Overgaming

This is not a PUA blog. To learn PUA, read Heartiste, and then practice on actual women, not this blog.

But some people have partially misinterpreted my observations on passing shit tests, so, clarifying.

I depict shit tests as tough, deadly, scary, threatening, and vital to pass, because they are. But though a cat will be bored if it manages to catch a cat toy, it will also be bored if it seems there is absolutely no chance of catching the cat toy.

The girl thinks she wants to enslave you, wants to dominate you. In a sense she does want those things, but if she were to actually get them, would lose interest. But at the same time you let her eventually earn the sight of soft vulnerable marshmallow inner core under that solid stone cold exterior – alpha badboy with a touch of provider beta. You need to let her win a little bit, or to think she might win a little bit. But not too much.

You are far more likely to err on the side of undergaming than overgaming. I play a very bad man, and I still regularly err by undergaming, and am endlessly astonished at the ways in which my mistreatment of women is rewarded. But zero vulnerability, zero betabucks provider, does not work long term either.

Do not take this as me telling you it is OK to be a whimpering beta provider. It is not. That tactic seriously fails to work. Been there, done that, got burned. Don’t be a nice guy. Be a bad boy. But while being a bad boy, let them see the occasional hint of a heart of gold. Just the occasional piece of niceness.

Ideally, of course, the man and the woman perform their biblical roles. The woman honors and obeys, the man loves and cherishes. And I suppose that if you got one hundred percent honor and obedience, it would then be safe to give one hundred percent loving and cherishing. But if you only get eighty percent honor and obedience, need to provide rather less than eighty percent loving and cherishing. Keep her on her toes.

Here ends PUA advice. Back to your regularly scheduled political posts.

168 Responses to “Overgaming”

  1. […] Overgaming […]

  2. Simon says:

    Been there, got that hat unfortunately. Came from background of being “OK” with women (but self-perceived as awful), discovered game, decided I needed to fully reprogram myself, got lots of women – including the one I’ve been most happiest with – and then drove her mad by never giving even 1% of beta, eventually it broke down. I suspect I’m not alone in this.

    Problem is, most guys seeking game advice are already a bit socially broken or maladjusted. Thus, they take the advice too literally, can’t understand nuance.

    Hopefully this post sets them straight, but I feel it unlikely.

    • simplyconnected says:

      > most guys seeking game advice are already a bit socially broken or maladjusted

      Jim always gives the example of Feynman. He needed game but didn’t seem broken or socially maladjusted.

      Anyone who has his house in order but bought the normie fantasy needs game.

    • jim says:

      Rather, the problem is that sex and the mating dance predates speech, and is controlled by a part of us far older and more powerful than the part of us that makes up stories about what we are doing and why we are doing it, thus to communicate about it in blogs is difficult and apt to result in miscommunication. People are not doing what they think they are doing, still less what they say they did.

      • simplyconnected says:

        Heard it said that the brain operates on a need to know basis.

        Funny how for example erection happens involuntarily, perhaps an indication that your brain considers reproduction far too important to be left up to you.

        • peppermint says:

          Arousal and anger are sort of voluntary, erections and angryface aren’t. Breathing is sort of voluntary because the consciousness needs to provide hints on when it’s possible or desirable to breathe. Heartbeats are mostly involuntary because they must happen regularly and there’s no reason the consciousness needs them now instead of a millisecond ago or a millisecond later, but you can configure them a little and spiders use them.

  3. daniel says:

    >I play a very bad man, and I still regularly err by undergaming, and am endlessly astonished at the ways in which my mistreatment of women is rewarded.
    Could you share some examples of both?

  4. Glenfilthie says:

    Or ya can shell out a few bucks and go get laid at a reputable whore house and dispense with the games of children. Children, by the way, that probably live in ghettos and trailer parks.

    Good lord, what a fugged up generation. The divorce rate is approaching – what? 40% now? Women instigate 80% of those. Of that 80%, 50% of that is due to crap like this.

    Be yourself. Work hard, be virtuous, don’t take shit and don’t give it. Do that, and the women will come to you. We are talking quality here too, with warm attractive women… not the bubblegummers, tire biters, and squaws that spread there legs for posturing twerps. I had my choice of such women in high school and just picked the one whose philosophy matched mine, and haven’t looked back.

    Copping out and being a gamer and a fake is easy, fellas. Being the real deal is a great deal harder, but you have to be smart enough to see that quality trumps quantity every time.

    I will now retreat amidst a hail of rotten fruits and feces, flung by cellar dwelling incels and soboys.

    • jim says:

      > Or ya can shell out a few bucks and go get laid at a reputable whore house

      The trouble with whores is that you know she has just had sex with another man before you, and will shortly have sex with another man after you, which is deeply emasculating.

      > Do that, and the women will come to you

      I hear a virgin speaking. Men must pursue. Women do not come to men. The form of the dance is pursuit and predation, conquest and surrender. Supreme Gentleman Elliot Rodger thought that being a gentleman, having an expensive car, and nice clothes would cause women to come to him. They did not. He eventually shot a bunch of people, and committed suicide.

      If someone claims “Do so and so, and you can catch a girl”, perhaps it has worked for him.

      If someone claims “Do so and so, and girls will come to you”, he is fantasizing.

      • Dave says:

        > The trouble with whores is …

        The trouble with the first world is that it’s illegal to rent a woman and impossible to own one. In the third world you can do either if you have money. A virgin daughter of a whore in Angeles City could give you children that are 3/4 white, and if you marry your daughters to white men, your grandchildren will be 7/8. If you can afford IVF, donor eggs, and Caesarean delivery, any Asian girl can give you babies that are 100% white.

        Jim, I’m sure you’ve met white guys in SE Asia who got tired of whoring, found a nice local girl, and started a family. How’s that working out for them?

        • jim says:

          Works pretty good, with due care.

          But cucks going to cuck out, irrespective of the girl’s race, and irrespective of hostile outside forces. The charismatic man does what he does, and people get out his way. The thing is, we used to have a deal where beta males got girls and now they don’t. Not here, and not in Asia. But it is a whole lot easier in Asia, because the external threat and external attack is less.

          Yes, Asia way easier. But Asian women are still women, and controls on women have collapsed in Asia also. Hence the Asian collapse in fertility.

        • Dave says:

          It sucks not to have a support network, but better no network than a network that actively undermines you.

      • Ron says:

        Ironically, if Supreme Gentleman Elliot Rodger had not offed himself, he’d be getting bags of naked selfies of fertile young women. Literally.

      • Glenfilthie says:

        I hear the bluster of the boaster busted.

        I do not advocate the services of the prostitute except as an alternate to pointless childish head games with childish women.

        I do not accept Elliot Roger or Kathy Forth as a sound basis for your ideas about the nature of men and women. They were loons with serious mental issues. Men are nothing without virtue, and women know that. That’s why everyone laughed at Roosh the Doosh when some cunned stunt threw a beer at him in the bar, and all he could do was sputter about lawsuits for assault. That’s why we all laughed at Ghomeshi and Weinstein as their feral women unpersoned them hauled them off to Pervert Island.

        I’ll give ya part marks: men must pursue. But he must show judgement and discernment in pursuing the right things. PUA is nothing more than a diseased byproduct of feminism. It’s driven by the shittiest aspects of the modern North American woman, and it’s producing unhappy, shitty men.

        I would recommend young men would be better served by a knowledge of classical stoicism and proper Christian principles than the shithouse understanding of Game. What these shysters call ‘Game’ is nothing more than elementary forms of flirting. It works too, I’ve seen the chads sweeping the bar flies and lounge lizards off their feet. By the time theryre 50 they are bald, fat and bitter. And single, without so much as a cat for company.

        Real men are playing for the long term. They’re taking good women off the market while you teach these kids everything they need to know about seducing tire biters. All I’m saying is that there is no easy way out. Good women know what they’re worth. Good men do too. Being a good man is hard work, but it requires patience, investment and sacrifice… which are things stupid people typically have problems with.

        • jim says:

          Game is many things, but a large part of it is understanding how women react to stimuli – something that women do not know.

          You are reporting a world in which “good men” – blue pilled betas – are marrying young.

          Obviously that is not what is happening. Blue pilled betas marry the women that have hit the wall and fallen off the bottom of the player’s booty call list.

          • Glenfilthie says:

            Women don’t understand stimulus and response, Jim?

            Hmmmmmmm. They’ve taken over the institutions that made us great. They’re running them into the ground right under the noses of patriarchs, and made crime thinkers out of those that notice. When they get spanked or corrected they lash out using other men to do their dirty work. If you’ve been watching the MeToo thing, you will see that a lot of the men being exiled and hurled into the void for sexual misconduct – are former loud mouthed feminists and liberal mouthpieces. The women responsible know exactly how to manipulate and deceive men and themselves. Like the PUA, they are looking for a fast and easy way to happiness, only they are doing it by using their vaginas as weapons rather than doing any work.

            I speak from a world where classical marriage still works, just as it has for 250,000 years. We watch alpha poseurs like Roosh and Ghomeshi torn to shreds by crazed cunned stunts and laugh as they lecture the rest of us on how to handle women.

            We’re classically successful men that never needed Game because we were smart enough to see that the women that play aren’t worth having. I look at the PUA’s with the same contempt as feminists. They are walking their followers into a world of hurt the same way feminists are led by pretty lies.

