Alpha

Your Friend Menstruation

From Schedules of Mating:

There are methods and social contrivances women have used for centuries to ensure that the best male’s genes are selected and secured with the best male provisioning she’s capable of attracting. Ideally the best Man should exemplify both, but rarely do the two exist in the same male (particularly these days) so in the interest of achieving her biological imperative, and prompted by an innate need for security, the feminine as a whole had to develop social conventions and methodologies (which change as her environment and personal conditions do) to effect this.

Years ago, when I was writing this post, my emphasis was on how an evolved dynamic (female pluralistic sexual strategy) translated into evolved social dynamics (feminine primary social conventions). My focus then was on how the feminine creates and normalizes social conditions that favor hypergamy by covertly manipulating social expectations – not only of the men who would facilitate that hypergamy, but also for women themselves in how their own self-rationalizations (hindbrain, hamsters) can be socially justified (i.e the myth of  the feminine mystique).

I wrote Schedules of Mating in 2005 (on SoSuave) in an effort to explain the rudiments of hypergamy in a more accessible way for guys who were still struggling with understanding why women would say they wanted “a Nice guy with a good heart” yet would behaviorally opt for Bad Boy-Jerks as their sexual partners of choice. I still think it’s a pretty good essay, which is why I revised and included it in the earliest posts at Rational Male. However, even at the time I was writing, I knew that the concept of an evolved hypergamy and its social implication still had a lot more under the hood to explore.

Biological Hypergamy

My point of departure for today’s post is this study on hormones and brain activity from the Kinsey Institute. I’ll be quoting the 2008 study, but do read it, it’s fairly brief.

“One area of the brain in which we observed a difference in activation in response to masculinized versus feminized faces — specifically during the follicular phase — was the anterior cingulate cortex, which is a region involved in decision-making and the evaluation of potential reward and risk,” said neuroscientist Heather Rupp, research fellow at the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction. “Activation in this region has been previously reported to correlate with ‘high risk’ nonsocial choices, specifically monetary risk, so it is interesting that it is observed to be more active in response to masculinized male faces, who may be both riskier but more rewarding to women.”

Previous studies have shown that women’s sexual preference for facial characteristics vary depending on their menstrual phase. These fluctuating preferences are thought to reflect evolutionarily founded changes in women’s reproductive priorities. Around the time of ovulation women prefer more masculinized faces — faces with features that indicate high levels of testosterone. These facial cues predict high genetic quality in the male because only such males can afford the immune-compromising effects of testosterone. Testosterone may be costly for the males’ mates as well because high testosterone levels also are associated with high rates of offspring abandonment.

Around the time of ovulation, a female’s preference apparently shifts from avoiding negligent parenting to acquiring the best genes for her offspring. At other points during the cycle, women will prefer more feminized male faces, as they might signal a higher willingness of the males to invest in offspring.

Alpha fucks and beta bucks is a biologically hard-wired feature of the female mind. Studies like this aren’t unknown to the manosphere, and even the early PUA teachers had an almost instinctual(?) understanding of how a woman’s ovulatory cycle could affect a guy’s odds of a successful hookup without ever having read them. There’s a plethora of practical applications a man might use with a firm knowledge of how a woman’s cycle affects her mood, her susceptibility to his influence and how her rationalization will be altered as a result of the particular phase she happens to be in.

In his blue pill years, I think a lot of what accounts for a guy’s sporadic successes with women can be attributed to the woman’s ovulatory phase and favorable circumstance. Right phase, right place, right time and a guy who gave off just enough subconscious Alpha cues to get the lay – or the brief girlfriend status until her subsequent follicular phase peaked and he wasn’t the Alpha she thought he was 3 weeks prior.

Alpha Phase

From a Game perspective, using the this illustration as a guide, the latter half of the folicular (proliferative) phase – the period between day 7 to about day 14 – might be called the Alpha Phase for Men. The Kinsey study (and many similar ones) would indicate that this 7 (maybe 10) day window predisposes women to (Alpha) sexual influence and would be the optimal period for a man to make a lasting Alpha impression. ‘Gina tingles are most commonly born in the proliferative phase.

I’ve caught a lot of grief in the past from angry women for suggesting that all women have an ‘inner slut’ and that all a guy need do is be the right man at the right time to bring this out in them. I think understanding a woman’s cycle kind of puts a punctuation on this. The hot coed on spring break in Cancun who fucks the hot guy in the foam cannon party is probably in her proliferative phase. Add alcohol and you’ve got the chemical formula for sexual urgency – even from the ‘good girl‘. When she thinks or says “I don’t know what came over me, I’m not usually like that.” she’s observing her behavior from luteal phase perspective. She really isn’t “like that” the other 21 days of her cycle.

As the Kinsey study reports, it’s during this part of a woman’s cycle that she become subconsciously attuned to masculinized traits and makes subliminal efforts to capitalize on her concurrent ovulation. In other words, this is the period in which hypergamy doesn’t care the most. It’s “fuck me now, I’ll rationalize it out later.”

About now you’re probably wondering, “That’s all well and good Rollo, but how the fuck do I determine what cycle phase a woman is in?” If all a guy were doing was cold approaches I could understand the confusion. There are countless ‘tells’ women will display when they are in their proliferative phase. Dr. Martie Hasselton has done some excellent studies on female ornamentation coinciding with ovulation and also how women’s vocal pitch shifts lower (sultry voice) during this phase, but if you’re still unconvinced, listen to your gut – men instinctually know when women are in the pro phase of ovulation. If you have the patience to learn, pay better attention to the behaviors of the women in your immediate social circle, or to the behaviors of the girl you think you may want to target at some point. Since women living in close proximity tend to synchronize their menstrual cycles, more likely than not they’ll covertly infer when it’s ‘rag week’.

Beta Phase

If the proliferate phase is the Alpha Phase for Men, then the luteal phase could be considered the Beta Phase. Again using the Kinsey study as our guide we can infer that women become drawn to more feminine features in men during the 14 day down side of their cycle. The attributes of attraction (not arousal) that define this stage are associated with comfort, familiarity, empathy, etc. meant to reinforce the perception that a man is a good choice for parental investment.

Again, this is nothing novel in the manosphere. Even Roissy has written posts regarding the applied use of beta-side Game – in context. Far too many men believe the WYSIWYG myth about women and their advertised attraction requisites as being predominantly beta-associative. As I illustrated in Wait for It?, the girl who spontaneously banged the hot guy in the foam cannon party is the same girl who’ll tell you you need to earn her trust because she needs to be comfortable with you before you have sex. Betas believe this at face value and don’t strike while the iron’s hot (the proliferate phase), wait her out and wonder why they get LJBF’d at the end of her luteal phase.

