‘Cheap Sex,’ our lives, our politics

Like I said, this book is good to read. In the article, the best sentence is, “The fuckboy lifestyle — in which a man can be basically worthless yet sexually successful — was simply not viable.” Absolutely. And men are still adjusting, psychologically, emotionally, and culturally to this shift. Women, especially young hot ones, now value sexual and sensual pleasure more than world-building and income. Every guy has seen some hot chick not just fuck but obsess over a degenerate guy. Then the guy thinks, “What is the degenerate doing that I’m not?”

Guys who follow that thought far enough find game.

The author neglects to make clear that sex is “cheap” for the top 20 or 25% of guys. It’s still very expensive for all the other guys. Those other guys are forced to watch porn, be celibate, cling futilely to their one-itis, become extremely wealthy, become famous, or learn game. In my view only that last one is practical for the vast majority of men.

When a man truly realizes sex is cheap, everything about him changes. “Cheap sex” is another phrase for “abundance mentality.” But when a man has abundance, it’s not just a mentality. It’s his life.

Frame. And why non-monogamy helps make me more diligent about diet and body

I’ve written about why sugar is evil and have alluded to the much-discussed need for guys to lift, so I won’t belabor those points here. Every guy who gets into the game or Red Pill worlds learns about why lifting and style are important, and if you don’t know why by now I hope you found this via a Google search because I don’t know what to tell you otherwise.

Non-monogamy has made me more diligent than the average game guy about diet, swimming, lifting, and yoga.

Like virtually all people who consciously work to quit sugar, at first the discipline necessary is very hard, but over time habits set in and I eventually stopped missing sugar. I learned to taste real food again and got in the Sunday meal-prep practice to ensure that I wasn’t as tempted by easy, quick and horrific foods during the work week.

As guys who get deeply into the game know, the initial parts of game are about attraction and dominance, but most chicks tell themselves that they can eventually tame the bad boy and turn him into a long-term provider-guy (that is basically the plot of all romance novels and romance novels are porn for women: citation one and citation two). Even among players who imply or even explicitly say that they’re only in it for the casual sex, lots of women will fantasize about locking those guys down long-term, or the women will attempt it, as long as the guy has an okay job.

Most normal women want children (eventually, in the case of a very young girl) and most normal women also want to be financially subsidized by a guy. If the guy is also hot and good in bed, that’s a plus. This conflict between short-term hots and long-term provision is fundamental and explained by evolutionary biology.

So even among women who are being picked up on the street, there is an element of “will this guy be my long-term provider?” that arises at some point. Initially it may be and probably will be all about the seduction and the hot sex, and most guys underperform in being hot, dominant, and playful because society teaches them to do the opposite.

But over time women have a biological need to find guys to have kids with and subsidize them and their kids. That’s part of the reason long-term, undefined, FWBs-type relationships are so uncommon. Few chicks will allow them, at least past the age of 25. Even if they do, they will drop the FWB when they find a hot-enough provider guy.

(If you’re dating a chick under the age of 25 in a contemporary Western country, you can ignore the last two paragraphs, because chicks that age are all about the feelz and the hot sex.)

At sex parties, the provider part of the equation goes away almost entirely, at least for a night of passion (and the provider part, as I said, is not relevant for most chicks under the age of 25 in contemporary Western countries). The chick probably already has a primary partner who she evaluates in part for his material characteristics. The new guy needs to primarily be a hot sex guy. So she’s evaluating the guy much more along the physical lines than even a normal chick during pickup.

That’s why I’m so hardcore about the sugar thing and so hardcore about lifting weights, swimming, and lately yoga (post on that coming soon). If you’re going to do sex clubs and non-monogamy, the need for good looks and strong sexual skills go up, because chicks aren’t much evaluating you, even subconsciously, as a long-term provider guy. It becomes all about the sex.

In the sex clubs, it’s also common to strip, pretty quickly, to underwear. She will see you fucking your main girl, too, so she will be able to evaluate your body and sex quality in a very tangible, immediate way. Hot guys with good sex skills get more swap choices.

In contrast, most pickup and online dating is conducted primarily clothed. She can obviously tell some things about your body, but by the time she sees you nude she will probably already have crossed the sex rubicon or gotten close to it. She can also likely tell herself a story about how she can turn you into a provider long term, at least if she really likes you.

Or she’s just drunk and horny and doesn’t care.

