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.

Advertisements

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.

 

Rollo Tomassi thinks all old men must pay for young ass

In response to my re-posting this post  (excerpt from post)

Either you are fucking multiple attractive young women who are in love with you, or you do not understand and do not have the skill sets involved.

There is no such thing as a man who could do that but chooses not to.  A fox sees grapes he can’t reach, and then tells himself those grapes were sour anyway.

And then he tell himself that all other foxes are deluded if they think they are getting high grapes.   “Your girlfriends are not really having orgasms you idiot!  Even though I have never met you or your girls, I know that!  God, how dumb can you be to think you are actually getting high grapes!”

on Rollo’s blog, and tweeting a link to it on my years old twitter account, Rollo replied:

[TL;DR Rollo is full of shit because he’s married. YaReally is too because he isn’t married yet. Read me instead because.

You aren’t full of shit. And the shit you are full of is not because you are married.

Read for comprehension.

You confuse some of your shit with the rest of your insights because you are not seducing and fucking young ass.

Or because you are too whipped to admit you are fucking young ass.

Take your choice.

Hehe,..I guess I should feel honored you’d start a Twitter account just to tell me all of that X.

From what I remember though, you’ve been ‘buying’ young ass in SEA for some time now. I’m not sure how that constitutes ‘seducing’ young ass, but hey, if you feel that what I write should be disregarded as ‘bad teaching’ because I’ve been married for 20 years, you can always look to Roosh for inspiration on how to live a rewarding life.

I still love you X. Yours has always been one of my earliest blog reads and I still pop over from time to time.

I agree with you that not censoring is the best method, because it shows the nature of the beast.

You have in your comment proved my point.

You believe that even though you have not met me or my girls, that I am lying about my personal experience. You HAVE to believe that.

Because YOU are not fucking young ass, it means I am paying for it.

That is exactly my point. You do not have a clue how to fuck young ass. And therefore you have no choice but to assume that I’m paying for it.

Discussion with commentors continues from here.  It’s surprising to me how much resistance many guys have even to the very idea of being with much younger women.  It must be about an identity crisis!  It must be about hormonal imbalance!  It must be about way out of whack priorities!  It must be this or that or that or this – but not about how great and life improving it is to be naked with young women.

People absolutely can’t stand having ambitions that seem out of reach, and will go so far as to deny other people the possibility that others have and are reaching good ambitions that they dare not have.

3d thinking in a 2d manosphere; powerful seductive intimacy instead of flat red pill paranoia and pump and dump

I’m loving this quote from Krauser:

Pretty much the only way to make money in that style is the Return Of Kings way: Leverage an already really big platform and then troll mentally unstable fringe elements for hate-clicks, positioning yourself as the crusader for justice that all the perma-angry lost boys can look up to.

An unfortunate strategy that Return of Kings and the RooshV forums follow is being heavily over-moderated, so that it is an echo chamber of he-man-woman-haters club of relationship fail. A cult of anti-intimacy. For a group of guys wanting to up their attractive manliness qualities it’s a catch 22, because speaking up as a man with any sort of opinions that ruffle feathers will lead to censorship; being a real man won’t be tolerated. With such heavy moderation it can’t be a self correcting user generated content community, but instead becomes the blind leading the blind astray. The communities are not only given content and moderated into selecting for perma-angry lost boys, but self select for people with developmental disorders such as schizoid PD and attachment disorders which manifest as a preference to pump and dump the bitches and be paranoid about divorce rape. Developmental disorders are encouraged from the top down as lifestyle choices, while healthy mature views are moderated out. There is some fundamental unhappiness that is self-perpetuating and growing and sickening other people, and that resists anti fungal medication.

***

Krauser has also been reading the Scott Adams Dilbert Blog , and wrote an insightful piece about seduction, with quotes from Scott.

I left this comment:

Ya, I’ve been reading his blog lately too. I can’t remember how I stumbled on it. Scott Adams tweeted about D&Ps book marketing strategy, and then I learned that D&P is also aware of Scotts blog, and the Trump series. Small world now.

