The Creep – Part 2

Just so we’re clear here, yes, I get that there are a lot of ways to take the term ‘creepy’. In last week’s essay I wanted to dig into what women claim is ‘creepy’ and how this term is really another illustration of ambiguous fem-speak rooted in how a guy makes a woman feel. Furthermore, this feeling is modified by where that man is stationed in her perception of his sexual market value (SMV).

Last week I got linked a Tweet about ‘creeps’ by Roosh (he still hates me). He had a good point, and I paraphrase,

“Creeps are just guys that go from 0-100 in sexualizing a conversation with a woman way too fast. A good PUA knows that slow and steady sexualization works best.”

Take that how you want, but I think this is definitely part of the creep dynamic. There’s a bit more to being creepy than overly fast sexualization (or presumed familiarity); we’ve got to account for a Blue Pill / Beta guy’s lack of social intelligence to understand that taking it slow should be something he knows already. And still, how can we presume this slow and steady sexualization is a proficient form of seduction when we see more Alpha, more immediately arousing men, go from 0-100 themselves and get a same night lay? I’ve done this myself more than a few times back in a time when there was no formal Game to be had. Right guy, right place, right time, and 0-100 is what a woman is hoping will happen. Hypergamy is nothing if not pragmatic.

That said, I am convinced that this over-investment, too quick, too soon is definitely part of the creepy dynamic. I’ve made the call in several prior posts that it’s part of the Beta mindset to want to bypass the arousal and attraction phases of seduction to go directly to rapport. Thus, you get a guy who shares too much way too soon and this itself is creepy for women. It’s a huge telegraphing of that guy’s state of desperation and optionlessness. There’s no mystery left about the guy (assuming the girl even had an initial attraction) and nothing left to figure out. This over-sharing is also a huge red flag to women’s Hypergamous filters; it’s an indication that a guy ‘doesn’t get it’ with regard to how to play the Game with her.

You see, this rush to get to comfort and rapport is usually because that ‘creep’ is anxious to get past the arousal phase, the sexual tension, because he has no clue what to do in that phase. It’s a real source of anxiety for him, and besides, every woman he’s ever asked has said she needed to be comfortable with a guy before she has sex with him (false). Comfort, rapport, familiarity (all of which are anti-seductive) should be where the sex begins to his way of thinking, so again, male deductive logic would follow that getting there quickly would be pragmatic.

When a more Alpha, natural, moves quickly it’s almost always because he’s working with a receptive (proceptive) woman. As I mentioned before, arousal covers for a lot of men’s deficits in Game or feelings of creepery.

The Creeps

As most readers will have probably guessed I’ve timed the release of this series to address the current Hysteria of sexual assault / harassment / rape charges that are  moving like wildfire through Hollywood first, and now through the rest of our pop-culture social strata. While it may be satisfying to see mealy-mouth self-righteous actors and moguls take a fall, it’s important to see the larger social mechanics in play here.

I wrote that essay over a year ago and I’ll say now that I’d never dreamed how prophetic that post would turn out. Criticizing this #MeToo sexual assault hysteria is next to impossible. For the same reasons no one wanted to question the veracity of the UVA fraternity rape hoax that Rolling Stone and Sabrina Erdley perpetrated – no one now wants to question the accusations leveled at the various personalities being conveniently outed for sexual assault/harassment that in some cases occurred 30-40 years ago. We are expected to believe the testimonies of women without question.

This isn’t to say that the celebrities involved didn’t do what their accusers are saying they did, it’s that we are expected to accept that this behavior is endemic in all men, and based on the same principle of believing whatever a woman has to say about it with no afterthought given to its truth or her motives. It’s one thing to presume that whenever a woman comes forward with a rape or assault claim we are expected to presume the man guilty until proven innocent, but we’re rapidly reaching a point where any claim a woman has about a man bears that same weight. When it comes down to ‘he said, she said’, what she said will hold the full weight of the law.

Our Feminine-primary social order is now repurposing this ironclad believability of women – and presumed guilt of men – for every crime a woman ‘feels’ she’s been a victim of at the hands of a man. At the same time we see sexual harassment being defined as something that even a wink from a man can convey, we also see the rapid criminalization of men  who would dare to talk to a woman they don’t already know.

When we combine this overarching presumption of male guilt with the potential crime of men dealing with a woman with the intent of establish intimacy, and then add to it the ever changing definition of what can constitute sexual assault or harassment (and with a uniquely endless statute of limitations), we begin to get a clearer picture of the direction the Feminine Imperative has for men.

I’m sure this all seems very reactionary, but so was the questioning of Sabrina Erdley’s story about a nameless girl who was violently raped on the shattered glass of a broken coffee table by fraternity boys. Once again, I’m not saying sexual assault doesn’t happen, I’m saying that the direction gynocentrism is taking is one in which men ought to lose rights and liberties that only women ought to be the judges of.

Creepiness is a feeling women get from men who lack the social skills to ‘just get it’ that they are or aren’t into them. What this distills down to on a root level is women’s presuming that men should know better than to approach them when they are beneath their Hypergamous attraction floor. It is the criminalization of men not understanding how they fit into women’s sexual strategies. I made a case for this in The Political is Personal. The more men resist the social intents of Hypergamy, the more it will become necessary to legislate men to comply with it.

Feminine-primary social doctrine is an extension of  women’s Hypergamy.

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

We’re rapidly reaching this peak Hypergamous state. As I mentioned in Male Control, since the Las Vegas shooting the narrative of masculinity has shifted. There is no more “toxic” masculinity – it’s masculinity on-whole that is toxic. As Open Hypergamy becomes more institutionalized and made a societal norm by the Feminine Imperative, and as more men become Red Pill aware (by effort or consequences) because of it, the more necessary it will become for a feminine-primary social order to legislate and mandate men comply with it.

In the Zone

Morpheus had a great comment last week that hit on what I went into in Sexual Zoning:

The term “creep” can really lead in a bunch of different directions discussion wise, but I think a really big one is “sexual zones” vs “non-sexual zones”. Increasingly, there are all sorts of places where the default presumption is that women should be “free from” male advances. Work, school, etc. In these zones, the margin for error is very small. Unless you are an objectively visually attractive man with super tight game, the odds of you being perceived as a “creep” are much, much higher. In sexual zones, such as the Friday night bar, your margin for error is higher. The default presumption is men are there to meet women. You still need to have the right social vibe and not come across as a weirdo but you have a little more room to play with.

And from that post:

I would argue that a large majority of men accused of sexual harassment or even just suspected of impropriety are men who’ve found themselves in an environment they believed was an acceptable sexual zone. We are fast approaching a time when all zones will be so arbitrary and ambiguous that every environment with sexual potential will be avoided. This will have the effect of putting women into unilateral control of their own Hypergamy. It will be a state of Sadie Hawkins world – only women will make approaches on men and only those who match her Hypergamous ideal, an ideal fostered and reinforced by a steady diet of social media ego inflation.

A while ago I read this piece about Mike Pence:

“In 2002, Mike Pence told The Hill that he never eats alone with a woman other than his wife and that he won’t attend events featuring alcohol without her by his side, either.”

Naturally the media wants to pass this off as some masculine insecurity on Pence’s part. Certainly there’s a religious reason for Pence not wanting to present any perception of impropriety – I’ve know pastor who will never have closed door meetings with women or do counseling for women without their wives present – but there is a practical side to this habit. It prevents the accusations and opportunity for anything like what we’re seeing in the accusation cycling through Hollywood today. But still, shaming the masculine is the first reflex for the mainstream media.

This Atlantic article is an exercise in deliberately not seeing the intersexual writing on the wall. This is the practical contingency for a social order bent on removing men via accusations of sexual misconduct. Yet still, for all of the inherent dangers of a frivolous sexual harassment suit at the disposal of any and every western woman, men are supposed to leave themselves vulnerable to them:

Pence is not the only powerful man in Washington who goes to great lengths to avoid the appearance of impropriety with the opposite sex. An anonymous survey of female Capitol Hill staffers conducted by National Journal in 2015 found that “several female aides reported that they have been barred from staffing their male bosses at evening events, driving alone with their congressman or senator, or even sitting down one-on-one in his office for fear that others would get the wrong impression.” One told the reporter Sarah Mimms that in 12 years working for her previous boss, he “never took a closed door meeting with me. … This made sensitive and strategic discussions extremely difficult.”

This is the social environment feminism and our gynocentric social order has chosen to establish for men and women. Men pragmatically look for ways to guard themselves against allegation, and yet are shamed for that sensibility. It’s gotten (or will get) to the point where old books “decent” behavior is too risky to engage in in the modern workplace. Powerful men must hide behind open doors, and still those men are shamed for being prudent. Why?

We live in a new era where marriage has become disincentivized for men by the risks of capital loss in divorce that overwhelmingly favors women with cash & prizes. Now add to this the increasing ego entitlements of women to high value men. As the prospect of marriage looks less and less like a good deal for men wanting to protect themselves there comes a need for women to create ways to bypass the requirement for marriage to access men’s capital. Enter the era of increasingly more nebulous, acrimonious, accusations of sexual harassment or assault and de facto believability of women’s testimony. Exit the era of frivolous divorce (okay maybe not entirely) and enter the era of more easily accessible capital via frivolous sexual assault lawsuits.

