What does “quality girl” mean?

Online, there is endless discussion of how to seek out and identify “quality” girls, whatever that means… “quality” in a girl is tricky, since most girls, like men, have some good and some bad points. A lot of guys who think they want “quality,” who say they want “quality,” really want to convert a hot sexually adventurous slut into a housewife (rarely works well, but give it a go if you like… please don’t come whining to the Internet if it doesn’t). If you go for girls who are -1 or -2 relative to you in sexual market value (SMV), you can probably get a girl who will invest heavy in you… if she’s not that hot, though, you won’t want her. A lot of guys “want” a girl who is hot, a sex fiend (for him and him alone), absurdly loyal (perhaps not demanding fidelity in return), mentally stable, even-keeled personality, and perhaps other things too. Girls who combine all those qualities are not that common, and they tend to have a lot of suitors to choose from. This is the male equivalent of women who want a guy who is over six feet tall, makes a lot of $$$, has good social skills, prioritizes her and her attention needs, etc. etc. These guys too exist, but in small numbers, and they tend to have lots of options, which they often like to exercise, vigorously and horizontally. Sometimes vertically, too, for the sake of variety.

A lot of girls aren’t honest about what they really want… superficially they want a “relationship” (with a top guy, which is unstated), but in reality their behaviors indicate they want to get f**ked a lot. “I got drunk and it just ‘happened'” is not the statement of a girl who wants a relationship. Thing is… a lot of guys aren’t honest either. A lot of guys aren’t truly working to improve themselves, and their results are consistent with that. I tweeted a while ago, “most guys don’t really care that much about getting laid.” If they do, you’ll see them quit video games, prioritize the gym, eat no sugar, and do the other things common to guys who get laid, as opposed to guys who don’t, or guys who say they want to but don’t align their behavior with that stated want.

Sailor socialist girl doesn’t care, and it’s not about economic systems

The conversation in the last post turned towards what “socialist” and “feminist” identifying girls mean… and the answer is usually, “not much,” because most conversations are about expressing feelings and hierarchy… the number of “socialists” who even understand what that entails is minimal. When she says she’s a socialist, she’s expressing what she sees as a “caring” underlying value and framing you as “uncaring” by comparison. The number of people interested in ideas is small. A lot of male nerd engineers treat all conversations like engineering problems and consequently don’t get laid much because their engineering mindset, while important at school and work, repels feelings-based women.

When she says she’s a socialist… she doesn’t really care.

She’s not a policymaker.

Her vote doesn’t make a big difference in her life.

There’s a big gap between any functional country and Venezuela… it will take a really long time for any functional country to hit Venezuela or Soviet Union or Cuba levels… she wants to feel good, to feel taken care of, to make other people feel like they’ll be taken care of… Mark J says in the comments, “Debating Western girls like this, (usually white, middle class with a college education paid for by daddy who I guarantee you made his money in a very unsocialist fashion, is a waste of time.) The only appropriate response is to ignore her or ridicule her.” I disagree a bit… “ridicule” never changes minds and doesn’t get guys laid… “ignore her” makes more sense, particularly for a guy looking to get laid, not teach basic economics.

Curiosity leads to sexual freedom… and threesomes… and storytelling

I was reading a good book about storytelling, A Curious Mind: The Secret to a Bigger Life, by Brian Glazer (the hollywood producer) and a journalist named Charles Fishman (red pill dad on storytelling). It’s narrated by Glazer… and he has good advice for players… like, “Most of the best things that have happened in my life are the result of curiosity. And curiosity has occasionally gotten me in trouble. But even when curiosity has gotten me in trouble, it has been interesting trouble.” I should list some ways curiosity has gotten me into interesting trouble, but a look through the archives will yield a cornucopia of material… when “Libido Girl” first proposed a sex party to me, I was curious, and many years later I am still involved. Glazer says he is “not the least bit embarrassed to ask questions.” A guy should be the same, although, with girls, it’s often better to make statements or assumptions. Don’t ask, “Did you get a job making coffee because you like coffee?” Instead, “I bet you got that gig so you can flirt with the sexy customers.” As the conversation evolves some questions are fine & normal, but too many questions to an unresponsive girl feels like an interview. Some girls, however, are bad at flirting and non-responsive… but if she keeps complying despite being boring, you might find her complying all the way into bending over for you.

“Eurovision Song Contest: The Story of Fire Saga:” the uncanny valley

“Eurovision Song Contest” is a cute movie, I laughed at some of the scenes, but it’s a socially uncanny valley movie, and the uncanny valley thing but one thing gnawed at me… the leads are way too old for the roles. So old they feel weird, but in a revealing way… the plot of the movie has Will Ferrell and Rachel McAdams as a platonic singing duo, with Ferrell also trying to deal with his father’s disapproval, and McAdams trying to sexually entice Ferrell, since Ferrell is, as in most or all of his roles, asexual or sexually uninterested in women (a fantasy many guys who lack masculine identity and play too many video games have). Farrell and McAdams are having problems characteristic of the 16 – 24 year old set… the teens and young adults who haven’t formed proper identities yet and who are trying to make it in the arts business… and the movie is ambiguous about the age of the characters, but come on. Even with surgeries and procedures Ferrell and Rachel McAdams are ridiculous.