Persuasion and hypnosis are important talents, easily underrated and overlooked.

In some sections of the manosphere you get big groups of people who are very class conscious, and don’t much believe in class mobility. Rollo and many of his commentors for instance tend to talk about Alphas and Betas and hypergamy as if the only option is to be aware of your real place in the scheme of things; there is next to no talk about changing one’s place on the ladder. No talk about seduction being a learnable skill, and no talk about learning to generate strong passionate non-negotiated sexual desire out of a woman way outside of a mans physical attraction league. Such a concept is instead seen as self delusion and even holding the concept further proof of further self delusion. You get groups of guys reinforcing learned helplessness through the categories of Alpha and Beta, who believe that woman go after “Alpha Thugs”, and that they can only protect themselves using red pill knowledge; they can’t actually improve their lot and get hot girls to fall deeply in love with them.

Adams talks about the 3d way of thinking, and using that analogy many in the manosphere are stuck in 2d thinking, and have no way to conceptualize the powers of persuasion.

But X, not ALL men can do what you do! Can’t we all just let them MGTOW?

Xsplat if you were competing in societies that emphasized and bred polygamous men, you would probably lose as an older man even with your touted romantic edge. The region you ran away to espouses monogamy relatively more than the West. If the East ever adopted the same ideals, you would have less places to go to and live this specific lifestyle.

Very relevant: http://human-stupidity.com/science/evolution-psychology-darwin/to-justify-our-moral-judgments-we-invent-victims-even-if-there-are-none

It is to most everyones personal benefit to limit the sexuality of the competition.

We justify limiting other peoples sexuality with “reasons” after the fact. Many humans are biologically hard wired to not only try to limit other peoples sexual access, but to never be able to either know or question why they do so.

When women slut shame, they do so to preserve their collective bargaining power for lifetime provisioning. When men try to limit the options of others, it is to increase personal sexual access. It is a hard coded strategy, and is implemented whether it is practically effective or not. We FEEL morally righteous, and even FEEL intellectually correct.

None of that is going to stop ME from having sex with beautiful teenagers.

People can talk about “society” all day and all night long. People can explain that “not ALL people can have a harem of two teenagers and two early twenty somethings”.

Ya. Not all people can.

That’s the game. Getting on top and winning.

Or the game is being sexually socialist, and preventing other guys from hoarding all the hot poon.

They are both just games.

I’m playing mine. And I’m explaining exactly how I do it, to the best of my ability.

Yes, not ALL guys can do it.

So what?

What I say is still true. What I say is still accurate. What I say is still applicable.

I’ve put in a lifetime of effort to be able to do what I do. The fact that not all men want to put in the effort has no bearing in any way on the efficacy of my techniques, nor on their value to improve the quality of life for a man.

Would people go to a master concert pianist tutorial blog and explain to him that “Hey, you know, not all people want to put in that much effort to be able to play the piano that well. A lot of people are content to play video games instead”.

Ya. So what? Let them go ahead and play video games. That doesn’t make the piano tutorial any less valid.

People do have different aptitudes. I have average musical ability at best. But with consistent application of playful effort over time, I can’t help but improve. After focusing on pure improv for two or three years, I’ve found that I can actually read music and play songs now! It’s rather incredible.

It’s not all only about effort, nor is it all only about technique, nor all about innate talent.

But it is about effort, it is about technique, and it is about talent.

No matter where a person is in relation to the piano, he can improve.

The same goes for women and relationships.

This blog can help people with what I know about.

I believe that no man is an innately helpless beta.

No matter where a man is in relation to women, he can learn and improve, through application of consistent effort.

And using memes about red pill truths to bolster a feeling of learned helplessness is a type of sin. It is self victimization. The opposite of self empowerment.

MGTOW guys self empower themselves to be perpetual victims of low sexual market value.

If there were someone I cared about, a son for instance, who struggled with girls and therefore decided to MGTOW, I would not just pat him on his back and say “That’s OK Son. I Understand.” Instead I would write this blog for him, so that he could read it and apply what I’ve learned to help his own life.

If there were a bunch of anonymous people I’ve never met, who struggled with girls and therefore decided to MGTOW, I would not just enable their self defeatist attitude with platitudes and wish them well on their journeys of conquering video games. Instead I would expose the harmful indifference, sloth, twisted partial truths and self-justifying lies of individuals and groups.

Update: The reason I linked to the article about people inventing victims where there are none is because that article discusses WHY we find the need to create REASONS for telling other people to not have sex, even when those reasons have nothing at all to do with our actual motivation to meddle in their sexual affairs.

(At least some) men and women are innately genetically programmed to cock block each other. And the process in which we do it is innately unconscious. We do not and often CAN not know what our motivations for cock-blocking are.

We believe our own rationals.

I believe that when MGTOW men proseletize, they are often motivated by cock-blocking other men, therefore reducing the sexual competition. “Since I’m not getting enough quality pussy, YOU should boycott quality pussy too!”

And while in theory MGTOW is all about men actually going their own way and making their own informed decisions, in practice, the MGTOW I have heard from are all about shaming other mens choices and sexuality on the one hand, and then using that same hand to whine about other men shaming them for not being sexually active. I’ve written several blog posts about them as a whole, and have linked to one active website where some of the most ill informed and whiny feminine-brained anti-male testosterone-free comments I have ever seen were made. I was shocked by the low level of commentary. As a principle MGTOW could have something to say, but in action by the “men” that I have seen advocating that principle, so far, it has been a whinge fest and a let’s all get together and shame everyone with a set of balls for owning them club.

And then within the larger manosphere, you have people of all persuasions looking for excuses. Any excuses. Looking for comraderie. Any comraderie. Looking for people to gather together into a he-man-woman-haters-pity-party-club-of-relationship-fail.

It might take the form of MGTOWs blaming modern western women for their personal and collective relationship ills. It might take the form of Return of Kings where people rag on feminism day in and day out. Or it might take the form of group think on the Rooshvforum, where pump and dump is put forth as the only politically correct version of relationships with females.

And when that happens the Red Pill is not used in the service enabling individual men to live like kings, but instead is used to create a rat king.

Everywhere guys take a grain of truth about the human condition, and use it as an excuse to either treat women like shit or to ignore them altogether.

And when a guy comes along and says, “Actually, if you aren’t having successful romantic relationships with women, it’s your own fault”, guess how welcome that message is!

I usually hear back various forms of, “No, it is not possible to have successful romantic relationships with women.” After that it’s explained to me that I also have never had a single successful romantic relationship with any woman. And that even the religious college educated virgins I’ve deflowered and lived with were in fact prostitutes.

From now on when someone claims superior social meta-knowledge to wink and call your loved one a whore, we can just call that “Red-pill emasculation”. It’s pure ego protection. “You can’t POSSIBLY be doing something that I find difficult-to-impossible! There HAS to be a catch, otherwise what would that say about me? You are so stupid to not realize that you are not actually living the life that you are actually living! If only you knew how impossible it was for ME to live that life, then you’d realize that YOU are not actually living it at all!”

So instead of red pill ideas being a spur to personal discovery, self improvement and greater social success, they get co-opted into shields to defend oneself against exactly that.

Why irrational self confidence will fuck up your life

There is a pernicious meme that has taken hold like a dandelion. The meme is that irrational self confidence will aid your self interest.

It is pernicious because it is a short term solution that is in the long term detrimental.

I don’t want to look around me 15 years from now and see that my friends are all now crack addicted homeless bums. And so when I can I mention to people “Hey, it’s probably not a good idea to spend all your money on crack”.

And I don’t want to look around 15 years from now and see guys not getting their intimacy needs met.

And so I tell people, hey, it’s probably not a good idea to blind yourself to what women genuinely value in the competitive sexual marketplace. Work now to build real value – don’t just assume that you already have it.

Everything does not boil down to confidence. While you can hypnotize yourself to believe that you deserve more than you really do, this is in the long term not in your best interest.

The way self hypnosis, and irrational self confidence works, is this; your brain excludes all information that does not agree with the self hypnotic suggestion.

“I don’t need a big dick to sexually compete. I’m great just the way I am.”
“I don’t need big muscles to compete, I’m great just the way I am.”
“I don’t need to be a great lover in bed, I’m great just the way I am.”
“I don’t need to make more money than the next guy, I’m great just the way I am.”
“I don’t need to get my own apartment and furnish it tastefully, I’m great just the way I am.”
“I don’t need to get an impressive car, I’m great just the way I am.”
“I don’t need to to dress well, I’m great just the way I am.”
“I don’t need to be a successful entrepreneur, I’m great just the way I am.”
“I don’t need to be tall, I’m great just the way I am.”

Irrational self confidence will leave you blind to what the competition is doing. You will literally be incapable of knowing what their relative strengths and disadvantages are. Because any such knowledge would harm your irrational self conception.

That is how the mind works.

You have two main options in life: self hypnosis, or meditation. You can either exclude parts of the brain from speaking to other parts, and therefore get magical self hypnotic powers, such as being able to make your hand numb, or forget the number six, or make the wall turn blue, or fall asleep on command, or you can unify your mind, and the wall will remain yellow and you will remain cognizant of the mosquito itch and you will be able to do math in your dreams.

The former will help you to screen for girls at the club who are down-to-fuck and get same night lays with them.

The latter option is what you need to get your intimacy needs met long term.

In my last two posts I made the readers aware that we have choiceless human psychological needs, and in order to be as satisfied in life as possible, you have to take these into account.

I don’t want to see people in the manosphere follow Heartiste and Roosh into becoming the next Mark Minters; blindsided by their own intimacy needs and structurally incapable of realizing them without huge compromise. For LTR success you need structural basics.

The dark triad traits will with absolute certainty fuck your life up.

You will not be able to experience empathetic joy. (Psychopathy.)

You will not be able to know realistic confidence and will exclude facts that threaten your esteem. (Narcissism.)

You will have boundary issues of not respecting others free will, and see others as nothing but a tool. (Machiavelianism.) Machiavelianism is related to the first two DT traits, in that it necessitates a lessening of empathetic joy, and is inconsiderate to opposing views.

If you want to lead a happy life, and not wind up a crack addict on the street, don’t choose the path of irrational self confidence.

Update from comments: In discussions where we share ideas and examine them, accuracy is important. A small conceptual mis-step of one degree can after many miles lead one far astray.

Irrational confidence necessarily means confidence that excludes data. It necessarily means deliberately ignoring reality. This type of thinking can not be applied only as required – it is a habit that will infect other habits, until you will be narcissistic in your world view – you will unconsciously avoid trains of thought that lead to a loss of esteem. You won’t be able to think clearly – even when you want to.

It is possible to have confidence without excluding reality. You can know your relative strengths and weaknesses, and know how much more attractive you would be if you were more confident, and you can put on some rational bluster and fake confidence. That does not exclude reality. That is rational confidence. You can rationally know how much your display of confidence in real life affects reality.

Reality respects us to the degree we respect it. Allegiance to truth wins out in the long game.

Update 2 from comments: Narcissists are charming, but can’t hold down relationships as sooner or later their bullshit is uncovered and they are revealed as shallow fakes. And when their masks are seen through they fly into a rage. There is even a name for that – it’s called “narcissistic rage”.

Narcissism is widely being deliberately taught as a seduction aid. Those advocating dark triad traits are damaged individuals causing social harm; they are harming the future happiness of our friends.

A narcissist will be incapable of thoughts that threaten to damage his self conception, and is capable of great evil. Narcissism is a horrendous and dangerous trait, and is not an aid to your life. It is something to root out from yourself at every possible opportunity.

A healthy ego and reality are good friends.

Update 3 from comments: Just to clarify I don’t think it’s problematic to seek and get validation, or to be proud of accomplishments.

I’m nit picking on one small detail. One little word. The word is “irrational”.

That one word can lead people astray. It can lead people to pushing into dim awareness or denying the non-confidence related attractive traits.

This will cause two long term problems:
1) People will neglect self improvement and so be unprepared for intimacy in older age.
2) People will develop poor mental habits, and give in to cognitive dissonance at every turn, choosing thoughts based on comfort, instead of truth.

