“How America Grew Bored With Love” and needs GAME

How America Grew Bored With Love is about how America is now excessively sterile because guys have no game and women are cunts. Guys reading this cannot help the latter problem but can improve the “no game” problem. The article echoes much that you have read here:

Erich Fromm, a Jewish psychologist and philosopher who moved from Germany to New York to escape Nazi persecution, wrote in his brilliant and forever salient book The Art of Loving that love, like any art—engineering, painting, playing an instrument—requires knowledge and effort.

“Our whole culture,” Fromm explained, “is based on an appetite for buying.” As a result, most people think of love only as an acquisition—how can they be loved—rather than learning how to love another. Falling in love is involuntary, but to protect and preserve a more mature and long-term love, the lover must have the discipline, maturity, and faith to “stand in love.”

That’s right: love is a SKILL, not just “something that happens,” contrary to what you have heard from the feminist culture at larger. It is especially a skill for men. Men engineer love/lust in women. Game shows guys how to do this, at the physical and emotional levels. Most guys don’t learn this skills, so they putter around playing video games and watching porn instead of f**king live chicks, which requires that they leave their hourses.

Guys should be careful with their money. If you don’t have money, “No money” becomes your one and only abiding problem that must be solved before all others. I have written a number of finance and career posts, most notably arguing that most guys allocate their money poorly. Most guys spend too much on housing (especially buying McMansions in suburbs or exurbs) and on transport (hot chicks don’t actually care what kind of car you drive). Money should be spend on food (good nutrition), gym (sometimes including personal training if you can find a personal trainer), and to a lesser extent good-quality clothes that fit your body.

Money should not be spent on an expensive “name brand” car. Right now, three to five year old used cars are a fantastic deal. Better yet, get a three-year-old Zero Electric bike for $5,000 and spend nothing on maintenance and almost nothing on fuel while making your date’s eyes bug out. Money should not be spent on a woman’s desire to compete with other women for housing. Much of my best game has been done in a studio apartment in a desirable location that was close to one or two good bars. Beginners in the game think about what to say to a chick, intermediates and above think about logistics because we know chicks are fundamentally irresponsible and want the bang to “just happen.” So we set up the conditions necessary to make it “just happen” for her because we “have some wine” at home.

Dating and impressing chicks costs far less than the typical guy thinks. The typical guy wastes too much money on the wrong stuff. The minimum you need is very minimal. Cleanliness and interpersonal affect are 10x more important than a stereotypically “impressive” car or house. Fromm was right decades ago and he is still right today. The capitalist marketing machine wants you to spend as much as possible and smart guys resist firmly. Smart guys spend time dead lifting more than time shopping.

Stevie Wonder sang in what is now a terribly unfashionable song, “Love’s in Need of Love Today,” that Americans might not have much love for love, and might have lost their desire to watch or listen to depictions of love, because love is subversive to its empire of ego.

This song is not unfashionable. It is true and that’s why it is still good. But it’s also true that guys need either no/very little ego (in the Stoic case) or titanic ego to succeed today. I try to have no/little ego but acknowledge that the “titanic ego” guys can succeed. Most guys have too much ego, in the wrong dimensions, to succeed.

I think love is fantastic, but I am also a realist in that love should not lead to marriage because modern, legal marriage is a catastrophe for men. Instead, I advocate that men do love but without marrying or even necessarily being monogamous.

Men cannot allow themselves to fall in love with a woman before she falls in love with im. Men also must know that most women will fall “out” of love with him before he does with her. Men also need to know that cohabitating will typically kill love, even as women push for cohabitation. Remember how Fromm argued that love is a SKILL? It is a skill most women don’t have and don’t or can’t understand. As a guy, we must be better. Feminism argues for “equality,” but equality must be earned, not given, and very few women earn it. Guys should know this.

Women still want and yearn to yield to a high-status man, but most men have not learned to be men, leaving women frustrated and un-f**ked. When women encounter a man who behaves like a man, they are often flustered, aroused, and confused because it happens so rarely. Game teaches guys how to be guys in a culture that is stupidly pushing guys to be androgynous quasi-humans who hide their dicks. To love requires experience, passion, and getting out of your apartment, out of your video games, out of your movies/TV, and into the real world. It requires the ability to endure pain and rejection, which most modern guys are too fragile to do.

The concept of “gender nonbinary” and the like has become popular in recent years. I reject that utterly. I am extremely gender binary. I’m a man, and feminine women are attracted to masculine men. If you want ugly, fat, mannish women, be androgynous. If you want feminine, attractive women, be a man. You won’t learn how in (most) school, except sometimes from physical education and some science classes. Chicks are waiting out there to be f**ked by a man who is a man.

Go get them.


We’re discouraging marriage and families at every level

We’re discouraging marriage and families at every level, then we’re surprised when people stop doing both. That is the point of the new Dalrock post, along with the fact that some of these ideas are bleeding into the larger media ecosystem. I’m not a big fan of him and his relentless coverage of the relentless internecine battles among religious persons, but I subscribe to his blog and find this piece worth passing along.

Victoria’s Secret knows that women want to be sexy

Victoria’s Secret knows that women want to be sexy and get that top guy. You wouldn’t know it, though, from this stupid New York Times article about the company.

The marketing of Victoria’s Secret has been nothing if not consistent. The company’s fashion show this month, complete with skinny models, push-up bras, thongs and strappy stilettos, was a near carbon copy of the one it first mounted in 1995, albeit with more feathers, sequins and wings. And its adherence to that vision of sexy will not be compromised.

Women, however, are not stupid. They know guys like boobs, butts, and height-weight proportionate women, and they will buy products that accentuate these ideas. If I were at Victoria’s Secret, I’d double down on being hot.

Women know that top guys have choices, and women know guys like youth and beauty. Women know that they are competing against other women for top guys. Older women at the New York Times may not want to acknowledge this, and they may not like it, but it remains true.

Smart companies may pay lip service to the bullshit in social justice warrior twitter and at the New York Times, but they know that their core clients remain in the game. The fight against lingerie will never be won by fat chicks or older writers at the New York Times, for the same reason fat acceptance will never happen.

Immigration, identity, knowledge part 2

Warning: as with “Get past your identity and look at the data,” “The stink of poly-ticks is high in this post, which has little to do with actual game, so you may want to skip it.” You’ve been warned. You should read “Ms. Slav story updates: Enter new girl Peaches” instead.

There are few fields with larger gaps between the “Twitter world” and the “knowlede world” than immigration. Most people who live in the latter don’t do Twitter as “Twitter natives” do. Among historians, anti-immigration sentiment is almost entirely absent. Why? Historians know that the arguments against immigrants have always stayed the same and have always been wrong. Like Henry Cabot Lodge’s famous speech 1896 speech, “The Problem of Immigration”:

other races of totally different race origin, with whom the English-speaking people have never hitherto been assimilated or brought in contact, have suddenly begun to immigrate to the United States in large numbers. Russians, Hungarians, Poles, Bohemians, Italians, Greeks, and even Asiatics, whose immigration to America was almost unknown 20 years ago, have during the last 20 years poured in in steadily increasing numbers, until now they nearly equal the immigration of those races kindred by whom the United States has hitherto been built up and the American people formed.

In other words, we gotta kick out those foreigners who are different than us. Today, of course, their descendents are making the same anti-immigration arguments that are common on Twitter. Lodge also says:

It is not necessary to enter into a discussion of the economic side of the general policy of restricting immigration. In this direction the argument is unanswerable. If we have any regard for the welfare, the wages, or the standard life of American workingmen, we should take immediate steps to restrict foreign immigration. There is no danger, at present to all events, to our workingmen from the coming of skilled mechanics or trained and educated men with a settled occupation or pursuit, for immigration of this class will never seek to lower the American standard of life and wages

It is necessary; immigration improves American lives and immigrants don’t compete for the jobs Americans do. Funny stories like, “Farmers Finding Few Americans Willing To Do Jobs Immigrants Do” are common. I have friends in the restaurant biz. Try hiring native-born Americans to be dishwashers. The places in the United States with the highest immigration rates also have the strongest economies.

No one arguing against immigration is highly knowledgable about history, or the way their arguments have been used for the last one to two hundred years, and they’ve been wrong the whole time. And anti-immigrant rhetoric is rarely if ever supported by (real) research in peer-reviewed journals. For example, The welfare impact of global migration in OECD countries finds that immigration improves GDP and “recent migration flows have been beneficial for 69% of the non-migrant OECD population, and for 83% of non-migrant citizens of the 22 richest OECD countries.”

We are seeing immigrants create new jobs. Immigration does not create crime and if anything immigrants have lower crime rates, on average, than native-born persons. So why do these memes persist? It seems that humans like to sort ourselves into tribes and it’s fun to create out-groups, and immigrants make handy out groups. Normal people don’t go trolling through the literature and instead form their views on single-hit sensationalist stories and the like. Most people also don’t think about history or their own families’s histories, which, in the United States, always includes immigration somewhere (unless a person is Native American).

The United States is not an ethno-state. It is a set of ideas and ideals. It is also a machine for taking in disparate people and turning their children into Americans (some of whom will in turn adopt anti-immigrant rhetoric). We should be happy this process works and works well. We should also be attentive to the kind of evidence cited by anti-immigrant types. Yes, there are sensationalistic stories about individual bad acts. Just as there are… sensationalistic stories about individual bad acts by people born in the United States. But the anti-immigrant rhetoric is almost totally absent among historians and economists. We should be thinking about why that is. Yes, it’s possible that there’s a giant conspiracy theory. Or, more likely, knowing history makes people chill out about the supposed foreign invasion.

In good news, American support for immigration is at all-time high. I doubt this is because of a newfound love for and knowledge of history, but it is nice.

Overall, Western Civilization is a hardy weed and normal people around the world want TV, convenient food, and hot sex.

I don’t expect to change hearts and minds because almost no one thinks statistically or attempts to systematically review what data exist.

The beta is strong in this one

I don’t love the terms “alpha male” and “beta male,” but sometimes they just fit too well to ignore, like in the sex diary about “The New Mom Feeling Nostalgic for Her Lap-Dancing Days.” This woman is married to a beta male and has a toddler, though it’s not clear whether the baby is actually her husband’s:

Damn, I lived it up.

