HBD and game

Robert writes:

I would like to see more discussion of game on this blog - but from an HBD perspective, not from the purient roissyite perspective

What Roissy calls “beta behavior” evolved because it’s the most successful reproductive strategy in a civilized society. When pre-marital and extra-marital sex was very strongly discouraged by society, being able to talk a girl into bed didn’t mean spreading your genes as much as it meant being forced to marry her at the end of a shotgun (or crossbow or sword or whatever weapon was used back then), or even worse, killed by her angry relatives, put in jail for the crime of adultery, etc.

Modern society is now reverting to a more primitive form, and the beta behavior bred into humanity over many thousands of years will much more quickly be bred out. Lucofkily, this isn't happening in Japan. The Japanese may have a low birthrate, but only 2% births are to unmarried mothers (see here). Japan will be the last bastion of civilization.

Comments

[reiver]

Funny... I actually wrote a conjecture related to this 2 days ago...

http://reiver.tumblr.com/post/175853452/loss-of-human-monogamy

If there is a genetic basis to Monogamy[1] (in humans), it makes you wonder… well, makes me wonder at least… if there’s the potential that Monogamy could be breed out of human populations. And if there’s a potential, are there any signs today which makes it seem like it could be happening.[2]

From a genetics point-of-view, from what I’ve read, it is easier for loss of function or exaggeration and redirections of functions to occur than to develop wholly new complex adaptations. As an example of that — as an example of what loss of function looks like — when comparing wolves to dogs we see that "[m]ale wolves help care for their offspring, but male dogs do not".[3] Then if we believe that Monogamy is a complex adaptation, then it would lead us to believe that it is easier for Monogamy to be lost than for it to re-evolve from scratch.

__________________________________________________

[1] Because people can mean different things when they say “monogamy”, to be explicit, what I referring to when I say “monogamy” is, when a male and a female live together, have sex with one another, and cooperate in acquiring basic resources such as food, clothes, and money. Often they also care for and raise offspring to together.

[2] Just to be explicit, I’m a fan of Monogamy.

[3] Even though male dogs don’t care for their offspring, I wonder if the “wiring” for that behavior is still there. But if it’s just kind of muted. And thus, would you really have to re-evolve that behavior from scratch.

[Brandon Berg]

"Japan will be the last bastion of civilization."

Isn't having a nonzero population one of the defining characteristics of civilization?

[Ted]

I'd say the theory is more that traditional virtues and high paternal investment were needed to ensure children survived to adulthood.

The game talk from what I've read is mostly common sense. "Ask lots of women out, overcome your fear of rejection, and come on cool and detached." "Progressively touch them starting with the hands." No shit!

To the extent it involve tricks like palm reading it will only work on dumb women. I filled up on them in high school, and if I want more then there's an endless supply of drunk college-aged fatties at local bars for some short-term fun.

[Peter]

Why do you say that modern society is reverting to a more primitive form? Is it just the rate of illegitimacy?

[as]

Also, beta males make for great fathers. For instance, engineers are often fond, doting fathers.

[John]

"If there is a genetic basis to Monogamy[1] (in humans), it makes you wonder… well, makes me wonder at least… if there’s the potential that Monogamy could be breed out of human populations."

I think that is exactly what is going to happen. Monogamy is useful when resources are limited, and the man and woman are both needed for the kids to survive. In our age of plenty, however, a single parent can raise kids alone. (I'm not saying it's easy--just that the kids will survive and reproduce). We may very well be entering a time when the alphas of the world end up with several wives, and most men end up with none.

I'm guessing that polygamy will be legal within a couple of generations. Look at how fast acceptance of gay marriage has grown. I'm not sure whether I like this or not. I like knowing I don't have to worry that much about my wife seeking another man, but you can make a good eugenic argument for allowing polygamy, since the better men would have more kids, and the worst would have fewer. People in such a world would be smarter, but perhaps not as happy.

[Marcus]

"Isn't having a nonzero population one of the defining characteristics of civilization?"

They'll have robots though.

[ac]

East Asia, including China, tends to be pretty conservative as well. Unfortunately they also suffer from horrendously low birthrates.

[Francis]

East Asia, including China, tends to be pretty conservative as well. Unfortunately they also suffer from horrendously low birthrates.

I'm not worried we'll run out of Han, Korean or Nipponese anytime soon. If anything, as the West gets weaker because of NAMs and Islam and liberalism, they'll move to fill the gaps.

[Mike]

Perhaps the betas could be encouraged to commit suicide. Or at least have the barriers to suicide remove. If it were as simple as if your unhappy commit suicide, without this talk of a duty to life, then everyone left alive would be someone who has consciously decided that life gives them pleasure and they have consciously made the choice of life.

[roissy]

what's the point of learning game if you're not gonna put it to prurient use?

"What Roissy calls “beta behavior” evolved because it’s the most successful reproductive strategy in a civilized society."

it might be more accurate to say beta behavior evolved in a climatically seasonal environment, and civilization was just a welcome side effect.

"When pre-marital and extra-marital sex was very strongly discouraged by society"

this is one factor. there are others. the past 40 years has witnessed a perfect storm of cultural changes act in concert against the predominant beta male paradigm of the heretofore ascendent west -- widely available inexpensive contraceptives and abortion, easy peasy divorce, rigged misandrist divorce laws, evaporation of slut shaming (by other women), and maybe most importantly (after birth control) the sub-saharan modeled economic independence of western women.