I think where most beta men lose the trail is in the belief that Beta attraction is (or should be) synonymous with Alpha arousal. Each of these concepts is representative of a different facet of women’s pluralistic sexual strategy – Alpha seed, Beta need. Women’s sexual imperatives can be defined by the degree to which her short term mating strategy can be justified, or offset, by her long term mating strategy.

Nowhere is this disparity more obviously manifested than in the biological reality of a woman’s menstrual cycle which creates it.

The Hypergamy Link

One aspect of hypergamy that I’m not certain most men really understand is that hypergamy is a biological phenomenon in origin. I sometimes wonder if Game-aware men confuse hypergamy with being a social construct. Women almost certainly do, but more from a need to protect the rationalizations that result from confronting the uncomfortable internal conflict that hypergamy causes for them – “why am I not hot for the sweet beta who’d give me the world, but am tingly all over for the hot guy who’s casually indifferent to me?”

The base truth of hypergamy as a dynamic is that it is the logical result of women’s innate, hormonal and neural condition. This root-level disparity of a plural sexual strategy led to the evolution of the feminine psyche – to be covert, to be excusably duplicitous, to be better communicators on more varied levels, but also to be the nurturers and empathizers.

Since the sexual revolution began, the biological rationale for social feminization has been men’s biological proclivity for violence and aggression. We were told that we’re poisoned by our testosterone; we’re controlled from youth to repress that in school to the point where teachers expect boys to ‘act out‘, so we drug them. Yet, the biological rationale for hypergamy could also be said to lie in women’s biological (menstrual) impetus that motivates their sexual pluralism.

Kill the Bunny

New Case Study today. Reader JAS at SoSuave wanted help with his most recent target (edited for length):

I am 42. So here is the deal.

I moved to a new city a year ago and started a new job. There is a 35 yr old, hot woman there who I will call D. D is hot- about a 7, very smart, cool etc. From the beginning we hit it off and we have always spoken and interacted with some flirtatious undertones.. but we work together. Much as I liked her, I was up to my neck in pussy all this year. Little by little we would talk about our dates etc. and just generally were cool.. but we never spoke outside of work or anything. I liked her but not so much that I felt the need to pursue.

About 2 months ago I noticed a change in her that coincided with a change in myself – we were upping the stakes mutually. She would come around and talk more to me, lingering, lots of eye contact. I started feeling the need to do the same. Things went on this way until eventually until 2 weeks ago I asked her to get a drink. She jumped at the chance. We met up that Friday and hung out. I was still unsure if I was interested enough to pursue her, but by the end of the evening it had all clicked. I LIKED her.. in a keeper sort of way. We ended our hanging out with a peck on the lips.

We met up at a work function the night after and weren’t able to do much, but we snuck some hand holding and another short kiss. She wanted to do brunch the next day, but I had a  birthday party for family Sunday and had to say no.

So back to work on Monday and due to our schedules wouldn’t be able to meet for a bit. Wednesday we both walked up to each other and she literally stamps her feet an says “I really want to see you!”. I said me too and that I would call her that night to meet up. Its was do or die, because she had a trip out of town and would be gone until this week. So I get home, text and …..nothing. No response until 10 pm saying she went jogging without her phone and met her sister for some errands. I was like WTF?

I played it off and said no big deal, but that I did find that confusing, could we meet tomorrow? she said she had tentative plans and wasn’t sure, but knew I wouldn’t hang around waiting so probably not. I didn’t respond.

Next day she is texting me and asking me questions all the time.. I responded late and only curtly as I sensed she was fishing to see if I was angry.

She went on her trip and when she got back on Tuesday, I played it cool and didn’t say much at all. I was polite but never brought any of it up. But I didn’t flirt much either.. Just being neutral.

So yesterday I was talking to her and decided to force her to either drop it or go for it. I went to her and said “go out with me”. She kind of hemmed and hawed but said she wanted to and Friday might be best. I said fine, but then she said that maybe she had to check on something to make sure. I remained cool and said, contact me and let me know.

I haven’t heard from her yet, but its still Thursday, so I decided to just leave the ball in her court.

What are my next steps? If she doesn’t call at all, I plan to not remind her about our plans at all. If she is interested, she will contact. If she doesn’t I plan a freeze out. But not sure what else to do.

This was JAS’s set-up situation. Later he developed a bit more:

I get to work today and she is walking in early. She comes to where I am and starts talking about the weather etc, as she talks I continue my trajectory towards the spot I sit at outside during my break. She realizes I am continuing on my path and starts walking and facing my direction. I am not overly talkative, but not acting all butthurt either, just chill. She eventually breaks and goes inside.

Later on, during the day she is insinuating herself into my conversations. Again, I am not being rude, or any different than usual, except I cut out the flirty vibe we always have and thats all. I notice her trying to read me throughout, kinda like “is he really ok, or is he secretly mad?”, but that may be projection on my part. Who knows what thoughts are in there.

As I get ready to head home, She corners me in the hallway, this is, more or less, the convo as I remember it

Her: I feel I’ve fucked this up. I should have called you but I’ve really been a mess lately.
Me: its cool, I had a feeling you weren’t feeling it and made other plans
Her: really? I mean, should we talk about this? Its always so weird talking here at work, I feel strange.
Me: I’m not sure what you mean. What is it you want to talk about exactly?
Her: this, us. I don’t know whats going on.
Me: if you like we can
Her: I give up, I don’t know what……..
Me: for me its simple, we are either feeling it, or we’re not. By your behavior my assumption is you are not. Or you would have made more of an effort. And if that is the case, Its ok.
Her: Are you feeling it still?
Me: are you? Look, we’re being crytpic, So let me show you how its done: Yes, I would like to get to know you, I made that clear by asking you out. I expect, if its mutual for you to follow through. If not, well..
Her: it is. We do need to get together. Cant we get together tomorrow? Doing things here at work is just always confusing. I feel weird here, its confusing.
Me: I have plans (I really do)
Her: this is ridiculous. Wednesday?
Me. Wednesday is fine.
Her: I can’t read you. You give me this look, I don’t know what it means. I give up
Me: grabbing her hand: It means I like looking at you. So wed? set?
Her: yes.
Me:good
Her:good!
We both walk away smiling.

This is the first stage for JAS. He gets a B- for performance thus far. The first exchange was weak – a peck on the cheek, hand holding, etc. sound like an episode of Hannah Montana. This is not how adults date. If I had to guess, it was his hesitancy to consolidate on getting more intimate with her that’s what gave her pause. When the green light’s on brother, drive the friggin car.

However, his recovery is what’s saved him. She is qualifying to him and in a big way, this is exactly how you want it. He handles himself maturely and with amused mastery when he’s not ‘on a date‘, he needs to transition that into getting intimate with her. Notice how she accepted his direction here:

Her: I can’t read you. You give me this look, I don’t know what it means. I give up
Me: grabbing her hand: It means I like looking at you. So wed? set?
Her: yes.
Me:good
Her:good!

