Red Pill Dad realizes that “almost everyone is doing online dating (OLD) and banging low quality chicks and then bragging about it… no one really wants to learn day game or cold approach.”  Well yes, and think of it this way, literally how many girls are true 7s in the entire world? The true 7s are almost always somewhere between their mid teens and mid 30s, call it 18 – 30, for legal purposes. A few 7s can persist into their early 40s, although that’s rare. A lot of girls drop from their true 7 potential into 5 or 6 territory due to poor nutrition and fitness. The number of true 8s, in the entire world, is not that high, probably a few percent of the female population, and every guy from puberty to senescence wants to bang them. They have a level of “privilege” that the male classes, who are busy working building and struggling, carrying the burden of civilization, can barely imagine, because we’re too busy toiling to try and keep a roof over the head and maybe impress the few hot chicks we’re ever exposed to (“f**king hot chicks” is a fine reason to stay in school, one not adequately emphasized). Continue reading “Pickup is hard, and top girls don’t stay that way for long, and musings on networks”
Almost every male and female in a modern dating context is doing some form of a dance: women want an escalator relationship towards marriage, and men want to avoid committing for a long as possible. Men enjoy the pre-label part of the relationship and women get value and security out of the label. Breeze’s post and Nash/RQ’s comments brought up some interesting points about this age-old topic: should a guy get out in front of things and confront the inevitable and have the talk, or should you avoid the talk and build tension, as Nash suggests? I strongly side with RQ and Lucas Bly, but Nash’s comments added another distinction. I’ve heard many in TRP communities argue that those who have the talk aren’t skilled, can’t hold tension, and are essentially pussies for giving in to what the woman wants and losing the frame. But Nash’s comment that he offers up, “I am your lover” made me realize we all might actually be agreeing here.
There’s value in building and holding tension, but only if it is inevitably released. Good standup is setup, punchline, build tension, release tension, and good seduction should have a similar cadence. Those who say you can avoid “the talk” altogether come off as those that haven’t spent much time around women and are LARPing. The talk is inevitable, so how can we approach it from a Red Pill frame. We have to lead. Create the frame, and let her step into it.
TRQ has a great post on the book Warrior King Magician Lover. Continue reading “XBTUSD’s take on “the talk” a woman gives when she wants to advance the relationship”
“Mr Non-Monogamous, Part 1 – The Unexpected Date” is from an older woman’s dating journal, and it’s about a guy who’s figured out pretty much what I’ve figured out… Lucy is older, verging on being a spinster, so she is very unapproving of men with lots of options, but read through the bile and you’ll see that the fellow, Charlie, has figured out that non-monogamy can work,
What the actual fuck is it with all these guys wanting to be in ‘Open Relationships’? Pretending to be all enlightened, all shary and sex-positive and forward-thinking, when really it’s just them wanting to stick their dicks into as many women as possible. It’s total, shameless, greedy fuckboyery, is what it is. At least in the past men had the decency to try to hide it if they wanted to bone a string of different women. Today it seems being a cheating arsehole is now a ‘lifestyle choice’.
No need to pretend enlightenment, but if you want “to stick your dick into as many women as possible” and “bone a string of different women” non-monogamy can be a functional frame in order to achieve those ends.
Charlie is “completely open about his relationship status, and he’s clearly very interested in her. Which, even coming from a total man-whore, is super flattering,” so he has that advantage… although merely being into a younger and hotter woman will often not be that flattering to her because everyone is into her. He has decent moves and is not a p***y, as so many men are today (so chicks tell me…), “he kisses her again, harder, grabbing her hair firmly at the back of her head and leaning fully into the kiss. Assertive, dominating, determined. This is a man who knows what he wants and is used to getting it. It’s insanely sexy.”
She seems to take too long to lay, IMO, but, whatever, the most notable piece of the story is the guy, who has figured out what I have figured out and what you, if you have been reading here long enough, have also figured out. It’s still surprising to me that, apart from Blackdragon and now a few others, like Yoylo, more guys haven’t incorporated this frame and these ideas into their game. I have heard it said that more chicks are putting “no poly” or “no swingers” on their online dating profiles (always ignore the profile claims about her not being a slut or whatever), so these practices must be spreading.
