The people who pursue and practice and the ones who don’t

I was reading about lifetime sex partner patterns for men and women, and how it is that men can report more lifetime average partners, and a thought bubbled up… most people never systematically improve their skills at sex, seduction, etc., and there’s a really huge gap between those who pursue systematic improvement in almost any domain… and those who do not (most people). Today, guys are lucky to live in a time when the means for systematic improvement are readily available online, which was not true for most of human history. For all the bitching about women and feminism, there has never been a better time in history, fucking EVER, for an average guy to rack up lays, assuming he wants to do that.

The question is whether he both wants to get laid and wants to pursue getting laid in an effective way. There is a really huge gap between people who pursue the game in a disciplined, systematic, effective way, and people who don’t (most guys). Almost no one talks about the role of intentional practice in improving performance, but it is there. I myself have not gone as far as I might in trying to improve my game… I have not, for example, bought wireless mics and recorded cold approaches for later analysis, which is a good way of figuring out what is working and what is not. If you have ever been involved in sales with a telephone component, you have probably recorded your calls in order to make sure you’re not f**king anything up. Then, to maximize your likely success. If you move the needle from a 5% to an 8% success rate, you will still fail most of the time, but you will succeed 62% more than you would have otherwise.

Chicks, of course, don’t have to do things like record and analyze their “sets,” because they’re the buyers, not the sellers, and if they’re smart they know how to improve their own diet, exercise, etc…. things that most chicks don’t bother doing, and it shows.

It’s possible to be an attractive guy with sociable hobbies and a willingness to tolerate rejection and do well at the game almost accidentally, especially when young and in school. But I think a lot of that gap in lifetime lays today is just a question of who perseveres, learns, improves, and keeps improving their game, versus who thinks that some guys are just “naturals” and that there is no possibility of improvement. If you believe you cannot improve, you are right. If you believe you can improve, you are also right.

There’s also more than one way up the game mountain, and guys who find one way blocked should choose alternate routes. Today everyone is online, so that route could be harder than it was five or ten years ago (that is my observation and experience). So maybe cold approach and in-person meeting has become more attractive as the average person’s social skills degrade and the average person becomes more autistic because of excess phone time. The average person is constantly on their phone, so maybe not being on your phone and paying attention to the world around you is a way to pursue an alternative route. Many daygame guys talking online (probably a minority of the guys doing game…) disparage using money as a component of game, but I do believe some guys do that effectively. A guy driven by ego probably doesn’t want to use money as a component, but a guy who is driven by f**king might want to.

Regardless of the way, practice and growth mindset are important and most guys have neither.

Two kinds of women in non-monogamy: The reluctant and the feral

I see a lot of women involved in various ways in non-monogamy, and the most common kind is a bit of a dabbler, and she’s more into forming relationships than hooking up. For this kind of girl, the kind most guys are familiar with, the girl is picky, random, and favors threeways and groups in theory, but she’s basically not that into it. In the right mood with the right situation, she’ll go for it, but more often than not she puts the brakes on things. This kind of girl is common apps, where her boyfriend is really directing things, and she’s just along for the ride… she might authorize some chitchat and send a “naughty” pic or two, but when it comes time to meet the other couple disappear, or something comes up and can they reschedule some other time?, etc. They’re like a lot of chicks players meet… they seem like prospects but fizzle out for reasons internal to them.

This type of girl is basically monogamous at heart, and for that reason she can also be dangerous if you’re cohabitating with her, or if you think you’re in a serious relationship with her… for her, non-monogamy may be a step in the branch-swing process. She finds another guy she likes, probably without the boyfriend’s approval, and because they’ve been to a few sex clubs, it doesn’t count, so why not go on that date with him, see where things lead… then she tells the boyfriend they’ve grown apart and she moves hard on the other guy.

That doesn’t always happen of course, and sometimes she’s just not that into the excitement of other people, so she’ll only be into switching if everything lines up for her (usually it doesn’t).

The other kind of girl is a true slut (in the sex-positive sense of the word) who loves f**king and f**king in groups. Her default answer is yes and her default mode is towards more f**king. This type of girl is rarer, but, if you can find a hot one of this type, she can make an insane, unbelievable partner in the scene. I have met several like this. This type of girl usually also feels limited or no jealousy, or, if she feels jealousy, she gets it f**ked right out of her.

This second type of girl is also the kind of girl who makes the “what’s your number?” questions irrelevant, as you can end up with huge numbers almost inadvertently just by dating around and going to parties with her. Most doors are open to her. She is typically low drama, and far lower drama than the typical chick.

I’m bringing this up only because, before I became intimate with the second type of girl, I don’t think I fully believed she existed. Maybe I kind of, sort of knew that she was out there somewhere, but now I know she exists, and I also know her power… but also her terror, to other women (for she lowering the “market value” of sex, if you will), and to men who secretly want monogamy from their women (many men do, even the superficially sex-positive ones).

I’m going to call this second kind of chick feral, but, again, in a good way (for my purposes, historically).

The tragedy of type two is that she has a lot of trouble acquiring and maintaining a primary partner. Her life also gets much harder for her as she gets older, if she wants a family, as most women (and people) do. The structure of aging is harder for women than for men in general… a guy who keeps building his value can have very high value from age 35 – 45 (although this may not be typical). A guy whose interest shifts from partying to family at age 35 will face a very different world than a woman who does the same (as we’ve all seen, if we’re old enough). Type two, the feral type, may also get used to tons of male attention when she’s in her 20s and early 30s, but she’ll likely see that attention drop over time, especially if she’s doing the typical American diet (full of sugar) and lifestyle (drives everywhere, only physical activity is going to and from the refrigerator).