More to come in part 3.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

Leave a Reply

  Subscribe  
Notify of
Mircea Popescu
Guest

The correct way to protect your capital is via something like the universal plan for wealth, ie extracting everything you can out of the empire, now. As long as they can confiscate it, they will, because they “have to” — women are entirely a pretext in this game. The Soviet Union confiscated it “for the war effort” or “for the children” or for “justice” or whatever the fuck, but in reality because socialism is untenable in practice ; the United States are no different.

cheupez
Guest

@rugby
Thanks for the great video selection, especially the male experience series. I wish I could watch all of them if it was not for the time constraints. I am in awe how you manage to watch all of them.

rugby11
Guest
rugby11

Not sure if this is relevant but from the female and male side (Not sure about “news” sources
but wondering if a female start’s something how does the male cope passed it without being a creep”)
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4941544/cheerleader-teacher-23-arrested-for-having-sex-with-teen-pupil-at-school/

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/22/ex-illinois-charter-school-teacher-28-charged-in-sex-romp-with-teen-boy-student.html

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/sex-with-student-cases-swamp-area-schools/9UapqJfGh3Qqh5wn53uHjI/

cheupez
haven’t seen all the videos

theasdgamer
Guest

John Nolte at Breitbart steps forward to defend Alabama candidate Roy Moore:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/24/nolte-shaky-allegations-roy-moore-not-enough-disqualify/

EhIntellect
Guest
EhIntellect

@ Novaseeker

I’m right in the middle of watching boys grow into men. I see them, their friends IRT education enforcing the FI narrative.

Sexual equality is the last thing on their minds. The girls play games no different than I experienced 30 years ago. They haven’t evolved, they’ve devolved. The boys, now, have unimaginable Game resources and are using them.

Young guys with game have a strong FI defense. They’re not falling for frustrating LJBF, other Betaization tactics.

MGTOW will increase. Not my preference, but better that than knuckling under.

I’m with Sentient. Alpha up.

Sentient
Guest
Sentient

Good stuff Rugby… That Systema clip is great.

[Note – it is not about fighting if you haven’t viewed it, it’s a narrative of rebirth, regeneration]

kfg
Guest
kfg

@Rugby -Cheupez: Spetnaz made a great bunch of videos before he essentially went dark and I’ve watched them all, but the later ones with less enthusiasm than the earlier, because they are all essentially stuck in the pain of having the red pill forcefully stuffed down your throat. They describe that state wonderfully, but they offer very little of where to go from there. And where to go is, like it or not, alpha up or lose. There is no way out. It is not a social construct. It is a construct of life itself. Winners reproduce, losers die out,… Read more »

kfg
Guest
kfg

“… That Systema clip is great.”

Yes, that’s the one, and I assume he went dark because he’s working on his rebirth now. I still check his channel now and again, because I want to see what he might produce after he is reborn.

Sentient
Guest
Sentient

Kfg

Who is he?

Yollo Comanche
Guest
Yollo Comanche

Spetznaz

Scott
Guest

Thanks, Rugby for the nod. Glad you liked the slideshow.

I need to go back and read this entire post and comments. It is a topic I will get into in at least one book chapter. I have some ideas about shifting social norms and spectrum/introversion. (Read: “Creeps”)

From a clinicians perspective, after swallowing the red pill, it is difficult to “unsee” the inherent problems with regarding non-normative behavior as psychopathology by definition.

gdeejay
Guest
gdeejay

@Scott

“From a clinicians perspective, after swallowing the red pill, it is difficult to “unsee” the inherent problems with regarding non-normative behavior as psychopathology by definition.”

Care to give an example for this statement … in laymen’s terms? I think I understand but want to make sure.

Edelweiss
Guest
Edelweiss

From my perspective, the guys most often labeled a “creep” are those with poor social awareness and/or men who those women see as offering no real value to them. Now in my mid 40’s, I can see things that would never have registered for a 20yr old version of me. I often think “how did I miss this before?”. My focus now is almost entirely on body language. A woman can consistently lie with what she says, but she (anyone really) can’t consistently lie with their body language. Any guy not well versed in reading the various signs of interest,… Read more »

Just Saying
Guest
Just Saying

During work, the women I’m around are like furniture – I can appreciate it’s appearance, and what it contributes, but I would never compliment a chair any more than I would a woman I work with And they are non-sexual creatures – doesn’t matter if they are at work or not. I keep my work and sex lives separate in the US, in other countries the line is more blurred depending on where I am. When I am at a gig – all of the women are for sex if they come back after a show. I’;m not going to… Read more »

Blaximus
Guest
Blaximus

” Women lie. Period..”