            • You're a Mouthbreathing Moron says:

              Your children are not your own.

            • jim says:

              “Classically successful men” (the men that women supposedly want according to the blue pill) do not score, except they do what Feynman did and what I am doing. Observe the age at which their wives condescended to get married.

              Observed outcome is that “classically successful men” marry reamed out sluts who have fallen off the cock carousel after hitting the wall around the age of thirty or so

              If these were good women, rather than worn out sluts who no longer get invited to the party, would have married when they entered their hottest years, not when they hit the wall. Good women get married when they approach their hottest years.

              Age of wife at marriage tells us that “classically successful men” are getting someone else’s used condom.

              Roger Elliot was rich, reasonably good looking, a gentleman, drove a BMW, dressed well. Never kissed a woman, utterly invisible to women.

              If there was in the universe one woman who behaves as the blue pill says women behave, Feynman would not have needed to learn game, Brad Pitt’s marriage would have worked, and Einstein would not have wound up married to Stalin’s KGB.

          • javier says:

            “Game only works on bad women” is a sour grapes excuse. He cannot get women, so they must not be worth having.

            The problem I see is there are plenty of exploitative PUAs who use sales and marketing techniques to sell snake oil to desperate losers. But in critiquing them, people like Glenfilthie offer no alternative than to backslide into beta blue-pill dogma. It’s not productive.

            If all you learn from game is to stand up to women and not worship them, you are ahead of 50% of guys. If you learn to approach and make the first move, you are ahead of 80%. That alone makes game worthy of study.

        • javier says:

          Standard NAWALT pedestalizer.

      • Hark Christendom Rock says:

        lel

        It’s absolutely true

        The boomer stands perfectly independent of the uhpression of his long-dead parents and utterly faultless for the depraved state of anyone that came after

        It must be incomparably blissful, such complete innocent guiltlessness

    • alf says:

      Your advice sounds as hollow as Merkel’s speeches on the need to be tough on immigration.

    • peppermint says:

      Yes, women key in on men who have the respect of other men or a good excuse for not yet having it.

      But there are a lot of intelligent well-respected young men without a woman, or with an unhappy woman, because they don’t understand that women need to be Gamed.

      These men are Jim’s potential audience, and helping a man get a wife puts him forever in your debt. With the economy looking up, men should be looking for wives now.

      • glosoli says:

        Be aware that a recession is incipient, global, deep, long-lasting.
        You hear maybe a year tops before America is dragged down by a strong dollar. Then ruined by its trade and budget deficits. The left wins eventually, US goes broke.

        • peppermint says:

          No. The left only won because the pre-Boomers, the men in The Twilight Zone, were pussies, who raised Boomer cucks for children, who raised degenerates like me.

          The Reagan Revolution failed because, this wasn’t planned by the left, everyone started going to college because of the civil rights, which temporarily raised the status of professors.

          Look at the young men of today and what they talk about.

          They are not cucks. They do not hate capitalism and the concept of marriage and responsibility.

          The 20c was an interregnum in which a Joymop-Jew alliance achieved power between the aftermath of the World War and the Migrant Crisis.

          • Yara says:

            Not so. The “Reagan Revolution” failed because https://youtube.com/watch?v=NR3RqMMIwD4

            • peppermint says:

              pinko

                • peppermint says:

                  Ronald Reagan the man was kind of a cuck. The Reagan Revolution wasn’t about him personally and wasn’t subverted bankers but failed because of the inflated power of people who love countersignaling bankers throughout the 90s and 00s

                • Yara says:

                  Signaling, countersignaling, and virtue signaling are forms of ideological posturing, the domain of the powerless. When you look at an ideologue, you are looking at a tool to be used and eventually discarded. Our rulers are not ignorant, stupid, and insane, they are exceedingly knowledgeable, cunning, and evil.

                • Yara says:

                  Or maybe, depending on your point of view, not evil, but merely hypocritical.

            • R7 Rocket says:

              @Yara

              The Deep State caught on video!

      • Glenfilthie says:

        Young, intelligent men, P-mint? Who, exactly? Show me one?

        Game is a scam. The only ones being gamed are the cellar dwelling millennials that are the emotional wreckage left by new age feminism. If you listen to these PUA’s you’ll end up as just another pony on some bint’s ‘cock carousel’. I suppose that’s great if that’s all you want.

        But for real men in real relationships that go beyond dicking bimbos at the bar, real life rears it’s ugly head: how do you handle marital spats? Money management? Division of household chores? What do you do when your kid starts fucking up his or her life with drugs, or pozzed notions of reality?

        I’m caught square in the middle of generational politics. I’m old enough to see and maybe sympathize with boomers that tried to steer their kids right and failed. I get gobbec on by contemptuous youngsters and millennials that have all the answers and know it all. They ignore me the same way I ignored my elders.

        I forgive you. It’s totally cool because there was a time I would have been gulled by this crap too. There’s a maelstrom of external forces hammering away at today’s young men and they are swept away by it, unable to see that the real battle needs to be fought within themselves.

        Good men don’t have to game anyone. Good men become good by conquering their inner demons, not by feeding them.

        • peppermint says:

          did you just ask me for a list of single men with above average income? Ask DoubleClick lol

        • Contaminated NEET says:

          >Who, exactly? Show me one?

          Fuck that. It’s lose-lose. P-mint said there are young, successful, intelligent men with no women. A man without a woman is a loser. Any example he provides will therefore be a loser, and you will just say he isn’t really successful or intelligent (he’s not a “real man,” not like you). Your ridiculous tautology will mostly work, because we are so strongly programmed to view any man without a woman as a loser.

          >youngsters and millennials that have all the answers
          You’re the one constantly giving all the advice.

          >I forgive you.
          I won’t forgive you until you’re fertilizing crops.

          • Glenfilthie says:

            That’s because a man without a woman, 9 times out of 10, IS a loser. I stand by what I said; P-Mint cannot back up his statement and nor can you. Successful men have no problem with women.

            That’s the other thing that blows me away – all these PUA types talk about getting laid as if it’s something difficult, or it’s some kind of accomplishment. These days most women will drop their drawers at the drop of a hat. Even a tool like you should have no trouble getting his ashes hauled.

            The pretty, smart women out there aren’t going to touch angry, bitter guys like you with a ten foot pole, and that’s because they’re paired up with men like me. I’d feel sorry for ya kid, but – enjoy that misery and loneliness, I guess. You earned it.

            • Steve Johnson says:

              >Successful men have no problem with women.

              Raising a daughter who turns out to be a dyke feminist qualifies as a “problem”.

              • Glenfilthie says:

                Wasn’t my doing, and now that she’s an adult she’s not my problem. At some point kids have to assume responsibility for themselves, their actions, and the consequences. There’s a lot of young men having problems with that these days too.

                Not naming any names or pointing any fingers of course. 😉

                • glosoli says:

                  Sad boomer, hence takes out his sadness on young men, which is very sad.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  >Wasn’t my doing, and now that she’s an adult she’s not my problem. At some point kids have to assume responsibility for themselves, their actions, and the consequences. There’s a lot of young men having problems with that these days too.

                  Yes, it was your doing and your fault and she’s your only child so she’s exactly your problem.

                  You write constantly about how if you’re childless and unmarried you’re some kind of loser but you’re even worse off than that. You’ll have the same number of grandchildren as a childless man – zero and you somehow think that you did everything right and that you’re in a position to give advice. You didn’t. You’re not.

                  You – like every other fuckup who doesn’t take responsibility for his life – think you just got “unlucky” and it could happen to anyone. Jim is helpfully pointing out your mistakes and you can’t let yourself see it because it would mean seeing all the things you did wrong to ruin your life and your daughter’s life. Sucks to be you.

                • Glenfilthie says:

                  Whatever. Boys, when you grow up, and get put through the wringer as I have, you learn a little bit about yourself and others.

                  I know I’m right about this. I can tell because you boys respond to me the exact same way a bull dyke feminist reacts when some crime thinker pops her narrative. Rage. Insult. Cognitive dissonance. And I can tell you aren’t happy, with the world or with yourselves. Can’t say I blame ya on that score. Guess you’ll just learn the hard way like I did.

                • Glenfilthie says:

                  Whatever. Boys, when you grow up, and get put through the wringer as I have, you learn a little bit about yourself and others.

                  I know I’m right about this. I can tell because you boys respond to me the exact same way a bull dyke feminist reacts when some crime thinker pops her narrative. Rage. Insult. Cognitive dissonance. And I can tell you aren’t happy, with the world or with yourselves. Can’t say I blame ya on that score. Guess you’ll just learn the hard way like I did.

            • jim says:

              > That’s because a man without a woman, 9 times out of 10 IS a loser.

              Fact is, most women are not marrying until they hit the wall.

              So, we have a suspiciously large number of “losers”

              Eight out of ten men don’t have a woman, or if they do have a woman, she is someone else’s discarded leftovers, some woman who was unceremoniously kicked off the cock carousel because she hit the wall at age thirty, and a lot of those men are hard working talented men with good jobs: soldiers, war heroes, successful businessmen. All losers?

              • Glenfilthie says:

                8 out of 10? I won’t believe that.

