Kids, the player, and the Red Pill: Comprehensive statement

I don’t have good answers or solutions to questions around how players who wants kids, should go about having them (and I think most guys should have kids… MOST is not ALL, so you may be an exception). I’m skeptical of the “Just do THIS, bro” stories I see, most of which reduce to a couple scenarios:

  • “Just marry the RIGHT woman:” while screening women is helpful, it is not possible to know how someone will evolve three years, five years, ten years later. You are still gambling when you marry a woman.
  • “Just marry and hope for the best.” This is a good way to lose half your assets, and to pay alimony in addition to child support.
  • “Just have a kid with a woman in a non-committed relationship and keep your harem going.” Most women won’t agree to this. In an age of reliable birth control and abortion, she is not likely to go for this by accident. This scenario is not impossible, just not common.
  • “Just have a kid and then leave the woman.” This is very bad for the kid and also hard to set up and execute.

In my view, guys in their teens, 20s, and early 30s need to have experience with a wide array of women BEFORE they attempt to set up a family.

Most women are ill-suited to relationships and family and most modern women under the age of 27/28 are not actually ready to have kids, even if they think they are. Many, conceivably most, women who have kids younger than that age stay with the father for a couple years, then divorce / leave him for one last big ride. It also seems that most guys comply with female demands and just wander into marriage because they don’t think they can get another girl; while this is a terrible reason to marry, it’s also super common. I encourage you NOT to sleepwalk into marriage. One way to know whether you should stay with a woman is to ask yourself, “Can I get another woman at least as good as this one if I want to?” If the honest answer is “Yes,” then you should consider staying with her. Only stay with her if you have options. If you don’t have options, you need to up your value and game.

Despite all the pleasures of being a player (it has NEVER been a better time to be a player, despite what you hear sometimes online), I think most guys eventually want kids. Typically this seems to happen around age 35 – 40. A guy who has been in the game for 5 – 10 years often tires of it… while f**king hot chicks never gets old, at least for me, it can get repetitive and unsatisfying, for lack of a better term. Many guys come to yearn for something more substantial in their lives than slagging randoms until the point they no longer can. If you’re a committed player for life, that’s fine, this is not for you and I wish you good luck in your endeavors. This is for guys who start thinking beyond the next bang. I spent a long time thinking about the next bang, so, again, I’m not opposed to that view… but I think I’m growing away from it.

Modern marriage doesn’t work because it’s a high-risk contract with little reward for the guy. In our society we link sexuality tightly with raising children. Is it possible to separate those two, despite the way marriage co-mingles them? To have a kid, but also to have other partners, consensually? It seems that very few people think about this, let alone try it. Yet many people end up doing it: they just marry, have kids, then have an acrimonious divorce, which is in effect a parturition of sexuality and child rearing. What if you skip the acrimony and the false till-death-do-us-part thing? I don’t see how people can make till-death-do-us-part promises with a straight face today, despite the regularity with which people do just that.

I’m interested in co-parenting as an alternative. Very few women have heard of co-parenting, though. The conversation about co-parenting is just getting started, and it’s more common than it was ten years ago.

It’s also apparent that most sexual relationships lose their sexual component over time, and that’s part of the reason I’m interested in consensual non-monogamy. Consensual non-monogamy is hard, and many people are inclined to succumb to the power and lure of “new relationship energy” (NRE), instead of investing in their previous relationship(s), which they have already hedonically adapted to.

I’ve been talking more w/ women (and some men) about co-parenting, since, it’s clear that the “we’re going to put our entire sexual, economic, and child-raising eggs in one basket” system hasn’t been working very well for decades. Is it possible or conceivable that we can have a consensual, intelligent co-parenting system instead? It doesn’t seem totally impossible to me, and some people are (finally) talking about this, which in my view is long overdue.

I wonder if more couples would work better w/ something like a child-raising and care contract. A lot of the successful couples I see seem to either be post-sex (weird to me, but whatever), or have quiet side arrangements. Problem for guys is that quiet side arrangements are much easier for women to arrange than guys to arrange. Just like a woman who writes on a dating app, “In a relationship and looking for something casual” will be inundated with sex requests while a guy who does the same will… not be. That’s why I’m more fond of the sex club situation, where extremely direct reciprocation is the norm.

Overall, I just don’t think humans are good at long-term monogamy. Even in the days after the Industrial Revolution and before reliable birth control, the likelihood of relentless, back-breaking labor and the possibility of early death means that it’s possible not that many people did modern long-term monogamy.

Today, I’m envisioning something like a five-year shared-resources contract, the purpose of which is to have two kids and remain romantically entangled. Then, after, you can re-evaluate the contract and decisions. Or a contract might specify that you’re going to have kids and do 50/50 custody and not leave the metro area. We’re pretty far from having this conversation, but many people are already doing something like this, if you look at the divorce rate.

Realistically, it is also very difficult if not impossible for most guys to have very small kids and be anything like a player. Well, maybe if you have the money to hire a full-time nanny or something like that, but apart from corner/edge cases it’s not going to happen, if you’re also dealing with kid stuff. The people who think otherwise either haven’t been in the situation or just abandon Mom/kid, which I also think is bad. For a lot of people who have two kids two years apart, they spend six years in “kid world” dealing with very small kids. Some have families who assume part of the burden. Some pay for child care. Some do both. Many just work their way through it. I recommend buying kettlebells and doing kettlebell workouts.

It is possible to have somewhat older kids, when they are more autonomous, and split time w/ the Mom and be a player. Most guys just don’t do this, or can’t.

I’m interested in co-parenting because it seems obvious to me that a) traditional marriage doesn’t work but all that b) having kids is important and meaningful. How do you square that circle?

