The Pareto Principle

Pareto

An interesting side discussion was started in what proved to be a very popular post thread for The War Brides of Europe, and rather than let it disappear beneath a thousand-plus comments I thought I’d pick up on an old post I’ve had in my drafts for a while now.

One of the foundational ideas of Red Pill awareness from the earliest PUA years has been the 80/20 concept – 80% of women want to have sex and / or pair off with the top 20% of men. This has been a fast and loosely defined in terms of subjective sexual market value (SMV) between men and women and the ratio of disparity between those valuations.

In intersexual terms, this 80/20 rule finds its roots in the economic theory known as the Pareto Principle: “80% of your sales come from 20% of your clients.” While I’m not sure the principle is directly translatable, it mirror the general rule of Hypergamy and women’s innate drive to optimize their sexual strategy with who they perceive as the top tier 20% (Alphas) men are fucking the 80% lion’s share of women. Many a despondent Beta picks up on the principle and uses this to justify his failures to connect with women.

I’m of the opinion that the 80/20 rule is often abused to justify men’s failures or successes with women (more often failure), however the fundamental notion is both observable and easily verifiable in-field as well as statistically. It is however important to keep in mind that the 80/20 rule as it applies to Hypergamy is often bastardized in its inverse. The presumption goes that if 80% of women want to have sex with the top 20% of men it should necessarily mean that the top 20% of men are fucking 80% of women. Many a despondent Beta picking up on this dynamic will use this assumption to disqualify himself from Game or give up in futility. More on this later.

As a point of reference, it’s important to remember that Hypergamy doesn’t seek its own level with regard to SMV comparisons. Rather, Hypergamy is always seeking a socio-sexual pairing that is a ‘better than’ exchange for a woman’s own, realistically comparative, SMV. And as I’ve mentioned previously, Hypergamy is always pragmatic about establishing that ‘better than’ SMV exchange with men’s.

While the Red Pill’s expanded definition of Hypergamy encompasses far more than just ‘marrying up‘, the 80/20 sexual selection process is simple enough that even Aunt Giggles in her heyday could illustrate it:

hypergamy-in-a-pic

As you might guess the fundaments of basic Hypergamy are easy to understand, so the tendency is to oversimplify the complexities that really define Hypergamy and how the 80/20 basics play out. And lastly, it’s important to bear in mind the dual nature of women’s Hypergamous filtering, impulses and attendant emotional investments – the 80/20 dynamic applies to both the Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks aspects of Hypergamy, however the characteristics that would optimize the former tend to come at the expense of the latter (and vice versa).

All that said, the 80/20 principle is fairly simple; a majority of women across the broadest SMV spectrum (80%) will always want for a ‘better than’ pairing (both sexual and provisional) than their own comparative SMV.

If the underlying mechanics of Hypergamy-inspired desire were only about a 1 or 2 step difference in SMV the distribution ratio wouldn’t be 80/20. As sophomoric as it is the above graph is relatively accurate: an SMV 3 woman is desirous of an SMV 8 or above man as representative of a Hypergamously optimal pairing (sex and/or provisioning).

For the 80/20 rule to hold true we’re looking at a comparative difference of 5 steps in SMV. Now, granted, this is on the extreme end of the spectrum, and it should also be noted that SMV is also a question of context and based on a woman’s ‘filtering’ perception of a man’s SMV being legitimate. However, this doesn’t alter the ‘better than’ merited pragmatism of Hypergamy.

Whether or not a woman is actually capable of this optimization isn’t relative to understanding the principle. Indeed, with the expansion of instant communication, social emphasis of women’s empowerment and esteem, and the influence social media exercises over the female ego, an SMV 3 woman of today might likely believe she is in fact deserving of a man 5 steps above her own (a good example). But for purposes of understanding how the Pareto principle applies to intersexual dynamics we must focus on the latent purposes for it to exist.

Common Errors

The easiest (or most convenient) mistake to make about this dynamic is to presume that the consolidation of Hypergamy (locking down a man 5 to 1 steps higher in SMV in monogamy) defines the 80/20 rule. Remember, this principle is about desire and women’s expected (entitled?) satisfaction of it, not the actual consolidation (LTR) of that Hypergamous ideal.

In the prior thread the conversation centered on the mistaken idea that the Pareto Principle is not universal or is only observed in some systems, but not in human sexuality. To which I’d argue that in no other system is this principle more evident than intersexual dynamics – and not just among humans but countless other species. It’s unflattering to the disguise in which the Feminine Imperative would put it in, but, whether realizable or not, the 80/20 rule practically defines female desire.

The second mistake it to presume the inverse: that 20% of men actually get 80% of women. Usually this gets trotted out as an equal-for-equal argument that presumes, again, that desire should necessarily translate into consolidation. Betas and lower SMV men do get laid and pair off with women for any number of reasons, but the principle isn’t about who’s actually fucking who. Rather, it’s about who has more access to sexually available women based on their SMV valuation. Nice Guys may finish last, but they do finish eventually – whether they finish ‘well’ is a thought for another post.

A third common mistake, made mostly by women, presumes the goal-state outcome of intersexual dynamics should be to arrive at a monogamous state. This is the consolidation of a female sexual strategy, and because we live in a feminine-primary social order, that committed, monogamous end to women’s sexual strategy is perceived as the socially “correct” goal. At no point is men’s imperative interests (sexual or life-rewarding) a priority, if it’s considered at all, in the Hypergamous equation. In the absence (or disregard) of men’s conflicting interests the Feminine Imperative substitutes what best fits its own interests as the socially ‘appropriate’ goals for men. Then it qualifies ‘manhood’ according to its proxy interests for men, so that any man not measuring up to them are not considered truly ‘men’ by its definition.

Women’s innate Hypergamous nature ensures a distributive model for desire that aligns with the Pareto Principle – even if the overall result of women settling for less than optimal Hypergamy appears to contradict it. Again, it’s important to remember that women’s Hypergamous desires are often not reflected by the outcome of those desires.

