad evil defective man.

  74. It’s somehow more fatalistic than that actually. Game deniers think like this:

    “I’m fat, and ugly, and there’s no method in the world to make me skinny and attractive. Because there is a single diet marketing company that makes outrageous claims about making me beautiful and skinny, all diets and workouts are bullshit. I was just unlucky to be born this fat, as opposed to all those lucky guys who were born skinny, and that’s all there is to it, there’s nothing I can do.”

  75. Also, Lone Survivor’s and MYG’s ridiculous point about resources being paramount is laid waste by most high-profile divorce cases. If wealth and capabilities were all it took to keep women happy, why has Donald Trump been married three times? Why was Tiger Woods publicly divorced? Why did Robin Williams marry 3 times and lose his last wife? Why do NFL/NBA players often deal with domestic problems and even divorce? Why does any famous and wealthy man EVER have trouble keeping their woman? If game is so meaningless and self-contradictory… why can’t the most physically attractive and financially attractive among us keep their women happy?

    My answer? Those men have shitty game. They have relied on their fame and fortune to keep women around, but they have zero understanding of how women actually socially test their men for fitness.

    If what Lone Survivor and MYG is saying is true… Then poor black men in the inner city should never be under the gun for child support enough to run from the cops and get shot in the back. Women should be avoiding having sex with such men like the plague, but they don’t. Likewise, women who are married to famous, wealthy, powerful men should *NEVER* seek separation from those men, but they do.

    Strange that actual facts about life demonstrate the absolute futility of arguing against the utility of game, strange until you actually accept reality for what it is.

    1. The Death of the Natural:
      http://www.rooshv.com/death-of-the-natural

      A lot of game denialists say that you’re not actually using game when banging girls, that the girl already likes you. “You get laid in spite of your game, not because of it.” Thirty years ago, I would have absolutely believed this to be true. If your mother didn’t get initial attention from your father, she would try again using various social or professional connections to get on his radar. If he revealed a strange habit on the first date, she would consult with her hens to figure out how to change it. If his income was low, she would encourage him to take on extra training that would ensure a more stable future.

      Today, your mother would not have married your father. If he hesitated to make a move, she would have had dozens of other guys knocking on her door. If he showed a weird quirk on the first date, she would call him creepy to her friends and not respond to his text messages. If he accidentally called her with his jeans, she would think he’s a needy loser. If he was broke with no immediate sign of earning dough, she would indulge in affections from wealthier men on the side. Sadly, game denialists are living in the past when they think that all that is needed for sex to occur is a natural attraction between two people. Today, a natural attraction just gets your foot in the door. It gives you three minutes. If you fuck up then she moves onto the next guy who is more competent at making her vagina drip.

      At the absolute minimum, today’s man must not make game mistakes. He doesn’t have to possess the tightest conversation or weasel game, but he must know what turns on woman. He doesn’t have to be alpha, but he can’t show beta traits. He doesn’t need the best text messaging game, but he can’t reply faster than she does. Denialists can reminisce about the past all they want, but to be sexually successful in today’s world, you need to know more psychology than Freud did in his time and at least a basic understanding of game theory.

  76. @ Rollo-

    “52 approaches is more than most men make in a lifetime.”

    The average man at most makes maybe half that in a lifetime, we are discouraged before we even reach adolescence (little girls are made of sugar and spice and everything nice, little boys are made of slugs and snails and puppy dog tails) and then….