                A more realistic number would be about half that, maybe. And military service is a bear on marriage as are some other careers and professions, so factor them out. What are we down to now? Two in ten? One?

              • javier says:

                I went to a wedding recently. The groom makes six figures, owns a house, is good looking and outgoing. The wife was an absolute hambeast. His friends all make similar money and had similar fat, ugly women, or no women at all. The worse you could say about these guys is they are somewhat dorky. If these guys were “losers” what chance do any normal guys have?

                I make less money than most of these guys, do not own a house, am overweight and balding, yet my girl is thin and cute, and treats me like a king. What could possibly be the difference between me and them?

                According to Glenfilthie, my girl must be a trash woman while these fat ugly hogs are the real prize. Get real. These guys desperately need game. Just teaching guys they are *allowed* to have standards, and to reject the fatties and the single moms outright would massively improve society.

                • jim says:

                  > The groom makes six figures, owns a house, is good looking and outgoing. The wife was an absolute hambeast.

                  Exactly so. If the way to get a woman is to be a good man, if women are attracted to good men, why do I see so many good men marrying women who got dumped off the cock carousel after they hit the wall?

                  Playing the bad boy works. Being a nice guy fails catastrophically, being a good man fails catastrophically – and I know it because I see so many nice guys, handsomer than me, richer than me, a great deal younger than me, and all that, failing catastrophically.

            • R7 Rocket says:

              @Glenfilthie

              You know what’s more pathetic than a gamma male?

              A Boomer Gamma Male.

        • Theshadowedknight says:

          I have watched plenty of good men in the Marines destroyed because of women, who had the help of dirtbags like you who blamed every failure of marriage on the men. Good men who had the respect of their peers and their women abandoned them, because of shit advice from things like you, and then got kicked while they are down because your kind want to prove how superior you are.

          You are not the wise elder. To a fool, time brings only age. Your parental failure proves that you were worthless.

          • Glenfilthie says:

            Name one? Guys like me don’t kick Marines or men down on their luck. But – nice try.

            You are right, I am no whiz kid. All I know is that ya can’t push up on a rope, shit rolls downhill, and if you treat women like shit, they’re going to reciprocate. I’ve not had a problem with shitty women in ages because I take pains to exclude them from my life. I get along swimmingly with bright, good looking and good humoured women every day, along with the dumpy homely ones too.

            The manosphere started off well when they advocated the manly virtues like fitness, self improvement and maintaining happiness in the face of adversity. The man that develops those virtues is a chick magnet. So much so that he will have to show judgement and discernment because although good women will want to take him off the market, the tirebiters will as well. And unfortunately that leaves the PUA’s with what’s left over. I have sympathy for you cellar dwellers, MGTOW’s and incels – who wants to take up with bubble-gummers and tirebiters – but you aren’t going to better your lot by aping the PUA’s. At best you’ll be a pathetic parody of the man you want to be.

            Cut the bullshit. Stop with the excuses. Do the work and BE a better man. Do that, and your problems with women will take care of themselves.

            • Bc@yahoo.net says:

              >Cut the bullshit. Stop with the excuses. Do the work and BE a better man. Do that, and your problems with women will take care of themselves.

              A good friend of mine is a natural with women. Tall, charismatic, charming, slept with a good hundred women or so. In his mid 30s he decided to settle down. The only woman wanting to start families he could find had as already hit the wall. He tried for several years to have kids with one such woman and she could no longer conceive. He’s now kind of resigned to being sudo married but never having kids.

              Another friend of mine has advanced degrees, is married a well educated woman who knows it’s high status not to have children so they’re childless as they head into thier 40s.

              A 3ed friend of mine dropped out and became a bum. In and out of jail, drinks all the time. Violent, thuggish and a general loser. No man has respect for him. He 7 kids with 4 different women. Being a better man is not conducive to getting women to have children.

              Family formation is largely impossible unless you snag a near virgin today and having kids is also quite unlikely without acting like a criminal.

            • jim says:

              > if you treat women like shit, they’re going to reciprocate

              You clearly lack experience with women.

              Treat them mean to keep them keen.

              That women find apes sexually attractive, and men do not indicates that that the women that present day women are descended from have not been making sexual choices since the time that we looked like gorrillas.

              Female sexual and reproductive choices are so spectacularly wicked and incompetent, that it is clear that they have not been subject to natural selection for competence in making sexual choices for a very long time.

              Looks like that populations that allowed female mate choice failed to have descendants, that peoples that allow female mate choice vanish.

              Unrestrained female choice results in the lek mating pattern, with the result that males fail to invest in posterity or children, and are disinclined to defend their land or their people, thus, vanish.

              • Glenfilthie says:

                I think your experience is limited to high school bubble-gummers and trailer park tire biters. Seriously,the only women that I ever met that behaved like the hags you describe were high school cheerleaders and the cock teasers that broke hearts for fun. I laughed like hell at the idiots that chased them. I was smarter than that I suppose. I grew up.

                I take myself, my values, and my ambitions seriously. I take marriage seriously too. If I could not trust it or rely on it, I would not fuck it. I don’t have to worry about red pills, blue pills, or batshit crazy women as a result. Life is simple, wholesome and good if you do the work to keep it that way.

                • jim says:

                  I say I know women, and you are out of touch.

                  And you say you know women and I am out of touch.

                  But if your account of women was accurate, we would see women getting married a good deal earlier.

                  If your account of women was accurate, Jian Ghomeshi would not be kicking movie stars out of his bed.

                  If your account of women was accurate Feynman would never have had to learn game

                  If your account of women was accurate Brad Pitt’s marriage would have gone OK.

                  All women are as I describe them, every single one. All Women Are Like That.

                • alf says:

                  It is about young, pretty and nubile girls. You know, the kind of girls that for some inexplicable reason never talk to you longer than 1 minute, if even that. Almost like they purposefully avoid you.

                  Of course, ugly women wished they could behave like those pretty girls, but beggars can’t be choosers.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  Cheerleaders… Smarter than them… I’M LAUGHING, GUYS, LOOK, I AM LAUGHING BECAUSE I AM SO MUCH BETTER THAN YOU!

                  You are just a sad nerd trapped in high school, hating on Chad because you were probably a pussy back then, and you never got past it. Shit, that explains so much about your posts. The nerd version of the high school jock that gets fixated on past glory, but you were a bitch and the cute girls would not look at you.

                • Glenfilthie says:

                  Why would they marry earlier, Jim? Married to what? Half your fan boys still live with mom and dad. Maybe they don’t marry because you would treat them like shit?

                  And really – Ghomeshi? Brad Pitt? You’re basing your models of human behaviour on Hollywood morons? And what you see of that is filtered through leftist tabloid rag sheets?

                  Well, I guess ya got me beat, Jim! All it takes to revive a failing marriage is to grab the bitch by the pussy, rail her up the pooper, crap in the fish tank and then wipe your ass on the drapes because they dig bad boys.

                  If you were right Jim, everyone would be doing that, marriage rates would explode and divorce rates would dive. If you were right, Ghomeshi and Weinstein wouldn’t have been hauled off to pervert island, and your fan boys here would be rolling in poon.

                • Eli says:

                  I rarely intervene, but Glenfilthie, you seriously are a cuck, dude.

                  There is nothing wrong with children living with their parents, as long as there is mutual respect between the members. Strong familiar support networks are the basis of any functional, healthy society. The fact that you look down upon it shows how strongly cucked you are.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  >If you were right Jim, everyone would be doing that, marriage rates would explode and divorce rates would dive. If you were right, Ghomeshi and Weinstein wouldn’t have been hauled off to pervert island, and your fan boys here would be rolling in poon.

                  If you were right you wouldn’t have only one daughter and she wouldn’t have turned out to be a fucked up genetic dead end.

                • Glenfilthie says:

                  LOL. 🙂

                  The difference between you and my daughter, outside of reproductive plumbing – is purely conversational. If you somehow do manage to reproduce, the idiocracy will be the only beneficiary.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  The “LOL,” the emojis, insults, the psychological projection of rage and cognitive dissonance upon us. That is the sign of a man desperately trying to keep the mental pain at bay. We are pulling you out, clinically dissecting your attitudes. Only one man here is showing an emotional response, and we can see who it is. You let too much slip, and now we know what you are. You failed, and not only do we know it, but we know you know it, even if you do not know you know it, so we have the edge in knowing.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  TL;DR: Gotcha, bitch!

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @Glenfilthie

                  “I take myself, my values, and my ambitions seriously. I take marriage seriously too.”

                  Boomerfilthie was so serious that he was just fine and dandy with No-Fault Divorce, Alimony and Childamony.

                  He even was cool with failing to conserve the girl’s bathroom!

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @theShadowedKnight

                  “Cheerleaders… Smarter than them… I’M LAUGHING, GUYS, LOOK, I AM LAUGHING BECAUSE I AM SO MUCH BETTER THAN YOU!”

                  Boomer gammas are really the worst of gamma males!

              • simplyconnected says:

                > That women find apes sexually attractive, and men do not indicates that […] women have not been making sexual choices since the time that we looked like gorillas.

                This is deep stuff. Will you consider a post on this topic?

                Seems like a nasty bind: if given choice, civilization disappears, if not given choice, stuck with the female preferences of apes..

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  It neatly resolves itself because women will bind to their first man and they’re sensitive to social pressure. Just have to control them until marriage and not allow your culture to encourage women’s worst tendencies.

