You are part of “The Revolt of The Public and the Crisis of Authority in the New Millennium”

If you are reading this, you are part of the revolt the public and the crisis of authority and therefore you should read this book so you better understand your own role in events. Anyone reading this blog is learning about ideas that are almost entirely absent from mainstream culture. You’re learning things that almost the entire educational edifice doesn’t want you to do (the big exceptions being 1. evolutionary biology departments in universities, 2. masculine sports coaches and some strength and conditioning coaches, and 3. the very rare, independent thinker who happens to work in education and stays under the radar). Taken together, the peer-to-peer information system is roiling the entirety of the developed world. People are learning things from each other that newspaper editors and other mainstream sources would NEVER put in front of readers’s eyes. Independent thinkers are able to put together ideas that wouldn’t be possible otherwise (and the importance of networked independent thinkers, those who form chains of knowledge, I address at the very end).

Martin Gurri is an impressive writer and I have not synthesized all of his insights. He understand, “Eventually the thought dawned on me that information wasn’t just raw material to exploit for analysis, but had a life and power of its own. Information had effects.” What happens if you learn that the dominant narratives are WRONG? In game terms, that means understanding that feminism is a lie (it’s not about equality (I support equality) but about special privileges), or that marriage makes men worse off? You pull one thread, and then a bunch of other threads come loose, and suddenly there is a bunch of bullshit that becomes obvious.

You read the Nassim Taleb books and learn that you are not the only one who is aware of bullshit.

You read evolutionary biology and realize that in today’s climate, monogamy is improbable. You realize that DNA testing should be mandatory at birth. You realize the state, as it presently exists, exists to extract resources from working men in order to give those resources to women.

You realize women are attracted to physical characteristics, which most of society underplays (except when it matters for money: Aquaman is popular among women and gay men).

Even if you don’t read evolutionary biology, you can read the books by Esther Perel, which target women, and realize that monogamy isn’t working. What do you do then? What do you do when you realize that your sweetheart, who pledges her undying love to you, will get bored of you in two or five or at most ten years, then use Facebook to stray?

You realize she loves her smartphone better than she will ever love you. If someone forced her to choose between her phone and you, she’d choose the phone. You realize she’s used her smartphone to send nudes many times.

You start to realize the civilization-enhancing lies that exist, that are woven throughout our lives.

You realize that anonymous advice by cads online is more useful for sex and dating than every movie you’ve ever seen or novel you’ve ever read. Why rely on the lie when you can mainline the truth? You realize that the amount of amateur porn out there reveals what women will happily do for men they’re attracted to, for men they perceive as superior in status to themselves.

You realize schools exist to enrich themselves. They’re still necessary for many people, but you become much more wary of them.

You realize you are just a consumer. You realize marketing is a lie. You realize chicks don’t care about the kind of car you drive, and that you should have spent one-third as much money on the car you now slave at a job you don’t like so you can afford that car. Why are you working the job you don’t even like instead of flirting with women and having sex? Why are you working the job instead of reading a book? You’ve never really asked yourself those questions.

Bloggers, and in general all dabblers in digital communications, are often accused of insulting sacred things: presidents, religion, property rights, even the prerogatives of a democratic majority. They speak when there should be silence, and utter what should never be said. They trample on the sanctities, in the judgment of the great hierarchical institutions which for a century and a half have controlled, from the top down, authoritatively, the content of every public discussion.

This is an excellent reason to write a blog: so you can insult sacred things like feminism and the feminine imperative, while helping other guys improve their game. I would probably not be writing this right not if not for Krauser in particular. Many other guys have written on the game but no one, to my knowledge, has done so at his level of depth. His racism is despicable but his knowledge and ability to convey his knowledge is great.

Game is useful because it has immediate practical applicability. Guys can and should go test it for themselves. No reason to take my word for it, or Krauser’s words, or the words of anyone in the side bar. Go try for yourself.

A third pattern [around the loss of traditional authority] would be the rise of alternative centers of authority. This is a corollary of the loss of monopoly. … Each vital community formed by amateurs interested in an affair becomes a threat to the authority of the institutions.

The best authorities for sleeping with hot chicks are not found in universities or the conventional media. They’re found online. Krauser, Nash, Yohami (if he ever gets a stable web presence) and a bunch of others are better authorities than all of literature, than any professor, than anyone writing for The New York Times or The Guardian. Even parts of Reddit are better for learning to have better sex with hotter chicks than traditional authorities. Alternative “centers” are rising, or have risen. There are other examples of this as well, but seeing as how I’m writing about f**king hot chicks, that’s the one I’ll focus on.

This is a great book for players, wannabe players, and anyone who looks at conventional culture, with its superficial “monogamy,” and thinks, “This shit is busted.” If you are writing online, you are part of the revolution. By historical standards, the revolution has happened fast.

