My friend Anna, who seems pretty monogamous

The world is a huge place, and any one of us sees a small small part of it. Seduction and Red Pill are a tiny part of a big world, and the guys in it are disproportionately ones with problems. I am thinking about it because I have a kind-of friend (see Female “friends:” the comprehensive statement), Anna, who is in her late 20s, maybe just turned 30, who is engaged… I’d rate her about a 6. A 6 with good habits, though… looking for a woman with good habits is under rated for long term relationships, something I have been mentioning on Twitter. Anna knows about some of the things I do and am into… and she’s not into any of them. She’s been dating a guy for a while who is probably a male 5 – 6 in the looks department, bit better in the economics department. In Red Pill lore that would mean she’s gagging to upgrade and stealing off to f**k random chads every weekend. It could be true… but I don’t think so… most girls can’t maintain a good-girl facade forever… most people will slip up. Online there are many stories about guys being caught totally flatfooted and unawares by chicks who cheat, run up debts, etc., but in reality I think that is quite rare… the being unaware part, I mean… most of these guys are not paying attention. With Anna, I think she’s going to marry the guy, if he’ll go for it. He might.

These are the stories no one shares online… cause they’re basic, quiet stories, about average people going about their lives. He’ll probably never post about how WOMEN LIE because I don’t think she’s lying. In the Red Pill world, cheating, bad behavior, divorces, etc. get read… we should tell those stories because they are real and important… they are also viral because they’re outrageous. We don’t hear stories about monogamy, fidelity, sticking together through the bad times, etc., probably because guys in pretty good relationships never get interested in red pill and seduction.

I have also wondered if, the hotter the girl, the better the offers of cheating, etc., she typically gets, and the more likely she is to take advantage of all those offers.

The chicks online, the chicks who respond to cold approach… they are not necessarily representative of all chicks. The chicks who want monogamy and meet guys through school, work, church, or friends of friends, then stay with the guy, or break up with him in a reasonable way because they’re not compatible, we don’t hear about. They’re invisible to the online world of anger. Their ex boyfriends probably aren’t telling stories about how evil they are and how all women are bad, cause not all women are evil or bad. Most are people. If I posted this to certain forums online I would probably be ripped apart for being a dupe, and how Anna is spreading her legs for randoms on the sly.

Could be, I don’t know, maybe Anna is getting gang banged by a gaggle of black guys every other weekend. Could be that she sociopathicly presents one way and acts another. Maybe in ten years she’ll divorce the guy out of boredom. Unlike most modern chicks, she’s not into social media… she thinks it’s kind of stupid… she’s had two serious long term boyfriends who I know of and not a lot of hookups, I don’t think. I know her from some mutual hangout spots, and I say that I’m probably not real friends with her because we are too different… we have some common interests, yes, and now some common friends, but it’s pretty rare for guys to be true friends with women, and our lack of real common interests keeps us apart, although we’re friendly and have spent a surprisingly long time together. In some ways we feel a bit like work colleagues who learn from each other but aren’t emotionally close. Most chicks who know things about my life and know things about my ways will open up about their slut adventures, etc., if they have any, and Anna has not done that. Guys who present as sex positive will often get girls to reciprocate, and Anna does not. She is like me in that she wants to let other people live how they want to live, but she is not very interested in the things I have done.

The chicks willing to make sex videos and be with guys like me are not representative of all chicks. Etc.

For a guy, it’s not possible to know for sure whether a given chick is like Anna or like all the chicks divorcing their husbands, cheating on their boyfriends, enjoying the flirtatious attention of other men, etc. etc. But if you watch a given chick’s behavior, you’ll get a sense of who she is over time, and she will do the same with you. A lot of guys see chicks whose behavior is not consistent with what they say, and they ignore the behavior when they shouldn’t. But some chicks are consistent with what they say… they say they want families and monogamy, they go out and find a guy who will give it to them. Both Anna and her boyfriend seem to have a pretty strong sense of their sexual market value (SMV), something that makes them kind of rare in the world of online anger. A lot of people are trying to reach above their SMV value, then complaining that it doesn’t work well… these are also the people who generate outrage stories (I have known plenty of these people, too). The guys complaining about how mean women are… are they going for women who are 5s, low 6s? If they chase the same girls all guys want, the hot young ones, well then how much do they know about ALL women?

Plus… look at it from her guy’s point of view… he is dating a woman who seems to be pretty monogamous and about his SMV level. If he were chasing flakey 8s, he’d be posting online about why do these chicks play games, why is she cheating on me, why does she run hot-cold, etc. Instead, he’s not trying to chase the hottest girls… and that means he’s not posting angrily about how mean chicks are, etc., because he’s got someone he seems to like/love and isn’t in the market for angry-man ranting.