For all humans, though, attraction starts with the body. Just like it does online. Online, women mostly judge your pictures, and I’m not even going to link to my piece about why guys doing online dating need to learn basic photography.

Improve your body and you will do better. It is possible for attractive guys in particular to have no game and fail, but it’s much less likely.

FRAME

Bringing women into sex clubs and parties also brings them deeply into a frame outside the mainstream. Those girls will lose their mainstream frame and gain a “sex-positive” frame (you can frame the frame more negatively, if you want). Some will enter that frame temporarily, then go back to conventional frames; that’s what happened to the woman I write about in “Women want to follow your lead: a story about a woman presenting two ways.” This is actually a very common story because most women want a family and children at some point, and going to sex clubs is not overly compatible with family and children: there is too much jealousy, competition, and risk for most couples to make that work. There are some women who don’t want kids or have already had them, and they are often the glue holding a club or a city’s scene together. Most women over age 40 aren’t objects of intense desire, so their presence or absence isn’t as important.

I’m rambling, as I tend to do, but point is that many women can be led into the sex club frame, but as they begin to think long term they will also fall out of that frame. The diet and lifting help a lot with the initial attraction and dominance parts of the seduction, but for women they’re less important for long-term compatibility. Most people, given enough time, almost stop noticing each other’s physical attractiveness, which is part of the reason long-term relationships are in my view so hard.

So a chick will think about the long-term project, realize I’m not good for that, and we’ll break up. Often it’s better if I break up with her or even seed the idea that she should find a father/husband guy who isn’t going to be me, no matter what she does. Being honest in this way means that the chick is less likely to do an angry, scorched-earth breakup because she thinks she’s been lied to. I don’t talk about long-term life goals on second dates but somewhere in there I give chicks my theory of relationships and that helps them decide what to do with or about me.

Many of those girls will leave to pursue a long-term relationship guy. Sometimes the things with that guy works out. Sometimes they don’t. When they don’t, they will often swing back around to me. Fine with me. I often wish girls good luck when they go.

The smartest and most conscientious women know and understand the gap between fun sex guys and long-term guys. They know the two don’t always overlap. And when it comes down to it, they choose the long-term play.

How many women are open to sex parties and partner swapping? [intermediate/advanced]

This is intermediate and advanced shit that beginners shouldn’t be reading. If you don’t have regular girls on rotation, go read something else.

Nash and I have a dialogue about women’s propensities towards group sex in the comments section of Women want to follow your lead: a story about a woman presenting two ways:

So you think 75% of women are open to sex parties and partner swapping?

Wow.

I’m tempted to argue… But I trust your POV on this topic. And, I am likely one of the guys that “doesn’t get it” in this regard.

And I know every girl likes to be choked. Like 98%. And I’ve seen guys surprised by that, when it’s totally normal for me.

Is it 75%? I don’t know and it’s hard to say. If you did a survey, I bet only something like 10% of women be willing to say that they’re open to group sex. I’ve said this before, but of the women I’ve propositioned for a club or party, about 25% have been eager and excited, about 50% uncertain, and about 25% have had been a hard “no,” which usually precipitates a breakup because I’m not willing to be monogamous again.

But that’s about 75% of the women I’ve already been sleeping with long enough to ask the question… so it’s not a random sample at all. Chicks who are very reserved, very sex negative, very interested in monogamy, and very unwilling to have pretty quick sex don’t like me and I don’t like them. They are out there, but you never read about them in pickup writing because they don’t respond to street come-ons and online they’re very slow-moving. I filter out prudes, hard, though this is not the same thing as filtering out girls who might take some time.

So I don’t know how many women are open to sex parties. I’m 100% sure, however, that far more women are interested than would admit it in public or to their boyfriends. It’s also true that, in my experience, many women who initially say no will come around to it. First they say no. Then they agree to go to one but do not want to touch or play with others. And then it slowly amps up. All players are familiar with this. So is any guy who ever dated a girl in high school or just an experienced girl. Most chicks won’t jump straight into things and need some leadup and then some processing time.

Women also like to follow. So a lot of women who have already invested in a guy and who are used to the guy leading will be open. The most common reaction I’ve gotten to women who’ve gone with me to a club or party is, “I never thought I would do that!!!! OMG!!!!” Some experience sub drop the next day, so care and reassurance is important. Most chicks have no internal feeling gauges so they need a man to reassure and lead them.