This book, Revolt of the Public, reminds me of something written by the great Nassim Taleb:

It may be a banality that we need others for many things, but we need them far more than we realize, particularly for dignity and respect. Indeed, we have very few historical records of people who have achieved anything extraordinary without such peer validation—but we have the freedom to choose our peers. If we look at the history of ideas, we see schools of thought occasionally forming, producing unusual work unpopular outside the school. You hear about the Stoics, the Academic Skeptics, the Cynics, the Pyrrhonian Skeptics, the Essenes, the Surrealists, the Dadaists, the anarchists, the hippies, the fundamentalists. A school allows someone with unusual ideas with the remote possibility of a payoff to find company and create a microcosm from others.

It is almost impossible for someone operating totally alone to achieve as much as a small group working together. Peter Thiel says as much as well in his book about startup companies and the power of groups, Zero to One. The game writers are like a school or a small startup company, producing books, disseminating ideas, testing those ideas in the field, reporting back on which ones work. Early feminists didn’t realize that, in unshackling sex from marriage and reproduction, they also created the conditions necessary for pickup artists. Now, modern feminists are miserable harpies, living in a world their mothers and grandmothers created, failing to realize that, when high-status men refuse to marry, the meaning of their own lives would disappear. If feminists realized this, they’d be unhappy about it. Feminists don’t understand that normal women crave families and family life, yet feminists have succeeded in creating the legal and social conditions necessary to DESTROY family life.

Men have learned not to invest financially in women. A man should invest in himself, in his skills, in his gym, in his food (vegetables, nuts), in his nice boots, and NOT pour money into women, which is a way of turning off most modern women.

A man today with a $400 used laptop, discipline, and an Internet connection can change the world.

You are an important part of the game network and that is why I encourage you to write about your pickup and game adventures. You may disagree with me and I may disagree at times with you, but you are part of an underground movement that is important.

I am going to re-read this book.

Advertisements

“Sex Clubs, Non-Monogamy, and Game:” The free ebook

The free ebook Sex Clubs, Non-Monogamy, and Game is done and it is available for download as:

* A .mobi file for Kindle readers.
* A .epub file for other readers.
* A PDF, for anyone who wants to print a copy or read in some other manner.

paper version is here, on Amazon: I suspect most of you will read on Kindles, iPads, etc., but an easy paperback option is now available. I have also put up an Amazon ebook download, although I haven’t been able to get Amazon to give me a $0.00 price on the ebook version; Amazon will only offer $0.99, so that may have to remain.

The cover is pretty crappy and I made it in five minutes. If you’re a graphic person and want to make a better one, shoot it over and I’ll replace the cover in future editions. Magnum and others have suggested that I pay a couple hundred bucks to get an online freelancer to do a better cover, and they are probably right, but I’m just not willing to go that far for a free book that I’ve already spent way too much time on.

Please get in touch if you have ideas or responses. I view this book as a potential work in progress. I don’t think I’ve covered every aspect of the field, but I haven’t read any books that are as detailed and thorough as this one. The copy I’m releasing today, on 3 January 2019, can be seen as a refined beta release; if I get good feedback, I will put out another version in response to that feedback.

The book is being released under a Creative Commons 4.0 Attribution license. That means anyone can redistribute the book or edit it, provided that your version attributes the original to “The Red Quest.” I have gone back and forth about whether I should make this book free or paid. A free book is more easily available, but most people value a thing at its price: “free” things are usually worth what’s paid for them. I hope Sex Clubs, Non-Monogamy, and Game is the exception to that principle.

There are other free books discussing the floating around, with The Book of Pook being the best-known. I just read it. I hope Sex Clubs, Non-Monogamy, and Game will be passed from player to player, without restriction, and that guys learn to be guys and learn how to live their possible lives. Please email copies of the book to whoever you think may want to read it.

The book is dedicated to Nash and to everyone who has ever taught me about the game. The first version of the book was about 31,000 words, and this version is about 42,000 words, the majority of those words in response to initial reader feedback.

The Tom Torero lay report book, “Below the Belt”

If you’re interested in Torero and have never read his books, start with Daygame, or his textbook (I can’t find the name of it now). Below the Belt is a series of lay reports and it’s fine: it does what it promises for guys who jones for more lay reports. At least a few of these have appeared in other forms, including some in Daygame. It’s strange for me to read them, as I’ve read some of Nick Krauser’s books, and I know enough about the background between Krauser and Torero to find Krauser’s absense notable. There seems to be some narcissism of small differences between them… they are similar in so many ways… yet some obscure-seeming beef separates them. Like Nabakov and Edmund Wilson having a falling out. I find whitewashing the past like that to be odd, regardless of what precipitated the split. I would rather learn about the tensions between them. There is a deep literature on creative partnerships:

In his book “Collaborative Circles: Friendship Dynamics and Creative Work,” from 2001, the sociologist Michael P. Farrell made a study of close creative groups—the French Impressionists, Sigmund Freud and his contemporaries. “Most of the fragile insights that laid the foundation of a new vision emerged not when the whole group was together, and not when members worked alone, but when they collaborated and responded to one another in pairs,” he wrote. It took Monet and Renoir, working side by side in the summer of 1869, to develop the style that became Impressionism; during the six-year collaboration that gave rise to Cubism, Pablo Picasso and Georges Braque would often sign only the backs of their canvases, to obscure which of them had completed each painting. (“A canvas was not finished until both of us felt it was,” Picasso later recalled.) In “Powers of Two: Finding the Essence of Innovation in Creative Pairs,” the writer Joshua Wolf Shenk quotes from a 1971 interview in which John Lennon explained that either he or Paul McCartney would “write the good bit, the part that was easy, like ‘I read the news today’ or whatever it was.” One of them would get stuck until the other arrived—then, Lennon said, “I would sing half, and he would be inspired to write the next bit and vice versa.” Everyone falls into creative ruts, but two people rarely do so at the same time.

It would seem that Torero has had several of these partnerships, with Antony (who is mentioned) and Krauser (who is not). If you want the negative take, Nash has you covered. I don’t have a strong view on the issue. I’m also in a different world, as my entire life doesn’t revolve around seduction or writing books and other products teaching it.

The Torero lay reports are valuable, and I don’t have a lot ot add to their value. Game reports reinforce how flakey and random girls are. A girl can be DTF one night, then ghost the next. Most guys don’t appreciate the randomness of girls, and more guys should.

Overall these stories seem like they match my own experiences, and that is nice. If we’re all having somewhat similar outcomes, then the system mostly works, probably mostly for the reasons worked out by guys who know evolutionary biology and create game systems that incorporate the results from it.

I like this:

In this book I’ve also made a conscious decision to document the darker sides of the player lifestyle, from rejections and dry spells to runaway egos and fuck ups. If you want to be a member of the Secret Society and get lots of casual sex without the romance then there’s a price to be paid, even if it’s not initially obvious.

Some guys writing about the game are either very young (in which case their life is all about the game and banging new chicks, as it should be) or underestimate the dark sides. I think there are still darker sides than we get here. The ego protection mechanism is still at work.

I vehemently disagree with this:

A long-term PUA has to be selfish, by default. He doesn’t settle down in one place or with one girl. He goes for what he wants and perfects how to get it. Learning the pickup skill set is exactly that: improving your frame, standing up for what you want, not being the Nice Guy doormat. The same techniques that work with gaming girls (breaking rapport, qualifying, leading, dominance) spill over into all your interactions. It’s not only girls that start calling you an asshole and a jerk.

A long-term PUA does NOT have to be selfish. Good PUAs create “win-win” situations. Chicks want to be seduced and wish more guys would learn how to seduce them well. A guy who seduces a chick is not being selfish. Especially if he does not hide that he’s a casual sex guy. A guy who sets the relationship frame appropriately is creating value in the world. A guy who pretends he might marry a girl and then jilts her… he is being a selfish asshole. I think chicks can sense that I have a generative spirit, despite my non-monogamous ways, and I think that helps me out. “Generative spirit” does not mean I’m a “nice guy” (I’m not), but I also try to make the world a better place. I genuinely think game does make the world better, because it teaches guys the skills chicks already wish guys had. I’ve been told that it’s nice to be asked out in public, by a guy, in person. Even chicks who say “no” or “I have a boyfriend” have said that. There is a problem with masculinity in the United States and maybe the world in general. Game is part of the solution (a topic for another post, maybe, although it will be a rambling, philosophical one).

“A long-term PUA has to be selfish, by default” tells us about the writer, not about the world. It is true that chicks will project eventual monogamy and domesticity onto the player. I have had that happen (although some of my interests in group sex retard the chick’s projections).

“The loud, cocky confidence which attracts girls is abrasive when you’re dealing with it 24/7.” Yes. I have met these guys.

She said that I was the third guy she’d ever had sex with (the first two were long term relationships) and the first guy who’d not bought her expensive shit. She also said she liked the direct way I stopped her on the street and that she knew I wanted to fuck from the start. Good feedback for a player, I’d felt my frame improving since daygaming Russians.

The thing about gifts is very similar to what Ms. Slav told me. That said, if you are trying to keep a girl around for the medium term, gifts can help a guy pass comfort tests. There are no comfort tests mentioned in this book, or if there were I missed them. A girl only loves gifts if she’s earned them. If she hasn’t earned them, a gift is a demonstration of lower value. Guys mistakenly see chicks go ape shit for gifts in movies and TV shows but forget that movies and TV shows are fiction, often catering to women who love the idea of an already high value guy giving them gifts.

If you ask a chick, “Do you like gifts from guys?” they say, “YES,” because they are imagining it coming from a hot, high-value guy. In which case a gift is very good. From a low-value guy, it can be okay but kind of icky.

After the lay we reclined on the bed and I asked her my typical post-sex questions (you’ve got a short window after the notch to get a girl to spit some truth from her hindbrain before her forebrain guards take over again).

I’ve also seen this. Right after sex is the best time to talk to chicks.

A weakness of writing books of just lay reports (like my first book in particular) is that once you work out how to have casual sex, the infield reports start to sound robotic as you get less and less learning points and levelling up in each one. The puzzle’s been solved, the hustle has become consistent, so why keep writing? Is sex just sex at the end of the day?

I have been thinking about more stories from my past, but many of them are not that interesting. Particularly the girls I’ve met online.

Some chicks are also attracted to players:

Finally she found out about my double life and my Tom Torero brand (I’m not sure how, but who cares). After a little bit of coldness she was increasingly turned on by the idea of me fucking lots of other girls for my job.

In a later story, Torero talks about dating a woman for a year and breaking up with her because she wanted a deeper relationship and perhaps a family. I would’ve liked to hear more about this. That may fit my own pattern of a larger number of short and medium term relationships, as opposed to a large number of one-night stands and ultra-causal encounters. If I like a chick, I try to keep her on rotation (non-monogamy can help with that). A guy who loves the one-night stand ought to do the one-night stands, and some girls want ultra-casual sex or decide they don’t like the guy after he takes her for a ride.

In my experience, it’s also rare for the first-time sex to be the best sex, so there is that aspect for me. Usually it takes three to five sessions to hit the peaks. Many guys who Yohami would call “bottom guys” think of consensual non-monogamy as a beta move that allows the girl to get strange dick while the guy sits at home playing video games. For guys with options, and guys who like a chick to stick around, the big problem can be retaining her in the medium term.

Should you read it? I dunno. If you want more lay reports, then sure. If you’ve already read a bunch of them, as I have, then I don’t know if it’s that useful. They do get repetitive, and that sense of repetition may be part of what’s making me thinking about the next part of my life. I have a kind of sense of having seen it, done it, it’s not as satisfying as it was, what’s next?

Ecosystems and clubs

Haven’t been able to find enough appealing books to read lately… I’ve been on a run of badly written SF novels that I don’t complete because I feel like I’ve already read them and, worse, the writer is a worse writer than I am. So I picked up the Nick Krauser book A Deplorable Cad. This section, about “Beckster” (Robert Beck) reminds me of something similar but adjacent to what I do:

He’d read the old Alt-Seduction forum then go out in-field to nightclubs to try it out. After two years of what were, by his own admission, “hard work and brutal lack of success,” he cracked it and became a good player . . .

His major ruse was to set himself up as a club promoter and then go out in the street, handing out cards to hot girls and getting their numbers.

From there, Beckster would invite chicks to the club. The chicks “would experience Rob as the king of the club who knew everybody and was treated with respect by the staff,” because club promoters can get paid to bring in chicks. He’d then find other players and wannabe players and get them to bring in chicks. On top of that, “Rob put yet another layer . . . which not only made his pulling easier but also greatly enhanced the perception of his cold-approach pick-up skills in front of the students who’d paid him a fortune in coaching fees.” By being the boss of a bunch of chicks, other chicks would see him as high value… then he’d go around to pick up the other chicks in the club. Then multiple chicks would “all compete against each other to vie for his attention.”

An interesting strategy. I admire it, though it’s not for me because I dislike clubs. The only other person I’ve read who seems to have a good read on clubs is Good Looking Loser, who writes “An Introduction and Major Misconception about Party ‘Club’ Game (The Scene – Hollywood, USA):”

Groups of people meet at a designated house to “mingle”, drink and do drugs – 1 or 2 hours before going to a nightclub. (pre-party)

These groups of people take as few cars/taxis (or limousines) to go to a nightclub where they have ALREADY BEEN PUT ON A VIP/GUEST LIST by the nightclub promoter that they ALREADY KNOW. (enter club)

They get in for free, have a COMPLIMENTARY table and access to a significant amount of FREE alcohol that their promotor has reversed for them. (club)

At some point in the night, usually just after that the alcohol runs out and/or girls dance for 90 minutes, the group will leave to a PRE-PLANNED AFTER-PARTY which is usually, but not always, at the pre-party house. (exit club)

Most solo guys or small groups of guys are never going to break off one of those chicks. The marketing job of the club, however, is to convince guys that, with enough money spent, that might happen. I personally would prefer honest prostitution to this kind of slight-of-hand, but there must be enough guys to bite the bait to keep the industry going.

Krauser does not like this form of game either:

This is known as Entourage Game, and Beckster invented the modern version of it. It’s pretty much the opposite of what I do. He builds an elaborate structure based on many moving parts that elevates him to a position of situational high status in an environment where girls go to party. I roam solo on city streets picking off girls who know nothing except what I convey in one-to-one conversation.

Krauser also has another friend, Mick, who is also not like me:

He enjoys chatting to strangers for the sake of it, whereas I hate it. He’ll start up conversations no matter where he is – to a supermarket cashier, a barber, his car mechanic. In contrast, I’ll say the minimum necessary to be polite. That’s how his style developed, and it makes him excellent at bar game because he doesn’t view all of this chat as work.

I am somewhere between Krauser and Mick, but I view most random chat as closer to work than pleasure, which is why I don’t much like working the bars. I have done it before, sometimes somewhat successfully, but usually in semi-warm atmospheres (e.g. after a work conference meet up, that kind of thing).

I also don’t like normal clubs, but I am somewhat like Beckster in that I discovered, or was initiated into, a kind of workaround, in my case through sex parties and sex clubs, where everyone has been pre-filtered for interest. The upsides I have written about quite a bit. There are some downsides to what I do:

  1. Many people, even when they know intellectually that they are not monogamous, do not want to see their friend or partner banging another person.
  2. If a guy is hunting the hottest girls, the ones who are 8+, he is not likely to find them. I have seen some, but they are rare and in high demand. If a guy brings high 7s and 8+ girls, however, he will be the king of his local scene (I have played this game very successfully).
  3. A guy still needs to find a compatible chick. This version of lifestyle or ecosystem must be layered onto existing game for it to work.
  4. A guy will be evaluated very directly based on his body and sex skills. If either are lacking, everyone will know it because everyone will see the guy nude and fucking. Because (almost) everyone gets naked and has sex at these clubs and parties, I have an unusual amount of experience in evaluating how chicks look clothed and unclothed. Many chicks who seem one way clothed turn out another way when not.
  5. Doing it well takes some amount of work. There are no shortcuts.

The main advantage to what I do is volume, sustainability, and of course many people have group sex fantasies… I just happen to live them out. Consensual non-monogamy also helps me retain chicks who would otherwise want to know, “Where is this going?” Overall, I find these trade-offs to be worthwhile. What I am doing is not totally unlike what Beckster is/was doing.

Another advantage: I am satisfying many chicks’ fantasies, which they will never satisfy on their because they are chicks and most chicks need to be led most of the time. Most chicks are not self-motivated or self-starters, so they need a guy to activate their sex drives.

Another thing, neither good nor bad: I tend to get and retain sexually adventurous chicks. For guys who have a thing for inexperienced chicks or virgins, he will not find them at the sex clubs. Note that many sexually adventurous chicks still present as “classy,” if you like that sort of thing. And many chicks who present as trashy are still hard to get in bed, based on my experiences. Just like guys who dislike game say that game guys are only getting “bad” or “damaged” girls, guys who think that every sexually adventurous girl looks like a gutter rat will be surprised.

I like reading about other guys’s systems. I actually draw from a couple ecosystems (I have not written about everything I do), so I am somewhat unlike the game guys who hit new cities and begin cold approaching. But the Krauser and Tom Torero books are the most complete descriptions of game I have ever read, rivaled only by some of the original Neil Strauss and Mystery books. It is surprising to me that no one else has produced comparably detailed works. Maybe that is because writing a book takes a lot of energy for little reward, apart from the ego reward. The majority of guys out there learning how to be a player would be well-served to quit hunting for kernels of utility online and read the Krauser books.

I feel like I am still learning from them. I don’t do a lot of cold-approach daygame, so they are not likely as “useful” to me as they will be to other guys who are learning to chase tail, but they are well-written and informative. The book written by an obvious expert in his field is often interesting to me, even if I am not directly in the field. I see the world differently after I read them. I like Nassim Taleb, even though I don’t wish to be a Wall Street trader, as he was. The Krauser and Torero books are written by experts. The most annoying part of the Krauser books is the fact that they are not readily available digitally. It seems that they can be found online, but I would prefer to just click the Amazon button and be done with it. Life is too valuable to be scrimping over a $20 book. Most of the Torero books seem to be on Amazon Kindle, which I appreciate.

If there are comparable books that I’m missing, please let me know in the comments. If you are an experienced game guy, think about writing a book.

One other thing I forgot to add: Krauser says, “This was a period when I was getting to meet all the ‘name’ PUAs in London and while they all had something I could learn from, I was struck by how strange they all were. It was like a little boy’s club. Our house of cads in Hampstead looked sane in comparison.” I’m guessing that I come off as more normal than most hard-core PUAs, albeit cerebral or nerdy if I let those parts of myself peak out. When I find a pretty girl who likes to read and isn’t a twit, I get very excited. Most pretty girls who like to read are looking for a guy who isn’t a stereotypical nerd but who isn’t a frat-boy jock. Pretty girls who like to read have dating problems similar to mine. So when we find each other, it can be beautiful. I am much smarter than most good-looking gym guys (I am not so good looking but I do all right… certainly not good looking enough to make the game easy) and I am much better looking than most nerdy readers, programmers, or engineers. Ms. Slav and I connect well because she’s an extremely pretty girl who is also smart, and so her and I match immediately.

