“Evolutionary theory says men stray to increase offspring, but what motivates women? Enter the mate-switching hypothesis”

Why women stray: Evolutionary theory says men stray to increase offspring, but what motivates women? Enter the mate-switching hypothesis.” An excellent essay by David Buss and offered without much commentary. For men the important thing to know is that most women will stray if given the chance and the right opportunity. Be the guy she cheats with, not the one she cheats on.

I have a post aout David P. Barash’s book Out of Eden: The Surprising Consequences of Polygamy coming down the pike. I highly recommend it. Understanding the theory helps the practice. Most guys have neither.

Your girl’s male “friends?” Usually they’re alternate options.

Advertisements

Bike Girl at the party

Like I mentioned, I took Bike Girl to the sex party, and from my perspective it went pretty well. She was incredibly, cutely nervous and anxious and kept talking about calling it off. But I told her that I’d RSVPed and that being a flake is bad.

I already knew about half the people there, so the social proof aspect was high before things got started. I encouraged her to kiss other women, which she was reluctant to do at first but after two drinks and some gentle encouragement from me and the crowd she got into it. Like most women she wants to be led, gently but firmly, and I was in my element while she was out of hers.

She didn’t sleep with anyone else and neither did I. I think this was an “eye opening” experience for her, though, and it expanded the range of her possibilities. We talked a lot about what it would be like before and what it would be like after.

Bad news is that the hosts of the party don’t have the face control they could. There were about four other attractive couples and one or two other attractive women, and there were too many overweight people. But water finds its own level and people tended to find their level of attractiveness.

We’re going to go back to another one, I’m sure. Most interesting from a game perspective, near the end of the party I was getting another drink and spotted one of the other attractive women coming back from the bathroom. Chatted for a minute and then got her phone # on a napkin. I’ve been seeing Bike Girl every other day or so, but last week on one of the off days I went to get a drink with this girl. She knew what was up, I think, and didn’t tell her boyfriend about it.

Now, this is pretty unusual, and I’ve tried this before and more often than not it fails. Most women will not do things independently without their partner; in this case, if she’d been unwilling, I would’ve tried to set up a 2:2 date. But she was willing and there was very little game; she was a “yes girl” and I already knew her secret, as she knew mine. That’s one reason I like the non-monogamy community: done well it’s an easy, easy place to fish. Downside is that very few 8+ women exist in it. Or they do and I don’t see them yet. If your goal is to hit the very top of the attractiveness curve hit the streets, hit the gym, don’t think too much about this scene.

But if you want some easy novelty and like group sex like I do, simple pickup can work.

I hesitate to post about this because, like I said, the Party Girl situation fails more often than not, and there isn’t a lot of lesson to take other than “take the shot.” I don’t think my game is strong and that’s part of the reason I post those links in the sidebar. The guys listed there likely have far stronger technical game.

In a couple weeks I’m going to try and take Bike Girl to a club. She’s hesitant about making this a regular thing but she’s not saying no. I wrote this in another post, but in my experience about a quarter of girls are excited by non-monogamy and sex clubs. About a quarter say no outright. About half are intrigued and can be led to it. Bike Girl is in that half.

Most guys in the scene have zero game, so they aren’t good at bringing new girls in. I have some game, so over the years I’ve built up a reputation that Bike Girl has reinforced. This opened up and opens up a lot of new opportunities, because no one really knows how attractive a guy is, including girls, but everyone knows how pretty the girl a guy has is. Bring in pretty girls and the girls will want you more.

To me this is next-level game. But I also already have kids and don’t want monogamy. If a guy doesn’t want monogamy, then it seems like going out with one girl in order to trade with others is a net gain. She’s likely got FWBs of her own, so why not capitalize on her desires to make a trade?

Not many guys think this way, from what I can tell. Most guys are also bad in bed, which limits their appeal in the scene. But for a put-together guy, it can be a gold mine.

Last week or two have been crazy. Almost too crazy. I said I was getting bored of the game, and I am, but then when it’s right in front of me, I don’t act bored.

I’ve said before that I think sex drives me more than the ego boost from seduction. I wonder if in actuality fear of reliance on a single woman drives me more than anything else. That doesn’t seem likely to me but it doesn’t seem impossible either.

“I Love My Girlfriend. So Why Do I Keep Cheating on Her?”

I have some more work to do before the weekend, but I saw “I Love My Girlfriend. So Why Do I Keep Cheating on Her?” and had to laugh. Guys want to bang as many girls as possible because evolution has tuned them to spread their seed. Most guys, given the choice, will sleep with as many women as possible.

Most guys, of course, don’t have the choice, and struggle to find even a single woman.

The article is funny because the woman writing the response, Lori Gottlieb, knows zero about evolutionary biology and thus cannot answer the question adequately.

If this guy has good enough game to cheat, it’s also not a surprise that his girlfriend as well as other women like him. Women like guys other women like, so when an attractive woman is with a guy, she increases his ability to get more women.

Funny how that works. And most women don’t seem to realize it.

“Where PUAs go to die”

Tom Torero has an interesting essay, “Where PUAs go to die,” which has some notes you’ll recognize from “I was also wondering if I really wanted to stay in the Game.” Beginner guys should not read either in my opinion. Intermediate and advanced guys aged 30+ might find them profitable, though.

I think that Torero point #3, “Boredom,” is tied to and precedes Torero point #1, “They get married / under-the-thumb and denounce the player life.” Except I don’t think guys who quit being players have to denounce being a player (although maybe they do; we all have a narrative and our narrative memes we like to propagate almost as much as our genetic legacy).

I’m not sure I have enough experience or lifestyle to be a “player,” though some women have told me I am. But I have been feeling bored with the pickup-seduction-bed-repeat process. The end result, sex, is still worthwhile, but the process is less exciting and I’m considerably less willing to put up with female bullshit in pursuit of sex than I used to be.

I think Tom has had at least some similar feelings before. In his book Daygame he says near the end, “Despite all of this sounding like a rock star’s life, the novelty of having lots of sex with hot girls had really worn off.” For me the novelty has worn off a little bit, but I still like the sex just not the process. Somewhere in the book I’m pretty sure Tom says that he likes the seduction challenge as much as or even more than the sex, while I feel the opposite way. Or I am just lazier, which is a hypothesis that should never be discarded.

Boredom is often a sign that we need to find new challenges and develop new skills. When I first started dating and sleeping with women as a teenager I was never bored and I was a total hound for sex. Now I’m too often bored and I almost “know” too much about sex. The prettiest women often have underdeveloped personalities, too. Not all of them, certainly, but a lot.

Guys who experience enough boredom probably look to kids and the next generation as their next challenge. Makes sense to me, but I already have them and do not especially want more. So that common route is foreclosed to me. I’m not entirely sure what’s next. Maybe I will never have the life mate that blue pill society tells us to find. That’s okay with me as I’m not seeking one, but I also can’t foresee myself forever chasing fresh tail.

I wrote this before, but it is also noticeable that almost all the guys in game have a narrative about doing poorly with women in high school and their 20s. I had the opposite experience (with many errors that I now recognize of course, neediness and too little escalating being more prominent) and now I theorize that after 50 – 100 different girls the hunger for pure novelty is lessened or more satisfied. One begins to seek other qualities or challenges.

For now, tail is good. I brought Bike Girl to that sex party. It was successful, I thought, and she kissed some women (something she claimed to have only done once before, “claimed” being the key word here). I will write more about that later. I also am meaning to finish my writing about Tom’s book Daygame, which is highly recommended. Work, sex, and real life have been occupying me.

I also have a post about sex clubs, non-monogamy, and game as well. That route may be a way of “weaseling” out of cold approach. Or as I think of it, efficiency. Regardless of what it’s called, I’m still surprised more game guys don’t try it.

I will never denounce players! The game goes on forever, even when I exit this earth and find it left to the guys after me.

Only question is, how do I explain it to daughters? I genuinely don’t know. The RP answers I have seen read like nonsensical purity fantasies that do not recognize the modern world or sexuality’s place in it. Those RP answers also come from guys who do not seem to have talked much to actual, live women about their early experiences. The most common cultural answer seems to be, “Do nothing and let them learn from pornography and magazines and their equally ignorant peers.” Also not so good, but I think most parents slide in that direction because it’s easiest. Or they lie.

Maybe lies make the social world go round.

Feminism’s internal contradictions as seen through Playboy

The Contradictory Feminist Legacy Of Playboy’s Hugh Hefner” is hilarious because it doesn’t actually say anything about Hefner. Hefner wanted to sleep with tons of hot girls and he did it. There is nothing really contradictory there. He liked sex positivity and sexual freedom for women because those things aided his interests in sleeping with tons of hot girls.

Real players like sex positivity and sexual freedom for women for the same reasons. Encouraging women to be sexually free and have lots of sex is in the interest of players. A lot of low-status guys who are learning Red Pill teachings are still angry about female nature or hate the way they have to offer support, resources, and their entire being just entice a woman to be with them.

Feminists are ambivalent. Some are sex positive because “freedom” or “equality” or just cause they like sex too. At the same time, though, being sex positive lowers the “cost” of sex to men. So guys, especially top guys, are less willing to invest time, resources, and energy into any individual woman. So when women get out of their 20s and want kids and “something serious…” they suddenly find that most of the top guys won’t go for it!

Oh no! What horror! The guy won’t invest in them. Which is what most women (still) want. Material conditions have changed a lot in the last 50 years, but human psychology still hasn’t.

Women also want to perceive themselves as victims. I have a half-written post on that subject as well. If anything goes wrong in a woman’s life, or if she doesn’t like her choices, it’s the fault of a man or men in general.

But Hefner in the end is simple. He wanted hot girls and lots of them. And he got them. All players are to some extent living his legacy.

So are women. Many are not so happy about it as early feminists thought they’d be. It turns out that when men don’t have to invest resources in a woman to get sex in return, a lot of men won’t invest resources in a woman.

Remember that evolutionary biology underlies game. Learn it, and a lot of female ambivalence and internal contradiction becomes clear.

The original HuffPo writer detects a little of these basic forces, but she’s like a pre-scientific-revolution person seeing a solar eclipse. She can see the sun occluded and understands darkness, but she has no idea why. Hell, I can tell her why, but I don’t think she’ll want to listen.

“But this other guy says…”

There’s a genre of response to game and RP writing that goes, “But this other guy says x and you say y, what gives? Is he right? Don’t you want to be right?” Some guy read “Anyone doing any online dating needs to learn basic photography skills” and also read Goldmund saying that online dating is shit.

You know what? Good for Goldmund. He should do the things that work for him. There are many bad things about online dating including stealth fatties (probably the most common), psychos, delusional people, and rampant entitlement. There just a short list. Look around the Internet and you will find a million online dating horror stories.

It’s also absolutely true that guys doing daygame or just game in general will on average find hotter girls, many of whom aren’t online. Part of game is cutting through life’s noise.

Don’t believe everything you read online and try things yourself. In my view, Red Pill thinking is about giving guys the tools to think about their lives and make the changes necessary to succeed—whatever “success” means in their life. If online dating works, and it’s hard to do well for all but the absurdly attractive, then great. If it doesn’t, then don’t do it. I’ve learned through a lot of trial and error what works and what doesn’t. Over more than a decade I’ve built up the photography skills and lifestyle to make it work for me. Sometimes, somewhat.

What do you need? I have no idea. I’ve never met you and know zero about you. Life is so full of richness and context that I see these absurd threads online where guys ask this or that, and often I’m like, “Without knowing so, so much more about you, I have no idea.” That’s part of the reason I like game writers who also write books: the good books break down so much material in a way that can’t be done in 300 word chunks on forums.

I’m not here to tell anyone how to live their life, but I am sharing some of the things I’ve learned or think I’ve learned. Some of them are probably wrong, which is why you need to try things for yourself. I also have weaknesses of my own and am sure that my own game is technically weaker than many of the guys in the sidebar. That’s why they’re listed in the sidebar.

I’m not a woman screeching about how the other guy is WRONG WRONG WRONG and don’t you think so too, Katelyn, right, tell me Katelyn, how WRONG is that?!? Like I said, try things for yourself. Think for yourself. I don’t have all the answers. I am not a guru. I can only encourage you to read for yourself, think about your goals, and take action to pursue them. You will learn more from one hour on the streets than in ten hours of reading guys online.

Any kind of success in a significant field comes from the mastery of many details. It’s rarely, maybe never, the single detail that matters. It’s putting them together the right way. That’s why most guys who write about game emphasize style, fit, hobbies, development, storytelling, escalation, overcoming AA, getting finances in order, lifting, logistics, and a couple of other topics. Lots of guys get one or two of those things right. Putting them all together in the right way is what wins.

Guys, branch swinging, and the low-effort shot

This morning I chatted up a girl in a coffeeshop whose order was screwed up. Don’t remember everything I said but I told her that it sucks to be at the stage of your career when you’re getting other people coffee. It was a cold read but a true one. We chatted for a bit and I told her to give me her number and we’ll get together sometime. She said she had a boyfriend, I said that’s okay, and she laughed and still said no.

A completely normal interaction, but I thought about it because I’ve been seeing Bike Girl but I still want to keep my skills somewhat sharp. Approach and escalation skills can deteriorate fast.

It’s also good to take the random shots that show up in your life because you never know when one might succeed. Around the time I started writing about the Red Pill I was closing out a relationship with a girl who I started seeing when she was 19. That was a low-effort shot and I happened to snare a “yes girl” who was looking for something exciting in her life. She was (and likely still is) the somewhat rare girl who is considerably hotter nude than clothed; clothed I judge her a center-of-the-road 7, and nude I judge her a high 8 (if she learns how to dress better she will get more and high-quality male attention).

We saw each other for about a year and a half. Like some other girls she required very little “game.” Well, apart from status, style, frame, posture… all the pre-reqs. Point is, it’s always a good idea to take the low effort shots when they appear. Sometimes the girls are ready for something new in their life. This morning’s girl wasn’t, but if I’d met her at another point she might’ve been.

I’m seeing Bike Girl, but just as girls “branch swing” into new relationships, it’s useful for guys to test their place in the sexual marketplace too. Not necessarily for a better offer, not automatically, but to see who is reacting and how they’re reacting. Girls can sense a guy with options and when you take the easy shot you make sure, first of all to yourself, that you have options.