Want is not have

The concept that a woman’s Hypergamous imperative wouldn’t be a mutual goal between the sexes is an alien thought to most women.  Much in the same way that men idealistically want to believe women mutually share their concept of love for love’s sake (and free from the conditions of their Burden of Performance), women are mistaken in believing men’s sexual strategy is synonymous with the female strategy and shares a mutual end. By way of feminine solipsism and a social order that only considers women’s imperatives as legitimate, collective feminine social consciousness rarely gives men’s imperatives an afterthought – and then only when they become problematic to the Feminine Imperative.

Women subconsciously reinforce the feminine-correct goal state of LTR monogamy by a continuous, autonomous, expectation of its fulfillment – even when that fulfillment creates cognitive dissonance with their short term vs. long term sexual strategy. It’s part of women’s Hypergamous firmware to do so because it ensures (or tries to) their subconscious need for parental investment and long term security / provisioning.

What women necessarily must disregard is that their own sexual strategy choices are determined by the want to pair with a mate who exceeds her own SMV. Thus, the Pareto principle applies.

In Open Hypergamy I made mention that there is a social transitioning taking place among women where revealing the uglier side of Hypergamy is becoming more acceptable. The degree of comfort with which women have in revealing the machinations of Hypergamy is proportional to their capacity to play the 80/20 game well enough to consolidate on a 20th percentile man (or his closest approximation). For women still uncomfortable with openly embracing the uglier side of Hypergamy concealing the truth about the 80/20 becomes a practical priority. You will find in the future that many of the conflicts you read between Strong Independent Women® of differing social or moral perspectives will be based in their degree of comfort in openly relating the machinations of Hypergamy.

Women for whom keeping the 80/20 rule concealed from men’s popular consciousness (women with less capacity to compete intrasexually) can ill afford to have men aware of their own SMV and how it affects their long term sexual strategy. High value Red Pill aware men have the leisure to exploit Hypergamy and low value Red Pill men aware of their Hypergamous role risk denying women of the resources to provision them in the long term.

The Male Side of the Principle

Way back in the Peak Hypergamy post Hollenhund got me thinking about how the Hypergamous  aspect of the Pareto Principle can become men’s primary source of frustration and apathy:

I have to COMPLETELY OVERCOME all my handicaps to the point where I am BETTER than 80% of men at least.

I have to have my shit together better than the vast majority of men. I’m having a hard enough time just getting to be AVERAGE, but what I need to do in order to have any kind of sex life and get ANY of my sexual needs met AT ALL is be better than the vast majority of guys out there.

So, in other words, you’ll end up killing yourself anyway, but you’ll do it the slow way, by making sure you’ll end up an exhausted wretch with an ulcer, high blood pressure and similar health problems? Because that’s what you’re basically saying there.

I tend to think of how men confront the challenge of their performance burden is a parallel to their understanding of the 80/20 rule. On some level of consciousness men either possess some evolved instinct for it, or they develop some learned understanding of their own role in relation to how the 80/20 dynamic applies to them.

I think much of what frustrates men about assessing their own SMV in a Blue Pill mindset comes from an instinctual understanding of the 80/20 rule and reconciling it with what they’re being socialized to believe women ought to evaluate them for. Before any Game, before any Red Pill awareness, men’s first deductive impression is to classify themselves into SMV respective “leagues“, and women who would or wouldn’t be sexually accessible according to those leagues.

Ironically, even men’s Blue Pill league evaluations fail to account for women’s 1-5 SMV step over evaluation of their own SMV. The equalist agenda teaches men that their leagues should be based on a like-for-like parallel, when Hypergamy really demands men’s SMV be well above that of women.

This of course gets distorted once men begin to become Red Pill aware and over-exaggerate the abstract concept of Alpha and how it applies to themselves. In a way they fall victim to believing they must become an Alpha parody in order to measure up to women’s apex fallacy impression of a top 20% man.

Needless to say Red Pill awareness and applied Game will reveal the truth about the 80/20 rule. Initially it seems like a horribly unjust set of conditions for an ‘average’ man, but the rule is still based on the fundamental biological and psychological underpinnings of Hypergamy, and therefore open to exploits for a Red Pill aware man.

Quality Assurances

Web

In the above example (h/t Young Patriarch) we can see the comparison between a naturalistic, Hypergamous socio-sexual order contrasted with an idealized socio-sexual structure. The Sexual Freedom model mirrors the 80/20 rule, while the Regulated model is representative of an idealized structure designed with the intent to evenly justify pairings according to a distributive monogamy.

As I mentioned earlier, men have an instinctual understanding about how the 80/20 Pareto Principle applies to women’s Hypergamy. And while Game is a modern contingency for it I would argue that the cross-culture concept of a monogamous marriage between men and women was a broader contingency designed not just to counter women’s Pareto-centered sexual strategy, but to ensure a greater majority of (lesser SMV) men had the opportunity to pass on their genetic heritage.

I could point out that the Regulated model above is very representative of an egalitarian model for monogamy based again on the like-for-like presumption, but Hypergamy being what it naturally is will always confound that ideal. However, I have to also point out that the Regulated ideal has always been a convenient selling tool to keep both men and women ignorant of the uglier, visceral nature of the Hypergamous sexual marketplace.

Marriage as a social adaptation serves (or served) as a negotiated buffer against Hypergamy, but it also serves as a perceived buffer against men’s Burden of Performance that would otherwise necessitate the constant super-achievement that Hollenhund describes above. As a social dynamic marriage was a Beta breeding insurance policy that conveniently enough took root about the time human beings began to adopt a largely agrarian lifestyle.

Today equalism and the fantasy of an idealized, mutually beneficial monogamy based on the Old Set of Books is little more than a contingent workaround for the 80/20 rule reality. As this idealism decays and is replaced by either Red Pill awareness or men learning the harsh realities of modern marriage liability the more we will see a shift away from the Regulated model in favor of a now openly Hypergamous model.