    “You’re so immature…”
    “We know what HE wants…”
    “Let’s be friends first…”
    “My father said he would kick any guy’s ass that hurts me…”
    “I’m looking for a GOOD man…”
    “Let’s just be friends…”
    “it’s not her fault, her hearts in the right place…”
    “Kim’s husband is a GOOD PROVIDER…”
    “My last boyfriend…”
    “All men want is sex…”
    “It’s what’s inside that counts…”
    “If a woman were president…”
    “That creepy guy…”
    “You’re sooo meeen…..”
    “You’re not MY TYPE…”
    “Where have all the good men gone…”
    “Well what do you expect, SHE’S PREGNANT!!!…”
    “He’s too short…”
    “I don’t care, my daddy will buy me a new one…”
    “A woman can do anything a man can do…”
    “Gay guys really understand women…”
    “He’s an asshole, she’s sooooo sweeeet, I can’t believe he did that…”
    “He doesn’t have a clue…”
    “You’re not supposed to ask how many I’ve been with, that’s rude…”
    “That’s ALL they ever think about…”
    “My father REALLY loved my mom, he kissed her every morning and every night, bought her flowers, did EVERYTHING RIGHT, always remembered her birthday, mother’s day, Easter, valentine’s day…”
    “Let’s talk about ‘OUR RELATIONSHIP’…”
    “If he knew anything about women he would….”
    “Family is what matters most…”
    “What would Jesus do?…..”
    “He could be a rapist….”
    “He’s bald!…”
    “But what about ‘their marriage’?….”
    “That’s not very romantic…”
    “Let’s do it for the kids (hostages)…”

    ….Blaaa Blaaa Blaaa Blaaa Blaaa Blaaa Blaaa Blaaa…… to infinity.

  77. Actually, I probably overstated my case with Tiger. He may have decent ability to charm women, but with all the cheating he was doing he really needed grandmaster level game to keep his wife.

  78. @Jeremy

    “Also, Lone Survivor’s and MYG’s ridiculous point about resources being paramount is laid waste by most high-profile divorce cases. If wealth and capabilities were all it took to keep women happy”

    Because you are spectacularly confused.

    ONE THING IS TO FUCK.

    A DIFFERENT THING IS TO HAVE A HEALTHY MARRIAGE.

    Getting laid is all about money.

    Having a good marriage is a lot more difficult. You need a good quality woman AND a healthy relationship. And that is something you won’t get with PUA game. Precissely, because PUA only works with women with low self-esteem in environments where you are not legally accountable.

  79. @Lone Survivor

    Because you are spectacularly confused.
    ONE THING IS TO FUCK.
    A DIFFERENT THING IS TO HAVE A HEALTHY MARRIAGE.
    Getting laid is all about money.
    Having a good marriage is a lot more difficult. You need a good quality woman AND a healthy relationship. And that is something you won’t get with PUA game. Precisely, because PUA only works with women with low self-esteem in environments where you are not legally accountable.

    Are you capable of defining “Healthy” in HEALTHY MARRIAGE? Do you have some nebulous concept or is it just from the “feels” ?? Does fucking have *nothing* to do with a healthy marriage?

    Are you capable of defining what a “quality” woman is?

    I don’t find myself confused, I find you utterly incapable of defining your terms, to the point where you simply subscribe to blue pill idealistic nonsense out of laziness.

  80. @Lone

    Getting laid is all about money.

    contrasted with Rollo’s repeated statements throughout his writing and this thread that he was getting laid the most (and the most enthusiastically) when he was dirt poor.

    You’re stating this repeatedly, and there’s guys here who can absolutely unequivocally call bullshit from their own experiences. I can say that some of the poorest motherfuckers I’ve ever seen have been shagging the hottest chicks far hotter than I could pull through Game or afford with cash.

    Getting laid is all about the money if you have no other Game would be a correct statement. To make the blanket statement that it’s just about the money period is incredibly ignorant. Really, you’re just making demonstrably false assertions as though they were gospel then wondering why we take a shit on them. Here I’ll spell out why: it’s because they’re simply not true.

  81. Even Affluence plus Looks doesn’t guarantee some girl won’t eventually find a reason to leave you for the next guy with similar affluence and better looks or better game. Like you quoted from Roosh, at this point, all men need to understand something of female psychology or accept the consequences.

  82. @Jeremy

    “Are you capable of defining “Healthy” in HEALTHY MARRIAGE?”

    Good and effective communication going both ways (sex is included as it is a way to communicate love), clearly defined roles for each member of the couple, both members getting their needs mutually met.

    I know people who are in this situation. OF COURSE THEY ARE A MINORITY (finding one woman who has not been damaged nor brainwashed by feminism is really difficult).

  83. @Lone Survivor

    Oh, wait, how embarrassing. It seems I was confused while reading your most recent reply to me.

    Lets review it in detail. I’ll repost one more time, mostly for the record…

    Lone Survivor

    May 6th, 2015 at 2:31 pm
    @Jeremy

    “Also, Lone Survivor’s and MYG’s ridiculous point about resources being paramount is laid waste by most high-profile divorce cases. If wealth and capabilities were all it took to keep women happy”

    Because you are spectacularly confused.
    ONE THING IS TO FUCK.
    A DIFFERENT THING IS TO HAVE A HEALTHY MARRIAGE.
    Getting laid is all about money.
    Having a good marriage is a lot more difficult. You need a good quality woman AND a healthy relationship. And that is something you won’t get with PUA game. Precissely, because PUA only works with women with low self-esteem in environments where you are not legally accountable.

    So, my comment that you were replying to was discussing high-profile divorce cases. I was discussing wealthy or famous men getting divorced. In order to be divorced, you have to be married first. What you are saying is that having a “good marriage” is a “lot more difficult”. Apparently we need a “quality woman” and a “healthy relationship”.

    So according to you, Donald Trump, Robin Williams, Tiger Woods, Kobe Bryant, virtually every famous man who ever was divorced or separated from their wives:
    1) Were incapable of finding a “quality woman”
    and/or…
    2) Were incapable of having a “healthy relationship”

    I’ll ignore the fact for now that those terms are utterly nebulous to the point of being little more than grasping at mist.

    The idea that wealthy, famous men are incapable of finding “quality women” is utterly laughable. I would literally laugh in your face were you to try to make that claim to me in person. So, on that point, shut up, you cannot make that claim without looking like an idiot.

    The idea that wealthy, famous men are incapable of having a “healthy relationship” is also laughable since most men of accomplishment get to where they are by making friends with the right people. Opportunity doesn’t walk the streets of suburbia looking for someone on their Playstation. Opportunity knocks on the doors of people who get out and mingle and learn how to deal with people in constructive ways while demonstrating high value to people with resources and/or motivation.

    So, either you’re claiming that wealthy and successful, famous men are either/both incapable of finding “quality women” and having “healthy relationships”, or you’re talking about getting laid. Which is it? Are you even capable of seeing how you contradicted yourself within a single comment that was attempting to reply to my comment? Or am I just going to get more blue-pill boilerplate on HEALTHY MARRIAGES from you?

  84. @Rollo

    Ah yes, now this feels absolutely correct to me:

    Looks.

    Assets.

    Game.

    Have two. Three is best, but if you only have one, Game is the most essential.

  85. Lone –

    “HAVE A HEALTHY MARRIAGE”

    FUCK!!

    There is no such thing. Marriage is nothing more than a legal binding contract with legal and financial consequences. That is all marriage is. There is noting more to it.

    “A Healthy marriage”
    “The marriage”
    “our relationship”
    “holy matrimony”
    “the relationship”

    All of these ideas reference an imagined concept that does not really exist. All relationships are temporary. A relationship is only a temporary condition related to a snapshot in time that is always in flux. “The marriage” or “our relationship” or “the relationship” describe a concept you are conditioned to believe is real, but it is not real. People refer to “marriage” and “relationship” like it is a living entity with a power of its own. There are people, emotions, actions and reactions but there is no such thing as “the marriage” or “the relationship”. It does not exist. You are conditioned to believe there exists some nebulous intangible entity identified as “the marriage”, “a healthy marriage”, “our relationship” etc. that has dominion over you and that you must pay allegiance to validate yourself, gain approval and experience intimacy with a woman.

    Know this, THAT SHIT ISNT REAL. It is a fabricated lie and you are conditioned to believe it is real. The intention is to psychologically fuck you over.

