“Eurovision Song Contest: The Story of Fire Saga:” the uncanny valley

Eurovision Song Contest” is a cute movie, I laughed at some of the scenes, but it’s a socially uncanny valley movie, and the uncanny valley thing but one thing gnawed at me… the leads are way too old for the roles. So old they feel weird, but in a revealing way… the plot of the movie has Will Ferrell and Rachel McAdams as a platonic singing duo, with Ferrell also trying to deal with his father’s disapproval, and McAdams trying to sexually entice Ferrell, since Ferrell is, as in most or all of his roles, asexual or sexually uninterested in women (a fantasy many guys who lack masculine identity and play too many video games have). Farrell and McAdams are having problems characteristic of the 16 – 24 year old set… the teens and young adults who haven’t formed proper identities yet and who are trying to make it in the arts business… and the movie is ambiguous about the age of the characters, but come on. Even with surgeries and procedures Ferrell and Rachel McAdams are ridiculous.

I checked and McAdams is 41, so she’s on the verge of infertility if she’s not already infertile… she’s way too old to be chasing a man-child. What’s her sexual past like? If she was 19 we could see her as a late bloomer but few hot or once-hot women age 30+ have no sexual past. Ferrell is 53… and still in his father’s shadow…? Has he not managed to evolve at all as a man? Ferrell, like Adam Sandler, specializes in man-child roles but even man-child actors must eventually move out of those roles. Ferrell and McAdams are in the social uncanny valley because they’re middle aged playing roles appropriate to teens and young adults, but their many cosmetic procedures also make them look unnatural, even with hollywood lighting and makeup. All acting is playacting but they feel off, even though they are funny. In the movie they have not managed to move past the problems that 20 year olds have and that is revealing about our society as a whole, which deifies youth and leaves little role for anyone who has left that period. Continue reading ““Eurovision Song Contest: The Story of Fire Saga:” the uncanny valley”

Red Scare podcast girls on real sex

I was listening to one of the Red Scare podcasts, I think this one, and it’s amazing how on-target so much of it is regarding how sexuality really works. One of the hosts said, “Feminism’s all about being in denial,” about your sexuality and sexuality desires… it makes me consider, how many chicks are figuring this out? Lots of them will admit as much in private but not in public, for fear of the feminist social media mob. If feminists were as drawn to the squat rack as they are to baselessly attacking others, they would have boyfriends. It’s like the old days in the Soviet Union, when everyone knew the truth privately but was afraid to admit it publicly. Modern feminism is a con… one of the hosts says, “I’ve taken the red pill on feminism a long time ago.” So Red Pill language is permeating the mainstream. One of them says, “Getting hit by your boyfriend feels good…. Well it doesn’t feel good but it makes you feel alive.” I like the distinction… is “alive” good? Sometimes. Sometimes maybe not. They get the ambivalence and ambiguity in sex and sexuality, something that’s almost entirely missing in the hysterical media world, where all women are innocent victims and all men evil predators.

In reality… there are few victims or true predators… a lot of women have decided that the inept stance that women are irrational is somehow desirable… exactly the opposite stance of the feminism in the 50s – 70s, when women wanted to be seen as being as capable as men. How many women have secret housewife fantasies they won’t express? I’ve heard those too, stated quietly.

Back to sex, one of them says, “I love getting restrained and getting the menace of violence.”… I keep saying “one of them” because it’s hard for me to figure out who is who… they both sound f**kable, could be wrong here… yet for men the lesson is, “BDSM skills matter.” That should be the new Twitter hashtag. I have another post about women’s love for BDSM that I forgot to put up… it’ll come…

Another time one says, “10 years ago I might’ve still been a yuppie.” I dunno, you kind of have to be a yuppie to afford big cities today…

I have talked about Red Scare a little bit before this, and I have been getting messages about it, and about how approving of it is somehow bad, cause it’s hosted by women, or some of the thins they say aren’t true… I disagree that some disagreement removes all value or truth… look, there are various things I disagree with them about (capitalism is awesome and the reason they have a podcast instead of being forced to toil in potato fields or factories, and also Bernie is economically illiterate and unfit to lead the country, or be more than a gadfly…), BUT: they have something interesting to say, particularly about culture, culture’s intersection with politics, sexuality, and male-female relations. It’s also important to not live your life in an echo chamber… we need to be able to disagree but be smart about it… most people can’t move on from their black/white thinking. Having something to say is compelling in an era of morons mindlessly repeating garbled angry formulas they learned fourth-hand from braindead tenured humanities professors.

If you listen to red scare, call her daddy, and joe rogan… one thing they all have in common is that they’re not having the standard media conversation. Read the new york times (and its analogues) and watch the standard news programming (and their analogues), and they’re all stories about bullshit “oppression” olympics, how bad women have it (nonsense… women are protected and supported by men), how white people are (somehow) bad (despite building modern civilization), how men are evil and women are saintly, etc. All of it is, basically… bullshit. There’s some hard news sprinkled into the “news,” particularly for scientific stories that don’t have immediate political ramifications, but a lot of the dominant media narrative(s) are so incomplete as to be wrong… and most people know it. The differences between men and women are obvious from everyday life… they can be exaggerated too much, yes… an individual man or woman may deviate a lot from the norm… but come on, look around at every day life. Get off the jerk-off Internet. The dominant media narratives and their more crazy online cousins (jezebel, for example, or gawker before it went kaput) are bankrupt. BUT… there is also a right-wing version of many of these, in the form of fox news and talk radio, and you know what? It is EVEN WORSE than the NYT, the PMC, academia, etc. It is totally fact free, and reality free. It has some online conspiracy theories wings too. Yuck. People who are not idiots avoid idiots. When we see these big media companies being full of it, we get the crisis of the authority and the revolt of the public that we are seeing.

So red scare, chd, rogan, eric weinstein (the Portal)… I don’t agree with any of them 100%… maybe not even 50%… yet they are all having interesting discussions, at times, outside of the mainstream narrative, and engaging a popular audience, like I am not, because I am writing and most people are illiterate. We can choose to break free of the “official” narrative. I think all four big podcasts have disagreements with one another… but all of them are more interesting and honest than say most of the new york times’s reporting on sex, feminism, men/women, etc. And people (including me) are responding to the “lower / very low bullshit” element.

To the extent red quest has readers… it has readers because what I have to say is somewhat interesting/plausible while also not being part of the standard media narrative, OR part of the standard-media-crazy-counter narrative (Fox News is far worse than the NYT, despite the NYT problems). Let’s look at one version of a different reality… I have NEVER seen anything in the media even remotely like the free sex party book. Never, not once, and I read a lot, more than I should, and I listen, too. If you are aware of anything like it, please leave a comment… I have read Troy Francis’s book by the way and it’s neither detailed nor terribly accurate. The book I put together is 50K words on how this world works. It is far too incendiary for mainstream publishers but also too complex and complete for the reddit/twitter crowds, which can’t understand or digest any idea that is longer than a few sentences. The book is based on analysis more than feelings and for that reason it doesn’t fit into the social media world.

I have seen NOTHING in the media that sounds remotely like the CHD girls. The closest thing is probably mid ’00s Tucker Max, who wrote from a man’s perspective and is also too old to be of interest to most college girls / post-grads working their first jobs in the big city and experimenting with f**king all the hottest dudes they can find. Those girls barely read. Or, the slightly older women who are thinking about what comes next for them… they are probably not the CHD audience but might be the red scare audience… still like f**king and being hot, but they know having a baby is the better/smarter life course… there is much to say here… and the mainstream media is saying very little of it, for the most part. Feminist journalists and university professors are mostly spinsters and are trying to glamorize and valorize their own foolish spinster decisions, while ignoring the gaping hole in their soul that everyone else can see.

So… I’m interested in people who are thinking something, and thinking something that is 1. smart, 2. different, and 3. real. Even if I disagree with parts. I am net pro Rollo Tomassi, despite the qualifications I have stated, because he is having a conversation that is mostly not being had elsewhere. He is often 3/3 even when I disagree. The university/new york times narratives… are often 0/3 (ouch). Not smart, not different, not real. The red scare thinking is often 3/3, or 2/3. If your reply is “don’t listen to girls…” I don’t know what to tell you. “Modern feminism is bad” does not equate to “all women or bad…” judge the ideas… also, do you exist in the real world? Lots of women are smart/intelligent/interesting/etc. If you haven’t figured that out then you are either 1. messed up/inexperienced or 2. you are not surrounded by good people. People image match and if they think you are messed up, they will justifiably avoid you.

Normal men like women and normal women like men… I can’t believe that statement is worth making… it’s out there at the extremes where you get problems. The NYT hates men now and that’s one of its narrative problems. There are also some number of genuinely bad dudes out there… not the majority but enough to be worth noting. The NYT conflates “they had drunk sex and that’s obviously rape” with guys who stalk chicks and do other truly bad things… I have seen it… heard about it… etc. Smart women prioritize their families for lots of reasons… one is that their fathers and brothers will help with male predation. If a woman is being stalked by some guy, staying with one of her (male) family members who owns a firearm can make sense, for example. Chicks are always at risk of predation… though modern culture and police forces mostly protect them from it… which is why the leftist anti-police rhetoric is often ridiculous… which is not to say there are not many problems with police… police shouldn’t murder people… we need a lot of changes in policing. It’s not “police bad civilian good” though. Or the other way around. It’s in the nuance.

So I view red scare as being able to speak to contradiction and complexity… even when I disagree with it, like I sometimes do… and contradiction and complexity are part of the human experience. They are mostly erased from the dominant media narrative, sadly. Re-injecting them is good. Most normal women do not like where the feminism industrial complex has gone, treating women like children or like men, when most women wish to be women. Many guys have not learned to be men and have to seek lessons in masculinity from strangers online, because they don’t get it in schools or from their fat video gamer fathers. The feminist nanny worldview can be challenged thanks to the Internet… and that is what we are seeing happen, thankfully.

So… if you have something interesting and different to say, say it… I want to hear it… I just don’t want to hear surface-level thinking, or bullshit. This blog is for saying something that I see no one else saying, something that is (I hope) tolerably intelligent and also true. No journalist is telling this story, so I decided to tell it myself. Red scare… is telling stories that other people aren’t, and that’s why I listen. Selectively, and rarely if ever to every episode, but enough.

I also admire the chicks doing Red Scare cause they’re pretty anti-fragile… they get attacked by dipshits on Twitter… and then they fire back… they’re not part of the university-industrial complex, so they’re not worried about being fired by some archaic dipshit institution that’s desperately scared of its own clients (“students”). Listening to people who often have something to say and who aren’t dipshits… it’s refreshing, you know?

If I had less to lose I’d start a podcast about game + masculinity… but, unlike the red scare girls, I want to maintain relatively mainstream employment. In another universe I’d find some girl to start a NSFW onlyfans with and be a dirtbag podcaster… troll feminists relentlessly… truly enter the gig economy… truly embrace hedonic degeneracy… learn how to synthesize mdma from the dark web… oh g-d, the depravity… I think I would combust… but I’ve thought about it… truly embracing the dark lord figure… podcasts today can be like the angry metal bands of the ’80s or the hippies of the late ’60s… I’d probably destroy myself in the process… yet it’s possible that I’ve maybe considered it once or twice… instead I do red quest, writing in an age where people have lost the ability to read and think… twitter and universities are like tentacled mind viruses flaying the ability to think clearly… yet Twitter and some podcasts are also where some free speech lives.

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), 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.

“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.

I wonder how much of the CALL HER DADDY audience is actually female and how much of it is guys jacking off to hot chicks talking about their sex lives… they 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. I’d guess a lot of their “show host” mode is a persona, like most entertainers. Not saying this is bad… just pointing it out… 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”

The dark side of denial and dishonesty about women

I feel a lot of ambivalence towards this skeevy story Teen models, powerful men and private dinners: when Trump hosted Look of the Year, cause the authors get some of the story… but it’s a story about dishonesty, and dishonest people, and the authors are dishonest too… the guys running this supposed teen modeling show thing are obviously just trying to get sex, but they’re putting on this dishonest veneer of modeling. The “models” are trying to get money and their big break and pretending to not be basically selling sex, which is what all “models” do (just without the act itself in the case of the handful of really famous ones who don’t need to). The authors are dishonest by pretending not to know that men and women are different, and that no one understands what’s really going on, when almost everyone involved does.

The “men and women are different” thing is shunted away from most teens by our society and education system, despite its obviousness… men want more sex with more different women than women want with men, and most women want it with men around their own age (some women also like much older men but almost none like younger men). But we’re unwilling as a society and culture to say, “men and women are different” and then to teach girls how… most attractive women eventually realize that almost all straight men want to have sex with them, and would if there was a way to do so. This power intoxicates many women and frightens others. Most learn to accept it, and then rue the day it departs.

A lot of the “models” in that story… had probably absorbed the wrong story that we present… unless their parents (more likely parent) told them the truth, as most parents don’t. Not directly. The lie that “men and women are exactly the same and want the same thing” is most dangerous to younger but post-puberty teens, who often don’t really understand that they may be desirable to many men… have you ever seen or heard a fight between a girl and her parents, with the parents saying, “Don’t go out in that,” and the girl saying, “It’s fashionable and I’ll do what I want, f**k you”? The parent is really saying, “You are sending sexual signals to adult men and they may respond to those signals,” and the girl is either saying, “I’m not really doing that” (she is), or she is saying, “I want to be sending out sexual signals so I can get the attention those signals bring.” And maybe more.

The parent-child misdirection is a lot like the misdirection in the “Teen models” story, where the guys are misdirecting what they’re doing (trying to have sex with young chicks) and the girls are misdirecting what they’re doing (trying to trade sex appeal for money) and the parents are often misdirecting what they’re doing (“this is a great economic opportunity…” the economic opportunity of trading attractive and sex for money has a name… I am not opposed to this business but let’s be real about it is, why don’t we?). And the authors hate Trump. I am not a Trump guy but I am a reality guy… and there is too little reality in this story.

The thing is… a lot of young girls are ignorant and their society and parents (often parent, no dad in the picture) have made their ignorant… I know from talking to the 18 – 22 year old models in particular… chop off a couple years and the ignorance is more profund. Parents aren’t doing their jobs. Education institutions aren’t doing their jobs. In a world of bulls**t, to speak the rare truth is a profound act.

These media hit pieces never stop to look a little bit deeper and to think a little bit more deeply and cross culturally. One book, by a woman named Judith Levine, a journalist, was totally controversial and no one wants to talk about it, least of all the writers. Age of consent varies wildly by time and place… take Rome,

The age of lawful consent to a marriage was 12 for girls and 14 for boys. Most Roman women seem to have married in their late teens to early twenties, but noble women married younger than those of the lower classes, and an aristocratic girl was expected to be virgin until her first marriage.

Most of you have probably not noticed that I haven’t been making a “right” or “wrong” argument in this piece, except to say that subterfuge is wrong, and we should be more honest about our intent. That includes the authors of that teen models story, who can’t come out and say that men and women are different and women need protection from carnal males, which is what they’re getting at. Their feminist indoctrination has them tied up… “men and women are always equal” on the one hand but also “women need special protections,” like religious Christians would say, on the other. They can try to make women the “victims,” however, because feminism also holds that all women are oppressed… and frightened lambs… who are subject to those big bad males luring them into temptation… does that remind you of anything, like Christianity?

I dunno. I read this story and think that there is a lot of blame and bad behavior to go around, and there is also a lot denial. There are also some girls from a surprisingly young age who are locked and loaded and ready for sex. I know cause I’ve met the adult versions of them, who tell me what they were like at young ages. I’m not nearly as sex-negative as most of the society. I’m aware that our current ideology and culture finds that Women don’t think that women can make adult decisions and be held accountable for those decisions. Then feminists are all like, “why aren’t women taken seriously at the upper echelons of corporations?!?”… they can’t imagine their own rhetoric and positioning has anything to do with it. Almost no one will ask what age of consent laws are really doing, or ask why it’s cool to prosecute male teens as adults for many crimes while announcing female teens are children when it comes to sex. Kinda weird when you think about it, right? But we don’t need to think about it… we just need to write that Trump is bad.

There is no real takeaway from my writing here. I think that taking these girls away from their families and their sources of strength/protection is bad. I don’t like all the subterfuge: obviously, the guys running these programs are trolling for sex and have set up a system to attempt to acquire it. I feel bad for the young chicks who genuinely don’t know what’s going on. Some of them probably really don’t because they’re young and naive. Their parents and teachers don’t level with them. It’s like giving a 15 year old boy a million dollars… how many 15 year old boys are going to be responsible with that cash? Not too many.

If you present as an adult… people will often treat you as an adult… whether you’re a woman, running a consulting company, whatever. If you present as a kid you will be treated like a kid. Presenting as an adult leads to entry, maybe premature entry, into the adult world… it is not smart for teen boys to talk s**t to adult men, although some do… it is a choice that can be made for teen girls to present as adults… but no one levels with them about making that choice. I don’t think much is going to change this dynamic. The historical and cultural forces supporting bulls**t are too strong. Feminists like having legal and cultural cudgels to hit men with. Parents want kids who are docile and not emotionally distraught because of erotic energies. Women want agency for the good things, like getting better jobs, and want to be victims for other things. It is very rare for women in public life to admit this dynamic… someone like Camille Paglia does… but she is a rare bird, one easily ignored by journalists, who have great capacity for self-delusion.

In the time of coronavirus we’re not on the streets and we’re not at the party, so the more boring posts will have to take the place of exciting real-time stories.

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.

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.

Singles push politics and societies to be more extreme??

How single men and women are making politics more extreme… fewer people are marrying and having children, but women with sons have a strong incentive to protect a “male” point of view and the same is true fo men with daughters having a strong incentive to protect a “female” point of view. Strip out some of cross-sex ties that come from marriage and children and both extreme feminism and the red pill stem from the same family locus.

Go further than the writer, who can’t go as dark as anonymous writers, like this anonymous writer… a lot of guys feel shut out of the sexual market altogether, and form communities of lost boys on the Internet, or fill their time with porn and video games, cause why bother trying for sex if they’re so far out of the sexual marketplace? Anger takes the place of success, when a guy isn’t numbing himself with video games. The less practice with women a guy has, the less able he is to seduce, attract, and retain women, leaving him with an angry festering emotional void where a relationship is supposed to go. (I’m not advocating this point of view and advocate the opposite, but it is out there.) Yes, it’s true that feminism has destroyed a lot of the school system and made it extremely anti-male, fostering video game dependency with its anti-male hatred… but a guy still exists in this world and for most people not having any relationship at all is bad, worse than all but the worst relationships. Particularly as one grows older. At age 20 you can say it will happen for me one day. For the average 40 year old man (yes I know about 40 year old players with hot 20 something women, that’s not average), it’s probably not going to happen.

A lot of women, meantime, have been “liberated” from the scourge of male resources and support. Haha, thanks feminism. I bet most real women really love that liberation from male wages and secure male attention. Women are used to being financially and emotionally subsidized by men, but now women are freed from the bonds of marriage to pursue hypergamy… they can chase guys +2 in SMV or more, get f**ked by them, and then have those men move on to the next field (woman). This hurts women. Worse still a lot of women at the bottom of the scale don’t even get to feel the pleasures of male attraction and attention. Hot men won’t pay attention to me? Feminism has the answer, that men are scum, etc., answers that are not true or interesting.

The red pill is a reaction to this situation. Feminists weaponized gender first, and now it’s happening among men. Men have also realized that if we hit the gym, practice seduction, learn what women like, and learn how to press women’s buttons, we can get as much sex as we can handle without having to marry the woman and subsidize her. It used to be that men traded resources for sex in marriage. Now we don’t have to trade. So for some top men… why bother marrying? Divorce still favors women… so why do it?

Women are unhappy when society favors marriage… women are unhappy when society doesn’t favor marriage… women vote for various means to extract subsidies from men via taxes rather than via marriage… men have mostly not figured this out. Too busy playing video games and watching sports. And we wonder why national politics are hopelessly fucked up, when they mirror a gender fight we all see on the ground. Feminists who started this gender fight didn’t think about what would happen when men get into it. Average men and women are still probably okay, the ones not contaminated too much by feminism… elite men are doing well (f**king as much as we like, based on good habits and knowledge of female attraction triggers). Elite women are doing somewhat less well because they have to compete so hard for other elite men.

We are getting into a situation where the extremes are more extreme. There are more virgins and incels than ever, and more hard-core players than ever. The hard-core players can learn from each other… I have been hearing reports from guys racking up 10+ lays in under a year from learning the game, then applying it to sex clubs. A guy who wants to raise himself above average has a clear path to doing that.

It has never been a better time to be a player… or a sexually unrestricted woman… it has never been a worse time to be a provider guy… or a medium tier woman trying to lock down a higher status man. An individual who can’t get what he or she wants is annoying… an army of women or men who can’t get what they want is a political force. A destabilizing political force. Families moderate humans. Adult humans without families are reshaping our society for the worse.

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.

“Good Men Aren’t Getting Harder to Find”

Good Men Aren’t Getting Harder to Find.

For most women.

The problem comes from the kinds of 35-year-old women who write those articles about how hard it is to find a “good” man, meaning he is over 6′, makes $100K or more per year, looks good, works out, looks good naked, is great socially, is great in bed, and wants to wife up older women.

These women are disproportionately likely to have attended schools that inculcate their own sense of specialness in the world. They live in big cities that favor players not providers. Maybe they don’t have full-blown narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), but they have narcissistic tendencies and work in narcissistic industries, like media.

They are women who think that men think like women… that men are attracted to money, wealth, and status, rather than things like looks, kindness, caring, and femininity (“femininity is a patriarchy concept”… no, honey, it’s a matter of reproductive fitness, but you never learned that from your women’s studies classes). Today, smart men looking for a long-term partner should look at a woman’s job situation… a woman out of school who has no work or work history whatever is probably showing that there is something wrong with her… but a woman in a corporate job is not that appealing to most similarly situated men. When I am evaluating women for long-term situations, two jobs in particular stand out, teacher and nurse. They are both jobs that are easy to leave at the job (don’t demand 50+ hour weeks) and they are both jobs that make it easy to leave for a year or two to have a family.

There are a lot of women who bring nothing to relationships apart from their p***ies… and then they are surprised… where are the GOOD men?

Her career is not that significant an asset, either.

Top men… are often looking at women in their mid to late 20s for family… not so much women in their mid 30s, who are rapidly approaching infertility.

I think there is a class of delusional women who spent their reproductive time in school and low-level media jobs, who can’t figure out why they’re still on the shelf, who are complaining about the “good men” shortage… I am complaining about the shortage of hot 22 year olds who are height-weight proportionate and want to bend over for me… what a surprise. Women have also not been taught in their bullshit schools that men and women value similar but slightly different things in long-term relationships, so if you don’t bring what men most want… you are going to get what you get.

Delusional women and rejected men also have political ramifications… this is a great work, one that I will say more about later. I think we are really seeing a crisis of delusion, increased by social media, porn, etc. People who raise their value and see past their delusion, they are okay. A lot of women… are not doing this… then they wonder where the “good” men are… the good men are having children with younger women, women who want relationships and families… or the good men are having a wild ride, cause women value sex appeal over stability.

Unfortunately, delusion today is pervasive and society-wide. It’s pushed by the advertising and media environment. Few of us can resist it.