The Internet fantasy bubble: the gap between the responsible and the spectators

The Internet lets people indulge in wild fantasy, and Twitter is more like World of Warcraft than is commonly assumed: this effect might also be more pronounced in “smart” people than dumb ones. Being smart, or high IQ, isn’t a shield from this effect either, and if anything it may make you more susceptible to these effects. Being rich also insulates a person from the effects of excessive fantasy: the richer we are, the more we seem able to indulge fantasy, because our base human needs are met.

To be good with women, you should be able to suspend disbelief and create an alternate reality, for women to step into, but that skill can be dangerous in regular life. Or useful. Along with suspending disbelief, rock-solid frame helps a lot with women, and thus the emphasis on bringing the woman into your world and worldview. Some guys seem to forget that that frame is a creation, and they carry it through on everything, even when it’s not correct.

Continue reading “The Internet fantasy bubble: the gap between the responsible and the spectators”

How to build communities and find tribe

XBTUSD shines a light in the darkness of the cave, revealing what guys are missing as the scramble around in the dark, cutting their hands and mistaking pain for enlightenment.

Most sex happens in a highly social context, and most “highly social contexts” involve some kind of community—yet no one writing online talks about communities, how they form, what sustains them, how they splinter, or what value they have.

Let’s take a simple example: when I was an undergrad, I joined a fraternity. My path to joining wasn’t certain, and I didn’t plan to join until the week the decision had to be made. Initially, I saw fraternities as a way for people without social skills to “buy” a group of friends: frats had dues, and if you paid, you had a guaranteed set of dudes to get drunk and try and fuck girls with. I was lucky enough to live in mixed-age housing my freshman year and became friends with one of the BMOC (“big man on campus”) seniors who lived in my dorm. He was in one of the “cool” frats (one of the ones hot girls spent time at), and over a number of conversations he convinced me that I had it all wrong, and that I should just join, as there was little downside. He correctly pointed out the downside of joining was that if I didn’t like it, I didn’t have to spend any time there, or could de-pledge if I felt strongly enough. I’d lose the frat dues, which weren’t zero, but that wasn’t a great loss for me at the time. I decided to join and a lot of what I know about community comes from that experience. Most Americans live alienated, isolated lives, and frats are the exact opposite, which explains why so many guys have a great time in school and an unhappy time after. Continue reading “How to build communities and find tribe”

My perspective on investing and financial security is super vanilla

A reader asks my thoughts on financial matters,

Hi RQ. With the GME short squeeze/bubble (whichever term you prefer) making headlines, it made me curious what your perspective is on investing and financial security. Obviously one of the best ways to improve your finances is to not get married, something you have espoused all the time, but I would love to read a whole post about the subject.

Don’t have a unique view or expertise here… a lot of finance advice is pretty wasteful because there are only really two or three ways to really achieve financial freedom:

  1. Spend less.
  2. Earn more.
  3. Invest in assets that earn more than inflation.

That’s it. Numbers 1 and 2 are both hard (if they were easy, we wouldn’t have a $10 billion finance industry trying to sell us on ways to do them).

Re: #1, I rely on Mr Money Mustache for ideas, so start there… he has a nice philosophy too, where he says, “What are you really on this planet to do?” Money is usually a way to achieve other goals, e.g. make friends, create things, etc. The advertising industry is there to convince you the way to have a better human existence is to buy shit (hint: it’s not).

Re: #2, that’s good as well, and you should develop valuable skills, but many high performers spend whatever they make, cause the hedonic treadmill is real, and it’s also not easy to make a lot of money, in most cases (if it were, more guys would do it). A lot of guys who focus on making a lot of money forget why they want to (to live a better life). I’ve not maximized earnings in my life, and have spent more of it than I should have living on the edge, partially due to some choices that, from a finance perspective, haven’t always been the best. Okay and worth it, but I’ve taken a lot of risks with sex.

Re: #3, see John Bogle’s books on index funds. See A Random Walk Down Wall Street, and other finance classics that extol index funds. Efficient markets hypothesis is mostly correct and most people don’t beat the market, sorry. The math behind lower fees and dollar cost averaging is sound, unless you are RenTech or someone like that (extremely rare).
Continue reading “My perspective on investing and financial security is super vanilla”

Roasted at Thanksgiving this year, and the legend of Ms. Slav

At Thanksgiving this year I got roasted… hot young Ms. Slav was the main topic of conversation… even though she wasn’t there and I’ve not seen her in a while, and none of the participants were present for her presence at Thanksgiving two years ago. Word gets around, and a jealous relative brought her up early by saying, “Whatever happened to your girlfriend Ms. Slav anyway?” From there, others took up the theme, and I think extensive snide commentary and questions about her were an attack on my current arrangement, and haters love revenge.

If you f**k with the social order of things, the social order of things will f**k with you back. Women hate seeing older guys with hot young chicks, not just because the older guy is unavailable but because seeing an older guy with a hot young chick will give other guys ideas, which is far worse than the one weird outlier guy who gets the girl every other guy wants. Guys hate seeing older guys with hot young chicks because the other guy is envious. Not all guys… some guys are past bullshit envy and will be genuinely happy for another guy getting one over on society and knobbing a tight young girl… but the majority want to be the hammer pounding the nail that sticks out.

For most guys I think Thanksgiving, yesterday, would’ve been uncomfortable… for me it was a bit annoying to see the social order fighting back, with the representatives of the social order behaving like zombies, not even realizing who or what is pulling their strings… but it is what it is, and I knew that I was pulling a social retard move by bringing Ms. Slav into that part of my life. I should’ve “accidentally” put some pics of me f**king her on my phone and then “accidentally” had them on the screen, when I was supposed to be showing cute dog or apartment pics. If you want to be a player, some bad things will come from it, and it seems to me that most guys who’ve truly been players and written about it don’t emphasize the bad parts. It can be lonely, and it can be alienating, and it can cause intense envy and jealousy. Older women are jealous they’re not young and hot any more; guys are jealous that you’re going to take home a hot slut and they’re going to take home no one, or their heavy wife who doesn’t like them any more anyway. Few women love men more than sugar. Few women love men more than sloth.

Continue reading “Roasted at Thanksgiving this year, and the legend of Ms. Slav”

There’s no money in it

The coronavirus world must be creating desperation because multiple guys have, independently, been asking why I don’t sell the book or hawk coaching, and I think the subtext is, they’re thinking about giving one or both a go. I’m not opposed to other guys doing either, but from what I can tell almost no one is making money from books or coaching, and in my view most guys are better off going to coding school or learning a skilled trade, depending on their underlying IQ, because those are the fields where the money is… go where the money is, not where it isn’t. If you doubt being a skilled tradesman has some money involved, call a plumber or electrician, or a general contractor, and get some bids/estimates.

Compared to a real job, I don’t think I can make real money selling books, and I’m not convinced any one is making real money at game coaching. Maybe Tom Torero and/or Krauser did at one point, or do, but Krauser in particular has written exceptional material. For me, sex clubs + game is niche within niche… they’re both niche… and don’t have, from what I can see, a larger addressable market… I also think most guys don’t (really, actually) care much about getting laid. If they did, their lives would be different. At any given moment, a tiny number of guys are really improving their lives and getting laid… the rest are watching TV, playing video games, on social media (with nothing to show cause their lives are boring), etc. etc. Me trying to make money from the book, or from a memoir (I appreciate the encouragement, don’t get me wrong), is like a young girl thinking she can make real money in pr0n. She probably can’t, though she can go through the industry wringer for a couple months, and in the process destroy her real-world reputation. Smart girls, meanwhile, are becoming nurses or teachers. Maybe it makes sense for a pretty girl to do some light escorting while she’s becoming a nurse or teacher… that’s deniable later on.

There are a number of career/finance posts scattered amid the moral carnage of this blog, like Don’t end the week with nothing, and I’ll offer that advice when I see it, but the best advice is almost always hard to implement and takes many years to pay off. Continue reading “There’s no money in it”

What does “quality girl” mean?

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

Sometimes vertically, too, for the sake of variety.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Update, January 2021, see The most stridently asserted opinions will disappear down the memory hole

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

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

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

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

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

What the thinking escort is thinking

From a funny tweet, “I’m not doing onlyfans because I need to I’m doing it because I’m slutty and I like money.” It got me thinking, past what I’ve written before… there’s probably some truth to that woman’s rationale… the good/psychologically sound strippers/escorts I know, or have known, get in the business because they like f**king a lot anyway and often like doing it with strangers. They’re like, “I could make a million bucks doing this part time, and I’m already doing it anyway.” Clients are usually older than the average guy they’d hook up with on their own, but some aren’t, and some are pretty decent in bed. A sex worker is really an amateur psychologist who also f**ks… her job is to figure out what the client really wants (often not what he says at first) and deliver it. A lot of regular consultants do this too, but bring a different skillset to the table.

I have probably met more girls who are sex positive and highly sexed, and mentally unblocked about it, than the average man has, because those girls often find their way into the sex-positive community and into sex clubs and sex club culture (sometimes clients bring them as dates). For a lot of these girls, they want to f**k a lot anyway, aren’t very interested in monogamy, are open to experience, and like sex adventures. If a woman likes those things anyway… she might as well get paid for them… like a guy who likes programming computers on his own time will also discover a robust market, and be pleased that he can get paid for stuff he’s doing anyway.

These chicks aren’t super common, and for the most part they aren’t completely flaunting who they are. Very few chicks, even sex positive ones, will announce they’re into sex work, or that sex work turns them on.

They can do math…. let’s take a woman who works as as sex worker from age 20 – 30 and she is hot and decently good at business. She charges say $500/hour and $2000/night in a big city. She works one night a week, and for the sake of simplicity we’re going to count each month as consisting of 28 days, so she gets a few extra nights off. She gets two one-hour sessions and two overnights a month, on average, so that’s $1,000 and $4,000 a month, or $5,000/month, or $60,000/year. Times ten years, that’s $600,000. She might also pick up some tips and some fringe benefits, but she also has to pay for fancy lingerie/clothes/etc. Some costs involved. She’s not quite made a million dollars in the four times/month scenario but if she’s enterprising and willing to work a bit more, she can get to that million pre-tax dollars.

Few normal men want to date sex workers (I bet you would never have believed that…). There’s some sex-worker talk out there about how sex work isn’t real sex and doesn’t count… we can safely discount that hamstering because of course to most normal men it “counts.” If she’s out f**king for money, then to balance the reciprocity equation, he needs to have his piece of the open relationship… and sex clubs are a way of achieving that. So sex workers who are highly sexed to begin with, will often also seek guys who are already versed in open relationships.

The majority of sex workers probably come from stereotypical f**ked up families, desperation, poverty, etc., and they realize that sex worker is more lucrative than other kinds of work, but it takes an emotional and spiritual toll that leads a lot of women to drugs, if they’re not starting from there. All professions have a culture associated with them and sex work, like music or anesthesiology, has a drug culture associated with it. So there’s a lot to be said for the messed-up stereotype, but I don’t think the sex work makes the woman messed up so much as she arrives at it already messed up.

Mostly I’ve been describing the psychology of the mentally healthier sex workers… the less mentally healthy ones are really dark, and often not very bright… bright women realize that sex work is a time-limited activity… and it’s hard to do well… scamming men is especially dangerous.

Obviously this is not very relevant right now, since I bet sex work is pretty dead, because of the risk and the unemployment rate (among clients). In a bad economy, hiring sex workers is one of the first things to go… and other girls flood the market simultaneously, although I’m not sure that’s happening right now. But… what’s happening cannot go on forever, so it won’t. I don’t think it can even go on a year.

Guys have to be pretty determined to want to hire an escort. Chicks have to be pretty determined to take the risk. A lot of the kinds of chicks in their 20s who would form the bulk of the industry are living with family right now, if they can. The ones who aren’t, aren’t paying their bills, cause evictions have been halted in a lot of places. But we’re going to have to re-start the economy sometime… within two years we should have a vaccine… some fundamentals will remain.

Priorities and what you bring to life (Katie’s story)

Women who prioritize families and long-term relationships, and who have reasonable expectations of the men they date, get married and have families and do their best to stay married. Those women are out there, but they’re not much discussed among the red pill / seduction / masculinity communities because they’re mostly invisible to us… Red Pill Dad and I have a conversation in his comments section about these issues, and I’m reminded of “Katie,” a woman I knew years ago, when I was in my early to mid 20s (she was, and still likely is, a year or two older than me). Probably a low 8 then… slender with no rack, so maybe she was a high 7 with a pretty face and pretty blonde hair, and during our friendship / interactions / flirtationship, she said she hadn’t had sex until she was in college and had had sex with 3 – 4 men by the time I met her, all in a relationship context. She was in a long-distance relationship, and I kept angling to get her into position to make my move, and she kept successfully angling me away, while keeping me in her friend orbit (we had some mutual things in common that kept us around each other). Good sexual tension between us. Eventually I did my move and she said no, hard, firm, and kind, although her long-distance relationship died of natural causes sometime after that. Tried again and she said no. Why? One, she was a year or two older than me (she didn’t cite that though it makes sense), but, most importantly, she knew I wanted to be a player, not her boyfriend.

A part of her liked me and the sexual tension, but her conscious forebrain knew what I was about and that I wasn’t going to wife her up. Katie came from a rich family and I think had excessive income expectations. We had good physical chemistry and made each other laugh… she was bright, too, and had a bubbly personality, and when a guy is potentially offered quality champagne it is hard to turn it down for whoever’s next, since the next girl might be watery beer. I bet she was/is good in bed. She had strong sexual presence yet I don’t think she was going to unleash her sexuality outside of a relationship. I telegraphed “player” and also had uncertain earning potential and she knew that, and chemistry was not going to get in the way of her larger goals.

Katie married the next guy she dated, or the one after him. She’s not on social media very much and never has been… to the extent she is, she’s depicted with her husband and family. No or little politics, no or little posturing. At that distant time when I knew her, I wasn’t properly strict on the “no friend zone” thing, so we kept in touch longer than we should have… I say “longer than we should have” because our professional life goals diverged, and our personal life goals were never aligned (I wanted to f**k a lot of girls and she wanted a secure family, that being the opposite of her family growing up). We had personalities that meshed in some ways but we didn’t have enough in common to sustain our connection, and I wanted to spend time f**king girls, not hanging out with a pretty girl I wasn’t going to f**k. She tried to hook me up with her unattractive friends… as usual, her attractive friends had boyfriends already. One of them was insultingly overweight, so maybe my estimation of her estimation of me is lower than I have been portraying.

Today, she’s been married quite a while and has three kids… and looks amazingly good for having had three kids, although she has the slender body type that handles aging really well, even if she was never a high 8 or 9. Could have had a little work done on her face. A lot of stunningly curvy women droop early, while some of the slender women who are less hot as 22 year olds grow into themselves. I’ve slept with women who are less attractive than she is, after she’s had three kids (you probably have too).

We never know what will happen, Katie’s story goes on, maybe Katie will have a change of heart and dump her husband to go do the f**king around she didn’t do early. Maybe her husband will turn her in for a younger model… life’s unpredictable and I don’t know her anymore and haven’t truly known her for a long time. It’s possible she’ll experience the deep satisfactions of seeing her family grow. It’s further possible she doesn’t have the much-discussed hypergamous disposition. If a player stopped her on the street or flirted with her in a bar, she’d probably laugh at him, or indulge him for a few minutes then say, “No thank you.” Players wouldn’t get far enough with her to make her memorable.

Stories about chicks who f**k a bunch of dudes really stand out in the mind, like stories about terrorism. Terrorism works at generating publicity because of the way the human mind works, even though you’re statistically more likely to die from excess sugar consumption, opioids, or cars. Stories about women cheating with 10 random dudes are more interesting than stories about women who thought about it but didn’t. The guys whose marriages go through a rough patch and then recover have much less need of red pill and seduction than those guys whose marriages dissolve. The guys who grow up with a good family and robust social skills have much less need than guys who don’t. Etc. “Selection bias” is real. I bet Katie’s husband doesn’t spend a lot of time online and doesn’t spend it in these Internet precincts. Why would he?

In red pill/seduction/masculinity communities, you’re disproportionately surrounded by guys who picked the wrong woman, probably without realizing what they were doing, and without the context to understand that you can’t make a hoe a housewife. You’re surrounded by guys who were cheated on, divorced, etc. Guys who grew up with single mothers, or with fathers who were weak. Guys with deficient social skills. That’s reflected in the worldview being generated by these guys. The male equivalent of the women whose sexual market value (SMV) mismatch problems have made them bitter towards men.

If your father ever taught you much about women, perhaps he told you a similar story…

More likely, however, he didn’t. Mine didn’t.

And if I had to guess, there are a lot of guys out there like me who had perfectly good fathers (in every other respect) who never really taught us about women in the way they taught us about the sea, hunting, fishing, cars, sports, etc.

The guys who are in (basically) happy marriages don’t have much to say because they’re not out hitting the streets chasing strange puss, and they’re not looking for deeper answers after seeing half their incomes diverted to their former spouses, and their former spouses’s new boyfriend. The guys who are true players probably have good social skills and gym routines and would find much of the anger and hostility online to be strange and off putting (as I suspect a lot of the red pill / seduction guys are in real life).

Katie realized correctly that I wanted to be a player, not her husband, and she reacted appropriately. I have met women who realize I want to be player but give in to their desires, and then find themselves frustrated when I am not interested in helping them pursue their reproductive life plans. Smart women mostly don’t make these mistakes, or, if they do, they have their month of fun and then jettison the fun sex guy in order to pursue the monogamy provider guy.

Most essentially, women who want monogamy find it. They don’t live in New York City, or in the big expensive party cities. They play no games, or fewer games than women who are addicted to interpersonal drama. If those women recognize a guy who does the things they want… a provider, a good earner, loyal, willing to commit… they will latch onto him and work to keep him. As they should. They will suss out who he is. Does he want to have a family sooner, or later? Does he have a good relationship with his own parents and family? Etc. They talk about their own desires to get married and have a family, since those desires can scare off players. They will bring other skills to the relationship than sex.

For a contrast, look instead at the 30-something female journalists, usually fat, who write about how there are no good men out there. Those women prioritized their careers over their families and chose to f**k fun-loving bad boys who didn’t want to commit. Then, as their SMV declines with age, they want to get out of the market, only to find out that their SMV is declining, and that they’ve practiced few of the skills that make long-term relationships work. They have lived lives that are largely the opposite of Katie’s, and they lack the self-awareness to understand what they’ve done or take responsibility for it. They have a lot to write about because they have to write something new every day or every week, and their failure to recognize how male-female sexuality works means that they can’t find the obvious principles underlying their decisions.

Let’s look at one description of modern women, “many, if not most women have become self-publishing soft core pornographers, posing with their asses in the air or wearing scantily clad bikinis or semi nude in their bedrooms making duck lips–those bored ass eyes, sexy and yet soulless.” I doubt this has ever described Katie or women like her. Plus…

women have a burden too–unfortunately (or maybe fortunately for those of us who are players), it’s become extremely reductive in modern society: be attractive (enough) and give sex. That’s basically it, and as many players have noted, this seems to be the only thing most women today are capable of providing. Maybe why I get so excited when I come home after a girl spends the night to find my bed made or my apartment tidied up.

I think Katie brought a lot more to her relationship than f**king, and I bet she selected a man who brought a lot more to the relationship than just money, or just decent sex. In this way she is like Anna, another girl who fits the “not very sexually adventurous” mold, although Katie is prettier than Anna and better than Anna overall. I’ve met plenty of women who bring little to the relationship apart from sex and I mentally tag them accordingly. They are the women who want to know why guys just want easy sex from them… and they are the kind of women who don’t want an honest answer to that question. A guy who has problems with the entire opposite sex usually has true problems within himself, and the same’s true of women. As guys interested in seduction we learn to improve ourselves. A lot of women don’t have those same self-improvement voices in their ears.