These are serious issues. That stem from just one tiny little detail. That niggling little detail of one word. Irrational.

Seems trivial, but it’s not.

Update 4 from comments: Another point is that humor can be better than a blustery confidence. You can be honest about being ugly if you are funny. This is a type of humble/confidence that displays high social intelligence. It goes over well. You downplay your disadvantages, while being fully aware of them. You don’t have to deny them.

Whereas overconfidence can display low social intelligence, such as seen in the clueless dimwit pictured at the top of the post; the poster boy for being stupidly overconfident and how this damages how other people perceive his social intelligence and therefore mate-worthiness.

Update 5: Here is an example of RATIONAL self confidence.

When I go to a club, 99% of the time I’ll be the ugliest guy there. This has serious real world effects – it’s not a small thing. My girlfriends all considered me ugly (even the current curvy hottie live-in love-slave of three years who is 23 years younger than me) and many of them called me ugly to my face.

But here is what I do when I refer to my looks; I call myself handsome. INEVITABLY the girl will break out laughing. I keep a straight face. I can play it straight because it’s so absurd she knows I can’t possibly be serious.

The thing is to never show weaknesses as something that you dwell on or get depressed about, but still don’t deny them. Be socially intelligent, and respect her intelligence. Know that she’ll get turned on for hotter guys, know that she’d prefer a hotter face, if she could put it on your body. But also know that even with some big weaknesses you can develop compensatory strengths.

Confidence doesn’t have to be fake or about denying reality. You can have a pin point accurate rational mental map and still do well with women. In fact you can even get away with not being particularly confident-in-your-confidenty-confidence and still do very well – if you have compensatory traits that you are confident in, such as social intelligence and humor and sexual skills.

I’ve even heard it advocated to make fun of being nervous and shy during an initial meet, because that displays some social intelligence – you are acknowledging the awkwardness but are still willing to plow through it – you are willing to stay glued to the reality of the situation even when it’s uncomfortable, and acknowledge it, instead of pretending you are full of confidentiness, and doing that in itself forms a common bond between the two of you. “Yes, look at us, this is a bit uncomfortable, isn’t it – ha ha – we’re humans doing human things!”.

The honesty that clear thinking develops will help you in innumerable interpersonal ways. You’ll develop real, honest, interpersonal rapport. You’ll know and appreciate and understand her REAL thought processes. Honesty contains humor. Irrational confidence does not. Can not. Humor is built out of honesty.

People crave genuine connection. Genuine connection is built on understanding. If you deliberately try to not understand what the woman values, by being irrationally self confident and denying your weaknesses, you create a schism between you and the girl, between you and yourself. You take things so seriously that there is no room for laughter.

I mean, just look at the poster child up top. I chose that image to make the point emotionally. That guy is too stupid to laugh at himself. If he could laugh at his flaws, he’d be much more approachable, likable, and even sexy. He’s so wooden in his “confidence” that he parodies himself. Lighten up guy!

Flaws are part of what builds connection between people – it’s what we have in common. Being over confident is like not accepting your self with humor and humility, which will put off a vibe that you can’t really accept the girl either. It will just be a shallow dance where nothing touches – nobody makes any real connection or really touches anything – nobody is vulnerable at all.

Confidence is not the only trick in the bag, and if you over value it, you can harm your other tricks – harm your ability to think clearly, harm your sense of proportion, harm your sense of humor, harm your genuine empathy, harm your genuine connection to women, harm your chances at real human bonding.

Women have so many hooks in them. Not just one hook. There isn’t just a confidence hook. You can play a woman like a fiddle without ever once considering how confident or unconfident you are. You don’t have to ever even think about it.

I do best when I’m so captivated by the girl that I lose interest in myself entirely. Rather than try to boost self confidence, I become un-self-conscious. How confident I am has nothing to do with the equation. I just do what I do, and it’s all reality based. No augmented reality – just reality.

People like reality, if you like reality.

New term: rational-funny-humility-with-genuine-realistic-pride