For a guy who makes a really large amount of money, it’s possible to deal with “child” support and the family-law system. It could also conceivably be possible to hire nannies, etc. and still be a player. I’m saying “possible” because I don’t think I know anyone who’s done it (though I’m not sure I know any true players anyway). For most people, kids, especially when young, just take a lot of time and attention, in a way that’s not very compatible with sleeping around.

I mentioned that many guys eventually get bored with being a player. I think we have been psychologically selected in part for having and being around kids, and it is very hard to get over our evolved psychology. The “grandmother hypothesis” asks if women experience menopause and cease reproduction, yet keep living for decades after, as an evolutionary adaptation to help their daughters’s grandchildren. While older men may still be able to have children, it’s not obvious how often men age 50+ actually did so… men may also be psychologically primed for leadership roles and to help their grandchildren. If so, then failing to set yourself up to be able to do that may be setting yourself up for psychological disappointment.

I like citing evolutionary biology and psychology, and those fields may have implications for stage of life. We look to them as players because they provide a theoretical framework for what chicks are into. But we can also look to them for other virtues, like how to think about age and family. Many families and communities are fractured by travel for jobs and by simple social dysfunction.

If our psychologies are primed for children/grandchildren, that can explain why so many people (including guys) without kids seem pretty f**ked up and bitter. There is a mismatch between what their deep psychologies want them to do, and what they have done or are doing. That mismatch is hard to reconcile.

It seems there is also a difference between a “happy” and “meaningful” life, which many of us intuit.

Satisfying one’s needs and wants increased happiness but was largely irrelevant to meaningfulness. Happiness was largely present oriented, whereas meaningfulness involves integrating past, present, and future. For example, thinking about future and past was associated with high meaningfulness but low happiness. Happiness was linked to being a taker rather than a giver, whereas meaningfulness went with being a giver rather than a taker. Higher levels of worry, stress, and anxiety were linked to higher meaningfulness but lower happiness.

That matches my intuitive sense and what I have been trying to convey. There is some trade off between having the best immediate experience RIGHT NOW and building a life that is “meaningful,” “substantial,” choose your word here. American society tells us we are supposed to be “happy,” which sounds a little like consumerist advertising bullshit to me.

One player I know wrote,

The firm subtext I have with any girl I date now is outcome indifference. She can more or less come and go as she pleases and I am fine either way. Once you have a child I do not see how you can become anything but outcome dependent. How would you handle that loss of leverage over her behaviour?

When you have a kid, you’re very likely going to be less outcome independent with the woman, but you also have to remember that, if she wants to leave and sue you for child support… she will. That’s just a fact. But most normal women want a partner and a father for their child, so, typically a man’s leverage increases in the first few years of the child’s life, as normal women want to be subsidized financially and want their child to have a father.

You can of course find exceptions to this. The exceptions make great stories.

It’s really difficult to predict how women respond to being a parent. They seem to have all kinds of responses, many of them unpredictable. In some sense you are tied to her for the next twenty years. But, in another sense, you still have to be ready to leave, or to have her leave; the main way to be outcome independent is to be prepared, psychologically and logistically, for what will happen in the event of a split.

The negative and the positive are both parts of life. Dwell too long or too far on either, and you will not be a complete person, in my opinion; complete persons have to embrace both. I like to think that I do, though I may be deluding myself.

Functional women also try very hard to make sure they are NOT going to have a kid with a deadbeat, a lackadaisical guy, or even a player who is going to abandon them. Women who are functional today get an IUD and, even if they get pregnant by a non-investing guy, they are not going to keep the baby. Obviously, many women are dysfunctional, but I’m not convinced it’s a great idea to have a baby with a dysfunctional woman. In an era of long-acting reversible contraception, separating sex from reproduction is easy and functional women do it.

There is also a stage-of-life question to the woman or women a guy is dating. Most chicks under age 22 – 25 DO NOT CARE about your career, your intellect, etc. They are in it for the hot guys, the feels, and the excitement (mostly). Chicks who pay their own rent, often evaluate guys on other factors in addition to hotness and feelings. There is a big gap between chicks who are being heavily subsidized by parents/state (via student loans) and chicks who have to pay their own way. The latter usually get MUCH more interested in a guy’s career and intellect, as those things directly affect his ability to keep roof over head. This is much harder than many chicks realize.

This is not universal, and some 18-year-old chicks will be very intersted in earning power and some 31-year-old chicks won’t give a f**k. But it is a strong correlation. It make sense, too. There is a lot of stuff in the Red Pill about how chicks’s sexual market value (SMV) is predominantly determined by looks and youth. While that’s true, it’s also overstated, especially for guys looking for a longer-term chick. For a guy looking purely for hookups, it’s pretty much all about the hotness. For a guy evaluating a longer-term deal, though, then her own psychology, earning power, etc. become much more important in the evaluation. In the modern world, a chick without a job is sending a terrible signal about herself.

Chicks also have their own game… chicks realize early on that they are competing against other chicks, and that, if all she offers is f**king… well, lots of other chicks can and do do that too. So women ideally learn how to cook, at least, and ideally learn other useful skills too. It seems that most women underestimate how much that can make them stand apart.

In some ways this is a lame essay, because I don’t have great answers to the problems of childbearing and long-term relationships. This is the Internet, so I know I am supposed to be the God-like guru who KNOWS EVERYTHING. I am not, though, and I don’t know everything, and some questions are unanswerable. I see that the old structures don’t work anymore and have been killed by feminism, despite the many men who are still foolhardy enough to sign the marriage contract. Almost no one is talking about the new structures (if you know someone who is, please tell me about them). So where does someone go who does want a family but also sees conventional marriage as fucked? We have to write a whole new playbook from scratch, which is pretty uncommon. Many of the suggestions I have read are either unrealistic or assume a massive amount of income/wealth, which is itself unrealistic for most people. Yes, I know the Internet has many people making $250,000/year in location-independent income, and they are willing to show you how to do it too for the low low price of $995… but that is atypical. If you genuinely have it, good for you, but most people don’t.

