Tribes

tribes

I received this email some time ago, but I felt it needed some serious consideration to give the concept the justice it deserved.

Rollo — You’ve been a major help to my understanding the underlying dynamics between men and women. I’ve observed them in bits and pieces over the years but never really understood the whys behind them or how to turn them in our favor.

It seems like one mid-term focus you have is on male-male dynamics, specifically fathers and sons. But I also wonder whether you’d consider writing more about bonding and support between men and how those relationships can anchor men’s lives at a time when male relationships are regarded with skepticism by larger society. Lately it’s struck me that men tend to innately trust the men they know and distrust those they don’t (and that it’s often the reverse for women). This inclines us to believe women when they decry the “assholes” who have mistreated them in the past while women are empathetic and credulous toward women whose character they don’t know and whom they’ve never met.

Many of us out here are lacking strong male relationships, and our small social circles translate to fewer men we innately trust and more men we innately don’t. Women seem to regard male friendships as a luxury at best–we should be focusing on career, family, and her needs–while women’s friendships are seen as a lifeline in their crazy, have-it-all world. Indeed, a man discouraging his SO’s friendships is widely seen as a sign of emotional abuse, whereas the reverse is “working on the relationship.”

This strikes me as a deep but largely untapped Red Pill well and could provide essential guidance for men looking to live a proud, constructive Red Pill life however women and children might fit into it. I’d definitely welcome your insights in future entries.

Look forward to every post!

Back in February Roosh proposed (and attempted to initiate) a worldwide event that would be a sort of ‘gathering of the tribes’ with the intent of having men get together in small local gatherings to “just have a beer and talk amongst like-minded men.” My impression of the real intent of in putting this together notwithstanding, I didn’t think it was a bad idea. However, the problem this kind of ‘tribes meeting’ suffers from is that it’s entirely contrived to put unfamiliar men together for no other purpose than to “have a beer and talk.” The problem with unfamiliar men coming together simply to meet and relate is a noble goal, however, the fundamental ways men communicate naturally makes the function of this gathering seem strange to men.

Women talk, men Do.

The best male friends I have share one or more common interests with me – a sport, a hobby, music, art, fishing, lifting, golf, etc. – and the best conversations I can remember with these friends occurred while we were engaged in some particular activity or event. Even just moving a friend into his new house; it’s about accomplishing something together and in that time relating about shit. When I lived in Florida some of the best conversations I had with my studio guys were during some project we had to collaborate on for a week or two.

Women, make time with the express purpose of talking between friends. Over coffee perhaps, but the act of communication is more important than the event or activity. Even a ‘stitch-and-bitch’ is simply an organized excuse to get together and relate. For women, communication is about context. They are rewarded by how that communication makes them feel. For Men communication is about content and they are rewarded by the interchange of information and ideas.

[…]From an evolutionary perspective, it’s likely that our hunter-gatherer tribal roles had a hand in men and women’s communication differences. Men went to hunt together and practiced the coordinated actions for a cooperative goal. Bringing down a prey animal would have been a very information-crucial effort; in fact the earliest cave paintings were essentially records of a successful hunt and instructions on how to do it. Early men’s communication would necessarily have been a content driven discourse or the tribe didn’t eat.

Similarly women’s communications would’ve been during gathering efforts and childcare. It would stand to reason that due to women’s more collectivist roles they would evolve to be more intuitive, and context oriented, rather than objective oriented. A common recognition in the manosphere is women’s predisposition toward collectivism and/or a more socialist bent to thinking about resource distribution. Whereas men tend to distribute rewards and resources primarily on merit, women have a tendency to spread resources collectively irrespective of merit. Again this predisposition is likely due to how women’s ‘hard-wiring’ evolved as part of the circumstances of their tribal roles.

From this perspective it’s a fairly easy follow to see how the tendency of men to distrust unfamiliar (out-group) men might be a response to a survival threat whereas women’s implicit trust of any member of the ‘sisterhood’ would be a species-survival benefit to the sex that requires the most parental investment and mutual support.

Divide & Conquer

In our post-masculine, feminine-primary social order it doesn’t take a Red Pill Lens to observe the many examples of how the Feminine Imperative goes to great lengths to destroy the intrasexual ‘tribalism’ of men. Since the time of the Sexual Revolution the social press of equalism has attempted to force a commonly accepted unisex expectation upon men to socialize and interact among themselves as women do.

The duplicity in this striving towards “equality” is, of course, the same we find in all of the socialization efforts of egalitarian equalism; demasculinizing men in the name of equality. A recent, rather glaring, example of this social push can be found (where else?) at Harvard University where more than 200 female students demonstrated against a new policy to discourage participation in single-gender clubs at the school. You see, women were very supportive of the breaking of gender barriers when it meant that men could no longer discriminate in male-exclusive (typically male-space) organizations, but when that same equalist metric was applied to women’s exclusive organizations, then the cries were accusations of insensitivity and the banners read “Women’s Groups Keep Women Safe.”

That’s a pretty fresh incident that outlines the dynamic, but it’s important to understand the underlying intent of the “fine for me, but not for thee” duplicity here. That intent is to divide and control men’s communication by expecting them to communicate as women do, and ideally to do so on their own accord by conditioning them to accept women’s communication means as the normatively correct way to communicate. As I’ve mentioned before, the most effective social conventions are the ones in which the participants willingly take part in and willingly encourage others to believe is correct.

Tribes vs. The Sisterhood

Because men have such varied interests, passions and endeavors based on them it’s easy to see how men compartmentalize themselves into various sub-tribes. Whether it’s team sports (almost always a male-oriented endeavor), cooperative enterprises, cooperative forms of art (rock bands have almost always been male space) or just hobbies men share, it is a natural progression for men to form sub-tribes within the larger whole of conventional masculinity.

Because of men’s’ outward reaching approach to interacting with the world around him, there’s really no unitary male tribe in the same fashion that the collective ‘Sisterhood’ of women represents. One of the primary strengths of the Feminine Imperative has been its unitary tribalism among women. We can see this evidenced in how saturated the Feminine Imperative has become into mainstream society and how it’s embedded itself into what would otherwise be diametrically opposed factions among women. Political, socioeconomic and religious affiliations of women (various sub-tribes) all become secondary to the interests of ‘womankind’ when embracing the collective benefits of being women and leveraging both their victim and protected statuses.

Thus, we see no cognitive dissonance when women simultaneously embrace a hostile opposition to one faction while still retaining the benefits that faction might offer to the larger whole of the Sisterhood. The Sisterhood is unitary first and then it is broken down into sub-tribes. Family, work, interests, political / religious compartmentalizations become sublimated to fostering the collective benefits of womankind.