And of course most women who go to sex clubs will then lie to their future boyfriends and husbands about them, for the obvious reasons.

I’m guessing that most women who are willing to be picked up on the street would also be willing to go to a sex club.

Then Nash said,

I can say that most women I’ve picked up HAVE been to a strip club. Not the same as a sex club, but it’s true. And about 50% of girls I’ve asked are very clear what kind of girl they would pick out at a strip club (that’s a fun question to ask a girl).

>> Hard to say. Probably if you did a survey, only 10% of women be willing to say that they’re open.

Mostly… we never care what women say when asked directly. Particularly in a group/public setting. It’s more about if you get them in the right mood… what might they say.

A woman’s “truth” changes like the wind. You have to catch her in the right moment to know her potential.

>> I’m 100% sure, however, that far more women are interested than would admit it in public or to their boyfriends.

Another game I play sometimes with women is to talk about 3somes, but turn the question around. I’ll tell a girl that most guys have fantasized about being w/ two girls. And then I say, “but most guys don’t think much about a girl being w/ two guys.” And then, I’ll ask if she’s ever fantasized about that. Again, hard to say if the answer you get is real…

I’m not into “MMF” 3somes myself, but it’s a way to get into the grit of a girls sexual mind.

But this leads me to a similar place in our understanding of women’s minds/sexualitites… would she like to be DP’d? Would she go to a sex club… and swap partners? The truth is guaranteed to be that this is all more common than most men would expect.

But I think your “women like to follow” comment is very much on point. Without a man to work out logistics and to push for it… the super kinky stuff is less likely to happen.

You can see why I’m excerpting all of this. And that strip club question is good. I’m not a strip club person and think I’ve only gone with women in tow. Personally, I’ve found strip clubs expensive and not very gratifying, so once I got into the BDSM and adjacent worlds I pretty much stopped going. Lots of strippers go to sex positive events anyway, so I can meet them outside of work.

I personally would prefer FMF threesomes, like pretty much every straight guy, but I have a male “threesome buddy” (sounds gay but isn’t) who I tend to trade chicks with. When I have a chick who wants a threesome with two dudes, I get my buddy to meet up and if everyone clicks we do it.

He does the same w/ me.

It’s a pretty baller move because most chicks are too scared to accomplish any of the things they really want. So they find a guy who makes it happen for them and they’re amazed.

But my real goal is a kind of “trade:” MFM for FMF. It doesn’t always work. Lots of chicks back out. It helps to say, “Which of your female friends do you most want to have a threesome with?” A guy can’t make it an iron-clad contract because chicks don’t think that way. But a guy can do a trade-off thing. It’s also possible to pickup a third chick together (I’ve done that).

Most of these things require deft male leadership. The guy can’t be too pushy but he also can’t be a wet noodle. Most chicks need to ease into kinky stuff. Not all. I’ve also seen chicks just go into feral beast mode the moment they’re set loose in a swingers club. A typical girl needs some comfort and slow escalation.

It’s not that different from pickup or online dating… some women will just do a one-drink-then-fuck, or a same-day lay, but typically they need some comfort as well as cocky-funny. It pays to play to the typical experience unless a given woman demonstrates otherwise via her words or her extreme compliance.

There is also the question of why do this at all? I do it firstly because I think group sex is hot. Secondly I’m not interested in monogamy, probably ever, and I don’t think it’s practical for most people today. Most people who proclaim that they’re monogamists are actually serial monogamists / serial polygamists, so their “monogamy” is only time-limited anyway. Blackdragon blog covers this in more detail, and thank you to however posted a link to it. Thirdly, lots of chicks really dig it too and they fantasize about it, so let’s be cool and make it happen.

Mostly I do it for me. Most people lie about their sex lives and desires. They get frustrated with their partners because their partners are lying too. In my view this short-circuits most of the lying.

If you want to know why people are tuned to lie to themselves, there is a new book, The Elephant in the Brain: Hidden Motives in Everyday Life, covering it. I’m starting to recommend it to chicks, but of course most chicks are too addled by their smartphones to read an entire book.

In short, most women are probably open to some kind of group sex experience but they need a guy to lead to make it happen. Kinda like everything else in intersex dynamics.

The deep psychology that keeps men in the game

I think most basic guys who get into game just want to find a pretty, acceptable girlfriend, and when they find one they drop off. Maybe they eventually break up, only to start the cycle anew. Or they have kids, and that’s another set of issues not conducive to game writing.

Then there are the guys who get into the game, maybe to find a girlfriend or maybe to just sleep with a lot of women, and they succeed: over time, they have amazing and awful experiences and they rack notches. They have amazing stories and many pleasures (as well as many pains).

Eventually racking notches loses some of its appeal. Most women are not that good outside of bed; they’re annoying to be around; they themselves lose their personal discipline; and the Coolidge Effect kicks in. So guys start to feel what I call “the Groundhog Day effect,” where nailing yet another rando loses some of its thrill. SOME. Not all of course. Most intelligent guys, sooner or later, also want to create something more lasting than random bangs. Usually that means kids. Often the desire for a family becomes acute in the mid 30s to early 40s… one can imagine biological reasoning for that, or the realities of aging and death as one’s parents die or become elderly and infirm. A lot of guys who marry or de-facto marry in their 20s do the opposite and seem to break up in the 35 – 40 period, maybe because they realize their opportunities to relatively easily close 20-something women are going to dwindle. There is a “wall” for men as well as women, though the male wall is further out.

(Yes, I know, the Internet is full of 45- and 55-year-old guys with their HB9 24-year-old girlfriends… maybe… I’m sure it happens, and it’s not impossible, but I don’t see much of it in my own life.)

Maybe the apotheosis of the “pack it in” guys is Neil Strauss, since he wrote The Game and then wrote The Truth, which can be read many ways… one being that he got tired of the game. His own psychology or biology were tired of the chase.

Granted, he is also a famous millionaire and married a 20-something swimsuit model. [Addendum: He seems also to have filed for divorce, so so much for Strauss as an example of quitting the game.]

We have two classes of guys so far: the ones just looking for an okay girlfriend, then the ones who do it for three to ten years before deciding to have kids or otherwise change.

Then there are guys who are in it for the long haul.

They are the guys who write the most intense blogs for long periods of time. Then the blog becomes fodder for a book. Most guys write for a while then disappear into monogamy or kids… or boredom with only speaking to pseudonymous guys online: I’m likely to disappear at some point; I don’t make money doing this, will never start a coaching business, and will run out of stuff to say. Yes, there is daily outrage against men in the news, and I’m prone to writing about that, but I think I will quit due to diminishing returns. There is only so much news outrage before outrage fatigue sets in.

The long haul guys are Krauser, Tom Torero, Blackdragon, probably some other guys I’m not aware of (although Blackdragon is writing more about relationships and less about game as such). Leave comments with others I’m leaving out. For them game seems like a total life practice and purpose, not a phase. Seduction is their art… or their demon.

Art or demon? In a comment to another post, I said that I wonder about the psychology of some of the hardest-core game guys. Neil Strauss wrote about his own psychological demons in The Truth. Tucker Max isn’t exactly a game guy but he too has written about his demons, especially as they relate to his messed-up mother. Krauser has written about his domineering mother too (very similar to Max and Strauss, and this may be a pattern worth exploring). I don’t want to go all Freudian, but I have to think about whether some of the more extreme cases of long-term game obsession come from bad places in childhood.

And, specifically, from men with bad mothers. Max, or his therapist, thinks there’s a psychological pattern. Does it take being somewhat messed up to really succeed at the highest levels of conscious game? Nash’s post “Tom Torero is a Thief | Street Hustle Book Review” got me thinking about these issues… be sure to read the fruitful comments as well. I don’t know what to make of the post because I don’t know Torero personally and he doesn’t seem immediately slimy to me, but what Nash says isn’t impossible.

Psychological explanations about declining long-term game motivation, loneliness, and a desire for substance are easy to dismiss as “blue pill” thinking, but I don’t think all of psychology is “blue pill.” I don’t even think the drive to pair-bond, which most people experience in various ways, is BP. Many BP guys suffer from oneitis because they can’t do any better, but some RP guys get tired of the game, of female bullshit, and the tedium of the chase. Even the joy of sleeping with a new chick can become a drug. Drug metaphors are common in game. Drugs can lead to abuse and the need for abstention and, ultimately, recovery.

To guys who’ve never had a lot of women, the last paragraph may sound like BS. So be it. Unless you’ve had five+ years of active game or sexual success, though, I don’t want to hear your arguments.

Get the experience, then you can tell me it’s BS.

Actually, I want you to have five+ years and be over age 30. Contemporary guys aren’t ready to have families and that kind of thing until at least age 30, more likely age 35. If you are age 21 or 26… talk to me in ten years. Enjoy chasing skirt today. I’m in favor of skirt chasing and there are millions of chicks out there who are actually thin and also want to get f**ked. Go seduce them, promise you’ll pull out, then don’t.

This has turned into a hell of a ramble post, but I’m going to keep going.

Almost all the guys in game, or realistically writing about game because I don’t know anything about the guys whose writing I haven’t encountered, have a common narrative: they were sexual nobodies or nonstarters in high school and usually college. Some didn’t get going in earnest until age 30 or later. Often they were or are jealous of their more successful-seeming rivals. Usually they don’t understand women’s feral sexual nature and are shocked to discover it, as shocked as Europeans finding the new world. They don’t understand that evolutionary psychology compels women to have an official purity narrative layered on top of their actual sex drive and behaviors. They learn game and change their lives enormously.

That is a common narrative for game guys and it isn’t my narrative. I’m coming from a world where I’ve probably had above-average success for most of my life. I’ve had struggles and I still struggle, and I am not laying chicks like a Hollywood actor, but I have done and am doing fine. Positive feelings and thinking tends to beget more positive feeling and thinking. To me, game formalized a lot of things I already sensed and helped me improve weak points. But I am not reacting against extreme failures in my past, or against an acute sense of missing out.

So my past and key reference experiences are different than the game guys I’ve read. I did “okay” in high school. At the time I perceived it to be below average, but now I realize I was above average, though not at the very peak. In retrospect I had a lot of problems with pedestalizing, weak eye contact, and, during initial encounters, subservient behaviors. But I had a lot of advantages from sports teams, reading, and decent willingness to approach (what would now be called “warm approach” in a school, university, or work environment). Given enough green lights I would escalate up to sex. I had a reasonable number of girlfriends and what I would now call positive reference experiences. Many guys get into the game because they feel they underperformed through most of their lives.

In college no one knew about “the game,” and while I wouldn’t call myself one of the ultra-high-achieving naturals, I did fine. I kept up with sports discipline, so I looked better than most guys. I did the default baggy college guy outfit and although it worked fine in retrospect I should’ve tuned what I wore better (in “fashion,” 10% of the effort gets at least 80% of the value). I relied on pure body more than fashion. I also wish I’d learned about black iron compound lifting earlier. At the time I believed that fancy Nautilus machines were safer and better. They’re more advanced and technological, right? WRONG. But I didn’t know better then. I also thought fat was bad and carbs were good, because that was the dominant thinking at the time and the government must be right. Fat makes you fat, right?

Hahahaha, I know, in retrospect I’m laughing at my naiveté too. I didn’t know any better. Neither did many other people.

But I tolerated rejection tolerably well and by the time I was in college I had a pretty simple setup: I figured out early on that I should stock beer, vodka, and a mixer. My strategy was simple: “Come over to the dorm [or house] for a beer later.” Drink a beer or two, listen to music, watch a movie, escalate. When you are surrounded by young hot unencumbered girls… a minimal amount of game can be very powerful.

I bobbled lots of stuff and didn’t persist through LMR. One of the most beautiful girls I ever tried for came over, took off her shirt, but said no to more, and for some reason I just stopped pursuing her. Years later she said she had a huge crush on me and wanted to know why I didn’t like her back. I told her that I didn’t think she liked me. In college opportunities for sex with hot chicks are just there, like breathing. Later in life, they typically must be pursued.

There are many other missed opportunity stories I could tell, but I had a strategy of sorts that was good enough and it was better than most guys. Game is often like running from a bear: you don’t have to be the fastest, you just have to be faster than the other guys. College guys are real slow. I’m sure that if I posted many of the things I did and said to the Internet, an army of couch-PUAs would tell me everything I did wrong, but it worked well enough.

Colleges basically set up warm approaches. Middle class and middle class+ college kids also have nothing better to do besides sit around and gossip, so I got a reputation as a “player,” which of course helped me with like 80% of girls. The reputation wasn’t really deserved, since I just ran the simple algorithm… but I wasn’t complaining either.

I also didn’t know how to keep girls on rotation, so if a girl wanted to be my “girlfriend” I would say yes, and “be her boyfriend,” most often until I got bored with her, at which point I’d suddenly break up with her and she would cry, because I didn’t know how to set appropriate expectations. Or she’d eventually catch me with another girl and get angry. I had a couple of those sitcom-y conversations where the girl would say, “But you’re my boyfriend, how could you do this to me?” and I would reply, “Because I knew that if I didn’t, you wouldn’t have sex with me | would stop having sex with me.” She would be… confused, more than anything, I think.

The right answer, of course, is to say, “I’m seeking something casual and we’re both in college and we’re too young to get serious…” but I wasn’t that sophisticated and back then no one was talking about poly or open relationships. I did intuit how to be sex positive, albeit without knowing that term. Not slut-shaming girls and being the chill guy they can come to for sex that won’t get back to their friends was super smart.

I also had not come to my fundamental realization, that there are really only two kinds of relationships: relationships with a woman with whom you plan to have kids… and all other kinds of relationships. When I came to understand that, much became clear that had previously been mysterious. Have you knocked her up, or would you? That’s one thing. Would you not, or not deliberately? That’s another.

Because of my sex-or-nothing attitude in later college, I became a somewhat polarizing person, as I (eventually) learned not to be faux friends with girls I actually wanted to sleep with. At the start of college I was… not so good at this and did some embarrassing things.

After college I somehow got the idea that it was time to “get serious” and “settle down.” Don’t ask me how or why. I don’t know. Other guys did similar things. If you love to raw dog you may wind up with kids earlier than you intend.

Overall I did well for a long time and that must have affected me and my expectations. Like I said, at the time I didn’t know about the joy of the barbell, and I didn’t formally know or intuitively understand that neither men nor women have much control over who they’re attracted to. Women’s attraction is often sub-verbal, visceral, and not optional.

Evolutionary biology is the foundation of game: a fact so important that I have to keep saying it. Attraction starts of course with looks and the body, which is why every RP and game writer says that lifting (or any exercise really) is such a vital place to start. Women don’t have much control over attraction… so maximize what you can control. That starts with the body’s motions and what a guy puts in his body.

It doesn’t end there and I’ve seen really attractive guys underperform because of personality flaws, being too passive/needy, etc. Having the whole package is best but not an option for most guys, since we have to develop what we have. Most guys never study the game properly.

The other side, of course, is that men only have so much choice in who we’re attracted to. Women wear makeup, hit the gym, choose high heels, etc. because they know they’re in competition for the very top guys. Every time I read a woman write about how women should quit high heels I laugh. Go ahead and do it… but your competitors won’t… and their raised, wiggling asses will attract the eyes of men.

Women know guys like youth, health, fertility cues, etc., even if no woman who isn’t an evolutionary biologist would use those terms. A given woman may defect from optimal strategy but if she does the higher-value guys will get taken by women who don’t defect, so the vast majority of women conform to male preferences… like guys who want to get laid conform to female preferences. You may have seen defectors who cut their hair short, quit shaving, and go vegan. Actually I only see them if they’re in my way, otherwise they’re pretty much invisible to me, like they are to the vast majority of straight guys.

Part of the game is learning those opposite-sex preferences. I didn’t know them in high school or college but I learned them well enough, and the formal component came later. It’s not necessary to know the formal component (virtually no men who have ever lived and reproduced knew it) but it will help, just like it’s possible to dominate a high school basketball court without lifting, but lifting will make any athlete better.

I wonder about the psychological effects of being a relative outcast during the formative years. I have my own psychological quirks, but they don’t stem from utter failure when I was young, which seems like such a common game origin story. A lot of guys who get into game at age 30+ may be going through a phase that I started when I was like age 18.

This is not a “shame guys” post, as I think everyone should pursue happiness and satisfaction as they see fit. In some sense I will likely always be in the game as long as I am physically viable, since I’m not interested in total monogamy and likely never will be.

How much tail does one need before one is basically satiated? When I am 50 or 55 or 60 will I still want to be stopping women and saying that I have to say that they’re cute, but they look like they’re ready for a yoga class? Are they poseurs or really going? Etc. I have seen the old people at the sex clubs and they don’t seem to be having fun and few of the younger people want them there.