Chicks also go through the epicycles men do. A 35-year-old woman who just got out of an eight or ten year relationship might be ready for some hot guy casual sex. Or a 45-year-old woman for that matter. The woman I call Low-cut top girl is younger than that and didn’t have as long a relationship, but she is/was in that phase. These epi-cycles are why marriage is so foolish for most men. A woman may love a man for ten years and then leave. Why give her half your money too?

This piece has probably taken a longer time than anything else I’ve written, and it still feels very incomplete to me. The whole Red Pill world feels incomplete to me at times… I saw a smart Tweet on the subjet,

The root cause of the brain drain in the PUA industry post 2010s.

The pick up guys who are cool and intelligent stay hidden because they have professional and business reputations to maintain.

The end result is the PUAs that go public are mostly unsuccessful weirdos.

Most guys with things going for them, would have to be nuts to come out. At some point, (almost) everyone needs to change pace. From f**king tons of chicks to building a substantial contribution. From writing online to living in real life. Not everyone… but most of us.

There is also a thing in modern upper-middle-class culture called “helicopter parenting” or “snowplow parenting.” If you work with Gen Zers in the 18 – 23 age bracket you may have seen some of the results. This kind of parenting is crazy, time-intensive, and leads to neurotic parenting and kids. Most amusingly, it does not work. How your kid turns out is largely not up to the parent, within reason. Jocko Willink has said that he lets his kids fail (in non-physically threatening ways). It’s important to know the strategic mission that the family is trying to accomplish. A lot of contemporary upper-middle-class parenting is about doing everything for the kid, destroying the adult’s life and not letting the kid develop. Don’t do this, although your peers might be doing it.

So, like I said at the beginning, I don’t have a final answer and am suspicious of those who claim to. I think that consensual co-parenting is a smart route, but most chicks are not going to go for it both because of cultural conditioning around marriage and because the marriage contract gives them an option on the guy’s financial resources. Chicks are also driven to find a guy they think is higher than them on the social totem pole. But there is a limit on how many guys are up there, so a lot of chicks end up becoming cat ladies instead of having families. Sad, but that is modern society. Chicks don’t learn femininity and then are surprised guys don’t respond to them… guys don’t learn masculinity and then are surprised when chicks don’t respond to them. The chicks who learn femininity aren’t online feminists… the guys who learn masculinity aren’t online PUAs. You see through the system, then you figure out who and what you really are. You figure out the final answers given by gurus are wrong or incomplete. You see that there is only the struggle. Eventually all of us lose the struggle and die… to live is to struggle.

Why romantic rejection stings: evolved psychology

Humans spent most of our evolutionary history in small bands and/or villages of 30 – 150 people; think about that ancestral environment for a minute: in it, there were likely only a handful of unattached, fecund women at any given time, all of them enmeshed in family kinship ties that had to be navigated by any guy who wants a shot at their p***y. In that environment, making a play for a chick and losing might be severely damaging or even fatal to a guy’s reproductive prospects; a guy should experience a severe psychological penalty if he fails. All of his people are probably going to learn of his failure, and failure may lead to a failure cascade. Fail hard enough and your genes wash out of the gene pool.

Contrast that with today (you can probably see where I’m going): in high schools or colleges, a guy may be surrounded by dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of attractive prime-age women. In big cities like Las Vegas, Los Angeles, or London, that number rises to the hundreds of thousands. Any particular rejection shouldn’t matter, yet to many of us it does, to the point that fear of rejection inhibits the attempt. In some circumstances, circumspection is still desirable: a lot of high school and college chicks are super into a guy’s social network and standing, which is why cold approach pickup is often undesirable in these environments… even though most high school and college guys should be bolder than they are and risk/accept more rejection.

Today, most women have minimal romantic oversight by their kin, particularly for short-term mating and after the high-school period. Women make their own sexual decisions. For guys living in big cities, any particular rejection is meaningless, yet it still stings. I think that’s our evolved response to sexual rejection, which is maladaptive in most modern situations. If she says no, move on to the next one. Practice hitting on women like you’d practice any other skill. If a guy works on his value, value delivery mechanism, and environment, he will likely improve. But in hitting on chicks and accepting their sometimes-cruel rejection, he may be pushing against his own psychology, and that is difficult. I want to acknowledge that it is difficult. Men and women have overlapping but distinct sexual strategies, which means that both sexes will struggle, just in different ways. The way to minimize struggle is to be ultra-high value (unlikely) or give up (unsatisfying). The rest of us must face the dragon.

It’s useful to try and overcome some emotional responses with rational thought. Useful, but difficult, and likely imperfect. I don’t expect to completely overcome emotional responses, but I wish to try, and, in my life, the effort to think through my feelings has been rewarded. Your first feeling toward a situation or thing is often wrong.

Understanding our evolved psychology is important for understanding how to live today. In ancestral times, a sweet tooth was adaptive and helped guide us towards edible fruits and honey, both of which were likely important to survival. Today, industrial agricultural can deliver sugar in quantities totally foreign to evolutionary times, leading to obesity, diabetes, etc. Almost everyone who quits sugar gets great results. Standing apart from the herd, though, is hard, and we see the results of those who can’t stand out (fat people) all around us. The modern information environment may also be bad for us, attempting to generate fake tribalism and bullshit outrage because both are extremely attractive, even if they’re bad for us. We should be reading more books and fewer anger-inducing, polarizing media articles.

I write about the ailments of sugar and the pain of rejection not because I am beyond them, but because I am not. I still struggle with both, even as I try to build habits that minimize the struggle, or allow me to win. I’m not 100% successful. Rejection still annoys me at times. I miss chicks I ought to open. I try to re-center myself by asking, “Why am I responding this way? What is the good response? What would Marcus Aurelius do, besides conquer Gaul?” We live for only a short while. We should try to do it as best we can.