"Modern society is now reverting to a more primitive form"

welcome to the jungle.

"Luckily, this isn't happening in Japan."

from what I understand, japanese women hit their economically empowered feminist stride much later than western women, so all you may be seeing there is a lag effect. of course, it helps their legitimacy rate that they're japanese.

[JohnM]

all they need to do is
a) make male birth control pills that are as cheap as skittles and as readily available
b) take away any financial incentive (i.e. welfare) for women to have kids
problem solved, amiright?

that being said, nature has a way of equalizing. something about what dawkins said in the selfish gene that relates to this.
by the way to HS have you been to peopleofwalmart.com?

[Underachiever]

Japan's population is doing fine. Right now they are way overcrowded. Having a population half of their current size would be an improvement for them.

[Basil Ransom]

reiver, monogamy is the simple ratio of balls to brains. Literally. In a physical anthro class at UCLA, the teacher showed the ratio of balls to brains in weight, of gorillas and of a strictly monogamous primate species, which currently eludes me. The monogamist species had a smaller balls to brains ratio. Humans were between the two primate species.

The book sperm wars says that a man's sexual strategy is dictated in part by the size of his balls. So where alphas spread their seed, expect sac size to increase. Brain size historically has come at the expense of sac size, but perhaps it need not be so, given that there is plenty of food.

[Gil]

If Beta traits are failing and Beta societies are experiencing low birthrates whilst Alphs societies continue to grow as well send migrants over to Beta societies to make up the shortfall in births then, yes, Beta traits are poor evolutionary traits for human and are getting weeded out. The question is this conspiracy rubbish by grumpy computer nerds or a genuine phenomenon and societies are regressing to their natural standards that has been relatively the same for at least five millennia?

Then again - if Beta societies automatically experience low birthrates independent of culture (and it seems so as Asians have fallen into this quandary and even the emerging middle class of India seems to do the same in deciding to party longer and fewer babies in later life) then Beta traits are indeed evolutionary dangerous and thus short-lived. Alpha societies may be primitive and brutish but they withstand the test of time thus meet the definition of evolutioaary success.

[OneSTDV]

@ ac:

"East Asia, including China, tends to be pretty conservative as well. Unfortunately they also suffer from horrendously low birthrates."

Well that's because they throw out all the girl babies.

[Truth]

[...] What Roissy calls “beta behavior” evolved because it’s the most successful reproductive strategy in a civilized society. [...]

One of your BEST POSTS/COMMENTS ever penned, Half Sigma!!

Keep 'em coming, especially on this poorly-understood topic.

[mike]

"Why do you say that modern society is reverting to a more primitive form? Is it just the rate of illegitimacy?"

We're moving backwards in several dimensions-

The way of life of the growing parasite class is reminiscent of a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. Instead of hunting, we have "hustling" and gang activity. Instead of gathering, we have regular trips to the welfare office. No ambition beyond survival and reproduction and the most instinctive impulses.

We're failing in education, and what is being taught is more of a pseudo-religious mysticism (liberal theology) than any kind of modern science or contemplative historical perspective. As HS has noted, the most prestigious professions are lawyers, bankers, and politicians - all value transfer, no value creation. Like medieval nobles.

At the same time, the political process has broken down into petty factionalism more reminiscent of a monarchless kingdom with multiple claimants to the throne. Our society is regressing into serfdom (the original communism) and power is being irreversibly concentrated in the hands of the political class.

I could go on, because in almost every way the American "mainstream" is regressing and devolving. We went to the goddamn Moon, man, and it's all been pretty much downhill from there. Yes, technology is still plodding along, but it's "petering" out with the demise of capitalism and the rise of bread-and-circus socialism.

[KingM]

East Asians, including the Japanese, aren't going anywhere any time soon. It's not like natural selection just stopped working. Give it a generation or two and the people who like children, who have a higher sex drive, will become the dominant segment of Japanese culture.

[PA]

The great thing about Game is that it lets betas mimic alpha qualities, thus propagating the civilizationally-desirable beta traits by "fooling" women.

For example, neither I nor any of the bonafide Alphas at Roissy's, as fas as I can tell, are criminals or thugs. Most of us are trustworthy, decent-IQ, and responsible guys. All good genetic qualities. But -- we also learned to mimic, always harmlessly, some of the thugs' and criminals' affects to get women to wanna be with us.

A related thought is that many qualities we call beta are an anomaly that comes only with peak-civilization periods, not a civilizational feature per se. Prior to the boomers' generation and pre-feminism, for example, rough Alpha masculinity was the nomral among men. Most men's "betatude" was basically limited to being non-criminal; it didn't mean new age mangina wuss.

[Gamma Man]

Japanese stand a better chance at survival with a low birthrate but with basically zero inmigration than White Americans, with a below-replacement birthrate and a huge influx of aliens with a highe birthrate competing for the same resources.
Japan won't be a glorified third-world country in a generation or two, like the USA is poised to turn into one.

[Hex Editor]

mike @ 3:54..very well put. You should have a blog.

What we need is for the best and brightest to focus their intelligence towards saving civilization. For example, finding a way to surreptitiously add sterilization drugs into the supply of food and drink patronized by the parasitic classes.

[Lee]

@ ac:

"East Asia, including China, tends to be pretty conservative as well. Unfortunately they also suffer from horrendously low birthrates."