Recently NY Mag had yet another feminist triumphalism article in the same vein as the Atlantic’s End of Men article (apparently 6 years is the period in which the femosphere believes popular awareness of its bullshit memes end). However there was this one salient point that illustrates this shift in monogamy:

In 2009, the proportion of American women who were married dropped below 50 percent. In other words, for the first time in American history, single women (including those who were never married, widowed, divorced, or separated) outnumbered married women. Perhaps even more strikingly, the number of adults younger than 34 who had never married was up to 46 percent, rising 12 percentage points in less than a decade. For women under 30, the likelihood of being married has become astonishingly small: Today, only around 20 percent of Americans are wed by age 29, compared to the nearly 60 percent in 1960.

In the old order of monogamy the mutually beneficial exchange centered on quality assurances, either via polygamy (sexual assurances) or monogamy (provisonal assurances) in a Beta context. These assurances, having been more or less compensated for by men’s willing or unwilling assistance via social and legislative means, are no longer an incentive for women to marry or commit to a long term monogamy, and this is evidenced in almost a decade of statistics that show this decline.

A Wife for Every Beta

In Christian Dread I made mention of Nick Krausers’ appearance on London Real. For a bit more elaboration on this principle cue the video to 5:00 and watch until about 8:33.

A wife for every Beta is the old order negotiated social contract function of committed monogamy. In a state of nature where 80% of men can never be assured of a genetic legacy, most men have no incentive to participate in an organized society. What the Regulated model of sexuality does (albeit inefficiently) is gives Beta males the incentive to cooperate in larger society by establishing monogamy as the predominant social order. And then, as Krauser mentions these societies tend to outperform those based on a Hypergamous, naturalistic socio-sexual structure.

As mentioned this arrangement was based on an exchange of long term security for women for assurances of sexual access and ultimately a genetic legacy. Essentially it was a negotiated compromise of the desire for the Alpha Fucks aspect of Hypergamy for the assurances of a long term Beta Bucks aspect of Hypergamy. By today’s socio-sexual standard this old order arrangement is supplanted with the relatively assured guarantee of satisfying both aspects of Hypergamy at different phases of a woman’s maturity in life. Thus we see the Epiphany Phase, Alpha Widowhood and every variety of schema I outline in Preventive Medicine.

The new, post-sexual revolution order is a model ostensibly based on ‘sexual freedom’, but what this really represents is a return to that naturalistic sexual order based on pre-agrarian, evolutionarily incentivized Hypergamy. We revert back to an open acceptance of the 80/20 realities that, if we’re honest, always informed even a Regulated socio-sexual model of monogamy.

In the new era of Open Hypergamy, women’s only necessitated compromise of her sexual strategy depends on her exaggerated self-impression of her SMV measured against her capacity to lock down an optimal male. This also explains the endless push to create self-confident, self-important ‘independent’ women. Women’s naturalistic predilection for the 80/20 Pareto Principle of sexual selection virtually assures their long term isolation – thus the need for a self-created impression of women’s self-sufficiency.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

Leave a Reply

  Subscribe  
Notify of
Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

Me with patience: “Once again the point flies over your head. Take 100 men and 100 women, 80 of the women want to get down with the perceived top 10 men. Suppose that 9 of those men are totally monogamous, the 1 man left is swimming in poon and will surely have sex with as many of the 80 women as he wants, including married women” Yes, which is why, you moron, the second part of my argument comes in. Women need to be monogamous and not tolerate men having sex with other women. Missing the point again, dearie. A… Read more »

Sun Wukong
Guest
Sun Wukong
Offline

@AR

More than you deserve, really.

It’s gonna be hilarious when her cuck’s info finds its way in here.

theasdgamer
Guest

@ Anonymous Reader

The solution to the problem is to elevate the perceived SMV of the 80 other men such that assortive mating has a chance. That”s derided as “The Fifties” with horror by many women.

Damn! You sound like me about…oh, Idk…a year or two ago…only the problem is that men’s status is artificially depressed by culture and laws relative to the status of women

not trying to be obnoxious, but it’s really so damn frustrating…I know, I know, I should lol

theasdgamer
Guest

@ Emily96

Women need to be monogamous and not tolerate men having sex with other women.
If that happens, then those 80 women will have to look for someone else.

Emily, women would rather have 30% of a hot guy than 100% of a dud. Your solution ain’t gonna happen.

nastynate
Guest
nastynate
Offline

Is it just me, or are the more and more annoying female trolls haunting these sites who just won’t fuck off? I’ve never understood the attention for attentions sake mindset.

emilyy96
Guest
emilyy96
Offline

ASD, it usually isn’t like that. And a respectable woman would rather have a faithful 7 than an unfaithful 9.

theasdgamer
Guest

Emily, a woman who is a 7 and marries a 7 will consider herself a loser for having settled for a dud. Hypergamy demands that she catch an 8, minimum. Likely she will pursue a policy of diminishing sex with the dud. Otoh, if a woman who is a 7 marries a 9, she will consider herself a winner as long as there is no plausibly deniable evidence of her husband’s unfaithfulness. He might be cheating, but as long as she has room for doubt, she’s a winner in her own mind. A woman who is a 10 and marries… Read more »

kfg
Guest
kfg
Online

“And a respectable woman would rather have a faithful 7 than an unfaithful 9.”

Who has had no lived experience as a 9 man, or a respectable woman?

Now, let’s not always see the same hands.

Agent P
Guest
Agent P
Offline

If one watches the two videos posted at the front of the comments and accepts the premise that biology precedes culture and culture precedes ideology, or that biology = hardware, culture = operating system and ideology represents software. The pill = a hardware upgrade (That is never going away except by massive social upheaval) then nothing about the 80 / 20 is going to change. It’ll get worse / better depending on your viewpoint. In fact, if we consider VR sex and sex-bots, that will have a corresponding “hardware upgrade” effect that the pill had for women only in a… Read more »

Forge the Sky
Guest
Forge the Sky
Offline

Emily, a few guys have already answered your question. We tend to try not to sound like a choir here, only voicing an opinion if it differs from or expands on what has gone before

But FWIW, female promiscuity is good for me, bad for society. I can’t change it, so I tend to focus on the former while lending the latter a wary eye.