The tragedy of type one is that she attracts a lot of drama of her own, and she turns down many pleasurable adventures that a more daring girl might enjoy. But, on average, chicks are much more reactive than proactive (this is why they’re rarely the founders of companies and rarely move up the ranks of existing companies) and for most chicks, nothing happens if a guy is not there to encourage it to happen. When I was younger I found this strange, and had a lot of conversations with chicks in which I would say, “Why didn’t you just do [obvious thing]?” and the chick would get huffy and say, “I just didn’t!” I’d try to pin her down on why she didn’t and she’d get huffier and angrier. Now I’m wiser in this regard and know that chicks on average are simply passive, and trying to move them out of a pretty narrow range of behaviors is wasteful, like trying to move a hill with a teaspoon.

Type one goes halfway a lot of the time and then stops… she seems like a promising lead, but she doesn’t go anywhere. In her heart and soul she’s closer to a time-waster than not. Smart players, whether they’re doing the game conventionally or non-monogamously, figure out methods and systems to sort time-wasters from non-time-wasters, the same was mineral extraction people figure out how to separate diamonds from dirt. When you find out you’ve got dirt, not diamonds, dump it and keep mining, while you also keep refining your process.

“The Startling Rise of Choking During Sex”

The Startling Rise of Choking During Sex” is not so startling… the massive success of 50 Shades of Grey demonstrates that women really, really, really, really like rough sex (not all of them, of course, but a whole lot of them). Guys learn to experiment with choking and find that, when done well, the chick enjoys it more and comes harder than she does without it… so the practise spreads… and now it’s mainstream and many chicks are disappointed if they’re not choked during the act. It’s so mainstream that the Atlantic writes about it. It’s more mainstream than dinner dates (most chicks hate dinner dates).

Guys who have read My Secret Garden already know the depths of female fantasy… but most guys just don’t get it, and women flit from guy to guy until they find one who does. To be sure choking can be hazardous and it has to be done deftly, and built up to… but done right, it bonds the chick to you more effectively (like going raw). It’s good to start by playing with her neck a little bit and asking how that feels, then lightly cupping her neck with her hand and seeing her response, and then move up from there. I’m sure lots of teenagers and young dumb guys try to mimic what they see in porn, with bad results that legitimately scare young and inexperienced chicks.

The Internet, amateur porn, game blogs, etc. also let the secret out… that chicks like to be choked. I remember the first time I had a chick put my hand around her throat… before I knew about the game, the forums, the blogs… I was like 23/24, and we were making out against a parked car after drinking at a bar. I was not 100% into her (I can’t recall her name) but didn’t have anything better going on at the time. We were there and then a f**king COP car pulled past us, and I stood back from her (quite a ways). The cop car stopped like half a block away from us and I just talked to her and that sort of thing, wondering WTF I was going to say to the police… but they started driving again after a minute or two. Who knows, maybe the cop(s) didn’t see anything and were stopping for some other reason… if I recall correctly the girl wouldn’t go home with me that night, and it took an outright date to seal it… but she was marginal and I think there was some SMV mismatch, as she was more into me than I was into her. I don’t recall if I was appropriately courteous to her afterwards… probably not, as I had worse manners then.

That chick was bold, but I didn’t have the mental framework necessary to integrate what she was communicating to me. That came later. I was startled when she took my hand and put it around her neck. Although I’d had a decent amount of sexual experience by then, I didn’t have the experiences or network to contextualize what that meant, or that the desire to be choked is common. Today I can’t pinpoint a single moment or experience when I realized women’s love of BDSM. Red Coco has a post about sex skills and I have one coming as well… there’s not much explicit commentary on this subject in the community and there should be more. I theorize that most guys are not actually getting laid much. Also, once a guy masters the toolkit, there’s a limited amount he can elaborate on it, and most of us forget how much we had to learn to get where we are today.

Today, there are also some explicit video websites that also have educational “how-to” videos on this subject. I don’t want to post links to them here as I believe that will hurt search engine rank, but you can find them yourself or contact me privately if you want some links.

Oh, I was wrong about the Tinder thing, it is that bad

I was wrong, and you all (as well as my younger friend) were right. Some context: a younger guy I know through work recently got what he perceives to be a nuclear breakup, in which his girlfriend of four years standing just dumped him… without any warnings that he picked up. More likely, he is an oblivious younger guy who thinks he is the man and had started taking the chick for granted and/or ignoring her subtler signs. Or who knows, maybe she did just wake up and drop him one day.

He was devastated for a month then signed up for online dating, like everyone else, notably on Tinder, and it was not good for him. I’ve met his ex and she’s quite attractive, although I suspect she’s going to run to fat due to low discipline… probably a low 8 today and might have been higher when they met. My friend got on Tinder and a few weeks ago started telling me how bad it has been for him. I said that it can’t be that bad, relying on my four, five year old memories of it… I bragged to him, “I will make a Tinder account, lie about my age, and I’ll show you how to do it.” Mentally, I thought, “It can’t be that hard, especially with good pictures.” I also told him to Google “daygame” and read the Neil Strauss book, but I don’t think he’s done either.

I did make the Tinder account and it has changed. The number of matches I got, even with very similar profiles, dropped majorly. I paid for the version that shows me who likes my profile, and my Tinder reaction is, “Where are all these fat chicks coming from?” While I too have read about how half of Americans are fat and another quarter “overweight” (polite term for fat)… I have never seen so many fat chicks in one place. I guess they are invisible to me in everyday life, unless they are blocking the sidewalk or I have to sit next to a sugar addict on a plane.

I ought to apologize to my colleague/friend and to the guys online who I privately doubted… RP Murphy / Red Pill Dad has been writing about this, and I’m glad I didn’t say anything publicly, because he is correct and I was not.