I checked and McAdams is 41, so she’s on the verge of infertility if she’s not already infertile… she’s way too old to be chasing a man-child. What’s her sexual past like? If she was 19 we could see her as a late bloomer but few hot or once-hot women age 30+ have no sexual past. Ferrell is 53… and still in his father’s shadow…? Has he not managed to evolve at all as a man? Ferrell, like Adam Sandler, specializes in man-child roles but even man-child actors must eventually move out of those roles. Ferrell and McAdams are in the social uncanny valley because they’re middle aged playing roles appropriate to teens and young adults, but their many cosmetic procedures also make them look unnatural, even with hollywood lighting and makeup. All acting is playacting but they feel off, even though they are funny. In the movie they have not managed to move past the problems that 20 year olds have and that is revealing about our society as a whole, which deifies youth and leaves little role for anyone who has left that period.

Red Scare podcast girls on real sex

I was listening to one of the Red Scare podcasts, I think this one, and it’s amazing how on-target so much of it is regarding how sexuality really works. One of the hosts said, “Feminism’s all about being in denial,” about your sexuality and sexuality desires… it makes me consider, how many chicks are figuring this out? Lots of them will admit as much in private but not in public, for fear of the feminist social media mob. If feminists were as drawn to the squat rack as they are to baselessly attacking others, they would have boyfriends. It’s like the old days in the Soviet Union, when everyone knew the truth privately but was afraid to admit it publicly. Modern feminism is a con… one of the hosts says, “I’ve taken the red pill on feminism a long time ago.” So Red Pill language is permeating the mainstream. One of them says, “Getting hit by your boyfriend feels good…. Well it doesn’t feel good but it makes you feel alive.” I like the distinction… is “alive” good? Sometimes. Sometimes maybe not. They get the ambivalence and ambiguity in sex and sexuality, something that’s almost entirely missing in the hysterical media world, where all women are innocent victims and all men evil predators.

In reality… there are few victims or true predators… a lot of women have decided that the inept stance that women are irrational is somehow desirable… exactly the opposite stance of the feminism in the 50s – 70s, when women wanted to be seen as being as capable as men. How many women have secret housewife fantasies they won’t express? I’ve heard those too, stated quietly.

Back to sex, one of them says, “I love getting restrained and getting the menace of violence.”… I keep saying “one of them” because it’s hard for me to figure out who is who… they both sound f**kable, could be wrong here… yet for men the lesson is, “BDSM skills matter.” That should be the new Twitter hashtag. I have another post about women’s love for BDSM that I forgot to put up… it’ll come…

Another time one says, “10 years ago I might’ve still been a yuppie.” I dunno, you kind of have to be a yuppie to afford big cities today…

I have talked about Red Scare a little bit before this, and I have been getting messages about it, and about how approving of it is somehow bad, cause it’s hosted by women, or some of the thins they say aren’t true… I disagree that some disagreement removes all value or truth… look, there are various things I disagree with them about (capitalism is awesome and the reason they have a podcast instead of being forced to toil in potato fields or factories, and also Bernie is economically illiterate and unfit to lead the country, or be more than a gadfly…), BUT: they have something interesting to say, particularly about culture, culture’s intersection with politics, sexuality, and male-female relations. It’s also important to not live your life in an echo chamber… we need to be able to disagree but be smart about it… most people can’t move on from their black/white thinking. Having something to say is compelling in an era of morons mindlessly repeating garbled angry formulas they learned fourth-hand from braindead tenured humanities professors.

If you listen to red scare, call her daddy, and joe rogan… one thing they all have in common is that they’re not having the standard media conversation. Read the new york times (and its analogues) and watch the standard news programming (and their analogues), and they’re all stories about bullshit “oppression” olympics, how bad women have it (nonsense… women are protected and supported by men), how white people are (somehow) bad (despite building modern civilization), how men are evil and women are saintly, etc. All of it is, basically… bullshit. There’s some hard news sprinkled into the “news,” particularly for scientific stories that don’t have immediate political ramifications, but a lot of the dominant media narrative(s) are so incomplete as to be wrong… and most people know it. The differences between men and women are obvious from everyday life… they can be exaggerated too much, yes… an individual man or woman may deviate a lot from the norm… but come on, look around at every day life. Get off the jerk-off Internet. The dominant media narratives and their more crazy online cousins (jezebel, for example, or gawker before it went kaput) are bankrupt. BUT… there is also a right-wing version of many of these, in the form of fox news and talk radio, and you know what? It is EVEN WORSE than the NYT, the PMC, academia, etc. It is totally fact free, and reality free. It has some online conspiracy theories wings too. Yuck. People who are not idiots avoid idiots. When we see these big media companies being full of it, we get the crisis of the authority and the revolt of the public that we are seeing.

So red scare, chd, rogan, eric weinstein (the Portal)… I don’t agree with any of them 100%… maybe not even 50%… yet they are all having interesting discussions, at times, outside of the mainstream narrative, and engaging a popular audience, like I am not, because I am writing and most people are illiterate. We can choose to break free of the “official” narrative. I think all four big podcasts have disagreements with one another… but all of them are more interesting and honest than say most of the new york times’s reporting on sex, feminism, men/women, etc. And people (including me) are responding to the “lower / very low bullshit” element.

