Perspective, “First Wave at Omaha Beach”

Perspective: your grandfather or great-grandfather may have been on the “First Wave at Omaha Beach | An account of the ‘epic human tragedy’ that unfolded when Allied troops landed on the shores of Normandy on D-Day,” facing down Nazi machine guns, artillery, tanks, and airplanes in order to free Europe from that particular political scourge.  You are afraid to talk to chicks, or unhappy because chicks are social media addicts, or lack the discipline to not cram poisonous sugar down your gullet. You are enamored of the fascistic moron in the White House, who would happily sell us all out for 30 silver (and is doing that whenever he can). On June 5 1944, your grandfather or great-grandfather may have been thinking that there is a very good chance this is the last day of his short life.

By the end of ten minutes, every sergeant is either dead or wounded. To the eyes of such men as Private Howard I. Grosser and Private First Class Gilbert G. Murdock, this clean sweep suggests that the Germans on the high ground have spotted all leaders and concentrated fire their way. Among the men who are still moving in with the tide, rifles, packs, and helmets have already been cast away in the interests of survival.

Compared to hitting the French beaches on June 6 1944, having a chick be mean to you is pretty minor.

Woman unhappy: High-value men won’t commit to her

Woman unhappy: high-value men won’t commit to her” is a better, more accurate title than “I Can’t Do Casual.” As with this woman, the problem is mismatched sexual market value: it’s easy for women to have casual sex with guys +2 or +3 above them but hard to get relationships from those guys. Then women yowl about the problem to other women who pet and soothe them, without getting real.

We don’t learn the age (likely over 30) or the place where the woman lives. I’ve meant to do a post on the book Date-onomics, which describes how sex ratios change dating and f**king. New York City has more single college-educated women than men , and its ratio is more lopsided than any other big city in the country. Basic women over age 30 are everywhere, and they’re all competing against hot chicks in their 20s.

Players should know this and move towards cities with a lot of women and fewer men. Women should do the opposite. I’ve had some private and Twitter conversations about this book, but it should be thrust into the open. The advice giver in the original article has either never read this book (would not be surprising) or has not thought to mention it.

The original woman likely has 1. SMV expectation mismatch and 2. Lives in a city unfavorable to her. She should move to Seattle and guys in Seattle should move to NYC, Nashville, or Austin (NYC’s cost of living for those not receiving state subsidies may be prohibitive to guys who also want to dedicate themselves to the game).

Most people (chicks and, I’m sorry to say, guys) would rather bitch about their circumstances than change them.

Most guys are invisible to the original chick,

It feels like my only options are to be alone, or to just have a rotating cast of guys to fuck while I hope that one of them might eventually deign to invite me to have an emotional connection. If I go that route, they get everything they want out of me, and I get nothing that I want. It makes me feel powerless and disposable, like they have all the power, and I hate it.

There is a third option, guys within her SMV range, but they are likely invisible to her and as unhappy with their plight (celibacy, video games) as she is with hers.

Women want emotion… AND financial support… AND from a high-value, high-status guy. It’s the woman’s trilemma. It’s easy to get any ONE of those things: weak guys will give her emotion or financial support. High-value, high-status guys will give her a tumble. Getting all three from one guy? Very hard. And many women thrash in this trilemma, without even recognizing that it exists. Sort of like how a lot of men want a young, very hot, and very loyal chick. Except for men, even getting #2 is hard.

An article that inadvertently reveals why women who don’t have kids are permanently damaged

The article is not about that, however, “An Ode to ‘the Moms:’ My friends’ mothers gave me Band-Aids, drove me home, and taught me something about grown womanhood.” The amount of anti-maternal material in the media is epic, so it’s nice to see a small corrective. One unstated point, though, is that women aged 40+ (maybe 35+) derive the majority of their meaning in life and status among others from their children.

The corollary is that women who don’t have kids are (typically) damaged in ways that cannot be easily reversed. There is adoption, though that is unusual. The vast majority of women care much more about their families than their bullshit careers (most of the women the author praises are teachers: I have said before that my ears perk up when I hear women who are teachers or nurses, as both jobs allow women time off easily for families). Most of our society and media work hard to conceal this point.

It’s super fun to be a woman at the height of sexual market power, ages 16 – 28, but it’s not so much fun for childless women over the age of 40. Sexual market power shrinks and will never go up again. That is why so many spinsters are bitter, and no amount of feminist posturing will change that.