While I can speculatively understand the socio-evolutionary underpinnings of how this psychological dynamic came to be, I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out just how effective this unitary collectiveness has been in shaping society towards a social ideal that supports an unfettered drive towards women’s gender-coded need to optimize Hypergamy. This unitary, gender-primary tribalism has been (and is) the key to women’s unilateral social power – and even in social environments where women still suffer oppression, the Sisterhood will exercise this gender-tribalism.

Threat Assessments

Asserting any semblance of a unitary male tribalism is a direct threat to the Feminine Imperative. In The Threat I began the essay with this summation:

Nothing is more threatening yet simultaneously attractive to a woman than a man who is aware of his own value to women.

When I wrote this essay I did so from the perspective of women feeling vulnerable about interacting intimately with men who understood their own value to women and also understood how to leverage it. One of the reasons Game is so vilified, ridiculed and disqualified by the Sisterhood is because it puts this understanding into practice with women and, in theory, removes women from the optimization of Hypergamy. Red Pill awareness and Game lessens women’s control in that equation, which is sexy from the standpoint of dealing with a self-aware high SMV man, but also threatening from the perspective that her security depends on him acquiescing to her Frame and control.

Up to this point, Game has represented an individualized threat to women’s Hypergamous control, but there has always been a larger majority of men (Betas) who’ve been easily kept ignorant of their true potential for control. However, on a larger social landscape, the Feminine Imperative understands the risks involved in men forming a unitary tribe – a Brotherhood – based solely on benefitting and empowering men. The manosphere, while still effectively a collection of sub-tribes, represents a threat to the imperative because its base purpose is making men aware of their true state in a feminine-centric social order.

As such, any attempt to create male-specific, male-empowering organizations is made socially synonymous with either misogyny (hate) or homosexuality (shame). Ironically, the shame associated with homosexuality that a fem-centric society would otherwise rail against becomes an effective form of intra-gender shame when it’s applied to heterosexual collectives of men. Even suggestions of male-centered tribalism are attached with homosexual suspicions, and these come from within the collectives of men themselves.

tribalism_1a

The above picture is from an “academic” conference (class?) Mediated Feminisms: Activism and Resistance to Gender and Sexual Violence in the Digital Age held at UCL in London. There’s quite a bit more to this than just collecting and codifying the sub-tribes of the manosphere, more can be found here.

Now, granted, this conference is replete with all of the uninformed (not to mention willful ignorance) concern to be expected of contemporary feminists, but this does serve as a current example of how men organizing for the exclusive benefit of men is not just equated with misogyny, but potential violence. As a unitary collective of men, the manosphere terrifies the Feminine Imperative. That fear, however, doesn’t stem from any real prospective violence, but the potential for a larger ‘awareness’ in men of their own conditions and the roles they are expected to play to perpetuate a feminine-centric social order. They fear to lose the control that the ‘socially responsible’ ignorance of men provides them with.

Men’s predisposition to form sub-tribes and intrasexual competition (“lets you and him fight”) has always been a means of covert control by women, but even still the Feminine Imperative must insert its influence and oversight into those male spaces to make use of  them. Thus, by assuring that feminine primacy is equated with the idea of inclusive equalism, all Male Space is effectively required to be “unisex space” while all-female sub-tribes must remain exclusively female. For an easy example of this, compare and contrast the reactions to Harvard’s unisex institution of campus club equalism to the worldwide reactions to, and preemption of, the “Tribe” meetings only attempted to be organized by Return of Kings in February.

Making Men

By controlling men’s intrasex communications with each other the Feminine Imperative can limit men’s unified, collective, understanding of masculinity and male experiences. Feminine-primary society hates and is terrified of men defining and asserting masculinity for themselves (to the point of typifying it as potentially violent), but as connectivity progresses we will see a more concentrated effort to lock down the narrative and the means of men communicating male experiences.

I’ve detailed in many prior posts how the imperative has deliberately misdirected and confused men about a unified definition of masculinity. That confusion is designed to keep men guessing and doubting about their “security in their manhood” while asserting that the feminine-correct definition is the only legitimate definition of healthy, ‘non-toxic’, masculinity. This deliberate obfuscation and ambiguity about what amounts to ‘authentic masculinity’ is another means of controlling men’s awareness of their true masculine potential and value – a potential that they rightly fear will mean acquiescing to men’s power over their Hypergamous social and personal control. Anything less than a definition of masculinity that fosters female primacy and fempowerment is labeled “toxic masculinity” – literally and figuratively poisonous.

This is the real, operative reason behind the obsessive, often self-contradicting, need for control of male space by the Feminine Imperative. Oversight and infiltration of male sub-tribes and instituting a culture of self-policing of the narrative within those sub-tribes maintains a feminine-primary social order.

Building Better Betas

Since the time in which western(izing) societies shifted to unfettering Hypergamy on a social scale there has been various efforts to demasculinize – if not outright feminize – the larger majority of men. Today we’re seeing the results of, and still persistent efforts of this in much starker contrast as transgenderism and the social embrace of foisting gender-loathing on boys becomes institutionalized. A deliberate promotion of a social constructivist narrative about gender identity and the very early age at which children can “choose” a gender for themselves is beginning to be more and more reinforced in our present feminine-primary social order.

As a result of this, and likely into our near future, today’s men are conditioned to feel uncomfortable being “men”. That discomfort is a direct result of the ambiguity and misguidance about conventional masculinity the imperative has fostered in men when they were boys. This feminization creates a gender loathing, but that loathing comes as the result of an internal conflict between the feminine-correct “non-toxic” understanding of what masculinity ought to be and the conventional aspects of masculinity that men need to express as a result of their biology and birthright.

Effectively, this confusion has the purpose of creating discomfort in men among all-male sub-tribes. These masculine-confused men have difficulty with intersocial communication within the sub-tribes they’re supposed to have some sort of kin or in-group affiliation with.  Even the concept of “male bonding” has become a point of ridicule (something typical of male buffoons) or suspiciously homosexual , so, combined with the feminine identification most of these men default to, today’s “mangina” typically has more female friends and feels more comfortable communicating as women communicate. These men have been effectively conditioned to believe or feel that male interaction or organization is inherently wrong, uncomfortable or contrived, possibly even threatening if the organizing requires physical effort. Consequently, interacting as a male becomes ridiculous or superficial.

Pushing Back

What then is to be done about this conditioning? For all the efforts to destroy or regulate male tribalism, the Feminine Imperative still runs up against men’s evolved predispositions to interact with the outside world instead of fixating on the inside world of women. Below I’ve pieced together some actionable ideas that might help men come to a better, unitary way of fostering the male tribalism the Feminine Imperative would see destroyed or used as a tool of soci0-sexual control:

  • While it is vitally important to maintain a male-specific mental point of origin, together men need a center point of action. Women talk, men do. Men need a common purpose in which the tribe can focus its efforts on. Men need to build, coordinate, win, compete and problem solve amongst themselves. The ‘purpose’ of a tribe can’t simply be one of getting together as like-minded men; in fact, groups with such a declared purpose are often designed to be the most conciliatory and accommodating of the Feminine Imperative. Men require a common, passionate purpose to unite for.