To the extent red quest has readers… it has readers because what I have to say is somewhat interesting/plausible while also not being part of the standard media narrative, OR part of the standard-media-crazy-counter narrative (Fox News is far worse than the NYT, despite the NYT problems). Let’s look at one version of a different reality… I have NEVER seen anything in the media even remotely like the free sex party book. Never, not once, and I read a lot, more than I should, and I listen, too. If you are aware of anything like it, please leave a comment… I have read Troy Francis’s book by the way and it’s neither detailed nor terribly accurate. The book I put together is 50K words on how this world works. It is far too incendiary for mainstream publishers but also too complex and complete for the reddit/twitter crowds, which can’t understand or digest any idea that is longer than a few sentences. The book is based on analysis more than feelings and for that reason it doesn’t fit into the social media world.

I have seen NOTHING in the media that sounds remotely like the CHD girls. The closest thing is probably mid ’00s Tucker Max, who wrote from a man’s perspective and is also too old to be of interest to most college girls / post-grads working their first jobs in the big city and experimenting with f**king all the hottest dudes they can find. Those girls barely read. Or, the slightly older women who are thinking about what comes next for them… they are probably not the CHD audience but might be the red scare audience… still like f**king and being hot, but they know having a baby is the better/smarter life course… there is much to say here… and the mainstream media is saying very little of it, for the most part. Feminist journalists and university professors are mostly spinsters and are trying to glamorize and valorize their own foolish spinster decisions, while ignoring the gaping hole in their soul that everyone else can see.

So… I’m interested in people who are thinking something, and thinking something that is 1. smart, 2. different, and 3. real. Even if I disagree with parts. I am net pro Rollo Tomassi, despite the qualifications I have stated, because he is having a conversation that is mostly not being had elsewhere. He is often 3/3 even when I disagree. The university/new york times narratives… are often 0/3 (ouch). Not smart, not different, not real. The red scare thinking is often 3/3, or 2/3. If your reply is “don’t listen to girls…” I don’t know what to tell you. “Modern feminism is bad” does not equate to “all women or bad…” judge the ideas… also, do you exist in the real world? Lots of women are smart/intelligent/interesting/etc. If you haven’t figured that out then you are either 1. messed up/inexperienced or 2. you are not surrounded by good people. People image match and if they think you are messed up, they will justifiably avoid you.

Normal men like women and normal women like men… I can’t believe that statement is worth making… it’s out there at the extremes where you get problems. The NYT hates men now and that’s one of its narrative problems. There are also some number of genuinely bad dudes out there… not the majority but enough to be worth noting. The NYT conflates “they had drunk sex and that’s obviously rape” with guys who stalk chicks and do other truly bad things… I have seen it… heard about it… etc. Smart women prioritize their families for lots of reasons… one is that their fathers and brothers will help with male predation. If a woman is being stalked by some guy, staying with one of her (male) family members who owns a firearm can make sense, for example. Chicks are always at risk of predation… though modern culture and police forces mostly protect them from it… which is why the leftist anti-police rhetoric is often ridiculous… which is not to say there are not many problems with police… police shouldn’t murder people… we need a lot of changes in policing. It’s not “police bad civilian good” though. Or the other way around. It’s in the nuance.

So I view red scare as being able to speak to contradiction and complexity… even when I disagree with it, like I sometimes do… and contradiction and complexity are part of the human experience. They are mostly erased from the dominant media narrative, sadly. Re-injecting them is good. Most normal women do not like where the feminism industrial complex has gone, treating women like children or like men, when most women wish to be women. Many guys have not learned to be men and have to seek lessons in masculinity from strangers online, because they don’t get it in schools or from their fat video gamer fathers. The feminist nanny worldview can be challenged thanks to the Internet… and that is what we are seeing happen, thankfully.

So… if you have something interesting and different to say, say it… I want to hear it… I just don’t want to hear surface-level thinking, or bullshit. This blog is for saying something that I see no one else saying, something that is (I hope) tolerably intelligent and also true. No journalist is telling this story, so I decided to tell it myself. Red scare… is telling stories that other people aren’t, and that’s why I listen. Selectively, and rarely if ever to every episode, but enough.

I also admire the chicks doing Red Scare cause they’re pretty anti-fragile… they get attacked by dipshits on Twitter… and then they fire back… they’re not part of the university-industrial complex, so they’re not worried about being fired by some archaic dipshit institution that’s desperately scared of its own clients (“students”). Listening to people who often have something to say and who aren’t dipshits… it’s refreshing, you know?

If I had less to lose I’d start a podcast about game + masculinity… but, unlike the red scare girls, I want to maintain relatively mainstream employment. In another universe I’d find some girl to start a NSFW onlyfans with and be a dirtbag podcaster… troll feminists relentlessly… truly enter the gig economy… truly embrace hedonic degeneracy… learn how to synthesize mdma from the dark web… oh g-d, the depravity… I think I would combust… but I’ve thought about it… truly embracing the dark lord figure… podcasts today can be like the angry metal bands of the ’80s or the hippies of the late ’60s… I’d probably destroy myself in the process… yet it’s possible that I’ve maybe considered it once or twice… instead I do red quest, writing in an age where people have lost the ability to read and think… twitter and universities are like tentacled mind viruses flaying the ability to think clearly… yet Twitter and some podcasts are also where some free speech lives.

Why you can’t trust drug claims, and what that says about the ability to trust in general

This is an even nerdier piece than usual, and it’s fundamentally about trust, verification, and science… try reading the Peaches saga for something fun, sexy, and actionable…

Game is an open field: it has few definite answers and doing it poorly has few short-term consequences. Drug development is different: it has more definite answers, although the answers happen amid a lot of noise, and has many important short and long-term consequences. Politics is closer to game than to drug development, but it’s not a perfect overlap, since failing or succeeding at game has a strong impact on a given individual… while most political opinions are meant to signal tribal allegiance, and being wrong has little impact on the individual. In the last three+ months there have been lots of dumb claims about how hydroxychloroquine “obviously” works.. and yet we’re still looking for that evidence, which seems less and less likely to exist. The more interesting preliminary commentary was out there, best summed by Derek Lowe… April 6, March 31, April 16… no bullshit and written by someone who knows a lot about drug development… his comments about preliminary studies with small sample sizes are accurate… the early studies showed that hydroxychloroquine didn’t seem to badly hurt anyone (good), but we have law of small numbers problems. The smaller the sample size, the easier it is to find a significant effect through chance. An early and bogus French study was done by a guy who is, to put it uncharitably, frequently full of shit. Yet a lot of guys writing in the game / red pill / right wing worlds went for him. Why?

Those guys often don’t know anything about the field and, in addition, they don’t know what they don’t know. Lots of drugs look promising in vitro or in murine/ferret/etc. models, then fail in humans. Evaluating data from coronavirus is tricky, because most people do recover. It’s possible to give 20 patients the drug and then see most of them recover, because they were at the stage in the disease where they were poised for recovery anyway. These kinds of problems are how and why double-blind trials showed up in the first place, to distinguish cause from effect. These are also the kinds of problems that lead many people to falsely believe in all kinds of cures for colds and flus that were on the verge of clearing up anyway. By now, we know that a large and real trial from the UK with 11,000 patients found no benefit to hydroxychloroquine. France has also suspended trials like this one. A trial of 821 patients didn’t show hydroxychloroquine acts as a prophylactic. Yes, there was a study published in Lancet that was withdrawn due to phony data: but other data is consistent with the “no benefit” hypothesis. In other words, the guys you read on Twitter proclaiming that hydroxychloroquine is an easy win were all wrong, and they were wrong in predictable ways.

A little knowledge is dangerous and most of the people on Twitter know zero about statistics or the history of drug development… they make the same mistakes homeopathy people do. Their conspiratorial mindset flares up. They have no skin in the game: they’ve heard of Nassim Taleb but failed to internalize his lessons. If their recommendations turn out to be correct, they announce how right they were. If their recommendations turn out to be false, they say nothing, or cite the one “maybe” weasel word they used, somewhere. If you can’t trust them on something that has known correct answers, how can you trust them on things that don’t?

Meanwhile, people with skin in the game know that most drugs fail. Twitter has its uses but taking drug recommendations from it is nuts. Then there are Twitter exchanges like this one:

Stedman may know something about men and women (a field with limited opportunities for falsification), but he doesn’t know shit about complex systems or about drugs, and he too doesn’t know it. He doesn’t want to learn, either. People have been trying to get Vitamin C to do something for decades (seriously, Linus Pauling initially made up the idea that vitamin C helps the immune system). Chaga is fine but it’s also been relentlessly studied. He’s a sort of Gweneth Paltrow and Goop for the red pill set: mostly harmless but also overconfident and making unbacked medical claims, relying on the ignorance of his followers. But if he’s wrong about something that can be falsified… what else is he wrong about? He’s also a conspiracy theory guy. And he has a large enough platform that he should try harder not to mislead his readers.

On Twitter, the ignorant are often loud and the most knowledgable often quiet. The ignorant have nothing at stake. Sometimes they are right, too, which is gratifying, when it happens. But what general lessons should we draw?

People are susceptible to showmen. Arguably the game is about becoming a better showman (Mystery was literally a showman: a magician). But the natural world doesn’t care about the show, like the human world does. It’s very reality-based. When dealing with women, some men fail to realize that the show can be more important than the reality, under current social and cultural conditions. When dealing with the human body as a system, the show doesn’t matter… the reality does.

There is a problem, I forget the formal name of it, in which people who have expertise or intelligence in one field, think they know all fields. Their knowledge or expertise doesn’t transfer, though. It’s limited. That’s one way people who are otherwise smart, make stupid mistakes. Stedman doesn’t even realize that what he’s pitching has a long history… he’s making a common mistake but doesn’t know it, and, when I pointed out that he’s wrong, he ignored and muted me. Fine. In terms of the drug world, politics makes people stupid and, oddly, people who know that then accuse others of it, not realizing that they themselves are subject to the challenge.

Meanwhile, here is yet one more piece, an older one, about HCQ not working in late-stage patients, which matches doctors’s anecdotal evidence. That HCQ wasn’t working well in moderate and severe cases became apparent by late March/early April, yet we still saw many on Twitter touting its efficacy… how many docs are writing to game, red pill, or far-right twitter… probably not a lot.

There is an interesting question in why otherwise smart people fall for myths, conspiracy theories, etc. I don’t think the whole answer is there, at the link, and I don’t have a full answer, but self-deception seems to be super common. Stedman falls for it. So do many others.

A gear switch. In game: it’s very tempting to lie to yourself first, but guys do well if they do one of two things: lie to themselves to the point of incredible, delusional confidence (“frame” if you prefer that term), OR be relentlessly honest with themselves about their strengths and especially weaknesses. The human propensity to lie to ourselves seems strong, and in medicine this seems like a particularly powerful tendency. We like to see patterns in randomness. Small parts of humanity have spent the last few centuries trying to learn how not to lie to ourselves. The internet does lots of good things, but it also allows the ignorant to be amplify their ignorance, without realizing their own ignorance.

One logical counter is to say, “Experts have their own problems,” and that’s completely true: but experts being wrong is notable and intersting, while non-experts being wrong is the norm, and many of them don’t even know what they don’t know.

It’s possible that the thousands of people wrongly amplifying their messages will learn something from this… but more likely they won’t. We have centuries of knowledge about how to test drugs already, and one more example of being wrong probably won’t convince anyone, anymore than the homeopathic holdouts can be convinced. Ignorance is the human condition, knowledge the exception. Game is one kind of knowledge, but it’s an imprecise kind. You can be great at game, or a great showman, and know nothing about scientific or technical fields.

There are problems with how to test drugs and other health treatments in the United States… but the noisiest people haven’t been repeating them, mostly. Their knowledge level doesn’t extend that far, and something closer to the truth, doesn’t make it to tweets.

We probably won’t learn much from the hydroxychloroquine debacle, since the people falling for it mostly aren’t or weren’t doctors prescribing medications. Everything I wrote above about statistics and drug development is well-known to people who work in drug development or have learned about drug development and how it works. Everything I wrote above about those topics will probably never be known to people with no skin in the game, no knowledge of statistics, and no downside to being wrong. They were wrong yesterday and will be confidently wrong about something else tomorrow.

Knowing what is really true is hard, which is why it took humans so long to build the civilization we have today. Most of our existence has been spent in superstitious blather. That tradition continues in homeopathy, anti-vaxers, and Twitter.

Most people who think they have secret knowledge are deluding themselves.

In some fields, there is a definitively right answer and a definitively wrong answer. When guys wander into these fields and say things that are likely wrong, or at least unwise, there is a tendency, maybe unfair, to denigrate their knowledge in all other fields.

It’s good to know when you’re part of a show and when you’re part of the study of reality… and a lot of guys online don’t distinguish between the two. Trusting noisy Twitter has its dangers.

Why Twitter’s Brooding Sea is likely a faker, and some other musings on the top of game

The other day I went on a Twitter talk about how you shouldn’t believe everything you read, and then I stopped being oblique and said there’s a “daygame” twitter account under the name “BroodingSea” (BS) that is likely… creative… in terms of its relationship with the real world. Another  daygamer guy asked privately why BS is unlikely to be a good role model, and why I think he is, if not necessarily fake exactly, then not telling us everything. There are a bunch of reasons… 1. His results are too good. 2. His supposed pickups are way too good/smooth. 3. He seems not to get any of the negative streaks other guys do. 4. There are almost no details in any of his stories. While it’s possible to get “yes girls” who like you / are horny at that moment / fuck you with much game on your part, they are rare (in some respects this girl had that quality… it can happen). At some point Nash or others called BS out on how unlikely his stories are, and then he began integrating more supposed “failures.”

Put all those pieces together and the bullshit siren should be going off louder than a Marine Corps drill sergeant the first morning at Basic. Unfortunately, BS disappeared, so we’re unlikely to see further revealing statements from him. He may have made the mistake of using some of his primary contact information in online profiles… always go with the burners… despite the improbability of his stories I don’t support doxxing, including of people I disagree with.

So what was going on with him? It’s useful to ask this question because he’s not the first and won’t be the last guy with extremely improbable stories. Most likely, one or more of of several things is at play… 1. He’s paying / using some money in his “game.” I don’t think this is bad (if a guy wants to do it, fine), but he should say as much and describe the role money/payments play. If he has sufficient money to pay, he can get a lot of lays that way, particularly in eastern europe, or with eastern europeans online. A lot of girls who are in the partial escort market have a sliding scale in their minds, where the more masculine/attractive the guy is, the less he pays (not all girls… some are super professional… using some money may also allow him to generate the unique pictures that can be claimed as daygame lays). Years ago I did something like what BS may be doing, for $500/mo…. in a number of ways I got lucky quickly… and I probably shouldn’t have done any money transfer at all… but I did it and it should be admitted for the sake of completeness. Back to BS, 2. He’s probably mostly online, with great pics, and getting girls who are much less hot than he says/implies (I have slummed it at times, usually when I’m horny and some girl shows up who’s less attractive than her pictures but also requires minimal work… not proud but it’s true…). I think he posted a pic or two of himself in which he appears to be jacked. If those pics are honest, he’ll be able to get girls -2 or -3 relative to the ones he should be able to get from the real world. 3. A bunch of his stuff is just made up. You know how people in real life who are full of shit often tell skeleton stories, and when you ask follow-up questions, you can see that they’d never considered an obvious point? Brooding Sea’s stories look like that. Some of them might be authentic.

“Call Her Daddy” the podcast, and what guys should take from it

Listened to CALL HER DADDY because of this, and the podcast feels more legit than expected… for example, they refer to “Metoo bullshit” in one episode… normal people who like f**king, see “MeToo” as a power play by feminist harpies in the media and academia, and by older women who want to stigmatize the hot sex lives of young one. Most chicks realize that f**king guys in authority positions, like bosses and professors, is hot… if it’s consensual… normal guys don’t try to make chicks do things the chicks aren’t into, and normal guys feel out whether she’s into it… the small number of crazies on both sides ruin things for the rest of us. Especially crazy feminist harpies.

I wonder how much of the CALL HER DADDY audience is actually female and how much of it is guys jacking off to hot chicks talking about their sex lives… they talk a remarkable amount about making and disseminating sex tapes. Are the hosts posturing or for real? We have all heard hot girls loudly talking about f**king at parties for male attention. I’d guess a lot of their “show host” mode is a persona, like most entertainers. Not saying this is bad… just pointing it out… a lot of entertainers make it look like it’s easy, when it’s not. The number of people who can build a podcast audience is way smaller than the number who’d like to. Despite being ostensibly pro sex, the CALL HER DADDY hosts do a lot of slut shaming too… the number of girls who are truly pro sex is not huge, not even today.

In the episode “Every Man’s Achilles Heel” the hosts cite the joy of bondage and how a guy’s familiarity with bondage and restraint sets him apart from other guys… ahem… as you should know… one of them says adding a blindfold “took it to a whole f**kin’ different level…” during sex… a blindfold! That’s it! I conclude that a lot of guys are dumb or just ignorant… I feel like I learned this shit ages ago. Sex skills for guys are still sorely needed.

Delicious Tacos, “THE PUSSY”

I read the Delicious Tacos book The Pussy and I can’t tell if it’s mostly a joke or not… The Pussy is like a Woody Allen movie, where you can’t tell if it’s more pathos or more humor, and the ambiguity is part of the appeal. Don’t read it if you’re not in the mood to be depressed. Depressed, like,

Four months since you left me. I’ve been trying to replace you the whole time. One girl came close; she was 22. Her face wasn’t like yours but she had big tits. She left me too. I was hurting from you and I tried to fix it and now I’m hurting from both of you and the evidence keeps piling up that I’m unlovable. Why won’t you love me. What is wrong with me.

The hole in this guy’s soul is large. I don’t know if it’s supposed to be fiction or nonfiction or if the writer/character is too miserable to care. He says, “Sex is the story. There is nothing else on Earth. Birds, flowers, sunsets: go fuck yourself.” Great, okay, yet other times he hates sex, although no guy hates women 30 seconds before he nuts in a hot one. I guess the book is about the male obsession with f**king, something I’m well familiar with. Joke: “What’s the definition of a nymphomaniac? The rare woman who thinks about f**king as the average man.” But homos can f**k whenever they want, and most of them seem to think about things other than f**king, like musical theater, or celebrity gossip… they seem like high achievers, most of them… they figure out that when you’ve had your fill Monday morning still comes around, so you might as well have a meaningful existence apart from f**king.

Is the pussy of the title the narrator? I dunno. I’ve read more boring books… I’ve spent more time on worse books, so I’ll probably give another one a go, like a girl I’m ambivalent about, maybe because one eye is bigger than the other, or she won’t go to the gym with me, or she gets angry when a post a tasteful pic of us f**king to a Snapchat story, but she’ll also let me rawdog her, and she also likes to hit sex clubs with me. By the end I was skipping sections… I’d seen the shtick… it’s a fine one, yeah, and it’s good he’s willing to use words like “mulatto.” Makes you know he’s not part of the political correctness police. Anonymous people admit the shit the named won’t. Usually. But listening to whining… I don’t have high tolerance for it. Personal opinion. Guys who were farmers living in the nineteenth century have things to whine about… guys in hunter gatherer tribes who spend their whole lives trying to stick the pointy ends of sticks into other guys, lest they receive the pointy end… have something to whine about. Us today… it’s harder to take seriously, despite the problems… listen to kids and they whine all the time. “No whining” is a top parenting rule. Adults learn not to whine because we learn that no one gives a f**k about our whining. People give a f**k about our solutions.

Alcohol is a stupid mind-altering substance compared to MDMA or psychedelics like LSD. That we think alcohol is great is an accident of European and Middle Eastern history. A depressed person like the person in the book (Delicious Tacos himself?) should connect with people through love drugs instead of depressives like alcohol. Our society is dumb. I ate too much Indian food tonight, although no animals had to suffer for my sustenance.

Being obsessed with sex and sex alone doesn’t do much for your identity (you will not learn how to f**k chicks from this book, unlike many other books I have discussed). If the rest of your life sucks except for jerking off, you’re doing it wrong. We feel existential loneliness and then we die. So what? Then what? What do we do now? Wallow in it, I guess. Or go make something. “Here’s the thing with me. I want to find a nice girl. But I also want to get you hammered in my filthy silverfish infested jack shack and rawdog you in the second hour of our first date.” Yeah, I have the same problem, like 50% or more of males. It’s called being alive.

While this guy is going on about his cock, other people are going out every day to produce the vast cornucopia of goods and services available. Thousands of people are working on coronavirus vaccines and treatments. Thousands, maybe millions, are making sure the Internet functions. It’s possible we’ll have a man on Mars within five years. UPS drivers make sure packages get delivered. Delicious Tacos, however, will be worried about his itches and commute. He likes a girl who has “her shit together but not in a drink the Kool Aid careerist way that made you sick to hear about.” Doesn’t make me sick to hear about, if her career is worth a damn (marketing, HR, and public relations don’t count, and neither do most girls in “art” or “media”). There is a difference between making a difference being a careerist, definitely.

Perspective.

Men would text him their woman problems. He told them go fuck another girl. They thought he was a genius.

The solution is always the same. Go to the gym. Pullups. Squat. Deadlift. F**k new girls. Realizing the simple things would’ve saved me much heartache. Ballache too. When I was young I thought it would be romantic to off myself over some random b***h, a legit way to fix the pain of romance, when in reality you can’t feel the pain of some girl when you’re tight and clenched as you’re about to deadlift.

The Pussy is a little like listening to someone else’s drug stories… he goes back and forth between f**king chicks and feeling like they’re worthless and so is sex, to not f**king them, and feeling like they’re worthless cause they won’t f**k him… it’s like, dude, pick one. Some things are true, “I don’t have a dating friendly lifestyle, is what I’m saying. No one who works does.” So what? Everyone’s got problems. People who make a lot of money solve those problems. That’s it. That’s the big secret of working. Every job is solving someone else’s problem. If you can solve a big problem you get big rewards.

I guess The Pussy‘s a big joke… I think one book by DT is enough for me… it has a propulsive vitality at times. This guy should buy a bike and commute on it and work on it… riding is very flow… commuting does suck… a bike ride is better than social media. Some people are never happy and this guy appears to be one of them. I don’t know, I have somewhat limited patience for the howls of the miserable. I can tell a story about my life being miserable… I can tell one about it being great… guess which is better… there is no story in this book… it’s a collection of random moments… enjoy the vital moments I guess.

Character, game, dating, and would YOU swap lives?

I was talking to Lee Cho daygame on Twitter about this, “One thing I’ve noticed about the game guys who write in depth… very few make me think, ‘I want to be that person.’ Many seem to have something interesting about them but very few seem top of the heap.” Most of the online game guys seem to have a bit of a screw loose, or lack common sense, or the ability to connect (for real, in a deep way) with other people… this shows, eventually, in their writing. Roosh might be the poster boy for this effect… I read him a bit years ago, probably like 2011 or 2013 or something, and found him interesting in terms of his game obsession but, even then, it was obvious that something was internally wrong with him, psychologically or spiritually, for lack of better words. Top guys (and girls… this is really a “human” thing, not a “man” or “woman” thing) have internal congruence, and people who lack it stand out… which Roosh seemed to, even back then… his interest in f**king women seemed to come from underlying dislike and disdain for women… which many women no doubt sensed, even if they couldn’t articulate what was off about him. So the higher-value, better-put-together women probably avoided him… which reinforced some of his negative views about women… leading to a cycle. Mature adults are highly attuned to congruence and will distance themselves from people who lack congruence.

There is “good screw loose” in the sense of someone who is smart but sees the world differently, and there is “bad screw loose” in the sense of someone who is off, f**ked up, etc. The online game guys don’t seem like they have a screw loose in the crazy inventor / startup founder / rogue genius way… it’s more like a screw loose in the way of the kid no one wants to pick for their team/group… even if the online guys get really good and accomplished at game. A lot of top girls, even the ones who are open to cold approach (lots are), are going to judge a guy based on his social world and social network… if the guy doesn’t have one, or much of one, she’s going to spot that quickly. So it’s going to be hard for a lot of guys to get or retain better girls… there are limits to the front. The better girls are also going to be super curious about character, and, if they find it lacking, they are going to pull away.

In real life… the people I most like and admire, I wouldn’t want to literally take over their lives, exactly, but there’s a lot in them to emulate, not just in their field of expertise, usually. Status/coolness first, THEN evangelize for whatever the thing is. Among guys developing game skills… almost none of them I’d want to trade places with… not at even odds… the number whose overall lives I admire… is pretty small. We’ve all probably met people who are “successful” in some domain, but there is something wrong with them, and whatever is wrong keeps them from getting to where they might get otherwise.

Take… let’s use the “all women blah blah blah” guys as an example. I agree that all women have the capacity to blah blah blah (whatever the example is)… but not all will… an example story from my life… there are others. Or the ones who say all women are lazier and worse than men in a bunch of ways… well, one study claims that women in their 20s now out-earn men in their 20s… one of my own early work mentors was a woman… she was at the top of her field. On average women are worse-suited to leading and creating large organizations… but there are exceptions, and “on average” conceals a lot… in terms of dating, all women have the capacity to cheat, sure… but not all do/will. If you think so, try to get women to have a philander with you… some will, but a lot won’t. If the woman is stepping out… there’s usually also something wrong with you, with her, or with the relationship… but men don’t like to emphasize that.

Top women… don’t put up with less-than-top men… women will also show you who they are, usually pretty early, and MOST GUYS IGNORE THE SHOW. Then… they bitch when the woman acts the way she has shown him she will act… you already knew, or should have known, who she is, but you choose to ignore that (the p***y is good) and then come to the Internet to cry… or to your friends… meanwhile… are you asking yourself who you are, and what you are bringing to the relationship… no, you are not… are you asking yourself what signs you missed… probably not.

If a woman bitches about all the cads she meets, and how guys are all blah blah blah… it’s like, you have probably met thousands of men, and if they are “all like this…” what do they all have in common… you? Same thing with men. Same thing in business. Have you ever met a manager whose employees are somehow all stupid and incompetent? Or an employer who can’t ever get workers? If he says that… then the manager hasn’t learned to be a manager, he hasn’t learned to help people level up their skills, or something is wrong with him if EVERYONE is incompetent. The business is not paying enough, or something else is the matter. I have already written about the most common problem women who can’t find a man have, “Mismatched sexual market value (SMV): Diagnosis and cures.” Well, in business, if a manager or company cannot find any employees, then something is wrong with wages, work environment, location, or something else. It’s up to the manager to diagnose those problems and make changes. Markets are pretty efficient. Most often the problem is wages. People want to make more money, not less, and if the firm is not paying adequately, people will go to the firms that are.

Character judgment is hard and often separate from physical attraction… most people claim to want both in one… most often they pick one and go for that… and get results consistent with it. Extremely effective people blame themselves for successes or especially failures, even when the success or especially failure is outside of their control. The question is always, “What could I have done differently?” “What do I do differently in the future?” Kids rarely do this… to a kid, it’s always someone else’s fault… to the true adult, it’s always my fault, even if it’s someone else’s fault… the most effective people do this… if you follow Elon Musk you know that he knows just about every single part that goes in a SpaceX rocket or Tesla car… he learns relentlessly, because he knows that if the rocket explodes, no matter whose fault it is, it is his fault. Look at the Boeing managers, by contrast. In Boeing, it is always someone else’s fault. But Boeing has an unfair crony capitalist market that is heavily tied into politicians, so Boeing can’t fail, over the short term, because it’s being propped up by regulators. Unless you are a trust fund kid or something, you have to get by on your own wiles.

Character judgment is separate from technical ability… people who are wise are doing it all the time… it is what I am doing when I write, “One thing I’ve noticed about the game guys who write in depth… very few make me think, ‘I want to be that person.’ Many seem to have something interesting about them but very few seem top of the heap.” Maybe they are different in real life… reading their writing, though, problems with character, personality, and intellect seem to leak out… even among the ones with very high technical skill… Krauser is probably the most technically skilled person writing about the game… but as for his character… read his blog/memoirs closely and decide for yourself… don’t take my word… don’t take my word for anything… try it for yourself… develop your own style, sense of judgment, etc. I can help you think about how to think about things, but I can’t tell you what to think. Many people never develop these skills properly and suffer for it, including many guys who are technically good at game.

I have seen some of the RSD videos, and none or almost none of them make me think, “This guy is admirable and I’d want to hang out with him.” Some of them probably have game… almost none of them seem like guys I admire.

There are exceptions… red pill dad seems pretty well put together, although I disagree with him in places… same with Magnum… not surprisingly, they want to stay anonymous… cause they know in the real world, the penalty of being made known is high… the amount of money one can earn from coaching is low… and most guys can’t be helped cause they’re too incompetent to be helped, or have deep problems, and “bad with chicks” is a manifestation of their underlying problems. A symptom, not a cause. A few guys can be helped… they are the ones I am most speaking to. The number of psychologically okay, well-put-together adult men who don’t have a real job, is super small. There is a lot of “location-independent income” roleplay happening online. I am 100% in favor of real small businesses that can do real location-independent income… that is, however, far harder to achieve than the online hucksters would have the average guy believe, as stated. Most of the guys pitching this… have little evidence of it. I don’t think I know any adult guy in real life, who is put together effectively and doesn’t have a real job of some kind. Effective adult guys… have a job… almost all of the time.

Effective guys also evaluate their effects on other people. There is a lot of “tough guy” role play online right now, among guys who think COVID precautions are stupid. Effective guys who are in touch with older parents / relatives / employers / employees… don’t wish to get those people sick, even if they don’t care too much about themselves… that is a point in How I see dating, girls, COVID-19, and the quarantines, right now.” Willful disregard of others tells us something about the guy, his mental state, and his social world. What it tells us… is not good. We know that the route through COVID and minimizing it runs through masks… yet there’s a bunch of anti-mask roleplay online (masks are a tool, not a symbol). Some guys will mistake the online game for the real world… which is sad… but maybe becoming more common.

If you read this whole piece… along with the original internal congruence one… you will see that a lot of it is about boy psychology versus man psychology… as well as, a bit less, girl psychology versus adult woman psychology. Girls are often attracted to men… and men are often attracted to younger women… but it is useful to see how and where these things intersect… and what maturity looks like. Some women reach psychological and emotional maturity very early… and if a man can’t match them, and grow with them, he is not going to last with her. People are messed up in some ways, are often attracted to and attractive to other people who are messed up. I mostly avoid the most messed-up girls (and guys)… I have f**ked girls who are somewhat messed up… probably not smart buy I have done it… but I have kept them at a distance. If the girl finds you messed up enough, and not in an attractive dark broody way, she is not going to f**k you… she is going to fade away. She doesn’t want to be in your life, like you don’t want to be in the lives of people with bad/weak character.