I can do well with basic chicks age 25+ who are starting to think about longer-term things, but if they are kind of dumb I get tired of them after a couple months of sex. They often become too much like having another kid around, which I don’t need in supposedly adult women.

Overall, I think I am more normal than the hardest-core PUAs, but considerably less normal than the average person.

The best books for learning game

On The Red Pill someone asked about the best books for learning game: I still think guys should start with Neil Strauss, The Game and Rules of the Game. They are somewhat dated and anything about “negging” should be ignored, at least at first. “Negging” is really push-pull or what Torero and Krauser call “fractionation.” The rest of the book is still more right than not, and Neil Strauss is a very good writer. Both books are also “mainstream” enough to give to your friends, even as a joke. Neil Strauss describes how he read evolutionary biology books that reinforced and supported the game he was learning.

For clueless guys and even some intermediate guys, it’s helpful to understand biological programming. Whether you want it to or not, biology drives us more than culture. Women don’t have that much choice in who they are attracted to, just like guys don’t. Guys can try to force themselves to be attracted to older or fatter women, but it just doesn’t work, right? The number of 45 or 50 year old women a guy will be attracted to is very close to zero, unless the guy himself is aged 60+. A 22-year-old hottie will make any guy look twice, especially over his 45-year-old wife. Maybe he’ll overcome his primal urge through conscious effort but it will remain. Girls are the same way but their criteria is not exactly the same for reasons that make sense from an evolutionary biology perspective.

I actually don’t think it matters very much where you start with game books, as long as you read a lot and more importantly immediately try to apply what you read. Too much reading in the absence of practice is masturbatory.

What else a guy should read depends on where he starts and what sticking points he has. Guys in high school and college will have different needs and ecosystems than guys who are 30 or 40 or 40+. If guys in high school and college try London daygame cold approach or Strauss-Mystery Method they are going to become weird outcasts quickly. They need more friendship, social circle, and connection techniques. Some techniques and mindsets described by London daygame and Strauss-Mystery are still applicable, but “cold approach” is for big, anonymous cities.

“Sticking points” will occur at different levels. For example the Reddit user MattyAnon suggests The Sex God Method, and that is a good book but will be of less use to very inexperienced guys. For guys who are getting laid but are not skilled or confident enough in bed it will be extremely useful, maybe even essential. The book She Comes First is also useful.

One of the best game posts I’ve read is by Krauser, “Reveal vs Restructure,”

I think it comes down to which side of this divide you fall on. Is your Journey a process of:

* Uncovering a pre-existing SMV and personality that is attractive to women, or;

* Ridding yourself of a Pussy Repellent virus and then building an attractive man from scratch.

A guy who is uncovering preexisting value will be different from a guy who has to build a lot of value. The latter guy may be a fat, psychologically messed up guy who needs to learn how to cook, how to quit eating sugar, how to use the gym, how to move his body, how to dress himself properly and get his clothes tailored, and why he needs to physically move to a city and get out of suburbs or rural areas. And he must start now and results may not come for a very long time. But he has no choice. He must struggle, or pay for it, or be alone.

Although this isn’t a book, I like the website Good Looking Loser because it’s about an attractive guy overcoming his own psychological barriers. There are a lot of attractive guys who need help with that. Some attractive guys have limiting beliefs and other issues that prevent them from achieving up to their level.

For books, I just wrote about the Torero book Daygame, and that is a good read. Krauser has good books too. There is a purple pill book, Mate, by evolutionary biologist Geoffrey Miller and writer Tucker Max, and I think it’s worth reading as well.

For guys who need help with fitness, Starting Strength is good and so is the 5×5 method or any number of others. The important thing is to start and make some progress.

Many people like the Mark Manson book Models. It isn’t my favorite but so many guys like it that I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention it.

Over time it is very important to understand how women think and how women evaluate men. There isn’t a single book that is best for this subject but all of the books recommended will help build this mental map.

My Secret Garden is all about women’s depraved sex fantasies, so if you have trouble realizing that chicks want to be totally dominated and used hard by the right guy, read it. Women prefer written porn and guys prefer visual porn, so to understand what gets women off you need to read, while also realizing that erotic material has its place but also often differs from real life.

Personally, I used to read a lot more novels than I do now. Great fiction is still wonderful but so much fiction is about people who are psychologically damaged or who are just dumb. For game-aware guys, watching fictional guys step on their dicks is painful. Usually the answer to their dilemmas is “escalate,” “lift,” or “find a new girl.” In most novels the answer is to keep pouring attention into a single hot girl, who by the end of the story comes around, exactly like most girls don’t in real life.

There is still great fiction but it is usually not about relationships. Right now I am halfway through a novel called Kingdom of the Wicked that is fun but not mainly about sexual strategy. Vary what you read or you will get bored.

If you haven’t already, on your journey you will also learn that there is life beyond game and that without personality and outside interests, you will never break into the highest girl tier for longer-term relationships, whether open or closed. Sex is like oxygen or water, because when you’re getting enough it recedes in importance, and when you’re not getting enough it becomes the focal point of your entire life (not my original metaphor but it’s a good one). When you’re confident that you can get acceptable sex in a tolerable timeframe your whole outlook changes and that is what people mean by “abundance mentality.” It’s not just a mentality, it’s a fact of existence. Abundance mentality ensures that no chick can occupy your entire mental space without your consent.

The more you read and learn, the more you will realize how most people, including most girls, are dumb.

Cheap Sex: The Transformation of Men, Marriage, and Monogamy

Mark Regnerus says, “My central claim in this book is that cheap sex is plentiful—that it’s flooding the market in sex and relationships—and that this has had profound influence on how American men and women relate to each other.” Yeah, he’s right, for the very top guys. Top 20% probably. The other guys are playing videogames and bitching on the Internet. Game is so important because the top guys are getting the sex. If you don’t learn game and you’re not a natural, all the other guys are going to be getting laid and you’re going to be whining instead of learning. It must be dispiriting to be the average guy reading about all the sex other guys are having and not having it himself. The average guy is too lazy to turn his frustration into action,  so he keeps sitting on the couch, while the guys who use frustration to propel themselves into action start getting laid.

The book is based around the myth that there’s this sexual cornucopia out there for guys. There is, yeah, and I’ve had it. I’ve had it in general and I’ve had it through the swinger and open-relationship worlds. But access isn’t free and it isn’t that easy for the vast majority of guys. If it were the game world wouldn’t be blowing up like it is.

Most women are unsatisfied too, because guys have left their masculine identities behind. I used to think women were just lying whiners, but now that I’ve learned enough game to evaluate guys the way women do, I see their point. Sleeping with a fat or skinny fat video game player who is unemployed or underemployed can’t be much fun for most women, even women who are themselves fat or skinny fat. Women are unsatisfied because guys are unsatisfying. Learning game makes women happier too. They want to be seduced but most men are too inept to bother learning how to do it.

Guys who aren’t red pill and getting laid are going to get angry reading the book. One Regnerus interviewee, Sarah, says, “I meet people in strange places. . . . It just happens.” From her perspective I bet she’s being honest, but she means that she takes zero responsibility for her decisions and she also only responds to what men offer her. Only the boldest and most game-trained men open a lot of strangers, so she’s naturally selecting for guys who are in it for sex. Kinda stupid if you think about it, right? But she doesn’t, or doesn’t critically, kind of like how fat guys playing video games wonder why they get no tail.

Individual responsibility is the basis of achievement. Sarah gets around to fucking “David, a musician who seemed more committed to making it in the industry than to making it work with her.” No shit. Musicians don’t want long-term relationships, and music is an almost purely mating call signal with little long-term economic viability.

Guys who do music are specializing in casual sex. I recommend that guys work to specialize in casual sex: hit the gym, don’t eat sugar, learn game, rather than civilization-building: get a job, maximize income via long work hours, etc. Guys need some minimum viable amount of money, but the rest is game.

Regnerus also cites a precursor book, Anthony Giddens’s The Transformation of Intimacy, and in that book Giddens predicts how the

achievement of reciprocal sexual pleasure [becomes] a key element in whether the relationship is sustained or dissolved. The cultivation of sexual skills, the capability of giving and experiencing sexual satisfaction, on the part of both sexes, [has] become organizad reflexively via a multitude of sources of sexual information, advice and training.

Couldn’t agree more. Guys need to develop sexual skills. Women would rather be with an exciting deadbeat who gets them off than a boring office guy who doesn’t. If she keeps getting off she’ll keep coming back. She wants to be taken to a sex shop, pick out some toys, and then have you use them on her. The first time a woman gets off with a plug in the back and a man in her front, she often thinks she’s seen God. Doesn’t matter that it’s a physiological illusion. You want her to think you’re Jesus. Cultivate your sexual skills. Great lovers are made much more than they’re born.

Regnerus says, “Opportunistic men are pressing women to operate more like men by privileging the physical over all other traits, and women—to mate at all—feel like they must play along.” He means, “women, to mate with the highest-value men, feel like they must play along.” Plus, a lot of women bring zero skills to their relationships. I’ve met a million slovenly women with no cooking skills who literally bring no concrete skills to the relationship apart from sex. If all they bring is sex, then yeah, guys are going to evaluate them on looks.

I’ve literally had this conversation with exes who bring up the ultimatum: move in or I’m moving on. And when I say I won’t live with a woman, they want to know why, and I ask, “What skills do you bring to this relationship?” They’re confused and then I point out to them that I’m a better cook, I make more money than they do, and I have better mechanical skills than they do. So what are they going to do to make my life and our household better? What gains from trade are we going to reap?

Then they start crying and I feel bad about making them cry.

We break up anyway.

Women won’t stay in uncommitted relationships for more than two years. Usually much shorter than that. Personally I’m happy to make them my official girlfriend as long as they’re willing to do swinging and non-monogamy, which, as I’ve said before, are underrated for top 20% RP guys.

Women want guys who make more money than they do, but if you’re a guy who makes more money you are also putting a lot of it at risk: “Women are far more likely to want out of their marriages than men. Among divorcees, 55 percent of women said they wanted their marriages to end more than their spouses, while only 29 percent of men reported the same.” So there’s a paradox: guys who want to marry often can’t because women won’t take their broke selves, while guys who don’t want to marry because they have too much to lose are often most sought by women.

Don’t get married. I’ve said it a million times before and will keep saying it till guys wise up. If you absolutely must must must must get married, do it after age 35 and after at least 50+ partners. Otherwise you just don’t know women. You might think you know women, but you don’t. When I was 21 I was like, “I’m such a stud, I’ve banged chicks, I know it all.”

I didn’t know shit.

I still don’t know that much. But from talking to a lot of guys, it’s apparent that I know more than the average guy. Which isn’t very much.

There is much more to this book than I’ve written here and I recommend it to all guys who want a better view of what’s happening. Regnerus doesn’t go all the way RP but he’s damned close.

Someone is lying: The new Elon Musk biography and the supposed 22-year-old virgin actress

ElonMuskBioThe Elon Musk biography is totally worth reading. One excerpt is published publicly. You should only read it to understand and maybe emulate Elon Musk’s insane work ethic (though not necessarily in the same domains: if guys emulated Musk’s work ethic but devoted their time to game, they’d be getting laid like Hugh Hefner). Musk’s is the ultimate purpose-driven life.

So far so good. You should not, however, emulate Musk’s approach to women. One part of the book consists of lies: Lies a hot actress told to Musk or Ashlee Vance, or lies Musk told to Vance, or lies that Vance picked up from somewhere else, and they show that Vance or Musk or both are naive about women.

Talulah Riley, who Musk married, divorced, and re-married, is described in the book as “a twenty-two-year-old up-and-coming actress,” and she was at a London club called “Whiskey Mist” when she met Musk. Vance says, “Musk and Riley sat at a table with their friends but immediately zeroed in on each other.” “The older Musk, meanwhile, took on the role of the soft-spoken, sweet engineer.” Being a “soft-spoken, sweet engineer” is not good, although if you’re a millionaire many times over and decently good looking you might be able to get away with it.

That night, apparently according to Riley’s description, she “allowed Musk to place his hand on her knee.” She’d allegedly “been living at home with parents” until the week before she met Musk. Do you buy it? I don’t.

After their second or third date, the two went to Musk’s hotel room, and “Musk told Riley, a virgin, that he wanted to show her his rockets.” Until she became engaged to Musk, Vance writes that “Riley had been a model daughter up to that point, never giving her parents much of anything to worry about.”

I don’t believe it. Women who aren’t highly sexual don’t become actresses. That being said, Vance says Riley is “a lifelong teetotaler.” It may be that Riley is one of those “oral and anal don’t count” women who do exist and sometimes exist for a weirdly long time. It’s rarely a good idea to understate a woman’s ability to lie to herself; the easiest way to lie to others is to believe the lie. But I’m skeptical even of that. I think someone is just sucker, although I’m not sure who.

Someone is lying and we just don’t know who or how. Riley being a virgin is ridiculous. Riley pitching herself as such makes total sense.

The book describes how Musk and Riley married and divorced, and Riley gives this reason for their first divorce: “I just wasn’t happy. I thought maybe I had made the wrong decision for my life.” She says she returned to Musk because of the “lack of viable alternatives. I looked around, and there was no one else nice to be with. Number two is that Elon doesn’t have to listen to anyone in life. No one. He doesn’t have to listen to anything that doesn’t fit into his worldview.” The idea that there is no one else “nice” for a gorgeous 20-something is ridiculous and yet Vance seems to believe it or believe it enough to repeat it. There may be no one else “rich” and “famous” who is willing or foolish enough to wife her up.

More likely: most rich, famous guys figure out what’s going on with women and aren’t dumb enough to fall for the shit Musk, despite his epic business and technical achievements, falls for. Musk is a genius in some domains and a kindergartener in dating.

Oh, and here’s one other thing: What have you accomplished lately? Vance writes: “Musk has decided that man’s survival depends on setting up another colony on another planet and that he should dedicate his life to making this happen.”

Sometimes I think I’ve accomplished a lot. Then I read about guys like Elon Musk and get serious perspective. Sure, I know more about women than him. But in most other domains he’s impossibly far beyond me.

Between the time I first wrote this and now, Musk has supposedly started dating domestic violence accuser Amber Heard. Stupid, stupid, stupid. This guy knows everything about technology and nothing about women.