XBTUSD has a follow-up post, which will make sense in the context of his earlier post.
TRQ asked about my first experience with non monogamy where I was with a girl who was not my partner.
I started to move into ethical non-monogamy (ENM) by changing the structure of the “dating” phase of relationships. Where I live, everyone assumes everyone is seeing/fucking other people until an explicit define the relationship (DTR) conversation happens. A clock starts running when you know that past a certain point, even though it was not made explicit, if your girl found out you were sleeping with another girl, she’d be angry even if technically she had no right to be (girls don’t readily accept emotional contracts). I started making the implicit contract we all sign (when we start dating people) explicit. I’d tell girls right from the starting point (first date) that I only wanted to be in non-monogamous relationships and that I didn’t want to be in any sort of committed relationship at the current moment. I like to call most relationships with an implicit contract “escalator” relationships: men know that once they start dating a girl the clock starts ticking and the girl will try and move you up the escalator as quickly as possible:
non exclusive → exclusive → meet friends → boyfriend → meet family → move in → marriage → children
Women compete for status by their ability to extract resources from high status men, and therefore it’s socially desirable to compare where they are in the relationship escalator with their friends, and in turn men throughout the years have come up with every possible way to drag their feet and slow this process. Women lose status when they can’t get you to the next step in a socially acceptable amount of time because time is the most precious resource a woman has. In the same way companies have “title” inflation to keep dumb millennials around without paying them more, men have used “title” inflation in a relationship context to keep women around longer by giving them new titles that come with no true concessions and resource investments on our part. Amongst Gen Z “exclusive” but not in a relationship is now a thing?
How can you exit this whole maddening structure? Give women the information, let them take responsibility for their choices. Rather than living in the world of don’t ask don’t tell about the other people we all know we’re seeing, I started being explicit about exactly what women could expect from me, and it was life changing. In many ways, I wasn’t doing anything that different than anyone else does when dating where I live, I was just being candid about it.
The first true extra partner experience I had once I was in a committed non monogamous relationship was actually initiated by my girlfriend (we can call her Sarah). Sarah had the highest sex drive of anyone I had ever been with, and was very sexually open. We had talked about having a threesome with a girl but she had said she wasn’t attracted to girls. She was a big drinker, and generally (like most people) became much wilder when she was drinking. One night I was at a big outdoor EDM show, rolling (MDMA) with a big crew of people and her and one of my female friends (Corey) just started making out. Corey was married to another friend of mine (Andrew). Andrew and I chatted and agreed we were both down to have a foursome. We went back to our place and had the standard hetero foursome where everyone fucks but the two dudes don’t touch each other at all. Andrew was cool with it but was slightly nervous so a lot of it was Corey and Sarah hooking up and us watching. I felt no fear/disgust/nervousness but rather was super turned on by the whole thing. I think a big part of it was that I knew everyone so well. It was hard to imagine feeling threatened by the interaction. A week later we all got together and debriefed and everyone agreed they had a great time. No latent jealousy, misunderstandings etc. Continue reading “XBTUSD on his first non-monogamy experiences”
Girls don’t seem to be coming out on dates, although it seems that most people ages 18 – 40 are either asymptomatic or have relatively short or minor disease progressions. What’s going on?
I think most chicks are wise to avoid going out with new guys, for the most part. 1. It’s true that the fatality rate for people under age 50 or 60 seems to be very low. But. 2. Some larger number people under that age have a long and miserable course of disease, with lots of coughing, lung pain, and difficulty sleeping. We don’t know the true percentage yet. It looks like it’s low (we can see that from the USS Theodore Roosevelt, where there have been or are at least 940 confirmed cases so far), but we aren’t sure yet. Furthermore, 3. lots of people interact with parents and elderly relatives… myself included… and I’d like not to be the vector for their demise, as would most girls. 4. Lots of girls in their 20s have moved back in with their parents, and those girls have left the big cities where they typically congregate in order to pursue sexual adventures with adventurous men. 5. Most girls who are at least a high 6 have a couple of background guys as insurance… any girl with a brain has picked one to be her “quarantine buddy.” Yeah, her quarantine f**k buddy. Her sexual adventurism is at low ebb… for good reasons IMO. The risk of meeting random new guys is much higher than it was. How high? We don’t know yet. She’s already gotten one of her background guys to be her mainstay for the next few months, so she’s not on dating apps if she can avoid it.