This is the dominance a woman is expecting from you when you’re building up to having sex with her. He owns it when he’s not on a date, but needs to own it when he is. Hesitate and thou art lost. Go timid on her on Wednesday, play nice and don’t escalate to making out (or more) and she goes off to find the next Alpha she thought you were.

Thus far JAS had been Alpha at work and Beta on the date. Her confusion comes from initially ‘reading’ him as Alpha, but he didn’t close the deal.

This is what women mean when they say they “can’t read you”
Translation: “You’re sending me Alpha cues, but you pull back like a Beta when it’s time to get physical.”

Also, have a plan. You lead. Tell her where you’re going and what you’ll be doing. She enters your world, you don’t enter hers – from his last conversation this is how she wants it anyway. Be fearless. She wants a whirlwind, you need to be that whirlwind.

After the Wednesday ‘date’ JAS gives us an update:

Well, we got our coffee today. I think it was good and bad… not sure if it was more of one or the other.

We got a coffee because lunch was impossible for both of us. As we walked we talked a bit about BS, until I stopped her and said “lets talk about what we came here to talk about”
So we started in. She gave me the “I’m not sure about what to do” thing. “I like you- obviously- and I’m attracted to you, but this is really complicated for me”
Me: yeah I got that vibe.
Her: so I don’t know, some days I wake up and say I want to pursue this, and other days I wake and think “fuck it, I cant deal with it”. I know I’m going to regret it if I don’t”

And so I pulled out my favorite move. I LJBF her. I said “look, whatever we do we’re good. Lets just be friends then”.
Hit the mark, “really?” she asked looking disappointed. In short, she didn’t let it drop there. She started saying she was attracted to me, and felt a deep connection to me and that I really understood her, probably more than anyone.

By now we’re back within eyesight of our hosp. co-workers are in and out. We go back and forth talking about it all, and she says “I’m sad” I asked her why. She said she didn’t know. I tell her “I’m a little sad too” she asked me why. I said “for the same reason you are probably. There is something here” We go on like this for a bit.

This where I think I got one bad thing- and I immediately thought of Rollo. She says “but you’re not very aggressive”
OUCH. I let it pass, mostly, but then it occurred to me “you make sure to keep us surrounded by people and never alone enough for me to do anything. You have your shields up, and you know it”
Her: yeah, your right. I’m scared of you, I think.

So I LJBFd her again. Basically I’m push pulling here, using the LJBF as a push every time I get something I don’t like.
Eventually, I say I have to go.. that I am leaving town. She says “tonight?” arent you driving?” I say “yes” she says I should wait until morning.

Is this an invitation to invite her out tonight? I’m still in LJBF mode with her. I say that was the plan, but I’ll see how I feel.
I then pulled her to me and kissed her, mind you, within view of potentially the entire hospital. So it wasn’t a major kiss, but it was on the lips and risky. Now she looks a bit confused – to be honest I am as well, since I am not sure if this is all good or not. Weird.
She then tells me again “I’m sad”
Me: dont be
her: no? why not?
Me: this isn’t over.
her: its not?
Me: no

So some good and bad here. The “your not aggressive” was a blow. I think I fended it off well though. I got her to admit alot, while maintaining frame, but its not where I would have wanted to go with this. Its about what I suspected. She is still scared to have a relationship, after what happened with her ex. I got her to tell me more about it all. etc. So I need outside imput here.

I also am of two minds of how to go here. I can try to get her to meet up again tonight- tell her I want to see her again before I go, etc. Or I can use the next two weeks vacation as a reset. Use it as an opportunity to work her via texts and having her miss me.

I believe she is being sincere as far as she can tell. Rollo is right she wants me to lead, but all the while making sure I can’t by blocking me out at every opportunity. I think I revealed alot of herself to her. I think she is being sincere when she said that I am a mystery to her, that she has never met someone like me. She says I am dark, and deep, and complex and she feels connected and attracted to me. And scared.

JAS, read what I’m about to write here carefully because it might help you with the next girl you meet after this one.

YOU NEED TO KILL THE FUCKING BUNNY!

Up to this point you’ve just been batting her around and confusing her with this coffee house, “safe-date shit. You’re not Gaming her or push-pulling her, or preempting anything with a LJBF.

“lets talk about what we came here to talk about”

Learn this now, you cannot negotiate desire. This is exactly what you’re doing here. You wanna fuck this woman? You wanna get some kind of relationship started?

STOP BROKERING THE DEAL.

Sexuality is spontaneous chemical reaction between two parties, not a process of negotiation. It’s sex first, then relationship, not the other way around. Genuine desire cannot be negotiated. Once you get past a certain point in the waiting game, what once had the chance to be an organic, sexual desire becomes mitigated negotiation of a physical act.

I feel like I’m reading a script between two kids from High School Musical. Take her on a ‘real date’. Go to a lounge, have cocktails, be indirect. Up to this point you’ve been overtly telegraphing your intent – this is the kiss of death. It’s like you’re writing up a proposal for a speculative relationship you might have if she signs the papers.

She is still scared to have a relationship, after what happened with her ex.

Yeah, my guess is this guy was the decisive Alpha you haven’t been with her, or if not she was hoping to find after the breakup. My advice to you is to chalk this one up to experience and NEXT her (workplace affairs are always a bad idea as it is). My readers will probably tell you she’s damaged goods, but if you insist on following through with this train wreck, stop being the PG rated JAS and start being the R rated JAS. Presume you’re dealing with an Alpha Widow and standing in her ex’s Alpha shadow.

Girl’s Night Out

A Girl’s Night Out

I’ve been dating this girl for about 5 months now. She’s very attractive, I’d say an HB7 or 8. Her interest level is extremely high. I’d say in the high 90% bracket. She always calls or e-mails me when we’re not together telling me how much she misses me, etc, etc. And she expresses her feeling towards me in many ways when we are together. So my point here is that I know she’s really into me. And I play by the rule of keeping my interest level slightly below hers to keep things going. And it’s worked. Also, I apply all of the Game principals in our relationship. So I’m no chump with this girl and I feel that I have a good grip on the realtionship.

Her friend from New York is visiting her for four days. Her friend is single and young (25). Tonight they’re going out to a dance club with another girl whom they know who is also not dating anyone. This is all just fine. I understand that I shouldn’t discourage or show any type of insecurities regarding her going out with her friends. But I do feel that her two friends are going to be interested in the possibility of hooking up with some guys even though my girlfriend is not. It only makes sense since her one friend is from out of town, and they are single. This concerns me because I think it will put my GF in an awkward position.

