Yes, the coronavirus is really dangerous and no, your view of the “media” being wrong is not relevant

There have been bad takes on Twitter about how the “media” was wrong about this thing or that thing, and therefore coronavirus isn’t dangerous. There is no “media,” but there are individual writers and thinkers whose work should be attended to. Some publications also do comprehensive fact checking and some don’t. The good publications do really well at fact-checking real things, like the number of cases or speed of spread. They may have political opinions you don’t like or agree with but are very good on basic facts (even if they sometimes ignore other facts).

In terms of being “right” or “wrong” in politics, and the consequences of being right or wrong, consider past political behavior in a crisis… both Bush and Obama, whatever else you think of either, reacted to the 2008 crisis with TARP, the stimulus bill, and bank prop-ups, because economists in both administrations had learned the lessons of 1929. Obama was roundly and wrongly condemned for this from the right and from the extreme left, but keeping banks upright is essential to a modern economy. 90 years ago we didn’t realize it. Firefighting: The Financial Crisis and Its Lessons is a good take, although it requires detail, which means 99% of the population lacks the sustained attention necessary to understand it.

Most people vote as a means of tribal identity. Less than half the (voting part of the) country identifies as rightish or Republican, so they foolishly voted for an incompetent who doesn’t have the acuity to run a pizza shop. “Basic competence” is why the white house’s occupant is such a potential disaster. He’s like holding a stick of lit dynamite with a fuse of unknown length. We are now seeing the blowup.

We are now seeing the blowup in a situation that demands high IQ, managerial skills, attention to reality, and fast reflexes, none of which the current white house occupant has. A competent president would have lasered in on removing FDA barriers to COVID-19 testing a month ago. He didn’t. With exponential processes, things can feel normal until it’s too late to prepare. Seriously, read that.

Yes, Trump is that bad, and many of the guys writing about game and women are unfortunately enamored of the stupidest parts of the right and the Republican party. Poor decisions from voters to elect Trump in the first place, and then to elect incompetent Republican Senators who have protected him, are likely going to lead to a lot of deaths.

Yes, the media’s hatred of men and being white is bad and annoying, but dying or being debilitated from a virus in a pandemic is worse. Much much worse. These two things can both be true and one can be a lot worse than the other. Right-wing voters are too tribal to have voted according to Trump’s fundamental incompetence. A lot of people may have to die because the real world exists (if we are lucky, states and local governments will step in). It’s not all Twitter and Fox News (much worse than most publications and not even remotely interested in facts).

This is not a matter of “bias.” This is a matter of real resources, which the country has not prepared, in part because of ineptness in the white house. The inept response is awful now and will likely be worse later. No, I am not a lefty. Think past right versus left. Avoid dogmas. This is “reality” vs “fantasy.” Develop a strong reality bias.

Most people’s ability to separate out what they want to be true and real from what is true and real is poor, and that is why we have the white house occupant we have.

If the other side had won the 2016 election, and the other side’s response to coronavirus had been this incompetent, the right would be screeching about that incompetence, for good reason. We are facing a real crisis with real stakes with someone who lacks the ability to understand what is happening at the helm. He should have been removed by the Senate already and every day the Senate delays removal we inch closer to the brink.

Dating sex positive and non-monogamous girls… and a ramble about the game

A player asked about the last FR… I told him that some of the women at that sex party were quite hot, but they were also looking for guys who are already good at what the women want… like, if you’re a guy and you’re not willing to do some mfm, they’re just not going to be super interested, and some women who’ve had a taste of what’s possible will not date vanilla guys anymore. Instead they want to date guys who can manage jealousy and who have underlying sex skills… those guys are not readily available commodities… so when hot women find guys who can make these peak experiences happen, some of them are happy to have found their male unicorn. Lots of guys will pretend to be non-vanilla and non-monogamous in order to get the lay, but few of them truly are, so women get tired of trying to separate out the pretenders from the real thing.

The player said

Can you just clarify this? These chicks wouldn’t date a vanilla guy just because he has not had experience/not into MFM? Really? I’m trying to gauge the value of MFM in my mind.

The hot women I’m thinking about would likely be open to dating a vanilla guy who is genuinely up for MFM, but a lot of vanilla guys will be excited for FMF (obviously), yet they’ll balk at the other way around. They don’t reciprocate, and reciprocation is a key aspect of human social life and bonding. A lot of guys are also sexually open minded in theory, but when the time for practice arrives, they change their mind and want exclusivity, etc. One woman I know searched for a primary partner and dated like 4 – 6 guys from the internet (not simultaneously), all of whom said they were cool with non-monogamy… then told her they wanted an exclusive relationship. She is a poly s**t so she dumped each. A lot of kinky/non-mono women find vanilla guys useless, cause it’s easy to waste weeks/months on them, just to discover that in reality, no, the guy doesn’t really want to be non-monogamous, although he’s fine with some fmf threesomes… just like every guy straight guy alive.

On the other side of the equation, some monogamously-inclined girls don’t want mfm. Why? If a woman really wants a conventional monogamous boyfriend who is going to be into her, mfm sets that goal back, and most men who will go for mfm will also seek fmf… a small number of guys are into hotwifing/cuckolding or whatever it may be called, but those defective guys are pretty rare.

Continue reading “Dating sex positive and non-monogamous girls… and a ramble about the game”

What to learn from famous guys, acting over the long term

I’m interested in what we can learn from famous guys, the actors and athletes and musicians, and how they structure their romantic lives, and you can see that interest in rambles like “When you’ve done it all, what then?” Those famous guys can get every kind of woman they want, and a lot of them spend a couple years laying out a lot of women. But… most of them wind up with long-term girlfriends and most of them even marry (then a lot of them divorce, like everyone else). Adam Sandler, to pick one example, could still be in the game as much as he wants… instead, “Movies shoot in summer, so he can bring his kids to set. During the year, the workday is arranged to allow him to drop them off at school and pick them up.” This is not a guy trying to max out his body count. Lots of other famous guys, guys who could have whoever, also don’t seem to be trying to max their body counts. What’s that mean?

I’m thinking about this because being in the game is many things, and one of those things is amplifying normal ups and downs. The highs can be very high but the lows very low. And I think about the highs because, as with drugs, loving the “high” too much can be dangerous, particularly for older guys. Building a peer group is important for almost every person, and guys into the game seem to also be alienated loners, often struggling with our own pasts, presents, and personalities.

There is something to the idea that “Age is just a state of mind.” To the idea, “You’re only as old as the woman you feel.” There is something to those things. But there is also something to the idea that, over time… doors do close. Lives change. People change. Peer groups change. Paul Janka hits this on the Torero podcast, and he says he got out of the game for a bunch of reasons, including that his friends were hanging up their pickup spurs and getting married.

I don’t really have a place I’m going with this. I’m thinking aloud. I also think that some people, guys and women, like the sex club thing as a couple because that allows the intimacy and partnership of a relationship with the novelty and ecstacy of the chase and new partners. The most successful couples in that world still put each other first. I bet a lot of the Hollywood guys, the musician guys, who get into long-term things have a little something on the side now and then, but they put their primary person first. The famous guys have problems with loneliness and meaning, like the rest of us. Maybe worse, in some ways, because someone always wants something from them (women know what straight guys are after, too). I know that if I stop hustling, very soon, no one but my real friends and my family want anything from me. Parts of the human conditions are real dark. We can try to understand it, but we cannot overcome it.

Think about girls, too. There is a lot of red pill talk about hypergamy and girls behaving badly. There’s some truth to that, too. There’s also some selection bias. I don’t want to repeat the whole thing but… “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.” “The women who react to street pickup are probably not a random sample of women, so drawing conclusions about all women can be dangerous.” Same with the women you meet online. I know some women, some of them very hot, who have never done online. I also know some women who did online for a very short period because they wanted a long-term relationship and when they found a guy who they like and who is reasonably within reasonable parameters, they stuck with him. Those are the kinds of women who are repelled by player vibes.

Game, at its best, allows human connections to flourish, “I will confess… the two ‘bottomed out’ periods of my life coincided with me backing off of game. I’m not certain the lack of game CAUSED those periods, I don’t think that was true… but game is an organizational force in my life, and I realize the utility there.” At its worst, it is guys trying to extract value, and extracting it from women who know what’s going on and are maybe attracted to that kind of thing. Trying to maintain that positive mindset can be one of the toughest things in game… and in life, in the face of adversity, rejection, etc. It’s something I struggle with. One way to contextualize struggle is to look at what others are doing and how they are dealing with the same conditions. Rich famous guys are different in many ways from normal guys, but not totally different, and we should think about what they choose to do.

All dogmas are to be avoided.

Where spinsters come from, “I would love to get married at some point”

In “where spinsters come from” series, this woman, who is already 32, gets a good place

Being single the past couple of years has made it easy for me to make decisions like picking up and moving to Europe. I enjoy the thrill of sleeping with someone new and I think more is more when it comes to sexual partners. That said, I would love to get married at some point in the next few years. But right now, I at least would like to form some genuine connections.

Packing up and moving to a foreign country, likely temporarily, is an awful place to develop the social structure and social life that encourages marriage. F**king randoms is great, and I’ve done it a lot, but it’s also terrible prep for marriage, particularly for women. This woman has already passed her peak fertility level and thinks that some guy is going to come along to wife her up the day she’s finally ready. Who knows, maybe some guy will (there are plenty of guys who will do dumb sh*t), but reading this is like watching a guy claim he’s serious about getting in the game while he stuffs Doritos in his mouth and picks up the gaming system controller. Actions and stated beliefs/desires are very different.

It’s kinda sad seeing delusion in action but it’s also informative. She sounds like a right good time though. Guys who are interested in monogamy also have to remember that they’re pushing against every female-centric clickbait website in the world that’s pushing a “you go girl” and “f**k around” narrative.

 

 

“Winners continue to win, and winning builds structural advantages”

That’s what a guy in finance was talking about on a podcast… I didn’t keep track of the original location, sorry, but the finance guy’s gist was something like, “In America, we have these narratives that we’re given from childhood. People are still religious, but we don’t really take our popular stories from holy texts anymore. We take them from Disney movies. The most common narrative when you’re a child in the United States is the little guy coming from behind. But when you get into investing, or any highly competitive arena, you realize that winners continue to win, and winning builds structural advantages. You’re disadvantaged if you’re small. This is not a romanticized story.”

The applicability to game is obvious… to come from behind takes a supernormal amount of work, and it takes someone who wants to buck trends, be different, and concentrate all of his resources on winning.

Most people can only win in one field. I have been talking to a guy in the game who also wants to improve his financial position (a good goal). But it is going to be very hard for him to do the game in depth and to dramatically change his financial life. The guys who he sees winning, financially speaking, have usually been laying the groundwork for victory for many years, and doing a lot of work to get to where they are. “Good, high-paying jobs” is a highly competitive arena where it is hard to come from behind, because other people have a variety of structural advantages built over years.

If you listen to rich, successful guys talk, a lot of them credit their wives for a lot of their success. Red Pill fanatics will reply to say those women are all cheating, they’re all waiting to divorce the successful man and take his money, they’re conniving, etc…. and while those things happen, I don’t think they’re the most common path for a successful, older rich guy. More commonly, a good woman will dramatically increase a man’s ability to succeed financially because she’ll believe in him, she’ll take care of the house, she’ll deal with the kid stuff. When he’s feeling down (everyone feels down sometimes), she’ll support him (there is a difference between sometimes feeling down and making your wife or girlfriend an emotional tampon). She increases a man’s ability to focus on other things, like his business and developing his skills. And of course for most guys, hunting for sex consumes lots of time, energy, and focus.

(Did you see the important word “good” in the paragraph… “a good woman…” a good woman enhances a man’s ability to achieve other goals, while a bad one is a burden.)

I am not suddenly pro-marriage, because marriage is a high-risk bet. If it blows up, the costs are sky-high. If it succeeds, however, the financial, time, and concentration benefits can also be very high. Some high-risk bets are good… this one seems net bad to me… and if a good woman enables a man to concentrate, talk to any divorced guy about what the divorce legal process does to his concentration.

Being good with chicks also has structural advantages. I know undersexed rich guys who can’t get laid, for all kinds of reasons… they are smart, but they have terrible bodies. They have oriented their minds towards technical fields, so that they can’t tease women, lead women, or connect with women. Women’s psychology baffles them and seems like a world of smoke, mirrors, vapor, and hidden trap doors (which it is… players just learn to navigate and get night-vision goggles). Guys who really learn the female mind can do very well at f**king chicks.

Obviously, a guy with a lot of money can use that to buy personal training, buy personality coaching, or buy chicks directly, but that last one has a bunch of downsides and the first two still take a lot of time and energy, and no guy who is 37 is going to get his 20s back. He may “make up” for them in some way, but time goes on direction. Rich guys may not have the structural advantages the captain of the wrestling team had… or whatever example you want to use. Almost all guys who nail a lot of hot chicks have some kind of structural advantage. Could be a job that introduces them to a lot of hot chicks. Could be good looks. Could be exceptional charisma. Could be sex clubs (or, as I think of them, an undervalued market opportunity that most guys don’t understand… investing in undervalued assets is how all those hedge fund guys got rich).

In popular narratives, the ugly duckling gets the girl in the end, who chooses him over the oafish jock. In reality, the oafish jock usually wins the pretty girl. “You’re disadvantaged if you’re small.” And in popular narratives, the ugly duckling often isn’t that ugly. We love to see the little guy come from behind. In reality, the solution is often literally to get big, by hitting the gym. Chicks respond to hot guys, more than they do to pudgy guys. Guys are more driven by pure body than chicks are, but chicks are too. A lot of guys absorb lessons from pop culture that are actively wrong.

Nailing hot chicks is a highly competitive arena with lots of subtleties, for most guys. There are naturals, yes. The guys who do it well (for a time, in most cases) often devote themselves fully to it. I have spent time (more time than I should have) explaining many of those subtleties in one area.

Unwifeable, a memoir, by Mandy Stadtmiller

Rarely has a title been truer than UNWIFEABLE, a book in which a hot woman tells us boredom = death, a lesson many guys fail to learn… let’s review the evidence, as she f**ks a dull rich guy, gets “halfway through a boring night at dinner,” then begins drinking to make the people around her entertaining. In New York City, “I make new [female] friends who tell me their stories of suffering through boring-ass business guys who get them into Michelin-rated restaurants and how they feel no qualms about taking them for a $300 meal because the guy is getting their company.” Nice guys have been erroneously told that money will make girls like them. Two women “exchange a secret glance within the first few minutes communicating the exact same thing: This guy is the reason women give up on dating entirely. He’s not even a bad guy—at all. He’s just so boring.” A man “launches into the world’s most boring story about his cell phone provider, and as we walk across the gravel, I am counting steps, grateful for the gift of disassociation.” “I find him boring, and I want to make sure he knows that. So as Blaine watches, I begin to flirt with everyone in the immediate vicinity—his friends, the caterers, my coworkers, gay men just trying to get out of my way.” You, Mr. Nice Guy, think of yourself as “stable.” She thinks of you as “boring.”

It’s amazing to me how mean many of these people are… Mandy is mean to any guy who reciprocates her interest in a direct and kind way (they bore her). Guys are mean to her. Is this what normal people’s worlds look like? But she makes me think… how many chicks have I met like Mandy, who say they want to be wives, but don’t act like it at all… and are then surprised when they don’t become wives. It’s like guys who think they want to be players, but don’t hit the gym, don’t go out and socialize, and complain online about chicks. When there is a wide gap between stated desire and actions that might bring one closer to that desire, it is time for therapy to try and understand why that gap exists and what might be done to close it.

All of us broadcast signals. We image match. If the signals we broadcast conflict with what we think we really want, there are problems. Mandy thinks she wants to be a wife, but she chooses to f**k guys who are not interested, not even slightly, in being husbands. Chicks are not stupid, although chicks, like everyone, may not behave optimally. This one seems to have a pattern: reject or ignore outright the guys most interested in her, and chase down the ones doing drugs and sex. I personally am not huge on chicks who are drunk or high, although yes I have been there too. A positive, direct thing I can say about her, however, is that she takes responsibility for her behavior and doesn’t blame guys for having sex with her when she’s drunk. That being responsible for herself counts as a virtue today speaks to today’s media culture.

This book, UNWIFEABLE, is so dark. I wonder how many chicks could write books like it, in which I’d be a bit character (“I look up and see this guy putting on a condom. What’s his name again? But my FWB who gave me the coke is already inside his date so I guess to I have to…”) Not a lot, I hope… not zero, either.

If you want to f**k around a lot, Mandy’s story makes polyamory look pretty good… in theory at least you are supposed to like each other, and care, a little bit, about each other, while also f**king other people. In this book the guys are all predatory and malevolent (the ones who aren’t are “boring”), in Mandy’s view… what is their view? How many of them were f**king her and looking into her eyes clouded by drink or drugs and wanting a family?

In her late 30s, Mandy goes through what Rollo calls the epiphany phase:

I’ve previously described this phase as a parallel to men’s feminine-redefined midlife crisis. This is a precarious time for women, usually the years between 28 and 30, where she makes attempts to reassess the last decade of her life. Women’s psychological rationalization engine (a.k.a. the Hamster) begins a furious effort to account for, and explain to her reasonings for not having successfully secured a long term monogamous commitment from as Alpha a man as her attractiveness could attain for her. . . . The self-affirming psychological schema is one where she’s “finally doing the right thing”, when in fact she’s simply making the necessity of her long term provisioning and security a virtue she hopes men will appreciate.

Rollo’s a little too harsh here, because I think most chicks do fundamentally want love… from a sufficiently high value man. Many of them, however, have dysfunctional ways of going about it (the more dysfunctional the girl, the better she responds to gamey game?), or, like this one, prefers excitement to love. She gets herself better than a lot of people do… “There is a true irony that people who are blogging or podcasting all about the minutiae of their lives are sometimes the loneliest people of all.”

Mandy also chooses an environment that’s high in excitement and low in commitment (New York City) and within that environment, sub-environments that are the same (stand-up comedy). Her book is funny, but mostly sad, and it’s a sad lament for the spinsters and to-be spinsters out there. It is bleak at times… “I am thirty-six years old. I have $279 in my bank account. I have no job prospects. I have no romantic prospects. I have nothing. And it feels like such a relief.”

Mandy’s memoir is red pill in another package,

The main epiphany for me came in realizing that success is not a finite, limited resource, and that I was coming from a mentality of lack versus one of abundance. Understanding this is a huge part of the battle.

Guys have the same problems Mandy does, when we get jealous of the success of others, instead of measuring ourselves and realizing we live in a world of abundance, if we choose to view it that way and access it (most of us don’t, sadly). This chick is going through what a lot of guys do… with the key difference that sex is easily available to her, whenever she wants it, which isn’t true of guys. But people don’t appreciate what is readily available (when were you last truly grateful for clean running water?), so that is kind of invisible, as is the way of chicks.

What people say, particularly the negative things, are often reflections of their own inner state… we think it’s all about us when often it’s not… Mandy, “How many times have I said cruel things—including to my ex-husband—that I may not even remember because I was in a rage blackout?”

Mandy is not sex positive and never integrates f**king a variety of people into her conscious personality. This limits her ability to enjoy it or even do it well and effectively. Guys who have read the free book know that many chicks need time to convert from their typical monogamous script into a non-monogamous script.

A book that is more red pill than red pill guys (it’s also super fun to read apart from what can be learned from it). Guys can learn a lot by listening and parsing what women say… women in certain circumstances and situations… not the ones saying “Just be yourself” “Just be nice,” but the ones who are a little more real.

What to write about in your game/player blog

Guys have asked, “What should I write about in the game blog?” (I said originally that the game blog acts as an ad to collaborators, among other things… check out the link). Write about whatever is going on and whatever you think about it, positive or negative. Most players who develop any skill will have some positive and some negative experiences, and readers respond well to something approximating authenticity. Write to teach yourself (it works) but also write to inspire other guys in their journeys… I retarded my own growth by not writing. Write too for others: over time, search engine traffic to your game blog will go up, leading to a virtuous cycle of men teaching men, and you never know when the right guy will stumble upon you and achieve enlightenment. The horrors of modern feminism happened because millions of women talked to each other about how to extract resources from men and avoid responsibility, and today men are too busy with video games to understand the world we live in. We need to teach other.

So if you did 10 approaches and they all failed, write about that. If you just had your first threesome, write about that. If you aren’t getting the things you want, write about that. If you are getting something you want, write about that. Write about the journey that brings you to where you are today and what you are doing this week to get you where you want to go. Write about the world around you. Few experiences are 100% positive or 100% negative. The guys who write overwhelmingly of one or the other either have skewed lives, or their psychologies are skewed, or there is something else going on.

Frustration and negativity also depend on a lot of things… like, if you’re a male 5 chasing female 7s, you’re going to have a hard time. Judge guys based on where they start and where they get to… if you’re a male 4 and improve yourself to a 5 and snag a 6, that’s victory, IMO. If you’re a male high 7 and are slumming it with 5s, that’s a thing you can do, but it won’t be that interesting to others. A well-known professional actor’s game blog wouldn’t be very intersting either… imagine, “I had to choose among a Victoria’s Secret Model, a starlette, the hottest waitress in LA, and another model, but I had to get up for a shoot in the morning, so I just had a threesome with two 9s.” Not problems most guys can relate to. If you are making some progress but not getting laid, write about that.

If your experience is 100% negative frustration, and you have volume (you don’t live in a small town/city), I don’t know what to say… you might lack any number of things… there are probably game checklists out there. The usual advice about lifting, fixing your diet, developing generic social skills without cold approach pressure… those things all apply.

There’s a saying in game, “Say what you see.” If you can’t think of things to say, talk about whatever you’re seeing and what you think about it. If you can think of any general lessons, talk about them. If you run a/b tests, describe what you find.

I started writing on Reddit, figuring I had a couple of things to say… then it turned out I had more to say… then I realized that many of the readers, voters, and moderators there are… who they are. Not all are fools, I want to add, but enough are fools that it’s impossible to explore the contours of non-monogamy there, and I am also not a fan of being beholden to the capricious. I began writing here, propitiously, a bit before Ms. Slav appeared, and she was an unusual experience: every guy has a thing about “this one girl who is different,” but I will claim that I have enough experience to say she is different.

Write on your own platform, not on Reddit or in a moderated forum, because you are harder to silence on a website than on someone else’s site. Forum quality declines to the level of the persons willing to spend enough time to moderate it. That rule explains much of what one sees. Independence is valuable.

A lot of guys, too, don’t really want to be players and just want to get a pretty and acceptable girlfriend. That’s a fine goal. It probably means the game blog will be truncated, just as many men’s lives are truncated by emotionally and psychologically murderous women. Or by emotionally, physically, and psychologically glorious women, who limit a man’s desire to chase strange. Just practice and tell us what happens. With enough practice you will become good, relative to where you started. I realized that I am the only person writing, who I am aware of, who has approached non-monogamy in the specific way I’ve been doing. Your revelations, which you teach yourself by writing, might also be useful to other guys. I know of at least two other guys who are seriously doing something like I have been doing, and another 10 – 20 who have read the book carefully and are thinking about it. If those other guys write their own stories, we’ll get rolling towards something like a movement. I just checked and about 30 ppl found their way here from search today. 20 – 50 will find their way here tomorrow. How did you find your way into the community? Probably from search, from a random link somewhere… I have links to all these guys, who all do something to shape the world we live in…

* Krauser PUA

* Dalrock

* Roy Walker

* Days of Game

* Rollo Tomassi / The Rational Male

* Magnum

* Good Looking Loser

* Tom Torero

* Red Pill Dad blog

* Kill Your Inner Loser

* Reddit Red Pill

Don’t write under your real name. Legal names make you more vulnerable to the mob and the surveillance state.

Good blog writers show themselves to be engaged, learning, and practicing their trade. Bad ones reveal themselves as followers and fools. Interacting with chicks a lot generates the best ideas/stories: you see something, you hear something, you report back on it… it’s like trying to be a reporter who goes out and talks to people on the scene versus one who never leaves the office. One person is going to generate a lot of good insights and the other person is not. Bogus players write platitudes about cultivating “inner game” or write about how “not to back down” or give repeated, fifth-hand advice about “body language.” Guys who have something valuable to say write about this one girl they were talking to and how that went.

Interacting with chicks generates the best material.

Bring back knowledge from your journey and share the knowledge. Some of the writers above disagree with each other… some of them I often disagree with… all of them I think advance things a bit. Go advance things.