Most guys are familiar with one-on-one dating, and models for players doing one-on-one dating are widely available. The skills learned in one-on-one dating apply to two-on-two dating. Simple ones include avoiding politics; searching for common ground; understanding hopes, dreams, and aspirations; listening more than speaking (if possible); having stories to share (if possible); etc. All the stuff from How to Win Friends and Influence People, as well as many other books. It’s also helpful to gauge the experience level of the other couple, cause if they’re highly experienced, it’s easy to accelerate towards sex. If they’ve never done a “full swap” (the men have sex with each other’s woman), go more slowly, take more time, and let them ramp up towards it.
There are two critical parts to two-on-two dating: your girl has to be devoted to being on the same team as you are. In addition, she has to be willing to help you succeed with another couple.
Lots of couples with a bi girl in the mix will hunt for a single girl. Single, attractive girls are called “unicorns” for a reason. They can be found, but demand far outstrips supply.
Some of the guys who read here are learning the non-monogamy ropes; most of this is in the book, but I thought I’d excerpt it here for whoever is curious. The person whose Twitter DM inspires it, knows who he is.
Couple-to-couple dating usually happens when contact details are swapped at a party, or when a couple finds each other online (it’s also useful to watch for a guy who tries to get your girl’s contact info: if he does, just tell him that you handle dates). If you’ve met at a party, regular phone numbers or email addresses are typically used. As of this writing, most people online seem to have Kik accounts; people like Kik accounts because they’re relatively anonymous, though I’m sure that the company could be subpoenaed for information about the person behind the pseudonym.
Couples from parties are, in me experience, more reliable and less likely to flake, but some will. First dates are not unlike regular first dates, except harder to coordinate, because they require the schedules of four people to mesh, not just two people. They’re also more likely to end in sex, if everything goes well.
If your girl is aligned with you, it’s useful to evaluate the other couple, even if they already meet your looks threshold. For example, if the guy is a blowhard, or doesn’t show reciprocity, or is disrespectful of you, your girl, or his girl, it’s time to leave. In normal dates, it’s somewhat common to fight through some amount of female bad behavior, much of which may just be a shit test, but if you see bad or indifferent behavior, it’s time to bail. Some girls will come out on dates at the behest of their primary partner, but if she seems bored or uninterested, it’s time to run: she will probably not want actual sex.
Some guys will also pretend to have a girl, then show up to a couples date alone, saying that his girl is out of town. When that happens, leave, obviously.
Remember the fundamental rule of sex clubs: value-for-value. Guys only bring value if they bring a hot chick with them. In normal, 1:1 dating, “value-for-value” is a little bit different, as the guy is assessing the chick’s physical attractiveness and sanity, while the chick is also assessing the guy’s physical attractiveness and sanity, but she’s also assessing a lot more about his social world, his emotional world, his dominance/prestige, etc. Guys who attempt to “give” too much value in the form of paying for expensive dinners, giving gifts prematurely, etc. are actually demonstrating lower value. With 2:2 dating, the value proposition is about two guys bringing two hot chicks to the situation.
There are a fair number of “pic hunters” or “pic collectors” online, and for that reason I’m reluctant to send nudes in advance, in most cases. Sometimes, if the vibe is good, I will, but I minimize that by saying that we prefer to meet each other in person.
It’s good to think of yourself as a guest in someone else’s relationship, and for them to think of themselves as a guest in your relationship. If they don’t conduct themselves appropriately, it’s time to end the interaction. Interaction problems are especially common among new couples who have no social script to follow, and in new couples it’s common for one person to be more excited about non-monogamy than the other person, leading to conflict. That conflict may be submerged at first but will emerge the closer the evening gets to sex. At clubs, I have seen guys start crying the first time they see their partners have sex with someone else, and I’ve seen the same from women. Most people don’t know how they’re going to react, which is why doing this while married or cohabitating is so dangerous for novices.
If this seems over-explained, imagine trying to explain conventional dating, in full, both the subtext and context, to someone who’s never done it before. The basic idea seems simple, but the complexities are sufficient to fill numerous books (most bad, like The Rules) and be the subject of endless gossip. I’m trying to prepare guys for most eventualities.