I’m a bit confused on whether or not I should ask her anything about that evening in a playful manner when I talk to her next. In other words, what’s the best practice to do in this situation? Should I simply ask how her night went and if she had fun and just leave it at that? Or should I playfully poke at her about dudes hitting on her, and how girls can be naughty?

So the dillema is that on one hand, I don’t want to seem too passive about the whole thing. But on the other hand I don’t want to seem insecure. Part of me says that I should express some degree of protectiveness toward her in this situation. But I don’t want to send the wrong signal.

What are your thoughts

Let her go.

“You do know what happens when your girlfriend ‘gets drunk, he was cute, and one thing led to another,..’?!!” Yes, I’ve been the guy who nailed your girlfriend.

“You do know that ‘taken’ girls just want to live vicariously through their single girlfriends?” I’ve written volumes about it.

This is a very common shit test. Don’t even pause to think about it and do NOT let her perceive for a second that you’re even contemplating it. Be matter-of-fact and tell her you’ll see her when she gets back. Don’t tell her to call you, and don’t you call her. If she calls be concise and ask her if she’s enjoying herself, nothing more – no details, nothing. Let her be as forthcoming as she wants and never for a minute give her the impression you’re suspicious or posessive. This is the surest way to pass this test.

When and if she asks about what you’ve been doing, tell her you’ve been busy with work/school, your family, etc., (i.e. something unavoidably responsible). Do NOT say you’re out with the boys in some lame effort to counter her going off with the girls. Do NOT give her the impression that you are doing anything as a reprisal to her going off with the girls. Do NOT give her the impression that you are pacing around the house waiting for her to call or sulking. In fact I’d advise letting your voicemail pick up the call and then call her back an hour later, if at all.

I’m sure many guys reading this are experiencing the twangs of possessive insecurity even in my suggesting this course of action. The reflexive response most guys will have in a situation like this will be one of mate protection; the fear being that if they don’t express their disapproval they’ll run the risk of their woman thinking they don’t care enough about them to be jealous. This is a trope most guys sell themselves, because it’s more about suspicion than jealousy. As intuitive as this sounds it really masks the insecurity that their girl will meet another guy and hook up with him. On an instinctual level we’re well aware of women’s pluralistic sexual strategies, thus an evolutionarily honed suspicion was hardwired into our psyches to protect men from becoming the beta cuckold provisioning for another male’s offspring. However, as counterintuitive as this sounds, a GNO is an excellent opportunity to display confidence behaviors.

The GNO Shit Test

The secret of the GNO (girls night out) shit test is, the truth of the matter is, that if a woman is determined to cheat on you, there’s really nothing you can do about it. You can protect your own genetic interests, but whether it’s on a GNO or with some guy from the office, if a woman wants to fuck, she’ll find a way to fuck and all the psychological, possessive arm twisting in the world wont change that desire. The covert message in this is what’s important.

Remember, a woman’s default is to communicate covertly. When you are indifferent to her proposition of a GNO it sends the message that you are confident enough in your own ability to replace her should she cross that line. Let her imagination work for you. Women love to convince themselves, “he trusts me implicitly” while they secretly sift through your text messages, but the covert message is really a veiled threat and exemplifies your self-confidence. Bear in mind it’s what she feels in this communication. If you leave her with the feeling that you’re clingy, possessive, sulky and worried, the impression she has is that you’re weak and are the kind of guy that women settle for, not compete for. Essentially you make her the PRIZE by voicing your insecurities. Alphas don’t worry about their plates on GNOs, in fact women enraptured by Alphas don’t see the appeal of GNOs.

A Prince isn’t worried about the behavior of one woman when he has several more on the royal speed-dial; one more testament to the power of abundance thinking and Plate Theory. This may or may not be the case, but the impression of it and the covert communication of it is vital. If, by your actions you can leave her with the feeling that you have a lot going for you, you’re in demand, that you are a commodity that other women will compete for, that you are the PRIZE; you plant the seed of doubt and she will voluntarily curb her desire to go on GNOs – and this is the outcome you’re striving for. You want your attention to be more rewarding than the attention she’ll receive on a GNO. You can’t force this into being so, but you can covertly manipulate her desire. You want her to talk herself out of going.

Learn this now, making a woman cognizant of higher sexual market value can only be demonstrated, never explicated.

Disclaimer: At this point I should also add that this in no way excuses the woman who CONSTANTLY goes on GNOs as some kind of ritual with her girlfriends. This is symptomatic of a larger problem and this, again, is based in desire. If you ever find yourself in this circumstance your best recourse is to NEXT and remove your attentions entirely. Women who have a regular GNO in LTRs are seeking something vicariously through their friends that they feel deprived of and need a fix for to feel completed. It’s only a matter of time until the right circumstances arise for her to consolidate on that deprivation. Better to cut your losses on a bad investment than play the cuckold for a woman who has no genuine desire for you and regularly demonstrates this in her behavior.

Possessiveness

I’ve known seasoned players who’d pee themselves over a girls night out proposition, but I always advise they adopt the attitude that she’s free to go do whatever she’d like. In fact I’d encourage it. That’s where confidence makes you a man, when you can say “go ahead, have a good time.” It’s what’s implied in the action that counts. If a woman (or man) wants to cheat, they’ll find a way to do it, with or without your knowledge. The only person who’s actions you can control are your own. Now, would it suck to break up a marriage over that? Yes, but I’d rather it be dissolved than to live disingenuously one minute longer than necessary.

If I locked my wife/GF up in a closet that only gives credence to my insecurity about my relationship and changes the nature of my LTR. In fact, in doing so the frame automatically transfers to a woman the moment you become possessive, because you confirm for her that you lack the confidence to generate new options (i.e stimulate competition anxiety) – to be a man that other women would desperately want should she decide to cheat. You must be a Man that your GF/Wife doesn’t want to cheat on. Sometimes a woman can’t appreciate this because she’s too immature to get it, but you have to be the Man confident enough to say “do what you want” while communicating higher value. As I’ve stated before, when your silence inspires more dread than your words, you’re probably an Alpha.

A lot of guys have a real tough time with possessiveness. What they tend to overlook is the element of desire. If you’ve got a girl who want’s to go off with the girls to Vegas for a weekend the operative in the whole situation is that she WANTS to go. While I do understand the necessity of ‘mate protection’ this desire is already established BEFORE you issue any ultimatum (which is a declaration of powerlessness). If she had a fear of loss to begin with she would’ve passed on the trip because she had a genuine desire to do so. In fact considering it wouldn’t even be an afterthought.

This is the Desire Dynamic – you can never force a genuine desire by means of coercion or negotiation. You can pay a woman to fuck you, it doesn’t mean she wants to fuck you of her own volition. The girl still wants to go to Vegas even if her man were to give her an ultimatum, and in addition he comes off as an optionless, possessive chump. I realize the idea is that if he’s uncompromising and she magically respects him she’ll develop a real interest level in him because he put his foot down as a “real man”, but the damage is still done. Her desire isn’t for him, it’s for Vegas, even if she says “OK honey, you win”. It’s not genuine.