With their already overcrowded 1.3 billion people, maybe that's a good thing. That's why China had the one-child policy rule, not because of conservative culture but because with 1.3 billion people, they needed to CONTROL their population because of too many damn people! I wouldn't worry about the dwindling population of East Asians. There are already too many of them. Not to mention that Asians make up at least 60% of the world's total population. They are not going away anytime soon ac...

[Lee]

Given two choices, most educated people would prefer the world to be dominated and taken over next by East Asians instead of Black and Latino NAMs.

With East Asians you would have value creation jobs and benefits/contributions added to society with all their educational + hard work values and minimal contribution to crime and causing trouble (East Asian societies are generally harmonious). Value creation instead of value transference jobs common with white people, and value creation jobs created by East Asians such as IT, science, and engineering. Most people would prefer that over a world dominated by NAMs which would only increase welfare dependence, burger flipping, gang-banging, souring crime rates, and generally lead to a degradation of civilized society.

[pzed]

"Well that's because they [east asians] throw out all the girl babies."

japan certainly doesn't. 2008 cia factbook says their sex ratio at birth is 1.06 male/female. compare that to a 1.07 avg worldwide. try again.

[Loo]

but you can make a good eugenic argument for allowing polygamy, since the better men would have more kids, and the worst would have fewer. People in such a world would be smarter, but perhaps not as happy.
Look at the Middle East to see how this hypothesis works out. Polygamy selects for the most aggressive males not the smartest. I think we'd be better of not following the evolutionary path of the elephant seal.

[Sheila Tone]

This may be the most inane idea I've seen you put forth yet. And usually you at least try to support your arguments. When it comes to women and sex, though, you rely on conclusory statements.

Roissey's not "prurient." He's not really about getting sex -- most "game" writing isn't. He provides a satisfying revenge fantasy for male voyeurs who don't want to deal with women in real life. He's way too bitchy and abusive for a real "player."

Despite these men's lack of real interest, they're still nursing wounded male egos because they lost face in front of other guys when popular girls didn't offer themselves in high school. It's their ego that's hurting, not their hearts or libidos. Rather than confront their dysfunctions, such men like to imagine sex is just a dirty little game they could "win" if they weren't such nice guys. It's a convenient excuse for their avoidant behavior. American men just can't admit they'd rather be alone with their cats and video games and Internet.

[HS: What do you have against cats?]

[Leonard]

Half - have you been out the Hamptons at all this summer?

The recession has changed things -

high end service providers are being shut down and replaced by less expensive alternatives

the cops on the Hamptons say that higher end escorts are being replaced by less expensive providers - brothel was busted by police & olice said one woman who worked in the house turned 30 to 40 tricks a night for as little as $30 per trick. Google it

Is there an HBD angle?

[late july]

Ugh...not more alpha/beta nonsense. These categorizations are so over-simplified as to be pointless. Now they are being discussed in the context of evolutionary pressures? To do this you would need to show the ratio of the human population's "alphaness" has changed over time. Then you would need to isolate genetic signatures that lead to alphaness in individuals. Then you would need to control for environment, culture, etc. Since these categories cannot even be defined with any precision for the current population this is foolishness from the start.

[jj]

The growing illegitimacy rate doesn't imply barbarism. Places like Sweden and Finland have very high rates of illegitimate birth, but are among the most civilized regions of the world. Illegitimacy can coencide with high civilization, provided people don't neglect their parenting responsibilities. High parental investment is characteristic of Western societies as much as Eastern societies. The main difference is that Westernerners, being less group oriented and more willing to defy societal norms, don't feel ashamed to raise a child outside marriage.

Within Europe, the Muslim communities have virtually no illegitimacy or non-marital teen pregnancy. I'd be skeptical if we'd argue that they parent better than their white European neighbors.

The major problems for the West are dysgenic breeding in combination with mass immigration from low human capital societies. That's not sustainable for a first world country.

[PA]

"[Arab] Polygamy selects for the most aggressive males not the smartest."

No. It selects for the richest. So you have a no-chin, man-tits, endocrine-imbalanced inbred emir's son siring children with 25 women. Real eugenic boon.

[roissy]

spungen:
"Roissey's not "prurient.""

the catholic church disagrees.

"He's not really about getting sex -- most "game" writing isn't."

right. game is actually about improving one's golf handicap.

"He provides a satisfying revenge fantasy for male voyeurs who don't want to deal with women in real life."

when all you have is bitterness, the male psyche looks like an enemy.

"He's way too bitchy and abusive for a real "player.""

you're just pissed i call you out for what you are: a woman who loathes male desire.

"American men just can't admit they'd rather be alone with their cats and video games and Internet."

cats? revealing.

late july:
"Since these categories cannot even be defined with any precision for the current population this is foolishness from the start."

alpha = tom brady.
beta = nathaniel schnerdling the accountant.
omega = homeless bum pissing himself.

[Peter]

"high end service providers are being shut down and replaced by less expensive alternatives

the cops on the Hamptons say that higher end escorts are being replaced by less expensive providers - brothel was busted by police & olice said one woman who worked in the house turned 30 to 40 tricks a night for as little as $30 per trick."

That particular house of ill repute catered to Mexican and Central American immigrant workers. Few if any of its customers could have patronized high end escorts. Completely different market segment.