Like most normal people, I’m also subject to feelings of loneliness. Friends help with that but are not a panacea. I’ve chosen a weirder life course than most people around me, and that makes having friends and maintaining friendships harder. Most people around me are married. Those who aren’t, are almost all divorced (and then most often re-married). I’m the guy at weddings and holidays without a spouse… or with an “inappropriate” date. Yes, I know that I shouldn’t care and should be a proud lone wolf, but I haven’t gotten to where I am in the business world by ignoring social cues. Almost no one gets to the top alone. The further up you go, the more soft and people skills matter. I’m good enough to mostly get away with my other life, but I can also listen to what people say.

I don’t think I have the psychology to be permanently in the game. I wonder about the guys who are in it for decades. Do they get bored? Do they wonder if there’s anything greater out there? Have their formative experiences so scarred them that, once in game, they can’t get out? I’m clearly not anti-game or anti-sex, but I wonder about these issues. Maybe I’m in a weird place because I’ve also already done some of the empire-building that is common to guys starting around ages 35 – 40.

I have a job and no desire to turn game into money. I don’t see sex as a validation of who or what I am. That’s part of the reason I’m happy paying for it, if the circumstances are right. Though I haven’t paid for it for a while, because I’ve been seeing women pretty steadily. To me paying or not paying for it isn’t a matter of pride. To me, the physical pleasure of sex is the best part. I’m susceptible to that feeling of intimacy and closeness that comes from sex, even though my conscious self knows it’s a lie. I don’t chase skirt for the ego trip (as best I can tell). There seem to be some number of guys writing about the game who want to f**k pretty girls just to see if they can and just to then say that they can do it. My motivations are more immediate and physical.

Most of the guys I know who have kids and a strong relationship are much more pleased than the guys without. We evolved to live around families and to raise kids. Most men who never do that are broken… “most” but not all… if you are a man who doesn’t want kids and know you’d be a lousy father don’t have them: enough unwanted children live in the world already.

A lot of people who never have a family, something is either wrong with their heads from an early age or goes wrong as the loneliness of transient f**ks messes with their heads over time. I use the phrase “a lot of people” instead of “all people” deliberately: you may be an exception. In human affairs, there are always exceptions, but you may also be lying to yourself and thinking you are the exception. Most of this ramble is targeted at guys over age 30 and likely over age 35. If you are 25 and have gotten this far, just bookmark this page and come back in five or ten years. For now, go bang all the hot chicks you can. Younger guys need the experience and need to get the call of the wild out.

Older guys, though, older guys who have been plowing a lot of chicks… who find themselves looking at the ceiling after the latest random is passing out next to him… who want to build the future by having a family… you guys are wondering about the long-term psychology, like I am. This ramble is for you. It does not tell you what to do, for that is not my way. It does attempt to help you think about what the good life is. The good life at age 24, may not be the good life at age 40. Maybe, though, you are a pickup artist. Artists are often maniacs, obsessed with their art until they die. If that is you, so be it.

The best books for learning game

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The more you read and learn, the more you will realize how most people, including most girls, are dumb. You also learn that almost no one has a complete and total handle on the game and sex. There is always another nuance.

Guys, branch swinging, and the low-effort shot

This morning I chatted up a girl in a coffeeshop whose order was screwed up. Don’t remember everything I said but I told her that it sucks to be at the stage of your career when you’re getting other people coffee. It was a cold read but a true one. We chatted for a bit and I told her to give me her number and we’ll get together sometime. She said she had a boyfriend, I said that’s okay, and she laughed and still said no.

A completely normal interaction, but I thought about it because I’ve been seeing Bike Girl but I still want to keep my skills somewhat sharp. Approach and escalation skills can deteriorate fast.

It’s also good to take the random shots that show up in your life because you never know when one might succeed. Around the time I started writing about the Red Pill I was closing out a relationship with a girl who I started seeing when she was 19. That was a low-effort shot and I happened to snare a “yes girl” who was looking for something exciting in her life. She was (and likely still is) the somewhat rare girl who is considerably hotter nude than clothed; clothed I judge her a center-of-the-road 7, and nude I judge her a high 8 (if she learns how to dress better she will get more and high-quality male attention).

We saw each other for about a year and a half. Like some other girls she required very little “game.” Well, apart from status, style, frame, posture… all the pre-reqs. Point is, it’s always a good idea to take the low effort shots when they appear. Sometimes the girls are ready for something new in their life. This morning’s girl wasn’t, but if I’d met her at another point she might’ve been.