I’m writing this today because I believe I’m both rejecting and being rejected this weekend. Plus, I read an incredible Red Pill account by an anthropologist, Napoleon Chagnon, who perseveres through both the tribe he studies and the Marxist-indoctrinated colleagues who can’t conceive of a world outside their narrow ideological bubble. The world rarely confirms to an ideology. We try to make it so at our own peril.

Two possible paths forward: Hedonistic partying vs children

I realized something else about Ms. Slav: I’m tempted by her because I think that, together, we could do a lot to build up the non-monogamous community and tell a lot of people about non-monogamy; that sounds grandiose, but hear me out. Like I wrote in this other post, you have to be cool / have status first. IMO I have reasonable status and Ms. Slav combines being young and hot with unusual intelligence and a total love of non-monogamy, sex clubs, group sex, etc. So much so that I was a little bit confused when I first brought her into the scene… most chicks need a fair amount of coaxing, coaching, help, etc. Ms. Slav just ran straight in, blew right past me, and is deep in.

Already, some of the non-monogamous dating we’ve done has been intense. Ms. Slav is a true bisexual, it seems, and likes to dominate women… a very powerful combination, since most women are submissive and reactive, so, when two bisexual women get together, they often fizzle because neither one will start things up… chicks are used to guys leading. That is why many bi chicks like couple-to-couple dating. The guys will guide the chicks into the hookup, which the chicks can’t manage on their own. One theme game guys learn is that a lot of chicks have trouble doing things without guidance/motivation/external stimuli… that may be why chicks do well in school and then don’t make it to the very top of workplaces, since top jobs demand autonomy and internal motivation.

Peter Thiel says that groups can get things done that individuals cannot. He is writing about companies. But that is true of other kinds of organizations, groups, and ideas too. We’re experiencing a feminist hellscape because lots of small groups of feminists got together in the 60s and 70s to figure out how they can extract more value from men, and they largely succeeded (their narrative is somewhat different than the one I have just presented, although the results are the same). I think I can do something similar with Ms. Slav… because she is hot, smart, and uninhibited, we could do a LOT of community-building in a way that I have not seen in other chicks.

Most people are only interested in their immediate needs and surroundings. Most guys who start to read the pickup literature, never do anything with it… the ones who begin practicing, most don’t write about it… the ones who write, most give up quickly… the ones who don’t, most don’t write books that might transcend their blogs… the number of guys who go beyond all that, is quite small. And usually they find themselves embedded in a group of some kind. One possible mistake I have made is not writing online sooner, although this might not have been a mistake, as I was focused on work and other matters and correctly anticipated that writing online could be a huge time sink with zero financial payoff. That anticipation has been totally correct. Importantly, though, Ms. Slav and I could built a large non-monogamy scene together, especially using couple-to-couple dating as an intake mode. Religious lunatics know that nothing beats person-to-person pitches… so do salesmen… real change happens one person at a time, ideally face-to-face. I am tempted by doing that kind of messianic zeal with Ms. Slav. I think she would go for it. I think she has the attributes for it.

So I realized that I’m tempted by her not just for the usual reasons, but because she could be a powerful catalyst for showing other people the way. I have helped to host parties before… the two of us together could be a powerful locus for parties. I’m better organized than she is, not surprisingly, but she also LOVES non-monogamy like no other chick I’ve met, even Libido Girl. Or I should say, “Like no other hot chick I’ve met.” There are some desperate fat chicks who are eager to flaunt their sex positivity. Most chicks will not make crude propositions and come-ons to me, at least before first sex… but low chicks, like 5s and below, sometimes will. It is their only potential source of value, so they use it. Not interesting to me, but enough guys must be willing to take the zero-effort lay for it to work. And fat chicks, older chicks, chicks who aren’t very sexy… like attracts like, which I’ve been talking about too, so they typically can’t host good parties. You have to have a core nucleus of sexy chicks and cool guys to make a party work. Take away the sexy chicks, and the whole thing falls apart.

One sexy chick who can attract and retain other sexy chicks, and you have a potential core/nucleus for a larger group. I have seen this thing sort of start before… but the chicks I’ve been with have never had the right combination of personality, IQ, and desire. The typical chick still fundamentally wants a firm, one-on-one relationship with a cool guy, while the other things are secondary to that primary relationship. Very few chicks think bigger than themselves and their immediate surroundings. That’s true of some guys, too, but I’m not dating guys so I don’t give a f**k about that in these circumstances.

So yeah. I think that’s why I’m stuck on this point. I have a pretty clear question, or set of questions to answer… one way is to ease off the non-monogamy, group-sex thing, and work toward having another kid. The other way is to join w/ Ms. Slav and go ALL. THE. WAY. To make the scene really happen. To leverage Feeld and other tools to meet a lot of people and to build a larger community.

If I had met Ms. Slav five years ago I think I would be doing this, or would have done this. Today, though, I feel my desire is not the same, and I am not as interested in building this kind of thing, compared to five years ago. I also recognize that my own desires seem to be shifting.

The trade-off is that doing this with Ms. Slav is not very compatible w/ having another kid. If you are going to comment and tell me how it is compatible w/ kids… please just stop, unless maybe you have had kids of your own… what people believe in theory is so far from what happens in practice, that I don’t want to hear it. Sorry.

Practically every guy on the Internet has some chick who is “not like” the other chicks… Ms. Slav is really not like other chicks. She somewhat knows, I know it.

Low-cut top girl asks if I am a “fuckboy”

Got a text the day after our last session from Low-cut top girl saying, “Hey, I have to ask you this are you a fuckboy?” For context, I had sent her my typical “Good seeing you yesterday” text, and she replied saying she had a great time, then a couple hours later she sent that text. I laughed out loud when I read it and decided to ignore it for about 24 hours, in keeping with typical texting practice that focuses on logistics and retaining my own ability to concentrate.