[Stiva]

@ Sheila Tone:

The typical "man who'd rather play Xbox than talk to women" type is probably someone who was taught all his life that he was supposed to be caring and polite and thoughtful towards women to attract them, only to find himself with a bunch of platonic female friends and an empty bed. Men don't drop out of the dating scene because they've suddenly all turned lazy and immature (in fact, such men are probably more intelligent and responsible than average, which is part of their problem), they do it because they were taught all their lives to be good provider betas and have become disillusioned after losing out to smooth-talking roissy types for years. Some may try to learn game to improve their lot but many haven't even heard of it, and many others are understandably skeptical of its promises.

If it were just a matter of being bitter that the hottest girls didn't want them in high school they'd get over it and find someone more their speed, not take an oath of celibacy and vent their frustration vicariously through someone else's blog.

[Farrout]

Hitler pissed at Betas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KnEbKv_1UI

[James A. Donald]

"Roissey's ... way too bitchy and abusive for a real player."

Abuse works. The guy who abducted Jaycee received hot letters from his present wife when he was in jail for rape, torture, and false imprisonment of a previous adbuctee. No one sends hot letters to the guy who lands an accountancy post at a major corporation.

Abusers are natural alphas. Roissy is not mysogynic, not an abuser and not a natural alpha, but he *pretends* to be a mysogynic abuser, in order to pull chicks. It works.

[Ted]

Sheila: you nailed it on the head.

Don't forget the economic angle though: "Buy my book, attend my seminar, and you'll have more pussy than you can handle!"

The Pittsburgh guy seemed to have spent a lot of money on PUA crap with no results. And he was fairly good looking, though gave off strange vibes and had unrealistic expectations.

In fact, if it had not been for the PUA scammers telling him he could land a hot young college girl if he learned their tricks, maybe he would have settled down with some lonely single mother from his church.

[Richard Hoste www.hbdbooks.com]

Sigma,

You may be interested in this...

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/09/02/levi-johnston-dishes-on-palins-parenting-in-october-vanity-fai/?icid=main|main|dl1|link7|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.politicsdaily.com%2F2009%2F09%2F02%2Flevi-johnston-dishes-on-palins-parenting-in-october-vanity-fai%2F

[HS Thanks, if not for my readers I'd have nothing good to blog about.]

[Nobody]

-As HS has noted, the most prestigious professions are lawyers, bankers, and politicians - all value transfer, no value creation. Like medieval nobles.-

Many medieval nobles actually did do the fighting and dying. Nowhere near the parasites today's lawyers, bankers and politicans are. They couldn't just take, they had to put up too.

[David Alexander]

"Men don't drop out of the dating scene because they've suddenly all turned lazy and immature"

For what it's worth, as somebody who never even asked a girl out on a date, the entire concept of even engaging in the dating scene was killed off by a combination of cheap easily accessible porn allowing for orgasms on demand, discouragement from the internet about the fate of beta males, and a sheer lack of desire to change my daily routine to fit a girl into the daily regimen. I don't want to learn game because I am not willing to become something that I hate in order to secure an orgasm, and I'd much rather spend that time chasing trains and big green signs in lieu of women.

[SFG]

"Places like Sweden and Finland have very high rates of illegitimate birth, but are among the most civilized regions of the world."

I wonder if it has to do with the misandrist divorce laws? Given how lefty scandinavian countries are I wouldn't be surprised if men are just too chicken to get married...

Of course this being Scandinavia even getting thrown in jail probably isn't too bad...

[Sheila Tone]

Roissey: It's absolutely amazing how much attention you pay to me.

I think the only "playing" you do is with the minds of lonely, angry male introverts. You annoy me because you're less intelligent than average for this blog neighborhood. I come here because I like smart guys. When you show up, it's like ... that skit when Chris Farley did the Chippendale's dance. Roosh is at least funny.

And that no-caps thing you do is SO EFFEMINATE. But I've got to hand it to you, your hissy, bitchy schtick seems to work with the guys too intimidated by the masculine player blogs. Who knew how many Sodini types were lurking around Marginal Revolution?

[Sheila Tone]

And "James," you're clearly completely clueless about the sex lives of successful men at major corporations.

[Sheila Tone]

How come there's never much about genetic engineering on this blog? It seems that would solve a lot of our problems. The lamest people could breed at their pleasure, but we'd zap the stupid and the criminal right out of their kids' brains.

HS: I dislike housepets, period. I'm waiting to hear you defend your position regarding modern society reverting to a primitive form.

Oh, and is Roissey actually claiming the Catholic Church has a *position* on him?

Some of you guys are such suckers. But at least blogs are free, unlike seminars and books.

[Reality Check]

... Perhaps the betas could be encouraged to commit suicide. Or at least have the barriers to suicide remove. If it were as simple as if your unhappy commit suicide, without this talk of a duty to life, then everyone left alive would be someone who has consciously decided that life gives them pleasure and they have consciously made the choice of life. ...

Nah, suicide is going to be more of an issue for *wanna-be* "alphas" like yourself -- who, in the obsessive quest for 'punani', and ESPECIALLY, female APPROVAL -- tend to forget as you get older, there is going to be more and more competition for those young and 'fertile' ladies, who will want nothing to do with your old, balding ass. Just ask George Soldini.

This is of course the same underlying psychological principle that stupid b*tches take (the one's whose life companions become their cat(s)), who, in their narcissism, wish to feel that no matter how plain and average (and older) they may be, they're ENTITLED to a man 'out of their league'.