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  That whole repetitive back and forth was mind numbingly boring, and then out of fucking nowhere Jim drops that bomb.

                  Second the motion; let’s see a post specifically regarding women’s terrible decision making capabilities.

                • jim says:

                  Which of my bombs was “that bomb”?

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @jim

                  “Which of my bombs was “that bomb”?”

                  That women are still attracted to apes, thus their incompetent and evil mate choices.

                  A good topic for a future blog post.

                • jim says:

                  Nah.

                  I was thinking of this:

                • simplyconnected says:

                  > Nah. I was thinking of this:

                  But in that example she’s laughing at the absurd situation, whereas in the japanese case they actually call the gorilla “handsome man”.

                  There was some study measuring actual (not just self reported) arousal, women were aroused even watching monkeys mate. Can’t remember the source..

                • jim says:

                  > But in that example she’s laughing at the absurd situation,

                  I know female sexual arousal when I see it.

                • Honest Abe says:

                  » I feel, um, I’m sort of…um, vibrating…from head to foot, really. And I think in a sort of overwhelmed joyful sense sort of bursting into tears now and then but I think it’s just the, the RAW THRILL of experiencing that which I never could have, FATHOMED and it happened SO FAST and he is SO UNBELIEVABLY STRONG.

                  Have you ever seen a woman so aroused she can hardly keep her eyes from turning in on themselves?

                  https://i.imgur.com/8WfJRPH.png

                  Now you have.

                • Roberto says:

                  Great observation (re: female preference has been rendered irrelevant from ape-times onward, thus females still desire apes); definitely thread-worthy.

                • simplyconnected says:

                  > I feel, um, I’m sort of…um, vibrating…from head to foot

                  > I know female sexual arousal when I see it.

                  I see the blushing, ecstatic laughter, the quote leaves no doubt.

                  I can imagine no man ever in the analogous situation.

                • javier says:

                  There was a study where they showed people porn and hooked up devices to their genitals to measure their arousal. They also had them fill out a survey to report their sexuality and how aroused they felt by the images. They were shown straight sex, both types of gay sex, and monkey sex.

                  The men were found to be pretty honest. The straight men were turned on by straight and lesbian sex. The gay men were turned on by the gay sex. Their machine results matched up to their survey; i.e. no straight guys were found to be secretly gay.

                  The women were total liars. They all reported not being turned on by anything, but they all were turned on by everything. ALL THE PORN. Straight, lesbian, didn’t matter. The woman’s state preference didn’t matter. They were aroused by all of it, even the monkey sex.

                  Female sexuality is mostly a lie. There are straight men and gay men, but women will just fuck. That’s just what they do.

            • Theshadowedknight says:

              Name one? Are you fucking retarded? Dox my friends to make a point to you? How the fuck does someone as ignorant of the way the internet works even operate a comment box?

              I treat women like shit and they like me for it. I never had as many women problems as when I tried to be nice, kind, and all that shit. Then I got sick of the bullshit, read up on game, and started being an asshole. When I was nice, I got told that I was such a nice guy and people walked over me and stabbed me in the back. Now they complain that I am an asshole, but I live in a world of smiling, friendly people, because no one fucks with me.

              You are old and irrelevant; a remnant of a time when things were less fucked up, and yet you still failed. Why the fuck would I take the advice of a boomer who crashed and burned on easy mode?

              • Glenfilthie says:

                for a fella that sets women afire with desire – you are one angry and unhappy and bitter fella.

                But as for me, married 35 years, own my own home, no debt, motorcycle, RV, both paid off – yeah, whadda I know?

                My only regret in life is my angry and bitter lesbian daughter. She is mad at the world too,and sounds just like you. When I tell kids like you they aren’t living right the response is always rage… probably because on some level they know I am right.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  I never said I am all that, but I was right about you. Figured so, but your response seals it.

                  No one will give a shit about your nice bike or the house you paid off. Family is what really matters, and you come at me with a consumerist success story. “Yeah, I got all this nice shit but my family line dies with me because I fucked up raising my little girl,” is a sad testament to a supposedly successful life.

                  Bitter and unhappy is exactly what you are feeling. You never got over your bitterness over your treatment as a young man and it poisoned you. Then here you are in your 50s or 60s with no grandchildren. Would you trade that RV or that motorcycle for a grandson or granddaughter? Possessions do not make you happy, and I bet you know that at some level.

                • jim says:

                  Great, you have a motorcycle, but I have grandchildren.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  This is sounding more and more like a troll. Do you at least have more than one child?

                • Glenfilthie says:

                  If some some random internet idiot wants to think I am a failure because my daughter is, I suppose there is no harm in it. Your response speaks volumes too. For me this is just some fun with fucktards. But – you have skin in this. For you there’s ego in it too and by the way you’re talking, you’ve won battles and lost wars and can’t figure out why.

                  Live and learn boys – if you can.

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  Glenfilthie, it is time to stop posting.

                  I think Game is a distraction. I think it is basically snake oil because the people who seek it are too inept to exploit it. But that is user error. It does work as intended when operated properly.

                  Regardless, I cannot help but point and laugh at your deplorable display. It was like you were reading from the Boomer classic “How to Ruin Literally Anything You Attempt.” You expound upon straight up fedora doffing buggery, belly patting wisdom nuggets, and ostensibly portentous “you’ll see me laddy” vagueries. I would belie

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  ve you are a troll if not for the lesbian daughter bit. Now I believe you are real regardless of any evidence that may come to light purely for the delicious mental image of some Boomer and his part time employed wife consistently talking around their muff munching daughter while they take the ol’ RV to Sturgis or Branson (either would be perfect). You failed in evolutionary terms. That has to weigh heavy. Maybe listen to some CCR and drink some prune juice about it.

                • Glenfilthie says:

                  To me this is just a social science discussion, so I will leave this here and leave it at that.

                  I know my comments hurt – it’s not what a good young man wants to hear when he’s been put through the wringer by a four star modern femcunt. When you hear that you could have handled things better and didn’t, it makes you mad and you want to lash out – hence the cheap shots at me through my daughter. Let’s talk about that, boys, because if any of you ever become fathers yourselves, you will run into the exact same thing if you have kids of your own: the shitlib femcunt poz is out there. Your kids will get indoctrinated at school and from their classmates in it. There are jurisdictions out there where perversion, homosexuality and all the usual bullshit will be pushed at your kids and you WILL be prosecuted if you resist. As a father progs and shitlibs will try to undermine you and have the force of law behind them when they do it. I know this because I was threatened with family and social services when I dared to spank my daughter for behavioural issues at school. She was misbehaving, she was failing, and the idiot she had for a teacher (an elderly cat lady) was telling me the kid should be put in a special ed program. Everyone was utterly shocked when, after her spanking – her behavioural and scholastic problems mysteriously disappeared and she started doing well. But I was not vindicated or forgiven and nor will you be if you try to discipline your own children. Word went out amongst the progs at her school and in my family that I was a child abuser. The same will happen to you if you try it – count on it. I disciplined my daughter, I held her to standards when everyone else made excuses for her despicable conduct, but by God, while that rancid brat lived under my roof, she got good marks and kept her nose clean. Could I have done more? Maybe, maybe not. I blamed myself for years afterward so nothing you guys say can hurt my feelings, trust me. When your kids fail, motorcycles, guns, dogs and toys are all you got and I am deeply thankful for mine. I would trade all those things and my left nut to see my daughter succeed. Any father would. But that young woman is what she is.

                  I’ll say this also: the PUA/Alpha/chad bullshit is going to have social consequences too. In your zeal to ‘stick it to the woman’ with a quick pump n’ dump and on to the next one (a la Jian Ghomeshi) – well, that is going to have social costs too if misapplied. Take a good, decent young lady (maybe your daughter?) and watch her get pumped and dumped by a series of deceitful, antisocial chads – what’s going to happen to her? I submit that after a few of those, you’ll have a full blown radical femcunt, man jaw, lesbian man hating shitlib on your hands, preaching hatred of men. They will have grounds for that hatred too, and they will act on it as they did with Ghomeshi, Weinstein and the rest. Heard recently that Weinstein is now looking at jail time if the cankles he boinked get the best of him in court. It’ll serve that jew bastid right too.

                  No, not all women are like that. Some women are especially rancid and shitty. There is an above average chance that one of you may run into one at some point in your life. I hate to say it, but my daughter is just such a woman. If you have a lot of kids, chances are one or more of yours will be too. There’s no easy answers. If straight discipline worked, my daughter would not be the rabid scoundrel she is.

                  That’s my story, that’s why I see things the way I do; in contrast to my daughter is my wife. She is not rug that I have to beat on a regular basis, she tried and lost to save her daughter in her way too and she blames herself for our circumstances too.

                  ‘Do unto others’ is a far better creed than shithouse Game as far as I am concerned. Maybe one day maturity and time will allow my daughter to deal with her demons and failures and she’ll fly right and we will patch things up. Maybe not. I’ve done all I can, for me, my heart now is to the winds, and my soul to its Maker.

                  Take care of yourselves boys. And take care of your women if you can.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @Glenfilthie

                  “When your kids fail, motorcycles, guns, dogs and toys are all you got ”

                  You know whats better than motorcycles and guns?