Don’t have a strong point in this bit apart from the idea that outrage sells and spreads, while whatever is the opposite of outrage doesn’t. Guys who are in satisfying relationships with women aren’t spending a lot of time in the Red Pill. Even among Red Pill guys, the most outrageous female behavior is the most interesting. I have spent a lot of time in the past ten years in short relationships 6 – 20 month relationships, and some of those have been very satisfying and have generated pretty few outrageous stories, even with non-monogamy mixed in. If we go to a sex club once a month… and the girl is fundamentally in my frame and following my lead… and I am making sure to stay at her pace and maintain her comfort level… there is not necessarily a lot of drama involved, or real good stories. It’s during the periods with lots of tumult, with badly behaved chicks, with chicks who are out of sync with me, etc., that the good stories happen. There are people whose actions, desires, and words all match up… we’re not hearing about them online. They’ve invisible to the anger machines.

Many people’s lives are punctuated by periods of tumult but also have long periods of relative peace. No one posts online, “I’ve been seeing this chick for 14 months and it’s going pretty well.” No one posts, “We realized that we weren’t right for each other anymore and had a respectful breakup.” Stories about how this one chick did a branch swing by f**king her coworker and finding their sexting… those stories are powerful. They are real too.

I still think it is a mistake for guys to get married… I think it is a mistake for Anna’s man to marry her because I think he makes more $$$$ than her. Marriage is an expensive, risky move. But… she is also the kind of person who is probably NOT going to have a family with a guy she’s not married to, so that element is present. She behaves less hypergamously than most women seem to, and she seems to have chosen a guy with a set of features, good and bad, that fit with herself.

All chicks have the potential to branch swing, behave hypergamously, etc., and it’s good to know this cause it will happen to you if you date enough chicks… but not all do it. The ones who do, make for better stories and bitterer guys than the ones who don’t. We all build echo chambers for ourselves, we all struggle, etc. I think there is too much anger online. I get why the anger is there. If some woman blows up a man’s life in an unexpected way, he’s going to be angry and extrapolate. If some guy doesn’t have the SMV to get the women he wants, he’s going to get angry instead of getting better, cause anger is easier. A lot of guys have been told lies about what women want, and when they see past the lie they’re going to get angry, yes. I get it, it makes sense. But anger blinds… don’t be so blind that you mistake your world for the world.

It’s good to pay attention to the possibility of a high duplicity chick, of borderline personality disorder (BPD) chicks, etc. But… they are probably not as common in normal life as they are in the stories online. Don’t be blind. Do some spot checks here and there. Confront the things that don’t seem right. But don’t be paranoid either. If you are paranoid and convinced all chicks are just waiting to cheat, upgrade, etc., you will not have a very happy, or the ability to bond with the better chicks (if you want to do that… some guys want to be players… that’s cool… the game is about helping guys get the tools to get what we want, not about telling guys how to live every aspect of our lives).

I have been some dark places… I get the anger… I do… but I want to acknowledge the dark without having it consume me.

“The stripper with the sugar daddy”

The stripper with the sugar daddy” is my version of the title… let’s be real here, she’s no computer scientist… she does have a typical alpha/beta boyfriend dynamic going on, though… “I’m leery of his avoidant attachment style but, like my weekend shifts at the club, the promise of pleasure lures me back again and again,” the usual, honey…

I’m also beginning to realize I’m torn between A and B. B is reliable, empathetic, open, everything I am not used to in men — but deep down I know I am not as into him as he is into me. I find myself drawn to the 10,000-piece puzzle that is A. Even though he is evasive and maddeningly frustrating, I realize that I am in love with him.

It’s like reading red pill fan fic… the boring guy is too boring for her, the exciting guy is exciting because he’s unreliably available. With A, there’s a little “accident,”

We go back to his place and fuck passionately for hours, in every position. I love making you come, he whispers, kissing the back of my neck. When he’s about to finish he asks, can I come in you, but I hear, can I come on you, and tell him of course. I am shocked when I feel myself getting filled with something. It’s been a long time since I let someone do that, for me it’s as intimate as it is risky.

B, however,

sends me a link to a playlist he’s made. I listen to it before work and realize it’s a love letter. I am flooded with conflicting emotions. He knows I dance and thinks its “fucking badass,” which is a rarity; he’s a feminist, a real one. We are compatible on so many levels but there is something missing for me.