 

  • Understand and accept that men will naturally form male hierarchies in virtually every context if that tribe is truly male-exclusive. There will be a reflexive resistance to this, but understand that the discomfort in acknowledging male hierarchies stems from the Feminine Imperative’s want to make any male authority a toxic form of masculinity. Contrary to feminine conditioning male hierarchies are not necessarily based on Dark Triad manipulations. That is the ‘fem-think’ – any male created hierarchy of authority is by definition evil Patriarchy.

 

  • Recognize existing male sub-tribes for what they are, but do so without labeling them as such. Don’t talk about Fight Club, do Fight Club. As with most other aspects of Red Pill aware Game, it is always better to demonstrate rather than explicate. There will always be an observer effect in place when you call a male group a “male group”. That tribe must exist for a passionate reason other than the express idea that it exists to be about men meeting up. Every sub-tribe I belong to, every collective interest I share with other men, even the instantly forming ones that arise from an immediate common need or function, all exist apart from “being” about men coming together.Worldwide “tribe” day failed much for the same reasons an organization like the Good Men Project fails – they are publicized as a gathering of men just “being” men.

 

  • Push back on the invasion of male space by being uncompromising in what you do and organize with passion. Make no concessions for women in any all-male space you create or join. There will always be a want to accommodate women and/or the fears of not being accommodating of feminine-primary mindsets within that all-male purview. Often this will come in subtle forms of anonymous White Knighting or reservations about a particular passion due to other men’s Blue Pill conditioning to always consider the feminine before considerations of themselves or the tribe. It is vitally important to the tribe to quash those sympathies and compromising attitudes as these are exactly the designs of the Feminine Imperative to destroy a tribe from within.Make no concessions for competency of women within the tribe if you find yourself in a unisex tribal situation. Even the U.S. military is guilty of reducing combat service requirements for women as recently as this month. If you are a father or you find yourself in a role of mentoring boys or young men it is imperative that you instill this no-compromise attitude in them and the organizations that they create themselves.

 

  • The primary Red Pill / Game tenets that you’ve learned with respect to women are entirely applicable in a larger scope when it comes to resisting the influences of the Feminine Imperative. Frame and a return to a collectively male-exclusive Mental Point of Origin are two of the primary tenets to apply to non-intimate applications of resistance in terms of aspects of society. Observations and the Red Pill Lens should inform your interactions with women and men on a social scale.

 

Finally, I want to close by restating that my approach to resisting the influences of the Feminine Imperative on a meta-social scale is the same bottom-up approach I used with unplugging men from their Blue Pill doldrums. Once men have taken the first steps in Red Pill awareness this new perspective has a tendency to expound into greater social understandings and a want for applications beyond hooking up with desirable women. That Red Pill awareness becomes a way of life, but moreover, it should inform us as men, as tribes, about how best to maintain ourselves as masculine-primary individuals and organizations.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

Speak your mind

1.3K Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
redlight
redlight
5 years ago

The girl (7) is holding a product that promotes “Gluten Free Maple Rye Whisky Peach Pie”

You would think that they would know that Rye has Gluten

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

“Rye has Gluten”

But whiskey is distilled fluid and does not.

Disclaimer of Bias: I am a celiac. The part that raises my hackles is the “Peach Pie.”

Blaximus
Blaximus
5 years ago

@ redlight

Curious, do you have an example of a 10? Do you believe in 10’s?

Expand that question to everyone, y’all believe in 10″s?

Got an example you’d like to share?

My thinking is that our ratings will vary widely in many instances.

I know, I’ve seen the Chart before, but what say you all?

Blaximus
Blaximus
5 years ago

http://gaia.adage.com/images/bin/image/jumbo/Snickers__Super_Bowl_50__Marilyn_16.jpg

No reason for this, other than I like the commercial.

Blaximus
Blaximus
5 years ago

Also, another random assed question: If you got a visit from the Hunk Fairy, would you want to be handsome and buff to go along with expert level Game?

Blaximus
Blaximus
5 years ago

… In this case, ” handsome ” would be described as a look that women instantly found attractive. I don’t know what constitutes a handsome man… except for some reason I instantly knew Brad Pitt was handsome to females.

No Homo.

Bromeo
Bromeo
5 years ago

@rollo

I’d def tap 357 that all day lol, give her a solid hb8.5 (limited view below torso)

Not Born This Morning
Not Born This Morning
5 years ago

One male “tribal” group you didn’t mention is note worthy. The construction industry group. Another is the oil and gas industry. These two industries are the most significant in their impact on human life conditions and economics. They are both still heavily “dominated” by men and likely always will be. For years, “the good ole boy network” has been vilified and significantly infiltrated by women and sissies in most industries except these. In these industries, results of performance is all that matters. A home is built on time and correctly or not. A well is explored, drilled and brought into… Read more »

SJF
SJF
5 years ago

@quixotic (May 17th, 2016 at 3:48 pm) As always, be fun and add value….. Also in regards to forming tribes through shared interests and goals in the OP, here is a repeat link to the comment I made this past January about a framework on how and why to Get a Mentor: https://therationalmale.com/2016/01/18/a-teachable-moment/comment-page-3/#comment-136711 I re-read the third bullet point on actionable advice at the end of the OP. Recognize existing male sub-tribes for what they are, but do so without labeling them as such. Don’t talk about Fight Club, do Fight Club. As with most other aspects of Red Pill… Read more »

Culum Struan
Culum Struan
5 years ago

Still running through this thread and not finished yet, but quickly: @quixotic – that’s an interesting Reddit thread – glad you reposted because the mods have deleted the main post now (they say the advice is “too obvious”). @HABD – Lol. All three of those girls were from my sugar daddy dating last year – all in the same span of 4-5 weeks too (girls DO come in phases). One of them turned out to be just a better hidden gold-digger who refused to see me again without cash. A second (the youngest – 19 year old) was a cool… Read more »

walawala
walawala
5 years ago

@Culum: “I did a bad job with the lay”… I think you’re wayyyyy too much inside your head. Last year I was banging a cute 21 year old student. We hung out…we cooked, she stayed over. She was very sexually inexperienced and a “feminist”… One day after banging her she got so upset that I was “selfish”…she just picked up her stuff and started saying I wasn’t banging her properly etc etc. This all happened right after we cooked dinner and before we were set to go out. I looked at her and said “I think…you better leave NOW!” I… Read more »

quixotic
quixotic
5 years ago

@Hank Nice FR man! Glad to see you pushing your comfort zone. “A lot of people around here just have their group that they talk to, or they are out by themselves and want to be left alone.” After reading your whole FR, here is your homework my friend: Open a group like you described or a person by themselves. In my experience going to bars, most people in bars do not want to be left alone. They are either: A. There to socialize. They often do not open other people tho and are praying to god you open them.… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

