Working on the koan for modern times

Pirsig tackled the koan in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

Ian McGilchrist takles the koan in describing left vs right brained thinking.

In modern times due to who knows what, but likely adderal and modafinil and social media and helicopter parenting and hip-hoppity music, culture is now more left brained and autistic and socially developmentally delayed.

XBTUSD asks:

What ways have you learned to connect with people (let’s not focus on women as I think it distracts from the point) deeply without words?

***
Not focusing on women is a challenge for me, as I spend most of my socializing time with girls. I had a few years recently with guys helping my business, but that was the exception.

What immediately sprung to mind as non-female examples were also love related. Babysitting kids. Hugging my grandma as a kid.

Oh, I had a meditating guy friend with whom there was some difficult to describe non-verbal connection. He taught me “the eye trick”, of sort of blowing someones mind with a gaze. Later I would do that with women. One girl would complain and get tunnel vision. “Stop doing that!”

***

That koan is running in the background. Some thoughts that probably relate to that koan came up:

My approach to therapeutic relationship talk: always do none. There is never anything to dig up or process or talk out. I have relationships, I don’t talk about having relationships. The therapy is in the doing. Not in the talking about how to do.

For instance my girl has some history that leads her to sometimes have an insecure attachment style. It can be a pain in the ass sometimes. Very rarely do I explicitly talk about the psychology of that, and then only very briefly with a light touch.

People, and especially girls, can use talk to alleviate anxiety, and it becomes an addiction. It goes nowhere. Believe me. It goes NOWHERE. A waste of time, that we don’t have enough of. You don’t talk your way into being at ease, content, happy, generous, loving.

You just practice those BEHAVIORS. It’s what you DO. NOW. That matters. Not what you think about what you do, or what you think about why you think about what you once learned to do. Just right now, being kind to each other. That’s it. Nothing else.

Very rarely a structure for mindfulness is needed. But usually not. Stating boundaries, gently and rarely, works 100 times stronger when you are both habitually kind. Otherwise talking becomes a game. Psychology as a game or puzzle is a dead end and a distraction.

People don’t change much. They can be at their best. Being at your best is largely an environmental thing. A habit thing. The habit of consistently generating fun lust, laughter, kindness. Habit of passion. In that space kinks work themselves out.

People can relax, open, grow, and learn. But the habit of trying to “work things out” through talking about difficult emotions prevents growth. It is directly counter productive. “Be here now”. “Just make the jam”.

My girl sometimes gets mentally overwhelmed and defensive to the point of being both cranky and unable to talk. Sometimes is too clingy or jealous. She learns through the environment, through seeing me back off patiently, not allowing my boundaries to be crossed but still kind.

Never a fight. Never an argument. Never a discussion about the right way to behave, or reasons why behavior isn’t ideal. Just slowly she re-patterns based on real lived experience. Her feeling of threat is not heightened, she gets space to regroup. It’s all about the space.

Mental health and learning to be kind isn’t about reprogramming your past or inner dialogue or your reasons. It’s not about verbal reasons or past patterns that need re-arranging with insights. It’s about the space. The space and your actions teach you; you swim in and give love into that space. You put your joy and lust and fun into the space. You share the space. That’s it. It’s not about anything else. Just this space right here, right now.

People FEEL that space. Even girls can shut the fuck up and share silent space. It’s MUCH more difficult for them, but they can, and they do. That’s often the best part. Just shutting the fuck up and sharing the space.

And related: The best way to change the deeply ingrained behavior of your partner is to find a new partner.

People don’t really change much. All you can do is work with whats there. When that’s very often frustrating, it’s a very real signal that social climbing is called for. The best way to change the deeply ingrained behavior of your partner is to find a new partner.

And then once you’ve cashed in your chips, and think you’ve got your best deal and bargain, you aren’t going to re-work your girl into a different one. Just get along and have fun. Nothing more than that.

***
I will work on this post and add new ones in the coming weeks. I don’t expect to do better at this question than others have done, but giving a similar answer with different words and concepts can really help, all around.

You don’t need intellectual connection with a girl; you might just be addicted.

XBTUSD said:

I’m curious how you balance a deeper understanding of the world, with having conversations with people who have a more surface level understanding of the world without losing respect and/or interest in talking with people. Obviously one could have bullshit surface conversations which can be fun in certain contexts, but for me really feeling a connection to someone requires going a bit deeper.

I have little to add to Redquests response, but I’m in the mood to chatter.

I also can find it difficult and unsatisfying to be thwarted by a bullshit surface conversation.

Redquest points out that there are underlying and deeper motives below peoples words and philosophies. It can be difficult to let go of the surface and deal with that, or just completely ignore the surface and change the subject to another deeper thing, such as fucking the girl.

When I moved to SEA, it took at least 5 years to adapt to not trying to hold deep conversations with women.

As TRQ says, use books, or perhaps other men, for that.

It’s a difficult transition to make, but there are surprising benefits. It can be, paradoxically, more satisfying and more deep, to limit yourself to connecting as deeply as possible, WITHOUT philosophy. WITHOUT high concept. Even at the mime level, at times. It’s a strange paradox, that I haven’t really tried to put into words, and am not sure if I could.

But I intuit that it’s a flawed mindset to assume that deep connections get deeper through intellectual connection, or that intellectual connection is required for a deep connection. I think now that’s more of an addiction than a need.

***
Many of us are sapio-sexual, and get more turned on by smart girls. I think that has to do with liking large breasts. Evolution noticed that smart girls make smarter babies which in turn are more likely to make surviving grandchildren.

On the surface, we assume that we just like to connect at a deeper level. But the genes are pulling the strings, and just find that girls brain to be similar to big firm high and bouncy titties. So when evaluating how serious we want to be with the kid*, we probe and test her mind. Fair enough. Just don’t mistake agreement or education or belief system or mind-training with good enough brain-genes.

As for emotional connection, you don’t need high concept for that. In fact, if you rely on that, I’d consider that a crutch. If you can’t get out of concept, you can’t really connect well. I think it can be good for a man’s personal and social development to be forced to connect without high concept. I think, like me, that eventually you’ll be quite surprised to learn that what remains is the meatier and more interesting and more valuable portion of what relationship and connection is all about.

Very often we use concepts as shields and distractions and weapons to fight DIFFERENT battles than we think we are fighting. Most verbal battles with women are not at all about what the words say they are about. Not about ordering the cutlery in the dishwasher. Not about philosophical nuance. A woman also has underlying emotions that often drive her words; men do too. As these are usually not available to our introspection and we most often can’t see what drives us, stripping away the concepts altogether makes things much simpler so that you CAN see the fundamentals.

After dealing with mostly fundamentals, you earn a MUCH clearer and cleaner picture of what the fundamentals of relationship are, and how to deal with them in a fun and fulfilling and healthy manner.

This is also another reason I think that all humans should spend some part of their learning teen years, when their brain is still most neuroplastic, babysitting. Dealing well with children is an essential skill for dealing well with adults. It’s surprisingly NOT important what the conversation is about. It’s more important how you have that conversation, meaning, you don’t even have to have any particular one, nearly every time.

* To a guy near my age, anyone under 25 is basically still a kid. Paradoxically I think young adulthood begins in teen years, and you have to take young people seriously, and can learn from them.

What seduction is, and how we learn it.

Some years back Neuro Linguistic Programming became a fad when people realized they could apply that form of persuasion to seduction.

Last year Dilbert creator Scott Adams popularized the power of hypnotic 3-d persuasion, and related it to Trumps bid for the presidency.

Here is a talk by an FBI negotiator who reveals many powerful techniques of persuasion:

I was a travelling salesman, and would set up my mini-store full of wares on college campuses and at music festivals throughout the U.S. mid-west. I hung out with other sales-men, and lived the life of a sales man. My target audience was mostly college aged girls.

Sometimes I travelled with a crew of helpers, sometimes I travelled with my Indonesian girlfriend. When I was with her, I’d leave her to do the sales all day while I went back to the hotel to meditate. She was a great little sales girl.

How did she learn?

How do we learn persuasion?

What did I learn from hanging out with salespeople, and how did I learn it? What did I learn from simply putting myself behind a sales table?

In pre-historic times, the art of tool making was passed down from generation to generation, and in thousands of years the shape of the tools didn’t change. Apparently archaic human brains were less creative than modern human brains, but I still believe that we have some vestigial similarities in how we fundamentally learn. We mimic.

We are evolved with mirror neurons. We pay close attention, and we absorb, and we mimic.

As modern humans, we are not constrained to mimic exactly. We filter, and adjust to our circumstances.

First you find a mentor or hero, then you copy his style, then slowly you develop your own style.

But you can’t develop your own style without practice, and that means repeated exposure to your learning environment. As a comic, your ethos is to get up on stage and just do it as often as you can. It’s not only about if you crush it or bomb. It’s also about just getting up on that stage.

Because we need that feedback. Our body and mind will figure out the micro-adjustments. MOST of our adjustments will be sub-conscious. We learn timing. We learn inflection. We learn the value of silent space. We learn how respond with tangential near-non-sequiturs instead of logical facts. We learn how language influences. How body language influences. How eye contact influences.

Learning is not done in a vacuum. It’s not done through books. We need to firstly mimic. Then we need to practice.

I don’t believe that there are enough resources currently for mimicking.

I think it’s become more apparent lately that understanding the sexual market place is not about something that you can learn in a book. It’s about something that you can be.

What you are completely changes how you are perceived and dealt with.

The above sentence is the KEY to understanding the sexual market place.

You can’t just talk about how women are, as if you are not in the equation. Women are very different, depending on each individual man, and on the context. How women will behave towards certain words is a null question. The real question is how a woman will behave towards YOU.

And you are a sexually class-mobile person. You can change from zero to hero, if you’d like to, and are willing to put in the time and effort.

And if you can follow the simple steps, of how we learn.

I really believe that we can’t learn about either the sexual marketplace or about how to improve our dating lives from un-masculine men.

It’s not about book learning. It’s about starting with an appropriate mentor to mimic.

The best teachers will understand what they do, and be able to put that into words. But even the best teachers will not know MOST of why what they do works. They’ll only be consciously aware of a very small part of it.

Even if you study from a wide array of teachers, and put their best insights into practice frequently, you will still miss out on the bulk of those teacher’s value. Most of communication is non-verbal and too difficult to try to squeeze into words. We need to see it and absorb it.
******
As well as being imprinted by mentors, we are also imprinted by the women that we date. That doesn’t mean you’ll become feminine, don’t worry. It’s more subtle than that. Once you learn to embody the masculine polarity as genuine and with fun ease, you can appreciate and incorporate quite a lot of fun quirks that the girls you are into have. Might be just a way that they say a certain word. Might be an appreciation for a certain type of adventure. Even fucked up people usually have a few fun aspects worth internalizing.
******
There is no rule book of how the sexual marketplace works, and of how women behave. Because: what you are completely changes how you are perceived and dealt with. This is why we can’t learn from un-masculine men. They only understand how women treat un-masculine men.
******
One man’s impression about how most mentors in the red-pill PUA and manosphere scenes are not appropriate role models:

******
Relevant: If you are using Rollo’s mental map of the marketplace and see him as a mentor you need to know this https://www.scribd.com/document/412763803/Statement-on-Removal-of-RT-From-21

Moving past game 101 to relationship 702

Daysofgame said:

An active conversation with men with real experience on truly advanced topics would move all of us fwd… deepen the practical renaissance of sex/relationship mastery.

You can’t get better at tennis if you only play against newbs.  So ya, more people joining in from a first person current lived perspective at more advanced levels brings us all to better form.

You’re perfect to have in the conversation about advanced relationship skills because three things:

• your breadth of study
• your willingness to tease out the wheat from the chaffe in what anyone says, plus your ability to translate between different frames of reference and metaphors and ways of thinking
• your Dale Carnegy high end skills of diplomacy.

An intern once asked me to teach him about Chi-Kung. I gave him an overview and a few lessons, and he went off on his own from there. In my understanding, there is no ultimate true method; you grow the phantom limbs that you choose to pay attention on growing. The framework that we grow on is very very loose. I don’t teach much of the traditional things, such as red on the outside white on the inside left side channel beside the central channel beside the white on the outside red on the inside right side channel. That channel is not a discovery of something real, it’s a creation of something that becomes real.

So anyway, within a brief period of some months, he was having very strong Chi-Kung and Qi-kong sex experiences. Very different from my own.

So if we get a community of guys talking about advanced stuff, we aren’t going to be agreeing on where is the right-hand channel and what color it is. But some underlying patterns might still be discernible.

The way that someones heart-chakra energy opens will be experienced uniquely for everyone. But love is an underlying pattern we will be able to notice. And we can consider the different frames of reference and viewpoints on love as real different worlds, seeing reality. The fun task isn’t to see the same reality, it’s to see the breadth and profundity. More info at once, and better integration of the massively parallel insights and embodied wisdom that are not surface.

My best guess (in part, as I’m doing this when I am “blowing girls minds”) is you are “bringing more and more energy through the girl.” This is “fucking her open to god.”

To quote myself: “You have to feel a lot in order for the girl to feel a lot”

I like the way you put it too. We all know that the more sexually responsive a girl is, the more fun she is to be with. Funny how guys never talk about that about themselves.

Children from a young age learn to sex differentiate. Part of it is innate; boys stop joining in on playing with dolls with the girls and get more interested in the Tonka Trucks. Part of it is just noticing what each group is doing. So I don’t know how much it’s cultural sex differentiation that keeps guys from talking out loud that they will be WAY way way better in bed if they FEEL more and are more sexually responsive.

Or maybe it’s because most guys are struggling to feel less, because it’s too easy to orgasm.

That’s where chi-kung comes in, of course. It increases no only your libido, but your control. You can hold MUCH more energy. It can be so intense as to be indistinguishable from pain.

I remember going to the dentist during a period when my sex was usually extremely intense. The dentist pain became the same as the sex pain for me – indistinguishable from pleasure.

That’s just one manifestation of high energy though. There are many other ways. Again, why chi-kung helps; to find many voices, to find many embodiments. And why formless meditation helps. To not need any dreams or embodiments at all, but to just let aliveness be simple. To appreciate the appreciation, and let it broaden in a non-local way.

Daysofgame said:

I am waking up to this. As I learn more, and the “matrix” slows down, I can change the course of events in real time… so “shaping her” is becoming more common for me.

What happens for me seems to be the reverse. I might look back at what I just said and note with some surprise how appropriate it is.

Actually, no, you’re right. There is awareness in that split second improv moment, and we are aware of what micro-split second decisions we are making as we riff.

This is very similar to improv on a musical instrument. I wrote a post about that, that referenced a study of jazz improvizationalists that showed that the usual analytical decision making process gets shut down during improv. I think we get more right brained, and the flow moment puts us both more into the moment yet at once less in “decision making mode”

So maybe it’s the analytical part of my mind that sometimes looks back and is surprised at what I’ve just said.

Because there is no time for the analytical part to make such choices. The other way to think is massively-multi-parallel. You can’t be analytical and fast on your feet like that. There is no time for it.

Lately I’ve been talking a lot about improv and moving into right brained artistic ways of being, as well as muscle memory from reference experiences.

I think we also need to talk about feeling love and lusty appreciation as habit. I’ve been chewing on that idea these last few days, waiting to be ready to write about it.

Together they add up to all at once a mixture of:

• being into the girl
• showing it
• leaning back instead of leaning in, as Riv would remind
• constantly joking and using her micro-shit tests as fun starting points for agree-and amplify, or role play or changing the subject in a funny way, or simply agreeing, or ignoring,  or banter and so on.  Her shit tests can be more than defused and disarmed, they become fun and nourishing play.  Another ritual of devotion, a ritual of improv that makes her laugh.
• filling the room with lusty paternal love that lights her up as if it’s opium in the air.
• a constant feeling of sexual addiction and lust; constant sexual flirting
• a feeling of long standing ease and closeness, as if you could have a conversation with your lips touching. You don’t have to move away from the fridge as she’s reaching in, she’ll appreciate you just being obstinately in the way as she sidles up right against you, as if you share the same body, you are so comfortable and familiar.

So ya, time slows down and you direct her attention and who she is, constantly, but also it’s a matter of habit, but habit of improv.

Always fresh, always new, yet always of a very familiar theme.

Being into each other and celebration.

Such a type of relationship is highly archetypal, by the way. If you act like this on the first date, the woman will fall straight into it, in mutual role play. She will feel as if the two of you have been in a great relationship for a long time.

It’s a kind of secret society. That even virgins can join. It’s just archetypal and easy. First date sex, and first date openness and coupling.

D said:

And I created someone who could be loved. The other part was recognizing the same potential in the people around me.

That’s a big deal.

I used to live in a monastery with Pema Chodron as the Abbess and my meditation instructor. She’s famous for teaching about Maitri, or self acceptance and love.

It’s a rather huge foundational part of all Buddhist practice, without which one can’t deepen and grow it into compassion.

Or the simple common sense notion that you can’t love others until you love yourself.

And no girl will love you for long if you don’t love her. Falling in love is something people prefer to do together.

So ya, keeping that warm sweet fire of self love in your heart is foundational to being loved.

To be as literal as possible… you’re making the experience of being with you, so intense, that she is “on drugs” when she feels that, it “changes her,” and she expects to be in a devotional state around you… and she has evidence… as you continue to use her as a vessel to concentrate “intense feelings.”

Yes, and not just intense feelings.

You feel good. You feel good around her. You like, love, lust, and appreciate her.

So you celebrate the energy-baby that is the love that the two of you create. You both feel that love as a real thing. It’s in the room, and you both deeply respect that baby. You both nurture it, constantly.

That baby needs sex, comfort, delicious food, quiet time apart, and on and on. It needs strong passionate sex, time with her listening to you play your muscial instrument or watching you be above average at the gym, or whatever it is that feeds the baby.

She’s going to be constantly saying “I love you”, because you are constantly, quietly, feeling love.

Her mirror neurons will pick up on your very subtle body language that you are unconscious of. All you have to do is be into her, (and 1000 other things that are already natural habit) and she’ll associate all her good feelings with you, and be constantly addicted.

She’ll miss you while doing the groceries, or if you step out to the gym. Even if you live together 24/7, she’ll not only never tire of you, but might burn with love so strong that it physically hurts her in the chest.

My girl dreams of me every single night. Unfortunately I’m often cheating in her dreams, or about to. That’s my karma, I suppose. That must be in my body language. But it’s also just because of the love-existential-angst.

Patrice talks about “karate school.” Saying she “learns your moves” and eventually you have to let her go and start over. This is “betatization” sort of, but staying one step ahead of her “chipping away,” and when she is too good… push her out.

And you are saying almost what Deida says. He says, in the end… women always win.

This hasn’t been my experience. However girls will leave a guy, eventually, who won’t commit in the way she wants. Marriage with monogamy is a common line in the sand that a woman is waiting for.

Blackdragon and others contest this point, and say that many women will hang around for years as fuck buddies.

That’s apples and oranges.

Women who are deeply in love with you and already pair bonded have expectations – biological expectations. It’s called having a baby.

Killyouregotowin said:

“Devotion… Fuck you! Devotion… Fuck you!” This is something that I believe even a “Top Guy” will have to deal with. I noticed that as I climb higher in life, her expectations of me climb as well. Briffault’s law doesn’t even begin to do justice on just how audacious female entitlement is. When you are a drunk captain, she will low level nag on a constant basis, but when you are making serious gains on a consistent basis, the slightest mistake will bring out a tantrum of worried insecurity based on her fear of you veering off course.

Been there, done that. Never again. I’ve had healthy win-win relationships in my recent and medium term past, and am in one currently, that look nothing like that.

With J she started to get cunty consistently, and even though we were living together I soft nexted her. No way in hell am I ever going to live that way again. I stopped eating for 3 days, and for the next two months without fail ate only every second day, which was on gym days. I upped my game, and demanded better treatment. That turned things around, and she never dared be cunty again. When she slides a bit, I let her know, and she fears my wrath. My wrath can be very gentle now; she listens and corrects.

But I could not have done that with a personality disordered passive aggressive or low self-awareness girl.

Not all girls are like that, and either it’s your fault, or hers, or both.

You don’t have to live like that.

Oh, and of course I still usually only eat every second day, and still maintain the gym regimen, and do everything else I can think of to remain extremely sexually competitive and her best option.

Both people have to work fucking hard to maintain strong passionate loving healthy win-win on the same team relationship, feeding the mutual baby of love.

And it’s up to you to make sure she works fucking hard. If you are working fucking hard at it, and she won’t or can’t, you have to move on. For her sake and yours. That’s what I think. Nobody can win with the personality disordered, and if you are walking on eggshells, while at the same time properly handling your shit and her shit tests, it’s on her.

Why trying to emulate a player archetype in order to seduce can be horribly counterproductive.

I’d push back a little here… you’re not wrong… but guys that aren’t “certain” of themselves will be distracted by this. They (in some cases) might be better trying on an archetype… rather than trying to invent one of their own.

In the beginning… men have a lot of false theories. And so much uncertainty. “Copying” a successful guy can be a reasonable first step…

I’ve used the example of comedians before. And writers. And musicians. It’s very common to start out emulating a style, but there is never big success without growing into a highly unique individuality. No one successful is completely derivative; it’s about discovering and creating novelty. Novelty is highly attractive, and you can’t copy novelty.

When teaching meditation it’s always done to teach both the absolute and relative views at the same time. That’s Buddhist speak for teach the advanced technique at the same time as the beginner technique. Because sometimes we’ll be able to be advanced, right from the beginning, and always we need direction and an over-arching view of where we can aim and head for.

So for meditation, it’s taught that you can rest your mind and not try to fight against thoughts, and just be present, without really doing anything. But for beginners that doesn’t work at all. They’ll just daydream or fall asleep. So you teach focus and slapping your mind upside the cheek every time you have a thought, to bring yourself back to the focus.

But then sometimes even beginners relax. So they need to know it’s fine to relax. That it’s best to relax. So you teach both mindfulness, and awareness.

For game you can’t just teach K and R selection and what to emulate. That misses the big picture and the whole point.

There are highly charismatic married men who provide for their many girlfriends, and get laid like crazy and have devoted love slaves and are charming as fuck.

Absolutely nothing to do with K or R. That’s a side show, that has nothing to do with nothing.

It’s just a distraction.

Like focusing on a candle flame is just a distraction. Not the point at all.

I mean, a candle flame can be a point. But it’s not what meditation is, anymore than visualization or chi-kung or hatha yoga or kundalini is meditation. There are infinite good types of meditation, even if dzogchen or formless meditation is perhaps an example of the penultimate insight.

You can meditate on being an archetypal bad boy, with the costume to match, and that can “work”. Or you can meditate on being a married professor, and that can work at least as well.

The form is nearly irrelevant and that’s incredibly important to know.

Because people have predilections.

I used to do mantra meditation before I met my community which focused on shamata vipassana. They explained to me that they preferred if I just did what everyone else did, down to the smallest details of the form.

So I learned their style of sitting meditation, but eventually I refused to do the suggested technique of imagining my self going out into the room on the out-breath. That gave me a headache. This did not make me popular with a few of the meditation teachers, who considered me stubborn and arrogant. Only later, in that community, was I introduced to various Tibetan teachers who explained many other forms of shamata vippasana, and my personal technique that I seemed to have invented was described back to me as a real thing called dzogchen.

In that community people also “graduated” from sitting meditation to doing complex visualizations and chanting. I was told that my simple practice had more profound effects on me personally than the gains that many of the senior students were getting from visualization. And I could not visualize at all, and I still can’t.

So predilection is a really big deal. You don’t want to try to be a bad boy pump and dumper if really you are into having girlfriends and even living with them. It would be stupid to do that, really. It’s also completely irrelevant.

You’ve got to put some faith in your own interests, and follow the ones that give the best returns. There are infinite ways to be attractive; you don’t have to choose to be something that you are not interested in being. It’s when you are interested in something that you get especially good at it. And getting especially good at something is attractive.

When it comes to becoming attractive, you really do have to be into what you are doing and who you are becoming. You can’t just be angry at the sluts you are fucking and throw away all personal responsibly for treating yourself and others well with hand waiving towards giving in to “the decline”. No, when it comes to being attractive, it’s attractive to actually love the women you fuck. It’s very unattractive not to. Communities that avoid this obvious fact are clearly broken and twisted and promoting poor mental and social health.

I’d like to think that people would easily come to this intuition inside themselves, if they take some time to open to their own hearts and minds. There are some intuitions that are clearly better to follow than teachings. Teachers don’t know you. They don’t know your life.

In fact that is an explicit and often stated Buddhist teaching. If you have to choose between a teachers instructions and your own well thought out beliefs, go with your own. I was taught that many times. That helps to make Buddhism self correcting and evolving. You discover your truth, you don’t adopt someone else’s.

What is true for you, in seduction, will eventually with certainty become vastly different than what is true for anyone else. You should know that from the beginning, because you need to give yourself permission to become what you want to become, and have relationships with girls who you actually like. And the types of relationships that you actually like.

The idea that either K or R selected, provider or cad, is sexier and gets you laid faster with more or better quality women is really facile. Really extra-ordinarily over simplified to the point of being wrong. A total sideshow.

Many facts of life were discovered by simple mind experiments, including Einsteins theory of relativity. Simple mind experiment: imagine you are a girl, and are way into this charming charismatic man who has firm boundaries and is great in the sack. One day he offers to pay for a trip to a foreign country. And your university schooling. And your apartment. Are you suddenly going to be into him LESS?!!

It’s completely absurd, and the entire concept is mostly used as rationalization for people to do what they are already inclined to do, while putting themselves in the best possible light.

It’s a rationalization that intimacy makes you weak, and that your lack of going after it is a sign of strength and charisma.

But it’s the complete opposite.

Retaining women’s passion and insane levels of devotion that makes them literal human slaves is a HUGE skill, MORE valuable than picking them up. Way way way more valuable.

——–

I’ve been living with J for over 11 months. She moved in basically on the first date. And she still tells me that she loves me more than 20 times a day and is obsessively crazy head over heels for me, dotes on me constantly, oral and sex not only on demand, but offered up constantly, to the point of distraction. This is normal. This has been my normal for many many years with many many women.

It’s not random chance and accident. I’ve been documenting about this here for ages. And she’s only 22 to my 52, slim, and noticeably above average in attractiveness. Also completely normal. I haven’t dated anyone over 23 in ages, unless they grew into being older, and they nearly always do. Women stay with me as long as they can bear it if I’m not monogamous, and usually come back to me over and over if they break up.

That’s all normal, and it’s a thing. A thing that has nothing to do with K or R or provider or not provider. The sliders are various – getting focused on one slider to distraction is a HUGE mistake.

Now many people online have an agenda and try to work backwards from their preconceptions when they pretend to use reason. So they’ll say that my results are due to my location. Not influenced by, but due to. Even though I’ve never met or even heard of any other westerner (or local) getting anything close to similar results, living in any country. My results are at minimum extraordinarily rare, and extremely consistent. The people who try to put it down to location could never replicate my results merely by changing their own location, and they know it, so when asked if it’s true then why don’t they also move, they ALWAYS come up with some bullshit “reason” why they are not able or interested to do so.

Rationalizations and backward rationalizations account for a good deal of what is pawned off as reason in too many discussions, even by leaders and so called experts. People do what they are comfortable doing, and then explain why they are doing it, using their internal press secretary, and sounding all logical when it’s really all limbic.

People use “reasons” to pump and dump and avoid intimacy, build up huge systems of what attraction is, discount and dismiss any information that contradicts their mental maps (such as that it’s been scientifically proven that women orgasm more for wealthy men, and that women DON’T have a dual mating strategy and DON’T show different mate preferences when ovulating when they are married to high testosterone men). It’s very often a collusion of like minded men who gather into self selected groups, and you get in-group out group group mind thinking.

It’s very dangerous, when people are looking for advice for how to be happier. Very dangerous to stumble upon these giant group mind consensus that seem so “reasonable”.

And we can’t point all our fingers at the guys generously trying to teach what they know. The problems really start from the bureaucratically minded noobs, who think that there are rules and secret systems that they can learn. “Oh, that’s beta behavior!” they’ll expertly admonish, from the comfort of their lounge chair. They will learn the rules and roles of a group and become an excellent parrot, all the while having very little real life experience, and yet will chime in with their expert opinion daily. Their opinion about what they have read, and their very few experiences based on very underdeveloped social skills with girls.

These are the guys that make monsters out of teachers, because it gives the teachers feedback that is insanely out of touch with reality. Newbies will of course often have twisted mentalities that are immature and outright unhealthy. No one knows what it is that he doesn’t know, but it can be worse with newbs – they can “know” bad attitudes such that they ask how to get to the wrong place. “How can I be expert at seducing women who are twisted mind fucking human rent-a-bikes?” “How can I be expert at avoiding heartbreak or commitment or attachment?” And the teachers have to answer over and over questions from broken or underdeveloped mind-sets, and hear parroted back as gospel their worst ideas. Until an entire cannon of bad ideas is built up, that they then identify with, defend, and build upon.

We have a word for keyboard jockeys in Buddhism too. They are called scholars. Buddhism is about hearing, contemplating, and meditating. It’s the meditation that makes personal transformation. Dating is analogous to meditating. Contemplating about YOUR OWN FUCKING PERSONAL real life relationships is helpful. Disclosing your thoughts about your own real lived life is brave and helpful. Contemplating about second and third and infinitely off hand reports and theories of others is mind wank keyboard jockeying that adds noise and prevents personal and group insight and growth.

————————————-
And another comment I made over at Nash’s blog:

Before there is muscle memory, there is learning. Sometimes it’s conscious aha moments, especially for things like no doesn’t mean no. That’s a fun one to learn. I’ve tried to explain, using examples, how no doesn’t mean no many times on forums, and it’s usually not well received.

It’s one of those things you have to learn for yourself. You have to live the nuance, and get the real feedback, to make it real and useful. It’s not an idea, it’s an experiential reality. The idea is only a map after you experience the territory. Otherwise it’s like explaining the color red to a blind person.

Treat em mean to keep em keen is like that too. You might have an idea about it that won’t work for you, but if you live an experience that very broadly fits into that map, it will not be negative to you. Just like no doesn’t mean no seems VERY negative to most people, but is completely positive to anyone who actually lives through the experiences.

But I do agree, I prefer low drama women who don’t demand negative treatment. Absolutely. Mental health is a very serious issue, and impacts hugely on our quality of life. The principal doesn’t have to be extreme, it can be subtle. For instance yesterday J said “Kiss me”, and I said “No.” She was shocked, then beamed a big smile at me and congratulated me for the balls. She was really impressed, and it was like I passed a test.

That could fall into the category of treat em mean to keep em keen; have boundaries and expectations, and don’t always comply with demands, just because she makes them. And if you are not treated up to your reasonable expectations, sometimes you need to be forceful. As forceful as required. If you are not as forceful as required, then it’s bad parenting, more likely, than merely a bad woman.

Why people insist on using tone knobs to blend the ranges of providers and betas

I left a comment on Nash’s blog today, and I’d like to expand on it.

Nash said:

I took tons of new, rare, interesting reference experiences from my times with Pixie Girl and Baby Dragon. I didn’t fuck either of them… but I took big leaps fwd in my education… at a stage in my game when “big leaps” are rare.

Wolves > Rabbits… every time. Of this, I am sold.

I like your mental map of growing reference experiences. Ya, I think reference experiences can be like a type of muscle memory, similar to how learning piano is a build up of things we actually do, more than things we think, feel, or believe.

And your idea of wolf being better than rabbit reminds me of a something that has been bothering me for many years in popular pua mental maps – that there is a tone knob that twists from beta on one end to alpha on the other, or a tone button that twists from provider to alpha. Many people make it the same tone knob.

Strange mental map for people to use, considering tone knobs have been out of fashion and people mostly use graphic equalizers now.

It’s a completely separate knob between provider and cad compared to beta and alpha. They are only related if you MAKE them related, by sliding them at the same time.

And I agree – wolf is way more fulfilling in most every way than rabbit, if you do it well; more passion, more return on investment, more connection, more of just about anything people value. If by wolf you mean longer term relationships vs pump and dump.

———————-

I’ve been promising to write about better ways to think about seduction, game, relationships. I think many of the memes that are common in some online communities are more wrong than right – and just right enough to be credible.

For instance there is this incredibly stupid idea that alpha fucks and beta bucks. It’s based on the truth that there are some betas who are also providers, and that there are some alphas who are also mostly into pump and dump.

I was given the opportunity for a free evaluation of one of Krausers books a few years ago, on the condition that write a review. Krauser said he didn’t care if it was a positive or negative review, as long as I wrote something. I reneged on my responsibility, as I was not able to bring myself to get through the book, as he had built, from the beginning, a premise of attraction that has nothing to do with my reference experiences. He talked about dressing and behaving like a bad boy cad as a means to increase attraction and get laid more.

That’s completely different than what I do or care to do or need to do. Now that may be true, for him, but it’s not TRUE.

Krauser is a good and thoughtful and insighful writer, but I could not finish that seduction guide because it’s premise was all about K versus R selection, provider and beta, and it seemed to want to mold the seducer into something, regardless of what he is. You can’t make yourself into something that you don’t identify with – you have to become your better real self.

We BUILD our worlds, and how people relate to us. We decide who we are, and what types of groupies we could attract. We create our characters and magnetize people around us who are interested in those characters.

You don’t have to do anything remotely close to what Krauser suggests in order to be a magnetic charismatic seductive character.

Which is why recently I questioned whether his entire philosophy of seduction was at its root flawed.

Now that’s not to say that he’s not great at what he does, or that he doesn’t understand women or have keen and hard won unusual insights into some of the workings of women.

I’m suggesting something far more mind blowing and broad.

I’m saying that he’s right, but that might have nothing whatsoever to do with how YOU can be right about women.

Or how I can be right about women.

He’s going to be right in his own, unique way. Women will deal with him uniquely; not in the same way as they deal with a category of men. That’s the whole point of learning and practicing charm. You become treated differently. It’s tautological to the entire process. You wan’t women to tell you “you’re not like anyone I’ve ever known”.

But you don’t get grouped like Krauser thinks you do. There is not a secret society army of cloned bad boys that you can emulate. We ALL get treated differently. All women, all men. ALL of us get treated very differently, within the first 5 seconds of meeting someone. People pick up on the most profoundly subtle of cues, and our vibe discloses our attitude and history as if it were a scent that a bloodhound could pick up.

When people get positive feedback from some women, when we try to know how and why that works, we can’t just look somewhere and see the answer. We have to make up theories. The mental maps for what we are doing that works can be way off. Because what works is built up over time subconsciously through real life feedback. Why does your golf swing work well? You might not be able to either communicate or even know most of why.

You can create a rich history of being a libertine lover, as Krauser does, and that will affect how you are perceived. But it has very little to do with wearing a leather jacket and rings, unless that’s what you want to incorporate into your image. You don’t need that image. You can create any image you want. As long as you get positive feedback for it.

Just look at the human species. We are very varied. Survival of the fittest doesn’t mean survival of the bad boy, or provider, or diplomat, or warrior, or baker, or thug, or genius. It means everyone who procreated found a niche that WORKED. There isn’t just two niches; provider and cad. There are more than you can imagine. You can be any niche you want.

I was re-reading a post I made that was a copy of an old rvforum thread that I participated in.
The posts that got me a 1 week ban from RooshVForum

I’m still amazed at how irrational and delusional and dissimulating were many of the rvforum member commentors, on insisting that Mark Minter getting married when previously he was had set himself up as the guru of swearing off marriage was akin to going back on the principles of not being a pedophile.

The reason for the lack of reason is clear. The RVF members suffered from a type of cluster A schizoid personality disorder, where they view intimacy with paranoid scepticism and see indulging in intimacy as pathological and a sign of terrifying weakness. When Mark realized that he actually wanted intimacy, and that he was wrong about his basic human nature, the RVF group-think mob turned on him in anger and declared him an excommnunicated outsider. Some were disgusted and angry. They felt actually betrayed, as if he didn’t just make a life decision about his own fucking business, but that he had betrayed a contract with them.

Which is why for a long time I’ve been calling out people with that mindset as being little boys trying to create a He-Man-Woman-Haters-Club-of-Relationship-Fail.

People who have either never had a long term relationship or been burned by them, deciding that therefore long term relationships are bad.

And in order to feel good about themselves, they gather together and
1) blame women for their relationship failures
2) blame society for their relationship failures.
3) blame the very idea of having a relationship itself as a failure, that only weak blue pillers would do.

These guys were so heavily invested in being anti-intimacy, that they put up with Roosh banning everyone who hinted at any other view of intimacy, on or off the forum. He would actually ban people for ideas that they expressed OUTSIDE of the forum. They rallied around him as if their group was actually a thing.

Foolish. They don’t form a group. There is no men’s movement. Men don’t have a collective bargaining position. Each one of us is completely on his own when it comes to each unique vagina that will either get moist for us or not. Each completely on his own as to what is his bargaining position and skill for negotiating how well he is treated. That’s a private affair, and no group movement of mens rights activists anti-feminists is going to have any influence in how individual or groups of women behave towards you.

So the framework for a better way to think about being attractive and maintaining passionate loving relationships with girls that you are really into is not about wearing leather jackets or about avoiding being a provider or about emulating behaviors of those you think are in a secret society. It’s not about avoiding feminists or acting either K or R selected. It’s about creating positive reference experiences that build up your muscle memory. And crucially, it’s not random wandering into positive feedback – you could get that from heroin. It’s feedback that is towards a goal. Feedback in line with your long term mission. For becoming more attractive and better at maintaining passion with women who are good for you.

This won’t look like what someone else is doing, most likely. It will be your true, authentic self, giving and receiving true, authentic love and passion. We all have our very different flavors, and are not fungible, and all are treated that way. There is no group called women, no group called men, who all are like that, and there isn’t an exceptional third group of chads that women treat differently as if they were a third sex.

There is something we call the human condition, and there are basic sex differences, but the human condition includes more variability than anyone can conceive; the more experience you have with women, not only the more similarities can you see, but also the more incredible variety. Just as different women bring out vastly different responses in you, so it works in reverse; and it’s not because of types. It’s because of individuals.

There is who you make yourself and how you treat people. You can’t make yourself into something that you don’t identify with – you have to become your better real self.

Charisma and musical development are synonymous

I’m playing around on my acoustic six string this morning, and have thoughts about improv that I think reverberate and echo widely into game and life.

When I was 16 I’d goof around haphazardly on the family stand up piano in the basement. Being of mild cluster C tentencies (anorexia, obsessive compulsive, struggling against neurotic thoughts) I liked to do a lot of tricky finger excersices. My thinking was that this would naturally lead into musical ability.

Later I wandered into the high school music classroom, during a free period, when all students could structure their own time. One guy was doing some simple chord progressions, with some non-technical melody in the right hand, using a slow tempo. It was a life changeing eye opener that I’ve never forgotten. I tell this story often. He put emotion into his music, and that was far more important than a universe of technical ability. It drew people in, drew him in, drew me in. It was an ability from another universe. I had no idea how he did that.

It would take me many decades of life and feeling and being open to emotions of every kind to be able to have something to bring to and pull out of the piano. The piano now is a completely different thing to me, because I’m a different thing.

We create our realities, within biological and physical and social constraints. But those constraints are bigger than any of us can comprehend. Music itself has been evolving over the centuries, and faster and faster. Social structures are also opening to more and more options. There is tremendous room within the facts to CREATE facts. Technology is the perfect example of this. We not only live within a bounded reality, but we use what we are given to paint and sculpt and compose and dance and sing and write and fuck our way into new worlds, that we create as we discover them.

You can make more beautiful and simply better music, using one string played emotionally, than 6 or 8 played with virtuosity. Guitar teachers, in fact any teacher, will tell you to try to avoid starting with bad habits.

Some teachers will tell you to never play even one note that doesn’t sound sweet. Focus on the sound, not the melody.

It’s similar with seduction and maintaining passionate romance. Technical game ability can get in the way of the moment – it’s not about your routine, or even quite so much about what you say. Or even do. It’s about emotion and what you are mutually creating into and out of your instrument. With seduction and charisma, your instrument is the other person. You are dancing emotions with her, feeding your emotions in and pulling her emotions out. Is the note sweet? Start with the note, and if you move on to melodies and beats, always pay attention to the note.

The guitar string can convey emotion just out of one note, depending on how you play it, and of course single string melodies can bring out more emotions. Add more strings and you can incorporate more elements of music, such as a repeating base line, or even a harmonic melodic base line. You can slide one string while plucking an open one. You can use double entendre and nuance, and convey several emotions at once; longing, sadness, joy, bitter sweet struggle, devotion.

Charisma and game is exactly like that.

You need to be able to first make one sweet note, then expand out, never losing the feel for what music fundamentally is embedded in, which is emotion.

************

Ultimately music is about creating and playing our own compositions. Mussorgsky changed the nature of music in his lifetime, it has been said, BECAUSE he was unschooled. He din’t know any better than to make something new. If you learn some musical patterns, or game patterns, these can not only open up possibilities, but they will also usually limit your view of what are your options. You’ll stick to the script, stick to what you believe that the pattern is supposed to be.

But that’s not how you write music, or how you interact with another person. You are always listening to that guitar string, playing with what it is giving to you. Listening to what emotions and sounds and chord progressions and melodies are coming out of the piano.

I’ve been very extreme in my musical development and focus on improv. I’ve learned a few difficult pieces, and these have greately expanded what my improv can be, and I want to learn more and more of other peoples music, but piano or guitar, for me, always comes back to improv. I say piano instead of music, because piano is a person that I interact with – it’s not an abstraction. The guitar is a different person, and brings out very different music.

When you free form improv, either with a woman or guitar, you might use some fundamental structures, but you have to more than merely bend those structures or add a few dissonant notes. You have to be listening to the instrument. Your own moods will come out of it, and yet often surprise you. You’ll be constantly micro-adjusting, or sometimes wildly diverting, based on what you hear. Different parts of your own mind are talking to each other, through your hands, the instrument, and the sound. They could not converse without this medium.

********************

I’ve switched to playing my acoustic in the laptop position. It suits my interests and abilities better. My left hand is damaged and so I can’t play important bar chords used in a strumming style, and learned to prefer a single (or multiple) string finger or plectrum picking style. It’s easier for me to hammer on and off and slide and move around the fretboard with it on my lap. I also use an open tuning, so that I can also strum chords by simply holding all strings down to one fret.

I’ve seen guys use this style of playing on stage. The body language conveys a more contemplative mood, and their music is always far from the heavy metal that must only come from a different guitar posture. The body language suits the music I prefer to make.

This also has a corresponding analogue in charm. I needn’t explain it; I think if you use your imagination you’ll picture it clearer than if I give you the image.

Or maybe you’ll picture something very different than what I have in mind.

Which will prove my point. Game and charisma and music will be altered by your history, perspective, and interests.

This is not something to fight, but to lean into. You’re going to be leaning into the unknown, over and over, and often living well outside of your comfort zone. That’s what music and social interaction does; it expands what you used to think of were your options. That often comes with some emotional strain.

*************

As a teenager I was once invited by two of the most handsome and cool guys in the school to join their clique, and hang around with them. That was too far outside of my comfort zone at the time. I rationalized this discomfort by looking down on them a bit, in my mind. It was a missed opportunity, that I passed up because I was safe in my smaller world.

Game is most often taught as a way to make you happy within a small world – game usually is taught in a way that keeps you safe.

But charisma won’t be what other people teach you, and it won’t be safe. You’ll be learning things that others don’t and can’t possibly know, things unique to you.

And you’ll be opening to new women and their worlds.

In order to gain positive reference experiences, it helps to be a social climber. If you are young, you’ll get good feedback from older women. As you become more worldly you may find your girlfriends and lovers getting younger and younger.

When I was 28 I had a 48 year old lover. At 50 I had a 16 year old one. Plus a 17 year old one plus a 24 year old one, plus a 23 year old one, plus a distant 17 year old one who was considering leaving her fiance for me.

People find it too much an insult to their ego to believe that I am a real guy, telling the truth about his life. It’s too much narcissistic injury. This is one reason I write so many diary type posts; to humanize my dating philosophy and ground it in real life experience, so you can see this as part of the human condition.

Many people will dissimulate like mad to claim that my personal currently lived life and my past experiences can’t possibly relate to what are their own possibilities, if they are even true at all. They don’t much care which option to choose – either it’s fake or irrelevent – all they want is a quick way out of personal responsibility to change their own world. This is a defence mechanism, and nearly always comes from people deliberately keeping their options and world narrow, because it’s far more comfortable that way to them.

How to use LTR game during pickup

In my youth at Buddhist meditation seminars the idea would often be repeated that if you want to fill a cup with knowledge, that you need to empty the cup first.

So I spend a lot of time on this blog just trying to empty cups – trying to kill stupid memes that will prevent the happiness and life that you want.

It is likely that nothing I can say will be able to properly empty your cup – we are all embedded within our reference experiences and no blog is going to alter your reference experiences.

Another Buddhist notion is that the only effective path to change is threefold:

1. Hearing
2. Contemplation
3. Meditation

Reading about how women work on blogs is only helpful if you also think about it and put the knowledge into practice.  Being a keyboard jockey will 100 percent always lead to wrong views.  You need to anchor what you read inside your own real lived personal experience, and contemplate about it to get an appropriate fit, for you.  It’s not enough to get lots of experiences if you don’t read about how to contextualize them and then contemplate to further contextualize and  embody the experiences.

No one can give you the truth about how women behave, because women are all slightly different and will behave towards you differently based on what you bring to the table.  So you can get some good pointers, but never the Truth.  You need to CREATE the truth.

Hearing, contemplating, and action will always lead to different, very personal viewpoints and experiences.

The goal is internalized real viewpoints based on real lived experience.

And to continuously update your viewpoints as you continuosly add new information and experiences – and here is the crucial part – all this must be done within the framework of a goal.  A lifestyle goal. There is no such thing as agnostic information.  Any viewpoint is towards a purpose.

The “truths” about women that men read on blogs can be extraordinarily dangerous, because they are gonzo truths; embodied truths.  True only to that particular life that CREATED that world and worldview.  Women relate to you very specifically based upon what world YOU create.

I suggest that a good goal for your life experiences, which will create your personal and unique embodied world view, is to get better with women and become more happy and give and receive fulfilling love and value.  That’s a lofty goal, but an excellent challenge that adds meaning and value to your own life and the lives of others.

Keyboard jockey knowledge is worse than useless.  It’s a diorama.  Don’t live in a diorama – that will only get in the way of embodying joy.

I have a theory that many people who have women troubles, and are therefore seeking answers online, have some very core issues that can’t be addressed or resolved through online advice.  Some people did not have the healthiest pair bonding and care with their mothers and caregivers as babies and during infancy, and this leads to Cluster A personality disorders, such as schizoid attachment disorder and paranoid views of society.

I don’t know how to address that, or even if it is addressable.  You’d need to look into that yourself, and perhaps start a long journey with therapists of various types.  I suggest that no single type of therapy will be ultimately effective; you’ll want to include body centered therapies along with cognitive therapies, and also explore other options, such as visualizations and hypnotherapy.

*******

Here is an example of one type of problem Cluster A issues lead to:

John Cleese talks about extremism as a manifestation of Cluster A personality disorder. Both paranoid and schizoid are cluster A personality disorders.

Roosh is paranoid schizoid and through both heavy handed banning and overmoderation, plus attracting like minded followers of his thoughts, his remaining commenters skew disproportionately towards cluster A.  This leads to a feedback amplification of paranoia and attachment aversion.

“It’s all OTHER people’s fault we aren’t getting the women we deserve!”

***************

Most men ultimately want a girlfriend as their goal with women, but when learning about how to seduce, come across ideas that they’ll fare better emulating an R selected bad boy, and faking it until they make it, and adopting dark triad traits, and avoiding provider qualities.

There is insight buried deep inside these ideas, however the presentation is too surface, too gonzo and twisted by twisted lives, and those ideas are nearly certain to get in the way of attaining what you want.  These ideas present themselves as meta, but it’s a very tricky shadow in the cave illusion.  Those are highly filtered and feedback-amplified views, not meta in the least.

The core insight of these (very false) ideas is that you need to get the true reference experiences and internalize them of being a dominant leader of the women in your life.

You can’t actually fake that.  As you date, perhaps read pre 2012 Roissy and maybe my comments on it.  It’s unfortunate that the comment section and current articles are no longer worth recommending, as the contemplation part of hearing, contemplaing, and action is quite important.  Commenting can really help you get better with women.  So can blogging.

It’s my expience that dating and having girlfriends, and learning to be dominant and sexy and fun within these long term relationships, leads a man to internalize the so called “confidence” that women are supposed to find attractive.  The more reference experiences you have of women treating you well, and of being able to maintain strong boundaries and arouse the utmost best behaviour out of the women you date, the more your body language will tell women that you are valuable and fun.

So this is completely different than R selected bad boy, although it is high-socio-sexual score body language.  You are in a secret society,  but it’s not of pump and dumpers.

It’s of romantic libertines.  You love women, and have had many, and they nearly always fall head over heels in love with you, and you treat them as best as you know how, learn from them, respect them, and try your best to enjoy life with each other.

Then when you are on a date, this will pour out of you – even when you are silent.  Every thing you say will be congruent with this, not because you learned a routine, but because you lived a real life.

I’ll try to be more detailed in the coming days of how to find and amplify positive reference experiences, if there is interest.  It’s a lot of work to go into detail, and I fear that most readers are far too cluster A or suffer other devlopmental cognitive issues to care.

So I’ll ask my readers to let me know if you are even interested in the comments section.  I know I’m viscious as hell in the comments section, but it’s not that scary in there.

Update: My reply to Jack20

Jack, I had asked you to read my 100 comments on Rollo’s blog before I replied.

And yet now you ask me if I believe that alpha fux and beta bux is are not dynamics that happen.

I’m pretty sure that I spent 10 or maybe 20 comments repeating over and over that the lover dynamic and provider dynamic are real, but that people keep refusing to use the word AND. Alpha fucks and beta bucks AND alpha bucks.

It’s kind of infuriating that people can’t hear that one simple word. I even wrote a post on the fact that people can’t process the word and.

Any alpha can be a provider with no risk or diminismment to his alpha status.

Rollo sees the world from the perspective of a beta bux. That’s his whole world.

He can’t even see that it’s completely inconsequential that some guys get treated like a provider.

So what?

Don’t be a beta provider.

That has NOTHING to do with don’t be a provider.

He keeps referencing a study of women’s ovulatory hormone changes, but ALWAYS neglects to mention that the changes don’t happen when the woman is partnered with a high testosterone man.

Also he NEVER mentions that high sociosexual score men don’t have their testosterone drop over the long term when pair bonded.

Which are perfect examples of how intellectually slimy that guy is.  A better example is simply his writing style; he writes to obfuscate instead of to clarify.

It’s completely irrelevant information that people can be taken for a ride and be treated like shit by their partners; other than as a spur to become an attractive man. It has NOTHING to do with provision.

Just become an attractive man – that’s the first and last job, and being a provider has nothing to do with it. You have to be attractive anyway, provider or not.

If Rollo had any clue about this, he’d be singing the praises of being a dominant lover who appreciates pair bonding, and might make a blog around the theme of “contemplative dominance for the modern man”.

He’s completely stuck inside a world that he himself created, and talks from that world, to people in that world.

That’s totally the wrong tactic.

That world is irrelevant.

Don’t be in that world.

How shaking off the 3 Rs is the first step to becoming attractive enough to get your dick sucked routinely. Second step is to…

The manosphere got off on the wrong foot with Roissy. Roissy taught core beliefs that confidence was the root of all attraction, and that dark triad traits were valuable to emulate.

It then stumbled drunkenly into a very dark alley with Roosh, who has serious Cluster A personality disorders.

Then Rollo came along, and hypnotized people with his pseudo-academic speak, and kept hammering over and over propaganda about alpha fucks and beta bucks until everyone just soaked in it and considered it to be true. Incredibly damaging poison.

All three have some insights into women and man-woman relationship dynamics; especially pre 2012 Roissy/Heartiste. However this has acted as fly bait, luring people into a dangerous trap, rather than feeding them.

The root of my personality and my best writing ever is in this post I made back in 2005: https://www.stickmanbangkok.com/readers-submissions/2005/12/face-guile-and-the-commerce-of-living/

It has at it’s root the Buddhist notion that all suffering stems from our unbridled immature human tendencies towards greed, aggression, and indifference. And that there are deeper more healthy and fulfilling ways to approach and deal with each other, that are based in open and awakened heart and unifying the mind in a cohesive honest whole.

We can be loved and give love.

We can. You can.

Stop listening to bullshit manosphere memes. Life is really pretty common sense. Love and be honest.

---

Below are comments that I made in the last post and elsewhere.  They are relevant and I believe you can piece the ideas together yourself well enough, saving me the effort of making a coherent blog post.

---

Blackdragon lives in the US and gives advice about maintaining open long term relationships, and has done so for many years. I don’t share his psychological makeup and so would and could not share some of his dating strategies (for instance I can get very jealous), however from my very long and detailed experience I will say that I judge his blog to be his real truth, and his system works exactly as he says, for him. That’s a stake in the heart of your argument right there.

There are countless millions of men in healthy loving long term relationships in the US.

There are pimps in the US.

There are differences between countries, and some basic human nature similarities.

If you want to change the subject to be about risk versus reward, then I’ll simply point out that every risk you mention can be mitigated.

And if it can’t, why the hell would you not simply MOVE?

Here is a quote about an MGTOW commentor that I found amusing:

You must be happy you live in the U.S. so you can blame alimony. Imagine if you lived in another nation, and had nothing to blame.

By the way, alimony is only an excuse not to get married. But you can’t even get a date, much less get laid. So nice try.

People can be, by nature and nurture, overly risk averse, and make this trait a habit that becomes an excuse to avoid personal development and confrontation.

Sometimes it’s better to risk losing everything, rather than live a shit life that isn’t even worth living at all. Because if things really do go sour after losing at a really bad risk:

There are things worse than death. And a timid life lived in fear of love is one of them.

————————————

But I really think it comes down to apples and oranges. The title of this blog post is:”If you respect Rollo Tomassi you have been brainwashed into accepting total loserdome for the rest of your life.” for a reason.

Because he is selling the cohesive world view of an apple, and to be happy and successful at life you need the cohesive world view of an orange.

He does not have the personal lived experience of becoming a highly charismatic man able to continually charm his woman to maintain her respect and devoted passionate lustly love, and his own authority and boundaries. *

It’s a very long arduous road to become such a man.

Only AFTER you are such a man, will you even be able to comprehend that the world could possibly be an orange.

But BEFORE you are such a man, you really really really NEED to KNOW that being an orange is a fucking option.

Rollo says it’s not even an option.

Which is why he is, without use of hyperbole and quite literally, an evil man causing tremendous social harm. Who attracts losers and sells loserdome for financial and social profit.

* (There are videos of Rollo online, and you can judge for yourself by his body language if you think he has lived a life working towards such masculine coherent charisma. I think his facial expressions are sometimes smarmy and effeminate and that he is not taking care of his physique. He does not strike me as a dominant sexy man who a woman would naturally give her best to, year after year. His body and facial language don’t give me the opinion that he values being such a man, or knows how to get from A to B, or even what B is.

I think this is a perfectly fair argument to make, because Rollo once posted a video of an Autralian teen named Cory Worthingon, and we were to judge by his body language and the coherent world view that it expressed (his attitude), using the “I know it when I see it” test, that he was an Alpha. He referenced the video and his argument many times.  He would tell us to watch Cory’s body language, as proof of his argument that “Alpha is not a demographic”.

He later went on to pull a sly and unspoken 180 degree turn and limit alphas to a class of physically attractive men that inspire lust on the spot, and claimed that if lust was not inspired on the spot that the man should look elsewhere on the spot.  An opinion that is a blatant tell of a keyboard jockey; no experienced charismatic man could possibly hold that viewpoint.)

————————————————————————————————–

Hi Jack.

I appreciate the careful thought that you have put into your questions.

Please read this and confirm and then I’ll take the time to respond in detail.

https://xsplat.wordpress.com/2015/08/04/100-of-my-comments/

It’s about some major disagreements I had with his philosophy in 2014. I stopped commenting after the exchange, and if you make it to the bottom of the post, you’ll see why.

————
Comment update:

I have a lot of ideas about your questions, however after years of internet discussions have long ago come to realize that very often people are completely fixed in their views, and only use what looks like rationality in order to either confirm their confirmation bias or dissimulate.

That’s why I asked you to put in a little bit of work to test your intellectual sincerity.

However for now I’ll just cut to the chase, and contrast the gist of all your questions, with the gist of my post about how to give and receive love
https://xsplat.wordpress.com/2018/09/14/how-to-give-and-receive-love-with-a-pretty-young-woman-habitually/

In order to give and receive love, you need to:

1) Believe that this is possible, attainable, and good, for you personally

I’ve also made many posts that uses the quick shorthand term of “losers” to categorize Rollos commentors and the very closely related MGTOW movement.

I’ll be happy to expand on the argument that those who refuse to give and receive love, and use all sorts of rationalizations and dissimuations to avoid it, are losers.

And I’ll be more than happy to explain in 100 ways why love is essential to basic human well being. And that it’s attainable, sustainable, healthy, noble, and far above risk in reward. And I’d be happy to go into great detail about what love is and can be.

If you are worth talking to. Most people are not.

We are all a product of our reference experiences. Your questions would lead me to believe that if I were to describe my life’s experiences that you would have no option but to discount and re-write them, and to explain them away in ways that make me completely deluded to believe that my personal experience actually happened and is happening.

————–
And I understand the sneering disdain that I not only don’t try to hide, but try to make as obvious as possible. I think it’s good and appropriate. I’ve seen myself get fat and unattractive. I’ve seen myself get drunk and treat people poorly. And I’ve seen myself diet and get fit and learn how to behave better. I’ve seen myself being completely unskilled at relationsips, and I’ve seen myself grow charming and fun and a respected authority in my relationships whom girls routinely sing loving love songs for – for year after year. I’ve seen myself suck at sex, and be great at it. I’ve seen myself lazy, and I’ve seen myself keep trying to get back on the horse.

I have every right to be disgusted by what is disgusting in myself, and to point it out when I see the same in others.

And what’s far far worse than mere personal laziness (everyone has the right to personal ruin and suicide, along with the ridicule that they should expect for following a path to ruin) is TEACHING others to give up. That they SHOULD give up, because relationships – the most noble of all possible endeavors – are low reward at best and more than likely dangerous.

When someone projects out his own inadequacies onto society as a whole, and then sets himself up as an authoritative teacher, that is, in a word, EVIL.

---

This is a comment that I think fits into the basket of “can’t we all just get along”. It’s a non-comment. A self-entardation meme-hammer.

Polemic is polemic is polemic. Why do you need to soften the edges? Make things all warm and fuzzy, and feel good and everyone gets a gold medal just for participating?

No, some things suck. Some things suck less. Some exact specific things that Rollo says are toxic, some exact attitudes that he has are toxic.

Don’t bring your photoshop smudge brush here and blur everything into a gigantic smear of “it’s all good, man”.

I used to sell wares on Grateful Dead tour, and the dreadlocked hippy wanna-bes tried their best to share a philosophy, that revolved around the saying “It’s all good”.

Fucking idiotic twats. When I could be assed about it, I’d confront them. No, it’s not all good. Fucking dimwit, non-confrontation is not a god damned philosophy!

Fucking hippies. It’s been studied that too much LSD makes people passive and afraid of confrontation. I keep losing the link, but I found the study on erowid.

I don’t suffer fools gladly, and people who think that confrontation is a meltdown have never witnessed a debate with a participant like Christopher Hitchens.

It’s NOT all good. No, we can’t just learn from everyone. People get sucked into entire world views, and YOU KNOW IT.

To get unsucked, you need to be vigorously shaken, sometimes. How hard is it to stop being Catholic, for instance? It’s all good? Just pick and choose the good that the good Pope says, and ignore the rest?

YOU KNOW very well that it doesn’t actually work like that at all.

World views are cohesive, and swallowed cohesively. People create authorities and swallow up everything they say, because they imbue no only specific ideas with validity, but the speaker of the ideas. YOU KNOW THAT.

Rollo’s food is laced with life sucking toxin, and so on the whole, his food is toxic. You can’t pick and choose from Rollo, practically. Because 99 percent of people who read him swallow all the intenesely life harming garbage – as a specific example the HIGHLY toxic meme that alpha fucks and beta bucks.

I’ll drop this here again:
http://patstedman.com/2017/11/22/what-is-upstream

---

And what’s more, if you want to understand what a book teaches, don’t just read the original text.

Ask readers of the book what it means. Then you’ll get the most important message – not what the book says, but what it is being read to say.

Anyone can paint a picture of a pear, but if everyone sees an apple, then the picture is of an apple.

Want to understand Rollo’s teachings? Examine his comment section. Compare his commenters with other slices of society.

They are for the most part MGTOW losers who have very little clue at how to date successfully, let alone how to maintain long term passionate relationships with attractive women. Which could be a fine starting place, yet nearly to a man they want that to be their ending place.

THAT is what Rollo teaches. The maintenance of class immobility. Alphas are alphas and betas are betas, so it’s not really your fault – it’s womens fault for wanting an alpha. And if you ever do become alpha, you’ll realistically have to pump and dump.

The passive agressive mind-fucker keeps pretending that he’s amoral and agnostic and just describing a real world.

No.

He’s creating a diorama. NOT describing a world. His world is a fucking cartoon with gigantic meter wide pixels and only 4 colors used in the pallate. It’s a diorama that barely resembles life at all. And it’s all due to his lack of real world experience in relationsihps, combined with what experience he has coming from an underdeveloped place, combined with his confirmation bias of only accepting input from betas and losers at the game of relationships.

His view is not agnostic in the least – it’s the view of a loser, to losers, who swallow it up thankfully, as it absolves them of any responsibility or hard work to change their own circumstances.

---

Days of Broken Arrows Said:

Terrific write-up. I agree with this and upon reading it realize why I never go to his blog anymore. In addition to what you wrote, his writing is also joyless and humorless. His worldview is that having a love life is a backbreaking slog that required work, work, work 24/7 — and you’ll probably still fail because hypergamy.*

Chelsea Dagger said:

I never thought much of Rollo’s writing to be honest. It is very dry and humorless and his followers do seem to be a bunch of angry guys. It reads like a chemistry textbook and is simply too tedious for me to get engaged by it. I think Roosh is just as humorless unfortunately. Whenever I read his blog, you can really see that he is a lost soul, just meandering along with no purpose. Neither of these guys are well adjusted, happy guys and their followers are much the same. Roosh’s forum these days in particular is really attracting some dregs between the white nationalists and the nihilistic hedonists who’s only purpose in life is scoring one night stands.

These joyless, miserable men are guys I quite frankly want nothing to do with.

---

 

I like how you made the theme of this blog post about lifestyle and positive habit maintenance-grind as being fundamental to good inner and outer game and logistics.

I’ve also let things fall apart a bit, and am trying to get things in order. So much constant maintanance required to be able to be optimal and ready to give and receive at opportune moments.

Gym and diet
Meditation and chi kung
perhaps Business

as the top three, usually.

Maybe also:
practicing music
keeping up with a tan
staying social
keeping a good home environment, which might include gardening, decorating, cleaning, maintaining audio and video equipment, furniture and bedding and kitchenware and toiletry

Doing what we do in the moment is of course always a product of what we’ve done in the past, and much of what we have to do falls into the category of maintenance.

It’s not like a video game, where you just need to be good while in set.

——————————————————————

There have ben some fun critiques over at Krauser’s lately of dodgy commercial PUA trainers.

It comes to mind that trainers that don’t mention the maintenance issues, and over-emphasize game, might have some of the common traits that Krauser laughs at, such as:

* outright lying about their stats
* paying for sex
* fucking ugly girls
* low to zero retention
* sexing drunken girls who are so easy to fuck as to be repellant to most men
* interested in the notch more than the quality of the girl, sex, experience, relationship, and her experiences of you, the sex, and future relationship; notch is the win – like a video game point.

Writers who use the term “well rounded” seem more authentic and trustworthy. It’s just like you say – a well rounded together life is embedded right in the exact present moment you bring. You can’t be actually attractive without being well rounded.

At least not to girls who aren’t crazed and dangerous human rent-a-bikes.

---

I feel that relationship game is barely discussed on the popular blogs that deal with seduction. I have a long habit of living with much younger women, and at 52 my current live in of 8 months is 21. We get along very well, and she treats me well.

I assume that just like day game, it’s a hard won skill that one continues to learn about and get better at. Of course it’s not just about set, or your internal framework, it’s also about setting, or the girl and her culture and your external setup. It’s still unusual and difficult to arrange big age differences with an attractive young woman who isn’t bonkers, but it’s much easier in some places, such as SEA.

And ya, people vary hugely, and while there may be trends, a lot of guys really aren’t built well for long term monogamy. And open relationships are possible but extremely challenging and volatile. The options for relationships are MUCH vaster than is generally discussed. The possibilities are MUCH bigger than is usually even hinted at.

I assume because it’s an overlapping, but still distinct and separate skill set. You can’t just transition out of day game into relationship game, as if it’s all the same thing.

---

Update: This is a low traffic blog, but sometimes gets a traffic boost if linked to by higher traffic sites, such as reddit.  If any reader finds the idea I’ve put forth that the meme of alpha fucks and beta bucks by definition could only be true from within the perspective of a “beta bucks” man,  and would always be false to a charismatic man and dangerously limiting to a man who wants to learn to internalize being seen by the woman he’s fucking as a dominant man, it would be helpful to your fellows to start a thread or comment that includes links to these recent posts.  I know that Rollo has snuck in as a cornerstone in peoples ideas of dealing with women, and this is actually a very serious sickness that needs serious discussion, in as many forums as possible.

How to give and receive love with a pretty young woman, habitually.

I’ve been very critical against some manosphere memes and those who spread them.  The reason is because I believe that these memes can directly cause tremendous personal and social harm, by stunting personalities and lives.

It’s my belief that deep down humans are wired to seek out pair bonding and love.

It’s my belief that much relationship advice directly prevents succeeding at these immutable and innate hard wired deep human drives.

The pre 2012 writings of Heartiste directly and openly admitted to the tremendous and inescapable value of love – and how love is the greatest possible pleasure.  Later he de-emphasised this, then seemed to completely forget it, then seemed to completely negate it.  Eventually he kept harping over and over on a clear falsehood – that confidence is the root of all real attraction.  To him all atractive traits can be reduced to and replaced by confidence.  Pure bullshit that will directly prevent you from finding and maintaining loving relationships.

Rollo says that it’s impossible to be in a loving long term relationship.  You can either pump and dump, or be a doormat who is not respected.

Roosh is just schizoid, and all but insane.  He’s deeply anti intimacy, and yet somehow thinks that intimacy could be possible, if only he could find a woman good enough.  Nothing is about him – it’s all about culture and women’s beliefs and habits.  He bans and prevents comments outside of his incredibly narrow and harsh belief system.

I’ve talked in greater detail many times about my disagreements with the philosophies and teachings of these dangerous and harmful men.  Please don’t underestimate their power over your mind, and their ability to personally harm you and your life.

I need to keep getting back to that, over and over, because some habits of mind directly will block your ability to give and receive love.

In order to give and receive love, you need to:

1) Believe that this is possible, attainable, and good, for you personally

2) Believe that you can realistically meet and date and spend a great deal of time with a woman worth of loving

It will be quick and obvious to see that many popular relationship experts can’t accept the most basic fundamental premises required for love, which is REQUIRED for human happiness.

So they are really trying to fuck up your life.

You might notice the next time that you are into a girl, that you are wary of leaning in too far into emotionality, because you’ve been heart broken in the past, and you don’t want to fall into a vulnerable position again.

It’s a wise instinct.  I have to admit it; love and heartbreak are two sides of the same coin.  Usually one leads to the other.

But it’s still worth it.

Which leads us to a 3rd and 4th requirement to be able to give and receive love;

3) Being able to maintain strong interpersonal boundaries (so as not to lose one’s self)

4) Being able to constantly repair ones boundaries and well being, through lifestyle and meditative and body centered meditative disciplines.  You can afford cuts scrapes and bruises if you can heal.  The greater regenerative capacity you grow, the greater your ability to risk injury.  Love requires a strong heart – and a strong heart is both vulnerable-and-sensitive-and-open, and well defined with clear boundaries of acceptable situations to be in and behavious to accept.  And a strong heart heals strongly – it’s our biological and emotional fact of life; life is about constant regeneration.  So is love.

Character and wisdom demonstrably come directly through sorrow, and this has been statistically studied. This blog is too low traffic for it to be worth my time to dig up links, but I’ve posted on it before. I know, there are over 900 blog posts here, so if you want to follow up on that thought, it’s still a matter of your own interest and Google-fu. But we all share that same intuition; who doesn’t prefer the company of wizened battle hardened happy folks?

Rough ideas that I may edit:

• Love is somewhat dependent on physical lust – in both directions.  You need to both be proud of how she looks, and be into her type physically, and get off just from seeing her, smelling her, contemplating her, and also you need to have a self respect and eroticism.  You need to be proud of how you look, and get off on your own sexual response, and know that she is proud of your physicality and eroticism and how she can get you sexually high.
• A very quick way to mutually share love is through role play.  We have intrinsic evolved responses that go back millions of years into the history of how our emotional systems work.  These responses are archetypal.  The most basic, fundamental, old, powerful, archetypal emotions relating to love all spring from our most basic, oldest, emotional responses of all – those of parents to children, and of children to parents.
  • You can very quickly fall into workable habits of mutual love, simply by role playing Daddy Daughter.  Girls fall into it near immediately – usually with just the barest of hints that you are into that.  Very occasionally some girls will be reticent about that game, but it’s too deep to really avoid – the intellect evolved much later, and the emotions are stronger and more base – it really doesn’t matter if the intellect disapproves at all.  The intellect might disapprove of a certain man or woman, but you’ll still get wet or hard.  Daddy Daughter goes too deep to be affected by approval or disapproval.
  • Daddy Daughter is also a good archetype to use in general, outside of the bed.  You’ll allow yourself more patience, and personal authority.  She’ll allow herself more abandon and respect.
• A major issue that I don’t think has been addressed at all, on any relationship forum, is the incredible importance of relationship practice.  People are not innately good at being in relationships.  They fail often not just because women suck.  Sure, compatibility is important, but relationship is a skill – a difficult skill.  At least as difficult as piano.  It takes practice practice practice and you learn more and more and more.  You can’t learn it from a book, you can’t learn it all at once, and you can’t know what it is yet that you need to learn.  No one can tell you.  You only learn piano in steps – only by practice.  Relationship skill is a skill.
• Daygame skills barely overlap with relationship skills.  You can be the top pickup artist in the world, and still be completely inept at giving and receiving love with an attractive young woman, and maintaining passion day after day for the longer term.  If you are interested in relationships, you need to very clearly see and know this. Getting a girl into bed is barely related to keeping her in passionate obsessive devoted love with you.

---

Feeling love is similar to feeling joy.  I assume most of us tend to avoid feeling happy, at some deep fundamental level.  We carry around with us like a childs comfort blanket this constant burden of feeling alienated and wanting.

Even in the middle of the most rapturous sex, this bad habit of mind can intrude, making it impossible to really feel loved, and to truly give over to that joyous celebration of mutual lusty devotion.

The easiest way around these neurotic mind habits are through the meditative disciplines.  Perhaps augmented by very rare psychedellic drug use.  Body centered meditations, and especially chi-kung get you into being being, and out of thinking about and watching being.  With body centered being, you can be love – just embody and feel and control and use your emotions, just like you sometimes do when you are totally into some song and riffing along with it in voice.  You join in with that song, and are at your full creative potential in your flow moment, embodying your emotions and body all together without need for separation.

You need to respect your own psychological need to do this, and respect that this is natural and default for women; they love to be in love.  They want and need it, just like naive teenagers.  You don’t need an excessive self regard to feel loveable.  People just like to love; it’s perfectly natural, and you can be a good enough receptacle for that attention.  Especially with care and practice.

* Being with someone is about re-enforcing habits. Habits of your own behaviour and moods and attitudes, and habits of your companion.

I suppose a definition of being charismatic is exactly that; the ability to re-enforce in others a habitual sense of joy for being around you.

I hear people often complain that they could not imagine being happy spending a lot of time with a woman, especially living with one full time, and working from home.

I think it’s not only a matter of personality style. I think it’s also a matter of relationship habits. And of course sexual habits.

I’ve written quite a bit about sex, and it’s my belief that lust is a huge help to maintain interest, and therefore the habits that increase lust, such as not having frequent orgasms if these tire you or lead you to disinterest, and doing chi-kung and lifestyle improvements that increase libido. Who hasn’t heard the joke of losing all feelings of love and interst after having a male orgasm? Male orgasm, because some women can actually get chatty and needy after coming. The reverse is also true; keeping your libido increases your interest in the woman. You’ll learn to prefer having that interest, and so will she. It’s better for the both of you if you are interested in each other.

Along with regular passionate sex, there are many other big and small ways that spending a great deal of time with a companion can become easy and fun.

You need to be able to enforce your quiet time boundaries; usually people simply don’t talk to each other. This is difficult for women, at first. But they get used to it, and it’s completely going to be your job to make that so. You will get annoyed if there is unwanted chatter all the time. Eventually the both of you will learn to appreciate silent company, as if you can feel each other in the space, and like that feeling. A feeling you both feed – a feeling of contentment and humor and appreciation. Maybe you had that with your Grandma as a young child. Being together is not equal to being burdened; we can learn the joys of shared silence. And be fed by the shared silence, and feed into it.
——————
Just as it takes you time to learn, it will take your woman. You are both flawed characters, but at your best you’ll be trying to make each other happy – lately I’ve had girlfriends who do this as habit. Before I’ve had girlfriends who would often do the reverse, and deliberately cause angst. It’s quite common for women to be troublesome deliberately, and difficult to avoid, but it is avoidable. It’s not their fault entirely. Eighty percent is up to your own actions, 20 percent is up to your mate choices; and of course mate choices means being able to attract as well as being able to choose.

Some women are great to go sexually quickly, but others can take one or even two or even more years to slowly grow into their ability.

It’s also quite a bit your own responsibility that this happens. Again, Daddy Daughter is a decent mental framework. Younger guys obviously can’t be in a position to mentor, and so I recommend young guys spend time with older women, who are very appreciative mentors. Some older women do very well in the role of mentor, and have more to teach than you can know; elders always do. Later you can switch up the roles, with younger and younger and younger mates.

Strangely enough, you’ll learn a lot about being an authentic masculine authority in young women’s lives by as a young man dating much older women who mentor you. The dynamic is different in ways, and similar in others. The regalness and mutual respect from different positions remains.

———-
If I drink, I’ll eventually ask you to tell me a story. When I’m out on the town with my 21 year old little girl, sometimes it gets to the point that I ask her to tell me a story. Inevitably she recounts our first date.