Grow up and get a grip on reality before reality get's one on you.

[Peter]

Illegitimacy may be high in the Scandinavian countries, but it's not too much like its American counterpart with women raising children on their own. Many if not most of the illegitimate children in Scandinavia live in two-parent families, the difference being that the parents cohabit without actual marriage.

[bbartlog]

The most recent statistics we have show a negative correlation between number of sex partners and number of children (of course this doesn't account for cases where a guy is raising another's child, unbeknownst to him). I believe Audacious Epigone has the goods if you want to look it up (it's GSS mining as usual). Point is, if you're worried about this as a specifically *dysgenic* trend as opposed to something that makes life frustrating for a lot of people, you're barking up the wrong tree. Birth control makes a huge difference.
Also, anyone who doesn't believe in true love should read the account of Tolkien's courtship and marriage of his wife. Perhaps you will not find it, but that is no reason to be a cynic.

[Robert]

Yes, game is a valid concept. But no, it is not the silver bullet that the puas claim it to be

The most honest pua story is that of Paul Janka. Janka is white, tall and good looking. Janka is very aggressive, asking out hundreds of females. Janka has developed a lot of strategies for getting the females drunk while he stays sober. Janka scores a lot.

Is it really "game" that is working for Janka, or is it (tall) + (good looking) + (asking out hundreds of women) + (drunk females) + (sober Janka)?

In my humble opinion, "game" or to put it another way, a cocky confident attitude, works but it just can't take someone from zero to hero

Here is an experiment - take Janka's identical twin, a man with the same height, same looks. Have this man ask out a thousand women without using game - ie have this man make self depricating comments, praise the woman he is asking out, be polite, etc. I would bet that if Janka plus game = 50 scores, the identical twin of janka, who asks out the same number of women without using game, will have a # of scores in the same ballpark. It won't be zero vs 50 - It will be perhaps 20 vs 50

My evidence? Well I know a number of tall good looking guys that have no game at all. The ones that put themselves in a position to get to know lots of females do spectacularly well. An example would be, tall good looking man who lacks self confidence, is self depricating, but who tends bar at a bar serving NYU students. Another example - tall good looking man who works for club med.

My point is, there is plenty of success out there for tall good looking white men who choose to spend 10 hours a day talking to single women WHETHER OR NOT THEY USE GAME.

I know that not all men are white, tall, and good looking. I know that for short fat bald asian men, life is hard. But stop pretending that game is a silver bullet that can move men up a number of notches on the success ladder. Game is just one thing that can move a man moderately up the ladder

The pua's like Roissey have their own scummy agenda for pretending that game is more powerful than it really is

[roissy]

spungen:
"Roissey: It's absolutely amazing how much attention you pay to me."

lessee... you brought me up in this thread first, not the other way around. spot the projection.
ps it's mr. "roissy" to you.

"Who knew how many Sodini types were lurking around Marginal Revolution?"

marginal revolution? i think i left a grand total of two comments there over the years. tell me again how i don't get under your skin stalkergirl.

"I'm waiting to hear you defend your position regarding modern society reverting to a primitive form."

HS helpfully included a link in his post to the rising rates of single motherhood. of course, you're welcome to argue that hordes of bastard kids are a step forward for civilization.

"Oh, and is Roissey actually claiming the Catholic Church has a *position* on him?"

you're a self-parody.

[Ted]

DA: Explain to me your problem with just lowering your standards. Do you go to bars where average looking girls go and get drunk on cheap drink specials? If not, why not?

I also find Meghan McCain attractive. She says she's single too and has trouble finding a date other than ambitious future GOP functionaries who want to use her.

[whiskey]

Sheila --

Thanks for commenting. More evidence that women HATE HATE HATE Beta males! Really it's so telling. Of course a bunch of bitter, disconnected, proto-Sodini or Cho types can NEVER really be any threat now can they? Or they can't slide to Brit Chav-ism within one generation now can they? Why no, the desire of women to screw the top 10% of Alpha males (exciting, dominant, a-hole jerks who provide rollercoaster emotions) by a generation of women who make decisions with their groins cannot EVER be possibly something that can cause social meltdown. Because women are perfect human beings, in every way! Feministing tells me so!

I love the typical Female response to betas: hey let's eugenics sterilize them, the way Hitler and the Progressives did Gypsies, Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians, Jews, etc.

JJ -- In fact, in the US and UK, there is considerable evidence (the Heritage Foundation has your cites) that single parent homes have kids that suffer greatly (by orders of magnitude) of: sexual abuse, poverty, young age of first sexual experience, STDs, substance abuse, poor grades, and so on. The US is not Iceland or Finland, small, mono-ethnic states with everyone vaguely related to one another, high social cohesion, and a static society.

Ted -- Sodini went to one (very lame) PUA seminar. A more competent one would have suggested he target women around his own age and shape up more.

[Reality Check]

"... Sodini went to one (very lame) PUA seminar. A more competent one would have suggested he target women around his own age and shape up more."

This is the gist of the problem, Testy, in that too many immature and egotistical losers wants someone 'out of their league' -- not just women, men also, like the über-loser George Soldini, a jack-ass who thought taking a few seminars was going to help him overcome and defy reality.

A commenter on Sailer's blog pointed this hypocrisy out, you now, the 'every man a King' nonsense:

"--And, Chronicles' Thomas Fleming has repeatedly set forth that the aristocracy has always had a decadent element, but the danger comes when, in the name of equality, every man is entitled to be Hugh Hefner.--"
http://tinyurl.com/lj9v38

...And every woman is entitled to be a Queen Cleopatra (LOL)!

It is about narcissism Whiskey, about average people thinking of themselves as more 'special' and 'important' than they really are, or wish to be. And this applies to men AND women.

So you and everyone else can start pursuing and dating women who you are more your social and class equals.

Again, it's all about social compatibility, not taking a course on manipulation to trick a woman (and more significantly, yourself) into thinking you are something that you are not.

The ruse can be maintained only for so long.

[Jack]

Sheila is an interesting case. She's married to a fellow lawyer (I think). She's probably mostly dated guys we would describe as betas - because the vast majority of men ARE betas. And she professes to like intelligence. So why is she so much against intelligent, good beta men, who might be a bit socially awkward, learning techniques to get women? There are guys who are decent looking and smart and never get laid. Roissy provides advice for those men and he provides a valuable service. YOu should either be praising him for doing so, or offering your own advice. Interestingly, you don't provide any, even though you claim to like nerdy guys.

Roissy is real. His stories and advice are too detailed to be flame. He's more intelligent than me, he's more intelligent than most people here. His IQ is probably at least 140. Though I do agree with Sheila on the capitalization thing.

Another possibility is that Sheila's criticism is just her was of flirting. I'm in law school and it wouldn't be that out of the ordinary...

[Wat Tyler]

Interesting thought that beta males should commit suicide. Let's take that just one step further. What if they became suicide bombers? Think about it. Beta males in our hookup-centered, sociopath-festishizing Sick Society are the equivalent of Palestinians in Israel - the systematically disenfranchised. Obliterating their hopeless lives makes the most sense if they do it in the midst of those who made their lives hopeless to begin with. And I'm not talking about women here (at least not primarily) - I mean the alpha male elite.

Can't you imagine it? I certainly can. Dynamite-strapped losers blowing out the windows of fraternity house basements on Party Night. Small-dicked cubicle rats sauntering into country club lockerrooms and creating a big impression by flashing their own little packages. Wet T-shirt contests in Fort Lauderdale transmutated into Baghdad market scenes - with paramedics plucking shrapnel out of the perfect abs of mortally wounded hot-body boys. Oh, yum! The possibilities are endless. Don't you think?

[Meg]

I agree with the points made above but I'd like to see another thread in which we focus on the following

"""
The most honest pua story is that of Paul Janka. Janka is white, tall and good looking. Janka is very aggressive, asking out hundreds of females. Janka has developed a lot of strategies for getting the females drunk while he stays sober. Janka scores a lot.

Is it really "game" that is working for Janka, or is it (tall) + (good looking) + (asking out hundreds of women) + (drunk females) + (sober Janka)?
"""

I mean, all of us set a standard for looks - will not date people whose looks are below that standard. But what determines the level ?

A big problem that many men have is that they set the level too high - They show interest in females that are "above their level" in terms of looks, they get shot down, and then they become demoralized.

The Roissys of the world, the pick up artists of the world, seem to be sending two separate messages. Message one is "be aggressive" express interest in hundreds of females. Work to show interest 24 hours a day. This is good advice. It can't help but to improve the dating life of those that follow it

Message two is - raise your standards - even if you have been rejected your whole life by "average looking" females, start shooting for "better than average looking" females. This advice in my opinion is crazy. A man that has been rejected his whole life should lower his standards and keep lowering them until he gets a warm reception

We know that George Soldini attended a pick up artist seminar - Wouldn't it have been better for our society if he had instead attended a seminar telling him to lower his standards? I mean lower his standards in terms of how good looking the females he pursued were, and also lowered his standards in terms of the social skills of the females. There are plenty of females that are a little "odd" - females with a touch of asbergers syndrome that would have welcomed Soldini and not considered him odd.

Another way of lowering standards is, Soldini could have dated foreign women - there are thousands of young women from southeast asia and latin america in the USA that would have welcomed Soldini with open arms

So I suggest a thread in which we discuss what men like Soldini should do - I would strongly advocate a sub culture and a web community be set up with the message to the Soldini's of the world "lower your standards and keep lowering them" Instead of the message the pick up artists are pushing

[Lake Wobegon]

"She's probably mostly dated guys we would describe as betas - because the vast majority of men ARE betas. And she professes to like intelligence."

So are the vast majority of woman in an equivalent way.

Let's stop confusing the big picture here. All "beta" really means in a practical, meaningful sense is that the vast majority of men indeed are average, JUST AS THE VAST MAJORITY OF WOMEN ARE ALSO JUST AVERAGE.

It is because we live in this foolish, Pee Cee narcissistic society where everyone thinks way too highly of him/herself, where, like in Lake Wobegon, everyone is somehow 'above average'.

This of course begs the question: If 'everyone' is 'above average', then who exactly is average, since you need a baseline to measure and compare the 'AA's' against, no???

I read Sheila's blog, and she is so right on the trend of dweebs and other social neer-do-well's -- man or woman -- who think cause they have a little status (mostly due to their family) that their somehow entitled to a paramour way, WAY out of their league...

HENCE, no one at *their level* is "good enough" for them, and they waste so much valuable time in their youth chasing after people who are often just using them for a little ego gratification.