I was on Tinder for like 10 – 12 days and two girls of note came out on dates. One of them had a Snapchat listed, so I messaged her on there… she replied (surprising, as she was hot) and quickly told me that she is “sort of” a “model and escort girl.” I told her that’s fine and then told her that I’ve dated girls who are sex workers before (this is true, albeit non-monogamously). Sent her some pics of us together. She then began asking me how much they charged an hour! And how much she should charge. I began laughing out loud and told her that she was thinking about it all wrong and that we should talk about it over drinks. She said okay.

Over drinks we talked about why she wants to do it, what she’s doing with her life (kind of in school, but her answers are flakey enough to make me think not in school), and I am studiously watching her eyes and not her prominently displayed tits. After a while, at the second bar, I tell her a little bit about what I understand about the sex work business.

Being an escort who makes good money and (ideally) avoids bad situations is only partly about having an available pussy and a good body. The rest of it is a mix of psychologist, customer service, and understanding the male mind. Most guys are not looking *just* for sex… Nash has been talking on Twitter lately about how guys are emotional about chicks, just not in the way that many chicks expect. Most guys, even guys who don’t want to commit are not seeking totally mechanical casual sex where they nut, roll over, and leave… they are seeking to connect with the chick. But many chicks are too f**ked up to let the proper connection happen. There is some more to this argument… I hope we get a Nash post on it soon.

Back to the story, two bars, some kissing between bars, some making out in bar #2, and she comes back but is a little skittish. She is also pretty young and maybe not used to hooking up with adult guys in adult guy spaces, so I pour the wine and after some wine do the kissing again. I can tell that she’s nervous and I call it out. She admits she’s nervous and I tell her not to be, but I’m getting kind of weird energy so I pull back and do a “back to college” move and suggest we watch something on Netflix… I have an account for a reason… so I pick Sense8… seems to be my go-to for some reason, and we start watching on a computer. It seems to work because she relaxes. The escort talk is mostly gone and after ten or 15 minutes we’re f**king and it’s actually quite nice.

After she re-opens the escort talk… and I’m thinking, “Has she just ‘paid’ me for more advice about sex work?” To be honest I think the answer is yes. I go on with the spiel, guys are there for sex but also for validation, for a pretty girl to tell him he’s handsome, he’s good in bed, his wife doesn’t appreciate him properly, his boss should give him a promotion, etc. etc. Not as crudely as I’ve put it here, but good sex workers do all those things… and are usually seeking more like a monthly allowance situation, which means less sex (mileage on her pussy) and more money. All things that guys who have been consultants of any kind understand… you want to get out of the “commodity service provider” category and into the “essential business practice and improvement category.” Like the consulting things discussed here.

She seems pretty impressed, although she won’t let me shoot nude pics (how is she going to escort??), and she stays over. We have another two sex-dates together. I learn her parents are divorced… not good… she admits she is between schools right now… she reminds me a little bit of Low-cut top girl, although hotter and less combative, but a little bit lost and with f**ked up intersex dynamics. Despite her physical attractiveness I could not get into her and during the third date suggested that we go to a sex club together. I’d seeded the idea a little bit with the concept that monogamy is strange if you think about it… but she was not receptive and then ghosted me.

The other chick was a high 6 or so, not as attractive as her pics, but had a decently bright and bubbly personality. We told a lot of dating stories, then moved into more life trajectory and emotional ideas… she seemed to vibe with it… two venues, back to my place, we start kissing again and she stops me to say that we can’t do this if I’m just going to ghost her. I tell her my views on ghosting, articulated at the link, but then I also turn into a girl and say, “You’re right, we shouldn’t do this tonight.” That’s often a line from game, but I mean it… I just don’t want to bang a girl who’s going to get hurt by it after… I can tell she is wrong for me (not hot enough, smart enough, personality not good enough), and then the script reverses and she says she really wants to and that she wasn’t trying to stop me. I tell her honestly that I don’t think we’re right for each other… she then gets on her knees and starts blowing me, to recapture momentum… I’m saying that I don’t think we should do this and I don’t want to set bad expectations that I am not going to live up to… she has stopped talking and keeps performing… it does feel like a performance, which is not my favorite feeling, but in the end I am still a guy and go with it.

We do date two… it’s also okay… before we have sex I just break out the idea of going to a sex club (also prematurely)… she is not into it either and looks like she’s going to cry as well… and she talks pretty bitterly about how guys just want to f**k and no one wants a relationship. Two chicks off Tinder, two sessions in tears or near tears. I’m kind of depressed, but I ask her about what the guys on Tinder have in common… she doesn’t know… I give her a version of “Mismatched sexual market value (SMV): Diagnosis and cures,” and I tell her that she’s probably like most people doing online dating and trying to get guys who are at least 20% more attractive than her, and that’s almost always going to lead her to disappointment. Like most people, she is dumb and wants to know if I’m saying she’s ugly. She’s not ugly, not at all, but attractiveness is a spectrum… if she is trying to date guys higher than her… guys who look good online… she is going to have problems. I don’t think she is receptive to this and it probably just makes her angry. I tell her she should just stop doing monogamy… this doesn’t seem to make her happy either. We have sex anyway, about an hour later, and the next day I tell her that I like her but that I think she is looking for someone who is not me. She doesn’t reply. Ghosted again.

These two are out of probably 100+ chicks I have liked or messaged via Instagram or Snapchat. Neither one of them really count properly in my opinion. Most of the Instagram ones did not reply. Makes me think about, Could Instagram be becoming an important adjunct to game?

So what do I think about Tinder?

