“The Key Logger” by Nicholas Jack

A reader sent me a copy of Nicholas Jack‘s book The Key Logger, a set of stories about the author’s spying and privacy violations. It’s akin to The Voyeur’s Motel, which is also relevant to human nature and especially the nature of women… topics much of society works hard to obscure. I myself don’t think I really “got it” until quite far into my life, and if not for some unexpected swerves I might still be in the dark.

This story from The Key Logger is about what a man sees when he leaves a computer with a keylogger installed on it open and available to women he dates. The results show many of them acting duplicitously, courting multiple men simultaneously, etc. To me, this book should remind guys that, when we are in doubt, we should go for it, as we never know when a woman’s situation will change or what she is really doing, as what she does is often very different from what she says she does. I am fond of keeping a list of “maybe” chicks who flame out or whatever and hitting them up every six to nine months. Often, their situation has changed or they are dissatisfied with their boyfriend, etc. I should say that I used to be fond of this practice but have been becoming less excited about it over time. “Snapchat in game” is a part of this kind of thinking/practice.

The bad news: the book is poorly edited and many sections are less developed than they should be. That is the nature of self-published books and for $8.99 on Kindle this one should be better or cheaper. My Secret Garden is probably a more immediately relevant book but this one reinforces what you will read in that one. But you will find much that is useful. The writer also notices things I have noticed:

We did another city tour on her scooter. It made me really understand why people love motorcycles. You are so shielded from the world when you are in a car, but on a motorcycle it feels like you are really there.

Most people excessively shield themselves from the world and live shittier lives as a result. I don’t know if motorcycles cause people to do less of that, or if people who do less of that choose to ride. I get the same feeling on a bike. Girls who don’t like cars are on average better than those who do. I have argued that men should “Ride an electric motorcycle—for fun, transport, and dating.” Used Zero Electric Motorcycles are widely available now. Electric Vespas are also now shipping and they are sexy as hell. Americans are too fat and too wrapped up in our big fat cars, then we wonder why we are disconnected from each other and miserable.

When a girl has a lot of options it’s very easy for her to use them if things get a little rough.

That’s simply true.

He also perceives that some women need a lot of attention from men, but that is partially an artifact of the women he’s dating. The women who don’t need constant attention aren’t dating around nearly as much. I do think women (and men) are very good at compartmentalizing when the need arises; women who are really good are probably not caught, or rarely caught.

This author, Nicholas Jack, is casually dating women who are casually dating him. Casually dating people often date multiple people. He seems to travel a lot for work, and that is detrimental to relationships. Men want sex and women want sex. If we can’t get it from one person, we seek it from another. He is discovering that women are human and also like sex. It is strange to me that our society works so hard and effectively to hide this fact.

He also runs into a girl who is cuckolding another guy; my guess is that their arrangement is consensual and she’s not actually trying to get pregnant, and they’re doing some kind of role play scenario. No guarantee that’s true.

This guy also likes normal clubs way more than I do.

The Key Logger could be seen as a long explanation for why I like consensual non-monogamy, as opposed to the de facto non-monogamy many people do. The girls this guy dates are already non-monogamous, so why not turn them into wingmen (wing women?) and go all the way? In my own life, I’ve been caring less about the game but it doesn’t seem to have affected results, at least so far.

There seem to be a lot of books that are okay but not where they should be, and some more effort would improve them. Quantity over quality sells? I was worried that I put too much effort into the sex clubs and players book, but it seems not.

Unfortunately, this book is far too short and poorly executed to highly recommend to most guys, but if you are looking for entertainment you can do worse. In addition, I wonder what would happen if a guy installed a key logger today and left a computer open in a prominent place. Would his results be similar to Nicholas Jack’s? I admire guys who gather data and run experiments, so I will encourage you do this and report back on the outcomes. I also encourage guys to write blogs because blogs are visible to search engines as well as places for a man to develop his own psychology. Twitter is ephemeral and a blog is more easily accessible to a wide array of guys.

Truths rarely admitted: “There’s nothing more powerful in our culture than a beautiful woman”

Truths rarely admitted: “There’s nothing more powerful in our culture than a beautiful woman.” But it’s coming from a gay guy, and gay guys, like comedians, can utter truths the rest of us will face a PC pillory for stating. Most gay guys aren’t PC; they know sexual market value (SMW) too well to be PC. Most PC people will admit dark truths if they’re stated correctly.

But there is more context

He said he feels enormous empathy for women who get frightened about their looks fading. “There’s nothing more powerful in our culture than a beautiful woman,” he said. But “it’s an unsustainable thing. One day it stops. And I have lived through it with so many female friends and part of my job is to imagine myself, the female version of myself, would I want to wear that? Where would I go in it? How would I feel in it? Would I feel vulnerable?”(Mr. Ford said if he were a woman, he would be Ali MacGraw.)

It is unsustainable. It fades fast. We name it “the wall” but you can name it whatever you want to name it. I feel bad for some of these women too… they might understand intellectually that it’s coming, but they don’t prepare for it and one day it BOOM hits them. A lot of guys online are pretty gleeful about that but I don’t share their glee, as beauty is only slightly less fleeting than life itself.

Annoyingly, we don’t get a link to the t-shirt mentioned

He used to tailor white T-shirts he bought at La Rinascente in Milan, but now he wears his own brand. “The cut of the sleeve has to be just right if you want your biceps to look right,” he said.

I did look around the Tom Ford website and clothes there are stupid expensive. Part of combining “Fashion and clothes for players” with Mr. Money Mustache is not spending stupid amounts of money on clothes. I still want to understand the cut of the sleeve thing.

Most fashion guys understand that the human social effect comes from successful attention to numerous details. Players who aren’t naturals eventually learn the same.

“Rom-Coms Were Corny and Retrograde. Why Do I Miss Them so Much?”

Rom-Coms Were Corny and Retrograde. Why Do I Miss Them so Much?” is an article where the title is the article. Rom-coms are porn for chicks because they feature a high-status male eventually committing to one woman, often below his SMV. Despite the feminist dream of a vibrator, cat, ugly pants, and low grooming standards, most chicks still want a guy or two or three and a family. Even chicks who identify as “feminists” want what most chicks want. Just like guys who identify as “feminists” still want to sleep with multiple chicks (if they can, and some can).

It’s funny when feminists admit their desires are pretty conventional.

Red Pill and seduction world downsides

Selection bias” is the shortest possible version of this list, but let me give the longer version too. There are many good, revelatory ideas in the Red Pill and seduction worlds, and these worlds are better than the default many guys learn in school. Any system or ideology will have its blind spots, and real life is much more complex than any ideology.

1. Most of the guys involved seem to be or have been failures with women; this breeds a lot of resentment and unhappiness, and some of those feelings never seem to abate.

2. Guys who have successful relationships with functional women don’t seem very likely to end up writing for the Red Pill. Guys who get cheated on, dumped, etc. seem much more likely to end up reading the Red Pill, looking for answers, and venting on it. Guys in successful relationships (they do exist) never enter, or glance at it before moving on.

3. Red Pill guys overstate hypergamy, female mate competition, etc. The larger world and culture UNDERstate these topics and forces, however. The reality is somewhere between the poles.

4. Contemporary feminism is bad but it also has less relevance in most people’s every day, day-to-day lives than it does online or among a small coterie of humanities professors.

5. Many of the leading guys have some pretty serious things wrong with them, or wrong in their psychology. They can be right about a lot of things and there can still be significant problems that show up, intentionally or inadvertently, in their writing.

6. The women who react to street pickup are probably not a random sample of women, so drawing conclusions about all women can be dangerous. I’m not arguing you shouldn’t do street pickup (in actuality I believe the opposite), but those who respond to cold opens are likely not representative of the broader population.

7. In many cases (not all), you’re learning things from (relative) failures rather than successes.

8. All dogmas are to be avoided.

9. It’s not possible to separate out the true players from the keyboard jockeys.

The biggest upside of the Red Pill is that it tells guys that we have to improve, we have to up our game, we have to protect ourselves, we have to generate value, and the world is not fair. You will often be fouled and the best solution is often to accept the foul and focus on mission and improvement. You can complain or you can improve.

If you study and practice seduction, you will also learn what’s possible. Many average guys think that only a tiny number of athletes, musicians, etc. get peak sexual experiences with top chicks. That’s not true. Such experiences are open to a very large swath of guys, if those guys realize what’s possible and work towards it. I admit that I made this error myself. Until relatively late in the game, probably around age 30, I didn’t fully realize what was possible. I did well from my late teens to mid-20s, but I didn’t fully realize what is possible until much later.

I’m also the kind of person who wonders about why things are the way they are, and it was clear to me as a teen that what I was told about sex, sexuality, and women by the larger society was not the whole story. The Red Pill and seduction communities are much closer to the truth than the conventional social narratives about mean, oppressive guys and wilting, innocent women. Women are much more sexually charged than is commonly portrayed and many guys never learn this.

Game or relationship “levels:” Different for men and women

There are different “levels” of game/relationship skills, each with its distinct but overlapping characteristics.

Meeting/getting laid: This is the stage most game guys live in: for guys, it’s often a struggle just to meet chicks and get laid. Most guys need to up their sex appeal, social skills, fashion, etc. Some guys are also living in bad environments (rural areas, suburbs). Most chicks don’t talk much about this, as it’s not important to height-weight proportionate chicks in their teens, 20s, or 30s. For chicks it’s not hard to get laid, even by guys who are +2 or +3 in sexual market value (SMV). Chicks would do better if they opened more guys, but that’s like telling the average barista they should just move to Silicon Valley and become a programmer to improve their life. The advice will be relevant to like 1/100 people.

Short-term relationships: These are usually easy as the honeymoon effect is strong and for that reason there is not much to say here. Lust and novelty maintains the relationship.

Medium-term relationships: These probably last from two months to two years. I have written a lot about how to manage expectations with these chicks. Guys who want novelty but want to retain chicks find this stage difficult.

Chicks who write about medium-term relationships are almost always writing about how to get this relationship into the long-term relationship. Most dating advice by and for chicks lives in this space and later. Most dating advice by and for guys lives in the meeting- and short-term space. For most chicks, just showing up or logging online is sufficient to get laid. But for most chicks who have decided to invest heavily in a guy, this is one of the hardest stages. Many guys begin to feel the call of the wild again after 100 or 200+ bangs w/ a particular girl. Dating power shifts to guys after sex and in this phase.

Long-term relationships (without kids): I don’t get why most guys would want to be in a very long-term, monogamous relationship with a woman unless there are kids involved, but some guys do this. The big problem for both men and women is boredom. For financially dysfunctional people, the big problem may remain daily living. Not much chick advice lives here.

Long-term relationships with kids: This is another place where lots of dating and life advice exists for both guys and chicks. It’s hard to do successfully. Competing interests are common.

A lot of man advice focuses on stages one and two. A lot of chick advice focuses on stages three and later. Does it seem like men and women are having different conversations around dating, relationships, and sex? That’s because we often are. I wrote “Kids, the player, and the Red Pill: Comprehensive statement” to offer some thinking to guys who are age 30+ and who are doing well in stages one and two. Guys online who do well in stages one and two seem to stop writing, as I will likely do.

Game helps the most at stages one and two. It obviously helps in the later stages, but the big boost is stages one and two. I’ve read players who say that game gets you in the door, but then you have to try living in the house. Once you are regularly tagging a chick, she is going to start to see who you really are, what really drives you, what you do when you’re sexually satiated, what your family constellation is like, etc.

What a woman who is determined to stay married looks like

She looks like this

I think I would be a jealous bitch if anyone actually DM’ed him or anything — but in our ten years together, I’ve never really had to deal with that. If I’m being honest, I think it’s because I have sex with my man. He always comes home to me. He never strays. He never even looks.

A woman who wants to keep her relationship is making sure sex happens. This woman is 1. A teacher, 2. Cooks, and 3. Fucks. I have mentioned before that teachers and nurses are naturally good life partners… they have jobs that pay acceptably and that are easy to take a year or two off to have kids. For some reason no one tells women in college that most corporate jobs have an arc that is very difficult to interrupt to have a family. Teaching and nursing have interruption built into them.

Women who want to be married and stay married build the skills they need to make that happen and employ those skills. Women who don’t… well, you’ve read plenty about them, that I don’t need to repeat.

The skills women need to get and stay married are not very complicated, but our society is determined to try and hide them. Be pleasant to be around, cook, and fuck… if a woman can consistently do those things, she’s a lot of the way towards being married and staying married.

NOTE: F**ked up the link first time through, and it’s now fixed.

Kids, the player, and the Red Pill: Comprehensive statement

I don’t have good answers or solutions to questions around how players who wants kids, should go about having them (and I think most guys should have kids… MOST is not ALL, so you may be an exception). I’m skeptical of the “Just do THIS, bro” stories I see, most of which reduce to a couple scenarios:

  • “Just marry the RIGHT woman:” while screening women is helpful, it is not possible to know how someone will evolve three years, five years, ten years later. You are still gambling when you marry a woman.
  • “Just marry and hope for the best.” This is a good way to lose half your assets, and to pay alimony in addition to child support.
  • “Just have a kid with a woman in a non-committed relationship and keep your harem going.” Most women won’t agree to this. In an age of reliable birth control and abortion, she is not likely to go for this by accident. This scenario is not impossible, just not common.
  • “Just have a kid and then leave the woman.” This is very bad for the kid and also hard to set up and execute.

In my view, guys in their teens, 20s, and early 30s need to have experience with a wide array of women BEFORE they attempt to set up a family.

Most women are ill-suited to relationships and family and most modern women under the age of 27/28 are not actually ready to have kids, even if they think they are. Many, conceivably most, women who have kids younger than that age stay with the father for a couple years, then divorce / leave him for one last big ride. It also seems that most guys comply with female demands and just wander into marriage because they don’t think they can get another girl; while this is a terrible reason to marry, it’s also super common. I encourage you NOT to sleepwalk into marriage. One way to know whether you should stay with a woman is to ask yourself, “Can I get another woman at least as good as this one if I want to?” If the honest answer is “Yes,” then you should consider staying with her. Only stay with her if you have options. If you don’t have options, you need to up your value and game.

Despite all the pleasures of being a player (it has NEVER been a better time to be a player, despite what you hear sometimes online), I think most guys eventually want kids. Typically this seems to happen around age 35 – 40. A guy who has been in the game for 5 – 10 years often tires of it… while f**king hot chicks never gets old, at least for me, it can get repetitive and unsatisfying, for lack of a better term. Many guys come to yearn for something more substantial in their lives than slagging randoms until the point they no longer can. If you’re a committed player for life, that’s fine, this is not for you and I wish you good luck in your endeavors. This is for guys who start thinking beyond the next bang. I spent a long time thinking about the next bang, so, again, I’m not opposed to that view… but I think I’m growing away from it.

Modern marriage doesn’t work because it’s a high-risk contract with little reward for the guy. In our society we link sexuality tightly with raising children. Is it possible to separate those two, despite the way marriage co-mingles them? To have a kid, but also to have other partners, consensually? It seems that very few people think about this, let alone try it. Yet many people end up doing it: they just marry, have kids, then have an acrimonious divorce, which is in effect a parturition of sexuality and child rearing. What if you skip the acrimony and the false till-death-do-us-part thing? I don’t see how people can make till-death-do-us-part promises with a straight face today, despite the regularity with which people do just that.

I’m interested in co-parenting as an alternative. Very few women have heard of co-parenting, though. The conversation about co-parenting is just getting started, and it’s more common than it was ten years ago.

It’s also apparent that most sexual relationships lose their sexual component over time, and that’s part of the reason I’m interested in consensual non-monogamy. Consensual non-monogamy is hard, and many people are inclined to succumb to the power and lure of “new relationship energy” (NRE), instead of investing in their previous relationship(s), which they have already hedonically adapted to.

I’ve been talking more w/ women (and some men) about co-parenting, since, it’s clear that the “we’re going to put our entire sexual, economic, and child-raising eggs in one basket” system hasn’t been working very well for decades. Is it possible or conceivable that we can have a consensual, intelligent co-parenting system instead? It doesn’t seem totally impossible to me, and some people are (finally) talking about this, which in my view is long overdue.

I wonder if more couples would work better w/ something like a child-raising and care contract. A lot of the successful couples I see seem to either be post-sex (weird to me, but whatever), or have quiet side arrangements. Problem for guys is that quiet side arrangements are much easier for women to arrange than guys to arrange. Just like a woman who writes on a dating app, “In a relationship and looking for something casual” will be inundated with sex requests while a guy who does the same will… not be. That’s why I’m more fond of the sex club situation, where extremely direct reciprocation is the norm.

Overall, I just don’t think humans are good at long-term monogamy. Even in the days after the Industrial Revolution and before reliable birth control, the likelihood of relentless, back-breaking labor and the possibility of early death means that it’s possible not that many people did modern long-term monogamy.

Today, I’m envisioning something like a five-year shared-resources contract, the purpose of which is to have two kids and remain romantically entangled. Then, after, you can re-evaluate the contract and decisions. Or a contract might specify that you’re going to have kids and do 50/50 custody and not leave the metro area. We’re pretty far from having this conversation, but many people are already doing something like this, if you look at the divorce rate.

Realistically, it is also very difficult if not impossible for most guys to have very small kids and be anything like a player. Well, maybe if you have the money to hire a full-time nanny or something like that, but apart from corner/edge cases it’s not going to happen, if you’re also dealing with kid stuff. The people who think otherwise either haven’t been in the situation or just abandon Mom/kid, which I also think is bad. For a lot of people who have two kids two years apart, they spend six years in “kid world” dealing with very small kids. Some have families who assume part of the burden. Some pay for child care. Some do both. Many just work their way through it. I recommend buying kettlebells and doing kettlebell workouts.

It is possible to have somewhat older kids, when they are more autonomous, and split time w/ the Mom and be a player. Most guys just don’t do this, or can’t.

I’m interested in co-parenting because it seems obvious to me that a) traditional marriage doesn’t work but all that b) having kids is important and meaningful. How do you square that circle?

For a guy who makes a really large amount of money, it’s possible to deal with “child” support and the family-law system. It could also conceivably be possible to hire nannies, etc. and still be a player. I’m saying “possible” because I don’t think I know anyone who’s done it (though I’m not sure I know any true players anyway). For most people, kids, especially when young, just take a lot of time and attention, in a way that’s not very compatible with sleeping around.

I mentioned that many guys eventually get bored with being a player. I think we have been psychologically selected in part for having and being around kids, and it is very hard to get over our evolved psychology. The “grandmother hypothesis” asks if women experience menopause and cease reproduction, yet keep living for decades after, as an evolutionary adaptation to help their daughters’s grandchildren. While older men may still be able to have children, it’s not obvious how often men age 50+ actually did so… men may also be psychologically primed for leadership roles and to help their grandchildren. If so, then failing to set yourself up to be able to do that may be setting yourself up for psychological disappointment.

I like citing evolutionary biology and psychology, and those fields may have implications for stage of life. We look to them as players because they provide a theoretical framework for what chicks are into. But we can also look to them for other virtues, like how to think about age and family. Many families and communities are fractured by travel for jobs and by simple social dysfunction.

If our psychologies are primed for children/grandchildren, that can explain why so many people (including guys) without kids seem pretty f**ked up and bitter. There is a mismatch between what their deep psychologies want them to do, and what they have done or are doing. That mismatch is hard to reconcile.

It seems there is also a difference between a “happy” and “meaningful” life, which many of us intuit.

Satisfying one’s needs and wants increased happiness but was largely irrelevant to meaningfulness. Happiness was largely present oriented, whereas meaningfulness involves integrating past, present, and future. For example, thinking about future and past was associated with high meaningfulness but low happiness. Happiness was linked to being a taker rather than a giver, whereas meaningfulness went with being a giver rather than a taker. Higher levels of worry, stress, and anxiety were linked to higher meaningfulness but lower happiness.

That matches my intuitive sense and what I have been trying to convey. There is some trade off between having the best immediate experience RIGHT NOW and building a life that is “meaningful,” “substantial,” choose your word here. American society tells us we are supposed to be “happy,” which sounds a little like consumerist advertising bullshit to me.

One player I know wrote,

The firm subtext I have with any girl I date now is outcome indifference. She can more or less come and go as she pleases and I am fine either way. Once you have a child I do not see how you can become anything but outcome dependent. How would you handle that loss of leverage over her behaviour?

When you have a kid, you’re very likely going to be less outcome independent with the woman, but you also have to remember that, if she wants to leave and sue you for child support… she will. That’s just a fact. But most normal women want a partner and a father for their child, so, typically a man’s leverage increases in the first few years of the child’s life, as normal women want to be subsidized financially and want their child to have a father.

You can of course find exceptions to this. The exceptions make great stories.

It’s really difficult to predict how women respond to being a parent. They seem to have all kinds of responses, many of them unpredictable. In some sense you are tied to her for the next twenty years. But, in another sense, you still have to be ready to leave, or to have her leave; the main way to be outcome independent is to be prepared, psychologically and logistically, for what will happen in the event of a split.

The negative and the positive are both parts of life. Dwell too long or too far on either, and you will not be a complete person, in my opinion; complete persons have to embrace both. I like to think that I do, though I may be deluding myself.

Functional women also try very hard to make sure they are NOT going to have a kid with a deadbeat, a lackadaisical guy, or even a player who is going to abandon them. Women who are functional today get an IUD and, even if they get pregnant by a non-investing guy, they are not going to keep the baby. Obviously, many women are dysfunctional, but I’m not convinced it’s a great idea to have a baby with a dysfunctional woman. In an era of long-acting reversible contraception, separating sex from reproduction is easy and functional women do it.

There is also a stage-of-life question to the woman or women a guy is dating. Most chicks under age 22 – 25 DO NOT CARE about your career, your intellect, etc. They are in it for the hot guys, the feels, and the excitement (mostly). Chicks who pay their own rent, often evaluate guys on other factors in addition to hotness and feelings. There is a big gap between chicks who are being heavily subsidized by parents/state (via student loans) and chicks who have to pay their own way. The latter usually get MUCH more interested in a guy’s career and intellect, as those things directly affect his ability to keep roof over head. This is much harder than many chicks realize.

This is not universal, and some 18-year-old chicks will be very intersted in earning power and some 31-year-old chicks won’t give a f**k. But it is a strong correlation. It make sense, too. There is a lot of stuff in the Red Pill about how chicks’s sexual market value (SMV) is predominantly determined by looks and youth. While that’s true, it’s also overstated, especially for guys looking for a longer-term chick. For a guy looking purely for hookups, it’s pretty much all about the hotness. For a guy evaluating a longer-term deal, though, then her own psychology, earning power, etc. become much more important in the evaluation. In the modern world, a chick without a job is sending a terrible signal about herself.

Chicks also have their own game… chicks realize early on that they are competing against other chicks, and that, if all she offers is f**king… well, lots of other chicks can and do do that too. So women ideally learn how to cook, at least, and ideally learn other useful skills too. It seems that most women underestimate how much that can make them stand apart.

In some ways this is a lame essay, because I don’t have great answers to the problems of childbearing and long-term relationships. This is the Internet, so I know I am supposed to be the God-like guru who KNOWS EVERYTHING. I am not, though, and I don’t know everything, and some questions are unanswerable. I see that the old structures don’t work anymore and have been killed by feminism, despite the many men who are still foolhardy enough to sign the marriage contract. Almost no one is talking about the new structures (if you know someone who is, please tell me about them). So where does someone go who does want a family but also sees conventional marriage as fucked? We have to write a whole new playbook from scratch, which is pretty uncommon. Many of the suggestions I have read are either unrealistic or assume a massive amount of income/wealth, which is itself unrealistic for most people. Yes, I know the Internet has many people making $250,000/year in location-independent income, and they are willing to show you how to do it too for the low low price of $995… but that is atypical. If you genuinely have it, good for you, but most people don’t.

Chicks also go through the epicycles men do. A 35-year-old woman who just got out of an eight or ten year relationship might be ready for some hot guy casual sex. Or a 45-year-old woman for that matter. The woman I call Low-cut top girl is younger than that and didn’t have as long a relationship, but she is/was in that phase. These epi-cycles are why marriage is so foolish for most men. A woman may love a man for ten years and then leave. Why give her half your money too?

This piece has probably taken a longer time than anything else I’ve written, and it still feels very incomplete to me. The whole Red Pill world feels incomplete to me at times… I saw a smart Tweet on the subjet,

The root cause of the brain drain in the PUA industry post 2010s.

The pick up guys who are cool and intelligent stay hidden because they have professional and business reputations to maintain.

The end result is the PUAs that go public are mostly unsuccessful weirdos.

Most guys with things going for them, would have to be nuts to come out. At some point, (almost) everyone needs to change pace. From f**king tons of chicks to building a substantial contribution. From writing online to living in real life. Not everyone… but most of us.

There is also a thing in modern upper-middle-class culture called “helicopter parenting” or “snowplow parenting.” If you work with Gen Zers in the 18 – 23 age bracket you may have seen some of the results. This kind of parenting is crazy, time-intensive, and leads to neurotic parenting and kids. Most amusingly, it does not work. How your kid turns out is largely not up to the parent, within reason. Jocko Willink has said that he lets his kids fail (in non-physically threatening ways). It’s important to know the strategic mission that the family is trying to accomplish. A lot of contemporary upper-middle-class parenting is about doing everything for the kid, destroying the adult’s life and not letting the kid develop. Don’t do this, although your peers might be doing it.

So, like I said at the beginning, I don’t have a final answer and am suspicious of those who claim to. I think that consensual co-parenting is a smart route, but most chicks are not going to go for it both because of cultural conditioning around marriage and because the marriage contract gives them an option on the guy’s financial resources. Chicks are also driven to find a guy they think is higher than them on the social totem pole. But there is a limit on how many guys are up there, so a lot of chicks end up becoming cat ladies instead of having families. Sad, but that is modern society. Chicks don’t learn femininity and then are surprised guys don’t respond to them… guys don’t learn masculinity and then are surprised when chicks don’t respond to them. The chicks who learn femininity aren’t online feminists… the guys who learn masculinity aren’t online PUAs. You see through the system, then you figure out who and what you really are. You figure out the final answers given by gurus are wrong or incomplete. You see that there is only the struggle. Eventually all of us lose the struggle and die… to live is to struggle.