Part 1: @Sentient “If you change vids to pics you think the girls won’t be looking at him? he won’t get the “free” IOI?” So basically “if you remove his negative subcomms, the girl will ASSUME he has the positive subcomms that society has told her a muscular dude is likely to have”? Yes, that is exactly what I’m saying. It’s the subcomms that are attractive. If society told women that guys in fedoras were likely to have the actual attractive subcomms they’re looking for, then you could throw a fedora on him in a pic and they’d love it… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

Part 2: @Bromeo @Blaximus “All I have is real life experience….which has gotta be worth something, right? Lol.” “Lol, You know, I have been giving this waaayyy too much thought lately and I am having a hard time coming to a real conclusion.” This is why it’s hard to explain this stuff to Naturals. When there’s too much to think about they revert to “whatever!!! fuck it!!! this is stupid, I just KNOW WHAT I KNOW ALRIGHT????” lol That’s why guys like Mystery and Tyler with obsessive “dive into the nitty gritty” robot brains for this stuff had to codify… Read more »

having a bad day
having a bad day
5 years ago

@Rollo hope you are feeling better… i think i covered most of your questions in your may 17 at 12:01pm comment in my comments on the last thread and this one…and if not me, then YaReally certainly did…lol… basically, i’ve come to the conclusion/mental model that girls filter for the ‘best genetics’ which in the case of ‘alpha’ is the ability to get p in v as fast and efficiently as possible…and that’s IT…lol… and THAT ability is 100% subcomms… that’s why you can kiss a girl off an open in a couple seconds…lol…and that just gets more true, the… Read more »

rugby11
rugby11
5 years ago

Woke this morning thinking of what masculinity can hold onto while using a phrase from a spartan king. “Contemt for death.” https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Qsma7OGcp6A Maybe knowin that game has evolved and that being able to use the underlining truths of what society is in 2016 is a boon that dosnt always have to come from a place of sorrow. About to head out and just wanted to add that a positive attitude in the face of overwhelming destruction and social toxic poison to the masculine dosnt have to be accepted or encouraged with a bond you develop with men in your area… Read more »

having a bad day
having a bad day
5 years ago

@Culum Third one was the best – really cool 20 year old, genuine desire sex – we met up a few times till she deleted my number (I assume she got a real boyfriend). OR you started to ping as ‘bf’ (you tend to have that issue…lol)…bc you are a great guy… and she just wasn’t ready for that…so, she bailed… (see Forge’s LR…) …if she’s not a ‘gold digger,’ ping for drinks…and see what happens… and ping the redhead, too…lol…you know, just for practice…lol @Sentient/HABD et al – still learning by reading the continuing looks debate (including HABD’s last… Read more »

having a bad day
having a bad day
5 years ago

@Hank

props on getting out there… and the FR… it’s not easy, but you’re doing great…

good luck!
—————

@quixotic

props on rocking the solid game advice… (and getting out in-field…) we need more of that shit around here…lol… and as long as you don’t start slinging around ‘looks matter’, it’s all good…lol…

good luck!

having a bad day
having a bad day
5 years ago

@Rollo YaReally @Rollo “Whenever we get into the ‘Looks’ debate YaReally and I get in the habit of talking past one another.” I don’t actually think you would disagree with me if you answered the specific questions I ask. But you stop analyzing at the surface level, just like Sentient…which is weird because you’re THE GUY who’s all about “let’s find out WHY women cheat, oh look here’s this Hypergamy stuff, here’s this SMV chart stuff”, but on THIS subject you just blank on it and hold onto your blind spot. this is why at first we thought you were… Read more »

Sentient
Sentient
5 years ago

Yareally Cognitive bias is deep. I get it comes from a good place [fear of sending guys down the “wrong path” etc], but it is in evidence nonetheless… Just here: ““if you remove his negative subcomms, the girl will ASSUME he has the positive subcomms that society has told her a muscular dude is likely to have”? Yes, that is exactly what I’m saying. “ Does not equal the next line: It’s the subcomms that are attractive.” If you remove the negative subcoms, AND he has not evidenced ANY positive subcomms then there are NO subcomms, and yet he is… Read more »

SJF
SJF
5 years ago

@YaReally Good walls of text there. I think you need a Venn diagram of the tribes of men in the manosphere and of the commenters here, though. ….no hate for the guys I’m talking about, I’m not saying your opinion is worthless, especially in other areas (like married life, kids, general life wisdom etc, I’m talking SPECIFICALLY about picking up and fucking <25yo poon) so don't take it personal,…. You can't KNOW this stuff unless you're experiencing it first-hand by trying to stick your dick in the <25yo crowd regularly. But the old guys think they know everything and are… Read more »

Bromeo
Bromeo
5 years ago

@sentient “If you remove the negative subcoms, AND he has not evidenced ANY positive subcomms then there are NO subcomms, and yet he is still deemed attractive. So in this scenario [stay on the point] it cannot be that the subcomms is are attractive, it is the mere appearance of the guy. That is the point. Whether that response is biologically conditioned OR socially conditioned isn’t even relevant to the effect, because the eye of the beholder registers it the same way, and you can’t escape living in your society.” This is exactly how I look at it. Remove game… Read more »

keyser Soze
keyser Soze
5 years ago

BREAKING NEWS :

Richard Dawkins and biologists all over the world are committing suicide en mass after PUA videos proved biology got it all wrong.

Governments and universities and academia are canceling all research studies.

redlight
redlight
5 years ago

Curious, do you have an example of a 10? Do you believe in 10’s? sure I believe in 10s. I went to a bar with a couple of 10s. Within a minute everyone was aware they were there, it was like our table was under a microscope, to find how these two beauties were changing the space/time continuum of the place. By everyone, I mean not only are all men aware they are there, but all the women knew they are out classed. Btw the 10s are used to getting everything for free. Drinks, meals, trips, drugs, clothes, anything really,… Read more »

Sentient
Sentient
5 years ago

Redlight/Blax Redlight that is nothing… One time I was walking towards Penn Station in NYC. I was a block away. As I kept approaching, but still a long way off, I was engulfed in an energy field. All around me, amplifying as I got closer to the station. There was a buzz, an electricity, the murmur of a growing crowd. This continued to increase as I got closer. You could feel it in the air all around you. Then there were people pointing. Men and women. Cars were honking. A tire screeched. I looked at what everyone was now staring… Read more »

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

Row! Row! Fight the Powah!

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14559357

keyser Soze
keyser Soze
5 years ago

http://catsdogsvideo.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2016/03/maxresdefault-4.jpg

This cat is socially conditioned(in cat society) to be scared of the dogs . But if she shows good subcomms , she’ll be okay.

YaReally
5 years ago

@Sentient “If you remove the negative subcoms, AND he has not evidenced ANY positive subcomms then there are NO subcomms, and yet he is still deemed attractive.” you–what?? …?????? You can’t have NO subcomms. Is THAT the disconnect, that you don’t even know what subcomms ARE??? You can’t have NO subcomms, that’s not a THING that can HAPPEN. You can’t– Jesus. Okay look: you can’t NOT have “body language”. That’s not POSSIBLE. Unless you don’t have a body. You either have good body language or you don’t. You either have confidence or you don’t, you can’t not have “anything” unless… Read more »

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

” . . . our hardwiring tells us Coke . . . ”

. . . that Coke is a stimulant and mood enhancer.

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

” . . . social conditioning has taught . . .”

. . . me that fire burns.

Sentient
Sentient
5 years ago

Forge/Quixotic Repost of this because based on Quixotics comment it may have been unclear This is solid gold. replay all your interactions with her via this new frame and learn what you missed. Really focusing on YOUR bias and projection will greatly accelerate your development. and then when you get to this “good girl” bit, go back over and do it again! What I meant by go back over the “good girl” response is to realize that she was never a “good girl”, that it was only you who put her initially in that category, and then played out your… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

@Keyser Nothing I’m saying goes against biology, but their experiments ARE flawed and should mostly be thrown out or redesigned (except that the way they would have to redesign them would be pretty much impossible in this politically correct day and age…they’re never going to do a socially acceptable accurate experiment that explains why a married girl will fuck us in a bar bathroom). It just goes deeper and explains shit that again none of this “looks matter” stuff explains (like the buff dude with gay subcomms) that none of the looks matter guys can explain (why that guy isn’t… Read more »

Sentient
Sentient
5 years ago

“The girl ASSUMES YOU HAVE POSITIVE SUBCOMMS because you fit the socially conditioned stereotype of a guy who looks like he WILL have them, and THAT ASSUMPTION is what gets the IOIs.”

Perhaps we need to look at the definition of “assumes”… An assumption is based on NO proof. So not a demonstration of a positive subcomm for example.

YaReally
5 years ago

@kfg “. . . that Coke is a stimulant and mood enhancer.” Is there no drink in China that is also a stimulant and mood enhancer? Of course there are. But you aren’t drinking those, you’re drinking Coke. Why? Because Coke was marketed to you so you tasted it and learned what it does to you. If that Coke had tasted SHITTY you would say “ugh, I don’t want any more Coke it’s gross” (just like a girl discovering a muscular dude isn’t alpha). You aren’t drinking some chinese stimulant mood enhancer drink because you haven’t been socially conditioned to… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

@Sentient
“Perhaps we need to look at the definition of “assumes”… An assumption is based on NO proof.”

Okay, then call it “she makes an educated guess based on social conditioning and previous experiences with similar things” if that helps you understand.

YaReally
5 years ago

@Sentient You don’t KNOW that jumping off the cliff beside you is GOING to kill you, but you can make an ASSUMPTION or an EDUCATED GUESS based on your social conditioning of learning that high falls kill people and/or previous reference experiences where you fell and hurt yourself, that it’s probably a good idea to avoid walking off that cliff. You didn’t just KNOW that coming out of the womb, you learned that shit through your social conditioning as your brain gathered evidence that “falling is probably NOT good”. If you grew up on the moon where you could fall… Read more »

Sentient
Sentient
5 years ago

Yareally

“Okay, then call it “she makes an educated guess based on social conditioning and previous experiences with similar things” if that helps you understand.”

You are starting to remind me of the story of the teacher who after the third time explaining something, finally understands it.

But this is still different, as there are visceral reactions your body experiences before any cognition is experienced. Do you agree with this or not?

Sentient
Sentient
5 years ago

Ya

“You don’t KNOW that jumping off the cliff beside you is GOING to kill you”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_cliff

YaReally
5 years ago

@Rollo “I could market a box of dog shit as the next greatest confectionary, and I could probably get a few people to try it, but the physical revulsion most people would feel at eating it is founded in root level, evolved, biological reactions to eating shit.” And would you then say “oh it was the box I put the food in that was repulsive to them” (the externals aka muscles aka exterior of the cake) or would you say “it’s the actual TASTE of the food itself” (aka the subcomms/sugar)? You guys are saying “ahh it’s the packaging, even… Read more »

keyser Soze
keyser Soze
5 years ago

Ya :

“Nothing I’m saying goes against biology,”. BUT :

” their experiments ARE flawed and should mostly be thrown out or redesigned (except that the way they would have to redesign them would be pretty much impossible in this politically correct day and age”

WOW, just WOW.
The prosecution rests it’s case your honor.

YaReally
5 years ago

@Sentient
Okay, then use this example:

“you shouldn’t babyproof your home because babies will just know what sharp corners do and avoid them? Does he say to hand them a running chainsaw or a handful of knives because the baby will just KNOW that they’re sharp and not touch them?”

YaReally
5 years ago

@Keyser
Nothing in that quote goes against biology. It goes against flawed experiments that give flawed results that don’t hold up infield.

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

“You didn’t just “know” that a hot stove burns you.” Of course. That’s why I responded to that particular comment and in the way I did. It is also the reason I posted the picture of the peacock, not just because it is cliche, but because it is the result of social conditioning, simply across a generational time scale. It’s called Sexual Selection. Nonetheless peahens respond to the sight of the tail (even absent a peacock), because that is how they have been socially conditioned across the generations. Insert runaway feedback cycle here. But that runaway endpoint began with a… Read more »

having a bad day
having a bad day
5 years ago

@Sentient at 8:05am… [face palm]…lol… i’m still trying, though… bc sure the knowledge-base… blah, blah… but i recognize the monkey trap nut you are hanging onto… and being a natural, it’s a big part of your self-identity, so you are in the same place the guy who just worked out hard for the last 5 years (who bought into the ‘just lift, bro…and you’ll get the chicks…’ ideology) is at when he STILL can’t get girls… so, if i can get YOU to see the light, those other guys can maybe get this too…lol…THAT’s why i’m continuing to push you…lol…(bc… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

@kfg “Nonetheless peahens respond to the sight of the tail (even absent a peacock), because that is how they have been socially conditioned across the generations. Insert runaway feedback cycle here.” Fully agree with this. This is what’s happening now that we have mass media to push social conditioning from the 1950s on (or whenever TV was in every home). But like scray says: the wide variety of body types of men means height/muscles weren’t selected for or we would all be giant buff dudes. “But that runaway endpoint began with a purely biological imperative, which became socially enhanced –… Read more »

keyser Soze
keyser Soze
5 years ago

I remember reading :

“It’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person.”

Sentient
Sentient
5 years ago

Yareally ““you shouldn’t babyproof your home because babies will just know what sharp corners do and avoid them? Does he say to hand them a running chainsaw or a handful of knives because the baby will just KNOW that they’re sharp and not touch them?”” I think this is the crux of the issue… not all of these things you compare are definitive, or the same context. These continued hyper extrapolations don’t disprove the biological case. saying a good looking guy actively displaying gay behavior (a comm not even a subcomm) is unattractive doesn’t negate the same guy not actively… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

@having a bad day “bc his look is in conformity with the narrative of what society says is ‘attractive’… = so he SHOULD have those positive TRAITS… so, society ‘informs’ her expectations (she infers the positive bc of the conformity) that he actually does have those TRAITS… the actual ‘subcomms’ in play are the information stream from society… so, they are there after all…” This. Thank god you’re here I feel like I’m in an asylum lol “in the non-attractive guy’s look, she uses the inverse of that idea to infer that THAT guy does NOT have those positive TRAITS… Read more »

Sentient
Sentient
5 years ago

HABD “i’m still trying, though… bc sure the knowledge-base… blah, blah… but i recognize the monkey trap nut you are hanging onto… and being a natural, it’s a big part of your self-identity, so you are in the same place the guy who just worked out hard for the last 5 years (who bought into the ‘just lift, bro…and you’ll get the chicks…’ ideology) is at when he STILL can’t get girls…” This is a false assumption though… because I am not a natural… I was invisible to girls, then visible, then developed proto game on my own, then tried… Read more »

scray
scray
5 years ago

@rollo “Sub-coms were derived from something tangible. Go ahead and dismiss 20+ years of evo-psych studies that attempt to answer this as eggheads disconnected from infield, but even if social fashions change the sub-coms don’t. Even if a woman fucks a dog she’s still fucking the great dane and not the poodle, why?” ya i already explained it. you win —> high t —> subcomms associated with it. “Why is monster porn about fucking a big physically dominant Big Foot and not garden gnomes?” why does midget porn exist? you’re exhibiting confirmation bias here…. “, the social conditioning you believe… Read more »

scray
scray
5 years ago

@keyser

“WOW, just WOW.
The prosecution rests it’s case your honor.”

what case?

lol do you even science?

a ton of evo-psych studies involve a guy DRAWING A STICK FIGURE and ASKING WOMEN which STICK FIGURE THEY PREFER

like….

is that a good experiment to you?

if it is, i’ve got some oceanfront land in Nebraska to sell you

YaReally
5 years ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FuR1lAJcTg

She has no idea (or doesn’t care) that she’s supposed to be scared of these cheetahs/lions and has mastered the subcomms of not being prey. Because she was living in the bush where she gained enough social conditioning and reference experience and understanding of the subcomms to do this.

But all the comments shit a brick over what she’s doing in this video. Because WE all “know” we should be scared of these things.

Where’s her fight or flight when she’s stepping toward the cheetahs, Rollo?

Sentient
Sentient
5 years ago
YaReally
5 years ago

@Rollo “Yes, you go and babyproof the house because things like antifreeze taste sweet.” So the kid KNOWS that the blue liquid in that bottle will taste sweet? Or does it put EVERYTHING around it in its mouth and when it puts the antifreeze in it it TASTES it and then LEARNS that it tastes sweet and continues to drink it? “We also teach kids to eat vegetables because we know that left to their own devices the kid will prefer a doughnut.” And yet in other cultures kids are taught that sugar is just a treat at the end… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

Look at this kid’s amazing fight or flight, it just KNOWS this 300lbs gorilla is dangerous:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u46IH8-cjFw

She has NO IDEA she should be afraid of that thing. Because she hasn’t been socially conditioned to know it can obliterate her effortlessly. When she grows up and LEARNS through SOCIAL CONDITIONING that that was a dangerous situation, she’ll watch this video and go “holy shit haha I was retarded”

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

” . . . the wide variety of body types of men means height/muscles weren’t selected for or we would all be giant buff dudes.” If height and muscles were not selected for we would be about a foot long (excluding tail) and crawling on all fours through the trees. This is what our cousins who were not subject to that particular selection look like: Here is what they look like when trying to display dominance: “It’s not the feathers themselves that are attractive . . .” I noted “even absent a peacok,” and further illustrated the point with the… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

“What you guys are suggesting is blank slate-ism. That the only reason good sub-coms are ‘good’ is because they have no intrinsic value beyond what MTV and pop-culture commercialism have inculcated into society.” No we’re not. We’re saying the reason good subcomms are good is because they are the most likely to give her the best chances at her offspring being protected and her being capable of surviving. It all goes back to the S/R stuff, but we’re saying the muscles THEMSELVES don’t cause high survival/replication these days, but Hollywood is still pushing the social conditioning that they DO so… Read more »

scray
scray
5 years ago

@rollo “What you guys are suggesting is blank slate-ism” nope let me remind you of what i originally said —> ‘welcome to what I SAID way back in like the earliest parts of this discussion re: what seems to be ‘hard-wired’ = the DESIRE for SOCIAL STATUS itself.’ that isn’t a blank slatist position. ‘ That the only reason good sub-coms are ‘good’ is because they have no intrinsic value beyond what MTV and pop-culture commercialism have inculcated into society.’ nope read the above; shit, read the speculation re: winning and T. THAT is why good sub-comms are good. it’s… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

@Rollo
“Still not answering the premise. Why does the kid prefer the sweet taste to begin with?”

DUDE. NO ONE IS SAYING the kid doesn’t have a preference for the sweet taste. You’ve gone down that tangent on your own making wrong assumptions about what we’re saying.

We’re saying the reason that kid drinks the antifreeze is because he LEARNS that it triggers that “sweet taste” trigger he enjoys. NO ONE IS SAYING HE DOESN’T HAVE THAT TRIGGER. That’s what “preselection” and “confidence” etc are, those are those diamond core traits that are attractive.

YaReally
5 years ago

@scray
“it’s fucking daffy how this point keeps somehow sailing past everyone on the other side of this discussion.”

I can’t even comprehend what’s going on. We’ve stated the exact same stuff like a hundred times. I’m starting to think this is an elaborate April Fool’s joke.

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

“Why does the kid prefer the sweet taste to begin with?”

It turns out that the physiological affect of sugar can be induced simply by touching a bit of something sweet to the tongue, even in endurance athletes.

And so by digging deep enough to get out of their familiar field (and into psychology) 90% of what we have learned about sports physiology over the past century or so can be thrown in the trash.

Psychosomatic effects dominate the physical.

scray
scray
5 years ago

@kfg

“If height and muscles were not selected for we would be about a foot long (excluding tail) and crawling on all fours through the trees.”

nope.

for all this bellayching about biology and evolution you guys sure aren’t that hip to how it actually would work.

selected for traits = go to fixation = LOW VARIANCE

thus

high variance ceteris paribus is evidence against selection

that’s why adaptations tend to exhibit low, rather than high, heritability…..

‘This is what our cousins who were not subject to that particular selection look like:’

lolbad ‘reasoning’

YaReally
5 years ago

@Rollo “And yet, why would the social conditioning exist that would teach a girl to fear a giant gorilla? Because enough humans were killed by them to cause that fear.” Yes. Exactly. That’s social conditioning. “Ones who didn’t and didn’t pass on that fear were eliminated from the gene pool.” No you can’t make that logic leap lolol or that kid would be scared of the gorilla. That’s totally illogical. That’s like saying your baby will just KNOW that you shouldn’t touch the 3rd wire from the left on some fuse box in your garage because you touched it and… Read more »

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

“NO ONE IS SAYING HE DOESN’T HAVE THAT TRIGGER.”

Hence Sentient’s head scratch above.

Likewise, no one on “the other side” has said that sub-coms don’t matter.

SJF
SJF
5 years ago

@YaReally I’m cool with your response to my comments. I’m sure I’ve posted some weird shit that transgressed your Venn diagram tribe, I just can’t recall what it was right now. And take it as either unintentional or as my ignorance of in field game. I’ll try not to stop over that line too much. I do think you were AMOGing my Venn manosphere tribe a bit too much with your previous comments. Which is why I responded to them. “Common sense that field experience trumps theory” is a binary. Give me both, please. Where our Venn diagrams overlap, we… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

@kfg
“Likewise, no one on “the other side” has said that sub-coms don’t matter.”

Subcomms are what’s attractive. The muscles themselves are not.

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

“LOW VARIANCE”

How many inch tall people do you know?

Your impression that there is high variance is due to observational bias by psychological exaggeration of small differences within your own species.

Even larger differences in other species that allow them to distinguish one individual from another are invisible to you.

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

“Subcomms are what’s attractive. The muscles themselves are not.”

What are the sub-coms of a sneaker?

YaReally
5 years ago

@kfg
“What are the sub-coms of a sneaker?”

Is it a sneaker that can impregnate a girl?

keyser Soze
keyser Soze
5 years ago

Scary.
You post 1 or 2 videos of cats reacting to dogs when attacked, it’s like Yareally posting 1or 2 photos of muscular men in bikini . If you think that’s the rule, you both are ignorant and beyond repair.

What next, you show a cartoon video of an elephant scared of a mouse!.

scray
scray
5 years ago

@rollo “And yet, why would the social conditioning exist that would teach a girl to fear a giant gorilla? Because enough humans were killed by them to cause that fear. ” in other words….X happened and PEOPLE LEARNED. YA. ‘ Thus, we developed the cognitive capacity to learn from near misses.’ lol yes, we developed the cognitive capacity to learn and adapt to any environment — yes, learning and altering behavioral phenotype is pretty much man’s signature evo advantage. ‘what is it about good sub-coms that make them intrinsically good enough to be taught to be valued? What is it… Read more »

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

“Is it a sneaker that can impregnate a girl?”

The fact that it cannot, but can generate a sexual response is the point. All there is to respond to is the size, shape and color, which approximate that of a dove.

Harrison Bergeron
5 years ago

Jumping on how the metaphors, used to explain looks don’t matter, are *slightly* incorrect has drawn this discussion down a retarded rabbit hole. Looks don’t matter BECAUSE: with or without them, you need good game to land the girls. No matter how you acquired that good game (years of growing up with sisters, an older brother who hooked you up with girls from a young age, confidence stemming from your ability/mastery of something, or learning PUA like a robot) you NEED to display some core things for her to be attracted to you, whether you consciously realize that or not.… Read more »

scray
scray
5 years ago

@rollo

‘Why would Hollywood continue the long tradition (as in millennia long) of socializing that the presentation of muscularly defined men (not Jacked or Yoked, even the Haselton study confirms that) ‘

not a long tradition. the level of muscularity has changed, the level of bodyfat has changed, so….

and i mean, let’s just say it was 1000 years long. that’s almost zero time.
western culture has been around for roughly that long and so have its confederate norms

scray
scray
5 years ago

@keyser

“You post 1 or 2 videos of cats reacting to dogs when attacked”

you posted a pic of a cat sitting there and made some shit up about cats and dogs, so i’m ahead.

scray
scray
5 years ago

@kfg

“How many inch tall people do you know?”

k the human male varies several feet in height from mid 3 feet to nearly 8 feet.

this is HIGH VARIANCE.

sorry charlie.

‘Your impression that there is high variance is due to observational bias by psychological exaggeration of small differences within your own species.’

no there simply is high variance.

‘Even larger differences in other species that allow them to distinguish one individual from another are invisible to you’

made up woo-woo

height has a high h^2 = high genetic variability = supporting my point.

like i said, l2science.

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

” . . . drawn this discussion down a retarded rabbit hole.”

Past a certain point I tried to sit out. I failed.

“The only common factor for sex is game, so why even concern yourself with the externals?”

In my daily life they never even cross my mind. I’m too busy living.

keyser Soze
keyser Soze
5 years ago

@yareally.

WHY INFANTS GAZE AT BEAUTIFUL FACES?

I’m sure Scary(nicely picked name) will understand this experiment if he try it.

scray
scray
5 years ago

@keyser

actually already discussed infants looking at ‘beautiful faces.’

that’s the result of learning as well — averaging of faces seen since birth, and the correlation may be spurious because more average faces are seen as more attractive, so a face that just looks more like a prototype of the faces the baby has seen will, just by virtue of being easier to fit to an average, on average be more attractive

🙂

Harrison Bergeron
5 years ago

Whether I think I’m attractive, or whether I think she thinks I’m attractive, or whether I think she thinks I think…wait…

I still need to, as CH would say, bustamove!

scray
scray
5 years ago

@rollo “There’s nothing biologically attractive about creative intelligence, ” yes THERE IS. LOL this is why i talk about how becoming good at indirect game is SUPER POWERFUL creative intelligence is JUST TELLING A STORY. if you can tell a good story, you can make people BELIEVE YOU. if you can make people believe a reality, then guess what? you’re in a prime position to put your social status through the roof. it’s power, pure and simple. gee, what is creative intelligence very useful for in this instance? oh shit, SOCIAL CONDITIONING i can simply hijack that natural desire for… Read more »

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

@Scray:

Cats range from a couple of pounds to over 800.

scray
scray
5 years ago

@kfg

mmmhm

like i said, height has a high h^2.

that really seals the deal wrt whether there is ‘high genetic variance’ or not.