Then they wonder why their 'still' single (and often alone) at 40.

And all the alcohol, feminist ranting, nor "PUA" courses in the world is going to change or mask this fact of life, that of living the rest of one's life as a lonely old man or a bitter spinster with her house of full of cats.

Wake up ... and grow up ... before it's too late.

[Bruce]

Let's have a longer discussion on the topic of - what should a man do if he is a total failure with good looking women.

Basically, Roissy and the PUAs have build a huge industry around the idea of telling men who strike out with good looking women to try to improve their game

Instead the right thing for the legions of Roissy fans to do is *not* spend money on PUA seminars, but rather to start targetting dramatically less attractive women, and to start doing it aggressively - in other words, follow Janka's advice and come on to hundreds of women a week but make sure they are much much less attractive

To my knowledge, Roissy has never advocated this but this path would save our society from more Sodinis, more Columbines, more Virginia Techs.

Why are there no advocates for this ?

New thread!

[Ted]

Jack=Roissy

Whiskey: I see no evidence of Sheila "hating" anyone. Her comments about angry introverts was directed the tiny fraction of men who read/comment at Roissy, not all "beta" men. His site is undeniably misogynist, though at times also funny and entertaining.

Also, the whole PUA thing sounds awfully expensive. Not only do you have to pay thousands of dollars in seminar fees pay travel costs if you don't live in a major city, but you also have to spend additional time and effort making sure it's a good seminar.

How would you know, anyway, that the one he went to wasn't any good? How many have you attended?

How many other suckers have spent over $10,000 going to multiple PUA seminars? From the standpoint of getting women that $10,000 would have been better spent upgrading from an Accord to a 3-series BMW.

[Robert]

Yes
the proposition on the table is that we will have a happier society if unattractive men, like the ones that perpetrated columbine, are encouraged to date unattractive women instead of getting angry

there is a lot of potential in this idea

[The Mighty Brad]

Five years ago I quit.

Back in the day, I used to think my problems on the romantic front could be solved for good. I'm had just gotten an M.S. in chemical engineering. I had no financial woes, debt problems, criminal record, alien abduction stories, horrible family problems, religious hang-ups, or health worries. I had many friends and a close family. I like snow-shoeing, running, soccer, reading, cooking, hiking, writing, my two big huskies Frosty and Snowball, and lots of other pursuits. I even
learned how to dress well without pegging the gay-o-meter.

But I had apparently had some insurmountable strikes against me. I don’t want children and didn’t have any—especially as a step-father
for some long-gone bad boy. Also, I'm short. I’m unattractive. I'm cheap. And frankly, I'm kind of selfish.

I had a good life and wanted someone with whom to share it, but after years of trying to stay upbeat and asking dozens of women out, after
years of trying to get my friends to set me up only to have them dance around the issue that I was simply impossible to match with even a
moderately attractive woman without a weight problem, after years of platitudes like, "It only takes one" and "There's somebody for
everyone!" and other such, it began to wear mighty thin.

Women weren’t and aren't interested in me because of my looks/height and other negative traits and of those that accept that, none have gotten by my own standards. I was stupidly optimistic that I could get by if I just kept trying to learn "game"; I believed that myth of “Someday, you’ll make a great guy for somebody!” Unfortunately, I couldn’t do anything about the looks, the height, the age, my standards. I look the way I do. I act the way I do. I have the standards I have.

I quit at the age of 32. I realized that I was destined to be single.

I just wish that I had heard this advice earlier in life; for many years I had humored the illusion that *eventually* I would—evidently
by magic—find a partner to share my life with. I did this partly from my own foolish optimism but partly because people always felt the need to patronize me and to say inane things like “there’s someone for everyone” and “someday you’ll make someone happy” when what I really
needed to hear someone say was the following:

“Yes, you are unattractive, miserly and short and there is nothing you can do about it. Yes, refusing to father children, or to be a step-father, is a handicap and limits the number of potential mates even further. The chances of you finding someone that (1) will accept these facts about you and still want to be with you and (2) to which you are also attracted to, is ZERO. You will never pair off with someone and you will live your entire life alone. This is inevitable and you should prepare yourself for it.”

[king obama]

"Why are there no advocates for this ?

New thread!"

There are no advocates for this because no one wants to lower their standards. Of course, if you constantly ask out or seek women/men waaaaay out of your league and always get shot down, then you probably do need to lower your standards, but the truth hurts.

Also, no one is going to make money selling books or giving seminars that basically say "lower your standards."

[jj]

"Another possibility is that Sheila's criticism is just her was of flirting."

Oooh.... Direct hit......

Oh, by the way Roissy, what do you think of South Asian/Indian girls when it comes to dating/game? I'd be genuinely curious about your views on that segment of women.

[Leonard]

Could Columbine have been avoided?

It seems to me that in every high school there are some "unpopular" kids - why not take all of the unpopular boys and unpopular girls and put them in a separate school?

Then they could get busy, away from the scorn and insults of the "popular" types

Seems that this would increase the happiness all around -

Many many unpopular loser males take the initiative and relocate to a place where they are seen as alphas. I urge you to google "charisma man" a long series of strips that show American gammas moving to Japan and immediately being treated like alphas by the men and women around them.

The best way to make gammas and lower betas happy is not "game" but it is a shift of this sort

[Jack]

I'm not Roissy. I'm likely younger, I get far fewer women, and I'm in law school.

[rob]

why not take all of the unpopular boys and unpopular girls and put them in a separate school?

Leonard, I had similar thoughts back in high school for remedial gym class. Unathletic kids get no exercise in team sports, and the social stigma of uncoordinated and/or fat hits hardest in gym class.

Put the unathletic kids in gym classes without athletes, and they'll have to get some exercise. They'll lose a bit of weight, and at least learn teamwork with other aspergery kids.

[Farrout]

The mighty brad,

Good for you, for both accepting reality and realizing that it's not the fault of women for having standards, just as you do. So long as you don't devolve into a self-loathing attention whore like David A, you'll be fine.

[ironrailsironweights.wordpress.com]

"Could Columbine have been avoided?
It seems to me that in every high school there are some "unpopular" kids - why not take all of the unpopular boys and unpopular girls and put them in a separate school?"

The Columbine shooters were not outcasts or unpopular.

Peter

[Lake Wobegon]

"I mean, all of us set a standard for looks - will not date people whose looks are below that standard. But what determines the level ?

"A big problem that many men have is that they set the level too high - They show interest in females that are "above their level" in terms of looks, they get shot down, and then they become demoralized."
__

True true, Meg, but it is not just men that set the level too high ... it is women who do this as well.

Sheila Tone did an EXCELLENT piece on this at her blog, that of the average, 'beta' female (a 'female Beemus' LOL), who, wishing to partake in a little hypergamy (and polyamory, perhaps?), chases after men way above her -

[...] "As she stumbled into the single world in her mid-20s, she acted like a 12-year-old. She was like a female Beemus — she’d go to a social gathering and fixate on the hottest guy in the room. But men from families as privileged as hers didn’t treat her like Andre did. Educated men didn’t treat her like Andre did. Attractive actors didn’t treat her like Andre did. Even other black men didn’t treat her like Andre did, not the ones who owned the club anyway. She always went after the popular guys. She abruptly dismissed any discussion of a person’s desirability versus what they were seeking. Thinking that way meant you were hard and bitter." [...]

Exploiting the racial advantage in romance. | Econoholic.com
http://econoholic.com/2009/04/exploiting-the-racial-advantage-in-romance/

--

Even our friend Roissy did an interesting piece on this pathetic problem: that of average women chasing after above-average, higher-status men 'out of their league' -- with "the spoiling from illusory experiences with alpha males" and the subsequent heartbreak that follows, and the cantankerous bitterness that is shown to [average] men in general as a sort of 'coping mechanism' (hey there Testy).

Consider -

[...] "There’s more bad news for betas hoping to drain their blue balls in sluts. Not only are sluts more apt to restrict their no muss no fuss sexual favors to high(er) status men, they find it harder to emotionally bond with men, particularly men who are lower status than the highest status men they fucked. ..."

"Once a woman has had that faint hope instilled in her, she can go months or even years rejecting more suitable beta males in favor of pining forlornly for that one alpha male who will certainly, she tells herself, come around and decide she’s a catch worthy of commitment. And the sluttier she has been, the more fly-by-night alpha males she’ll have lodged in her memory to pine over.
"A few years of getting her heart broken again and again, and even the most romantically idealistic slut will turn crassly cynical. And cynicism is the venom that slowly clots the lifeblood of love.

"Interestingly, this is further proof that female obesity, just as much as the other factors I’ve written about, has heavily (heh) skewed the mating market against the interests of the average man. Not only does a growing mass (double heh) of fat women result in fewer acceptable partners for men and thus more intense competition for the remaining thin babes, but the fatties have likely poisoned their ability to bond with men because of their history of getting pumped and dumped by promiscuous alphas." [...]

Sluts Are Not Less Discriminating « Roissy in DC
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/08/21/sluts-are-not-less-discriminating/

*And let's not kid ourselves, that since a major reason for obesity is people using food (especially junk food) to self-medicate, a good and major reason why a lot of these women BECAME fat was to heal a 'broken heart' .. which was really a 'broken ego', in these cases.

[Eurosabra]

The answer is simple, "all cats are gray at night." I'm a childhood friend of Paul Janka's and I have learned game with him, Ross Jeffries, Style, and Mystery, and I have become an expert at picking up women supposedly in "my league." While it has been an illuminating experience to note the vivacity, intelligence, and wit of women who learned not to limit their brains' engagement with the world because of their allegedly-inferior bodies, and to learn that "sex is easy, love is hard", there is STILL a qualitative difference in being accepted by a stereotypically-attractive woman and a woman tout court. This goes beyond to the status-symbol element of being seen with a stereotypically-attractive woman as a form of social signaling, and intrudes into a gray area that Roissy is willing to name, namely the sensual/sexual experience benefits of sex with someone who can function as a satisfying sex object. I've lived the outer limits of a non-objectifying, consent-based, egalitarian sexuality, and it seems to me to be the pale echo of raw-dogging Beautiful People sex, however technically competent it was and however addictive it became, however precise my fine-tuning of the fireworks and the tactile awesomeness of the experience as a whole. Indeed, while not willing to go to the extremes of Eivind "Rape is Equality" Berge, I would argue that the only men who experience REAL sexual agency are those who choose their partners from among stereotypically-attractive women. The rest of us are inducing multiple orgasms in a bunch of the personality-compatible 2nd best...