I’m pretty confident Tinder gives paying customers boosts up and beyond whatever they say they do, so I bought the premium features. One of them lets me see who has liked me. Almost everyone who did, was fat. Literally, where are all these fat girls? They must be all around me, and I just don’t notice them at all, unless they’re in my way (to be fair, they often are). I’d guess that you need to buy the better versions of Tinder to make a go at all.

What happened to Tinder? Some possibilities include…

1. I’m doing it wrong somehow. Maybe I need longer conversations. I’m not and never have been a fan of long online conversations, because ten minutes in person will reveal compatibility far better than ten hours of online conversation, but the market may have shifted in that direction.

2. My profile is/was too tuned to jackass party boy. I changed it halfway through.

3. Lack of Instagram presence is holding me back.

4. I didn’t put enough time in: in my defense, this was a pretty low time commitment… previous forays in this world have shown that 90% of the output emerges from like 10% of the time, and that if it doesn’t happen pretty fast, it’s time to move on and try another strategy. It took the belligerents in WWI way too many years to learn that horses are worthless and charging into entrenched machine gun positions is stupid. Humans are resistant to reality and I am not an exception, however much I want to fancy myself one.

5. Something else I’m not aware of.

Out of the ten or so acceptably attractive and seemingly normal chicks I matched with, two wanted to go on dates apart from the 6, both were bad (see below). Generally, I unmatched pretty quickly if the date wasn’t going to happen, or removed them from Instagram if that was the contact point. My sense from talking to people in real life is that many people let matches sit there and linger for weeks and months… this seems to provide chicks with a sense of unlimited possibility, which is bad (for guys as well as the chicks themselves, I think). Guys should un-match or block the chicks if it’s not moving forward pretty rapidly.

Also, I hadn’t 100% appreciated the extent to which some chicks are into Instagram. A large percentage of chicks appear to be chasing Instagram attention; how many deeply understand that online attention is garbage? I don’t recall this from long-ago forays into Tinder. To do online seriously, I think need an Instagram thing as an extension of online dating. Fortunately, I don’t want that.

One entertaining girl I messaged on Snapchat, a standard opener. Opened, no reply from her. Then I did a Torero-like recovery text, figuring that I’d see what happened, and she replied, “You have to understand I get a million messages a day, I only reply to the pictures.” Incredibly bitchy, but also maybe good advice. I replied the same is true of me (it isn’t, thank God) and wished her luck. And then removed her.

My impression from interacting with people in their 20s is that a lot of guys retain random chicks on social media accounts when they shouldn’t… this is bad for the guy (his brain incorrectly thinks he’s got a shot) and addictive to the chick (cause chicks love attention). I did message some chicks (on Instagram, it appears you can message chicks without following them), and then removed them when they didn’t reply or didn’t want to go on a date. Perhaps this is the “wrong” thing and chicks watch guys’s feeds, then message the ones they find interesting. If so, that seems like a terrible way to be in the game, but, again, I could be wrong on this.

If this online thing is really how 20-somethings are trying to pair off, I understand why they are all miserable… I don’t mean to be an old codger, but something has gone seriously wrong. The number of articles about social and emotional problems in Gen Z is enormous. If they are on Tinder, I see why… it is so damn depressing, far more depressing than I could have imagined, far more depressing than daygame (or maybe I have enough practice to not to be too hurt by blowouts?). And the number of fat chicks… it’s like a zombie army of them. Chicks must also be unhappy because so many of them are too fat to attract a man’s attention and lack the fortitude to implement the simple systems needed to be height-weight appropriate. I have long disliked the arguments about modern life being fundamentally f**ked up, but using Tinder makes me think they have some validity.

I can see why some non-elite guys get radicalized by attempting Tinder, since it’s a depressing and yet awesome display of female privilege… female privilege has always existed, of course, but it’s not been so in your face… a huge parade of attractive chicks, all implicitly saying “no.” Worse than them is the even larger parade of not-so-attractive chicks, all also saying no.

Apart from the two chicks I told stories about, I did go out with two other random chicks who turned out to be fatter than I thought. Did chit-chat for an hour… I will say that fatter chicks are way more engaged and work harder to impress me, but it just… doesn’t work. I can’t be bothered. I feel bad for fat chicks. Just not bad enough to try and bang ’em.

How many guys stay with a woman not because they’re excited about her, but because they don’t think they can do any better? Bet a lot of guys do.

Among the two non-fatties I met, the would-be prostitute is the more interesting one. Has the figure for it. But she is just not that smart, which I could tell by talking to her and trying to explain some about what successful prostitutes do (it isn’t just the sex).

She also wouldn’t let me shoot nude photos of her at all, even though shooting a chick nude is somewhat normal today, especially at the beginning of an affair, but refusing is strange for someone who is going to let strangers shoot loads into her for money.

With both chicks, I told them a lot about what I actually think, and that was probably “bad game.” I was having a Twitter conversation about “honesty” versus “social skills” or “palatability” recently, where one guy said you should be scrupulously honest with everything you say to chicks. It’s an opinion and I understand why he has it. But I think it’s also a good idea to have the social skills to know what you should say and when you should say it… to take a non-game example, if you have a junior colleague who wants to take an assignment he’s not ready for, you could say, “No. You suck.” In some circumstances that could be appropriate, but in many cases it will sting him and make him hate you.

You could instead say to him, “What skills do you think the assignment needs?” Lead him down that path. Ask him what he thinks he’ll be doing in that assignment. Ask him how he thinks he’ll handle some of the challenges that arise. If he can’t answer some of those questions… he’s likely to see the problems for himself. And then you can say, “Work on those skills, show me work product [x], and then we’ll talk again.”

Same effect, different outcome, right?