                  Nuclear weapons, and nukes being set off in Cambridge MA, NYC, DC, LA, San Fagsicko, and Chicongo. THAT will take care of the “you WILL be prosecuted for disciplining the kids.” No more centers of power, means no more prosecutions by those centers of power.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  Do motorcycles, guns, dogs and toys fill the hole where your grandchildren should be? Asking for a friend.

                • Yara says:

                  Glenfilthie, perhaps you’re not very smart, but you’re not stupid either. I see you as a man who tried his best in an environment sufficiently hostile that his best wasn’t good enough. You tried corporal discipline and were undermined. You disowned your daughter and ultimately your whole family when she went rogue. That takes guts. Perhaps you shouldn’t have expected a better outcome from college; perhaps you should have had more than one child; perhaps you shouldn’t have mixed genes with a Russian peasant; but you gave it a shot and stuck to your principles. You’re a tragic figure, a man who got it good and hard, far harder than he deserved.

                  Just don’t try to pretend that your Harley can fill the gaping hole where the continuation of your patrilineage should be. I say, give it another shot… or three. It isn’t over ’til they’re throwing dirt in your grave.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Glenfilthie says:

                  >Take a good, decent young lady

                  I think you miss the central point of the redpill with this phrase.

                  Women are not angelic creatures, they at least subconsciously (if not consciously) want to get used as a receptacle by a series of alpha chads when young. The nicer good natured ones are more likely to have thoughts like “if I didn’t have a family it would be fun to go into prostitution” (this is not an uncommon thought among nicer women).

                  The exception are sexually frigid women (who are much much worse because the only interest they will ever have in a man is gold digging him).

            • R7 Rocket says:

              @Glenfilthie

              Go fertilize a crop field, boomer.

              I deliberately ignored boomer advice and as a result, I have no debt and have amassed a small fortune.

              My life would’ve been ruined with student loans and credit cards if I took advice from you boomer dirtbags.

              • Yara says:

                Eh. He grew up in a high-trust America. No one had heard of drugs. Divorce was unknown. There was a high correlation between schooling and education. The newspapers pretty much told the truth. People believed what they saw on the television. The companies really were pretty much responsible citizens. There was a social fabric in the social safety trampoline. Everyone was not yet out to screw everyone else at every opportunity. The Eternal Boomer, in his childlike innocence, still believes that things are just as they were. Maybe that’s better than if they tore it all down and threw it away out of spite.

                • jim says:

                  We boomers demolished Chesterton’s fence, and what was revealed was what Chesterton’s fence had been protecting us from.

                  I come from an enclave out of time, upper class enclave, now long vanished, that was far behind the times, a cultural survival from before World War I, so what was going to come over Chesterton’s fence was not entirely a surprise to me.

                  One generation pretends, but, knowing the reality, keeps unprincipled exceptions in place. The next generation, that is the boomers, takes the pretense seriously, dismantles the unprincipled exceptions. Terrible things ensue, which no one is allowed to notice, because noticing would damage the pretense.

                  And now, people are starting to reconstruct the lost knowledge. It is this knowledge, knowledge of the fallen nature of man, that the Dark Enlightenment is recreating. And this knowledge that Glenfilthie is denying.

                • Just a small thing, Jim. When Boomers were children, they were raised so that eating happens at meals, meals take place at a table, together, at mealtimes, when people are supposed to eat even if they are not hungry and outside mealtimes not eat even if they are hungry, and children eat as much as given, not more, not less. Also, people were not expected to eat too quickly. Children were not allowed to leave the table until father finished eating, so it was better to eat slowly. Nobody really understood why exactly, but now we know it: it is about learning to control hunger signals and as a result not becoming fat.

                  Even though this is something that was not particularly attacked by libs, Boomers tended to be more and more relaxed about such rules for their children. And eventually even for themselves. Waistlines exploded and researchers are scratching their heads why.

                • javier says:

                  Yes, precisely. Glenfilthie keeps saying men just need to find better women; what does he thing we are doing? Game is just an adaptation for a world of feral women. He insists it doesn’t work; as if everyone who tries game doesn’t try state-approved courtship methods first.

                • peppermint says:

                  The problem with Boomers is that they took Descartes seriously.

                  The first problem with Descartes is Plato’s dualism.

                  The second problem is Descartes’ further practical induhvidualism, “I think, therefore, I am” followed by doing the minimum required to not get arrested, and the consequent negative view of authority as restricting the freedom to commit crimes instead of facilitating civilization without which the individual might be able to last for a few years hunting and gathering.

                  Boomers are cancer because Boomers are induhvidualists. Everyone else for all of history has understood that they belong to a nation without which they are nothing (Andrew Anglin just wrote that btw), and ultimately to the Aryan race. Being an induhvidualist is existentially terrifying because individuals die, so Boomers turn to bizarre scifi personal immortality cults. Besides being terrified into madness, induhvidualists are scum, shirking their duty and even betraying their nation and the Aryan race.

    • Nikolai says:

      On the contrary, women divorce their husbands for failing to game them.

      Game works on all women, regardless of class, status, race, education, profession, etc. I know because my girl is a 19 y/o virgin double majoring in stem fields who frequently cooks my meals and bakes me various confectioneries. She’s pretty much the definition of a good woman. Wanna know how I got her? I did what Jim does and acted like a massively overconfident, threatening and offensive jester. Works wonders.

      Being a “gamer” is not all that difficult, but it is significantly harder than being a boomercon. What’s actually difficult is finding a great girl, keeping her and staying out of prison in a world where passing shit tests is oftentimes illegal.

      • Does Game work on depressed women, women who have serious self-worth issues and all that? I mean, the essence of Game tends to be that many women have highly inflated egos due to orbiters and all that, and you cut it down to size. What happens when her ego is already small, hurt and vulnerable? A neg works when she thinks she is beautiful, but when she thinks she looks like shit it could backfire.

        I remember my first girlfriend when I was 19 (so over 20 years ago) and clueless and she was 17. She was beautiful in the sense of naturally pretty face and excellent taste at make-up and clothes. But she was also overweight a bit and tended to be terribly vulnerable and self-hatey over that. In that sort of situation the usual pig and cow jokes I like to hand out in abandon would not have worked. Ultimately I lost her because I was way, waaay too needy and clingy and pedestalizing, but I still think what she needed was not a threatening type but more of a massively overconfident (and of course self-reliant and not needy/clingy) but still relatively kind type.

        Although I suspect that sort of stuff is often a shit test in itself. I mean if you tell a woman she is not too fat for you and she says she still feels too fat for herself that is kind of rebellious. But if that is a shit test, that doesn’t sound like something straightforward to pass.

        • Roberto says:

          “You’re right: some people might mistake you for a runaway hippopotamus. But I certainly would not!”

        • jim says:

          I have never had problems caused by informing women of their defects, even when it results in them bursting into tears.

          You conjecture it would have caused problems. Should have tested this out empirically.

        • Steve Johnson says:

          >Does Game work on depressed women, women who have serious self-worth issues and all that?

          Do women with “serious self-worth issues” actually exist?

          That sounds more like an excuse for women made by people who don’t want to look too closely at women’s actual sexual choices.

          • I am not talking about the types who fuck everybody as a therapy, I am talking about the types who fuck nobody because they are too ashamed of their body to get naked in the first place.

            • jim says:

              Again, not seeing it.

              I see alpha widows – women who once had sex with someone cool and wait thirty years for him to call them back, rejecting all other men as inadequate.

              Don’t see any women failing to have sex because they think themselves inadequate, because they are not. Lots of guys want to bone them, and they know it full well.

  5. Hark Christendom Rock says:

    I think I prefer the woman advice

    Some technical discussion would be interesting too

    Politics, yawn

  6. Wilbur Hassenfus says:

    They want to believe that the dangerous man has a secret sweet vulnerable side, accessible only to them due to the special and unique magic of their special and unique vagina, a vagina like no other vagina.

  7. Simon says:

    Game is being emotionally centred without relying on your woman, and having knowledge of traditional gender roles.

    The alternative is a lifetime of reacting to your wife in order to appear alpha. Which she can see through, as you cannot hide body language. If she hangs around, it is in spite of your trying to appear alpha.

    • jim says:

      Game is the science of charisma.

      In an environment where society gives women superweapons and all the cards, outcome independence is a requirement for charisma, but it is not charisma.

      You have to be coldly indifferent to all the bad things a woman could potentially do to you, but while that is necessary, that is far less than enough.

      • Simon says:

        Studying creativity or intelligence will not make you creative or intelligent.

        • Steve Johnson says:

          Luckily charisma is a set of behaviors and not a capability so studying it can work the way studying other behaviors can work.

          • Simon says:

            Charisma is a capability that expresses a set of behaviours.

            https://youtu.be/fzkBfTfiXS0

            • Steve Johnson says:

              It’s a set of behaviors and behavior can always be imitated and learned.

              That doesn’t mean that someone who studied it will be as good as someone who dedicated his life to practicing and has natural talent.

              • Simon says:

                Imitated charisma is as effective as imitated intelligence.

                • Anonymous 2 says:

                  The secret of success is sincerity. Once you can fake that, you’ve got it made.