I replied to her “I don’t know what that means.” In the same text, I invited her over, offering dates and times (covering logistics). She resisted at first saying that it’s important for her to know, and I said I’m not a big texting person and that we can talk in person. She agreed. In person I can gently probe what she means. I pretty much know… and that’s okay. I think I’m going to talk more about being sex positive and invite her to a club. I have lost chicks at points like this… while the seduction community is full of good responses to accusations of being a player, in reality girls who are mentally healthy and want a significant, one-on-one relationship are not going to hang around very long with a guy who isn’t going to give it to her.

You can increase the probability of retaining her with a good response, and I have a bunch, but you cannot guarantee it. I may be too indifferent with this one… I have a lot going on at the moment, more than I really want/need, so that makes it easy to be blasé, which is another word for “abundance mentality.” It’s also interesting that girls like the term “fuckboy” more than “player” now. I think.

This kind of conversation has gone both ways for me. I can tell Low-cut top girl is extremely interested because of how much she texts me, and she seems bothered that I don’t reply immediately most of the time. Attention is the only tool men have and I gave her a copy of Deep Work. She seemed to think that being given a book is weird. She seems to be continually thrown off balance by me. She also seems super basic, and to have had her one big relationship with a super basic guy. I still wish she were just a little bit hotter. She seems like a bad candidate for anything long term, as she is one of these girls who fancies herself as very intelligent when she is in fact not, and she seems to have had limited exposure to really intelligent people. It’s okay to not be that bright and understand that… it is bad to think you’re up there and not be. Being basic / average and owning that is fine… being basic / average and pretending you’re not, can be kind of annoying. I don’t say anything about that directly to her, as there’s no need, but I can feel it, and I think she can feel it. She has not read enough to know anything and hasn’t had nearly as much life experience as she thinks, so she is guided by her feelings and by random, anecdotal evidence, and mistakes that for wisdom. Not a super common set of characteristics, but I have seen it before.

The younger the girl, in my experience, the more desperately she wants rapid text replies, and the stranger she finds my texting habits. That’s okay with me, as I want to set frame appropriately and not be beholden to a flighty chick’s random notions and urges.

This post sounds more negative than it should. Low-cut top girl is mostly pleasant to be around and she obeys me sexually. I find her more entertaining than not, but I also know that girls who are entertaining because of their ignorance can become annoying for the same reason later. I feel like most of her challenges I have already seen from other girls, almost like she is just a Markov chain automated text generator spitting out typical female nonsense. Overall I am enjoying the sex with her, so I should probably shut up and enjoy the ride.

How do you avoid the Markov chain text generator feel? Learn a lot and try your best to think for yourself. Most chicks, unfortunately, do neither. Ms. Slav, does both pretty well, and that is part of the reason she is more interesting to be around than most chicks. Most guys don’t do this very well either… they select conversation topics from the fields SPORTS, WORK, or VIDEO GAMES. Or FAMILY, if they have one. Then they are surprised when chicks find them boring, or when other guys find them boring.

Overall, Low-cut top girl’s question at this stage is likely a form of comfort test, a subject that doesn’t get much play online because I think most guys never reach this stage.

Art and music event: Ran into that guy again, and other game things

Last night I dragged myself to a kind of art and music insider event (hard to describe it precisely, but it overlaps with the non-monogamy community), and there was… the guy I nicknamed The Bitch,

While we’re talking, the guy who I describe in this story and this one is also there. He turns out to be a bitch, so I’m going to call him The Bitch. The Bitch and I had some rapport before the Ms. Slav thing, but he now hates me. At the party, early on, I nod at him and say hi, and he says nothing back and looks away.

I guess we’re okay now, because we arrived at the same time and had this moment where we were eyeing each other, deciding whether to renew hostilities or not, and I just smiled and treated him normally. So maybe I was overly dramatic in the description. I’m still not a fan of him, but we’re likely to keep running into each other.

The event was way too loud, but I felt like I needed to keep up community status by making an appearance. I furiously hit on a thin, hot chick who had her big tits prominently displayed in a low-cut top; lots of good laughter, banter, etc. but then she denied the number. I went a little more direct in getting it by saying we should get a drink, rather than cloaking intent in future event planning. Later in the night, The Bitch was flirting with her and DID seem to get the number. Not 100% sure, though it seemed like it. Also flirted some with a chick who is pretty new (and hot), though she likes some kind of death metal techno music (don’t recall the specifics of it, but it sounded stupid to me) and I collected the email. Felt a bit on autopilot throughout. Tiredness and previous oversocializing held me back.

I had a break from Ms. Slav while traveling, but the last week has been tiring. I’m a bit socially exhausted and, despite Ms. Slav’s bad behavior, I’d like to keep her in the fold. I’m not sure whether she has an IUD yet or not, but I’m going to keep wrapping it up with her because she is f**king around enough that she is going to have a problem sooner or later. This is not always a popular view online, but I feel like I don’t don’t properly bond with a chick unless we’re bare and I finish in her. I actually think most girls feel similarly.

As for the break, it’s been longer than the traveling… Ms. Slav cancelled a date like an hour before we were supposed to meet, so I went silent for about a week, maybe a little more, then f**ked her right before I left on a trip. It seems like she is now worried about losing me… which is a nice position, but maybe with the wrong girl.

Ms. Slav has a new girlfriend from school, and I would LOVE to get that threesome. But I’m taking it very slowly and circuitously. Less is more. The threesome action w/ Home Friend happened due to patience on my part. Ms. Slav definitively rejected The Bitch in part because of his impatience. He pushed too hard at an event, and that turned her off enough for her to cut him off.

Calibration is such a tricky skill: knowing when to push and when to pull back. Knowing how to leave the girl enough plausible deniability. Knowing how to propose a proposition without it seeming forced. These skills are very hard to articulate. That’s another reason so many online questions from guys are difficult to answer… there is so much calibration and information available from real life, that gets stripped away in online questions and reports. Some of the principles are easy to articulate (raise your value, raise your value delivery mechanism, show your masculinity, think about the law of reciprocation), but getting them appropriately integrated into a given situation… so much tougher. So much more delicate. I think that is why I tend to write long posts, and why I wrote the book… it’s not possible to fully describe what’s happening in a small number of words. Sometimes it is, like when a girl is into you and makes the bang easy, or when a girl isn’t into you and rejects you solidly.

I also hate to sound like a chick, but I am trying to get a little bit more in touch with my own feelings around how I should direct my life. My work life is going pretty well. I’m trying to figure out where my love/sex life should go. Especially as I consider booting up conventional online dating for the first time in a couple years. Non-monogamous online dating has a different set of assumptions embedded in it.

What else… at the yoga studio I go to, a chick with a fiancé (who I met briefly) has been oddly flirty. She’s also a pothead. May try to make a move there. She seems about late 20s / early 30s, low 7. Another chick is much older and moving from student to teacher… I think she’s 40, maybe early 40s, and yet I find myself strangely attracted to her. She’s very slender and a former dancer. Me feeling attracted to her also makes no sense, yet I feel it.

I’ve not had much success at gyms or, recently, yoga studios, in part because I am wary of soiling the atmosphere at places I go regularly and in part because I haven’t, for whatever reason. But there is no intrinsic reason I can discern why this should be so. At yoga studios most people don’t seem to talk to each other, which I find strange… so I make a point of doing chitchat where and when possible. Just little feelers to see who might respond. The pothead responds to them, as does the older woman who is moving into an instructor role.

Come to think of it, that chitchat from the gym did lead to a short bang with a very pretty blonde girl a couple years ago. I should write out that story at some point. I’d mostly forgotten about the girl.

I’m supposed to see Ms. Slav tonight but apart from that I hope to read books and go out for coffee and go to the gym this weekend and not much else.

Cleaning house after the death: de-clutter and live your experience

I have a somewhat different view of physical objects and possessions than most people I know, maybe because I’ve been involved in cleaning out the houses of dead elderly relatives. I try to do a kind of minimalism. If an object is not being used regularly, I get rid of it. If I can replace a larger object with a smaller one, I try to do that (like moving from a DSLR camera to a mirrorless camera… some of you may protest that I can just use a phone, but I can’t, not while retaining anything like the image and video quality I desire and you should desire). As a person accumulates more stuff, he stops owning the stuff and the stuff starts owning him. I have written before that some of the best sex I’ve had and done occurred in a small studio apartment that had a bed, a couple of pots, some books, a desk, a computer, and not much else. Chicks would remark on the spartan decor after I’d f**ked them a few times. Sometimes the first time. I’d shrug and talk about how experiences are more valuable than possessions. The less you have, the more mobile you are.

About the dead relatives. Apart from cash and some sentimental photos, pretty much nothing they had was valuable. Their art that showcased their super-important taste and personalities… the carefully chosen furniture that had gone out of date and smelled like old people… their weird collections… it got trashed because it wasn’t of any real value. The person who died imagined its value, and their imaginary value died with them. It had meaning to the person who owned it, not to the other people. The advent of eBay and Amazon have made these problems even more acute. Turns out that most “antiques… ” no one gives a shit about them. A “collector’s item” is just a marketing ploy. People collect experiences, unique states of mind… those are the things that matter. What you can do matters. What you can do to make the world a better place matters. What you have, it doesn’t, except to you. Most chicks won’t be that impressed with it.

What I’m trying to say is, don’t get attached to stuff. Only think about what stuff does for you and how it enables you to live your best life. Too much stuff makes you immobile. Get rid of it. Read Marie Kondo. Focus on the game. Realize most women don’t care much about your stuff. They care about YOU.

Marie Kondo is big in the culture right now. I’m sure some of you are like, “A CHICK? I can’t listen to a CHICK.” In which case you have become like some of the feminists you claim to dislike. Anyway, point is that she has a book, now she has Netflix show, and it’s for a good reason. Most people have way too much shit.

That’s one mistake I haven’t made. I’ve made lots of mistakes.

Life is short. It’s a cliche but it’s also true. I didn’t appreciate that in my teens and 20s, like most people that age. The older you get, the more people you see die, the more real this becomes. It’s part of the reason I think guys age 35 – 40 start to want to have kids… you realize that you really are a temporary, transient phenomenon and you want to “pass the torch.” I feel grateful for a lot of what my family has done for me… it’s important to pass that on. One thing I’m hesitant about in the pickup / RP worlds is that a lot of guys seem to be filled with hate, with conniving, with a desire to con other people. I don’t feel that way. I don’t want to let other, unrelated people sap my value, but I also want to make the most of existence and to let other people exist too. Having more stuff, it doesn’t make your life better. It’s just encumbrances.

I see guys, they focus on how this couch or this piece of clothing or this other thing will help them get laid, and it doesn’t. Worst of all, I see them get married, try to give the wife the big house in the nice neighborhood… it doesn’t matter. In the divorce, she’ll keep it anyway. The right thing to do is buy less than you can afford… to think about what really matters in life… to make the most of what you already have. So few guys get here. So few guys understand that the woman doesn’t want his stuff, she wants him, and what his stuff is doesn’t really matter. It should be clean, and he should have a good space to f**k her in, beyond that it doesn’t matter.

The idea that we should horde stuff is a holdover from evolutionary history when stuff was rare and valuable. It’s a holdover from childhood, when more was better (because kids are stupid). It’s not a useful belief for employed adults. The desire for stuff lets us fall prey to marketers. This is a point in Geoffrey Miller, Spent: Sex, Evolution, and Consumer Behavior, a book everyone but especially guys in the game should read. The #1 way marketers sell stuff is by implying that it will improve your sex life. In fact, most physical stuff will not improve your sex life. Instead of being convinced that stuff will improve your sex life, skip straight to the things that will actually improve your sex life, that have been described here many times and that are available in the links in the sidebar. Having a good body, a good mind, a mission in life, and real skills are 100x more attractive to most women than having a lot of money or a lot of stuff. Stuff is clutter that one day someone like me is going to have to go through and junk.

Female “friends:” the comprehensive statement.

Experienced guys can quit this post right now, as it’s about an obvious topic, so you don’t need to read it. But it comes up with such frequency online that I want one, comprehensive discussion of it.

A guy on Reddit says, “Anyone else find themselves increasingly distant from female ‘friends’?”

Those scare quotes around “friends” are good. The guy goes on, “Have you guys also found it more and more difficult to have girls around who are only friends? I struggle to see how other guys have girls around only as friends (unless they’re ugly).” He’s right. If a guy is around a girl he finds attractive, he should make a move on her within the first week of meeting. Maybe slightly longer in some situations, like if they go to school together and will be forced into a lot of proximity.

One of the commenters said something smart,

Almost none of those women you call “friends” are friends, in the sense that they are loyal, caring, trusted people in your life. They are people who know you, and may occasionally hang out with you.

But you would be less than nothing to them the instant you start to be a social drag on them. Most people are that way, so it is not necessarily a woman thing. It is just that, in my experience, very few men are any good at being a friend, and almost no women are.

As a young and stupid guy, I liked being “friends” with hot chicks because it meant I hadn’t yet been told, definitively, “no.” So I would grind away much of that initial attraction, if any existed at all, by hanging around the hot chick and not making a move. I achieved a paradoxical situation: I found it very easy to lay out girls I was a little bit attracted to, but very hard to get with chicks I was highly attracted to. With chicks I was a little attractive to, I would do almost perfect push-pull, hot-cold game, without knowing what I was doing. I genuinely didn’t care, so I’d run great game and generate loads of attraction. With girls I was attracted to, I’d simultaneously supplicate and avoid making a move.

With girls I was a little bit attracted to, I was an unconscious game expert, dribbling out just the right amount of attention to hook her. I wasn’t very concerned about how good I was in bed, which made me better in bed because I wasn’t worried and became focused on the moment.

With hot girls, girls I thought were truly “top tier” (a stupid thought), I would do the opposite: timid, scared to make the move, worried about offending her, worried about being told “no.” It took me too long to realize that “no” is great. When I hear a firm “no,” I can give up on that girl and go find a girl to say “yes.” A firm “no” from a chick who means it is actually advantageous to guys.

To guys who are into smashing hot chicks, that is. To guys who are afraid of being rejected, “no” hurts. Most guys who are attracted to their female “friends” aren’t friends. They are too scared to make a move. They are better off making the move, getting to “no,” and then moving on.

I also hadn’t realized that, if I’m not f**king her, chances are that someone else is. Most chicks are being f**ked by someone. Hot chicks, medium chicks, even a lot of ugly chicks. If that hot chick is going to f**k someone, it might as well be me. I wish I had internalized that concept at a much younger age.

When a guy propositions a girl for sex or starts kissing her and she says no, he doesn’t need to make a big deal about it. In fact, the less big a deal he makes, the better. She has been honest with him, and that is good. He doesn’t have to have a “friend breakup” talk. He just needs to direct his attention in more useful directions. Stop texting her, stop the unsolicited contacts. If you see her around, say hi and be cordial. Just don’t increase intimacy. Don’t do one-on-one hangouts. When you find a girl you can bang, you won’t remember why you had it for some girl you couldn’t. You’ll naturally lose interest in the unavailable chicks, because you’re too busy being deep in a chick who is available.

Friendship also thrives on mutual interests. For a lot of guys, their female “friends” are girls they’d really like to fuck. Remove the horny from the situation, or realize that you’re not going to fuck her, and what’s the basis left for the friendship?

Right.

Your time is finite 

Every guy has 16 waking hours in the day. Time spent with female “friends” is usually not time spent getting laid or being in the gym or hitting on chicks or otherwise improving his life. Most guys who are “friends” with hot girls, are merely providing value to the girl while getting nothing in return. If the guy demands equal value in return, the girl hops to the next male “friend.” This kind of behavior becomes bad for women over time, as older women will eventually lose the beta males who provide this guy of free attention, but for women in their teens and well into their late 20s, using one kind of guy for attention and validation and another kind of guy for sex is common.

Telling a 20-year-old-girl that she won’t be able to get away with this when she’s 34 is not going to work or mean anything to her.

In my last two years of school, I got in with a couple of party girls who’d get tons of party invites, and, although I wanted to f**k them, they were genuinely good sources of other leads. I’ve seen guys say, “But girls look at me differently when I’m out with a hot girl!” But do you bang those girls? Putting your dick inside a girl is the real test of anything related to the game, like profit and revenue are the true tests in business. In business, many people will say, “Oh that sounds like a cool product / service.” Do they pay for it? Then they mean it. Do they think someone else might pay for it? Then they do not. Talk is cheap.

Being “friends” with a hot girl seems to get most guys very few lays, from what I can tell. Yes, it might be easier to get warm intros, but most of the time a hot girl trying to pass off her male “friends” to other chicks is not going to succeed. Other girls are like, “If he’s so great, why aren’t you dating him?”

Exactly.

With those two girls towards the end of school, I wanted to bang them, but I didn’t… and I didn’t care that much. This was a rare circumstance where being the hot girl’s friend led to me getting laid. But by then, I’d also gotten used to meeting chicks and escalating. Meeting chicks at college parties is the easiest thing in the world. Eventually I started dating one, and that was around the time I really got over my fear of “no.”

Anyone who is old enough will remember ladder theory from the earlier days of the Internet. It’s kind of stupid but gets the basic idea that women by and large put men into two categories, one for potential sex and one for everything else, including “friendship.” Men mostly want women for sex. I have very some female friends, but they’re women I’ve either had sex with before or don’t want to have sex with. If a guy genuinely doesn’t want to have sex with a woman… and she brings genuine skills or insight to the table… then being friends is fine. Being friends because you don’t have the balls to try and f**k her is bullshit.

Weak ties and random reinforcement schedules 

Despite all that, I’m not opposed to guys having loose connections with, or to, attractive women in relationships. Most guys figure out that chicks keep a stable of possible boyfriend alternatives in silent reserve (high-quality guys learn to do the same thing). When a chick is ready to leave boyfriend #1, or when she gets dumped by him, she’ll often leap, or “branch swing,” to a new guy. So it’s not a terrible idea to put yourself in place to be that new guy.

Thing is, you don’t need to spend hours and hours with a chick to be that guy. Being cordial to her when you see her is enough. A very occasional coffee. You can invite her to stuff you’re already planning to do, like going to the gym or a (normal) party / drinks. A little time goes a long way. If she’s hot and has a boyfriend she won’t cheat on, you can position yourself to be next in line. But “less is more” in this situation, and if you get too close to her you’ll be a feminized “I see you as a brother” friend.

This kind of weak-tie situation is not a total time suck and it might not be a total waste of time. You can cultivate a lot of weak ties without a lot of time spent. These strategies shouldn’t be part of your primary effort to get chicks, but it can be part of the background effort. Some hot chicks spend very little time being single, just like high-quality guys. They have backups in mind. It isn’t terrible to have a weak tie with a hot chick, so that when her breakup hits, you can hit her up for a drink, even as most of your mating energy goes into finding, cultivating, and banging new chicks.

Remember that chicks also like social proof. If a weak-tie chick sees you banging hotties, she’ll know that you’re in the hottie-banging business and will hit you up for that service when she’s ready. If she sees you desperate for her, desperate for what she’s not going to give you, you’re demonstrating lower value and turning her off.

For guys who moan about their time in the “friend zone,” they usually spend hours and hours with an attractive chick, not realizing that all those hours are just decreasing his overall attractiveness. A little distance and mystery will do more for him than being her emotional tampon. It seems that some guys think “Don’t cultivate women you find super attracted as close friends” means that you have to rude to women, or cut them out entirely. You don’t, not necessarily. But they should not be a primary social outlet for you. They should at most be a secondary or tertiary social outlet.

Social media thrives on random reinforcement schedules:

We begin with the first force: intermittent positive reinforcement. Scientists have known since Michael Zeiler’s famous pecking pigeon experiments from the 1970s that rewards delivered unpredictably are far more enticing than those delivered with a known pattern. Something about unpredictability releases more dopamine…. Technology companies, of course, recognize the power of this unpredictable positive feedback hook and tweak their products with it in mind to make their appeal even stronger.

(This is also why you should avoid social media.)

So: if you’re going to be in loose contact with that hot chick, be intermittent. You don’t need to reply to her right away. You’re a busy guy. You don’t need to view her stories or whatever. Maybe you’ll shoot her an occasional message to get a coffee, a drink, hit the gym together, etc. But keep it very occasional.

One theme of this blog is that different strands and techniques in game feed into each other. Work enough strands and something will come through. Plus, work enough strands and they’ll work together to make a rope. One strand is weak. Several together can be strong.

As I’ve gotten older, I’ve observed some of the “friend zone” in reverse, in which women will maintain friendships with men in hopes of getting the man to invest in her fat self and especially her fatherless children. This isn’t a great look for the woman, and it reflects the way male sexual value frequently peaks later than female sexual value. It seems that younger guys have problems with female friends, and older guys learn 1. what true friendship is, 2. not to hide our dicks, and 3. if she isn’t f**king me, she probably isn’t important to me.

With all that context, however, it’s possible for high-value guys to have female friends, if they’re already getting all the sex they want from other sources. I have (had? can’t tell right now) a lover nicknamed Ms. Slav, and I would not be surprised if we shift towards a friend/mentor role. I like her in a lot of ways, but I have other lovers who are in some ways more compatible than she is. The age gap, combined with her interests and proclivities, mean that we might not be suitable as lovers. Like the girls I knew at the end of college, she is an interesting person AND I am getting about as much sex as I want, so we wouldn’t be “friends” with me quietly hoping she comes around to sex with me. We’ve already been lovers, and I’m not accepting a fake “friendship” as a second- or third-best option.

In my own life, the highest-value guys have very rarely had problems with “the friend zone.” If a chick won’t f**k them, they move on. Lower-value guys should do the same thing. Attention is the only tool modern guys have, and most guys waste it. No guy needs to be rude to a woman who rejects him, so it’s not like he can never say hi when she passes on the street, but he should withdraw attention. She’s not his friend. We all have internal mechanisms that make us want to lie to ourselves about all sorts of things. Being true to yourself and accepting the Red Pill is about not lying to yourself. When you don’t lie, you can assess your own weaknesses, assess how to fix them, and assess what you really want (as opposed to what you think you’re supposed to want). You may not entirely know what you want, or you may have multiple, conflicting desires. I have that problem right now. But I also acknowledge it and am aware of it. Not all problems can be solved. The female “friend” problem? That one’s easy to solve.

Most women also make for terrible friends. There are exceptions, of course, but most guys with female “friends” are lying to themselves about what’s really going on.