I spent some time doing two-on-two dating, but I make minimal effort in that domain. If I’m on the market, I’ll typically give one or two apps or websites a look once a week. Today, Feeld is probably the most common app, followed by OKCupid. SwingLifeStyle.com used to be the most common site, but its dated feel dissuades most couples in their 20s. I’ve heard people discuss SDC.com. By the time you read this, some other apps or websites may be common; the dating world changes fast enough that what’s true today may not be true tomorrow.
It’s typically bad form for opposite-sex individuals to contact one another directly. That is, it’s common for guys to talk to each other to make arrangements, for groups of all four people to talk, and for girls to talk to each other, but when a guy contacts the other couple, it’s typically for surreptitious one-on-one sex. Players know that, usually, the most difficult time moving a girl to sex is the first time. After the first time, the guy doesn’t “count” as a new guy, so the girl is much more pliant. Even guys who can’t articulate the situation like this are aware of it, so after a couple-to-couple swap, a fair number of guys will try to arrange sex. That’s where your girl should tell you, “Hey, Joe just texted me to meet up one-on-one.” Then you can either tell Joe to f**k off, or you can ask his girl if they’re also dating separately.
This is a game theory problem. In a two-couple, four-person situation, there are strong reasons to defect, for the sake of the sexual novelty. But a hot chick brings automatic value to the situation, so it’s usually bad practice and bad game to let her go sleep with another guy, one-on-one, with no reciprocity.
Finally, a word on flaking. With a typical, one-on-one date, there are only two possible flaking parties. With a two-on-two date, that number increases to four. Beyond that math, many more people are attracted to the idea of consensual non-monogamy than are ready to execute the idea. In many couples, one party will be far more into it than the other, so the one party will get online, create a profile, start chatting, set up dates, etc., only to have the other party veto the whole thing at the last minute.
In addition, some couples like the idea of consensually f**king other people in theory, but when the moment of turning theory into practice arrives, they no longer like it so much. Flaking and ghosting online typically care no consequences, so people are more willing to engage in bad behavior. Expect a lot of flaking in this domain.
When a couple flakes, I’ll sometimes shoot them an email about the next sex club I’m going to and when I’ll be there. They can show up, or not. This might sound like a waste of time to players used to the normal dating world, but sometimes a couple I’ve interacted with online will show up four or six months later and be down for a great swap. The cost to me is low: I have a list of potential couples on email, kik, and text; I send them all the notice a week or two before the event or club night; and then if they show up, great, and if not, I’m not out much. If the girl is ugly or my girl doesn’t like the guy, we can be polite, say hi, and then fade into the background or move on to other couples. For some couples, the email or text saying, we’re going to the ____ Adult Club, is sufficient to get them off their asses. Others never show, and that’s life. Online life is flakier than real life.
There’s one club in particular where I’m somewhat known (and popular) for bringing in newbies, because I’ll use the above strategy. Couples can debate among themselves whether they want to show up or not. If they cancel two hours before the date, which is sadly common, my girl and I don’t care.
It’s not worth taking flaking seriously: assume you’ll see more flaking rather than less. I don’t spend a lot of time chit-chatting online. After two or three exchanges, I propose a time and place to meet. If they can do it, great. If not, I move on, and I’ll keep them around for party invites. Enough quality chicks and couples have shown up after six months of invites for me to keep up the practice.
A fun red pill story about a 41-year-old single mom doing online “dating” (really: attention seeking)… she says that she has “to really like someone to make time for him right now”…
While my kids play by themselves in their room, I swipe through Tinder and Bumble. One guy asks if I want to sit six feet away from each other and have tea. It’s a charming idea, but I have to really like someone to make time for him right now. This guy doesn’t make the cut.
But, also, she says “Men without kids are very quick to dismiss women with kids”…
I text the therapist to see if he wants to reschedule. I think he’s going to ghost me. Men without kids are very quick to dismiss women with kids. I have to work twice as hard to prove to someone that I’m half as cool as their other prospects.
The author of course doesn’t see that her having “to really like someone to make time” is the female side of guys without kids being “quick to dismiss women with kids.” She is doing to men the same exact thing she is complaining about men doing to her. She is doing Facetime “dates.” I’d call them “attention-seeking endeavors.”…
I wait for him to FaceTime. It rings. He’s there. He’s cute, and he’s made himself a turkey sandwich. Unfortunately, he’s got a high voice. It’s actually kind of squeaky. I can’t with the voice … but it’s a fun break from my day.
A high, squeaky voice, and so he’s out. She’s quick to dismiss a guy because she doesn’t like his voice. Her ex husband is her ex because “Aside from being a great provider, and a pretty good dad, he’s let me down in many ways. He can be very emotionally distant, and he’s not particularly nice to me.” “Emotionally distant.” WTF does that mean? She lives in Tribeca, a ritzy, expensive part of New York. He lives a few blocks away She probably married a rich guy with options because she liked the security of his job… but he had options… and he exercised them. “Rich” is really rich… like millions… but her money… it’s not enough… “I’m feeling lonely. It’s such a cliché, but during this scary time, it would be nice to have someone to hold me.” She’s lonely but can’t/won’t take the actions necessary to get away from loneliness.
My guess is that she’s seeking attention from men who are as lonely as she is and hornier, and that she’ll sleep with her coparent again. Tinder failed last time I tried it. I can see the appeal, while daygame is dead, of trying online and doing a direct-to-apartment date appeal to girls to try smoking out some of the horny ones. “Facetime dates” seem retarded to me. Maybe a short 10-minute Facetime call makes sense… “let’s move to Facetime and see if we like each other.” Ten minutes there. Chit-chat, a little game, ask her over, move on if she’s a no. Women know there’s a surfeit of men to sponge attention from and men are happy to provide.
I link to a lot of these sex diary stories by women cause women are so damn red pill it’s funny. Their self-awareness is ultra low. Regular readers know that chicks are random. Probably that is a key game takeaway, especially for guys getting started or coming off bad streaks. I have had 6s and even 5s act like I am a cretin when I have flirted with them… girls who affected an air of being above my station… and I have had 8s who act like they are lucky that I am willing to f**k them… the difference is often in the chicks, not in me.
If you are trying online and want to write up a field report about it, do it and send it in. I bet daygame works great when this is over. Massive party.
In “where spinsters come from” series, this woman, who is already 32, gets a good place
Being single the past couple of years has made it easy for me to make decisions like picking up and moving to Europe. I enjoy the thrill of sleeping with someone new and I think more is more when it comes to sexual partners. That said, I would love to get married at some point in the next few years. But right now, I at least would like to form some genuine connections.
Packing up and moving to a foreign country, likely temporarily, is an awful place to develop the social structure and social life that encourages marriage. F**king randoms is great, and I’ve done it a lot, but it’s also terrible prep for marriage, particularly for women. This woman has already passed her peak fertility level and thinks that some guy is going to come along to wife her up the day she’s finally ready. Who knows, maybe some guy will (there are plenty of guys who will do dumb sh*t), but reading this is like watching a guy claim he’s serious about getting in the game while he stuffs Doritos in his mouth and picks up the gaming system controller. Actions and stated beliefs/desires are very different.
It’s kinda sad seeing delusion in action but it’s also informative. She sounds like a right good time though. Guys who are interested in monogamy also have to remember that they’re pushing against every female-centric clickbait website in the world that’s pushing a “you go girl” and “f**k around” narrative.
Festivals, concerts, the parties that go with them… I read almost no guys writing about them online. So… let’s talk about what happens, within my limitations, because I don’t have a lot of experience with music festivals and concerts, since they don’t match my personality properly… but I know people who do these things and can infer their power. I think the guys who get laid the most, with the hottest chicks, develop a network or ecosystem of people… the people who go usually have friends or make friends, and I think a lot of them have access to drugs that make them more open to meeting people (including chicks) and to offer access, just by starting with basics like, “What have you seen tonight?” “Are you girls rolling or what?”
Also, exposure is one way to get chicks. If you see a chick at two or three different venues, a logical open is, “Did you see at [place]? I think so.” Even a little bit of familiarity can pry open a closed chick. I have seen guys at parties just go by and say “Hey, what’s up?” to almost everyone they see at a party… then next time they’re like, “Hey did I see you at [venue]?” They’re planting lots of seed. At festivals with thousands of people this works less well but even among festival people I think the same faces will show up again and again.