Guys can derive more meaning from sex and sexuality well into their 40s (perhaps beyond). I argue that most guys should also have families, but most guys need not even really think about that until age 30, and need not seek to execute it until at least age 35. It takes that long to build up your game, your career, and your knowledge of and experience with women.

“I guess you didn’t like guys who were—Dependable.”

Anjelica Huston, like most chicks, doesn’t like boring guys

I guess you didn’t like guys who were—
Dependable. Secure. Yeah. No. I never found those ones to be sexy. I like the difficult ones.

If you are a boring dependable guy, top chicks are unlikely to be accessible to you. Being boring is just about the worst thing a guy can be today. So don’t be.

Keep this in mind if you read the rest of the Huston interview, where she goes on and on about how bad this guy and that guy was. Chicks aren’t dumb (a common refrain on this blog): they know who the exciting cheaters are and who the boring faithful guys are… and they often choose the exciting cheaters. Most of the time, when you hear a chick complaining about some demon of a man, she knew what he was like before she started f**king him, and she chose to do so anyway.

Huston likes “the difficult ones” like most chicks do. Game is the process of teaching guys to be one of them, and not one of the guys chicks like her ignore cause they’re too easy and too boring.

In her interview she could have said, “I deliberately chose exciting cheaters over reliable nice guys.” But that would be too honest, so we have to get some euphemisms instead.

Truths rarely admitted: “There’s nothing more powerful in our culture than a beautiful woman”

Truths rarely admitted: “There’s nothing more powerful in our culture than a beautiful woman.” But it’s coming from a gay guy, and gay guys, like comedians, can utter truths the rest of us will face a PC pillory for stating. Most gay guys aren’t PC; they know sexual market value (SMW) too well to be PC. Most PC people will admit dark truths if they’re stated correctly.

But there is more context

He said he feels enormous empathy for women who get frightened about their looks fading. “There’s nothing more powerful in our culture than a beautiful woman,” he said. But “it’s an unsustainable thing. One day it stops. And I have lived through it with so many female friends and part of my job is to imagine myself, the female version of myself, would I want to wear that? Where would I go in it? How would I feel in it? Would I feel vulnerable?”(Mr. Ford said if he were a woman, he would be Ali MacGraw.)

It is unsustainable. It fades fast. We name it “the wall” but you can name it whatever you want to name it. I feel bad for some of these women too… they might understand intellectually that it’s coming, but they don’t prepare for it and one day it BOOM hits them. A lot of guys online are pretty gleeful about that but I don’t share their glee, as beauty is only slightly less fleeting than life itself.

Annoyingly, we don’t get a link to the t-shirt mentioned

He used to tailor white T-shirts he bought at La Rinascente in Milan, but now he wears his own brand. “The cut of the sleeve has to be just right if you want your biceps to look right,” he said.

I did look around the Tom Ford website and clothes there are stupid expensive. Part of combining “Fashion and clothes for players” with Mr. Money Mustache is not spending stupid amounts of money on clothes. I still want to understand the cut of the sleeve thing.

Most fashion guys understand that the human social effect comes from successful attention to numerous details. Players who aren’t naturals eventually learn the same.

“Rom-Coms Were Corny and Retrograde. Why Do I Miss Them so Much?”

Rom-Coms Were Corny and Retrograde. Why Do I Miss Them so Much?” is an article where the title is the article. Rom-coms are porn for chicks because they feature a high-status male eventually committing to one woman, often below his SMV. Despite the feminist dream of a vibrator, cat, ugly pants, and low grooming standards, most chicks still want a guy or two or three and a family. Even chicks who identify as “feminists” want what most chicks want. Just like guys who identify as “feminists” still want to sleep with multiple chicks (if they can, and some can).

It’s funny when feminists admit their desires are pretty conventional.

“He Cheated in an Open Marriage”

He Cheated in an Open Marriage” gives you a flavor of what happens when a higher-status guy is getting older and is in an “open” marriage/relationship. If a guy keeps working on his game, body, and value, his sexual market value (SMV) will outpace his wife/partner’s from age 30 onward. Or age 35 onward, depending on the couple. This produces a strong incentive for the guy to push the relationship’s boundary.

The greater the disparity between the SMV in a couple, the greater the temptation to do such things.

The venue in which the story is being published is also notable, as the whole issue is devoted to what’s happening to marriage (from women’s perspective, naturally). Under current divorce law, every woman who makes less than her partner is incented to marry that partner if she can. No woman wants to directly admit that, however.

Poly/open is becoming more common in the overall culture. Smart guys will figure out how to leverage this trend.