I was pursuing musical theater in New York. I was hot. I was a dancer and top earner at a members-only traveling lap-dance party. C would visit me. He’d get hard watching me dance topless, legs spread, reverse-cowgirl style, closer and closer to the eyes of a well-dressed Wall Street exec. C would follow my ass, and we’d lock eyes as I simultaneously led another finance dude to “get comfortable.” Well, those days are gone.

Most guys should be smart enough to know not to get in serious relationships with sex workers. This one seems not to know that.

Today is the day C works from home and I get to see J, my Sugar Daddy. I busted my ass in class today; I’m going to look hot.

J is somewhat new. We’ve been fucking once a week for three months. He gives me an allowance of $3,000 per month. I’m saving it all to go to nursing school. Plus, we’re planning on moving in a month, out of my mom’s house. We need all the money we can get right now. We never intended to be here for more than a couple months. C knows about J — he gets off on the idea of another guy jerking off to me on the regular.

This guy is working and taking care of a baby, so that his wife can go f**k another guy for cash? No way.

And this other guy is paying an older woman who’s already had a kid $3,000 a month for sex? WTF? Even in Silicon Valley, he should be able to get much better value for his money. Unlike some Red Pill guys, I’m not opposed to paying for it (in the right circumstances), but $750 per lay with an older woman is crazy.

If guys are wondering why a lot of women are outrageously entitled, look no further.

I’m an only child, and my parents are divorced. I’ve always had a rocky relationship with my dad, but my mom always supported me in theater. I went to a private Catholic high school

Bad relationship with the father… into theater… the red flags as far as long-term relationships go just pile up.

She looking at yet another guy to f**k for money, too.

I believe that, in the course of seven days, she f**ks one guy for cash, goes on a date for another, and never manages to lay her husband:

C is pining for a blow job. I offer sex — that’s my test. If he rejects sex, I know he’s just lazy and wants to come effortlessly. Sorry, C, no can do. I’m just as lazy and tired as you are right now. C masturbates. I like to listen by the door. I am a closet voyeur. I love the idea of watching a guy totally uninhibited, unaware that he’s being watched. It turns me on the most.

She’ll get it up for the guy paying, but not for the man she lives with and she’s married to. Diagnosis for husband: Beta.

My only hope is that the story is fantasy, not reality. From a man’s perspective, the whole story is “what not to do.”

“After a year of #MeToo, Americans are more sceptical about sexual harassment”

After a year of #MeToo, Americans are more sceptical about sexual harassment.” Good, and that is as it should be. Having been victim to false accusations and rumors myself, whenever I hear these kinds of accusations, they make me think less of the person making the accusation.

Maybe normal women understand women’s propensity to blame-shift in the sexual arena. Normal women fear that their husbands, brothers, and sons will be targeted. I get it. Women are very fond of doing things, then saying, “It wasn’t me.” MeToo is really about evading personal responsibility. Normal people also know that “Women love the sexual interplay they experience with men, and they relish men desiring their beauty.” Why don’t strident American feminists know this? Because they think pleading ignorance will improve their bargaining position.

Sex robots from an evolutionary biologist

This article about sex robots and their potential effects on the mating market is by evolutionary biologist Diana Fleischman, and unlike most articles about sex written by women it’s not filled with hampstering rationalizations. She writes many things, among them that guys who are too weak to learn and apply game may turn to sex robots for sexual release and companionship.

To me, that sounds pathetic, but there are many guys out there who cannot or  will not face and slay the dragon. Today there are no good male initiation rituals and many boys do not learn how to become men. That is very bad for individual guys, but it’s good for me personally if some guys turn towards sex robots because that improves my relative market position.

Feminists have been surprised by the way the end of marriage has not turned out well for women. Most women want a partner and children, but now that men are slowly realizing that they don’t need marriage to obtain sex, and that marriage is a bad deal, we’re refusing it, and thus making it harder for women to achieve their primary ends. As feminists work to make most normal men more reluctant to approach women, those men will be shunted out of the dating market:

The average single man paying attention to contemporary social fashions will struggle to understand the new rules of meeting, courting, or having sex with women. Something as banal as trying to converse with a woman wearing headphones is now often considered harassment. A man’s chances of mating success increase when he approaches many women, but so too do his chances of a gaining reputation as sexist, exploitative, or immoral. To take a fraught example, how does a man know that a woman is genuinely consenting to sex? A lack of ability to pick up on cues can incur catastrophic costs.

I view “contemporary social fashions” as another form of shit test, as do most Red Pill guys, but the average basic guy probably doesn’t realize as much, thus leaving more women to me and other guys who learn game and learn what women actually like, as opposed to what women say they like, or how women present.

As women raise the cost of sex for normal men, normal men will turn towards robots, porn, and professionals, leaving cads like myself the majority of the market. This will likely also make women unhappy, as they offer sex but get no commitment in return. I don’t expect feminists to realize this dynamic, and I feel bad for the guys who never discover game, but for game-aware guys all of this is great news. Players win.