She likes him but is an avoidant type herself… so B’s statements of attraction to her turn her off… while A’s distance turns her on. Different types women of women will be turned on by different things. This is not a chick who likes comfort or needs much of it. This is a chick who likes wild uncertainty. The more sexually open and fluid she is, the more likely she is to be turned on by game playing, hot-cold, push-pull, etc. Know your audience.

Finishing inside is a universal path to intimacy and connection, however.

 

 

Women hate the demystification of romance: commodities, artisans, and the game

Women hate game but simultaneously women hate guys with no game. Players look at this and initially think it makes no sense, because on the surface it doesn’t; women should want guys to learn game and learn how to please women instead of repulsing women with awkward banter, technical talk, sports talk, terrible fashion, etc. Yet we have all seen game demonized by some women and feminists, who also complain that there are no “good” men (since men don’t learn how to be effective around and with women). I would probably never tell a women in real life about consciously practicing “the game,” although I have encouraged a few to read Neil Strauss (they hate THE GAME the book, mostly).

What gives? The seduction and sex process is probably shrouded in more mystification than any other common human activity in the entire world. The whole culture is collectively blowing so much smoke around seduction and sex that even women don’t understand it themselves, mostly (thus many women encourage men to do things that the woman herself doesn’t like, like “Just be nice to her,” fine advice if you are +2 or +3 relative to her in SMV and bad advice if you are not). Men don’t understand the seduction process either.

What happens when you remove the mystification and understand the process? Men get more power and often become less interested in commitment. Women hate game because it demystifies romance and pushes sex with a woman just a little bit closer to commodity status. A little economic theory for you, no one wants to be a commodity because a commodity can be made by many producers, pushing profit to zero or near zero. Everyone wants to be differentiated because a differentiated product can earn profits above the market rate. Apple makes more money than a thousand white-box computer makers because Apple is differentiated from white box makers; if consumers wanted to maximize income we would all be buying white box computers running Linux and a web browser. Most computer users prefer the branded experience though and producers want to create brand mystique so they can charge higher prices. Mystification can help everyone win. I’m writing this on a Macbook not a whitebox Linux laptop, so I’m as guilty as anyone, I want to add.

Many guys think, “What do women want?” “I don’t understand women.” “I got lucky.” If they learn evolutionary psychology and game, they figure out what women want and how to deliver it, with much greater consistency and reliability than if we don’t learn evolutionary psychology and the game. A lot of women have nothing of value in their lives apart from their p***y, so, if you take away the value of that by learning game, they have nothing to offer and end up being commodities. Hot guys with good game take them for a ride then decline commitment, leaving her feeling used and unhappy. So women demonize game and think romance should “Just happen” like it does in the romance novels they masturbate to. At the end of all romance novels a hot guy wifes up a woman, usually a woman who is lover SMV than him.

I think many women are frustrated right now because they find it easy to get a guy +2 SMV for sex but can’t get him for relationships. The guy who is even SMV or -1 might be willing to do a relationship but he doesn’t have the value she seeks. Many women thrash in this trap for a long time. The ones who thrash in it too long end up being spinsters and writing those stories about why hot rich men won’t “man up” and marry 35 year old women past their prime. Game improves male SMV but also makes the guy choosier and less likely to commit. A guy with many options won’t be as interested in committing as a running-to-fat guy whose chief hobby is video games, with porn and TV being secondary.

Economic history has parallels to this. Starting with the Industrial Revolution, people began figuring out how to produce artisanal goods at mass scale. Artisans fought like hell against this because they argued mass-produced goods can never be as pure and honest or whatever as hand-crafted goods. Everyday consumers were like, “LOL whatever bro” and bought whatever was cheapest and most functional. Entrepreneurs used factories to demystify the production process and make high-skill artisans redundant. The children of artisans ended up working in factories because that’s where the efficiency was. Today some artisanal commodity goods have high status again among some people, but the vast majority of us buy cups and plates and clothes that have been inexpensively made by machine.

Those artisans were angry but ineffective. We now have the term “luddite” from nineteenth century anti-technology groups who failed. Women also don’t want game entrepreneurs to apply evolutionary psychology to the dating and sex process because they want to be artisanal producers, not commodity products. No woman except someone unusual women like evolutionary biologist Diana Fleischman will ever characterize the situation this way, but the instinctive anger reaction is there. Women like a guy who “just gets it” and shows his intelligence, charisma, etc. by “just getting it.” Women hate the idea that average guys can counterfeit or more realistically learn these traits, then avoid committing financial resources to women. Personally I think these fears are overblown because the vast majority of men are too lazy with insufficient IQs to make any of this happen. But a few will and in the process they might remove themselves from the marriage market. That’s frustrating for women. Smart men are learning from each other and using that learning to reduce female market power.

Continue reading “Women hate the demystification of romance: commodities, artisans, and the game”

“Picking up girls” skills and “long-term relationships” skills

I’ve said this in some different places but not headlined with it: “Picking up girls” skills and “long-term relationships” skills overlap, but there’s a lot of non-overlap too. For picking up chicks, approach anxiety, initial comments, flirting skills, sheer physicality, fashion sense, logistics, dealing with shit tests, etc. are paramount. Guys should practice and build up those skills. For long-term relationships, emotional compatibility, lifestyle, money/money philosophy, ability to maintain sexual heat, long-term life goals, etc. are much more important. Guys can be good at both but there’s a lot of distinction between the two and if you specialize in being a player you will likely hone the early skills and forget the later ones even exist.

If you are a young guy without a lot of experience with women you should concentrate pretty much entirely on short and medium term relationship skills. If you are an older guy you will have to evaluate your life course for yourself and think about what you seek over time.

Guys who are truly specialized in short term relationships may lose the idea that in the medium or long term, some of the “game” aspects go away… or change. Yes, women will still shit test over the long term, but sometimes the issues are real issues and not shit tests. Real issues that need to be addressed. Sometimes they are comfort tests, a topic that doesn’t come up much because I think most guys don’t get to that stage. Emotionally healthy and secure chicks will have needs that they will bring up, and consistently not meeting those needs will cause the woman to look elsewhere… if she is damaged she may become more attracted to adrenaline, drama, and not having those needs met.

I have made this mistake before.

Continue reading ““Picking up girls” skills and “long-term relationships” skills”

“The mom having an affair because her husband did first”

The Brooklyn Mom Having an Affair Because Her Husband Had One First. This piece illustrates the dangers of affairs and non-monogamy. I see guys online suggesting that it’s okay for a guy to have a quiet side piece while his main woman cares for the kids and runs the house.

That is of course possible. For a few guys, feasible. For most guys, not much…. requires too much money, time, dedication, etc. Too easy to get caught today.

If you do it, she will likely want to do it too. And when she does it, this can lead to alienation of affection as well as paternity uncertainty. If the guy in this story thinks the next kid in his, well, he might be wrong.

Continue reading ““The mom having an affair because her husband did first””

Tough conversations. Downside of being known as a player

Tough conversations this weekend. I’m having some challenges making some of the changes I want to make, and I am suffering some right now because I have been a player for a long time and have a player reputation and a lot of player instincts. The player instincts don’t serve me well in trying to develop a longer-term relationship with a woman who has a more secure attachment style and who knows what she wants.

A word on reputation and what chicks are looking for. Players tend to filter out family-oriented chicks. TD Daygame has been talking about this on Twitter, although I don’t think he has a blog anymore, so I can’t link a canonical post on the subject. But chicks who want monogamy and families do exist…. they are the ones who are not intersted in guys who give off player vibes. Some of them are also very pretty. You can tell who they are because they usually have a small number of lifetime sex partners, usually don’t have sex immediately, and typically find guys who are attractive, have their shit together, and are career-oriented. Extremely sexually adventurous chicks make for interesting and fun stories… extremely family-oriented chicks don’t, usually. I am thinking of two chicks in particular I know who were (and are) very pretty and followed this pattern. Often they will compromise somewhat on looks and extroversion to get family-oriented and monogamous. They often find long-term guys in their 20s and often work jobs that give them access to guys with good earnings and family orientation.

Obviously there are many family-oriented, mostly monogamous chicks who will have one or two flings in their lives… if you catch them at the right time with the right game you may get with one of them. But for the most part these chicks keep their wilder impulses under control and filter guys for being better dads and providers. If a woman is looking for this she is not going to like players or guys who signal player. This is the kind of woman who, if you cold approach her, will say “no” and move on. She’s probably never been on Tinder or, if she has, she quit it in disgust. She’s not doing the things all the Red Pill guys complain about in sexually active women, but she’s also looking for a guy commensurate to her in value, so low value guys are going to be just about sexually invisible to her. I think a lot of online Red Pill guys are low value and thrashing about women because it’s almost impossible to overcome being low value, kind of like fat chicks complaining about men. For fat chicks, their number one problem in accessing higher-value men is being fat, and pretty much nothing they do without changing their diets and movement habits will improve their situation.

Reputation matters and chicks are going to judge you on, like you judge them on it (if you know them). Continue reading “Tough conversations. Downside of being known as a player”