Andy
Andy
5 years ago

Wow… this is still going on? Is this like a pride thing? Sheesh… “What is it about those sub-coms that register as being survival beneficial?” There was obviously, somewhere in our past, a correlation between social dominance and healthy offspring. One theory I have is that in our past there were probably a lot more women than men in the Hunter/Gatherer days. This would raise the social value of men, and they would be in abundance and preselected, etc, etc… I think the looks guys are assuming that in the hunter/gatherer days only the physically strong survived. It’s just not… Read more »

having a bad day
having a bad day
5 years ago

@Sentient that visual cliff link might not be the best support for your argument of innate knowledge over learned social cues… However, results do not indicate that avoidance of cliffs and fear of heights is innate. … This study found that the infants exhibited distress less frequently when they were placed on the deep side of the apparatus in contrast to when they were placed on the shallow side. … This suggests that babies look to their mother’s emotional expressions for advice most often when they are uncertain about a situation. … This helps support the hypothesis that experience does… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

@Rollo “Why would Hollywood continue the long tradition (as in millennia long) of socializing that the presentation of muscularly defined men (not Jacked or Yoked, even the Haselton study confirms that) should represent the goos sub-com ideal?” The same reason you don’t sell antifreeze at your ice cream stand. Because you know your audience believes that antifreeze tastes bad. The same reason you’ll put a fireman on the cover of your future novel instead of a skinny or fat guy. Because under the current social conditioning that’s how you make MONEY. You STUDY the red pill and we can’t even… Read more »

keyser Soze
keyser Soze
5 years ago

Feminists and ugly fat women agree with you on ” looks don’t matter” .
How ironic.

YaReally
5 years ago

@Rollo “Attraction? Yes. Arousal, possibly, but the creative capacity is still subject to the social conditioning that what the guy creates has status value” Remember solipsism. If I pass a girl’s shit-test with wit/humor, she assumes that because SHE felt a spike of attraction when I passed her test, that OTHER girls feel that same attraction, which creates a feedback loop after you pass a handful of shit-tests and she creates her own preselection in her mind. “When we talk about looks and the sub-coms women expect from a particular look we’re focusing on the AF side and ignoring how… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

@Andy
“I think the looks guys are assuming that in the hunter/gatherer days only the physically strong survived. It’s just not true”

In a zombie apocalypse I would have grunts doing the physical fighting etc FOR me. Just like the dude who creates a society in all the zombie movies isn’t always the biggest jacked guy, he’s just the most charismatic dude who knows how to work social dynamics.

@Rollo
“rather what creative intelligence implies on a subconscious level.”

It implies better odds of their offspring surviving.

scray
scray
5 years ago

@rollo “You should read that post. Not saying you can’t talk a woman into bed with you, rather what creative intelligence implies on a subconscious level.” yes you have your speculation. i think my speculation is more accurate because it helps explain shit like religion, ideology, etc. when you can tell a good story, you can shape reality. cult leaders, great charismatic figures in history…..these are people who pretty much are applying the same concepts RSD talks about…. …. but on a level that is beyond the reach of normal people. charles manson was an ugly little troll who created… Read more »

YaReally
5 years ago

@scray
All of what you just said lol We teach guys to have charisma. There’s a reason EVERYONE around Russell Brand falls into his frame and why he was getting laid before he was a celebrity and it’s not because of his height lol

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

” . . . height has a high h^2.” Among registered Siamese cats it does not. You missed the point. Selection only operates among breeding populations. There are no 2 pound Siberian Tigers. Siamese and Siberians have been subject to different selection pressures. Genetic sports are not the result of selection either. You have now gone so far down the rabbit hole that even if your basic premise is correct, you are wrong. There is so little variation among humans that even the degree of sexual dimorphism is not particularly large . . . . . . except to us.… Read more »

scray
scray
5 years ago

@kfg “Among registered Siamese cats it does not. You missed the point. ” you don’t have a point. we’re talking about human beings across evolutionary time, not ‘registered siamese cats’ ‘There are no 2 pound Siberian Tigers’ the ‘cats’ you’re referring to are not the SAME SPECIES ‘You have now gone so far down the rabbit hole that even if your basic premise is correct, you are wrong.’ lol no, you just have no clue wtf you’re talking about ‘There is so little variation among humans that even the degree of sexual dimorphism is not particularly large ‘ you’re just… Read more »

Harrison Bergeron
5 years ago

@keyser Everyone on earth except feminists/fat acceptance knows that looks matter wrt women’s attractiveness. And people on both sides of this argument agree ‘cats are not dogs’ so your comparison is irrelevant wrt men’s attractiveness. @all The way I see it, if you believe looms do matter, you either 1) think you are unattractive and therefore can never have sex with pretty girls 2)think you are attractive and therefore can have sex with pretty girls as long as you maintain that attractiveness My question for you is, what advice would you have given scribblerg (I think it’s him, older guy… Read more »

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

“Russell Brand”

Imagine if the poor bastard hadn’t had the misfortune to be raised on post Kellogg English food. Guy looks like he has a trial by combat Viking King not too far back in his genetic line.

You were on better ground with David Spade.

Sentient
Sentient
5 years ago

So who taught this baby to react like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHJPYZL-66Y

Who taught you?

SJF
SJF
5 years ago

” . . . drawn this discussion down a retarded rabbit hole.” “Past a certain point I tried to sit out. I failed.” “Wow… this is still going on? Is this like a pride thing? Sheesh…” LOL. Obviously a Venn diagram manosphere intellectual-wrestling-match-tribal-border skirmish is going on here. It’s OK, there’s always figurative beers afterwards. From the OP: “Men need a common purpose in which the tribe can focus its efforts on. Men need to build, coordinate, win, compete and problem solve amongst themselves. The ‘purpose’ of a tribe can’t simply be one of getting together as like-minded men; in… Read more »

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

“The way I see it . . .”

3) I have zero fucks to give. As I don’t spend any great deal of time looking at myself, how I look is Somebody Else’s Problem

kfg
kfg
5 years ago

“the ‘cats’ you’re referring to are not the SAME SPECIES”

http://www.liger-hercules.com/liger-hercules-moksha-bybee/liger-hercules-moksha-bybee-liger-cub-aries.jpg

1.3K
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
%d bloggers like this: