Game and group sex are many things, but boring isn’t among them

Game and group sex, conceived of as hobbies, are rarely (and arguably never) boring. The spikes and crashes are very affecting, creating a lot of turmoil as one succeeds beautifully but also fails hideously. The subject comes up because of:

Marc Andreessen: I think people forget how boring things were before the internet. People really like to be into things. People like to have thing, something that isn’t just like go to work, come home, go to work the next day, change the baby’s diaper today, change the baby’s diaper tomorrow… people like to have a thing.

If you go back thousands of years the thing was the gods, the tribe, the family, whatever cult you were in. If you progress through to the last 2000 years people got super into the big religions, Protestantism, Catholicism, Judaism, Islam and so forth. The rise of mass media, they got super into movies, media, and then some fringe political movements and actual cults. People got super into Scientology. But they were kind of these big movements, and a lot of other people were in them. It was never that distinctive or original to be Catholic or something. It was a marker of identity but it wasn’t a marker of uniqueness in the way that modern man looks for.

There used to be a term for activities that people would do to pass the time before the internet. The term has almost completely died and the term is “hobby.” People used to have hobbies. When I was a kid it was like “what do you do when you get home from work or school, you have a hobby.” And if you remember what hobbies were when I was a kid, it was like stamp and coin collecting. [laughs] It was like ham radio, wood-working. Maybe there were a few people who were into wood-working or stamp collecting and after the first couple months, it’s like “ok it’s just a bunch of stamps in a book, this is boring, onto the next thing.”

The internet has just killed hobbies. They’re dead, all gone, the concept doesn’t even exist. It’s funny, the concept of having a hobby died at the same time as the concept of “going online” was introduced, which is a phrase you heard constantly from 1994-2005. You would get home at night and you would go online. The big internet company in the 1990s was actually America Online; this was a big deal, Americans could go online. And starting in the mid-2000s Americans stopped going online because we’re now online all the time. The idea of not being online now is a weird thing.

Hobbies died when everybody went online. So what replaced hobbies? And to your point, what replaced hobbies was basically internet movements. The benign way to put it would be internet communities, the somewhat more intense way to put it would be internet cults, right? Now what are people into? They’re not into stamp or coin collecting. They’re into socialism online or MAGA or QAnon, or the Trump Russia conspiracy or bitcoin or Elon…

Richard: That sounds awful! [laughing] Compared to socialism or MAGA or QAnon or wokeness and Russiagate, stamp collecting sounds like an improvement!?

Marc: Yeah yeah yeah! But I’d say literally that’s what’s happening. You could paint a picture of that and say these are destructive things and everybody is crazy and all that stuff. You could also say it’s not boring! Things were pretty boring, things were pretty dull. And actually, this would be a right-wing argument. One of the right-wing arguments is that man is simply not meant to be an atomized economic function. Man is not optimized to literally be like a drone, just drifting along the waves of history and to not have a principled position on where he should stand, and not have a sense of identity on something greater than himself, a connection to community and society and all these things.

Having been in longer relationships with women, the longer and deeper relationships can feel stable and comforting, but they’re often boring, too. That’s why chicks are constantly hassling their boyfriends for expensive, out-of-country vacations, because the chick is bored and needs entertainment (which chicks derive almost exclusively from men).

Game is rarely boring though it can be alienating… alienating, because it can facilitate many short-term, shallow relationships, and those come at the expense of long-term relationships. For almost all of human history, virtually all relationships were long term… it should not surprise us that a sudden change to numerous, short-term, successive relationships is jarring to our psychology. In my own life I’ve been in long-term relationships and felt the call of the wild. 

Consensual non-monogamy, which is a primary topic of the work you are reading now, tries to be both exciting (new sex partners!) but also grounding (you can have new sex partners while having a primary relationship)… so, you can do some relationship building and some stranger-sex having. This ties into the Internet because “online” of course organizes and facilitates game and non-monogamy: game, in something like its modern form, comes about from guys networking online to trade ideas about how to seduce and f**k chicks. Non-monogamy has gotten more popular because people interested in having intense sex experiences can now find one another, which wasn’t practical pre-Internet. Strangers can go on dates, and a bunch of strangers can converge on a spot for meetups and sex. The Internet facilitates niche interests and communities: it helps people become more extreme, by letting us create mutual reinforcement loops. Whether this is “good” or “bad” probably depends on the community and topic… but it does mean that things like game and group sex can happen.