Most importantly, many girls are in a flirtatious and open frame of mind… outside of their “everyday” mode. Party drugs (ecstasy, molly) can make people open to doing things they might not do otherwise. Some chicks like coke. That seems like less a sex/love drug and more of a… I don’t know what to call it.
The best people seem to have good logistics and things like afterparties planned and ready to go. The guys who do really well here seem to have broad, shallow networks. They meet lots of people (men and women), collect lots of numbers, and then keep in contact with people and facilitate connections. Many guys will have lists of girls and ask “Are you going to yyy venue/party this weekend?” Sometimes the hookup happens there, sometimes on a date after, etc. Lots of girls fall away… but the power of the network is high. Because it’s about the network and a momentum strategy, most guys aren’t going to show up and get laid… they are going to need to learn the world and the world’s rules, and meet some of the people in it. The winners building winning systems.
Drugs… are dangerous. They can be addictive. It is fine to like them but awful to need them. The other problem with drugs, apart from addiction, is that they destroy a lot of time. Many people after molly/ecstasy need like 48 hours or longer to recover. Alcohol is like this too of course. But if you come to rely on these things or do them too much, they will compromise your other goals in terms of fitness, finance, career, etc. I have seen men and women turning 30, 35, whatever, and realizing that their life consists of a series of parties and drug experiences and sex experiences, but… there is not much to show for it.
Most lives need balance. If you are compromising your other goals… you will suffer for it… the quality of your life, family, career, and development will suffer for it. Drugs can be an aid to reaching other people but they can also be very destructive. It’s also easy to get into dangerous credit card debt and have your financial life fall apart.
One thing… I have been at the outskirts of these worlds sometimes… and I can see their power but also their selection bias. The chicks in them are selected for being sex-positive s**ts. So other girls… may become unavailable to you or just less interesting. But some of them… are also good.
Sometimes in real life I’m really attracted to chicks I wouldn’t find appealing online. And that’s true of chicks too. Real life has seduction/feedback/eye contact mechanisms lacking online. We’ve spent our whole evolutionary history evaluating each other in the real world, and like 20 years evaluating each other online… then we are surprised when problems emerge from online.
Guys writing pickup material were almost all social retards for most or all of their lives (a lot still are). They are introverts trying to work with their introversion. Their loner nature limits their social networks. So the things normal guys do for girlfriends and sex, don’t apply to most of the pickup guys. Because of their personalities, they’re blind or semi blind to some types of ecosystems.
These guys doing festivals etc. also have compelling pics, often with pretty girls, and use those to judiciously seed social media accounts. The average guy who spends his days playing video games, watching porn, etc., doesn’t have any of that visual social proof. He literally doesn’t spend enough time with women to understand them properly. His weaknesses are a kind of reverse Matthew Effect. As he gets weaker, he gets weaker, instead of stronger.
Also… if you meet real women… most of them are not like the resentniks online say they are. Yes, there are some bad ones. Yes, many of them will take free value if it’s offered to them (as many guys do). Most of them… are struggling. In ways different from the ways a lot of guys suffer, but not that different. Talk to them enough and you will see their struggle.
There are many good things about pickup seduction and red pill guys. There are also some blindspots, like with any movement/ideology. I want to talk about their positives but I also want to surface some of the blindspots. The world is huge and any person’s place in it tiny. We all mistake our realities for reality.
I’m not 100% sure how to get a guy totally outside the festival/concert/etc. scenes, into them. Just start going? Ask your friends (you have some of them, right?) to go? On this blog I often talk about how to get antisocial loser newbies going (example), but this is one area where I’m not sure how to do that.
One thing to ask is what value you’re bringing. Are you ripped? Do you set up photobooths? Do you have drug connections? Do you make connections among different people? Do you have an afterparty set up and ready to go? Guys should ask these questions and have good answers for them. Chicks bring value just by showing up and being hot. Guys… should try to answer this question. Just being there is okay but I think the better guys go past this.