              • Oliver Cromwell says:

                The anti-charisma expressed by almost all men today is also in large part learned. It lies on a spectrum like any other trait but men are naturally charismatic the way they are naturally tall and stronger. Most men have been taught to suppress their charisma.

        • jim says:

          Studying chess will make you a good chess player. Studying war will make you good at war. Charisma is somewhat learnable, and improves considerably with practice.

          • Simon says:

            Upon first contact, females read and rank males socio-sexually in ~3 seconds.

            Male/female interaction is largely non-verbal, and largely out of control of both participants.

            She has already decided whether she would let herself be fucked by you.

            Any attempt to appear more charismatic than you are will be read by the female as insecurity.

            Interacting with females is simple, and enjoyable.

            • jim says:

              No, men take three seconds to evaluate a women. Women take a lot longer. I have massive empirical verification of this.

              I also have empirical verification that charisma can be learned, and can be faked. A large part of charisma is the warrior spirit.

              Women can, and often do, dismiss a man as a sexual prospect in three seconds, rendering him permanently invisible, and having been instantly friendzoned, nothing he does is likely to change that – except preselection.

              But to decide she will have sex with you takes a considerably longer. Six to seven hours is the minimum, though it is possible to get her to decide to have sex with you with nothing but internet interaction and massive preselection, as with pop stars. Usually takes a minimum of six or seven hours of personal interaction, or considerably longer through internet interaction. Unless you have attractive characteristics that can be efficiently communicated through Tinder, internet interaction is doubly inefficient because it inherently takes longer, and because you are competing with a thousand other males doing the same thing.

              • Simon says:

                I have empirical verification the charisma cannot be learned, and cannot be faked.

                It is also not a coincidence that Roosh cannot sustain a long-term relationship.

                You cannot fake charisma because body language is largely out of your control. Who you are always shines through. All you’re showing is that you’re not comfortable with who you are, essentially trying too hard. You’re lowering your own status. Men notice it automatically. So do women. To women it is like blood in the water.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  Simon says:

                  >I have empirical verification the charisma cannot be learned, and cannot be faked.

                  At most you have verification that *you* can’t learn or fake charisma – this is basic rules of reasoning.

                  >You cannot fake charisma because body language is largely out of your control. Who you are always shines through. All you’re showing is that you’re not comfortable with who you are, essentially trying too hard. You’re lowering your own status. Men notice it automatically. So do women.

                  Bullshit on all counts:

                  1) You can control your body language
                  2) “Fake it until you make it” has been used successfully lots of times
                  3) Women aren’t some magical intention sensing machines – they’ve got good intuition but study can beat it simply because almost no men will try to mimic high status behavior due to an evolutionary ingrained fear of other men. In modern times that fear is vestigial and women simply don’t have bullshit detectors that work in that environment.

                • jim says:

                  Fake charisma till you make it.

                  Worked for me.

                  One part of charisma is outcome independence – that there is nothing the chick could do to harm you that has you worried (when in reality you are worried)

                  Easy to fake.

                  Another part of charisma is the warrior spirit – that you plan to go ahead with what you are doing, and if anyone gets in your way, you will knock them down and walk over them, or maybe kill them.

                  Easy to fake.

                  Read Heartiste analyzing Trump’s charismatic moves. Then do what Trump does. For example, Trump’s negs. Copy the master.

                • Simon says:

                  That you believe the only option is to fake this says it all.

                  That you believe you are fooling anyone you encounter by pretending to be alpha indicates a complete lack of self awareness.

                • jim says:

                  I score.

                  That you seem to be ill informed about female nature leads me to doubt that you score.

                • I have the intermediate opinion. Faking and acting can be understood in simulation or RPG terms as making any stat appear higher than it is, but with 1% higher chance of failure with every fake point added. So if Alice has a threshold of only fucking 140 CHA men and Brigitte has a threshold of 120 CHA, Charlie who has 80 CHA can fake 140 and have a 60% failure or fake 120 and have a 40% chance of failure. Danny who has much lower CHA is basically hopeless.

                  The same can be said for example about business negotiations, faking the ability to walk away, or in aggressive posturing between drunk males, faking the ability to beat the other. People notice it if you add too much, not notice it if you add only a moderate amount.

                  So the real thing is 1) increase the real stat as much as you can 2) add as much fake as you feel ready to risk 3) go for situations where the combination of that two is likely enough.

                  I think what Simon is saying that a 4chan neckbeard cannot fake Trump levels of charisma, which is obvious, you cannot add 100 points because that is 100% chance of failure. I think what Jim is saying that an older (which means naturally more confidence, you stop giving shit more and more for every ear after 30), fit, well heeled man can fake being a more playboyish and more evil version of himself, which is also true, because it is just adding 20 points with 20% chance of failure.

              • Simon says:

                The models are easy to evaluate.

                1. Emotional self reliance coupled with a relationship framed by traditional gender roles. Interaction with females are easy as breathing. Shit-tests barely live up to name, are dealt with playfully, simply.

                2. Faking charisma coupled with a relationship framed by traditional gender roles. Interaction with females a lifelong attempt to appear charismatic. Shit-tests extremely stressful and difficult to pass.

                • jim says:

                  I don’t believe you.

                  If shit tests are “easy to pass”, you are not attempting to pass the hard ones.

                  Emotional self reliance is unimportant, for by nature I have always been emotionally self reliant. Indeed, all men are by nature emotionally self reliant, a fact that women are always complaining about. What is more important is outcome independence – that you are indifferent to anything she might do to harm you.

                  Indeed, the reverse of emotional self reliance is necessary. I sometimes have to simulate an emotional need for my girlfriend that is, in fact, fake. As women fake orgasm, men emotional dependence. It is part of the soft gooey inner core that supposedly exists under one’s stone cold evil hard exterior.

                  Men need sex, a housekeeper, and children. But emotions? Boring.

                  This aspect of male nature, that men are emotionally self reliant, endlessly frustrates and irritates women, who want to be needed in the same way that they need a man, thus are frustrated by male emotional self reliance. But, men and women being different, women are not needed in that way. They are needed in a different way: Women are needed for their pussy and their womb.

                • If men were emotionally self-reliant, Oneitis could not happen. No suicides after breakups etc. Also the widespread tendency to not have much of a male social life and basically use the girl as company. And the whole insecure thing that having a GF somehow validates one’s existence, and not having a GF is a failure.

                  No, I think Heartiste and Rollo gets that: the tendency to use the girlfriend as a foster mother is much of the root of all beta and is quite widespread.

                  The reason shit tests can be brutal is that they often cut into ones self-respect.

                  You are kind of right that emotions are boring, in the sense of the roller-coaster that women tend to do, making a big deal out of small things that happen.

                  But in many many men under that hard surface there is one deep and unchanging kind of emotion, a need to be needed, a need to be wanted, loved, accepted, validated, respected. And it is entirely possible for women to hurt this, that is why shit tests can be brutal, and this emotional reliance on the girlfriend for validation is precisely where frame control tends to slip away, oneitis develops and one slides into more beta behaviors.

                  I would also say the need to be needed does not come from a strangely mutated expression of sexual desire. Just as Heartise and Rollo point out that it is treating the girlfriend like a mother, it probably comes from a less than healthy relationship with ones mother. If I had to make a bet: it comes from having had too much influence of the mother in a boys life. My father tended to work his ass off and come late home, in many other cases, the father is not in the picture at all. This is why an explosion of single mothers led to an explosion of incels a generation later.

                • peppermint says:

                  I want my gf to be my surrogate mother with Stepford Wife eggs. It’s a pretty normal thing to want, but most fathers are going to require you not do that on a prenup.

                  I’m not sure what you meant by mother, though. Do you mean woman who cooks your food and washes your underwear and judges your apartment and tries to make it as nice as possible? Mothers do that for men who don’t have gfs.

                  Now, a lot of households are partially financially dependant on the gf. This is emasculating – it does sort of color the relationship as pimp/bitch or maybe mother/son if you’re a total cuck faggot with an incest fetish – but most men are able to deal with it, or would be if they knew what they were doing.

                  The whole point of talking about Game on the hard right is to put our guys in a position to get first pick of the women, which boosts our status as a team. Lefties will never give each other good advice because each leftie wants to have access to all the women.

                  Due to Trump’s economy, and the end of millennial fun time as women who turned 20 in 2005 hit 35 and realize they’re still not married, there are going to be significantly more men looking for a wife than women who are wife material.

                  We want our guys to get first pick, lefties to commit suicide out of despair because no woman would ever marry a leftie, and those normies who can’t get a good woman because America wasted so many xir and millennial women to take old maids or mud women and use donor eggs.

                  We can talk about whether to preserve some of the human DNA of those Stepford wives. I’d support preserving some, not all, because we want to discourage being an old maid or a coalburner, not validate it as a reproductive strategy.

                  At any rate, since the men outnumber the good women, and last 50 years have proven that women are mostly useless outside of the house, some will simply have to accept their station not as the broodmares they want to be but as test tubes.

                  And the next generation will grow up knowing that if they fuck around their eggs will get replaced with Ms. Perfect’s eggs. They’ll be world-historically well-behaved.

                • jim says:

                  > And the next generation will grow up knowing that if they fuck around their eggs will get replaced with Ms. Perfect’s eggs. They’ll be world-historically well-behaved.

                  Men have an instinctive revulsion to being cuckolded, because we have faced that problem for millions of years, and had the brains to recognize it and deal with it for hundreds of thousands. Women, not so. Getting their eggs replaced by those of Miss Perfect will not worry them.

                • Yara says:

                  >And the next generation will grow up knowing that if they fuck around their eggs will get replaced with Ms. Perfect’s eggs. They’ll be world-historically well-behaved.

                  Downright goddamn genius, you are.

                • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

                  >Men have an instinctive revulsion to being cuckolded, because we have faced that problem for millions of years, and had the brains to recognize it and deal with it for hundreds of thousands. Women, not so. Getting their eggs replaced by those of Miss Perfect will not worry them.

                  Contrapositively, that also means such a policy would also be easier to implement.

            • Simon says:

              My meaning was unclear, in the third paragraph I essentially meant sexual prospect.

            • Theshadowedknight says:

              Interacting with females is simple, but hardly that enjoyable. They tend to have little to nothing interesting to say, and they are more interested in conformity and the opinion of the group to have anything relevant to add. The are nice to look at, and talking with them is fun at first, but the novelty wears off quickly and bless you are fucking them.

  8. Frederick Algernon says:

    With each passing day, I grow more enamored with the task of building a family and a life with my woman. She is my property; I am her monarchy. She renders, I provide. We are not perfect. We both took the absolute worst paths to get where we are. Life is dynamic; we may fail. But this Game silliness, something I did without needing a manual or lesson, is so much noise. There is so much work to be done, and so much time and energy is invested in thots with no hope of ROI past lingering vag scent. I guess, if you want to impress lefty soy bois by showing them you are dominant, have fun.

    Looking forward to Master Jim getting back on topic.

  9. lalit says:

    Ah Jim, I see you are back to your old habit of casting pearls before ……..
    Except for a few, most of your blog readers do not seem to understand simple points that you make, let alone the more subtle ones.

    The responses to any comments you make about female nature would be amusing, if not for the fact that it is men of your tribe making those comments. That may not hurt much, but it can’t be fun.

  10. What tends to trip me up with the whole concept of Game is that I think it is supposed to be based on competence, but it is not said by Game writers, it is assumed. That is, I think, for Game writers, the beta is already someome competent. He gets called over by the women he orbits to take a look at the strange noise from her car and usually can at least tell what it is, if not outright fix it. He thinks he gets something with that, but he doesn’t.

    What happens when you take away the presumption of competence?

    To be fair it does not really matter in a bar pick up, in a let’s go grab coffee date, or taking a woman home (after you paid a maid to make up your place, or if you are yourself competent enough to not have rotting banana peels beside the overflowing ashtray).

    But it matters with things like marriage and kids. And I am honest to admit I tend to be incompetent with everything that does not have a keyboard attached to it. I rarely go camping with people because I would be mostly underfoot while they competently turn 2D fabric into 3D tents by some magic not entirely comprehensible to me. So I married the typical rural girl who can fix things and has a practical sense. It was quite comical when my father bought a power drill for her, not me, as she was both more interested and more capable at using it.

    So I found myself in the situation where it is hard to alpha up when you are just plain incompetent in most things that need to be done. Things go well enough as long as you have no kids and live in a tiny apartment, the small amount of housework gets done somehow and leadership is mostly about planning our free time, where to go, what to see, in which my google-fu and generally better understanding of things like the arts helped retaining a leader role. As long as it is about enjoying life, competence isn’t that hard to show.

    But then a kid happens, a larger home happens, we quickly find we have no free time whatsoever, rather overwhelmed by tasks, and she knows each and every task from drilling in the curtain rods to changing nappies far better than me. How do you lead in that a situation? Well, either grow up to it and develop competence. Or you are reduced to being an unskilled assistant to the wife. Not good.

    And it was especially not good that feeling my authority slip away, I tended to revert to the really dumb kind of primitive “alpha” ways in panic, just yelling “respect my authority” and stuff like that. Being incompetent, yet demanding respect instead of earning it or enforcing it isn’t even beta, it is gamma. Actually we were on the brink of divorce once and I saved that situation by betaing up from gamma – offering to do certain things I at least could, like bathing our child and at least not demanding respect I could neither earn nor enforce. That way we would both have something like an hour of free time a day and more on the weekend. At least she could rely on me as a semi-competent task-sharer.

    This is a dangerous situation and it made me understand the 10-15 years younger estro-grin Nintendo husbands who are widely ridiculed online – they cannot alpha up because they cannot even beta up, they have zero skills beyond videogames and an office job and their wives are in charge because they have some basic skills of how to run a family. They are not simply lacking alpha but also lacking the beta competence to build alpha on.

    Right now I am in the process of slowly gathering enough beta skills to have a competence base to build some more alpha on. Maybe there is a shortcut, but I doubt it. Only now I understand my late fathers wisdom that I should have wriggled out of military conscription because a basic practical skillset they teach there, from pressing your clothes to keeping order in your living space helps with these things.

    I suppose I am lucky that my wife is way more tolerant than other women.

    The basic lesson learned is something like being in a survival situation, that playboys who can be kind of alpha in a bar quickly melt away and explose themselves as fake in a situation where serious competence is required because they lack the beta competence basis.

    So as a hindsight and as a future plan, I should have approached the whole situation far more seriously, that having a family is not easy and plan it out how to play it to my strengths, thus never losing the leadership edge. More importantly, I should have never let my wife turn it into a survival situation, by going back to part time work due to feeling imprisoned at home, never hiring an au pair because that makes her feel like a bad mother, and so on, I should have planned this out and made it a clear rule in advance that once a week we go out and do something interesting, while there will be an au pair at home with our child, that I am not going to help you clean but will hire a maid to do so, if you need a part time job so that it forces to go get up in the morning and go outside, maximum is 4 hours, not 6 and then some overtime, and so on.

    So anyway. The lesson is fake alpha roleplaying in a bar melts when faced with serious challenges, a family is a serious challenge, and betaish manly skills in the Art of Manliness style form the basis of competence one can build leadership on. Also, make sure too much competence is not needed – don’t be so frugal and fork over money for all kinds of help in the kind of things you are not very competent in. I hear there are families now who don’t even cook, there are services delivering healthy food, not pizza every day.

    • jim says:

      > But then a kid happens, a larger home happens, we quickly find we have no free time whatsoever, rather overwhelmed by tasks, and she knows each and every task from drilling in the curtain rods to changing nappies far better than me. How do you lead in that a situation? Well, either grow up to it and develop competence. Or you are reduced to being an unskilled assistant to the wife. Not good.

      This presupposes that you have to assist your wife. Really? Should not she be looking after the house and you making the money?

      My wife could do no end of things better than me. But it was always me telling her “Do so and so”, and she would do it.

      I live in a house that my wife found, and whose purchase she negotiated. I told her “look for houses that meet the following requirements”, and she found a long list of such houses, and organized travel for us to see the houses. And then when I saw this house I said “Buy me this house” (meaning negotiate using my money) And she did. Way better negotiator than I am. I tend to be moved by pity for the people she is negotiating with.

      Although I have always asserted that the ability to use an axe or a machete is a paradigmatic male ability at which women are helpless, my current girlfriend took my machete away and proceeded to cut down a tree with astonishing efficiency.

      I have never felt the slightest embarrassment telling women in my life to do stuff that I am too lazy or too incompetent to do, and it has never been a problem. I do not have any problems telling my current girlfriend to do some household task while I goof off.

      When my children were very young, I would do the fun stuff, like carrying them around, playing with them, and cuddling them to sleep, while my wife would do the stuff like changing nappies and so forth.

      I am, however, more competent than any of my women at any task involving power tools. Power tools are a man thing. If your wife is more skilled with power tools than you are, it is emasculating. As that business with the machete was, but not too worried about the machete, because I usually use a chain saw, which she would never dream of using.

      You do need to work on man skills. When a power tool needs to be used, tell your wife to go away, because you are going to do it all wrong and she is just going to start nagging you. Then learn to use it. It does bother women when a man is no good at manly work. You need to take out the garbage and deal with spiders. But it does not bother women if they are working hard while their husband is watching television and demanding a beer and a sandwich.

      Me change nappies? When my wife had to go away for a couple of days, the entire family, one of them a hard core feminist, just took completely for granted that it was entirely unimaginable to expect me to change nappies. Men don’t do that stuff – at least not men like me.

      But I do think that if my current girlfriend could use a chainsaw better than me, I would shrink several inches in her eyes.

      • I generally agree, but one more thing that is working far better recently is that I understood better what the captain – first mate relationship really means. While the captain must come across as absolutely confident that he can do everything the first mate can do, he does not really have to do it, he can be just there, not doing much, making some strategic decisions and making everybody rest assured that in a crisis he will take over and sort things out but as long as there is no crisis he does not need to do much.

        In your example your wife probably felt you will not let her make big mistakes, buy a bad house or pay too much for it, which was probably reassuring for her. Women often find responsibility terrifying.

        Basically relieving other people of the pressure of responsibility, which is also what good bosses at work do: don’t worry, just do your best, and if I did not tell you to do it differently then the responsibility for your mistakes is mine.

        • jim says:

          >In your example your wife probably felt you will not let her make big mistakes, buy a bad house or pay too much for it, which was probably reassuring for her. Women often find responsibility terrifying

          Yes, that was exactly the way it was.

  11. Greg Gee says:

    YO need to read bodyforwife by James Fell

    http://www.bodyforwife.com/

    https://twitter.com/BodyForWife

    He is fit. He is a male feminist

    He is married

    He has two kids

    That tells you something right there

    • alf says:

      Textbook high-roller leftist. Interesting species. The definition of man is wolf to other man.

      Very aggressive moral posturing. The mix of purple pills (fitness, hating on fad diets, hating on miracle cancer cures) serve to make his blue pills more credible (hating on Trump and white males). Insufferable kind of guy, but he does demands respect.

    • jim says:

      I see a lot of “male feminists” whose private lives differ radically from their official position – who use their public position to cover saner private practices. Jian Ghomeshi being a notorious example. The Effective Altruist movement is full of them. That James Fell says things that are congruent with being loser pussy does not mean he is actually a loser pussy. Much as noisy prominent advocates for diversity and integration usually spend millions of dollars to avoid diversity, male feminists will cheerfully beat women.

      • The Cominator says:

        Re: The hypocrisy of male feminists.

        This makes me think we to encourage a leftist purity spiral to destroy these male feminists who don’t live as actual feminists. Metoo is not good because it targets all men, we need one that starts targeting male feminists the way the left is currently targeting their own white men.

        What is the best way to get this started?

    • I don’t actually see anything unusual here. It is entirely common to try to achieve fame by occupying interesting niche positions that reverse common correlations or stereotypes. Milo, the flaming gay rightist. Pink Pistols, the gay NRA. Thomas Sowell, the black conservative. There are hundreds of such potential roles out there waiting to be played. Someone will be a pacifist military veteran, or a pro-Palestinian Jew or a pro-abortion Christian or a Neocon German or whatatever you want. This isn’t any way different. Some of these are honest, some are just roles, even that does not matter much. Anything published under one’s real name and face must necessarily contain posturing and advertisement, even when there is a honest core.

  12. jim says:

    Most good men manage to marry eventually – to a used up woman who has been dumped off the cock carousel after hitting the wall, after she has spent her youth, her beauty, and her fertility shagging bad boys.

    If women were attracted to good men, good men would marry earlier.

    Therefore, I tell all my readers, be a very bad man.

  13. Cloudswrest says:

    > “Men have an instinctive revulsion to being cuckolded, because we have faced that problem for millions of years, and had the brains to recognize it and deal with it for hundreds of thousands. Women, not so. Getting their eggs replaced by those of Miss Perfect will not worry them.”

    This is profound. I’ve often wondered why women are so okay with donor eggs. I never really thought about it from an evolutionary psychology point of view. Cuckolding in women is evolutionarily novel. I can see women shopping for designer eggs like they do a Gucci purse! This is just too droll! Every dude will effectively sire children with Grace Kellys, Audrey Hepburns, etc.

    • peppermint says:

      women will cuckshame each other, a lady will be a woman whose husband breeds her and the other women will be made to know about it

    • Steve Johnson says:

      Wicked stepmothers are a cultural trope for a reason.

      Women do have an anti-cuckolding module.

      • jim says:

        Everyone hates stepchildren, and adoptees get treated like pets rather than children. But implanted eggs do not trigger that defense.

        • Steve Johnson says:

          Not a lot of examples to draw conclusions one way or the other but my guess is that women have child identifying modules that work separately from “did I give birth to this kid?”. If the module is separate then implanted eggs will get treated like adoptees.

          On the other hand separate module might misfire to the detriment of that woman’s genetic prospects and so get selected out.

          • jim says:

            Why would they?

            It is a new problem. Like ice cream and soft drinks, not present in the environment of evolutionary adaptation.

        • Actually, these days people virtue-signal via adopting stepchildren, this is why they ensure they are from the far, not the near. Their step-parents (tink Brad Pitt) don’t quite hate them, they just consider their welfare a tool, a mean to make a statement about themselves. While for real children wanting them to have it good is a terminal goal in itself.

          I don’t know the details but my assumption is that the stepchild gets a lot of loving attention in public, very little in private. Gets expensive toys to shut up and not be underfoot, does not get to play much with other kids because the enjoyment he derives from it is unimportant, but something bad happening to with, like getting beaten up by other kids sheds a negative light to the stepparents. Gets a good school, because that is a bragging right.

  14. Neurotoxin says:

    Jim, thanks for adding me to your blogroll.

  15. Neurotoxin says:

    Above there’s an exchange about faking charisma. In fact, some of the relevant aspects *can* be faked, as our host and the Chateau have said. But also and more deeply, the whole thing about faking it is often meaningless anyway. If you throw a punch at someone, are you “faking” throwing a punch? Similarly, if a girl at a nightclub says, “Will you hold my drink?” and you say, “No,” you aren’t faking saying “No.” You actually said it.

    • I don’t know if we are talking about the same thing. Charisma is strongly connected with confidence and high self-worth and all that. My point is largely that some timid, socially anxious nerd trying to fake being the opposite tends to be very transparent. Charisma isn’t what you say but how, body language and all that.

      On a deeper level, you generally have to convince yourself first that you are cool, manly, attractive and generally worthy before you can convince others of it. Good actors are able to kind of switch their mind into actually believing their role. Often with help: in order to prepare for his role as Jim Morrison, Val Kilmer wore his clothes, visited his hang out places, and went to his apartment.

      Why do many men believe money attracts women? What actually happens is that money tends to boost the confidence and self-worth of men, and that attracts women. This is how these things work. Lifting weights isn’t mostly about presenting a sexy body to women but convincing yourself you are manly. (In both cases it works through a T boost. If you would be hypnotized into seriously believing you are a king, your T would go through the roof.)

      Faking it until you make works, too, but faking has to be believable enough for *yourself* to make it.

      Self-programming is not straightforward. Perhaps we really should go a hypnotist. Why not?

      • jim says:

        > I don’t know if we are talking about the same thing. Charisma is strongly connected with confidence and high self-worth and all that. My point is largely that some timid, socially anxious nerd trying to fake being the opposite tends to be very transparent. Charisma isn’t what you say but how, body language and all that

        I have no difficulty projecting the body language of someone who might kill white knights, even though this is a total lie.

        This may be made possible by my inward belief that white knights deserve death, but unfortunately the state prohibits me from giving them their just deserts. I contain multitudes, and I can choose which one of the multitude shows.

    • Steve Johnson says:

      The word covers both the attribute (which describes a person’s traits) and describes behavior.

      Behavior can simply be copied – the only question is how skillfully the copier is – does he notice all the details? Does he come up with ideas for charismatic behavior on the fly successfully? That’s it.

    • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

      The nervous system is a miser that spends nothing on that which it is not regularly demanded to do so.

      Practice virtue to acquire virtue.

  16. Glenfilthie says:

    Another interesting social consequence of the Gamer crowd: Dalrock is butt hurt because women are weaponizing Game Theory too!! And I am sure that more than a few of her uglier fan girls and xirls etc – are saying that yes, all men are like that.

    Like watching a train wreck.

  17. Glenfilthie says:

    Oops – sorry, for those of you capable of appreciating irony,

    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2018/07/03/the-ugly-feminists-greatest-fear/

    • jim says:

      That is not feminists practicing game. That is feminists going insane because of the conflict between feminism and sexual desire.

  18. Jim,

    Do you have an idea why is it that it is the loudest machismo cultures that are unable to run a patriarchy and control women? The topic came up on Twitter that Puerto Rican women are hard to control, I go googling and the first result is this: https://www.happierabroad.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15024 also mentioning what looks like the proximate cause: “Their fathers are obsessed over their daughters and treat them like little princesses.”

    And the thing is. it rings a bell. I don’t know what it is like on a cultural level, but on an individual level, very tattooed, very muscular, very much white-thug-life type guys on my Facebook are putting up photos which look like they are absolutely spoiling their daughters.

    • jim says:

      Not seeing it.

      Puerto Rican men are macho?

      Puerto Rico is macho like white frat college frat boys are rapists.

      Googling for Puerto Rico Macho, the typical hit was like:

      While catching up on work emails, I was interrupted by deliveries of tea sets and knives from great-grandmothers so I could “set up my kitchen”

      Oh, the horror, the horror.

      I suppose that machismo was a real thing when the US snatched the place in 1899, but some time in the past century it has been most thoroughly eradicated, crushed, and buried. Continued complaints about Puerto Rican machismo are feminists dancing on its grave.

      Yesterday’s feminists heroically smashed Puerto Rican machismo, so today’s feminists have to go on finding witches, regardless of whether witches exist or not.

      When Puerto Rico was conquered, the feminist jackboot came down on them hard, and continues to tread on them.

  19. Mister Grumpus says:

    See, any AFC like me can grump around all day about how hypergamy, and status and resources, and these ho’s ain’t loyal, and all that. Us AFC’s can just freestyle that sort of thing easy.

    But I love THIS because you’re pointing through the wormhole to the Other Side, man. And on the other side, chicks rob resources from their providers to hand them over to you for the privilege of receiving your sexy dastardly dealings.

    There is no worldy promised land and there’s no beating the system, but at least being shown that there is some kind of there there, well that at least makes the quest interesting enough to keep going, because it proves that us AFCs don’t know everything yet. There’s new country out there.

Leave a Reply