I’m seeing Bike Girl, but just as girls “branch swing” into new relationships, it’s useful for guys to test their place in the sexual marketplace too. Not necessarily for a better offer, not automatically, but to see who is reacting and how they’re reacting (it’s possible to “friend zone” chicks in order to keep them on deck, but most guys lack the game and lifestyle to make this a reality). Girls can sense a guy with options and when you take the easy shot you make sure, first of all to yourself, that you have options.

Be kind from a position of strength, not a position of weakness

Don’t be a “nice” guy. But I’ve observed guys who can be kind while still being dominant, and I’ve observed guys who attempt to be kind but are really giant pussies. The differences are instructive.

Two guys I work with illustrate the point… one is respected, demanding, and yet kind, while the other guy runs around supplicating to women and superiors in a way that makes him seem like a dog. He’ll do anything for anyone and as a consequence no one respects his time or (limited) knowledge. He brags about the things he does for people and especially for women. Watching him brag to women he’d like to bang is pathetic. He’d be a sexual harassment lawsuit waiting to happen if he had the balls to make a move. Fortunately he doesn’t and he’s at least harmless enough not to be a likely lawsuit target.

The other guy will not do anything for anyone any time. He isn’t miserly either. Instead he seems to carefully evaluate who he is actually friends with and what actually needs to be done. He can be astonishingly generous with his time if he thinks his investment is likely to be worthwhile, but he is also good at subtly but definitely shaming people who waste his time. One of my first bosses was like him, and I learned more from that boss (and from a particular client) than I have from anyone else, ever, including teachers, professors, and girlfriends.

I’m also thinking about kindness from a position of stregnth because in this essay VC Paul Graham states,

Good does not mean being a pushover. I would not want to face an angry Ronco. But if Ron’s angry at you, it’s because you did something wrong. Ron is so old school he’s Old Testament. He will smite you in his just wrath, but there’s no malice in it.

In almost every domain there are advantages to seeming good. It makes people trust you. But actually being good is an expensive way to seem good. To an amoral person it might seem to be overkill.

Being kind does not mean being a pussy. If you’re “kind” because you’re a pussy and can’t be assertive, no one will respect you and no one should respect you. Things are often valuable in proportion to their supply, and an infinite supply of a thing (like kindness) is of low value.

Don’t be “nice” to women, but be kind to ones who you’re already fucking and who deserve kindness. Don’t give anything, including attention, to women you’re not fucking and who have proven that you’re not going to fuck them. With women and clients pretty much everything is a binary: You’re fucking them or you’re not; they’re giving you money or they’re not. There is no in between. Women and clients like the liminal state. It took me way too long to learn this.

I hate to use the word “nice,” which is close to “kind,” because “nice” has been so polluted by the idea of the “nice guy” that it’s toxic.

Being kind can also mean being tactfully honest. If someone is deadlifting incorrectly it is kind to tell them, or to tell them how you know what you know. Being “nice” can often mean trying to assuage a person’s feelings, even when feelings of inadequacy or wrongness are justified. That being said, know when to speak and when to shut the fuck up. Often shutting the fuck up is best because morons can’t be helped and can’t take justified criticism.

The girl I’m breaking away from sees me as kind because her sister (who she is close to) does and because of something I did: I paid her tuition (which wasn’t much money) briefly. Now, I know, and you should know, that it’s a horrible idea to use money to supplicate to women. Let me emphasize that before commenters jump on me. I’d already been dating this girl for about a year. When we first started dating I don’t think she had any idea how much I make. I don’t waste money on the usual dumb shit guys waste money on (cars, apartments; unfortunately I do have a high burn rate that is not negotiable, however). Her work and school interfered with her ability to do the things I wanted her to do, so I just paid the tuition. She didn’t ask for it, directly or indirectly, which is an unusual mark of character these days. It isn’t a lot of money to me. You can argue that I was manipulated, but if so then I was party to the manipulation.

We’re on the path to breakup because she wants to move in with me and I’ve flat-out said no. I’ve been down that path and I’m not going down it again. I like this girl and I like the crazy shit I’ve encouraged her to do, but long-term she’s too young for me and I don’t want the kind of committment she thinks she wants but doesn’t actually want. Living together is the death of eroticism and I won’t do that again. Not anytime soon. Maybe someday.

Reminder, I originally wrote this post a year and a half ago, so some of the personal anecdotes don’t line up with my current life.