    Ever notice that the prescribed thoughts, feelings and behaviors required of you to maintain allegiance to “A healthy marriage” are not the thoughts, feelings and behaviors you are naturally inclined to?

    This is why women will say “we need to work on ‘our relationship’… Their goal is to use “the relationship” or “the marriage” as an authority against you mandating that you change your thoughts and behavior. “A healthy marriage” is an especially acute version of this unreal concept. If you honestly consider this, you will realize that all the requirements for “a healthy marriage” include thoughts that you aren’t permitted to have and behaviors that you are not allowed to perform and others you are required to perform. And the script doesn’t align with your natural tendencies. And part of the script defines your natural tendencies as bad, evil and defective. It is a list of all the things SHE wants you to do, so she can control and manipulate you and optimize her agenda. It is far easier for her to fool you by getting you to succumb to “A healthy marriage” than it is for her to honestly and directly ask you to do or not do things. You may not comply with her request. You are far more likely to comply with “a healthy marriage” if you think it will earn you her sexual intimacy. Men who fall into this trap of pursuing “a healthy marriage” invariably end up with their balls cut off.

  86. @Not born this morning

    Well, that’s actually a good piece of thought. Thanks for that insight.

    You are right, marriage is a contract. I would say that the only context for a marriage contract would be to have children. I have read that a good way to tackle this issue is by avoiding civil marriage and doing only a religious ceremony (for those who are catholic). Also, observe the legislation. In Australia, for example, living under the same roof for 3 months already gives the woman right to claim half of your assets.

    No children? Then no marriage.

    Now, let me turn the question back to you: what do you think a healthy context for having and raising children would be?

    I would also like to hear Rollo’s thoughts on this one, as he is married.

    1. @Sun wukong
      Count me in for Sunday

      @Rollo
      I try one approach a day

      @Glenn
      “Let’s get back to empowering ourselves, getting laid and being amazing and powerful men.”
      Missed you
      @Not born
      Your right about the conditioning
      I would argue from what I observed
      My family made such a wonderful point an me being a guy. So they would point out all the negative things. I used to find my dads gay porn and wonder if gay porn was what men would feel great about. Until I realized what people do called a shit test. I think shit test are a great way to approach. Especially when all goes wrong because it shows you human beings dealing with each other.

  87. I’m not sure how anyone can define a ” Healthy Marriage “. By all socially accepted definitions I’d bet dollars to donuts that males would get the shortest possible end of the marriage stick.

    Marriage is not for the weak willed. I readily admit that when my 1st marriage exploded like a roadside IED, the fact that I ascribed to social definitions of the Healthy Marriage ultimately led to my ex’s hypergamic tendencies to become bulked up as if on steroids.

    IMO, marriage is a job when it comes to the man’s role. You have to set the frame before marriage, and hold that frame throughout. It gets risky because sometimes having children makes men soften their frame. And since we men are the true romantics in this world, we tend to become blinded by love and affection for our family and in this blindness we let slip our frame and eventually crash into the rocks.

    Healthy marriage will be largely subjective. But what is clear is that men must hold frame and do the majority of the heavy lifting. No expectations of appreciation as we understand it. No expectations of love and understanding as we define it.

    Then if and when love, understanding and appreciation happen to appear from time to time it will be twice as satisfying.

    Marriage is a huge and possibly nasty job for men. We don’t get credit for even undertaking the task….but that’s par for the course.

    I used to tell guys not to get married, but I’ve changed my view on that in recent years. Now I tell men to study their partners beforehand, learn the ways of women and how to use them to your best advantage ( oh, look…GAME ) and listen to the tales of marital disasters that abound and take heed to the lessons to be learned.

  88. Remember: Women want Lions. Then they, along with societal nonsense will try to turn the Lion into a Tabby curled up at the foot of the bed.

    Gentlemen, stay away from the catnip. Fuck the kibble and bits.

    Stay a Lion and always keep roaring.

    1. I’ve got other posts to write. I don’t have time for remedial classes with Lone.

      I don’t expect many things, but deductive curiosity is one of them.

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: