Thursday, December 5, 2013

Microsoft Developed a Bra to Fight Obesity of Women

Sometimes you look at the output of Microsoft and you invariably ask yourself whether they are joking. Just think of the Zune, their SmartWatch or whatever it was called, or their push to abolish ownership for video games with their Xbox One console. The other day, though, I was made aware not of a product that made me pinch myself, but a research paper with the title, "Food and Mood: Just-in-Time Support for Emotional Eating."

In a nutshell, the researchers explored how to detect that someone was about to eat when it wasn't physiologically necessary, and how to keep them from doing so. The article makes for some rather amusing reading, because the researchers put sensors into a bra that would monitor the emotional state of the woman wearing it:
You just can't make that up!

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

An Anecdote about Absurd Female Entitlement

I travel a lot by train these days. Normally, I take a book and disappear in one of the few quiet areas. Last time, though, I felt a bit too tired to read, so I decided to watch a documentary on my laptop in one of the regular waggons. Shortly after I started the video, the middle-aged woman who was sitting behind me, started talking on , talking on the phone with her daughter or girlfriend or whatever. She was speaking loud enough so that I could easily have followed the conversation.

Instead, I focused on my screen. The big surprise came after about ten or fifteen minutes, because suddenly that woman was standing next to me and telling me that she like me to use headphones. Whoa, sister! I told her that I don't have any head phones with me, and turned my head away again. This didn't deter her, so she added that the video I was watching was disturbing her. It wasn't as if I was watching porn, or a loud action movie, or anything like that.

The whole situation seemed rather absurd, and not just because the volume of my speakers was adjusted so that I could barely hear it. I had actually been taking the other people sitting in the waggon into consideration. This is not at all common behavior. Normally you're exposed to significant noise pollution.
Okay, that woman was still standing next to me and apparently waiting for some kind of reaction. I noticed that some other woman was giving me an angry look. 

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

Why Relationships work, or don't work


Let's say Joe Ex-PUA listened to me and settled down with a young woman. You may now think, "Wait, how is this supposed to ever work when there will always be other younger women around? Won't he forever be tempted to jump ship?" Well, first, you'll also get older, and your focus in life will eventually shift from getting laid or, in the case of PUAs, fantasizing about getting laid, to something more constructive. Remember, you used to have hobbies in high school! Second, it's really not the case that girls are that easily interchangeable.

I certainly don't want to urge guys to settle down with some random girl, albeit precisely that seems to be what the average Joe is doing. In that case, you're pretty screwed from the get-go. Eventually she'll have a baby, possibly from another man, and she'll calculate for how long she has to remain married to you to maximize alimony payments. Sadly, Joe allowed himself to get bullied into not signing a marriage contract, since doing so would be "unromantic", according to the 32 year-old he married who was desperate to get a guy.

Monday, November 18, 2013

Attraction and Age Differences


Following up on my post Male Sex Drive from Teenage Years to the Middle Age, I'm now going to answer the the one remaining question:
What is your view about age when dating and chasing girls who are interested in you but significantly younger than you?
First, what exactly is "significantly" supposed to mean? Let's assume we're talking of girls past the threshold of the age of consent. Okay, say, she's 18. How old would a guy have to be in order to be called "significantly older"? I'd say, 25, 26 maybe. Ten years is certainly an age difference I would call significant.

Having settled that, the question then is how this would affect your sex drive. I'm tempted to say quite significantly. Youth is equated with beauty and sexual attractiveness. There are some absurd feminist campaigns that guys should marry someone "their own age", "a mature woman", or "someone who can handle you", but at the end of the day, this is all just so much hot air. Normally, you would pick a younger woman over an older one. This is fine, since girls prefer older guys, too, which explains the malaise of young guys trying to get girls.

Sunday, November 17, 2013

Reader Comment on Male Sex Drive during Middle Age

I received an interesting email from a reader (thanks, K.!) regarding my last article Male Sex Drive from Teenage Years to the Middle Age, and thought I better share it with you:

Aaron, 
maybe I'm an anomaly, but I'm just about as horny as I was as a teenager, and don't need little blue pills to get horny, hard or stay hard! Maybe a little motivation for those guys heading into their 30's and 40's, as I'm 59! I attribute it to not smoking, eating healthily as in organic whenever possible, staying away from red meat and keeping in shape at 5'9" and 175 lbs with a flat stomach. Partly genetics maybe, because I have longivity in my family tree on both sides.

Saturday, November 16, 2013

Male Sex Drive from Teenage Years to the Middle Age


I received an interesting question as part of a longer email the other day. The guy who wrote to me was curious about my view on how the age difference between you and your woman might influences your libido (i.e. are you better off with a younger woman), as well as how your libido changes in general throughout the years:
What is your view about age when dating and chasing girls who are interested in you but significantly younger than you? At what point people stop having sexual libido/desire or their desire decline as they age?
I'll cover the second question in this article, and the other in a follow-up.

Let me tackle the problem of declining libido in several steps. First, male sex drive declines as you get older, but I'll hypothesize that the change is largely due to lifestyle choices and constraints, and not so much due to biological factors. About teenage boys it is said that they would bang a hole in a tree just as well. This is certainly exaggerated, and just another example of the misandry of the mainstream media. Young girls are horny, too, yet no mainstream media buffoon ever wrote that they would shove anything in their vagina.

Thursday, November 14, 2013

Three Billion Women, and what this means for One-Night Stands


My post on The "three billion women" argument was primarily about finding a partner. This is not the goal of everyone, but for every chest-pounding virgin on PUA forums who claims that he wants to bang more women than Genghis Khan has there are hundreds who secretly wish to just have a girlfriend. Of course, part of the problem is that some of those guys have the twisted idea that women would only have sex within relationships, while one-night stands are reserved for studs and guys which coke, but that would be a different topic altogether.

Let's say you're a reasonably well adjusted guy and you want to sow your wild oats for a while. Women don't just marry anybody, but their criteria for a one-night stand are often much lower. This is particularly true if she's got self-esteem issues and thinks that having some random dude bust a nut in her would make her feel desired and accepted. There's no shortage of such women out there.

Let's just take a different branch in the previous Fermi estimate, and continue at the point where we had whittled down the number of available women to about 5,000. Social class will still plays a role, but women are a bit less strict about that if they only want your cock instead of your wallet. So, if you're in the middle of society, then we'll be a bit generous and assume that you'll have no access to the top 10 % of society, and that you have no interest in getting involved with the bottom 20 %, for a variety of reasons. Both seems to be rather plausible percentages. So, you're down to 3,500 women, vs the previous 2,500.

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

The "three billion women" argument


One of the more asinine PUA statements is that there are "3 billion women" (google that in addition to "PUA" and be surprised) on this planet and therefore plenty of chances to get laid, and oh-so-many ways to experiment and refine your "game". The sheer stupidity of that number is hard to stomach.

Okay, let's say there are 6 billion people on Earth, 3 billion men and 3 billion women, and let's ignore the slight gender imbalance. We're working with huge numbers, so a few measly hundred million don't matter. So, Joe PUA, how would you go about hitting on all those three billion women? Well, first you would probably realize that you're neither a pedophile nor a gerontophile, in other words, you neither fuck children nor the elderly. Then there is the problem that a good one billion of those women reside in India and China. Too bad, bro!

Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Real-Life Example of a PUA who Creeped Out an Entire Campus


In my last post on Wannabe PUAs and Social Exclusion I mentioned how the complete absence of tact can easily make socially inept guys alienate their entire surroundings. In the comments this discussion was enriched by a number of people, such as Johnny who chimed in that when he makes a new friend, he learns through Facebook that they've got a handful of mutual "friends" already, or an anonymous with the observation that he's bumping into the same people in a city as big and vibrant as NYC.

So, there certainly is some awareness that you're not as anonymous in the crowd as you might think. But what happens if you are a PUA who thinks that the world is his oyster and, just like in an arcade-style video game, he can always just insert another credit or hit the reset button? Well, "Sean Larson" is what's going to happen. (Thanks to another anonymous commenter for the tip!)



Sunday, November 3, 2013

Wannabe PUAs and Social Exclusion


One of the most fascinating aspects of "pick-up artistry" is that it is commonly men who are socially excluded who are drawn to it. Think about it, if you were the popular jock in high school who had cheerleaders falling over themselves to suck your cock, you probably wouldn't google a phrase like "how to get laid". It's fairly safe to assume that the typical guy who falls for the many snake oil salesmen in this corner of the Internet has a deficient social skills already.

This puts him at an enormous disadvantage. Not having undergone a typical socialization process, he is unable to adequately evaluate the teachings of his new "guru". I mean, if you were socially savvy and saw what guys who actually got laid did, and what they looked like, there is no chance in hell you'd believe that PUAs who look like clowns actually get girls. Gullible guys don't know that, so they don't question them. Instead, they lap up their nonsensical advice. Approaching chicks randomly, dozens a day? Sounds good to him. "Plowing" in the face of complete disinterest? Sure, he'll try it.

What prompted me to write this post was in fact a Facebook status update I found in my email inbox some days ago. Here it is:

Saturday, October 12, 2013

Friendships in the Real World


A lot of men who end up typing "how to get laid" into a search engine seem to have a pretty strange understanding of how social interactions work, which gets readily exploited by shady PUA marketers. In recent years PUAs have moved from claiming to teach you how to get laid to some kind of all-encompassing lifestyle advice. Now they tell you how to make friends and become popular. Sadly, their approach seems to be about as flawed as their pickup advice was. PUAs tell you to go out and hit on chicks indiscriminately, and unsurprisingly this is also how they tell you to build your social circle. However, you normally don't make friends just by talking to someone. So, let's step back and look at how "friendships" in the real world work.

Sunday, September 29, 2013

The Slut Fallacy


Some days a guy on my forum posted about a recent one-night stand he had. To make it short, he met a girl at a bar and ended up at her place with relatively little effort. His story was quite interesting to read because he didn't view it as a warning signal that the girl let him raw dog her:

I ate her out (risky) and then had unprotected sex with her, she let me do it without a condom. Wow!!!

We thought that this was indeed risky, but when questioned, he offered his assessment of the situation:

Usually I would not even think about unprotected sex but I figured since she was a grad and not some common bar slut I was at less of a risk.

Does something about this strike you as somewhat questionable?

Sunday, September 22, 2013

Wreck-It Ralph and Randomness in Dating


I recently watched Wreck-It Ralph. That movie is an attempt by Disney to cash in on the recent craze about all things "retro", and of course it has to conform to mainstream media gender stereotypes. There was one rather surprising scene in it that highlights realities in dating, which I will expand upon further down.

Let me briefly introduce the main characters:

  • Wreck-It Ralph: A humanoid version of the gorilla in the original Donkey Kong video game. Fat, slow, and dimwitted.
  • Fix-It Felix: A rough analogue to Mario in Donkey Kong. He's very short, thin, and has a slavish sense of duty.
  • Vanellope von Schweetz: Female support cast: creative, witty, and resourceful.
  • Tamora Jean Calhoun: The lead character in the Call of Duty parody Hero's Duty. She's the typical "strong female character". Of course, without her, the male leads would achieve nothing. I mean, just look at this:



If this isn't a complete reversal of gender roles, then I wouldn't know what is.

Sunday, September 15, 2013

Reader Comment: How an Engineer became Sexy

I'm not having much spare time these days, but today I managed to go through some of my notes. There was one comment, made almost a month ago, that stuck out. I thought it deserved greater visibility so I'm posting it on the front page. Take some time to let it sink in since there are a lot of unpopular truths in it, and many of you can probably relate to it in one way or another.

But without further ado, here's "anonymous" on how he managed to become a sexy engineer:

I'm 30 and like most average guys I didn't really have a lot of luck when it came to women between 18-26. However, the average woman in my peer group has plenty of men chasing her till she get's to 30. There are many women who knew at the time that I wanted a relationship with them, however I was always passed over "for better men" I'm sure every guy has a story to tell.
Eventually things improve for men with age as a result of genuine achievement such as getting status,handling real responsibility, and genuine competence. Also the "sex haze" tend to calm down a little after 28 and you can evaluate things more clearly. 
Now, the problem appears to be as Alek Novy has pointed out in his articles, men are apparently not allowed to be selfish. So, now that I have better options, I get called an "asshole" for politely declining a "wanting to catch up over coffee" with some of the women who are now 30 and looking for a "serious relationships" only. I get called an "asshole" for dating women who are 25. You see the issue goes far deeper than dating, it is more to do with "male sacrifice/disposability"

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Female Fertility and Age: Feminist Propaganda vs Biology


There was an anonymous comment on my article Why should it be "creepy" if an older guy takes a young woman?, and since it's an important issue, I thought it's better to reply to the following extensively in a separate blog post in order to not clutter up the conversation on this site too much:
I can't help but feel like this sounds a bit like Roosh and the manosphere's "cock carousel" obsession, and the idea that women are "used-up" by 25. Correct me on the difference if I'm wrong.
I don't quite see the connection to the cock carousel hypothesis of the manosphere, which I have previously covered anyway. However, that older single women are desperate is hard to deny. Well, maybe that's not the case if you take their immature chest-puffing like "and man should be happy to get me" and "mature women are more attractive than younger ones" seriously. But let's forget about political correctness and all that stuff for a while and look at reality.

Fact is that a woman's fertility declines rapidly throughout her 20s. This has nothing to do with the "patriarchy", alleged societal oppression or misogyny. It is simply a fact of life. I'm not too fond of explanations from evolutionary psychology, but I see good reasons why men would prefer, given the choice, to have a younger partner. You're just more likely to have children with her than with a 35 year-old. Therefore, I tempted to think that this explains why men are attracted to young women.

However, feminism happened and with it the systematic indoctrination of women, leading to questionable beliefs such as that she'll be as fertile in her 30s as in her 20s, that she'll be attractive to men basically all her life long, or that it's easy even for 40 year olds to have kids. I've even heard that it was a "lie" that a woman's fertility peaks in her early 20s. But let's just assume you're a feminist who is more interested in facts than ideology, however unlikely that combination may be. Maybe you figure out that typing "age and female fertility" into your favorite search engine is a good starting point.

Shall we have a look at what I found?

There is a good summary on Wikipedia, but I also checked out Babycentre.co.uk. They have a few dozen medical advisors, so they probably don't make stuff up. For starters, their "Your Age and Fertility" page lists some heavy-hitting questions such as, "Does my age affect my fertility?".

Yes, Virginia, it really does. Seriously, what does it say about our educational system when women doubt that. Well, in some corners of this planet "intelligent design" is taught as some kind of alternative to evolution, so you can't just blame the kids. The answer to that question from that site is:

Yes. Fertility starts to decline for women from about the age of 30, dropping down more steeply from the age of 35. As women grow older the likelihood of getting pregnant falls while the likelihood of infertility rises.  
(...) 
The average age at which women have in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment in the UK is rising. This reflects the increase in infertility due to age. However, the success rates of IVF treatment for women over 40 using their own eggs are low, and have not increased much over the past decade.  
From a purely biological perspective, it's best to try to start a family before you're 35 years old.

They even provide a nice chart:



It was adorned by the sad comment, "How do you get your wife to stop blaming you for why she can't get pregnant when none of us has seen a doctor?"


The next question seems superfluous to me, but maybe you have to spell things out for people who don't believe in all that science-stuff:

Will it take longer to conceive as I get older?
Your chance of conceiving quickly does depend on your age. Women are most fertile between the ages of 20 and 24. It can take much longer to get pregnant when you hit your late 30s or early 40s. You may have problems conceiving at all. 

This kind of hand-wringing makes me sick. No, it's not the case that it "can take much longer", but that she can expect that it will take much longer, and that her chances of getting pregnant are dramatically lowered. No, that one of your friends managed to get pregnant at her alleged first try when she was 35 does not prove the contrary.

Then we move on to, "Why does fertility decline so rapidly?":

The two most common causes of female infertility are ovulation problems and blockages to the fallopian tubes as a result of infection.  
Ovulation problems can happen as you get older because: 
You have fewer good quality eggs left, making it more difficult to conceive. Your number of eggs (ovarian reserve) declines with age. You can buy a kit to test for ovarian reserve. These tests can only tell you about the quantity of eggs, not the quality. 
A few women (one per cent) go through the menopause earlier than usual, and stop ovulating before they reach the age of 40. 
Your periods may become irregular. As you approach menopause your periods may become fewer and further between, making ovulation increasingly irregular too.

There is also a note that, for instance, untreated chlamydia may make pregnancy impossible. Well, thankfully all women only have sex in committed relationships, and take good care of their health, so this is nothing anybody would have to worry about, isn't it, girls?

However, let's contrast this healthy does of realism with what you find in the mainstream media. Here's a quote from a recent article in the Wall Street Journal:

It's a touchy topic: broaching the issue of having children. But OB-GYNs say they are increasingly making it as routine as asking about contraception during annual visits. They are educating patients about fertility rates, which gradually begin to decline around age 32 and then rapidly decline after age 37. And they are discussing the risks of miscarriage and chromosomal abnormalities, which increase at age 35 and above.

Maybe it's irrelevant, but the author of the article happened to be a woman. This might explain the factual inaccuracy that female fertility will "gradually begin to decline at 32". Is it too much to look up some scientific facts instead of repeating feminist disinformation? It's not quite clear what in the article is supposed to be an indirect quote from the doctors, and what she has added herself. However, the subordinate clause implies that she has added that part herself instead of merely reporting.

What's quite sad is that this quote is from an an article with the promising headline "More Doctors Broach Delicate Topic of Women's Age and Fertility Rate". As it turned out, the goal was to write about a different kind of stupid:
I've had, like, a 42-year-old say, 'Why aren't I getting pregnant?,' " Dr. Auguste says. "I say, 'I'm sorry, it's the science. At 42 you have fewer eggs and older eggs than a 28-year-old. At this point you really need to speak with an infertility specialist.' " Dr. Auguste says some patients get hostile and don't believe her; she usually doesn't see those patients again.
I guess that women lose control and throw a tantrum is just another one of those myths spread by the patriarchy. As a contrast to the harmful information in the article, I was glad to see that at least some of the commenters things as they were. The top comment was by a poster with a female name:

If the hand-wringing feminists on here really want to help women, they should spread the word about fertility and age. I know hard facts are a bit foreign and scary to your ears, but what could be more useful to a woman who thinks she has forever to have a baby?

Some guy chimed in:

There is no woman who at 30 years of age has not had multiple men attempt to court them for marriage. In generations past, women respected such advances and married before they reached 30. Now in urban centers women of our upper classes are deluded -- often through their own sexual escapades with men that would not commit to them -- into thinking that they deserve better. 
The problem is not the absence of worthy men or "career." The problem is that our women are spending too much time partying, taking pole-dancing lessons (yes, really), taking exotic vacations and overall focusing on themselves. 
When most of our mothers were changing our diapers and driving us to elementary school, our finest young women are out drinking and fornicating with men than use them for short-term gratification. It is really shameful. 
Career? Education? Hogwash. For the vast majority of women, it's emulating Sarah Parker and her girlfriends on TV and searching for their own personal George Clooney.

When I hear a 30 year old woman complain about a lack of a partner or read stories about some 35 year old that can't get pregnant, I can't help but think that this is just a variation of the common "I screwed up, now you go fix it" mindset of a generation that has a strong sense of entitlement and no idea of the concept of personal responsibility. Seriously, Virginia, if you're 35 and without a man, it's not society's duty to fix that. You surely had men in your league approaching you, yet none was ever good enough. So, deal with the consequences --- or pray that you'll get some manginas who bought into the "marry a woman your age" propaganda.

What do you think? Let me know in the comments below!


Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Why should it be "creepy" if an older guy takes a young woman?


Alek Novy occasionally speaks of the "pussy cartel", i.e. a set of loosely enforced behavioral rules for women to make sure that the price of sex remains high through artificially limiting supply. Don't let the economics jargon scare you off. It'll all become clear in a moment. One example is "slut shaming". If women were generally less discriminating about whom to have sex with, a lot of men would not even bother getting into a relationships. From this you shouldn't deduce that I think that relationships are just about having sex. However, there are plenty of guys for whom sex only happens in relationships. Some are so pussy-whipped that they become the girl's boyfriend without getting much sex at all. They are happy if she's putting out once every three months. It's great for the girl's ego, but the guy should feel like a loser.

In a world where all girls are promiscuous you would see a much smaller number of couples. Women have to look out after another, though, and if they manage to convince a large enough number among them to only have sex in committed relationships, which used to mean "marriage", while being supported by mainstream media bullshit such as the myth that sex is the most incredible thing on earth, then they surely manage to reel in enough suckers. However, to keep things in order, they may also want to ensure that men and women who pair up have roughly the same age. Otherwise, women around 30 would have to compete with women who are ten years younger, and it doesn't take much imagination to picture how that would end. So, what better way than to "creep shame" guys and telling them that they have to take a woman their own age, and that they should also consider women who are older than them? To make women who realize that their looks are waning feel less secure just spread articles like "7 Reasons Why You Should Want to Date an Older Woman":

Monday, August 19, 2013

The Biggest Dating Mistake Women Make


I've written a lot about dating from a male perspective, but there are a few phenomena in female behavior that deserve some attention, too. Let's start with what might be the biggest dating mistake women make. No, this is not some kind of hyperbole, this stuff really wrecks women's lives. So, what might that be? Well, read on!

Saturday, July 20, 2013

How Female Ambiguity Promotes PUA and Poor Dating Advice

I was recently ranting about the ambiguous signals of women, which are partly due to nonsensical dating advice, but also to their narcissist wish of wanting to have their cake and eat it, too. They know that they can only get male company if they fuck the guy, but since they don't want to fuck any guy that comes along but still want to have some losers around who bolster up her fragile ego, they just string them along.

An interesting corollary of the female unwillingness to clearly let the guy know whether they are interested or not is that this behavior enabled the spread of the inane PUA culture. PUAs take the words of women at face-value. Instead of realizing that if she doesn't allow physical advances (one of the main points of Minimal Game), she's probably not interested in you as a sexual partner, PUAs are happy as long as women talk to them, and search for techniques to turn the interaction sexual at some point.

The Ambiguous Signals of Women


There have been some heated discussions in the comments to Sexual Harassment vs Dating in the Real World I and Sexual Harassment vs Dating in the Real World II. Some feminist tried to defend standard female behavior of not clearly indicating disinterest and therefore leading guys on. There was a consensus that women, when it comes to dating/mating as opposed to mere socializing, often don't clearly show when they are not interested, but also when they are. It's all too convenient for feminists to excuse "female laziness", as Alek Novy calls it, and demand of men to read the mind of women. However, since women hardly ever make the first move, this step is up to you. But beware: feminists are quick to cry "Sexual harassment!!! Attempted rape!!!!". Compliment the wrong girl on her dress, and you've sexually harassed her.

Presumably any man no matter how good or bad looking has experienced that a "no" from a woman can mean "yes, but you've got to jump through some stupid hoops first", while a "yes" can easily mean "no, but I'll lead you on anyway and cancel our date for next week five minutes after the meeting time". It's easy to see why men are getting fed up with this. Of course, then there are all the girls who play games on principle. Let's say she's flirting heavily with you in some social setting. You call her up the next day, and then she brings up some bullshit excuse. But because you've got more women lines up, you don't bother and move on. If you happen to have some mutual friends, you may now hear that "Jennifer totally wanted you to take her out. Why didn't you take her out then?" If you now say that you don't like girls that play games and, in fact, prefer those that don't, you immediately become the asshole, of course.

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Reader Comment on the Sexual Power of Women


I'll post a couple of substantive articles later today and for the entire rest of the week, but as a warm-up, here's a comment a reader just left on Do women really hold all sexual power?

The first time that I saw this claim that women hold all the sexual power, I just knew that something was wrong with that statement. It is shown to be nonsense by being mocked by reality.

For example, many women, with “all sexual power,” are in relationships in which they are miserable and unhappy.

Many women, with “all sexual power” have been pumped and dumped have been the community mattress, cum receptacle, with their STD infested pussies, are damaged goods find that no decent man would ever touch them with a long stick.

Monday, July 8, 2013

Sexual Harassment vs Dating in the Real World II


As we've seen in Sexual Harassment vs Dating in the Real World I, feminist definitions of sexual harassment are to a large degree subjective. Remark to some woman that she's as tall as your wife, and you're on the hook for a five-figure settlement --- if you're a Republican presidential candidate. But let's have a look at what Joe Schmoe has to expect at Monash University in case he wants to meet girls:

What actions constitute sexual harassment? 
Examples of sexual harassment:
• uninvited touching;
• uninvited kisses or embraces;
• smutty jokes or comments;
• making promises or threats in return for sexual favours;
• displays of sexually graphic material including posters, pin-ups, cartoons, graffiti or messages on notice boards, lockers, desks, computer screens;
• sexual insults or taunting;
• repeated invitations to go out especially after being refused previously;
• flashing or sexual gestures;
• sex-based insults, taunts, teasing or name-calling;
• staring or leering at a person or at parts of their body, and
• unwelcome physical contact such as massaging a person without invitation or deliberately brushing up against them.
Sure, flashing someone or calling someone names is something I'd consider inappropriate. All the other bullet points are at least to some degree questionable. Let's start with "uninvited touches". You may now say that there is no way that this is okay, but look at dating in the real world: Assume you're talking to some chick in a bar, she's pressing her tits against you, and you may now as well touch her. She didn't first ask whether it's okay with you if she pressed her tits against you, and it would be pretty weird if she asked for permission first. Likewise, it would be pretty absurd if she claimed that you sexually harassed her if you proceeded with putting your hand on her ass.

Sunday, July 7, 2013

Sexual Harassment vs Dating in the Real World I

After dissecting Stoya's cry for attention in What exactly is Sexual Harassment?, I asked myself whether there is a plausible definition of sexual harassment. As I have written in that article, one could probably agree on drawing a line physically aggressive maneuvers when it is clear that this is uncalled for. I do not intend to paint men in a bad light, however.

It's apparently quite popular to depict men as sexist swine who commit countless acts of "street harassment" and grope unsuspecting women. However, speaking from my perspective as a reasonably attractive slender 6'3" guy, I can tell you that I've had to endure countless acts of "sexual harassment". I can't even count how many times women have rubbed their tits against me as they were walking past me in the club. The more daring (drunk) ones have little qualms pinching the ass of men that are clearly out of their league. (Why is it almost always the absolutely plain and average if not unattractive looking women who do that?)

Sure, feminists claim that it's always men who approach women who are not interested in them but, believe it or not, any guy with options knows full well what it is like to be hit on by a woman you couldn't fuck with all the Viagra in the world. If it is true, as women claim, that men are much more visual than women, which I doubt, then it is infinitely worse to be a guy who gets hit on by an ugly chick than the other way around, but let's not shove too much logic down the collective throat of feminists.

Thursday, July 4, 2013

What exactly is Sexual Harassment?


In the comments to PUA Travesty on Kickstarter a reader pointed me to a two part series of blog posts by some porn starlet named Stoya, in which she describes some of the examples of sexual harassment she has had to endure. Partly, she claimed this is due to her "taking off her clothes for a living", but of course mainly you've got to blame all those male sexist pigs who make advances. Alek Novy did a good job pointing out Stoya's hypocrisy, but let's go through it methodologically, before arriving at a possibly surprising conclusion. It should be surprising for feminists, at least.

First, Stoya lumps all unwelcome encounters of a sexual nature together. Some guy trying to shove his fingers up her cooch and some other dude squeezing her ass in the context of porn conventions is seen as  "absolutely nothing, NOTHING" compared to the pain it causes a delicate flower like her to just walk down the street. Now, please note that I don't intent to trivialize sexual harassment, I mean, real sexual harassment, like guys forcing themselves upon girls, grabbing their ass and the like (and of course this also includes the many women who dared to pinch my ass in night clubs). Then again, since girls do that too, a reasonable argument could be made that this is part of human dating behavior, and only once force comes in, people clearly overstep a line.

However, look at what kind of actions overstep a line according to "International Porn Superstar Stoya(tm)", with commentary:

Monday, July 1, 2013

Sex as an Exercise in Seeking Validation


In one of my recent articles I tangentially made the point that guys who want to have sex with a great number of women are mostly driven by validation. They enjoy the thrill of the chase, a sense of novelty, and that women show sexual interest in them. I don't think many men will be able to put himself into a position where the latter is a reality, and the former should quickly lead to frustration if there aren't enough successful encounters. The implosion of the PUA fad is directly related to that. Approaching 1,000 women just for a date is idiotic. But even for those who were fortunate enough to have sex with many women, it's normally just a phase to go through.

While I was primarily writing about the male perspective, I think that the female perspective is largely identical. Think about it: it you only wanted to have sex, you're better off finding a nice girlfriend who enjoys having sex with you. Any guy who is single or only sees women casually will find it very difficult to have sex as often as someone in a committed relationship could. There is no difference between men and women. If she only wanted to have sex, she'd get some guy who turns her on and who enjoys boning her, and that would be it.

Friday, June 28, 2013

PUA Travesty on Kickstarter


While I certainly don't agree that literally anything is "rape" nowadays in the minds of some deluded feminists, including talking to a woman, I do think that the concept of "plowing" has been taken way too far in the PUA community. If you persist when the woman objects to your advances, you certainly met the criteria for sexual harassment. For an extreme example, look at my 2011 post RSD is cool with date rape.

Quite recently, I've been told about a Kickstarter project that was eventually banned, but only after it reached its funding goals. First, thanks to all those who pointed this out to me: Assanova, B., and an anonymous commenter. I don't follow the PUA scene much these days, so I'm grateful when people tell me about various absurdities. To recapitulate the story, Tofu Tofu, a guy from the seduction section on Reddit put up a Kickstarter project with the title, "Above the Game: A Guide to Getting Awesome with Women". Looking for controversy to get some buzz going, he mixed his mental masturbation with a good dose of sexual harassment. Here's a quote:
All the greatest seducers in history could not keep their hands off of women. They aggressively escalated physically with every woman they were flirting with. They began touching them immediately, kept great body language and eye contact, and were shameless in their physicality. Even when a girl rejects your advances, she KNOWS that you desire her. That’s hot. It arouses her physically and psychologically.

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Plowing is one of the most damaging PUA concepts


In the comments section of my recent article Hubris as the basis of the PUA scam, I had a discussion with Alek Novy about the existing social norms regarding approaching women, and what they imply for men.  In this article, I'm going to expand on it, and will eventually point out the overly harmful consequences of what PUAs call "plowing".

First, let's just recapitulate how Western society works: In order to spare women the negative consequences of feeling rejection, it's the task of the man to approach her. However, the woman can't be too blatant about her interest, so you normally get mixed signals. This is all to allow for plausible deniability on her part. Let's say Jill Average gets wet for Joe Buff and sees him at the college bar. Joe is there as well, and looks for some new chick to bang. Jill thinks that now her time has come and makes a "move", but Joe ignores her. Then, she can still say to herself, "Oh, no, I wasn't flicking my long hair to get the attention of Joe Buff. He just happened to walk past when I did it, and of course I did it with no reason at all."

Let's say Janet Stunner does the same and happens to be Joe's type. Janet flicks her hair, Joe sees this and realizes that Janet is looking for dick. He takes her home, and they have sex. However, by merely sending out a signal as apposed to approaching the guy, Janet can keep telling herself that she isn't just some slut who is willing to any fit guy. Again, plausible deniability protects the female psyche.

Friday, June 21, 2013

Hubris as the basis of the PUA scam


My wife recently skimmed my blog and remarked that I surely have a lot of bad things to say about women, and that I let men off easy. She pointed out that there were plenty of "fat, short, and ugly men hitting on young girls in clubs who consider themselves to be God's gift to women". She had a point, and as I thought more about this scenario, it dawned on me that without male hubris, in particular the failure to see yourself realistically, the whole PUA scam never would have gotten off the ground.

Let's first contrast hubris as it's present in both genders. Women may think that there is the proverbial knight in shining armor that will save them from their misery and accept them because they've got such fabulous personalities, even if they are physically unattractive and actually have rather obnoxious personalities. Not wanting to face reality, they keep pining after attractive guys, or fuck some average dudes, but it's all just to keep them busy until their own personal version of Mr Big steps into their lives. This normally doesn't quite work out so well, and the well-known result is that those women end up being rather desperate 30 year-olds or, in the worst case, single moms who no guy with options would go near.

But just as women delude themselves, so are there plenty of guys around who neglect the importance of looks, money, status. Before discovering PUA, they hoped that somehow some fabulous chick would accidentally end up riding their cock, and so they roamed bars and clubs just to ogle chicks, and also hit on any woman they meet through work, no matter how far out of their reach she may be. You know, maybe they'll get lucky by chance.

Sunday, June 9, 2013

Who came up with the "sex is the greatest thing in the world" nonsense?


Did you ever watch any of those teenager movies like American Pie, or did you ever skim one of those magazines that are aimed at teens? Or did you just listen to what other people say? If so, then you may have gotten the idea that sex was absolutely fabulous, like, the totally best thing in the world. However, once you have had sex, you realized that it isn't all it's cracked up to be. Sure, it's nice, but it's hardly a step up from masturbation. I'd argue it's different, but not better or worse.

Sorry, that wasn't quite right. Sex can be worse than rubbing one out. I've had "lays" that were infinitely worse than my worst wank. I don't think I ever failed pleasing myself, but that's not something I could say of all the girls I've met. In fact, I've found myself questioning whether pulling girls just for sex was really worth it. I think any guy who has the option of being with many women --- this only applies to a minority of guys --- eventually gets to the point at which he'll simply get tired of sex. The reason why guys pursue meaningless lays, though, has often more to do with a sense of validation, but even that gets boring after a while.

Thursday, June 6, 2013

Feminism as an excuse for being ugly

Apparently last month there was a three-day celebration of feminism at the University of Cambridge. The pictures on Facebook are well worth a look due to their concentrated stupidity. I just want to talk about one particular issue, and it might be a somewhat controversial one, at least in the mainstream media.

Ask yourself whether you have ever seen a good-looking feminist? I certainly haven't. I don't want to stoop as low as Roosh V with his post on the "ugliest feminists of America", but it's hard not to notice that the "intellectual" leaders as well as the typical follower isn't exactly the kind of woman you'd fantasize about having sex with. Somehow I get the impression that "feminists" like to influence other women to look less attractive, i.e. as unattractive as they themselves are. Why they do it I don't really know, but it could be that they are simply envious of better-looking women, which makes them want to work towards a future were all women are unattractive. This is all just conjecture, though, but I wouldn't know how else to explain this phenomenon.

Let's have a look at this picture:


Oh, it shouldn't?

Wednesday, June 5, 2013

Sleazy, how come gurus make money if they're so shit?


PUA shills haven't pestered me much recently, apart form some dude who tried to pollute my forum. However, quite recently there was a blog comment that had an angle I wasn't familiar with. Let me just cite the shill comment as a whole:
Yeah. Just out of curiosity, Aaron. A lot of people seem to say that speed seduction doesn't work. How would you explain that Ross (but also V Kelvin, RSD, and other "guru$") is still making money and have supporters?
(This comment appeared under Romance is for Losers.)

Please take a moment or two to let the previous quote sink in.

There are at least two good counter arguments. Let me start by questioning the premise, namely that PUAs make money and have fans. As I've shown in recent articles, interest in the big names of the PUA scene has dwindled dramatically. It's also a fact that there haven't been any big releases like 20-DVD sets in years. Also, many PUAs have moved on. David DeAngelo tried rebranding himself as Eben Pagan, Neil Strauss is back to writing about celebrities, and many of the B-team either quit or moved into self-help. Some seemingly well-established names like DJ Fuji are barely hanging on. His forum has something like 500 posts...

Monday, June 3, 2013

Romance is for Losers


A big mistake inexperienced men make is that they believe mainstream dating advice, and then there are of course those who believe the equally nonsensical advice of PUAs. It is not true, as PUAs claim it, that you can get any woman you want if you just used the right technique. However, following mainstream advice by being courteous, and not too pushy, taking girls out on dates, and waiting for at least two weeks before attempting to have sex with her will also guarantee that you won't get much action.

Plenty of girls don't mind if you waste your time or money on them, though. Why time? Well, it equals attention, and a plain average girl would rather have some average guy drooling over her than none. It doesn't mean that she can't wait to rip his clothes off, though. What guys who take girls out on dates don't realize is that there is a much faster route. It's just not necessarily available to them. Based on my experience, I am tempted to say that girls make the decision to have sex with you very quickly --- if they are attracted to you. Then there are guys that just don't do it for them at all. However, there is an unfortunate third category that can be exploited for material gains. This is where dating and diamond rings come in.

I found it quite startling that some girls were openly mocking the guys they were dating when they hung out with me. This also ruined any notion I had of women being kind. One particularly materialist bitch in London viewed some middle-aged guy as nothing but a walking wallet, and thought this was all good fun. Once she even asked what I think he should buy her next. I didn't quite manage to develop a lot of respect for that woman. However, I'm undecided whether that guy deserves pity or ridicule. He only has himself to blame since he should be perfectly aware of the fact that he's not getting anything in return. Still, it struck me that they were willing to fuck me so quickly, while they only dangled a carrot in front of some other guys.

Message from a Reader: The Consistency Trap

Below is a message from a reader: Max describes how he got caught up in PUA, and how he managed to free himself from the negative influence. Please pay particular attention to what he calls the "consistency trap".


Hi there. My name’s Max, and I was into PUA for a few years. Even though I learned through experience that it was unnecessary, it was your site and PUAHate which convinced me that it was really ridiculous. Weirdly though, I found it hard to let go of it. It took me a while to figure out what the issue was. I eventually realized it was something I call the consistency trap.

Basically, you can encounter PUA because you were searching for “solutions” with girls, either because you wanted more or because you feel bad. I was in the second category: at that time, I had been heartbroken by a girl I really liked and didn’t like me back. I felt awful, and discovering the PUA thing was a revelation: if I could just master “social dynamics”, be alpha and a master PUA, I could probably fix that! And moreover, this could enable me to make sure that I would never suffer from that again.

Saturday, June 1, 2013

Do you find most women attractive?

In the discussion following Do women really hold all sexual power? an anonymous reader made the following statement:

Most men find most women somehow attractive (not my case, but so I hear).

I questioned this statement, and so did others. However, it is a position plenty of women and men seem to hold. Women think that men would fuck anything that walks and while the guys I personally know all have personal standards, they might still think that others are less discerning. However, it seems to be much closer to the truth that unattractive guys, as well as guys who don't know about their market value, might stick with a relatively plain looking woman. I do hope, though, that they find at least some attraction for them.

Please note that this myth is also used to justify this inane talk about male sexuality being worthless, which was at the core of the article I linked to above.

Friday, May 31, 2013

Vibrators and Blow-Up Dolls


I think it's safe to say that mainstream media systematically ridicule men. Or can you, off the top of your head, tell me about a movie or TV show that portrays a woman as emotionally unstable, unreliable, or incompetent? Those traits are nowadays apparently the sole domain of men. Man-bashing of that kind is so common that you may not even notice it any more.

If you need a reminder, check out this video:



(That guy has created a series of over a dozen videos that collect and discuss depictions of misandry in the media. Check it out if you've got the time.)

An Encouraging Message from a Reader

This was recently posted in the comments section of the post So, how healthy is the PUA Scene? I thought it deserved to be seen by a greater number of people.


I am so happy to have found the idiocy of this scene early on. The straw that broke my back is when I started hanging out with someone who wanted me to be their wing and assured me that he was having epic nights going out and that he had slept with 100+ girls in his life. This idiot had internalized almost every single PUA material out there that he could quote things verbatim. Being that he was my height (5"8) and bald and was getting as many women as he claimed to be getting excited me. I was hopeful at the prospect of hanging out with him and learning and benefiting.

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Feminist Power Fantasies


Have you ever been in a situation in which people were expected to make small talk, and you were asked in which historic epoch you would have liked to live in? I think it's an absurd question, but it's one that enjoys some popularity. Especially women seem fond of that kind of daydreaming. However, as soon as people explore this topic, they make one serious mistake: they refer to the elites, the aristocracy.

Don't get me wrong, this kind of comparison is of course perfectly legitimate if you happen to be the Queen of England and ask yourself whether any of your ancestors might have been a happier parasite than you are. However, the vast majority of people aren't quite so lucky. So, the next time a girl asks you a question like that, before blabbering about how fabulous it must have been to have lived in the baroque era, tell her to think about the fate of the common man. Suddenly, this comparison isn't quite so sexy anymore.

Yes, Virginia, of course you would have lived in Versailles!

Tuesday, May 28, 2013

Do women really hold all sexual power?

There is a lot of bullshit in the mainstream media. I find it especially irritating when clearly subjective opinions are presented in an allegedly objective manner by people who have a hidden agenda. One such example is the claim that women have all the sexual power in the world. Of course they don't. (Hint: it's mutual).

There is a longer backstory behind this post, and it seems worthwhile discussing it openly. I recently took an online course in Behavioral Economics on Coursera. The teacher, Dan Ariely, is knowledgeable and also lovingly flippant at times. For instance, he started every lecture with an inappropriate joke, and plenty of the examples he used might have easily offended some people's sensibilities. As a bonus, there were guest lectures at the end of each week, given by professors teaching in behavioral economics or related disciplines like psychology.

In week 2, though, I saw some giddy woman in front of the camera, telling about her "research". She was making some rather daring statements, such as "women have all the sexual power", "women decide how soon in a relationship sex happens", or, my favorite, "men's sexuality has no worth". Of course, she referred to the mainstream media model of dating, according to which a guy has to wait three weeks before some chick will spread her legs for you. Needless to say, in her little world, this applies to "all women", and we as men are at their complete mercy.

Thursday, May 23, 2013

Sex, Porn, and Voluntary Celibacy

In the comments section to my recent post on Google search trends regarding the main figures in the seduction industry there was an interesting debate. A PUA believer (shill?) claimed that because interest in search terms like "picking up girls" was high, the seduction industry must be in great shape. You can probably quickly find out what the problem with this line of reasoning is. If not, then feel free to refer to my response to that comment.

An anonymous commenter chimed in, ridiculing that position by referring to the ever-rising interest in sex and porn to further illustrate the absurdity of that argument. Here's the graph, taken straight from Google Trends. It shows interest in the keywords "sex" and "porn" over time, and look at the success story "porn" has become:

"sex" (red) vs. "porn" (blue)
So, why would you prefer porn over sex? I don't want to read too much into this data, but I couldn't help but think of the rise of the MGTOW community. A relatively prominent position in this scene is to choose voluntarily celibacy, or simply pay for sex, instead of following some made-up social conventions. You know, nonsense like that the wedding ring is supposed to cost the equivalent of half your annual income, or that fat women have a "great personality" and all that jazz.

Monday, May 20, 2013

So, how healthy is the PUA Scene?

It's been a while since I actively looked into the mainstream seduction community online. My perception certainly is that while there are new fads like currently Simple Pickup and Roosh, the main players have been on the way out. The other day I researched traffic patterns via Google, and look what I found:


Neil Strauss
This is celebrated author Neil Strauss, on a slow but steady downward slope. The other players --- no pun intended --- in this business didn't fare quite so well. On the other hand, Neil Strauss is quite prominent due to his other books, which helps him keep his popularity up.

Can you guess what the following graph represents?

Mystery Method
It's public interest in Mystery Method. Mystery represents mainstream (idiotic) PUA game more than anyone, given that he was the most prominent character. Thus, this graph is presumably more indicative of the scene than any other. Note the sudden spike in 2007, followed by a continuous slide.

Up next: Real Social Dynamics.

Saturday, April 20, 2013

Guest Post: The Flawed Sociology of Roosh V (by Eagle Eyes)


Since the typicial guys in the manosphere were at some point abysmal with women it wouldn't come as a shock that their knowledge about sex comes mostly from porn. Roosh made a post on his blog about whether American women had looser pussies. Keep this in mind for some of the points I'm going to raise below.

In an earlier post, "Going Abroad Just to Bang 6s? -- Taking down Roosh V",  I pointed out that Roosh only goes after girls who are DTF (which is why there is basically no mention of girls he has slept with using "day game"). In a nutshell, Roosh only hooked up with American girls who were openly DTF the same night and based on THOSE GIRLS makes generalizations of American girls as a WHOLE. If you're still not convinced, read Roosh V's blog post "The morality of game".

He writes:
I know they love fucking, partying, drinking, and playing the game. They feel proud to be successfully emulating their horse-faced television role models, and are as likely to pump and dump me as the other way around...

...and:

After I was done with a girl, I knew it wouldn’t take more than a couple weeks of going out for her to get boned by a new man...

Does this sound like the type of girl you bang? It doesn't to me. But then I already mentioned the girls Roosh goes after. However, Roosh clarifies this for us even further...:

I’ll be the first to admit that many of my bangs back in the States were HATE FUCKS. The masculine attitude and lack of care these women put into their style or hair irritated me, so I made it a point to fuck them and never call again.

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Guest Post: Why Roosh V is in no Position to Criticize Western Women (by Eagle Eyes)


I suspect Roosh was getting laid in America (gee I sure hope so...because he certainly writes alot about it), but he was NEVER in a position to criticize American women on the whole...because he was always banging LOWER QUALITY.

For example that's like eating the worst pizzas in town and then claiming ALL pizzas are disgusting.  It's all about the competition and the level of talent. A Danish 6 is not an American 6, because grades vary with the country. Yet if you can bang only 6 at home, you can still find the countries where 6 are hotter, and that's what Roosh is doing.

Have you read this entry?

Some of the girls in the pictures were decent some were not. I personally don't see the difference between these girls and the girls in most major American cities...Roosh even mentions this in the link.

I quote:

...You’re probably thinking, “Well NYC or Miami has these types of girls everywhere, too.” Great, but are banging them? Are they giving you the time of day without attitude? Are they fun to interact with? Do they know how to please you? Are you happy with them? If the answer to those questions is yes, then congratulations, you’re the man.

I have NO TROUBLE with western women...

...But I know how the situation is for the average man in most American cities.

The "average man" he is referring to isn't average at all...not everyone is as lame as him.

I don't buy the excuse that Western girls have attitude. Initially, some of them do...but it's all an act, otherwise they'd have no friends. Girls in the Ukraine or Poland may behave differently...but that doesn't make them more easier to bang (Roosh even admits on the link above).

Guest Post: The Mind of the Average Manosphere Blogger (by Eagle Eyes)


Roosh loves many foreign women because supposedly they have traditional roles, aren't sluts, are feminine, dress better, can dance, can cook, etc, etc. So what does he do? Does he marry one? Does he get into a LTR? No, he treats them exactly the same as American women..."pumps them and dumps them".

Looking closely at the entries on his blog and his posts on his forum...one quickly realizes he doesn't go foreign because it's better...he goes foreign because it's supposedly easier. But he'll never find success where ever he goes because his intentions are all wrong. The best example of this is his pathetic blog entry titled The beginning of the end, where he reveals what goes on in his troubled mind:

The notch was a great metric that kept me motivated in the game longer than my natural disposition. I wanted to hit a high number so that I COULD FEEL LIKE A MAN.

Is anyone here surprised manosphere bloggers have sex because they want to feel like men?

Thursday, April 11, 2013

Guest Post: Going Abroad Just to Bang 6s? -- Taking down Roosh V (by Eagle Eyes)

I have been working on a piece on Roosh V, pointing out some of the more egregious misconceptions and lies he spreads, but one of my readers just did an absolutely fabulous job, so I will replicate his work here --- and rewrite the post I had intended to publish.

There is something pathetic about boasting to strangers on the internet about your "notch count" and your "harem". There is also something pathetic about meeting up with strangers and traveling to a "unknown" part of the world...

The very nature of Roosh's website attracts social misfits. Since Roosh criticizes American women, American men who can't get laid with attractive (or in some cases any) American women are naturally going to criticize them rather than themselves...and since being misfits, long for others that feel the same. They search google with words like "American girls suck" or "American girls are sluts" and Hey Presto! A link to Roosh's website comes up. Smart, yet pretty obvious.

People who are mentally weak are afraid of change, so they are willing to blame something else other than themselves. It's pretty ironic how they like to talk about the female rationalization hamster...

Two Reader Comments on the Manosphere Invasion of Russia

There was quite a response to my exposure of the follies of the Roosh V forum crew who plans an invasion of Russia, settle in some "Russian shithole"and bang all the local women. I just want to share two of them with you. The first one is from Kurt, which was sent via email:

I had a friend who quite a few years ago, traveled a bit around the former Soviet Union. He said it was one if the hardest places ever, for hooking up with women. A little backstory, this guy at one time had a really hot "9" easy, long term relationship, was well traveled, was socially adept, and was pretty good looking and used to have women offer to buy HIM drinks! Where does that leave these bozos?
I guess the answer is that should they indeed go to Russia, they'll fap off to Russian Internet porn there. I can't even imagine how stupid this would feel.

Monday, April 8, 2013

The Great Manosphere Invasion of Russia (Part IV)


Onward to part four, comrades!

One big theme was of course the mystical pussy paradise, which is supposed to exist off the beaten track somewhere deep in Russia. Regular women don't do if for those guys. Instead, they fantasize about getting pornstars, as was pointed out by a commenter to part III of this ongoing report. In addition, the guys seem to overly confident. What struck me as downright absurd was how much of a sure thing they thought going to Russia is. Not having been there, they make the wildest demands:

A lot of information can be deduced from these pics, like for example in Cheboksary, there are some nice looking girls, but there really aren't many blonde girls. For those of us who like girls with a particular look, your site is gold. Keep up the good work.

So, to reiterate: the girls have to meet all kinds of criteria, but those dudes don't think they should have to bring anything to the table besides their "white god factor". This reminds me of the PUA bullshitters who claim that "looks don't matter", yet on the other hand only want to bang "10s". Exploring this topic in more detail would be worthy of another post, though.

At one point, comparisons between guy who are "slaying pussy" in the Dominican Republic were drawn:

Saturday, April 6, 2013

The Great Manosphere Invasion of Russia (Part III)


I had to take a bit of a break from covering the collective tragedy the Roosh V forum crew was getting into. The amount of bullcrap I can stomach is quite limited, and the first two posts of this series exceeded my quota. Anyway, where were we?

Right, after collectively enjoying fantasies of a pussy paradise somewhere in the hinterlands of Russia, and gathering all kinds of information, our heroes already see themselves swimming in pussy, thanks to their self-declared "white god factor". Any notion of precaution or rationality was quickly thrown in the wind. It seemed that nothing could stop those young adventurers, but a surprise event led to a major setback. BrownBear, who took it upon himself to meticulously research Russia's B- and C-cities, surprisingly called it quits:
I wish I could go with you guys...the heart has been broken (...) She is a 10 to me and I moved to a different city and it's over. But life goes on, I have no regrets I'm very young still.
So, all the while he was fantasizing not only about banging women by the dozen in Russia, he has also been ogling some random plain Jane in his home country, and now she's gone. The immaturity is staggering. With BrownBears withdrawal, some well-kept secrets where shared with the Roosh V forum, like how one would "pipeline" girls well before you arrive. This is how it works, according to BrownBear:

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

The Great Manosphere Invasion of Russia (Part II)


In Mark Twain's The Adventures of Tom Sawyer one episode consists of Tom and his friends trying to become "pirates", so they leave the village behind to live off mother nature. It quickly turns out that their romantic notions were quite mistaken. One passage describes how they feasted on some meager fish:
They fried the fish with the bacon, and were astonished; for no fish had ever seemed so delicious before. They did not know that the quicker a fresh-water fish is on the fire after he is caught the better he is; and they reflected little upon what a sauce open-air sleeping, open-air exercise, bathing, and a large ingredient of hunger make, too.
At this point you can probably see the parallels to the Roosh V forum crew already. They are starved for food, er, pussy, and anything would do. We left them when they were collectively fantasizing about being "the only ticket in town" in some remote corner of Russia. What happened next?

Well, what happened was the equivalent of Tom Sawyer and his crew merely seeing some fish in the distance, and starting to salivate. Some dude dug out pictures of "Club Amsterdam" in Volgograd, which showed scenes like this:

Party on, bros!

Sunday, March 17, 2013

The Great Manosphere Invasion of Russia (Part I)


Russia is seemingly invincible. In 1812, Napoleon tried to invade Russia. He suffered a great defeat. In 1941, the Nazis undertook "Operation Barbarossa", the largest military operation in history. The Germans never recovered from their losses, and it was a prime cause for losing WWII. Of course, after WWII was over, the cold war began. Eventually, the Berlin Wall came down, the USSR lost some of its territory. Yet, Russia is still strong, and growing stronger.

However, the fate of Russia may turn this autumn. Napoleon has failed. Hitler was defeated. But as it turned out, the USA aren't quite done yet. As it so happened, Roosh V's goons have been plotting an invasion of Russia and intend to right many wrongs. They have been denied pussy in their home country, so they are now going to the Russian hinterlands and take what is rightfully theirs.

In a perfect exemplification of the Mighty Whity trope Roosh V forum member Vorkuta calls his brothers to rise up. His first post perfectly sets the tone for the train wreck that is unfolding over 22 pages of forum posts:
I think we have all at times imagined moving to a shit hole in deepest Russia,somewhere way off the beaten track and spend a few months using our white god factor to the max to bang a stream of hot local women. Well,time is ticking and so that dream can either remain just that,a dream or it can be put into action and followed through on. Of course nothing is stopping any of us going solo and renting an apartment in some random town and seeing if pussy paradises still exist. However I think it would be a lot more fun to do it with a few like minded RVF members. These cities are not getting easier,they will become more difficult and with Russia hosting the World Cup in 2018 etc. the place is going to change. Let's get in whilst being foreign still means something.

Saturday, March 16, 2013

Manosphere Myths: The Pussy Paradise


The manosphere is obsessed with many things, most of them entirely imaginary. One of the strongest collective delusions in that corner of the Internet is the belief that right where you live, the women suck, but that somewhere else they literally throw themselves at you just because you happen to have a pulse. It's the myth of the pussy paradise, namely that in some other place the women will literally throw themselves at any (foreign) man.

Roosh V himself is a prime example. I don't want to bash the poor guy this time, but instead talk about the people on his forum. They think that it's only the fault of the women in their area if they get rejected over and over. This must be the case because their idol Roosh V himself says that the women in [insert random country] suck. Salvation is to be found elsewhere, so Roosh travels all over the world, and doesn't really get anywhere with girls, and his forum members aspire to be like him. They don't get laid at home either but believe that in some faraway land things will be much different.

Monday, March 11, 2013

Manosphere Myths: The Cock Carousel


If you read manosphere writers like Roosh or Heartiste/Roissy, you really wonder in which world they live in. It looks as if they describe some bizarre fantasy. As you may know, just like the seduction community beforehand, the manosphere believes in the alpha-beta dichotomy. You're either an alpha with a harem of willing women, or you are a loser who doesn't get laid at all. A popular phrase in those circles is that 10 % of men fuck 90 % of the women, which directly relates to the myth of the cock carousel. It boils down to the following claims that are slightly exaggerated for effect:

a) 90 % of women are sluts and fuck all the time.
b) Most men don't get laid at all. There's just 10 % of them who fuck all the women.
c) Once women are past 30, their "sexual market value" immediately drops to zero, and they all panic, hoping to find some "beta chump" who will marry her.

Since Roosh and Heartiste write for the constantly sexually frustrated guy, they have to give him good reasons why not getting laid isn't so bad. They do attract a lot of people who have barely any success with women, and Roosh's own dismal track record appeals to them. If their idol hardly ever gets laid, then their own situation can't be so bad, after all. Of course, it's important that the typical PUA/manosphere follower believes that he is part of a "silent majority."

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Roosh V’s Weak Ego — A Case Study

Roosh V certainly likes to lash out. He denounces American women in general, thinks little of the many countries and cities where he didn’t really get anywhere, and is always quick to find an excuse for his lack of success. It seems whenever he doesn’t get laid yet again, it’s apparently because feminism and US-style materialism have finally taken over the entire country on the very day he arrived. This then makes Roosh construct an alternative reality in which Swedish girls are fat, Danes look like dogs, and where London sucks. Apparently he lives on a different planet than I do.

I do think there are just two reactions Roosh evokes in his readers, which also explains why he doesn’t get bashed so much online. Anybody who’s travelled a bit just immediately realizes that Roosh is full of shit and bitter because he doesn’t get laid. Those people then just move on. However, there is also the crowd of men who got burnt by the seduction community and proponents of game. Having learnt that the “cube” doesn’t magically make women spread their legs, and that Ross Jeffries-style hypnosis is a complete fabrication, they eventually realize that they have little to offer in terms of looks, status and money, basically all the things that according to “game” don’t matter. Instead of working hard to improve their position in life, those men then fantasize that there must be some pussy paradise somewhere on earth where Joe Below Average counts for something. Roosh V looks like the savior to them. He, too, didn’t get anywhere with women in the US, so in their mind he must be right! (Again, the problem is always the others, never they themselves.) I’m just sketching the problem in broad strokes, but I may expand on it in more detail in future posts. Yet, when I see Roosh writing that American men "chose homsexuality" so that they don't have to put up with the women, I can only shake my head:

Monday, January 28, 2013

Reader Comment: Game is Nothing but Over-Hyped Bullshit

The following was posted by an anonymous reader on the "Peek into Project Hollywood" story, which I posted some months ago.

I wish I could've seen the light sooner, but over a year ago, I signed up to take online Pick-up courses with one of Vince Kelvin's Instructors who branched out and made his own unique system. I won't say who it is, but it's funny seeing some of the names in this article as this Instructor would team up with them to answer any questions "AFC's" such as myself had on phone calls. During my time in Pick-up, I'll admit I ran into your site a few times.

I thought "Oh, this is just some dude who's pissed-off that pick-up didn't work for him. He should've developed his "inner game", and cold approaching does work. So many women were receptive and gave me their numbers. He's just trying to make a website like PUAhate.com so he can cry about his experiences in pick-up. When all along he should've done this then that, and he would have success."

I read Johnny's book and one point that truly struck me, that was truly profound was that it's ok to be rejected. I remember back when I was in PUA, I had immediate success getting lots of numbers and scoring a couple of dates. Unfortunately the dates, didn't go so well because I'd turn into a social robot. Then when I decided to work on my "nightgame", I would get blown off sets like crazy for about half a year. Considering such little return on such large investment, it would've been wise on my part to stop. But because I was told that I'd eventually "get it", that I would be extremely successful with women one day. Yeah...all those lays, one-night stands, and casual relationships would never came. Though because I was told that it was okay to be rejected, like an idiot, I would keep going. So much to the point that the instructor felt sorry for me and gave me most of the lessons for free.

As I would view more videos, I would be given assignments like i.e. approach these women with this opener, then play this game, then work on establishing comfort. Then I'd reference back to the blown sets and those times I used those terrible openers, then to add these techniques to my repertoire. I thought to myself, I'm done! If I try to implement these techniques, they will cause me to think in the conversation and look socially-retarded like so many other approaches I performed. I'll probably get the set blown in my face again, I'm tired of this bulls***. After that point, I began to distance myself from "game" and realized it was nothing but over-hyped bulls***. I was sick of "DHV'ing", "establishing comfort", "playing the 5 questions game before I make out with her". None of this crap worked, and even when I did apply it, most chicks would look at me weird, stop the conversation, or laugh straight at my face. I'll admit, one thing pick-up did help me with was becoming a more social, comfortable, and confident person in many situations. But at the cost of my psyche, time, and hobbies. 

Now I'm happy that I stumbled upon sites like AttractionInstitute.org and your website. These sites give one a good idea of how to just be a regular guy casually dating women. All in all, when I look back at this experience, I find it funny that the guy I was back then would be criticizing the guy I am right now. Thankfully though, I've read Johnny's book and it truly highlights the disgusting snake-oil marketing campaign the PUA industry is. I'm just happy I found the light, I look forward to more of your posts Aaron.

Sunday, January 27, 2013

Reader Comment: Game only works if she's only interested, and then you don't need game anymore


Some days ago this anonymous post appeared in the comment section of "There is no Point in Pretending". I'll reproduce it here in full since it deserves broad attention.

This is extremely interesting, Alek and Aaron, and it rejoins a thought I had a while back, when a local PUA of my country was talking about the night where he approached two hot girls, and one of them warmed up while the other one remained cold. I remember thinking that if he got two different reactions from girls while saying the exact same thing and being the exact same dude, it obviously meant that their reactions had nothing to do with him or what he said, but came from whether they instantly liked him or not.

Isn’t it ironic that PUAs teach you to Game girls that you don’t know? Think about it: in a non-social circle environment, there are only two reasons for a girl to see you again after an initial encounter:
-She is interested in you.
-She is super social (in that case, there is a good chance you will actually never see her again even though you had a good interaction with her: she was just being her super social self).

Now here is where it gets funny: PUAs say that girls always assume that a stranger who comes to talk to them is hitting on them, which is only logical. That means that, whatever you tell her (and NO, going “indirect” does not fool anyone), she is deciding whether or not she is interested. And that’s the kicker: for her to react positively to your approach, for her to start talking eagerly to you, she needs to be very social or to be interested, and this interest, as correctly pointed out by Alek, will stem from non-short-term fakable things, basically your style and looks. In order to spit your nonsensical game, you need her to want to listen to you in the first place, either because that’s her way of being or because she already likes you. 

The funny thing is that PUAs do sense that some girls are initially more responsive than others, but, because of their deluded view of the world, they think that if the girls is non-responsive, it’s because they weren’t “alpha/unstiffled/detached/in the Now/etc” and therefore they need to stay with her and try to “plow” and persist as much as possible until she warms up. They also account for initially warm girls by the fact that they sensed their alphaness or whatever before they opened their mouth.

It is just crazy the extent to which these guys can go to avoid seeing the obvious. When you do Game on a girl, she has to be willing to listen for you to demonstrate your attractive qualities. And if she is willing to listen, she is interested already, by definition

Thursday, January 24, 2013

Guest Post: Virgil Kent's Nexxt Level Up: repeated evidence against game (by Shackleford)

Shackleford is back with another brilliant analysis of the "manosphere". This time, he shows that some people don't even know what they are writing about and in fact prove the opposite of what they intended.

Unbeknownst to Virgil Kent, his new site Nexxt Level Up provides repeated evidence against the legitimacy of mainstream PUA tactics, as well as Roissy game. This is not too surprising; Virgil Kent always seemed apart from the PUA cult and more like a relatively normal dudebro that was into randomly banging girls. He piggy backed onto Roosh's audience many years ago, but the general tone of his work is far less whiny and preachy than that of Return of Kings and Heartiste. That said, his content isn't all that engaging or deep, but he still provides solid gold evidence against the usefulness of mainstream game concepts. Let's review:

Example #1: http://nexxtlevelup.com/game/dc-and-little-california

This is from the post "DC and Little California", in which Virgil is completely unenthused about going out but ends up taking a girl home. We find out in this story, however, that the process of hooking up was easy, almost as if the girl was already attracted to him and all he had to do was not fuck up. In fact, that is exactly what happened:

Again there was something cool and nonchalant about the whole thing. Nothing weird or hesitating like the last one, it’s as if she saw me and decided before talking with me that she would be ok with sleeping with me if I didn’t fuck it up or turn out to be gay.

Note that Virgil did pull a DHV move by showing that he knew the bouncer, but the evidence in the story reveals that she was already attracted to him on first sight.

Example #2: http://nexxtlevelup.com/game/autopilot-game

This is a guest post by a dude named Nate, who has stood up to the racists of the Roissy-sphere, so he can't be that bad. I also thank him for posting a pretty strong rebuke of game. The above post, titled "Autopilot Game," describes a journey in which a man starts out using PUA tactics only to find out that they are practically worthless: key sentence is that the narrator of this story "starts going out more" because of PUA, which of course produces some results despite these tactics, not because of them. The narrator realizes this eventually:

Maybe, you start to wonder, maybe just maybe something is wrong with the rulebook. After getting slapped the previous night, you can’t stop thinking about it. It nags at you every day. Certain thoughts creep in, seemingly heretical in nature. Maybe the playbook is stupid? Maybe it sucks? Nah, remember where you came from. But… maybe the playbook/rulebook was made for people who need rules, for those who need set plays and guidance? What if you don’t need those anymore? What if you’ve outgrown capital G “Game”?

No, Nate, you are correct: the playbook is stupid. As we find out at the end of this story, the narrator finds success by following his own path and focusing on the girls who are already attracted to him, and finds out (surprise!) that "negs" and "shit tests" are almost completely irrelevant in this type of scenario:

At the bar, you see this hottie eyeing you two tables down, but before you can even make your approach she pops up behind you and introduces herself. Your buddy knows the score and leaves immediately, and you draw her close while getting to know each other’s names and stuff like that. After a mere two minutes, you are making out already and she’s feeling your arms. As if on autopilot, you guide her to the barstools where you can sit close, drink, and enjoy each other’s company. Even though she’s new, nothing else about this interaction is. You smile, laugh, even compliment her a couple times because after all, she does look very nice tonight. You have forgotten what a “shit test” is because you haven’t gotten one in forever, or at least if you have you didn’t even care to notice. You take her to a nearby club because you enjoy getting your grind on in low lighting, and by one o’clock she’s in your bedroom, taking her clothes off.

This naturally ends with the narrator - having settled into his own niche - realizing that reading game blogs is counter-productive:

The next morning, mildly hungover but otherwise feeling great, you check in on those blogs you used to read religiously but hardly any of it resonates with you anymore. Not that there is anything wrong with any of it, but as a custom built machine you know exactly what you do or don’t need to do to the point that even thinking about it does more harm than good.

Example #3: http://nexxtlevelup.com/game/the-tyler-chronicles-never-give-up-on-the-night

This is my personal favorite post, because it contradicts one mainstream game trope ("looks don't matter") and one Roissy-game trope (the tendency to overthink every fucking part of an interaction). Virgil establishes right away that the subject of his story, Tyler, is good looking. Virgil addresses this directly by implying that it's his game, not his looks, that gets him laid:

This is the guy betas will scream at the top of their lungs, “Game only works if you look like that”

Unfortunately, evidence from the story reveals that it is precisely Tyler's looks that got him laid. The evidence is contained within Tyler's description of first encountering the girl who he would later hook up with:

I saw a girl to the right of the attendant stand looking my way. She was a very sexy red headed girl wearing a thin leopard long sleeve shirt over a grey shirt. I was the only one standing in that area. I caught her looking again. My blood started pumping.

Tyler gets her number and later takes her out on the date in the Boston area. The funny thing about this story is that Tyler makes a couple of mis-steps during this date that could've have pointlessly derailed this girl's desire to sleep with him. First of all, he takes her to a loud, crowded frat bar in downtown Boston, where she acts justifiably uncomfortable. He senses this and recommends going to a bar in her neighborhood. She agrees and he follows her in his car to her neighborhood, which leads to the single most amazing part of this story, the part where his loyalty to Roissy concepts of mental-masturbation and over-analysis almost prevent him from an easy lay:

I started following her. We approached a green light that turned yellow, and she gunned through it. Did she just do that on purpose?? Fuck this….I stopped at the red light and decided I’m heading home. 
Seconds later she called, “Did I just lose you?” “Yes, you ran a red light. It’s getting kind of late anyways…” I was too tired to drive all over Mass, and I was annoyed. “Oh my God, I’m so sorry! I’ll pull over until you reach me!” Her tone convinced me to stay.

You can almost see his Roissy hamster wheel ruining the night: "she ran a red light!!! This is a shit test!!! The only way for me to pass it is to go home!!! Trying to follow her after this is beta!!! I have to push every part of this interaction in my favor or it's over!!!"

Fortunately for Tyler, he decides to follow her, she suggests they skip the bar and go to her apartment, where she finally opens up, and then banging ensues. This implies that the whole charade of going to bars to finesse her for hours was pointless in the first place.

Conclusion

While Virgil Kent is a friend of Roosh's and former friend of Roissy, we can see pretty strong evidence from his stories that traditional PUA game plays a non-existent role in both his and his collaborators' successes. The girls in each of these stories were initially attracted to the guys, and all the guys had to do was be cool and escalate. Despite this, the subject in his last example almost fucked it up by freaking out over the girl running a red light. Moral of the story: it's not that complicated.