Sometimes being super blunt is the right thing to do. More often, it will alienate people, especially early on. With the 8… she lacks the internal ability to realize she’s not that smart and as a result has not thought through the various things that her job entails. Maybe she will learn them over time, but I’m not sure she has the intelligence to do that. Her emotional intelligence doesn’t seem to be particularly high either. I warned her that there’s a good solid chance she’s going to have some really negative experiences if she’s meeting totally unknown guys for paid sex off Tinder.

She almost started crying (second date). Didn’t quite cry, but almost. I tried to comfort her some… and told her to get a job as a hostess at a restaurant or something like that. She has had jobs like that, but the pay is not high and at the last one some guy working there was apparently chasing her around, thinking she’s a free bread basket and he wants to dive in for the goodies. Although her story was somewhat garbled. She seemed to be looking at me for moral support and I kind of shrugged and was like, “That’s guys.” Put your foot down. I don’t know, call the police if he’s touching her without her consent. She strikes me as the sort of girl who can’t say no properly, who will do so in a flirty way that says to men, “Come hither.”

Or… who knows… maybe she was f**king the guy, and some other guy was jealous and made things uncomfortable for her. This is another “narrative” thing. Most chicks complaining of “sexual harassment…” it’s bullshit. It’s abetted partially by the chick, like most guys who get conned are getting conned because they’re trying to get something for nothing.

Both these chicks are examples of how NOT to seed non-monogamy. To do it properly, a chick has to be invested in you and has to be largely in your frame. It should be done like 6 – 12 weeks after the initial sex. I used it here (and have used it in similar circumstances) as a filter for chicks I’m not 100% into… they can get introduced to the world, I can get credit for bringing new chicks in, etc. It’s a low probability play that I use in situations when I’m going to let the girl go anyway… so I might as well test to see if she has deep non-monogamous fantasies that I can engage. In both their cases, the answer is no, or I just couldn’t be bothered to do it right.

What a depressing experience… there seems to have been a “golden age” of online dating from like 2006 – 2014 or 2015… when being online got old enough to make online dating not be too weird, but before smartphones and the masses destroyed it.

I think I also haven’t properly appreciated an ecosystem advantage I have (or had, as I am pretty much letting it go, I think). The power of real-world meeting has always been large, but it seems to have actually grown as more people have heaved themselves online.

I feel like kind of an idiot for mentally scoffing at the guys who denigrate online dating apps… I dunno, maybe Bumble works better, because it forces chicks to make a decision. Overall, though, some of the anger among the Red Pill communities makes a little more sense… if my primary experience of dating were of online dating, I’d think women are idiots too… although I’d be wrong, I’d be basing that view off a limited number of women and a circumstance not favorable to guys. The anger of women towards men also makes a little more sense… women don’t actually like having to choose between 30 different, very similar appearing guys, I think. At the same time, they go out with the hottest-seeming guys… get f**ked… then the guy moves on… then the woman posts something online about how ALL MEN ARE DOGS… because she is chasing the OMG hottest guy, who has lots of other options. Truly a situation to breed discord. In real life, people who behave as dysfunctionally as they do online will fail.

I also don’t believe women who can’t find dates online. They are being unreasonable and not dating effectively.

A lot of younger chicks also seem to be social retards. They’re spending too much time online and not enough time in the real world. Social retards who spend too much time online make themselves even more socially retarded. This applies to guys too and explains why so much of the Red Pill discourse is retarded… it’s being driven by guys who are spending 4+ hours a day online, instead of going out into the real world and meeting chicks. Or even other guys. A lot of younger chicks seem more socially retarded than they did when I was like 20. Japan shows us where we’re going.

So many people are living contrary to human nature. Too much time online, too much sugar and simple carbs, not enough time exercising, no time creating. Too much consuming, too little creating. Half of teenagers have social/emotional problems like anxiety and depression… because of how we live now… and we are too addled to learn how to live properly. We are meant to interact with other humans in real life… not an infinite sprawl of their shitty pics online, working for social media companies without being paid for it.

There is a meta lesson here, too, which is that real experience beats theorizing. I didn’t appreciate how f**king bad it is. In a few relatively short years, the whole thing changed around. I also didn’t appreciate how mal-adaptive a lot of the female behavior seems to be online. Or is it that the adaptive chicks just get snapped up faster? Whatever the source is, I was just f**king wrong. It’s humbling to be so wrong.

I would guess that it can be useful to use online dating once every 2 – 3 months to pick up any easy pickings who are new to online… otherwise, not at all… and like I said, it’s just f**king depressing.

If I am a high-quality guy (I let others make that determination), I made the Tinder market a little bit worse when I deleted my account. Who is left when the high-quality people with good social skills and lives leave?

I will say that I feel validated in pursuing the non-monogamy dating patterns I’ve followed, as dating couples and some single chicks WITH a chick is way more fun than pursuing it alone. Doing so has also helped me develop pretty large social networks through friends and friends-of-friends. When a woman breaks up with her boyfriend, her first source of new dick is often guys she already knows… and ideally guys she’s already f**ked… meaning, me.

I knew that non-monogamous dating is a kind of force-multiplier effect: more sex with less work. Until this experiment I didn’t appreciate how much the force-multiplier works. I had thought it was like a multiplier of 1.5 or 1.75 or something like that. Now I think it’s like a 3 – 5x multiplier, at least if you’re a guy who just wants more sex with hot chicks… Nash seems to like relatively inexperienced chicks, with particular life histories… the kinds of chicks who are not going to end up at sex clubs, for the most part… so for someone like that, what I’ve done is the wrong route. For someone like me, this seems like it’s been an incredible deal, which I didn’t understand until recently. Seeing the conventional-dating online wasteland has changed my view. Now I think I am more of an advocate for this than I was, for a guy who wants sex with a lot of different women.

Maybe all the supposed Tinder hookup stories are about fat chicks.

Maybe I’m doing it wrong and need to tone down the fuckboy profile.

Maybe I should actually amp up the profile and make it all about bondage, paddles, and discreetly anonymized chicks who are tied up (that’s one way to filter). I speculate on this because Feeld has been okay for me, as I wrote above, though it does depend on starting w/ a hot chick.

It’s been a while since I’ve been this provably wrong.

This tweet is interesting… I find it almost unbelievable and wonder if this pattern is common. We may also be in a cycle where on Tinder chicks are shit to guys, so the better guys leave it… as the better guys leave, the better chicks do as well… and then the chicks are bitchy to the guys, and the guys are trying a mass-contact strategy, leaving everyone poorly off.

Despite a low or moderate amount of effort I technically slept with two chicks, but the escort one is too weird to “count” as a proper lay and the other one is not really hot enough IMO. While I’ve done worse I don’t see any reason to count her. It sapped my spirit… I don’t think f**king an 8 has ever sapped my spirit before… this is a new feeling.

Overall, this experiment points to the need for in-person approach over online. Something has gone terribly wrong w/ the online world in the last 4 – 5 years. I hadn’t appreciated how badly that’s happened.

 

Could Instagram be becoming an important adjunct to game?

I’m at heart a pragmatist: I look at what works with chicks, then do that. For a long time, my impression has been that most social media use is a feminine, low-status move… as Nash says, “Instagram is for girls.” As far as I can tell, minimal social media presence has been a net benefit to me, not a drawback, because chicks associate social media with their girlfriends and orbiter guys. Maybe some guys with stratospherically interesting lives have been able to leverage it, but if they have stratospherically interesting lives they probably don’t need it, either.

This comes up because of a Twitter conversation between Nash and Seven Daygame, as well . Nash mentions the “no social media post” I linked above. He also says,

You have to look at WHY she said [Instagram]:

— If she uses that as a “shit test,” my line will help
— If she was not that into you… nothing will help

IG is a “holding cell for orbiters.” I never want in there.

Sometimes I can show strength when I reject IG, and she’ll like.

Another comment from Smirking Soldier. That’s interesting, because in the last year or so, I have noticed more chicks trying to give me their Instagrams and more chicks talking about starting to date guys based on Instagram flirting (that post I linked is from two years ago… interesting… Guys badly want social media to work. Here’s why it (mostly) doesn’t is from this year).

A guy DM’ed me because I said that “It could be that this rule/principle is shifting.” My net read is that Instagram is still a slight negative. But I’m now seeing chicks on it everywhere… when I glance at a girl holding a smartphone, she seems to be on it. I’ve heard some chicks say they’re surprised when I say I think it’s a waste of time… not good surprised, which can have an element of confusion to it… negative surprised, like they’d reply to someone who says he thinks deodorant is a capitalist conspiracy. Chicks I’ve slept with have been very eager to sign me up to follow their Instagram… which is fine, as I know they increase their follower count (seems to be important to them), while I don’t interact beyond that.

So while I’m net negative on Instagram, I’m open to revision, and I have to be: if it turns out that Instagram is a form of social media that increases lays… then I guess I need to be working it harder. Guys are the sellers and girls are the buyers in the game… the only exceptions are guys who are so high-value that the market flips, like with famous guys. That’s probably less than 1% of guys and I’m not in that 1%. For the rest of us, it’s game, it’s learning how to read the market and respond to it. If you run a failing business and the market doesn’t appreciate what you’re selling, it doesn’t matter how badly you want to sell it or think the market should appreciate the product… the market has spoken.

It could be that guys working the “broadcast” model (they never interact with the chicks’s accounts and let chicks reply to them) of social media are doing all right… that appears to be Seven and Smirking Soldier above.

I’ve also thought about posting erotic but not nude or pornographic stills from video cips (no girls’s faces in them). Probably too explicit, but the thought has entered my mind before. A bit like the SnapChat in Game gambit. That might just screen chicks, though, leaving the ones who are horny or whatever. It will also piss off the women in the screen grabs, if they learn about this, which they might, even doing them as stories.

Game fundamentals are eternal, like masculinity, facing your fears, approaching the chicks, etc. But some aspects of the game change with the culture and technology. Could be that we’re witnessing that change now.

Being adaptable is good. I’m not a huge fan of being a digital sharecropper, which seems to be what a lot of online systems encourage. But I’ll do the things that increase the bang rate, and if that means Instagram, then damnit it’s time to do it. The other thing, though, is that most of my everyday life… is just not super interesting. I work, I think, I read, I go to the gym. Most of it doesn’t DHV. Except maybe to intellectual chicks, who are pretty rare.

So yeah. I’ll also note that I did a little experiment over the last week or so, which has shaken some of my confidence about the relatively good state of the world. Story later.

I’m thinking about patterns… and in the last year, it may have changed, and I may not have changed with it (yet). Chicks adding me to Facebook has been a demonstration of interest for a long time, even though I don’t use it much either.

The gap between demonstrating higher value, “DHV,” and demonstrating lower value, “DLV” can be narrow (more narrow than some guys think). In my experience, no or little social media seems to have been a “DHV” for the last ten or so years. But if that shifts among the hotter young chicks… then it can become a DLV thing where you’re a weirdo for not doing what “everyone else” does. Sometimes, not doing what everyone else does is good… not eating sugar, hitting the weights, interacting with real people in real life… those are things not everyone does that are good. But the deodorant example above is bad. Refusing to get a real job because you want to be true to your “authentic self” by living at home with your parents is typically bad. Etc. And these things can shift. Being a dirty grunge rocker in 1990-1995 seems to have been cool and possibly a path to getting laid. Not so much today.

