Those who have read Krauser will recognize him as an unusually intelligent, talented and driven man, with a hard won and refined understanding of picking up and bedding hot women.
I left this comment on his most recent post:
I can see that the guy is ego invested in virtue being broadly virtuous. He would like to think that since virtue is a good thing, it is good across all domains, and therefore makes a category error, which you correctly point out. Being virtuous is not necessarily being sexy.
However you go too far to say that the willingness to be monogamous has no value to women, or that women don’t actively screen for that willingness. And you go too far when you say that other factors, such as wealth and listening ability are not actively screened for by women when they pair bond.
There are women with low socio sexual scores, of all ages. The community gets it wrong about that, and Rollo is partly responsible, with his idea of stages of mating. It is not true that all young hot girls screen primarily for alpha boys. There are girls of all ages who have low socio-sexual scores who put very high value on bonding and do not want sex without bonding. This is hard wired into them. No matter how hot and no matter how young.
I’m currently seeing one such girl – a 24 year old who has been obsessively in love with me for 7 months or so. She again found evidence of me seeing other girls and is again horribly heartbroken and devastated. Women do get that way, just as men do. We are seeing each other again, after she broke up with me, as being in love is a compulsion, however it’s very difficult for her to expose herself to further heartbreak. That girl was a virgin when I first met her. She is not an anomaly. There are plenty of low-socio-sexual-score women out there, who value security and commitment extremely highly, and do not want any sort of sexual relationship without it.
And it is a continuum. And there are SOME girls who ACT on a dual mating strategy. Not ALL girls ACT on a dual mating strategy. And of the ones that do, when they are interested in an LTR they certainly do usually place value on valuable things, such as money, ability to listen, and willingness to commit to monogamy.
And while it generally reasonable to make categories of attraction, such as comfort based attraction versus sexy based attraction, that model is simplistic but not correct. It is generally right, but not always right. Sometimes the categories are not so distinct, and therefore sticking to pigeon holing money into a comfort based beta-bucks category becomes a category error. Money can be used in such ways that add overall value to a man and therefore cause a sexual response in women. This has been scientifically studied and the conclusion was that women orgasm more for wealthy men. Fitness is not only about symmetry, not only about MMA ability, not only about social skills, not only about muscle size, not only about relative social positioning. Fitness is all of these and many more – it is a gestalt, measured by the community in general and by individuals who are affected by their communities. Women are highly tuned in to what other women find important, and yet still make individualized choices. Many women do value money. It is what it is and labelling such women as “gold diggers” does nothing to change their filters, and even less to change their sexual response to wealth based signifiers of power and status.
I think that many in the community get over-invested in the R selected notion of value, and I think this blinds people to how the world actually works with real women. I also have a hard time getting through videos that strike me as having an incorrect premise regarding K or R selected value. Just as you can’t make it through videos that overemphasize the K value system, I can’t make it through videos that overemphasize R selection as if it were some ideal to aspire to.
People have different temperaments and sexual strategies. It’s all too easy to get stuck inside our own characters, and simply become not only unwilling but unable to see outside of our characters point of view. In that case holding frame becomes a deficit.
A mild example of that might be not noticing that alternate strategies have alternate benefits.
An extreme example of that might be hating on all gays for their sexual orientation, for instance.