In-person meetings are just more powerful and immediate than online meetings… online used to work… now everyone is online and it doesn’t. A common theme of my writing is that guys with good sex lives have good social lives. Usually that means minimizing the modern online bullshit of video games, TV, and social media. Top guys develop skills and abilities and social lives that are consistent with getting laid. This is why so much of the seduction conversation is hard… it’s almost never one single thing that gets guys laid… it’s a bunch of things. I have been trying to explain the things I do and I have realized that it’s not one thing, it’s a bundle of things.
Exceptional effort (that is effective) = exceptional results.
Like everything else in life.
Some recent experiences have me thinking about this (I hadn’t been able to capture this facet orf what I do until those experiences). And just observing the world around me. Almost no guy I know seems to have gotten the best sex life just via online. Maybe the ones who are super attractive and don’t need it that much.
Even within game… the best conversations are happening outside public spaces. I didn’t understand that when I started writing this blog, the best insights wouldn’t be posted publicly, they’d come from chats, emails, etc. If you are only living on the public side of the game world, you’re missing out.
Ho boy, “The Beauty Exec Fantasizing About the Single Dad Next Door” conforms so well to Red Pill stereotype and doctrine… it does as much as “My friend ‘Anna’” does not… the writer is 43, divorced, two kids, f**king around, she states she wants a relationship, but, “Why is it that the nicer the apartment, the less I like the guy?” Probably cause really rich guys are often compensating for lack of personality and/or bedroom skills. This guy also doesn’t have good options, “it makes me feel kind of repulsed how into me he is. I should be thrilled. There is nothing not to like about him.” No guy should be that into a 43 year old woman with two kids. This woman knows that his extreme interest is a demonstration of lower value (DLV).
“He’s the kind of guy who really craves family. Again, it makes him pathetic to me.” Because if he craves family with her… he must not be high value… so he turns her off. To her credit, she says, “I adore my kids. They are the two greatest loves of my life.” This is why dating single moms is a bad idea. Their kids will always be first, if they have any character. Find a woman who hasn’t had kids yet and give her the greatest loves of her life. This woman is chasing the hottest men… but also, “My ex had an affair, which is why he’s now my ex. Other than cheating on me (over the course of two years), he was a good husband and a great father.” She probably got a guy who has very high SMV… and those guys… they tend to use their SMV… which she probably knew before she got knocked up by him. An SMV mismatch problem. This woman was probably delusional about her ex and she is delusional about who she might date now.
I’d like to find someone to have a serious relationship with, but that someone has to be amazing. I won’t compromise. I am content with my life as is, so I would rather be alone than with someone I don’t totally fucking worship and adore.
This woman is 43 and… delusional… she has the psychological insight of a teenager, and she thinks she wants a serious relationship but will only consider the guys who will likely disqualify her. She may be content right now, “as is,” but as her SMV fades, whether she keeps up the yoga or not, “I actually hate yoga but I do it for the yoga bod,” her options are going to get worse. She thinks she wants a serious relationship but all of her behaviors and beliefs point in the opposite direction. This is an incoherent woman.
Overall this story matches recent discussion with Mark J,
Red, how much of this do you think is down to location ? Big coastal cities naturally attract younger, hotter, more hypergamous girls. I’m in NYC and de facto assume any girl I am fucking is seeing or at the very least talking to other guys. But if I was in a smaller Midwest city for example I could imagine that being a lot less common.
There is something to this… I said back, “There’s also some sorting going on… if a girl (or guy) wants to be a big slut, she moves to the big city. It’s about the culture of the place but also the people who move there.” The writer above is a sample of being a big city slut, but not being able to acknowledge it.
Short Dancer, maybe the last girl I was in intense love with (while ago now), moved back to her small town and from what I can tell is now dating a guy who is worse than me in pretty much every respect… except that he seems to be willing to commit to her… and that is important to her… more important than I understood at the time… in some ways I was blinded by my own belief system. We all self-deceive. So Short Dancer is willing to turn down a big city experience to make less money, have less excitement, but also to find a guy who is willing to commit to her… and she is very pretty. But she doesn’t seem to be interested in playing the hypergamy game. She is the sort of girl who is probably not going to show up in some Red Pill horror story. Not yet, anyway. When she’s ready to stray… I hope she gets in touch.