It was really that good. I’ve documented it here. It’s etched in her mind, and fresh. Our love is at least as strong as fresh young infatuation. Love can last longer than the average 6 months to max 2 years. In a minority of people the measured blood hormones associated with passionate love remain indefinately.

She still tells me that she loves me many times a day, just like she did from day one. She came this morning many times, and I was quite full of bonded attachment and love for that small child like woman.

It’s a skill.

If you want it.

I had to believe, on that first date, that all that actually did happen between us could happen between us. To me it was simply inevitable and obvious.

I wrote this as a poem once: “Cynycism is the dust on angels eyelashes”. Or something like that. Cynicism is just dust on our eyelashes – it’s not our vision, not our heart or understanding or soul. It’s just dust.

———
Relationship isn’t a skill in the same way that learning the facts of history is a skill.

You can’t memorize being competent at interpersonal skills.

Can you find a book that will teach musical improvisational skills?

You think there is some guy who can teach you to day game?

No. Well, not quite.

I’ll prove it quickly.

When the Beatles first came on the scene, most all bands that they knew only played cover tunes. Playing cover tunes is a level of competence, sure, but no one gives the same respect to others or ourself for mimicry.

Later they thought they should create their own tunes.

There is a lot of music created by different people, and it’s all quite distinct, even as we usually can recognize what comes from each distinct artist.

When you create music, you’re on your own.

Being good at relationships is like being good at music. It’s going to be your own creation, and it’s going to be extremely different at different times in your life, and with different women.

There is no book about this.

You can’t learn improv, exactly, yet you can learn improv, and it does help to hang around and improv with others. Seeing others do it makes you see that it’s an option, and you might try it, on the spot.

It’s really up to you to forge and discover your way.

—————————-

Improv as the foundation of game

After you get very proficient with seduction and maintaining strong passionate long term bonds with women, it becomes increasingly difficult to explain what it is that you are doing.  More and more you are just being yourself.

More and more the mental maps that other people offer to describe ways to optimize dating strategies seem more and more incorrect.

When you get good with women, you are getting authentic with women.  And then only after the fact we offer our own personal interpretations of our real life reference experiences.  It’s not keyboard jockeying.  It’s not trading around secret rules.

Our job as guys with experience is to get other guys to develop their own reference experiences, authentically.

Without substituting maps for experience.

I listen to a lot of WTF Marc Maron interviews of comedians, and one way that comedians learn their craft – I suppose the foundational way – is through improv on the spot, and being thrown into situations in which they must perform.

Comedians say it takes about 10 years, on the stage, to learn the craft of being funny.

Now of course you can and should study other comedians. But you can’t copy any comedian – that would not work. That can’t and doesn’t work.

Each guy HAS to develop and find his own authentic style, through feedback. It can and does and should take a LONG time. If it doesn’t, then you are stuck in the process of learning – there is more and deeper to go.

One thing I think a lot of guys miss is that feedback can happen within LTRs and MLTRs – not just on the street, or during the initial seduction stage.

LTRs actually should always stretch a man’s ability to the limit – if not, he could either be dating a hotter girl, or more girls.

Theory helps, and I do my best to think about and theorize and create and read mental frameworks that can sort the raw data in ways that organize without conflicting or excluding data.

But improv is important not just because it teaches us the muscle memory, deeply, in our being.  It’s important because it IS a way of being.

I chose to learn the piano by pure improv, for two years.

It was purely a personal preference choice, and not one I would recommend to others.

I’m of the pure improv school, means that I realize that there are other schools.

I’ve also mentioned often that I do recognize that I’ve subconsciously incorporated skill-sets into my improv.

My flow moment, to me, is my primary motivation. I spent two years being a crappy piano player, because I prefer flow moments to being able to play the piano.

It’s personal. It’s what matters, to me.  I believe that improv can become a character trait, as well as a skill – a way to be more present and authentic in the now, as a leader.

***

Daysofgame.com said:

Deserve” is one of the most fucked up words in human psych. There is no such thing as “deserve.” Replace “deserve” with “desire” and you are closer to the truth in BlueVs statement.

That’s an interesting perspective, because in a way you are removing mental frameworks, and therefore being more present.

A great deal of Buddhism has that at the core. We must have philosophy, and mental maps, of course, yet a strange paradox is that the more refined maps look simpler and simpler – like edited prose.

I like how you side-stepped the entire argument. Whether we deserve to date women so much younger and more attractive than ourselves is the wrong question – not even worthy of giving a yes or no to.

Nothing to do with the now moment – if you can simplify enough.

Simplifying is actually hard, long work.

On the other hand, while deserve is the wrong question, the sexual marketplace is an exchange of value. Some girls might be “tricked” into thinking that a hollow shell of a man who is a good character actor narcissist is “worth” fucking, but girls don’t stick around with narcissists. That’s part of the very definition of being a narcissist, on the books; people don’t hang around, because people aren’t stupid, and they see through you, and see no there there.

I personally feel very deserving of true love, and very deserving of giving true love.  And have a very inflated idea of the level of beauty that I rate, if you would base my male value on looks alone.  But you could edit that and simplify it and say that I personally receive and give love, genuinely, and that hot young girls have been into me and still are.

The attitude of not deserving is a serious character flaw, and will certainly lead to problems with long term relationships, and most likely even to a sour grapes attitude that “I didn’t really want a long term relationship with that hottie anyway”.

So sometimes we need to reverse the curl of the paper, in order to get it flat. Go from the mental map of being undeserving, to being deserving, and then finally to simply going after what you want to the best of your ability – and stretching way past what others could conceive of as possible.

Why xsplat might settle down. Marry even.

In answer to axiom verge: You are asking if I explain away doing selfish actions of breaking hearts with justifications, making the actions moral in my mind through justifications.

Yes, I do.

This subject is confusing. And very painful.

I feel really horrible for what happened with V. The woman loved me and did absolutely everything possible to be the best girlfriend for me, with the aim of being my wife and having a family with me.

I feel terrible that I wasn’t able to do it with her.

I want to know why.

So I try to examine my own motives, and ambitions, and desires, put them together with how I understand hers, and try to come up with a grand theory of mind that includes both of our strategies.

It quickly becomes obvious that we have competing strategies.

So I can’t just take sides, with hers. With the “feminine imperative”, or the female centric monogamous strategy. I have instincts and drives also that are just as foundational to my well being, even if they aren’t as culturally acceptable.

I know that I can’t sit at the round table of polite society, among other couples, as a guy with a woman in love with him who continues to seek out new girls. The playboys and playgirls can sit at that table. But I can’t, because I don’t fit into any of the accepted roles.

A guy is supposed to either settle down, or date around and never let anyone fall in love too much. My strategy is to fall in love, in parallel with more than one girl.

That doesn’t fit in, and I know it causes pain, and confusion.

I can’t justify it, but I can’t not justify it either – I mean – it is what it is – the cards that I’ve been dealt. I didn’t create the human condition. I didn’t create the fact that I can feel stifled and bored and trapped. I don’t have an off switch in my head for these instinctual hard wired evolved emotional urges to breed with the hottest women that I can attract.

These are VERY strong urges for me. My whole life, every fiber in my being, every act that I do in my life, is ALL geared towards mating with hot girls.

I’m evolved, born and bred, cultivated, in one and only one direction. So how can I stop being me?

Evolution is not about justification. It’s not about polite society.

I really wish that I was wired as a family man. Some guys are, and I truly believe that is another evolved hard wired instinctual personality type strategy.

Some guys are evolved to prefer monogomy, and this has been measured as low socio-sexual score in the psychological community. Others, like me, have an extremely high socio-sexual score, and enjoy, crave, and one might even say psychologically NEED sex with less long term commitment in our lives, with occasionally new partners.

It’s not an excuse, or justification. If we don’t follow our wiring, we can’t just suck it up. There are consequences. We become less able to be kind to our partners, act worse towards them, and things go downhill. So we try our best to work with what reality gave us. This real world, and our real urges and desires in it.

Here is a horrible, horrible example. One that’s happened to me more than once, but I’ll use this example specifically:

I once dated a 19 year old virgin. I found her face to be very attractive, and we quickly fell in love and she quickly gave me her virginity. We became bonded, and she was very much in love with me.

I was in Thailand at the time, and the culture there is much more promiscuous, and it was quite common for some guys and girls to have various forms of side lovers, one form of which is called “gik”, which means no strings attached lover. The gik is not expected to be faithful, and not expected to ask too many questions about your other lovers. Affairs also happen, which of course is more emotionally involved and complicated.

I mention the context because even though she was a virgin, she was not naive; she grew up in a millieu of some sexual refinement. You can’t be too naive in Thailand.

So while I was dating her, I had another main girlfriend, and was also actively dating and meeting new girls from time to time.

The nineteen year old, P19, loved me the most. My other girl S23, had other boyfriends and was a bit of a playgirl, but we had also formed some bonds, and had very frequent sex. S23 is the one who once looked up at me with pupply dog eyes and said “Dad, why I love you Dad? You no rich, you no handsome. Why I love you Dad?” It was a serious heartfelt question and she wanted a serious reply.

Here is the point of the story; at night I would often leave the side of P19, to go to the “internet cafe” and work, but instead of working go see S23. With P19 I could only have brief sex before I got tired or soft. With S23 I could go all night. And yet I loved P19 much more.

It was very confusing, and if you use morals to understand the world you’d go fucking crazy. There was nothing moral about it. It was biological. S23 was the hotter girl, and more my type. Smaller, for one thing. I like small girls.

Since then I’ve thought about that situation many times.

And I’m reminded of it with what happened with V.

V was more my type, physically, than P19, but a similar thing happened even when I first met her. At the same time I as I was initially dating V23, I had another lover, S17. S is extremely small. Imagine the smallest sexually mature girl you know, and that’s S. V would visit me, and have sex until I felt too tired for more. Then at midnight she’d have to go home, and S would come over, and we’d fuck all night. I NEVER got tired with S. I got tired with V after about an hour.

Same thing.

Eventually V and I grew into a stronger sexual chemistry. Which was a bit of new information to add; ok, so sexual chemistry can also grow.

But it was growing from a different base.

Most of the time that I dated V, I had other lovers, at least one. But eventually I gave them up, in order that she wouldn’t break up with me again, because I was very in love and attached to her, as my mate.

But I found it very difficult to do – too difficult.

And now my introspection can’t exactly tell me why.

Was it because fundamentally I need a plurality of girls?

Or was it because she wasn’t hot enough and my style enough to begin with?

That’s a horrible, horrible question to pose to oneself. So amoral! V and I loved each other dearly and were best friends, and had absolutely everything in place to be life long companions. Except that I really, really, REALLY wanted other lovers and not just her.

Morality has and had nothing to do with my desires; they were there regardless of what morality says should or should not happen.

Did V “deserve” a man who would not have these feelings? I don’t think deserve enters into it either. She fell for me, just as girls are famous for doing; falling in love with the bad boy who “cheats” instead of the good boy who never would. That’s so common it’s a trope.

But what if she were hotter?

Well, I’ve dated hotter girls, very hot girls, and lived with them.

Usually for the first year I’m mostly satisfied with monogamy, with little urge to look around. Not out of moral duty, but simply fascination with the one girl. She holds all my interest.

Now my situation is a bit different than my past. I’m quite old, and you could say almost aged out of the marketplace, for the hot girls I’m so used to dating. My options are dwindling fast. It’s VERY difficult for me to replace a hot girl with another hot girl now.

And I have a new hot girlfriend, who wants to live with me as my mate.

I don’t feel the need any more to date other girls, like I always did with V. That’s so horrible and painful to admit. I really really wish that were not true. It’s terrible that it’s true. V was everything a girl should be. How could I possibly want more?

But I do; I want a hot girl who is small. And my new girlfriend is that. Exactly my type. Great sexual chemistry. Fucking perfect fit. She’s way hotter than I “deserve” if one only considers bodies. I’m not that attractive, and I’m old, and she is noticeably well above average in attractiveness, and young.

I’m not likely to do better to pair bond with, without getting someone very mentally damaged or impaired.

And every year that goes by makes it less likely.

Opportunity affects desire. Before I was always able to make sexual opportunities, because I’m quite experienced and skilled in both seduction and keeping girls around.

But that can’t last forever, without major improvements in cosmetic surgery.

So I really hope that I can be closer to what most people consider moral. Not just because I’m tired of breaking hearts all the time. But because I want to be happy for myself.

I don’t sleep around because I feel it’s the moral and right thing to do. It’s a very deep hard wired compulsion – one that if you don’t have you’d never be able to empathize with. My entire being is driven to fuck hot girls. It’s not a side job.

So now I have a hot girl that I’m fucking. For now I’m going to do just that, and hope for the best.

Update: I’ve been updating the post related to meeting J, and getting over V, daily.

https://xsplat.wordpress.com/2018/01/22/forced-against-my-will-to-replace-my-primary-and-the-usual-fast-bonding/

Here is an extract from today that is relevant to this post.

I realize that keeping this girl for the long haul is a different task than falling in love and having our honeymoon phase. It’s a common thought that younger girls will cheat on their much older husbands. As long as I remain interested, I think that I’m up to the challenge. I like to be constantly challenged with constant seduction; long term seduction is something I’m good at and have put a lot of thought and effort into.

There has been a great deal of emotional wreckage surrounding my life. V once told me that girls spirits can ruined. One girl turned to prostitution after having a serious nervous breakdown when she finally realized that she wanted me to stop seeing my second girlfriend, who at the time was M. Another seems to have sworn off men entirely, after in our relationship I wouldn’t stop seeing other girls, and didn’t want her to keep the baby. Another woman left her husband for me, and wound up single. She was 41 years old to my 30. I had counseled her to stop fucking me or she would fall deeply and uncontrollably in mutual love, but she would not listen. M had years of torment about not keeping me faithful and not marrying her, and is still not married. I could go on.

V is a strong woman who I have a great deal of respect for as a person. Her female agenda for strict monogamy is annoying, but also includes wisdom, and I think she can do well in her future. It took a lot of strength and courage to leave me, and she’s been working hard to put her life in good order. I really respect her, and like her, and always did.

So many broken hearts in my life. And mine has been broken so often. I keep telling myself that collateral damage is inevitable, and everybody – absolutely everybody who dates – causes and receives heartbreak. It’s built into the system, and we didn’t create the system.

But I’m looking forward to not being the “cause” of that in the immediate foreseeable future.

Why even the best pump and dump artist is considered relatively low sexual market value

My comments over at Rivsdiary, where Riv questions why Krauserpua didn’t correct the interviewer for saying that women who hold out for sex sometimes do it because they view the man as being of higher value – Riv posits this is wrong, and that the holding out is only for “providers” who all by definition are of lower value.

…

Riv, are you operating under the mental map that alpha strategy and provider strategy are distinct? Always Either/Or? Never AND?

There has never been, nor could there ever be, an alpha provider who pair bonds? And there has never been and could never be a woman who seeks out such a man, and makes him wait as her strategy?

…

Daysofgame said:

We should escalate… we should lead… we should be a sexual threat… but I think for “most sex,” we’ll fuck more if we go 2+ dates… and then sex… and then drop her into rotation.

I’m not sure that there is any rule of thumb about number of dates and the likelyhood of a girl sticking around.

I think it has more to do with vibe, and sexual connection. The type of vibe and sexual connection – does it include love and comfort – no matter how rough or S and M style it is.

It’s hard to really know what it is that works when things work, but I think girls can bond fast – on the first date, and during first date sex. And of course more sex gets better each time, and more bonding.

But the idea of alpha non-bonding R selected sex – even having that mental map at all in your head, could likely be sending a vibe that could scare girls away.

Vibe over technique.

…

I’m going to assume Riv that you viewed my question as rhetorical, but it still would be useful to clarify to get a reply.

I asked Rollo this years ago, and he replied that it was only possible in theory, but pretty well never in practice.

I consider it psychologically impossibility for the long married Rollo to both consider being an Alpha Provider an impossibility, and to consider himself to be one.  In other words, he doesn’t consider himself alpha in his relationship, and blames it on his provider status, and proclaims that therefore no other provider could be alpha either.

I talk from first hand experience a lot, and that doesn’t always go over very well, so I’m not really sure whose reference experiences I’m supposed to use in that case.

But from my experience, I can be a really lousy lover sometimes who hardly gets into sex, and can’t provoke much feeling out of my lover, and then on a different day or later the same day, after some chi-kung, or maybe smoking a little pot, or simply paying more attention, I can feel a great deal more energy and emotion and power in my own body, and arouse a hell of a lot more out of my lover.

So I know from my own body that there are gigantic differences in what sex can feel like. And what sex can be aroused out of me by sympatico lovers, and what my part in that dance is.

I honestly think that you have it completely reversed as to who the high level men are.

Your version of Alpha bad boy is the low level man; the man who can’t arouse the full sexual potential, and therefore fully love-enslave and get the full Alpha treatment out of a woman.

It’s only the romantic bad boy, the romantic libertine, who can get the best out of a woman.

The pure love em and leave em bad boy won’t be able to even begin to get the beginnings of half way decent sex out of MOST girls, who actually need to be at least somewhat in love first, before fully opening up their best sex.

…

Or look at it another way. The women who can’t pair bond, do you view them as superior, because they are so hot that they simply don’t have to?

No, you view them as fundamentally broken.

Dark triad traits are traits of people who are fucked up. Not normal. Broken people.

Those are not the highest level men, by any stretch.

People who can’t pair bond are fucked up and broken – not the highest level, and they won’t ever get 1/1000th of the treatment that a woman will give to a man who has ALL of the attractive traits going on, which absolutely include love and pair bonding.

It’s such incredible bullshit to keep repeating over and over and over that women give up their assholes for the R selected pump and dump thug, but only give tepid sex to boyfriends.

So so so incredibly WRONG.

When are people going to learn?!!

How many more years will it take?

…

In other words, much of the theory that is red pill was created by men who started out as sexual underdogs, and then took a video-game approach to getting sex – which will NEVER arouse the best sex out a woman.

Sex isn’t about technique.

It’s all vibe. And personal power – or mojo – or chi-kung.

The idea that “provider-betas” get shitty sex was created by betas that get shitty sex.

It wasn’t created by men who have their shit together and have extra-ordinarily devoted love slaves who they in turn love and care for. The guys in great relationships never bothered to get into the conversation.

Or when they did, they were shouted down by the know-it-all know nothings, who wave in their fists at blasphemers their copy of the Rollo certified sexual marketplace map, and have spent years debating the finer points of the map, and know all the rules of it, inside and out. And who have never had a good relationship, and so blame it on women for viewing providers as betas.

The map, the diorama, is more wrong than right, and so I think it is much better to simply flat out call it

WRRROOOONNNNGGGG

…

Regarding always using the strategy of opening with the bad boy and letting her tame you, again, I don’t think we find any one size fits all answers.

Sometimes the girl will quickly be very, very, very into the guy, and the sex can quickly become the best of her life, by orders of magnitude.

That makes her feel incredibly vulnerable – panicky even. It can really throw her off balance – she’ll not only obsess over the guy, but will get paranoid thoughts about if he’ll leave her, and for girls that means jealous fits.

So the rule of thumb to not appear clingy and supplicating is correct, but at a kindergarden level, the same way 2 plus 2 will always be 4, even in high school.

It’s very simple, but there is much more to math then that.

A better rule of thumb is “say I love you about 1/3 as much as she does”, and then take that attitude and stretch it out.

But she will need reassurances, the more she’s into you. And if the seduction is going well, that could be very quickly.

So again, taking the idea of that bad boys are the higher value guys to emulate is completely ass backwards.

Girls will literally go to jail for their men. Sacrifice everything. You can own a woman’s heart, mind, body, and soul.

But what will a pump and dump guy own?

Actions speak louder than red pill memes. The actions of girls to betas who have no skill in bed or in life or in domination are nothing to base a philosophy of love on.

…

Provider =/ Beta.
Alpha =/ pump and dump expert

So, when are we going to stop saying and thinking provider-beta?
When are we going to stop saying and thinking that the one night stands go to the high value men?

I had a model handsome intern out here, who was a dating coach, and considered himself very well versed and practiced in game.

Girls would approach HIM at the bar.

But he couldn’t get a girlfriend if he wanted one. He was always singing the refrain “these ho’s ain’t loyal”. Because no matter his game and looks, he could never inspire loyalty out of a girl.

And I never saw him with a single girl who was as attractive as he was.

What about shooting way out of your league and getting fidelity and devotion in all actions, and 100 times better sex? Would not the man who did that be, by the woman’s own actions, MUCH higher value?

Bad boy R selected game is pretty well a waste of time, when compared to getting the most out of women. It’s fast food – a few times a month. Instead of top level feasts 5 times a day. Guys who rely on pump and dump for sex barely get laid at all, and they have shitty sex, relative to chi-kung sex with a woman in devoted full blown love.

Right and wrong is a social contract that means you must betray and out those that break your preferred contracts.

Is being able to lie or deceive a positive quality? One that can bring more benefits than we like to believe? Sure that it can also be dangerous and make you lose quality people if that is your character all the time. But wouldn’t it be positive at certain times?

Children must be taught that social norms and parental expectations are the equal to right and wrong.

Some people eventually begin to question rules.

It’s emotionally and psychologically difficult to question certain rules. We have the term “cognitive dissonance” to put a pin in the mental map of the shit that goes down when our brains overload from frying our circuits. Our neurons are wired up, naturally, to know and understand rules.

Right and wrong are basic rules we were reminded of, constantly, since before we could form long term memories.

Yet from other perspectives it’s quickly clear that right and wrong are strategies to power. Evolutionary psychology would predict and accurately record that monkeys and dogs will steal dinner scraps only if no one in power is looking. We lie when we expect to get away with it.

From this I will jump ahead.

There is no empirical right and wrong. There are social mores. It’s fine to kill and intern Japs if it’s WW2 and your society is wartime US. It’s totally wrong, even as a US citizen, from a different social time.

And we must take this one step further.

Right and wrong completely relies on outing people who betray social mores.

Right and wrong can not work without law, betraying confidence, and outing people who betray contracts.

There is no right and wrong. It’s a SOCIAL contract.

Only society can create and enforce it. And it only works through outing people.

(This post was written as fast as I could type it with no edits, after drinking half a big bottle of vodka. That’s an admission of weakness, not a boast.)

Further thoughts:

There is no society. We clique and shift alliances.

Even as I age out of the dating marketplace, I’m nowhere near my peak lifetime potential

One of my girls is causing drama, phoning and threatening the other two in her city.  I’ve had to next her.

A girl that I’m bonded and in love with, but for whom I have a bit less sexual chemistry, agreed to meet me, after she had broken up with me for seeing other girls, and I was away from Bali for 8 months.  She has never had sex with anyone other than me.  She’s about 26 years younger than me. I’m very emotional about her.   I’m the type of guy whose emotions can’t be hidden; my eyes tear up out of happiness, my face flushes red out of embarrassment.

On the first night she limited my groping away from her nipples.  The next day she insisted on a condom.  At first.  She has a very difficult time understanding how I can be in love with her but refuse not to stop fucking other girls.  Every time I say anything about her, she bounces it back with “that’s what you say to all the girls”.

V is so sweet.  Very emotional, very romantic.  Very bright and funny. I have some feelings for her that I don’t have for anyone else right now.

Only with her do I get to be witty.

I very occasionally go out hunting.  Most of the time I don’t even make one approach.  I rarely get any IOIs, and in fact can’t even catch a glance most of the time.  When I’m not outright invisible I get actual scowls of disdain, just for daring be taking up space.

Lately I’ve been getting messages from some girl I handed my business card to.  She’s small and my type – I only approach girls who I’d want to see on a regular basis.  At first I assumed it was the drama girl, trying to entrap me, so I ignored it.  But as of today a date has been set up for when I return to Java.  Nice timing – I can drop the drama girl without any change in the number of companions.

You may notice that within this narrative is an underlying theme, and principle.  If a man holds his frame, at all costs, things can work out far better than how women SAY they will.  And no matter what you think your sexual value, you can punch above your weight.  And up your value to punch yet higher still.  And you can do that far longer than other others will tell you.  I expect to still be dating young women when I’m 70 years old.  Some of them may be my current companions.  Even though they’ll be pushing or even past forty, a girl gets bonus points for history.

Being old does not necessarily mean you can’t still date attractive young women.

Being non-monogamous does not necessarily mean that women will not remain deeply romantically and sexually attached to you.

A man can hold his frame.  It would amaze most people how much weight holds up under a strong frame.

Women will threaten every possible thing they can to keep a man monogamous.  Some will resort to threats of theft, police, and physical violence, against you or the women in your life.  Most will threaten abandonment.  And yet if a woman is bonded and attracted to you, she will feel compelled to keep seeing you, even if it causes her frequent tears.

It’s very difficult for me to get dates.  I plan to order a wig today, as there is not much hair left.  Sometime this year I may get something done about the heavy wrinkles in my face.

But even without the wig and surgery, and even being short and ugly and bald and old, and even with already having four lovers who fight over me, I’m nowhere near close to my sexual marketplace potential.  Even without further building up my businesses and pipeline – but just now with what I have, I am only scratching the surface.

Some percentage of cool and interesting attractive young women would continue to fall for me, as I am, and put up with and even join in on my sexual shenanigans.

I’m going to need to slot in some time for handing out more cards.