The Warrior Gene – Is Alpha Genetic?

I held off on posting this video because it’s about 45 minutes long and I figured most readers would probably want to watch it at their leisure (rather than on their ‘valuable’ work time), but it’s well worth the investment.

Any time I write about defining Alpha or detail my interpretations of Alpha as a dynamic it’s always cause for heated debate. People are always conflicted on the issues of what biological, attitude or character traits makes a Man Alpha, and as I’ve detailed before there’s always a want to force Alpha into a definition that would best describe ourselves.

Beyond this there’s the question of what makes a Man, naturally (genetically?) an Alpha, and what factors make him a learned Alpha or a contextual Alpha as situations warrant. I’ve covered all of these interpretations in the past year, but it wasn’t until I watched this episode of National Geographic Explorer that I became aware of the concrete genetic evidence of (or at least a genetic indicator) Alpha. I’ll try not to be too much of a spoiler here, because watching this video through a manosphere, Alpha-Beta filter should be enough to give most of my readers a new insight to how Alpha can be defined.

Biological Determinism

For a lot of guys subscribing to the idea that Alpha is built upon manly virtue and noble intent, your first impression of a biological Alpha-determinant will likely be one of disbelief, or incredulity. Watch the video to the end. You’ll probably come up with rationalizations about how a biological predisposition for violence does not an Alpha make, and how humans aren’t slaves to their biology or instinct. You’ll be pleasantly surprised by the end of the show.

That said, while watching this here are some things to think about:

  • Is Alpha both nature and nurture?
  • How does this propensity for violence and /or a biologically motivated dynamism agree with our present defining of Alpha?
  • Does an ability, or lack thereof, to channel this natural (genetic) impulse toward constructive or destructive ends change the definition of Alpha?
  • How does the idea of a biologically defined Alpha evolutionarily agree with what we understand about Hypergamy? (War Brides, the attraction of violence, rape fantasy, etc.)
  • Can Alpha be learned and internalized or faked in the long term convincingly?
  • Is genuine Alpha status earned or determined, or perhaps both? (don’t answer until you watch the end of the video)

This study has given me a lot more to think about in terms of how we define Alpha, but it correlates well with my prior Alpha concepts. Alpha is a mindset, not a demographic.

I will do a followup on this post once readers have had the chance to view and opine.

Blueprint for an Alpha Widow

Hithard’s recent flushing of his nest drew the unsurprising female indignation response from Rational Reader ‘S’. Hers is the predictable reflex with which women feel the need to associate with themselves when confronted with (even hypothetically) another woman’s behaviors reflecting badly upon the feminine as a whole. In Indignation I touched upon the need for women to create the rise that comes from indignation for themselves, or live it vicariously through the proxies of their friends or media that caters to this need.

However there is still a need for a disconnect from that indignation impulse in order to preserve the feminine ego. It may be satisfying to experience drama via a third party, but not many women can afford to be called out for it.

So when a woman inserts herself into the psychological proxy role of another woman experiencing that indignation first person, the immediate response is one of ego preservation. My drawing attention to this isn’t to burn down S’s feelings about casting herelf into another woman’s role, but rather to observe the more rational process women will use when they’ve got a disconnected God’s-eye view of all the aspects of a relationship between the two parties causing that indignation.

“I would never stick around / go back to a man who dumped me! Here’s what she should do,…”

For all of what makes women primarily emotional creatures, it’s interesting to see how rational a response they can muster to a vicarious source of indignation. And in predictable feminine fashion S makes that third party indignation about herself (here’s what she / I would do). From Point, Counterpoint:

Women on the other hand almost exclusively rely upon personal experience and anecdotal evidence to form a premise; only using extrinsic information to support their personal interpretations when the source agrees with that premise. The innate solipsism of women promotes a self-centric primary position as the beginning of forming a premise and then progresses to extrinsic sources for ancillary support.

What S fails to account for, and what Hithard elaborates on in his final comment is that, with the first person emotional investment, women will routinely return to a former lover if his Alpha impact was sufficient enough. Even when a woman cannot physically return to that Alpha defined relationship, she will return emotionally.

What Hit hard describes is the blueprint for creating an Alpha Widow:

@ S
“Well that’s good for those women but I’m serious. Why would anyone want to hang around someone who does not want them?”

That’s a valid enough question for me to give an answer on before I go. I do feel it is a topic that can benefit us all.

For women it all depends on how strong the emotional connection is to a man and if you are filling her needs.
Let’s focus on the emotional connection though as it has the strongest pull factor, and hopefully I can give you some form of idea through a post. Which is difficult when challenging a held belief

Now for arguments sake let’s say you and I (hey try to visualize I am your perfect match) S go through the usual process and begin a relationship.

Things start off strongly. There is both a physical and emotional attraction, but more than that… When we are together there is an element of excitement that sets your heart fluttering. The feeling that I overwhelm your senses, where you feel safe to begin investing in me, both emotionally and physically. With each passing day you feel a stronger and stronger connection that warms your core. Where mind body and soul feel as though they are full of the pure essence of being. You are happy to be led in this passionate embrace. Your needs are satisfied, your spirit fulfilled. YOU ARE HAPPY!!

“Wait, what you’re breaking up with me?”

“What do you mean you want to break it off, no I don’t understand?”

“How is this for the better?”

And this is where the residual emotional attachment comes into play.
Developing an emotional attachment with a woman is a bit like hooking someone on drugs when it’s done right. It is very hard to maintain past a certain timeframe though in a relationship. And there can be numerous other mishaps, with this post only touching the surface.

Now first thought is usually ‘a$$hole’ and anger.
But that passes as the innate need for contact develops. The feeling of just being close to that person even if only briefly, gives them that fix that they crave.

Now I can drip feed your emotional needs to position you to where I want you to be. If I have anchored the emotions right, then you will feel as if no one can love you like I do. Or no one touches you or makes love to you with the passion that I do. Each stage through the escalation I have to ensure I am leading, directing and in touch with where I want to be. The end result I am looking for is your emotions screaming out to be fed in my absence. The reason you run back and fuck me is because it feels as if my intimacy is feeding your soul. The reason you try to please me is to grasp at the high I can deliver

You’re probably thinking:

“I’m not that stupid”

But most people can think back to moments in their life where the heart ruled the head. Hypotheticals are always a mother foucker. The most I can say is this is a high percentage occurrence.
Guys do this as well and God knows there are forum boards full of guys wanting to run back and get stomped on again. Guys tend to get hooked from their feelings being taken high, low, high, low etc over time. Women more from an intense high to a low over a shorter time frame.

Just reading something about a situation can be very hard to identify with because it reads like a no brainer. But if a lot of people wrote down the dumb things they do in love they would simply cringe and think;

‘Was I really that stupid?’

So bear that in mind when challenged with what may feel is an inconceivable notion. Emotions can blind you.

And you are right – why would a sensible person stay. The saving grace for a fool in love is time. Time to wake from his/her stupor.And generally people eventually wake up

I suppose I treat relationships a bit like bubble gum from time to time. I mean it’s great when it has flavour but over time it gets bland and tasteless and I have enough of it and throw it away. The last thing I want to do is go find it and pop it back in my mouth again for another go.

The above was just an over the top example to try and answer the question. Not something you should try and do, some kind of relationship advice, or something I go out of my way to do. Generally you only need a bare minimum of emotional attachment and play it from there. Each step can be expanded on massively and you will have to forgive my syntax, rambling and bad grammar.

Big thankyou to Rollo who has been a great mentor over the years. Someone who has my greatest respect.

Just learnt of the passing of Jophil, a great loss to the community and one that has saved many a broken man. I regret not letting him know the positive influence he had on my life.

Later all and best wishes

I’ll come to you like an affliction, but I’ll leave you like an addiction, you’ll never forget me, you wanna know why?,…

Flushing the Nest

Esteemed SoSuave member HITHARD relates a recent flushing of a nest:

It must be an attitude shift or something. But every time I come back to the SS forums my relationships blow up. I don’t notice myself doing anything different but if I’m with a girlfriend they must notice a change and purposely start pissing me off. Perhaps it’s a good thing, a wake up call that I’m not with the right girl and I should go back to FB for a while. My now ex started getting bitchy last week and it just escalated from there. I’m pretty laid back – but arc up if someone tries to stand over me or dictate terms. Her jaw dropped when I told her to pack her things and leave. She hasn’t been living here on a permanent basis but had managed to horde a bit of her stuff over here in the past three months. She was a really nice girl, very pretty good with money. But she started to not so much nag, but nitpick at me and I’m over that at this stage of my life. It’s either something she has managed to hide for all these months or I bring it out in her. Either way it’s a no go from here. Am I being selfish over this?

So perhaps SS is bad for me short term but a deal saver long term. Or it’s a subconscious thing of ‘relationship is already over time to go on SS’
After all the FB, plates and relationships, I do look around and am just not impressed with the quality of the women out there.
I do worry I’m starting to form a trend of breaking it off with women when I get bored or irritated though. My longest LTR was with what I think was a BPD chick long before what I knew what BPD or the SS forum was. I sometimes worry if that has left a lasting effect.

There’s always going to be a contingent of guys – mostly White Knights, but some well meaning red-pill men too – who’ll presume you’re throwing the baby out with the bathwater when ever they read a situation like this. A Scarcity Mentality is one of the hardest mental schemas Men deal with in transitioning over to becoming Game-aware. For most, the better part of half their lifetime has been spent in a psycho-social condition that’s taught them women are to be prized, and her intimacy is a rare and precious gift, rewarded to only the man who can prove himself worthy of it.

It’s a hard schema to unlearn, and even the most unapologetic of PUA still feels that twang of doubt about a decision to NEXT a girl he thought might be of LTR potential. So it’s no shock that to NEXT a woman for what appears to be some minor infraction of nitpicking seems like a wanton overreaction – like stomping on a flower before it has a chance to blossom. Necessitous men, and men recovering from being so, will often adopt the same mentality women will when they hear about situations like this, and call it callous, or selfish, maybe even vindictive of past hurtful experiences. The reason for this is because these men, and women by default, still view monogamy from the perspective of the feminine imperative. Monogamy is meant to serve the feminine, so any action that controverts that, no matter how justified, is by definition selfish.

In the time I’ve been writing in the manosphere I’ve read more stories about how Game saved an LTR more so that the reverse, but that isn’t to say there aren’t breakups that result from a new Game-awareness. Hithard’s self-evaluation about his NEXTing isn’t unexpected. His story isn’t the first I’ve encountered about “Game destroyed my LTR” – that Scarcity Mentality self-doubt needs a scapegoat and Game is an easy foil for this, especially for guys who’ve just unplugged, pushed the envelope back against the shit they were accepting up to that point and the LTR imploded. In virtually everyone of these instances where a man reclaims his balls and the result is a breakup, inevitably the guy realizes what a tough, but ultimately good decision it was to rid himself of a toxic woman, or a woman too insecure in herself to want to relinquish frame after having been in control for so long.

Often enough, a breakup is the red-pill solution.

Flushing the Nest

However, I know Hithard (virtually) well enough to know this isn’t his case. He’s been unplugged for a while now, so my guess is twofold:

First I think there’s more to the ‘nitpicking’ and the nesting that this girl was initiating than he’s going into detail about. I think he’s trying to be more judicious about this because he’s seen (or is subliminally aware of) behavioral cues and attitude cues that are familiar to him from his prior (BPD) LTR, and wants to give her the benefit of that doubt.

He’d hit the 3 month point, and this is usually the time when a woman starts to get comfortable enough with a guy to attempt a frame grab. The obvious tell was how she was semi-permanently establishing a nest at his place. Never a good idea, but entirely expected of a woman who feels the urgency of sex decline with her competition anxiety. I don’t know for certain that this is Hithard’s experience, but it follows a very consistent pattern. At the very least she’s reached a stage at which she feels comfortable enough to make demands of behavioral change (nit picking, nagging, complaining).

On a basic, relational level these are shit tests, but these are now the variety of shit test that qualifies for LTR frame control, as opposed to the types of shit test a man receives whilst dating when the urgency of competition anxiety mediates a woman’s delivery. For example, while single, only the most vapid, self-absorbed women will feel comfortable in making the demands most other women will commonly expect of their LTR man. When single, the art of the shit test is in its nuance and subtlety, when monogamous the shit test is overt and unmistakably direct.

Secondly, after a certain age (SMV), and after some degree of prior relationship chaos there’s a want for some sense of stable normalcy. Most guys are all too willing to compromise what seem, at the time, like small concessions to their women’s demands in exchange for keeping the peace and the legs open. The problem is that this progressively becomes a situation of death by a thousand paper cuts, or frame control by a thousand conceded nitpickings. For beta men, frame control is ceded as part of their wedding vows, but of the Alphas I know who were “fixed” by their women, their backsliding into beta-dom was the result of an incessant etching away of that Alpha dominance by a steady stream of small shit tests and concession of frame by little compromises.

Dumping a woman is DHV (demonstrating higher value) of the highest order. True or not, It implies you had other, better options than her. Dumping a woman is the antithesis of the Scarcity Mentality and it broadcasts this not only to her, but her girlfriends as well as any other girls in her (your) social periphery. Dumping her implies you’ve just gone from a comfortable, familiar beta to the indifferent Alpha that she never realized you had a capacity for. My guess is Hithard will hear from her again. At first it will be desperate and crying, later it will be casual with feigned nonchalance – don’t take the bait.

Whether or not Hithard takes her back or bumps her down to fuck-buddy status, the message is now clear for her – he will control the frame. She will enter his reality or not at all. Most freshly unplugged guys have a very tough time owning this, because for most of their lives it’s been endlessly bashed into their heads that they don’t deserve it. This is the conflict Hithard must resolve.

Pushing Forwards Back

 

 

Recently I’ve been sifting through the comments at the Chateau and some other blogs regarding the Kristen Stewart dust up about her “infidelity” with Rob Pattinson in favor of a married, 41 y.o. movie director. The PMs barraged my inbox for a week. Alright, alright, you got me, I’ll give you my take,..

I was loathe to even broach the topic considering the yeasty pop-culture discharge that Twilight-Moms are rutting in after this “devastating bombshell shocker!” 12 dead in an Aurora theater? That’s terrible, but a 22 year old HB 6 cheating on Edward for an older established movie director? That’s fucking news. Once women make an emotional connection with a narrative, it’s a very tall order to get women to make the separation of fantasy from reality.

Needless to say, I’m hearing the manufactured indignation in real life. It’s spreading amongst social circles, on talk radio topics – even my daughter’s 14 y.o. friends are dropping their 2¢ about how worldly and knowledgable they are as to why ‘Bella’ would cheat on ‘Edward’. As I wrote in Indignation, from a very early age girls / women have a psychological need for something beyond the mundane life that their security need drives them to. Kristen Stewart is an excellent example of this conflict because she represents a strata of woman who, minus her celebrity, is very mundane herself. Put her in an evening dress and maybe she cleans up to an HB7 on the Tomassi scale. She’s not a stunner, but then, that’s why she’s the perfect Lego brick to play Bella; socccer moms and tweens can see past her as a place holder into which they can cast themselves in her role.

But hypergamy doesn’t care about the social conventions and ‘IRL’ romantic expectations of Twilightees. Hypergamy demands optimization in terms of excitement, long-term security and Alpha dominance relative to a woman’s capacity and opportunity to maximize them all.

Lost in the midst of all this we have 26 year old Edward Rob Pattinson experiencing his WTF? moment. While he’s ostensibly a good looking guy and a Contextual Alpha, the lesson to be learned here is one which may confuse red-pill noobs. Why the fuck would Stewart ‘cheat’ on a guy who’s adored and desired by millions of women? Because hypergamy doesn’t care.

When a woman’s self-perceived SMV exceeds the degree to which she perceives is the SMV of the man she’s with, this is the point at which she will seek out (or be open to the advances of) an Alpha she believes exceeds her own SMV.

If that sounds counterproductive, just remember this dynamic relies primarily upon a woman’s self-perceptions and is predicated upon her acknowledging the phase of life in which she finds herself in according to the SMP. In the age of social media, women now have an ubiquitous source of ego inflation available to them like never before. This contributes to women’s overblown sense of worth and entitlement in a way society has never experienced.

Going Feral

The Kristen Stewart affair is really an illustration of a much broader dynamic however. Recently on the SoSuave forum member Backbreaker related a story about a friend who’d gone through much of the same thing (albeit to a more mundane degree) poor Rob Pattinson has just experienced. The thread is extremely long and well debated, but the plot summary is really one of an unfortunate guy on the receiving end of his girlfriend’s hypergamic optimization. His friend was traded for another, better option. From a life perspective, he’d failed to keep pace with this girl’s hypergamic imperative and was thus selected-out by it.

As I wrote in Navigating the SMP there is a particular window of opportunity for women whilst in their prime SMV years (22-24) that less and less women want to consciously recognize – or at least they aren’t encouraged to recognize thanks to feminized social conventions, and the ego-fuel of social media. Precious few women are self-aware of the hypergamic impulses their subconscious is driven by, and thus their behaviors are manifestations of.

When women get to be 25-29 there is a limbic, subliminal understanding that her window of hypergamic opportunity is closing. A woman’s hindbrain knows on an animalistic level that her period of maximally optimizing her hypergamy is closing, thus the motivation to pair off monogamously with the best provisioning male begins to take priority over fucking the best genetic (most sexually arousing) males she was happy to pair off with in her prime (22-24).

In Backbreaker’s, our subject woman is merely a common illustration of this process. So, in this respect, and strictly for purpose of example, I can understand Backbreaker’s line of reasoning. Young men need to be aware of the ruthlessness and callousness of this feral, evolutionary process. As a Man, you do in fact need to keep pace with the hypergamic imperative that WILL rear its ugly head when the moment and opportunity of a better hypergamic prospect present itself. Sometimes, even a woman’s perceptual prospect of a better optimized hypergamy is enough to set the process in motion. A woman’s hypergamic urgency declines as she comes to accept her diminished capacity to optimize hypergamy, but as a Man, the need to prove yourself will always be an aspect of your relationship with a woman.

If there’s fault to be found it’s not in women’s seeming duplicity about her ‘feelings’ versus her hypergamy-motivated actions; the real fault is in young Men believing in pollyanna fantasies about true love, soul-mates and feminized romance porn in favor of the harsh realities of hypergamy.

Ethical wonks will want to have their say, “She’s a slut! She’s a hypocrite! Perfidious woman! Have you no honor? Men are made of different stuff, we’re the moral cement that holds society together, unlike you amoral weaklings.” No one gets mad when wolves on the tundra tear the throat from a caribou. No one calls them evil for messily devouring the carcass; they’re just doing what nature has embedded into their instincts to do.

“But human’s aren’t wolves Rollo, we have freewill, you wouldn’t understand because you’re not as morally attuned as I am.”

Yes, human’s aren’t wolves, and we do in fact exercise a great measure of freewill, but for all of that, presumptively righteous, self-guided refusal of determinism we are still subject to the same feral instincts. Our natural state is not one of self-control, so why are we shocked at the environment that sets the frame for us to even have any concept of what control even means? Evo-psych, hypergamy, natural instinct isn’t deterministic, it is probablistic.

We ignore at our peril the evolutionary results that directed us to the conditions we find ourselves in. When it doesn’t serve our purpose we call it weakness or moral turpitude; but when it does, that feral energy, that righteous anger, that sweaty bloodlust we evolved in the wilderness so long ago that helped us run down a caribou ourselves, that instinct we call courage or determination and we put angels wings on it in appreciation.

Backbreaker took a lot of heat for his assessment of his friend’s ‘progress’ in life. The title of the thread, “If you aren’t going forward, you are going backwards” set the tone for the discussion. In a sense he faults his friend for the demise of his relationship due to his lack of progress or ambition, but this doesn’t come from malice or ill intent. Rather he uses the scenario (not unlike the Stewart affair) to make the point that a Man must continually grow and become more than he is in order to survive and thrive. The distinction that men need to make is the difference between success motivated by the need for pussy, and an abundance of pussy that is the by-product of a man’s success.

Hypergamy doesn’t care about your moral interpretations. Hypergamy doesn’t care about your personal motivations to achieve and become more than you started with, it only cares about what you are. If that makes you feel slighted or morally indignant, go read War Brides. Yeah, that’s some really fucked up hypergamy right there, but the question isn’t whether it’s moral or not, the question is ‘what do you plan to do about it?’

Hypocrites & Little Emperors

Over the weekend I read an interesting post from Vox regarding hypocrisy (great song BTW) and the impressions we as Game-aware men sometimes indelibly leave on guys who actually make the transition from from the Matrix to being Game-aware:

It is true that adulthood and maturity are drenched with hypocrisy, because we are all largely incapable of living up to our ideals, morals, and standards. But that doesn’t mean that wallowing forever in that point between childhood and adult is desirable, or even possible. With regards to Game, it is perfectly understandable that gammas and deltas might look at the decadent world of the alpha and think it looks like paradise, complete with 72 cheerfully compliant non-virgins, but that is as much of an illusion as the world of the blue pill.

For obvious reasons, nothing motivates a man’s imagination better than the potential for sex. On the most rudimentary level, the male ideal – the counter to feminine hypergamy – is unlimited access to unlimited sexuality. The most extreme idealization of this (72 virgins in heaven) is too far fetched for all but the most mentally imbalanced and religiously fanatical. However, men’s rational predispositions want to temper the unbelievable with the concept of the fantastically attainable. Think of it in terms of porn; most men tend to click past the videos of “porn stars” – huge breasted, HB10’s®, overly made up, in lingerie and high heels, all eager and willing to perform any feat of sexual acrobatic – they’re too improbable, too unbelievable. But give a guy a tempered, believable, sexual vignette, one into which he can relatively assume the POV perspective of the male, and now you’ve got participant. You’ve got a believer.

To varying, subjective, degrees of fantasized believability, a lot of newly unplugged red-pill men can visualize themselves in some, albeit limited, capacity to experience the Alpha’s porn. However, I don’t think Vox goes far enough in fleshing out the Alpha fantasy though. A majority of men (i.e. betas) wouldn’t entertain the notion that they could experience the, now stereotyped, hedonism of the rock-star bad boy PUA Alpha for the same reason overdone ‘porn stars’ don’t appeal to them – it’s too slickly unbelievable. What they will believe, and probably to their detriment, is that they can enjoy the Game well enough to fit their personal capacity to get with their ‘believable’ ONEitis girl who they just know is their perfect soul-mate. They’ll play the Game realistically and long enough insofar as it grants them access to the ‘type of girls who’d always rebuffed them.’

Rubrosa from the Sosuave forum picks up the continuation of this fantasy:

Every religious nut I’ve ever encountered who has passed judgement on me and my “sinning ways” has had a past which was heavy on the sex and drugs. In other words, they pissed all the “fun” living out of their system before they became “Born Again”. Now they preach “The Way.”

There seems to be a theme in certain parts of the manosphere (which I agree with) which states more or less the following:
It’s not about the chicks…it’s about you improving yourself….which gets the chicks.

I have a friend who’s a very successful Businessman/Playboy. We both have similar experience in terms of our journeys in dealing with the opposite sex. We were laughing at his story about how he didn’t feel like screwing this one girl only because he didn’t feel like driving that evening. I joked that if he was 20 years old, he would have made the drive. He laughed “Are you kidding? Back then I would drive 3 hours to get laid!”

I think that maybe I’m like those wackjobs who preach only after they’ve sinned. Does all my advice fall on deaf ears because no matter how much advice one hears, experience is the only true teacher? I have enough experience and Game savvy to where I can bang a different chick every night of the week with some reliability…so it’s somewhat EASY for me to say “It’s about you, not the chicks !” Kind of like a rich John Lennon singing “All you need is Love ”
I feel guilty in some weird way because I’m saying that chicks aren’t a priority maybe because I have a large supply.

Rollo ? Your take ?

I don’t read Rubrosa as making a religious statement here so much as he’s drawing comparisons in hypocrisy. ‘Do as I say, not as I’ve done’ is what he’s concerned with. The religious are easy targets in this regard, but really, everyone’s a hypocrite to varying degrees.

When I was a young AFC in my late teens I would’ve honestly been appalled by what I advocate on this forum today. My outlook at that time was incorrect and influenced by persons, conditions and social conventions of which I was totally unaware. The 19 year old Rollo Tomassi would’ve advocated the exact opposite of the 44 y.o. Tomassi would now. Does that make me a hypocrite today? Or, what if my outlook was correct and through the course of life and events I changed my way of thinking and lifestyle for a period of time, only to later go back to what had originally been truth to me later?

Life is learning. A hypocrite is someone who’s words and actions are incongruent, certainly in the present, but maybe not so much the past. I give advice here based on what I got so horribly wrong in the past, not because I did everything perfect from the get go. This is why it’s a dangerous business to build your reputation on moralism or absolutism. What your life experiences teach you will eventually come into conflict with convictions in spite of how rock solid you believe they are. And it’s then that people will call you to the carpet for being something you say you are or you aren’t.

Hail to the Emperors

Now, more to the point, yes, it is all about getting laid, AND it’s also about improving oneself too. Pussy has inspired more men to become great than any other factor in human history. I think what’s missing here is that the drive to succeed and the drive to get laid are mutually beneficial, and often symbiotic. The problems arise when you attempt to separate these two influences and turn them into absolute binaries.

Pussy = Bad.  Being a Little Emperor = Good

Pussy = Good.  Being a Little Emperor = waste of time, or just a means to pussy.

It doesn’t work this way.

When people say “If all you’re living for is fucking and women, then I pity you for not living right.” what they’re doing is making a binary judgement call while using themselves as a referendum. When one guy feels he’s living ‘by the rules’ then everyone else has to play by them too in order for him to validate his existence.

When another guy wins by not playing by the first guy’s rules he then needs to invalidate that win. Take a guy who did everything by the book, got married to the first girl he’d ever banged, went to college, has a decent job, has 2 kids, and sit him next to the high school drop out, who’s still unmarried, enjoys many women, stumbled into a well paying job and has few responsibilities. Who has the greater life experiences? Who’s “doing it right? Which one of these guys is more likely to try to invalidate the lifestyle of the other? Who envies who, and who is ‘happier’?