I disagree with Marc A. in that internet movements didn’t replace hobbies for most people: instead, most people are passively scrolling social media. Maybe that is “the” hobby, but I think of hobbies as being active. It’s easier than ever to learn how to lift weights, but the average person is fatter than ever. Information about how to get laid is easier to acquire than ever but most guys don’t seem to care, preferring, it seems, pr0n and video games, letting the machine become a substitute for the real. The social media thing is so bad that I developed bits about how Instagram is lame, and I’ll use those bits on dates, and the girls will usually agree, and some will even agree that they should stop… but they often say they “can’t.” Sex parties forbid cell phone use, which give them a very “in the moment” feel compared to most of what passes for social life today, in which people are maybe 30% in the moment and 70% waiting for something to happen on their phones. Seriously, talk to girls about what their phones are like, and if you’re close to the girl, you’ll see that she gets like 10 notifications per minute… she is incapable of thinking about anything for more than a few minutes without her phone going off. On some level she knows that’s bad, but she mostly won’t stop herself. And, if she’s hot, she doesn’t need to.

It could be that, before the Internet, a lot of people had sex for lack of anything else to do. Now it’s a more affirmative choice, so there’s less of it, because we can watch other people get laid on Netflix instead. A lot of people choose boring.

Action matters, yet we’ve lost the habit of action. The problem today is almost never a shortage of access or information. We are most often our own worst enemy. 

Unwifeable, a memoir, by Mandy Stadtmiller

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mandy’s memoir is red pill in another package,

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

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

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

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

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

Boredom = death

Boredom = death, when it comes to chicks that is. This chick is f**king some guy who is nice but boring, “We had sex. He’s always very tender. It’s always slow and nice. I can come easily, so I always orgasm, but I can’t say it’s from his moves, which are pretty green.” Plus, he’s weak, if you translate from chick-speak, “He’s just so kind and thoughtful. Which brings me to my one hesitation about Ben … Sometimes I worry I’m not excited enough by him.”

This guy needs to both up his game and find a chick with slightly lower SMV. The woman just broke up with a doctor she names Drew, “When Drew and I were together, we would go away most weekends. I was always dying to be with him. Like, panting for him. With Ben, it couldn’t be more opposite. I feel Zen. I wouldn’t call it ‘blah’; it’s more like calm.” She knows her SMV is at risk from aging, “He was a resident, and she was one of the nurses. This happened a year ago, when I turned 30. It killed me. It still kills me. Sometimes at work I look at his Instagram page and try to analyze it. Is he with the nurse?”, but she doesn’t act that way. Probably his nurse is a little younger and also more economically functional.

The chick in the story is probably not a good earner, “Work was tedious. I had to present a bunch of new products to the owner of the shop, who is nice but intense. She had a lot of questions. I was not my best self. Get me home to bed!”, and “Drew” knows it. I have said this in various places, but when it comes to long-term relationships, the chick’s qualities aside from “hot” and “willing” become important. Seduction advice focuses on the short term, but for longer term relationships a woman’s qualities outside her rack, her backside, and her oral skills gain in importance. The chick in the story doesn’t seem like she has much of anything that contributes to the household apart from her p***y. That’s fine for short-term, but for a lot of guys p***y is, if not a commodity, then available, and character, earning, cooking, etc. are not. Guys look for “full package,” and “Drew” was either bored of her, or looking at a more functional woman, or could be both.

It’s strange to me that more women are not working to move themselves out of the “commodity p***y” and into the “special girl” category. This woman is not doing that, and she’s suffering because of it. Feminism has set up a highly competitive sexual marketplace, and many women have not properly internalized this fact either.

Lesson for guys is simple, don’t be f**king boring, and if you are, a lot of chicks who are on the younger and hotter side of things will next you.

I have some non-mainstream methods of not being boring.