They do. They try. If you can read them, their attempts become as tissue paper though.

And if men realize that women ” lie “, then take what they say with a grain of salt ( or a dump truck load ).

Doesn’t make them bad people, lol.

trackback

[…] Edelweiss had an excellent comment in last week’s thread: […]

scribblerg
Guest
scribblerg

Defining Alpha for human’s is a fool’s errand because it doesn’t exist in a real way in human behavior. The alpha model in pack animals is specific to a pack’s social order. And even then, say in wolves, an alpha pack leader can be a female wolf. Human psychological/emotional and social order cannot be reduced to pack behavior. So first things first, be very careful when using this term. In humans Alpha simply means social dominance. A socially dominant man gets noticed when he walks into a room. Social dominance is defacto acknowledged. Now one can achieve social dominance by… Read more »

rugby11
Guest
rugby11

“Doesn’t make them bad people, lol.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNbYopzcRAA&t=33s
scribblerg
“Real social dominance is when people willingly submit to you. Same with women. Listen, Alpha is either born or formed very young in men. And even then, a man has to carefully develop his social intelligence and “stay within himself”, as Roger “The Rocket” Clemens used to talk about. Alpha men don’t have crises of confidence when they are insulted, or a woman acts out.”
Gold truth to the core…

Morpheus
Guest

“Women often rewrite history according to their situation – so never believe what a woman says without proof.”

YUP. THIS! I’m relearning this one as I see a 10+ year relationship that was mostly good especially the early years (before she went peri-menopausal) be recast as some “abusive” nightmare she “survived”. It is so surreally absurd.

Mr. Roboto
Guest
theasdgamer
Guest

@Morpheus

If you game your ex, you probably will see her recollections turn more positive.

Morpheus
Guest

If you game your ex, you probably will see her recollections turn more positive. LOL, not likely, as I received an e-mail from her attorney to not contact her further in any way unless I want harassment charges filed or an order of protection issued, and a law enforcement friend informed me these are pretty much universally issued at a woman’s request for any and all reasons. Although I came out just fine financially my ex acted like a petulant toddler throughout the proceedings process. She delayed her half of certain payments just to fuck with me, delayed responding to… Read more »

Morpheus
Guest

Mr. Roboto, Great post there, and spot on. Here is the “scarier” part about the whole women’s emotional state and how you react to it. Because of my ex-wife’s accusations and me trying to genuinely understand what the hell she is talking about I’ve spent some time reading about “emotional abuse” and alot of it is complete horsecrap intended to vilify the man and portray the woman always as the righteous “victim”. Do you know what one of the things considered “emotional abuse” is?….Invalidating emotions. So in other words, if the woman feels a certain way, and you try to… Read more »

theasdgamer
Guest

@Morpheus Game is more than Frame and witty one-liners. I recall scrib saying that his situation had speshul snowflake status, yet here he is a couple of years later saying that his daughter is just another girl and now they get along Ok…(he implies “because game”, lol)… You’re a clever guy. I’m sure you can figure out some way to use Preselection to game your ex without you saying a single word or even being near her and getting her to come to you on your terms. You might want to get a restraining order against your ex to make… Read more »

jamess101
Guest
jamess101

“They are just racist against ugly men’: Hall of Famer Jose Canseco goes on bizarre Twitter rant claiming women only report sexual misconduct when it’s an unattractive man”

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5173865/Jose-Canseco-goes-bizarre-sexual-assault-Twitter-rant.html#ixzz519pqFkhR

trackback

[…] CBS Los Angeles asking whether it was still OK for men to hug women. I used the cartoon I posted in The Creep 2 to illustrate my bigger […]

Gregorio
Guest

This isn’t a quote from Taylor Swift duc. None of the things you’re claiming she’s said are true. What is wrong with you? What enjoyment do you receive out of spreading false information? cbu ALL White people are fcking racist PEDOPHILES pcj i will kill white people, you are all racist this is SEWER 2154 kokpo noah.b.hurowitz@gmail.com

http everyword tv httpanybunnymobilatest587025
Guest

Adding the quantity togetһеr, it increases tһe totɑl of
75 millіߋn of Americans staying ɑt likelihood οf diabetes οr having diabetes.

From how it’s diagnosed, tο wһat medications ɑnd diets wօrk orr ԁon’t work.

Generаlly, ᴡith thiѕ condition, thee pancreas generates ⅼittle or no insulin.

trackback

[…] they know that in doing so they reduce their own chances of reproduction. Women simply deem them ‘losers’ in the SMP (sexual marketplace). They become scolds, or worse, they become men who are “insecure in their masculinity” […]

1 4 5 6
%d bloggers like this: