Why are polyamory and non-monogamy popular now? The Internet.

Gwen Kansen asks, “Why is polyamory so popular now?”, but I could reframe the question as, “Why have numerous once-minority pursuits, beliefs, and interests spread?”, and the answer is the same, “The Internet.” That’s a true but not completely helpful answer, and it’s more specific to say that anyone with niche interests, unusual beliefs, or non-mainstream pursuits had a lot of trouble and friction finding one another before the ubiquitous Internet, and so niche beliefs stayed very niche. We know that plenty of women had group-sex fantasies, even before the Internet, from books like My Secret Garden by Nancy Friday. What people didn’t have back then were ways of finding one another and spreading ideas about niche interests. Niche interests aren’t purely a sex thing: you can view modern versions of political correctness or “woke” politics as a growth in a niche field, and, while I don’t want to activate people’s political identities with this post, it’s hard to imagine the White House of January 2017 – 2021 without the Internet. The Internet facilitates feedback groups in which persons with niche interests find one another and reinforce their beliefs about their niche, and thus drive more extreme versions of that niche.

Still_be_Friends_1Humans really like f**king, a point I’m not going to belabor and, if you don’t believe it, why are you reading this? The ones who really really like to f**k a lot, often want novel experiences, but those novel experiences often come with costs, including search costs, danger, reputation costs, and others I’m not imagining right now. Online, anyone who wants to can write about their sex adventures in a way that’s effectively anonymous, barring the interest of the NSA or someone powerful and snoopy. Anyone who wants to can explore the group-sex scene in their city. Anyone who wants to can download Feeld (today), or, back in the day, use other sites to explore non-monogamy domains. Put those things together, and it’s possible for large numbers of people to coordinate in a mostly anonymous fashion. A woman’s family doesn’t have to know that she’s hoping to get drilled by four dicks at a party. A man’s friends don’t have to know some other guy unloaded in his girlfriend, while he was deep in another guy’s girlfriend. It’s possible to take baby steps in these directions. Once a couple or girl get enmeshed in the network, their friends often learn about it. Probably the most powerful impetus that encourages new people trying f**k parties is friends who are already going. You can f**k and still be friends, but many people go to f**k parties and don’t f**k friends.

Continue reading “Why are polyamory and non-monogamy popular now? The Internet.”

Why I don’t accept most generalizations about men and women and you shouldn’t either

In a private chat, Red Pill Dad and xbtusd have been talking about their respective experiences and the qualities that might be possessed by different women at different ages. Each of them has stereotypes and generalizations supported by their experiences, yet they’re very different guys who live in different places and have led different social, economic, educational, and dating lives. Their conversation reminds me of the dangers of generalization.

Think about the tiny number of people you’ve interacted with in your life. I have maybe, I don’t know, 2 – 10 people, depending on how you count, who I’m very or pretty close to (know a lot about means I know a lot about them), maybe a couple dozen I know a little bit well, a couple hundred who I vaguely know, somewhat recently, by first name or face (could be 1,000), maybe 10,000 I might conceivably have interacted with since I was a freshman in high school (maybe a bit more, maybe less)… that’s not a lot of people, if you think about it… some of these numbers might be a little low, but even if you assume I’ve had some vague interaction with 30,000 people over the last 30 years, that’d be 1,000 a year, way too many for more than idle passing on the street, that sort of thing… 500 a year is probably too many, even counting schools… point is, however one slices these numbers, I don’t have substantial interactions with that many people, and I haven’t, in my whole life. I checked, the United States has 330 million people in it, and 330 million is a huge number, so huge humans can’t comprehend it.

Continue reading “Why I don’t accept most generalizations about men and women and you shouldn’t either”

The “club” world’s underlying darkness, and the non-monogamy world

I.

A few weeks ago I went over to some “clubs” with some friends (clubs of the sort I expect are dying: it’s something I don’t normally do, but the crowd urged me to go and I went with the crowd (what, it happens sometimes, you never do?)), and the club, despite its reputation and slutty Instagram feed, was strangely grim: too many guys and too few women, and the guys were circling the area, hunting, seemingly, for any hint of female attention. Superficially, a big happy party, but just under the surface, desperation, attention-seeking… the sorts of things any person with modest emotional intelligence could perceive. Perhaps people drink to dull whatever emotional intelligence they have. Without coke, I don’t think these places would exist.

A lot of the people were trying to be sexually successful but would probably be more sexually successful if they quit alcohol, sugar, and other simple carbs.

Continue reading “The “club” world’s underlying darkness, and the non-monogamy world”

Most guys don’t care much about getting laid, I hypothesize

THE GAME comes out in 2005, MYSTERY METHOD a year later. A bunch of pickup blogs show up then too, almost all abandoned since, and sometimes descending into madness and/or conspiracy theories along the way. Few guys have any desire to write about pickup and chicks for more than a few years, and the ones who do are often, or usually, unbalanced, or nuts in some other way(s).[1] It’s important to have coolness and status before trying to evangelize or teach, yet the most prominent and least anonymous guys appear to have neither. Most are the kind of guys I’d want to avoid, not the kind who I’d want to get a drink and chat with. 

A few years ago (2015) the book MATE: BECOME THE MAN WOMEN WANT, by Geoffrey Miller and Tucker Max, also came out, but it didn’t seem to make a splash. In a major occasion on par with the moon landing, Red Quest as a blog is founded in 2017, its initiation commemorated by a massive, 10-ten granite ziggurat next to the Washington Monument in DC. Red Quest’s readership peak is 2019, as of this writing, although you never know, maybe some feminist tweeters will come along to denounce me, and thus drive up traffic.[2] Most people who find their way here from twitter or reddit, belong to twitter or reddit, prefer corporate media, and aren’t much interested in other venues. They’ve been captured by the big-tech borg. Some people complain about centralization of power among big tech companies, but the vast majority of people’s actions show preference for big centralized platforms, not for decentralized, censorship-resistant efforts (describing what seems to be true is not the same as approving of a thing that seems to be true).

What’s going on? Knowledge about how to do better with chicks is available, but few guys seems to avail themselves of it. Chicks themselves are not out there talking about the excessive number of socially smooth, interesting, and cool guys who are seducing them. If anything, chicks are complaining about how cold it is to meet guys through online dating, and how they wish guys would approach them in real life. Chicks are lonely, bored, and understimulated, by their own admission. Memes about funny cats go viral, ideas about how to get laid, don’t. I post that most guys just don’t care that much about getting laid, and even the ones who somewhat care, don’t care or care much about figuring out how to do so effectively. The information itself has been around for at least a decade and a half, probably longer, and it’s still very niche.

Some guys still seem to think that doing better with chicks is simply impossible: and yet the guys who practice the game demonstrate otherwise. Or maybe most guys really aren’t picky, and are okay dating a few points below themselves. They perceive the mountain to be too high, and go back to the Shire of video games. I know a coach who says his clients think a same-day lay (SDL) is impossible, because it’s so far out from their idea of what’s possible.

Overall, it’s not like men are better at getting laid via some other avenue. Men seem to be getting laid less than they did a few years back, which is also consistent with the “most guys don’t care much” thesis. You’ve probably seen the graphs showing that the number of guys in their teens / 20s who have gone without sex in the last year has something like doubled, or maybe a bit more, from like 8% to like 22%, in the last ten to twelve years:

Number of video gamers and herbivores seems to be going up, which is I guess kind of nice from a “competition” level, but existentially depressing from a societal and cultural level. Maybe one day humanity goes extinct cause the video games are too good. Maybe the effort and subtlety needed to master the art of seduction is too great. Most guys have returned to an oral-first culture, and thus the extensive written corpus about how to get laid lies fallow, for want of readers. In a similar human puzzle, Why aren’t there more computer science majors? It’s probably the most lucrative undergrad degree, and highly impactful on the average person’s life (the average person spends an unbelievable number of hours per day on the phone, which is another way of saying, “Doing things CS majors produce”). Lots of people go to college, get worthless degrees, and spend the next decade plus paying back “student” loans that can’t be discharged via normal means like bankruptcy. Weird! I hypothesize most people aren’t smart enough to do computer science degrees but maybe there are other reasons. Most guys are smart enough to implement the rudimentary parts of game, however, they just don’t. Maybe guys are just lazy?

Some of the guys who download and read the book probably don’t do anything with its ideas right away, but a planted seed may sprout years down the line. Could be that “time” is a key element for ideas to spread. But ideas from THE GAME and such have had a long time to spread, and seem not to have. Video game ideas, by the contrast, appeal to many millions.

There seemed to be a lot of energy in the pickup and seduction worlds in the ’00s and early ’10s. Where’d it go? Guys in their 20s don’t seem to be writing about seduction and dating experiences (if I’m missing guys who are, let me know). Maybe, today, being in good shape, a male high 7, and having okay pictures of a guy looking buff and hiking or whatever, is enough to snare high 6s and some 7s off dating apps, so the drama of cold approach and bar seduction isn’t needed. The process is a little smoother, its terrifying peaks and valleys and storms smoothed into a neater, more manicured path. Meanwhile the guys playing video games and getting fat are mostly out of the game altogether, or get women consistent with their lives. A guy who gets frustrated enough with his underperforming sex life will find his way to the knowledge he needs, while a guy who is fundamentally content with underperformance, won’t. 

It may also be that most guys interested in and writing about seduction are fundamentally unappealing or crazy, a point elaborated in, “The most stridently asserted opinions will disappear down the memory hole.”  I look at most of the guys writing about player blogs and they do not seem cool to me, and many of them say and tweet crazy things that will repel normal people, or reasonable people. So it’s hard to separate the crazy opinions on various topics from the reasonable, but slightly unconventional, views on how sex and dating actually work.  

Maybe this sort of thing will always be of interest to only a small group, for some other reason I’m not aware of. Maybe I’ve not plumbed the psychology of man sufficiently to discern it. I think I’d imagined that Red Quest as a blog would be more enticing: more efficient, and often effective, ways of getting copiously laid. Even if most guys aren’t interested in undertaking these practices, I imagined they’d be interested in or curious about them. They’re powerful tools, however unusual.

I don’t have much of a conclusion. Whatever makes ideas popular, does not appear to apply to guys figuring out how to get laid.


[1]The last year and a half have been revealing. I’ve speculated in private that I think this universe is self-limiting, because the accurate and useful ideas about, for example, picking up chicks, are often swirled together with a bunch of other off-putting, inaccurate, and widely disliked ideas: a bunch of anti-social people discussing social skills.
[2]If you know any, direct them here, so they can denounce. Ten years ago, it seemed like pickup artists and such were regularly denounced online and in the media, and now, no one does. It seems the culture wars have moved on. By the way, we lost, at least in terms of numbers and attention.

No one “empowered” talks about “empowerment:” see the lie

“Empowering” and “empowerment are hugely overused words, and the people using them are neither. The people talking about “empowerment” are trying to escape from some aspect of themselves they don’t like, or something they’ve done that doesn’t fit their present narrative. “Empowered” people aren’t talking about empowerment, they’re busy doing things in the real world. Things that are really empowering include learning rare/unusual skills, building a real business that adds value to the world, having peak experiences, deepening real relationships, and probably a few other activities that don’t come immediately to mind. Also, the most “empowered” people I know never talk about empowerment or say they’re “empowered,” so talking about “empowerment” is a sign of weakness/neediness/something undesirable. I searched for the word “empowerment” on red quest and found it in a single post, used skeptically, despite the fact that red quest is in some sense about “empowering” guys to lead the lives they want. If you do the things advocated, and develop the skills described, you’ll be “empowered,” and if/when you are, you own’t need to talk about it. “Empowering” is used once in this blog, but in a quote.

Continue reading “No one “empowered” talks about “empowerment:” see the lie”

The most stridently asserted opinions will disappear down the memory hole

The most stridently asserted opinions will disappear down the memory hole.

Remember all the hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) truthers from a few months ago? The ones who no longer exist, or seem to exist? The ones who had all the answers six months ago?

I know, I barely remember them either, and probably none of the people who were confidently pitching it do. But I wonder and you should too, “What are they stridently asserting today?” Should we believe it? Why?

What should we take from this episode? I haven’t seen any of the voices who were confidently and wrongly asserting that HCQ or this thing or that thing (vitamin c! no, d!) is a magic bullet, talk about how they were wrong, why they were wrong, and most importantly what will change in the future.

Continue reading “The most stridently asserted opinions will disappear down the memory hole”

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 ret**rd 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”

“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”

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

Why Twitter’s Brooding Sea is likely a faker, and some other musings on the top of game

The other day I went on a Twitter talk about how you shouldn’t believe everything you read, and then I stopped being oblique and said there’s a “daygame” twitter account under the name “BroodingSea” (BS) that is likely… creative… in terms of its relationship with the real world. Another  daygamer guy asked privately why BS is unlikely to be a good role model, and why I think he is, if not necessarily fake exactly, then not telling us everything. There are a bunch of reasons… 1. His results are too good. 2. His supposed pickups are way too good/smooth. 3. He seems not to get any of the negative streaks other guys do. 4. There are almost no details in any of his stories. While it’s possible to get “yes girls” who like you / are horny at that moment / fuck you with much game on your part, they are rare (in some respects this girl was a “yes girl”… it can happen, but every girl? No). At some point Nash or others called BS out on how unlikely his stories are, and then he began integrating more supposed “failures.”

Put all those pieces together and the bullshit siren should be going off louder than a Marine Corps drill sergeant the first morning at Basic. Unfortunately, BS disappeared, so we’re unlikely to see further revealing statements from him. He may have made the mistake of using some of his primary contact information in online profiles… always go with the burners… despite the improbability of his stories I don’t support doxxing, including of people I disagree with.

So what is going on with him? He’s not the first and won’t be the last guy with extremely improbable stories. Most likely, one or more of of several things is at play… 1. He’s paying / using some money in his “game.” I don’t think this is bad (if a guy wants to do it, fine), but he should say as much and describe the role money/payments play. If he has sufficient money to pay, he can get a lot of lays that way, particularly in eastern europe, or with eastern europeans online. A lot of girls who are in the partial escort market have a sliding scale in their minds, where the more masculine/attractive the guy is, the less he pays (not all girls… some are super professional… using some money may also allow him to generate the unique pictures that can be claimed as daygame lays). Years ago I did something like what BS may be doing, for $500/mo…. in a number of ways I got lucky quickly… and I probably shouldn’t have done any money transfer at all… but I did it and it should be admitted for the sake of completeness. Back to BS, 2. He’s probably mostly online, with great pics, and getting girls who are much less hot than he says/implies (I have slummed it at times, usually when I’m horny and some girl shows up who’s less attractive than her pictures but also requires minimal work… not proud but it’s true…). I think he posted a pic or two of himself in which he appears to be jacked. If those pics are honest, he’ll be able to get girls -2 or -3 relative to the ones he should be able to get from the real world. 3. A bunch of his stuff is just made up. You know how people in real life who are full of shit often tell skeleton stories, and when you ask follow-up questions, you can see that they’d never considered an obvious point? Brooding Sea’s stories look like that. Some could be authentic… a bunch don’t seem like they are, though.

Continue reading “Why Twitter’s Brooding Sea is likely a faker, and some other musings on the top of game”