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Offline

“…..I will make it my purpose to expose you for the easily verifiable attention whoring, pseudo-religious fraud you are. You’ve been warned.”

OH LAWD!!!!!!

comment image

nastynate
Guest
nastynate
Offline

“ASD, it usually isn’t like that. And a respectable woman would rather have a faithful 7 than an unfaithful 9.”

BULL. FUCKING. SHIT.

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

The solution to the problem is to elevate the perceived SMV of the 80 other men such that assortive mating has a chance. That”s derided as “The Fifties” with horror by many women.

Adsgamer
Damn! You sound like me about…oh, Idk…a year or two ago…

No, I sound like myself right now. You know it’s true, because historically it’s worked.

only the problem is that men’s status is artificially depressed by culture and laws relative to the status of women

So? We both know that. I’m describing reality to Emilyslut and lurkers, not prescribing anything.

Sun Wukong
Guest
Sun Wukong
Offline

@Rollo

Good point. Em is displaying such cognitive dissonance on this thread in light of the discoveries about her past and current actions that I’d be genuinely surprised she manages to function without your teaching that THIS is the normative female mode of operation. This is what the dualistic model looks like in real world practice. Even with her own shit show laid out in front of all of us and her, she preaches how it’s just not true.

I don’t think of it as The Hamster anymore. It is The Iraqi Information Minister.

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

Rollo’s last comment has me feeling complemented on my value as a man.

What’s this about Emily cucking her BF? Is there some backstory I missed?

Sun Wukong
Guest
Sun Wukong
Offline

@Jeremy

TL;DR: Scrib went digging and found her actual social media profiles. Realizations included that she rode the carousel hard core, snorted coke, pulled a bunch of other shit, then got engaged to a guy she won’t give it up to after fucking every hot cock she came across (using God as a cock block), yet continues to send titillating pics to dudes she perceives as hotter than her pre-cucked Beta sucker. Nobody found the ID of the poor bastard yet though.

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

Ah, and does Emily have kids with this poor sod yet?

She sounds like about 5 women I occasionally hung out with in my beta prime years.

Johnycomelately
Guest
Johnycomelately
Offline

“It will be interesting to see how long the FI will be able to keep a lid on things enough to keep the masses from becoming too restive.”

The powers that be learned a long time ago that facsimiles of reality and substitute goods are just as good as the real thing. Why else would anyone watch television or engage in social media? The limbic brain gets a jolly good experience one way or the other.

Take away the reality facsimiles and you’ll have a revolution within a week but that ain’t happening any time soon.

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Offline

Something I’ve noticed with numerous 20-something chicks. Even after they have secured a man or sufficient SMV, they continue to troll for more attention from social media ( or while walking around in public..) with powerful regularity. Yareally alluded to the extra punch given to females from social media. They are akin to crack addicts. What’s interesting is that women don’t have a realistic measure of their actual SMV. In fact, I submit, the narcissism practiced by women today is unparalleled in history. We males are partly responsible for this. If anyone has bought into the ” love her for… Read more »

scribblerg
Guest
scribblerg
Online

@Emily – Reasonable question – I presume you actually wanted an answer, yes? First step, a little crash course in what it’s like to be a man: – We have higher sex drives. – We get aroused more quickly and more often. – We want to spread our seed far and and like variety. However, in exchange for paternal certainty in our offspring, we offered to be monogamous and dedicated to the mother of our children to help bear the cost of raising children. It was a bargain, and a tougher one for men given that we have much higher… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

Emilyslut
ASD, it usually isn’t like that. And a respectable woman would rather have a faithful 7 than an unfaithful 9.

No TRUE respectable woman would prefer an unfaithful 9 to a faithful 7.

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

@ Scribbler Excellent response. I don’t think there is much fear of the feminine troll. I haven’t seen them be too effective in sticking around before with ability for the regular commenters keeping frame and discussing what we discuss. As Forge said on this page: “We tend to try not to sound like a choir here, only voicing an opinion if it differs from or expands on what has gone before” I guess I beat my extinction burst of excessive commenting according to this idea. And that’s a good thing. As far as other trolls. I’d be totally indifferent to… Read more »

Kryptokate
Guest
Kryptokate
Offline

Come on, at least admit that no one lifts weights merely for “self improvement” — they do it to look good. That’s like women saying they wear makeup or dress provocatively “for themselves” or for “self expression”. Yeah right. People do that stuff to look better and appeal to the opposite sex. I can’t think of many activities that would be more pointless than building more muscle than you need in order to do the work your body actually does, or painting your face, absent the fact that both activities make you look better to others. And life is much… Read more »

Sun Wukong
Guest
Sun Wukong
Offline

These complaints are irrational particularly because if women all went au naturel tomorrow, you’d just think none of them were hot. Projection. I’ve never dated a woman that looks bad the morning after. Never dated any that have had cosmetic surgery like boobs or the like. Never dated any that had extensions or fake eyelashes. I won’t. If she doesn’t look good natural, I don’t want her. Just because you look like shit without makeup and look like you’re desperately trying to cover up looking like shit with it doesn’t mean all women do. My ex looked spectacular waking up… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

Katietroll
Come on, at least admit that no one lifts weights merely for “self improvement” — they do it to look good

I lift weights to improve my health in various ways, that is by definition self improvement.

Prove me wrong or retract.

Liz
Guest
Liz
Offline

Interesting, Kryptokate. I think people work out for all sorts of reasons. It’s also good for one’s self concept to see an attractive person in the mirror, isn’t it? To look down at a flat stomach instead of rolls of flesh? If I were stranded on an Island (assuming in this hypothetical I didn’t have to husband up my resources and had an adequate supply of food) I’d still work out about the same as I do now or more.

Roy Hobbs
Guest
Roy Hobbs
Offline

@Kate

It’s a little sad you exercise to “purely make yourself look better.”

Personally, while I do exercise to look good- I do not deny this; I also exercise for myself… I like lifting and knowing I can run a (reasonably) long distance without dying.

Think significantly overlapping Venn diagram.

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

Geisha Kate Troll I can’t think of many activities that would be more pointless than building more muscle than you need in order to do the work your body actually does Two reasons off the top of my head: Someone who lives the cube farm life might still want to have the muscle to go rock climbing or kayaking, and so would be likely to maintain muscle mass and tone for the weekend. Upper body work is a proven way to increase / maintain a good level of T. Men need T to live. Dearie, there’s a whole world of… Read more »

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Offline

@ Kryptokate Do you always have to barge in here with your hair ablaze? You are funny. I happen to lift weights. I have NEVER lifted weights to look good for women. I do, however, support my brothers who lift and workout to look good/healthy for themselves. If a guy happens to lift to attract feminine attention, I am all for that also. As long as it’s within reason. I lift for strength. I happen to believe strength is vitally necessary for men, because time tends to rob us of it as we get older. But I do not expect… Read more »

Sun Wukong
Guest
Sun Wukong
Offline

I maintain my health out of lifelong habit. My parents pushed me in to soccer 4 years old. I played until I was 20. I continued skating and jogging after that. I’ve allowed myself to lapse once, climbing from around 180 or 190 to 220 or so. I felt disgusting, regardless of how the opposite sex looked at me. It just felt gross and was a pain to just feel my gut in the way when I’d bend down to tie my shoes. I’ve stayed just above 190 for a while now, and I know what it takes to get… Read more »

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

“Come on, at least admit that no one lifts weights merely for “self improvement” — they do it to look good.” That statement comes from someone that has never felt what it feels like to have the absolute level of circulating testosterone that a masculine man has coursing through his body. Strength is a primary tactical masculine virtue. Lifting weights elevates the mind and body of a male. It makes him more masculine. Independent of looks. It is masculine self improvement. And you have a problem with that? Why? The search function on the top right can direct you to… Read more »

Sun Wukong
Guest
Sun Wukong
Offline

The argument isn’t about why people would get in shape, it’s about why wouldn’t they?

Whoops, fixed typo.

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

“It is masculine self improvement. And you have a problem with that? Why?”

I wonder what HABD would say? Oh yeah,……that’s the FI speaking…….

stuffinbox
Guest
stuffinbox
Offline

@ Shallow Krypto Kate
I only lift weights for self improvement,to achieve balance. Also only wear black rim geek glasses boots and bibs to ward of shallow bitches like you.

When I see a woman w/ lots of makeup I look close for herpes sores she may be trying to cover.
My woman seldom wears makeup, it is what is in her eyes that is attractive , she is just full of life. Try to be your own mental point of origin and don’t worry so much about appearances and your inner light may shine through attracting more quality people into your life.

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus
Offline

KraptoKate is a perfect example of a chick dictating to men a feminine reality.

We are not female.

Sun hit the nail on the head, PROJECTION.

stuffinbox
Guest
stuffinbox
Offline

Reminds me of this gal used to bring her car in to the shop. Comes in the morning in sweats,dumpy ass saggy tits love handles bags under eyes short messy hair. when she came in the evening total blush eyliner support nice figure definite 8. Damn boys whoever falls for that better fall hard.What a disapointment don’t pay first.

stuffinbox
Guest
stuffinbox
Offline

Back to biz .In 2014 ,the World Family Map project looked at the 49 countries that make up the vast majority of the world’s population.
The percentage of children who live w/ two parents is 88% in the Netherlands,85% in the Philippines and Indonesia,83% in Germany,78% in Canada,76% in Nigeria,74% in Ethiopia and 72% in Bolivia.With our 69% the US sits in 32nd place. Columbia comes in dead last around 20%.

Morpheus
Guest
Morpheus
Offline

“A woman who is a 10 and marries a 10 will consider herself a loser for having settled for a dud. Hypergamy demands that she catch an 11, which exists only in fantasy. But her imagination tells her that he must be real.”

Couldn’t help but think of this

https://youtu.be/4xgx4k83zzc

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

Blaximus
Do you always have to barge in here with your hair ablaze?

Eh, prolly just that time of the month, again…

Anonymous Reader
Guest
Anonymous Reader
Offline

Blaximus I lift for strength. I happen to believe strength is vitally necessary for men, because time tends to rob us of it as we get older. Have known some older men over 70 who got cut on for this or that. Men with upper body strength seem to have a higher survival rate and a faster recovery time, but this is purely anecdotal. I got no real data. Read up on osteoporosis / osteopenia a while back for a relation. Turns out that men can and do develop that also, if they just do chair parade, but picking up… Read more »

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

Heh, 20% of you guys might be interested in an essay Nick Krauser wrote concerning “THE GERMAN IDEALIST TRADITION IN PHILOSOPHY AND DAYGAME” on Feb 18 @ Krauser PUA. It is based on the ideas of Max Stirner http://krauserpua.com/2016/02/18/the-german-idealist-tradition-in-philosophy-and-daygame/ Certainly of interest to ScribblerG in regards to ego (and in the spirit that I claim that all ego investments are not handicaps. Some ego investments, are really, good. Up until the point that they are not. * see my footnote in this regard at the end) and Hegelian shit. It has to do strongly with mental point of origin, ties… Read more »

kfg
Guest
kfg
Online

” . . . men who ‘do the right thing’ are denigrated and treated and depicted as chumps and losers nonstop.” But once a chump has been smartened up, you can’t shame him back into it. ” . . . no one lifts weights merely for “self improvement” — they do it to look good.” Another hamster heard from. ” I can’t think of many activities that would be more pointless than building more muscle than you need in order to do the work your body actually does . . .” Now, this might come as a shock to a… Read more »

emilyy96
Guest
emilyy96
Offline

@Rollo “Incorrect. Women would rather share an Alpha success than be saddled with a faithful Beta” Naa. Say I”m an 8, my bf is a 8/9. I’d rather be the mistress of Leonardo Di Caprio than the wife of my bf? Hell no. Maybe I’d rather share a 9 than date a 4, but even thats a difficult decision. I have too much self respect and pride to do either of those two things xD “What about men tolerating their women flirting with, teasing and advertising their sexual availability with other men online or IRL?” Fyi, and Glenn can confirm… Read more »

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

Maybe since Emily is a philosophy major, she can write an essay on this. From a red-pill, male perspective contrasted with the Feminine imperative. You know, compare and contrast. You know, debate from the other side of the aisle. With an emphasis on Masculine/feminine polarity. It would be good practice for you. I remember doing things in between university studies like reading outside stuff for my own edification (we didn’t have the internet and facebook back then, but we did have public libraries.) Write it down and re-look at it in 10 years like Nick Krauser did 20 years later… Read more »

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

“I was just seeing what people rated me outta 10.” How’d that turn out? Say I”m an 8, my bf is a 8/9. Say you marry him go through with the female stages of manipulation. He becomes a 6 and you won. But that is going to suck. (It is all pretty predictable, you got a good start on the hide the vagina routine…….and in the end it won’t be pretty.) Even if you chose wisely, you still have to treat kindly. If you want a primer on what the female stages of manipulation are I can provide it right… Read more »

keyser Soze
Guest
keyser Soze
Offline

The ugly feminists (HB 5,6,7,8) want the top 20% alphas but not Trump!.
The betas (80%) are revolting as we speak by rooting for an alpha Trump!.
A bit confusing.

emilyy96
Guest
emilyy96
Offline

I’m actually taking a sociology of gender course where I am writing on the red pill and mgtow smile

But good idea. And LOL Cancun… Been there done that. I’m going to the Bahamas.

“How’d that turn out?”
I think 7.5? But I never say a girl with over 8, or a guy with over 7 on there.

kfg
Guest
kfg
Online

Addendum:

And women in beauty pageants today are usually not particularly attractive either. 10 and 12 are the only ones that even rate:

http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/contenders-getting-ready-for-miss-ussr-uk-beauty-pageants-final-show-picture-id471900320

@Emily: “I’m actually taking a sociology of gender course . . .”

Of course you are.

“Been there done that.”

Of course you have.

“I never say a girl with over 8, or a guy with over 7 on there.”

Attractive people don’t need to go on a validation hunt to find out whether they are attractive or not. See above.

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

“I understand. I get that monogamy is becoming less and less of a good idea for men. And feminism is probably the root cause of all that. But it isn’t like monogamy was perfect back when it was a good idea for men.” I thought you were arguing for the Catholic Doctrine. “Back when the wife had few rights within the marriage… There is very little reason for women to want to return to that age….” So you are arguing for a feminist, Feminine Imperative, Matrix type of world order to dominate your future husband with those first two attributes?… Read more »

keyser Soze
Guest
keyser Soze
Offline

I was in a relationship with a nice woman and at the same time I was fucking other women and I hated it if someone made fun of her.
I know how you feel Emily.

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

“I’m actually taking a sociology of gender course where I am writing on the red pill and mgtow :)” Don’t get too ego-invested in that. Fat chance you won’t though. You are definitely going to have to go through ten revisions of that and let us proof read it. Or risk a bad grade. You know you are going to have to serve up pablum to your FI professor? Right? I remember writing bad shit in humanities seminar back in the 80’s on Doestoyevski–I think it was re: Notes from the Underground– and stuff like God didn’t create man, man… Read more »

emilyy96
Guest
emilyy96
Offline

Don’t you dare compare me to yourself Keyser.

SJF, I believe in complementarian marriages. I will support my husband every way possible. And yes, this is the Catholic way. We don’t believe in dominance, control and submission.

“So why not try to chose wisely and treat kindly as a future wife?”

I do… I don’t get it, do you really perceive me as a mean person? sad

kfg
Guest
kfg
Online

@Emily: “… I don’t get it, do you really perceive me as a mean person? :(”

The phrase is “nasty piece of work,” and I am behind Rollo smartening up your chump 100%. You deserve it.

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

“We don’t believe in dominance, control and submission.” Heh, neither does red pill and game. You just think in those terms. Your religion and your church and your priest(s) do grant you unfettered licence to the FI and feminism and the female stages of manipulation of the masculine after marriage. I actually like my Catholic upbringing, my monogamous marriage and my dedication to my children. And I don’t dominate, control and make my wife submissive. Go figure. How the hell did that happen? I do “just get it”, though. But then again, I have a clue and I’m adaptable. Thank… Read more »

SJF
Guest
SJF
Offline

The huuuge problem with Philosophy is that you have to read a ton of material. Then you have to sort it out in your head. And then you know what the problem is? Some of it is Ideology and some of it is Praxeology. Guess what Red Pill and Game is? Hint: Feminism and the Feminine Imperative (firmware encoded, aware or unaware in the FI) and Religion is Ideology. May or may not work depending on the battle and the war. And it is a top down approach. Good luck with your individual. bottoms-up relationship in that regard. This blog… Read more »

viavitae
Guest
viavitae
Offline

Watch these little girls shit-testing Superman. 100% proof its hardwired.

KryptoKate
Guest
KryptoKate
Offline

On fake beauty, eh, I got complimented all the time for being a natural beauty and having great genes when I absolutely am not. And men that have seven me in the morning or lived with me think this. They don’t know what they’re talking about. Seeing really is believing. If you look good and it isn’t obviously artificial looking, men will believe you naturally look like that. I’ve never k own then to be able to discern the difference very well. You form a mental representation of someone in your brain when you meet them that is an actual… Read more »

KryptoKate
Guest
KryptoKate
Offline

Also, it’s great for some of you that you actually enjoy exercising or feel crappy if you don’t. But that kind of means you should get no credit for it either, if you’re just doing what you enjoy anyway. Kind of like I don’t expect to get credit for reading the Internet and arguing with strangers, since I just like to do those things. But me? I hate exercising. Always have. Every minute sucks. There’s always better and more enjoyable uses of my time. But I do it anyway, because it makes me look way better. I’d say it makes… Read more »

kfg
Guest
kfg
Online

“But that kind of means you should get no credit for it either, if you’re just doing what you enjoy anyway.”

Good lord it must really suck to be you.

Sun Wukong
Guest
Sun Wukong
Offline

@SJF

The huuuge problem with Philosophy is that you have to read a ton of material. Then you have to sort it out in your head.

Then you have to go out and live it. Then you might have a thought worth a shit in your head. Maybe. Until that moment it’s a waste of your daddy’s money.

Sun Wukong
Guest
Sun Wukong
Offline

Side note: I see incredible value in philosophy, just not as young students see it or professors teach it these days. Clearly it’s not making our resident daft cunt in to anything other than an overpriced daft cunt. Reading isn’t enough. Thinking isn’t enough. They both have to be compared against actual human experience across a lot of time. Then a lot more thinking. Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance would have been nothing but incoherent rambling to me at 18. Or 22. Or 25. But last year it was “Of course” to me in many ways and “I’m… Read more »

IAS
Guest
IAS
Offline

@KryptoKate: why do you think being miserable doing something that is should earn you more “credit”? I’ll grant you that doing so signals discipline and/or willpower. I’m not entirely convinced you in particular are an example of high discipline, given that you’ve gone out of your way to disclose your motivation for working out is basically to look good (for others). I can assure you that even someone that enjoys working out is employing discipline if he/she does it regularly. Many people that enjoy working out are more disciplined than motivated. In my experience, discipline is more effective than motivation,… Read more »

IAS
Guest
IAS
Offline

Relevant for KryptoKate (who is busily building character)

http://howibecametexan.com/2013/05/20/calvin-go-do-something-you-hate-being-miserable-builds-character/

Johnycomelately
Guest
Johnycomelately
Offline

An interesting consequence of hyperagamy that I am personally witnessing is high SMV males are holding out longer for marriage (mid-late 30s) and that this is creating false signalling for mid SMV females which causes them to hold out longer than they’d desire for the false hope of landing their dream guy.

Basically delaying high SMV men are disproportionately driving market conditions.

Liz
Guest
Liz
Offline

“Attractive people don’t need to go on a validation hunt to find out whether they are attractive or not.”

Truth.

Liz
Guest
Liz
Offline

Kate, learn to like exercise. If you make it a habit, this should be natural and you will miss it when you don’t work out. If you don’t like your current regime try something else. You’re not going to be able to force yourself to do something you don’t like for the rest of your life. What will happen is, you’ll get comfortable (say, married) and let yourself go. Then it’s just a cascading snowball effect. Objects at rest, and all that. “At any rate there is NO person, literally no human on earth, and I mean man woman or… Read more »

Liz
Guest
Liz
Offline
Andy
Guest
Andy
Offline

“Living with an out of shape body sucks. Living in shape just feels better. Every moment of your existence feels better. The argument is about why people would get in shape, it’s about why wouldn’t they?”

+1

“Attractive people don’t need to go on a validation hunt to find out whether they are attractive or not. See above.”

lol. Can we finally just conclude that Emily isn’t going to learn ANYTHING here?

Pinelero
Guest
Pinelero
Offline

Andy you guys are helping her with her gender studies research. Having you guys dig up articles and explain things, so she doesn’t have to hit the library and read boring research articles like the ones with statistics and facts.

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline

@ liz

Dear Penthouse Forum:

A couple of years ago a neighbor showed up at our door in the morning and I was wearing my eyeglasses and pig “mmm bacon” shirt and some lounging pants. I looked like absolute hell. He’d locked himself out of the house and needed the spare key (they’d given it to us for checking on the dog when they were out of town). Mike was out of town at the time…

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline

@Johnnycomelately “An interesting consequence of hyperagamy that I am personally witnessing is high SMV males are holding out longer for marriage (mid-late 30s) and that this is creating false signalling for mid SMV females which causes them to hold out longer than they’d desire for the false hope of landing their dream guy. Basically delaying high SMV men are disproportionately driving market conditions.” Not true… what you are witnessing is more high SMV guys realizing their value, amongst lower older SMV women who would not settle down with these same guys when they were younger and thus lower SMV… Carousel… Read more »

HopelessHypergamy
Guest
HopelessHypergamy
Offline

@Forge The Sky

Learning what I have learned, I will second (or third) that a man learning game is one of the better things he can do for his partners. Especially if done with some level of genuine like of women as they *really* are. (Without misogyny.)

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline

@Emily

“And yes, this is the Catholic way. We don’t believe in dominance, control and submission.”

And 1,960 years of history proves otherwise… LOL Are you 14? Or 12?

Andy
Guest
Andy
Offline

@Pinelero

I try not to let her affect my enjoyment of this blog, but here we are… talking about her again. STILL arguing against basic truths, hijacking the conversation, not learning a fucking thing… Sigh. It would be one thing if I thought that some of it was sinking in… It would take a rare woman to accept this shit at her age. She’s obviously not it.

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline

@Emily

“I wrote in caps on hot or not or tinder or whatever the hell it was (over a year ago) that I have a boyfriend and am not looking for dating. I was just seeing what people rated me outta 10.”

And Eve said to Adam… “I didn’t eat the apple… I just wanted to see what it tasted like…”

Liz
Guest
Liz
Offline

Lol Sentient. razz
Every good Penthouse forum story should mention bacon.

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline

And Eve’s attempt to trade up in the garden may be the first recorded hypergamous act… certainly the most famous.

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline

@NastyNate

“Is it just me, or are the more and more annoying female trolls haunting these sites who just won’t fuck off? I’ve never understood the attention for attentions sake mindset.”

It’s Game 101 Nate… they are getting tinglez here they aren’t getting elsewhere, cloaked of course in hamster plausible deniability.

It’s always the same.

I’m surprised they can all type so many words out, one handed…. Lulz…

Andy
Guest
Andy
Offline

“I’m surprised they can all type so many words out, one handed…”

Can you imagine when some guy unlocks all that repressed shit in Emily’s head? lol, oh man…

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline

“Can you imagine when some guy unlocks all that repressed shit in Emily’s head? lol, oh man…”

Wait I thought the SAE house already did? Before her re-virginization project?

Andy
Guest
Andy
Offline

lol, OHHH okay. So it’s self loathing for all the orgasms she had doing those un-holy acts… lol. Makes sense.

Craiger247
Guest
Craiger247
Offline

@Emily “men lose their 20’s in frustration, lose their 30’s and 40’s in a different form of frustration, wind up embittered. ” Per your quote above, what you described there is a beta. And that is exactly the guy you are actually going to end up marrying. That is when/if he awaken from his BP slumber, and realized he’s been “cucked” by religion, his wants/needs/desires have been shelved to better serve you and the Lord, as well as an entire life dedicated on BP thinking/ideology/etc., as his balls turn a deep hue of purple. He will redefine bitter/frustrated, and it… Read more »

having a bad day
Guest
having a bad day
Offline

@SJF (and @Andy (now that i read through your comments too…lol)) What is is you don’t get about feminist and FI application to marriage and old school Catholicism with a +1 hypergamous relationship that can’t be harmonious in a marriage. What don’t you get about the fact that you should lock down your boyfriend and yet treat him kindly within that construct (that serves your sexual strategy, yet dis-serves his–esp. if you don’t change your line of thinking–i.e. it is a raw deal for him. But a good deal for you.) Get with the program or stop posting SPAM. Understand… Read more »

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

@SJF It is interesting in the comments on ROK that YaReally linked to regarding Rollo, and also the comments on Married Red Pill Reddit when Rollo linked to this essay on the Pareto Principle. A lot of hate there. It seems 80% of men in the manosphere either can’t understand Rollo’s writings or find them too obtuse or don’t like his high highfalutin style of writing (how they judge it as such I have no idea. I can’t relate to not relating to his writing style). Their loss. Rollo’s writing requires careful reading, and some introspection to understand. Roosh’s writing,… Read more »

Kiljoy
Guest
Kiljoy
Offline

Re the London Reel video, here’s one of theirs that is more revealing (42:00 – 45:00) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fPeW53IeVA8

Andy
Guest
Andy
Offline

“girls CAN”T understand that stuff…it is literally IMPOSSIBLE for them to see it…”

I definitely admit that it’s very rare. Lesson learned. okay, lets stop talking to her or about her.

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

@Kryptokate Come on, at least admit that no one lifts weights merely for “self improvement” — they do it to look good. That’s like women saying they wear makeup or dress provocatively “for themselves” or for “self expression”. Yeah right. People do that stuff to look better and appeal to the opposite sex. The projection (ht Sun) is high here. Kate you’re just projecting what you know and understand as a woman (that as a woman, vanity pays dividends, so therefore everyone is motivated by vanity) onto men. Men do not work out for the same reasons women do. Frankly,… Read more »

emilyy96
Guest
emilyy96
Offline

“girls really can’t do logic/rationality/introspection…lol… girls CAN”T understand that stuff…it is literally IMPOSSIBLE for them to see it” Ohhh, all those facts and figures. My God! Let’s see if I can do that… here goes. guys really can’t do logic/rationality/introspection…lol… Also guys can’t really understand girls, it is literally IMPOSSIBLE for them to understand us. See, I can do that too :O! @Craiger247 I didn’t post that quote, someone else did. I was just quoting it. Many 30+ women are still pretty beautiful. That said, I know men age better. I don’t really care, I’m getting married soon so whatever… Read more »

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

@KKate Addendum: If women and men seek and enjoy fitness for the same reasons… How come there’s no female version of the Tour de France? Are those men who do such things to their bodies doing it for vanity? I’d say not, considering many of them look so lower-body exaggerated that their shape is more like prepubescent women than men their age. Those guys do get women, but that’s simply because there are female groupies for every male endeavor, and the alphas of any male endeavor will get women, period. Most women would look at them in beach shorts and… Read more »

Liz
Guest
Liz
Offline

Hm.
I don’t think women exercise only for vanity either (at least, not all of them..those who do probably won’t keep it up). I don’t do pull-ups, or stand on my head, or sprint that last quarter mile up a hill as fast as I can for vanity. It’s fun, and challenging.
Yes, I avoid activities what will make me look bad (the reason I’m no longer a cycler, it thickens the thighs), but gymnasts and swimmers do (their bodies are strange, I think, unlike men who compete in those sports…it’s a much more attractive physique on a man).

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

@Liz http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1487277.1381936770!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_970/exercise17f-1-web.jpg You might claim that ^^ woman does not work out for reasons of vanity, but she did post that picture on facebook. The problem with asserting that women don’t work out for “look good for opposite sex” reasons is that even if it were true, women will soooo easily and soooo often seek attention with their good looks that it’s an unprovable hypothesis. Seeking attention with good looks is such an important and common tool to most women that it’s impossible to separate the working out motivation from that tool. It would be like a soldier trying to… Read more »

Jeremy
Guest
Jeremy
Offline

@Rollo,

Wow, another female fitness attention whore. If I had a bitcoin for all of them in the world…

Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline
Sentient
Guest
Sentient
Offline
kfg
Guest
kfg
Online

@Jeremy: “Long distance cycling, along with many other endurance sports, are dominated by men not because women can’t do them.” Interestingly, of the three women that I consider athletic peers to men, because on their best day they beat the best of them, two of them were long distance cyclists. The third was an ocean swimmer. What the two things have in common is that they are non weight bearing (and a woman’s fat distribution is a positive advantage in ocean swimming). @Liz: ” . . . the reason I’m no longer a cycler, t thickens the thighs . .… Read more »

%d bloggers like this: