Woman validates the Red Pill, “The Beauty Exec Fantasizing About the Single Dad Next Door”

Ho boy, “The Beauty Exec Fantasizing About the Single Dad Next Door” conforms so well to Red Pill stereotype and doctrine… it does as much as “My friend ‘Anna’” does not… the writer is 43, divorced, two kids, f**king around, she states she wants a relationship, but, “Why is it that the nicer the apartment, the less I like the guy?” Probably cause really rich guys are often compensating for lack of personality and/or bedroom skills. This guy also doesn’t have good options, “it makes me feel kind of repulsed how into me he is. I should be thrilled. There is nothing not to like about him.” No guy should be that into a 43 year old woman with two kids. This woman knows that his extreme interest is a demonstration of lower value (DLV).

“He’s the kind of guy who really craves family. Again, it makes him pathetic to me.” Because if he craves family with her… he must not be high value… so he turns her off. To her credit, she says, “I adore my kids. They are the two greatest loves of my life.” This is why dating single moms is a bad idea. Their kids will always be first, if they have any character at all as human beings. Go find a woman who hasn’t had kids and give her the greatest loves of her life. This woman is chasing the hottest men… but also, “My ex had an affair, which is why he’s now my ex. Other than cheating on me (over the course of two years), he was a good husband and a great father.” She probably got a guy who has very high SMV… and those guys… they tend to use their SMV. An SMV mismatch problem. This woman was probably delusional about her ex and she is delusional about who she might date now.

I’d like to find someone to have a serious relationship with, but that someone has to be amazing. I won’t compromise. I am content with my life as is, so I would rather be alone than with someone I don’t totally fucking worship and adore.

This woman is 43 and… delusional. She thinks she wants a serious relationship but will only consider the guys who will likely disqualify her. She may be content right now but as her SMV fades, whether she keeps up the yoga or not, “I actually hate yoga but I do it for the yoga bod,” her options are going to get worse. She thinks she wants a serious relationship but all of her behaviors and beliefs point in the opposite direction. This is an incoherent woman.

Overall this story matches recent discussion with Mark J,

Red, how much of this do you think is down to location ? Big coastal cities naturally attract younger, hotter, more hypergamous girls. I’m in NYC and de facto assume any girl I am fucking is seeing or at the very least talking to other guys. But if I was in a smaller Midwest city for example I could imagine that being a lot less common.

There is something to this… I said back, “There’s also some sorting going on… if a girl (or guy) wants to be a big slut, she moves to the big city. It’s about the culture of the place but also the people who move there.” The writer above is a sample of being a big city slut, but not being able to acknowledge it.

Short Dancer, maybe the last girl I was in intense love with (while ago now), moved back to her small town and from what I can tell is now dating a guy who is worse than me in pretty much every respect… except that he seems to be willing to commit to her… and that is important to her… more important than I understood at the time… in some ways I was blinded by my own belief system. We all self-deceive. So Short Dancer is willing to turn down a big city experience to make less money, have less excitement, but also to find a guy who is willing to commit to her… and she is very pretty. But she doesn’t seem to be interested in playing the hypergamy game. She is the sort of girl who is probably not going to show up in some Red Pill horror story. Not yet, anyway. When she’s ready to stray… I hope she gets in touch.

Author: The Red Quest

How can we live and be in society?

11 thoughts on “Woman validates the Red Pill, “The Beauty Exec Fantasizing About the Single Dad Next Door””

  1. I wrote about some similar scenarios today as well–it’s just so interesting to me that women seem unable to adjust when considering their SMV relative to the marketplace. Like, older chicks may be fine going for older guys, but they still expect those guys to be Chad types who make a ton of money. Really strange and hard to understand, because I know I’ll have to make an adjustment here at some point. Like how long can I really expect to have a shot at girls in their early 20’s? Probably a few more years–mid to late 40’s, but at some point I’ll have to go for girls in their later 20’s/early 30’s. Nice thing for guys is that you can stay in that range til 55ish probably.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It’s also a thing where women who want monogamy and have a good read on their own SMV get in relationships, work to stay in them, have families, protect their families, etc. Like that drunk chick in her 30s you wrote about, https://redpilldad.blog/2019/12/04/red-pill-observations-a-sad-story-lessons-from-an-8-and-a-trip-to-college/, her counterpart who wants a family and monogamy is not at a sports game getting drunk and hitting on random guys… she’s probably with her husband or family.

      Women who have reasonable expectations get them fulfilled… like men… women who don’t… they make a lot of noise.

      Like

  2. Great post. I really like both how you write (stream of consciousness style) and how you think. You have such a great mind for this topic.

    > But she doesn’t seem to be interested in playing the hypergamy game

    As I believe you know about me… I hate this term.

    Hypergamy = “I want the better one.” And who doesn’t. It’s such a braindead concept. Dur. It really says so little.

    In this case, perhaps she is still “dating up” (much better term), where “up” could be anything she is craving… Long-term or otherwise.

    I bet you are and were better than him on many objective criteria. Many subjective ones too.

    Maybe that was the problem. It can be like that.

    Maybe this guy is simple and catchable… And that make him “better.” Or maybe he is fat, and dresses like a loser, but has this romantic side that comes out… Mostly for her, so he is “better.” Or maybe she just wants to go to Apple Bees, definitely get the desert, have a quiet night on an old brown couch, with a fleece blanket from Target, and BBQ chicken thighs on the weekend, SPECIFICALLY because all that reminds her of her parents… and he kills it at all that, so he is “better.”

    Hypergamy is so braindead because it is so obvious one one hand (“better is more desirable than worse” – such insight!) and fails to account for non-obvious things (like personal taste) on the other.

    To make this more personal… alpha fucks beta bucks is barely any better (although that phrase alone is a lot more content rich) and I am interested in where INTERESTING (as a quality in a man) fits…

    Before I found game… Girls dated me because I was “interesting.” Not cool. Not sexy. Not rich. But interesting.

    Beta Alpha

    It is a good example because girls DO f**k “interesting” guys. And pointing that out throws some sand in the low-IQ gears of “hypergamy”as it struggles to explain when/why that happens.

    Go RedQuest.

    Like

    1. Hypergamy is not my favorite term either. It’s emphasized too much among players and red pill guys. But it’s emphasized too little everywhere else. Some women are also more enthralled by it than others… smart women understand their tendencies and control for them. Less smart women don’t/can’t.

      >>Maybe this guy is simple and catchable… And that make him “better.” Or maybe he is fat, and dresses like a loser, but has this romantic side that comes out… Mostly for her, so he is “better.” Or maybe she just wants to go to Apple Bees, definitely get the desert, have a quiet night on an old brown couch, with a fleece blanket from Target, and BBQ chicken thighs on the weekend, SPECIFICALLY because all that reminds her of her parents… and he kills it at all that, so he is “better.”

      Yes, exactly. I believe I mis-judged her. “who is worse than me in pretty much every respect… except that he seems to be willing to commit to her… and that is important to her… more important than I understood at the time… in some ways I was blinded by my own belief system. We all self-deceive.” I think my impression of her was wrong… and it being wrong has some lessons for other guys. There are some other details I didn’t share that reinforced my earlier thinking about her.

      With her, also, who knows… maybe she’ll get bored of this guy in a year or two… I’m also almost completely disconnected from her on social media now, so I don’t really know what’s going on with her.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. With all due respect, as I consider both of you to be mentors, I don’t think you guys understand hypergamy and why so many guys talk about it–especially in the red pill community.

    > Hypergamy = “I want the better one.” And who doesn’t. It’s such a braindead concept. Dur. It really says so little.

    This is oversimplified. It’s not that chicks just want a better one. It’s that they want the absolute BEST one, to the point where huge numbers of women–maybe even most–are pretty delusional when it comes to what it is they can get in the sexual marketplace. This is even further inflated by the false validation they get from social media. Just look at the data from swipe dating: men swipe right close to 50% of the time; women something like 15% of the time–although I’ve seen studies recently that suggest it’s even less than that.

    So as far as single women go, hypergamy VASTLY shrinks the sexual marketplace, which obviously has a negative effect on men. It’s actually quite similar to what would happen to the economy if there was a sudden, steep raise in interest rates across the board or a massive tax increase–the economy would contract and not function nearly as well as it does now.

    Now I’ll grant that players are less affected by hypergamy because game by its nature increases our SMV, on top of the fact that we’re opening lots and lots of girls, so we partially avoid this problem through simple math–increased value plus lots of options mitigates hypergamy. Additionally, I’d argue hypergamy especially doesn’t affect either of you much because you’re top guys: RQ you’re in a social circle/environment where sex positive chicks are widely available, and Nash, you’re an advanced day game guy mostly targeting Asian girls who are likely to perceive you as having higher value simply due to the fact you’re a white American. Plus, both of you guys from my sense of it, are fairly wealthy compared to the average guy–so again, another increase in value which offsets hypergamy. I guess what I’m saying is that for a top guy, hypergamy might well seem invisible or even ridiculous. To go with the economic analogy, if we have a recession, the ultra wealthy aren’t going to be happy about , but it’s not going to have much of an effect on their day to day lives.

    However, just as most Americans would be fucked if the economy tanks, hypergamy has a tremendously negative effect on most men, ranging from full on blue-pill betas to guys who’ve just swallowed the pill, but haven’t learned pick-up and game. Furthermore, guys lose girlfriends and wives to hypergamy in a disproportionate ratio to women who lose men to hotter, younger chicks. I’m one of them in a way, having been divorced. Full disclosure: I’m glad I got divorced and it was probably inevitable–but it wouldn’t have happened if she didn’t think she could do any better. Now, is that partially or maybe even fully their (my) fault? Sure. But that doesn’t mean those guys aren’t human beings who’ve experienced real trauma and loss.

    I agree that too much is made of it–hypergamy isn’t going away–and it’s no use blaming women for it, other than perhaps being delusional about what they can/should get in the sexual marketplace.

    Like

    1. Totally respect you too. And I love to argue. Guess what comes next?

      > This is oversimplified. It’s not that chicks just want a better one. It’s that they want the absolute BEST one,

      Well, if that were true… girls would “sit it out” if they couldn’t have “#1.” And they don’t. That is not how nature works. I hear you saying they believe they could do better, and I hear you implying, that’s why they don’t DATE DOWN, and there are A LOT of unfucked guys at the bottom end of the SMP… but so what?

      Most girls can get laid if they want, they don’t sit it out, they SHARE TOP GUYS (polygyny) or take their best option.

      They do “share,” which is also much more interesting than the concept of “hypergamy.” It says much more.

      Hypergamy (if such a topic has any value at all, and it mostly does not)… FUNCTIONS as “I want the better one.” That is actually how it functions.

      Maybe she want’s “the best.” But assume #1 isn’t interested in all the girls in the room (he has his pick), “Girl #5” hooks up with whom? = the best she can get. You see this yourself, I know you do. You are often that guy. And if she “branch swings” (also a brain dead concept), it’ll be to?? To “a better one.” That is how it functions.

      If it was IN FACT “only #1” (or even #1 “90%” of the time) that would partially explain the vast hordes of women that “sit it out.” But vast hordes of women don’t sit it out, at least insofar as they can’t have #1. I think you’re concerned about the “vast hordes of men that can’t get laid” – more on that in a different response.

      LET’S DO BETTER:

      Vin de Carlo and his buddy Brian say “they want the best one IN THE ROOM.” And they acknowledge that she might spend a lot of time in “3 or 4 rooms” a day. So, she want’s the “best” in the room, and the rooms changes as she moves around, so her attn changes… AND… if she can’t get #1 (and she may immediately realize that), she will date whatever guy “meets minimum standards” and is interested in her… that is MUCH more accurate. That is what we see in the SMP.

      If you want the TRUTH, we ought not begin with one of the dumbest, most over simplified concepts ever to hit the manosphere, and then… backwards rationalize why it must be true. The TRUTH is best seen in practice. We don’t start with the theory and then force examples to fit. We start with examples… and resolve a theory.

      So let’s take you, RPD. If you don’t mind, Sir. I respect you. I think I can be a bit flattering here and help make my point.

      — Are you “The best?” In some rooms, probably. In all rooms? I doubt it. But enough of the time.
      — When you meet a girl on the street, are you “the best?” Probably not, but you’re probably “good enough” to be worth some time.

      So… you, you personally, kill it. I believe that. I think you’re credible and likely very good. You’re high value (and damn the guys that are not… nature wants it so). But I doubt you’re the “best.” And you don’t need to be… you just need to be “better than.”

      Now YOHAMI would say, “If she is out with you, assume you are her BEST OFFER.” That is close to true, right? I mean, why would she DATE DOWN, when she can DATE UP (date down/up… much more interesting that the muddy water of “muh hypergamy”). You’re “the better one.” We know this is true in practice.

      But WHY? This is, again, where Hypergamy is completely useless and leads men to this pathetic fatalism. WHY?? Why is some “less than obvious” guy busy with girls while whathisname is not… we don’t know! The selection criteria are so vast and personal.

      Hypergamy comes to some “complaining” conclusion and fails to push men into brainstorming how they can 1. improve their value, 2. pick different rooms, 3. differentiate their product. Etc.

      It’s a terrible lens. A defeatist lens. That is why I dis it so hard.

      Like

    2. And also, RPD… you surprise me, as you are a HIGH VALUE, SKILLED MAN, but… you do a surprisingly good job representing pathetic Redpill attitudes. Ones I don’t think serve you, but DO in fact show how that crew thinks. Again, I am often surprised you are associate with them at all.

      > [women] are pretty delusional when it comes to what it is they can get in the sexual marketplace
      > further inflated by the false validation they get from social media

      Yeah? And? What is the goal here? To magically correct girls thinking? Or maybe to just find solidarity in complaining? Again, you do so well as a Player, I am surprised you repeat these mindsets and EMPTY COMPLAINTs. So ineffective.

      > hypergamy VASTLY shrinks the sexual marketplace, which obviously has a negative effect on men

      Wow. You are searching for “just rationale” for why low value males can’t get laid. THAT is CORE redpill thinking. So much of redpill is “the basic complaint that women want the better one.” This is actually what I think of redpillers = A complaint lobby. While men of game are out “finding solutions.” Huge difference… and I think you’re in the latter camp, but won’t let go of the former.

      I said last week (and I was being a dick, but it was an illustrative “dig”) that HYPERGAMY is “PUSSY ENVY” in men. Can you hear it here?

      I do not think you personally have “pussy envy.” But you are using the talking points of men that do. “If only average, lack-luster men had pussies, they’d have more choices.” Right? So embarrassing. Is that what they want? To be “a six” with pussy, just so they’d have more dates? I think that IS what they want. Disgusts me.

      If redpill was more than complaints, they would see the “harsh truth” that most men ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BREED. NATURE wants it that way. Good genes, all that. And you don’t have to have 6-pack abs… because MANY CRITERIA are selected for. Poor, “non white” POETS get laid. Out of work, fat FUNNY guys get laid. Etc. But guys with “low LIFE FORCE” (credit: Pat Stedman), and no obvious value do not… so what then? The SMP is broken? No… it’s perfect. Why would nature want to pass on middling averageness to the next gen? That is not how nature works.

      YOU surprise me… as you are not “middling averageness.” You kick ass. And yet you come off as a spokesperson for the “I deserve” guys that refuse to hustle enough to build value and FIND THEIR NICHE.

      > increased value plus lots of options mitigates hypergamy

      It doesn’t MITIGATE it at all. You have been “indoctrinated” to think hypergamy is a bad thing, something that needs “mitigating.” Hypergamy is simply and ONLY “I want the better one.” Men do it too (they just have fewer choices, which I think IS your central pain point here). And you, Sir, you ARE the better choice (much of the time). And yet you use hypergamy as if it was a cancer, when in fact it is your paycheck. Can you see that? This is a core tradition of LOW VALUE “I deserve” types in the redpill… of which you DO NOT resemble.

      > mostly targeting Asian girls who are likely to perceive you as having higher value simply due to the fact you’re a white American

      This, my friend… is insulting BS. It’s you doing SJW level thinking. “White privilege,” straight out of ditsy college chicks mouth. You’re RIGHT, girls DO DIFFERENTIATE. But do all white guys kill it? No. Why?

      Pay ATTN: Did I PERSONALLY KILL IT before game? No. I did not. Did I get “whiter” since then???? Is that why I get laid now? C’mon man. Come up a level. Drop this BS. I got good at GAME. THAT was the difference. GAME itself is value. PLUS, I increased my value in other ways. So, +++.

      I feel like I am taking off in FEMALE PSYCH… actual, deep lessons in female psych. That is EXPERIENCE, not “whiteness.” THAT is why I am getting better. Not because I am bleaching skin. Ridiculous.

      LET’S DO BETTER: I am a bit different (both here, and in a crowd of all white people). That accounts for the “white thing,” but ALSO accounts for MY GAME. My interest in PSYCH. My interest and SKILL in EMOTIONS. Girls have met dumbass white guys that think their passport will get them laid, and it does not. They are “white too,” right? When they meet me, its my GAME that separates me…. not my whiteness (totally insulting and beneath you, you know better).

      You are digging into this pathetic “you’re white” to justify your hypergamy theory… when you have much better reason to explain why I am any good. And I think it’s BECAUSE you have too much redpill in your diet.

      > fairly wealthy compared to the average guy–so again, another increase in value which offsets hypergamy

      You don’t know how I dress, but I wear $40 black jeans and $20 tshirts and $50 Adidas. You know how I meet girls. I do have some money… but how do they know that on a cold approach? I don’t wear a watch ($$$), I wear a $10 silver ring I have had for 20 years and a $10 leather bracelet? So how does my wealth hook them?

      It doesn’t. Again, insulting. You’re doing SJW “economic inequality,” but from the low value Redpill POV. It is amazing how similar the redpillers are to SJWs. It is a FACT they are a response to the rise in feminism/SJWs. THEY are the mirror the equally sad/pathetic thinking on that side.

      I have a nice house, but girls don’t see that until I bring them home, right? Again… it’s irrelevant. But more so… I lose girls, all the time, to guys that will never have the resources I have, that are not as “white” as I am. Why? Because this is all more interesting/subtle than ‘white game”/”rich game” allows for. You know all this.

      What girls MIGHT see in me/RedQuest is our IQ. We are smart, and that shows quickly. It’s an “honest signal.” Not every girl likes it, but it’s a proxy for “rich.” It’s a proxy for “successful.” It is a proxy for “capable.” SMART/effective a type of VALUE. How does an unsmart guy compete with that? He emphasizes other points, other niches. The OPEN MIC SINGER. The ULTIMATE FRISBEE GUY. The RELIGIOUS GUY. The MEDIATOR. A million niches… rooms where he could be “her best offer.”

      “But, but, but… what about guys that FAIL to do any of that?” “What about guys that fail to demonstrate value?” “Doesn’t hypergamy mean those guys won’t get a shot at getting laid?” no use blaming women for it, other than perhaps being delusional about what they can/should get in the sexual marketplace

      “Muh Hypergamy” (aka PUSSY ENVY) – as it’s used – is MEN being delusional about what they can/should get in the SMP. Can’t you see it?

      I am so surprised to see wise men sucked down this path… that is why I try so hard “TO ‘PILL THE REDPILLERS.” They obviously need it. This shit is cripplingly bad POV.

      Like

      1. Holy shit–sounds like you and I wear the same stuff! Good fashion sense my man :)

        Read your comments and I think we have some agreement and disagreement.

        > Well, if that were true… girls would “sit it out” if they couldn’t have “#1.” And they don’t.

        This is just not true. I’ll agree that most girls probably can get pumped and dumped if they want to–but a relationship with a HQ guy? No. And they do indeed sit it out. Look at Rob Henderson’s work or read some of the Quillette articles. Women will absolutely sit it out if they can’t get what they want. Which again, contracts the marketplace.

        > Vin de Carlo and his buddy Brian say “they want the best one IN THE ROOM.”

        Agree–but what women perceive to be the room is now essentially global. Where before social media and online dating most women had regular access to say, between 10-30 men in their work/social circle, and whatever she could meet IRL, now her perception is limited only by the size of her metropolitan area and the number of followers she has on IG.

        > You are digging into this pathetic “you’re white” to justify your hypergamy theory… when you have much better reason to explain why I am any good. And I think it’s BECAUSE you have too much redpill in your diet.

        Perhaps I do. But if you don’t think Asian women like white guys, you’re crazy. I’ve got a buddy in Vietnam and a friend who worked in the Peace Corps in Korea who’ve told me firsthand that there’s a difference. It’s just like a lot of white chicks automatically perceive black guys as being hotter than white guys–even if we could objectively agree that the two dudes were of similar SMV. Don’t mistake me for an SJW–I’m not talking about white privilege. I’m simply talking about the objective truth, which is that some women prefer certain races to others. Again, this is shown in the data collected in such books like Dataclysm.

        Also, please don’t infer I’m not saying you’re not good–I said you’re a top guy, bro! I know you’re good! I’ve picked up a lot of your stuff and incorporated that into my game because of that.

        Anyway, on some of the stuff I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. Perhaps I’m in a different spot too, because I’ve only really gotten into this stuff starting in 2018, so I’m much earlier in my journey than you and more advanced guys are. Much love my man!

        Like

  4. Mr RPD… very reasonable response to my (as usual) over-torqued comments. Thank you for your patience with me. I have some obvious flaws.

    And yet… you can count on me to have something to say.

    > And they do indeed sit it out. Look at Rob Henderson’s work or read some of the Quillette articles. Women will absolutely sit it out if they can’t get what they want.

    Indefinitely? They go on a hunger strike? : ]

    I know for a fact that there are girls (MOSTLY INTROVERTS) that go on long periods of “sexual hibernation. They can “live without.” These girls are introverted, have small “life circles” (– that is word for word from a girl like I am describing), they are NOT online, they read, they like TV, they spend time with family and their “one good girlfriend.” So they “sit it out,” but not for the reasons you’re implying… they sit it out as QUALITY MEN have a hard time finding them at all.

    But for more typical girls, average office girls, girls that have a normal social circle, almost ANY GIRL that dates online, girls that party… I think you’re going to have a hard time proving any SIGNIFICANT PORTION that keep themselves away from offers. Some, definitely… but a very small percentage.

    And the thing BOTH GROUPS have in common is… MEN START IT ALL. So the first group (hard to reach introverts) are still subject to action from men, but are good at hiding. Some small % will be “super stubborn”… but the rest… “65-75%” of women with some fertility left… they don’t sit it out, they almost cannot, as they have TOO MANY OFFERS, and at least some of them are decent offers. And girls use a rating scale that is RELATIVE… they pick the “BEST ON THEY CAN GET **IN THE ROOM** they are in.”

    > contracts the marketplace

    This is so bizarre to me, as you sound like you are concerned about being “match maker” for this “low value” class of men that will never be dateable. Perhaps that is why you care that the marketplace “is smaller” (unnoticeably so) even as YOU see your personal marketplace expanding thru a combination of innate/earn VALUE and GAME.

    You’re not in your 20s. You’re not rich. You’re divorced. You have a kid. You should NOT be getting laid like you are. How could it possibly be??? : ] It’s almost as if the individual guy matters? No. Can’t be.

    Let me pause: You do or do not except that most men are now, and will always be, undateable? Over 50%. Over 60% Maybe 70% of men are undateable. The “drone” class of men.

    Is this ^ part of your model of the SMP?

    It is for me. You/I both know men can commit to game and shift out of undateable to dateable. Maybe not at the level you and I are at, but it is doable. We can “cheat Nature” (I am). But “if Nature had it’s way,” the bottom 70% would NOT BREED, and that would be a GOOD THING for the population. A healthy culling of the least desirable genes. This is proper evo-bio. Are the redpill guys comfortable with THIS “harsh truth?”

    I think Redpill of full of guys that don’t get this at all. And they have the “I deserve” mentality about their spot in the SMP.

    Players can make the marketplace work for them. And in that top 30%… it’s not easy… it takes work…. but the SMP isn’t really changing. It cannot, in our lifetime. (Marriage can change… TRUE… but sexual opportunity… barring a major war/disaster, etc… no.)

    > what women perceive to be the room is now essentially global

    No. C’mon. For ridiculous instagram ‘hos (that get flown around) and a few jet setters. For salary girls with money (but only in spurts, as they need to keep the salary flowing).

    Most girls don’t move around. The “global options” don’t all come to them… so they can/do date locally. They have to. We all do. They can milk attention online… but dating is a local thing (and that is coming from me, and I have had an odd % of Int’l flings in the last few years… and I know that is odd behavior).

    The Vin deCarlo/Brian comment is lazer because is shows how RELATIVE it all is. She picks the best guy in the room. The room she is in. Imagine a house party… SMV is quickly sorted out… she makes out with someone. Who? The “best in the room.” Specifically, “the best SHE CAN GET” in the room.

    That whole argument about hypergamy and “global options” is just loser talk. It’s excuse making. Average guys with average gifts and a little bit of work, go out on Friday, and they “miss” a lot, but they hook up. It’s bitter “quitters” that have “pussy envy” that need those theories to justify why they can’t compete with even average guys.

    You are becoming a great CASE STUDY for me to watch. I am interested in men’s relationship to game and SMP. And male psych too. And you are so interesting, because you are CREATING ACTION in your life, top level, and still use talking points that sound like a fat guy in Dockers that thinks Hooters is a peak experience. I know you are 1000X times more interesting than that. You are for real… I think better than me in many ways. And yet…

    > you don’t think Asian women like white guys, you’re crazy

    In a friendly way, man… I want to nudge you past this kind of lazy, lazy thinking. This is really “first grade” understanding of attraction. You know better. Trust what you see, not what you’ve heard.

    Do some Asian girls have a “pale fetish.” Sure. But again, my stats are remarkably similar to guys that hit on same-race girls. I am 1:50 on my best weeks. 1:70 when I have a lot of momentum. 1:100-1:25 if the Daygame Gods want to make me work. That is with Asian girls… as a “magical white guy.” My stats are just like MOST “decent daygamers.” And we all hit on different girls. The stats are related to the player’s skill/value, not “race combinations.” That is a terrible way to try to explain anything.

    SOME FACTORS are more powerful than others.

    I posted Yoylo saying “it’s easy” and MrWhite saying “blowout, blowout, blowout.” Both are white guys talking about Asian girls. What is the difference? So many differences. But Yoylo was in a POOR COUNTRY. He swears that was nothing to do with it (and I think HE is likely very good), but POOR/some-money is a more POWERFUL FACTOR than Asian/white. Do you get what I am saying. MrWhite was in TOKYO, a wealthy, top-tier city, and he thought it was hard… even with that “magic whiteness” you think is a thing. It wasn’t “harder” for (necessarily), but it just wasn’t “easy.” They didn’t give a fuck that he was white, had a passport, and even that he had skill. They know local cool guys, too. So… it’s the same ole’ SMP.

    SKILL and VALUE trump everything else.

    > It’s just like a lot of white chicks automatically perceive black guys as being hotter than white guys

    This is just bad math. You are RIGHT, that many women have a black guy fetish. True. But on average, I’ll bet 1$ it’s HARDER for a black guy (avg) to hook up with white girls (avg) than with girls of his same race. I think you’re comparing FETISHES (which exist) to AVERAGE. Bad math.

    EX: I have a fetish for Asian girls (and Asian culture). So an AVG Asian girl will find it easier for me (that is ME liking her, not the other way around). But think of all the white players you know. I am one of the only ones that specializes in Asian girls (not because they are easier, they are not, but because I like them). Avg white guys (all my friends) are not that interested. They want “Ukrainian” girls, or French girls, or whatever. Right? Fetishes explain low% (me, my interest), not high% (most white guys interest).

    Most people date their own race… you can see it with your own eyes. Cross-race is not “easier.” That is an inexperienced POV.

    > Don’t mistake me for an SJW–I’m not talking about white privilege. I’m simply talking about the objective truth, which is that some women prefer certain races to others.

    You are doing “GROUP BASED” analysis like the SJWs do (“women make better leaders,” “toxic masculitity”). Yes, it is remarkably similar.

    RACE is too broad to be interesting (for dating). This is one of my MAIN POINTS. OTHER FACTORS provide for better explanations. So YES, you are like SJW… they ALSO think RACE/”GENDER” are really important factors when they are not good factors at all (in dating).

    INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES are crucial in dating. And it’s very “redpill” to play the “group based” analysis, and that is why they are WRONG. “Guys can’t compete” (not GROUP BASED) “because of feminism, the pill, hypergamy, meh, meh, meh.” Low IQ take.

    You have to SEPARATE “undateable men” from the ones that are dateable. And THEN, look for patterns.

    The SMP is GLORIOUS for you /I. Oh my Daygame God, what a time to be alive!

    But for two other “white guys” the SMP is desparate. Right? Why? Because RACE is a low-res lens, a terrible way to look at this (other than if you have a fetish). So is COUNTRY/GEOGRAPHY. All the broad brushes lead to sloppy math and weak conclusions.

    Redpill is FULL of sloppy math, as the membership is so packed full of UNDATEABLE GUYS that want to be “right” about the SMP, but never grow enough to actually compete in it.

    That is why I PUSH MEN AWAY FROM REDPILL and TOWARDS GAME. In GAME, if you’re undateable, you’ll quit (usually), and that cleans up the conversation. We can “kind of” trust the guys that are left. Whereas in redpill… “everyone is welcome.” So now there is no distinction of experience… so lessor theories go unchallenged.

    YOU SIR, are ready to graduate out of “redpill preschool” into graduate seminar level GAME/SEDUCTION thinking. You’re not like them. Leave them behind. You know so much more than your peers there.

    > Also, please don’t infer I’m not saying you’re not good–I said you’re a top guy, bro!

    Thank you, yes, yes. This is not about my status (I am crystal clear about my place in the SMP… because the GIRLS let me know, all the time). This is not about me… I got pissed about your sloppy conclusions, not about my status.

    I get so passionate because I want to CLEAN UP THE THINKING for other men – so they can grow, so they can join us. And the redpill ideas are incredibly limiting. That “Race” is a good filter (it isn’t, not for dating), that “looks matter,” that “hypergamy” is a problem for dateable men (it isn’t, it’s HOW they get dates), that some countries are “easy” (they are not, unless you’re exploiting $$$).

    Most of all, that the GUY, the GIRL, and the CONTEXT always matter. Always. So the “group based” (SJW-like) mentality of redpill that do the “AWALT” level thinking and will be “correct” barely “55%” of the time (barely better than a coin flip) whereas other schools of thought (ALPHA/GAME/SEDUCTION) can move you to 60%, 65%, 70%, etc… and that is radical improvement.

    I am trying to “pill” redpillers… because they need it.

    You Sir… are going to kill it either way. Even if you drag this redpill albatross stuff behind you like an anchor. But other guys… it will retard them. We should LEAD THEM TO GAME. Many of the same lessons, but a better crowd.

    Like

    1. I agree with a lot of what you said, and I also accept the fact that you are older and wiser, especially with regard to experience in game and seduction. Your points on attraction, the sexual marketplace, race, etc. are fair and valid–I think I still tend to be too high and low with regard to my emotions. I’m currently working on becoming more stoic, more grounded, as I believe this will help me become a better man, as well as with women.

      My only observation would be that having a knee jerk reaction against everything that uses the tag “red pill” isn’t helpful. You also need to accept that for a lot of guys, there’s a period of pain, mourning, anger, and ever rage, that’s perfectly natural given how we were raised/what we were told about women, vs. what is actually true.

      Have you been zeroed out by divorce? Lost your kids and been forced to pay child support and alimony for a lifetime? Found out the wife you thought was faithful was cheating on you all along? Spent time loving a single mom and her kids only to have her jump ship for a better offer? If you have, then I’m sorry. It sucks. I know from experience.

      If you haven’t, then try to put yourself in the shoes of a guy who’s just had one or more of those things happen, has no idea how to run game, how to gain an advantage, etc. Part of the process of grieving is anger, unwillingness to accept reality, bargaining, so on and so forth. I see the red pill as helping guys to get through this process. You’re right to point out that a lot of it is just useless anger, but I guess my point is that some of that anger isn’t useless. It’s necessary and completely understandable.

      So when guys hear you say, “muh hypergamy,” they think: fuck that guy, what does he know–and the unfortunate
      thing about that is that you know a lot and could teach these guys a lot about how to get out of that anger phase and into doing something more productive.

      As always I appreciate the conversation and look forward to talking more about actionable things guys can do to be successful in life and with women. Cheers my friend!

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s