Earlier today I met a friend for coffee… had two very good interactions with chicks who seemed into me but claimed boyfriends… but they were very pleasant, even in what is technically a rejection. The contrast w/ online is startling. My buddy is in the non-mono community… lower SMV than me, if I can be honest / possibly an asshole. There was an older-but-not-old woman there too, with her big fake tits hanging out, and I left to leave my friend time to get her number. He didn’t… lacks killer instinct… after she left I asked him about it and he said that being in the community makes him lazy. This is probably true, although lazy and cowardly can be pretty close together too, like DHV and DLV. I have my cowardly moments… but I have enough game and enough underlying value to get the multiplier effect going, by bringing new chicks into the non-mono community. Leveraging both game and the non-mono community has led me to great results, in my view, and that is why I have been writing about it, before I leave or dramatically scale back both.

Date-onomics: players should go where the gender ratio is good

I keep mentioning Date-onomics: How Dating Became a Lopsided Numbers Game in private, and I finally mentioned it in a post, but I didn’t elaborate, so: small changes in male-female ratios have pronounced effects in sex culture. If there are lots more guys than chicks, like engineering schools or military bases, there’s a lot of monogamy, a lot of long courtships, longer waits for sex, and more transfer of financial resources from men to chicks. If there are lots more chicks than guys, like liberal arts colleges and New York City, there are more hookups, less monogamy, shorter courtships, and more casual sex. In American cities, there are profound differences in male-female ratios. In most cities, there are more single college-educated females than single college-educated males. San Francisco and Seattle are exceptions: those cities have more dudes than chicks. New York and L.A. have among the most skewed ratios, in favor of men, in the country: both have far more chicks than dudes. Get out of SF and Seattle if you can. Choose similar jobs in NYC or LA.

If you are a guy, you want to go where the chicks are and the dudes aren’t. I have said before that there are really three levels of game: 1. Your interpersonal game itself, 2. Your underlying value and 3. Your environment. Ideally, a guy will try to improve all three at once. If you have strong game and value, but a terrible environment, the game may still be very hard for you, because you are competing heavily against all other men. If the opposite is true, you may still succeed despite yourself. Date-onomics also explains why so much of the online advice guys give each other is useless… we don’t know how cool a guy is, what his life is like, what he looks like, how he acts around other people, or where he lives. The last one is important, as guys who live in cities will do better than guys who live in rural areas (a lot more men than women) or suburbs.

It’s strange to me that almost no players talk about this. Many players talk about Mark Manson and The Book of Pook, but this should be on the player’s reading list, despite its extremely Blue Pill framing.

The author says “I realize most people do not want to think about supply and demand when contemplating matters of the heart.” Players sure as fuck should. If you are a player or just a guy who gives a shit about your sex life, don’t take the job in San Francisco. Take it in L.A., NYC, or almost anywhere else instead. If you are a guy debating whether you should go to college, the author writes “By 1992, the female-to-male ratio among freshly minted graduates reached 54:46. At first glance, 54:46 may not sound like much of a gap, but it meant 17 percent more women than men graduating from college.” “By 2012, the college gender gap has doubled to 34 percent more women than men.” College is where the chicks are, so there can be good reasons to go there.

The book also uses college education as a proxy. If you’re a guy who looks, acts, earns, and behaves like you’re college educated, whether you actually are or not is probably irrelevant. If you’re a guy who behaves like an idiot and you don’t have good game, then you are probably not going to get chicks whether you went to college or not.

Admirably, the author is willing to use words most mainstream authors will not “A surplus of women in cities may be a geographic manifestation of the general phenomenon of hypergyny, that is, women’s marrying up.” I think the correct term is “hypergamy,” but whatever, that’s something almost no one admits in the mainstream (except Jordan B. Peterson, whatever his other flaws).

To be sure, New York has downsides in that it’s expensive as fuck all. Birger has tables from the Census showing the male-female ratio in different cities. Chicago has 40% more college educated chicks 22-29 and 20% more college educated chicks age 30 – 39. Same in New Orleans. Same in Vegas (although I don’t like Vegas as much because of the lack of foot traffic on streets; it is also about driving). Austin, Texas is not as favorable to guys, but Houston is. Nashville is favorable to guys. Philadelphia is.

The book has story after story about supposedly “gorgeous” women age 30 – 45 and their travails dating. I do not sympathize much with those women because they just waited until their sexual market value had begun to decline to value marriage. Much like this chick and numerous others you’ll read about in the media, all with the same whine about the same predictable problem. The highest-level men don’t care that much about women’s careers; high-level men just want a woman who is economically functional. I myself like hearing about teachers and nurses, because they are economically functional without being married to their jobs. I’m not as thrilled by women in the corporate rat race who are sweating because they can’t fit a baby and their careers together. I, like many men, think those women are fine for casual sex but problematic for relationships. This book helps explain the spinster epidemic overtaking us all.

I’m getting off topic, but players need to know that where they live will affect how their dating life works. A bunch of guys writing about the game right now seem to be living in the Bay Area… maybe that’s why they’re writing about the game… the Bay Area is game on hard mode. Bully for them but I would refer it on easy mode.

Roy Walker didn’t like New York, but he’s comparing it to London/Europe, so I don’t have his perspective. It does seem like Eastern Europe and Russia just have hotter chicks than any other country, but, again, I don’t have the experience to offer personal testimonials.

This book is also useful for guys who have a son. Girls do much better at school than boys because they typically mature faster. A 5 year old boy is about as mature as a 6 year old girl. Same with a 15 year old girl and a 16 year old boy. If you have a boy, try to get him to start school relatively late, compared to his peers. That will likely improve his school prospects. Most people don’t do this and that’s part of the reason there are way more girls in college than boys.

In summary, ignore the Blue Pill wrapping and please read the book for yourself, taking from it the important lessons about environment. I am guessing that far more urban, college-educated women read books than do rural, not-college-educated men, so the author has wisely decided to pander to his audience. Many guys report that the game feels way different in some cities than in others, and that has been my experience as well.

Bike Girl: One year away thoughts

Bike Girl ended a year ago, and I’ve already forgotten most of the details of the end… I wish I’d started writing the blog sooner, as many of the details around various chicks have faded away. There is no substitute for writing very close to the events as they happen in real time. Everything becomes abstract and mushy, given sufficient distance. I’ve been encouraging many guys to write their players journey blogs, and the value of fresh material is part of the reason why… the value of random search engine traffic is another… mostly you should write for yourself, but the fact that you might reach some other poor suffering dude is a nice bonus.

About Bike Girl, Anastasia asked on Twitter, “Have you heard about her after?” Not too much: little bit here and there… we kept fucking for a while after the breakup… but really we are too different. She is more looking for a guy who is kinda chill and matches her, or a guy who will take care of her (likely financially)… I am neither… she wouldn’t put it that way, though. Fort Worth Playboy asked, “How would she frame it?” A good question. I think she’d frame it as I’m a jerk and a player who takes advantage of her. I pretend to offer girls one thing, then don’t follow up on it. She was ready to move to the next stage and I cruelly ditched her. She is pretty enough that she can find guys who will happily commit to her… she has a few in her orbit… like so many chicks she’s most into a guy who won’t commit to her room, board, and upkeep. I’m a little harsh in the last sentence, as she did have a job when I was with her. But only a little harsh.

I think I confuse some chicks, because I don’t really read as fuckboy (contra this, which reveals more about the quality of Low-cut top girl’s mind and thinking than it does about me), but I also don’t really read as monogamous “good guy.” So chicks don’t really know how to categorize me… The ones I get along with, aren’t bothered by this. The chicks who are happy doing something a little different than the standard categories (e.g. consensual non-monogamy), often like me quite a bit because they get to be different. The ones who want the usual are often flummoxed. The ones who like me are okay thinking in shades of gray, rather than black and white. In conversation I ask a lot of “Why?” and “How do we know that?” and “Are we certain of that?” kinds of questions. Not in a mean way… I don’t try to use them as cudgels… but in a searching way… and girls who are searching like those questions… girls who already know everything don’t like them very much.

I think you can tell which kind of girl I like better. The chicks who are happy doing something a little different than the standard categories (like consensual non-monogamy), often like me quite a bit because they get to be different. Chicks who like rigid categories need to find guys who fit in those categories.

I hope Bike Girl is doing well. I could ping her again… last I heard I believe she was dating someone. I wish her well… but she is going to have a tough time trying to get a “got it all” (looks + money + charisma) guy. She can get a guy w/ one or two of those, I think. She seems like the kind of chick who will keep looking for the “just right” guy, as her 40th birthday sails past and her fertility window closes. I know some women who just stay on the shelf too long… it’s sad, but common. Maybe increasingly common. Our idiotic culture tells women that she should HAVE IT ALL. Stupid. But almost no one “has it all.” Not men. Not women. No one in our culture tells men that we need to “have it all.” I wonder why.

(That last statement is sarcastic.)

With the blog, Nash says, “I can tell by the way you write that pieces are ‘fresh,’ they aren’t stewed-on for weeks… and I appreciate that about your writing. I want to do more of that.” Some of them I sit on for too long… not all, though. I’m a fan of the 12″ MacBook and similar computers for their portability… got an idea? Pop in for coffee, execute it, move on. It’s amazing how far tech has come… laptops used to have to be big and heavy to be functional… now they don’t. By the way, don’t buy a 12″ MacBook the day this is being published in May 2019, as they are overdue for an update.

UPDATE: The 12″ MacBook is dead and now replaced by the 13″ MacBook Air. A less portable machine and I wish the 12″ MacBook had been updated.

I was tempted at times to start the blog earlier, but I didn’t because I knew it would suck up more time and energy than is desirable. As a consequence, many of the details have faded; looking at my writing from just one or two years ago shows me as much. I remember previous girls, that they existed, a few things about them and about us… but not the stuff that speaks to how it really was. Strangely, my habit of making sex tapes provides many of those details for other girls. One of my favorite girls, I haven’t written a lot about here, but I think about her a lot.

She was likely a high 7 / low 8, principally due to her youth and hobbies (dancing). For whatever reason I connected with her strongly, but she did not want to do what I wanted to do (sex clubs), and I let her go. I wonder if I should have stuck with her longer… of all the chicks I’ve slept with, for some reason she stays with me the most. One of the early times we fucked, probably the third or fourth, at the end of it she sighed happily and said, “I needed that.” A little moment… a minor one… one I would have forgotten if not for the video… but the way she says it… it’s nice, like a few seconds later when she said that she’d been thinking about seeing me all day. She sounds so satisfied. Very satisfying to me in turn.

Sometimes I leave the camera on for a while after the sex, and the conversation after is tremendously interesting. I think people are more honest and less guarded right after fucking. I didn’t realize that making fuck tapes would catch some of those moments. Come for the smut, stay for the talking.

I have some more stories I need to finish, but I don’t think they have much in the way of real learning points, so they don’t seem urgent. I have been doing a bit of cold approach, but not in a good or consistent way… my head space has been bad for that, and it shows.