Tuesday, July 7, 2015

Two types of female laughter

SciVo understood what I was pointing out about why it's foolish to try to attract women by making them laugh:
When women say that they want a guy that makes them laugh, it's practically a tautology: they want a guy that they want. They have the causality backward -- they laugh because they're attracted to him, not the other way around -- and probably most of them aren't even aware of it. Of course, laughter is only a sign of attraction if they're laughing with you and not at you, so the sign of approval elicited by clowning around is a fake one that won't lead anywhere.
This is correct. And it's important to distinguish between attracted laughter and amused laughter. The former is when the girl laughs at anything an attractive man says and plays with her hair. The latter is when she's watching a comedian do standup.

The fact that a woman laughs at something Michael Macintyre or Frankie Boyle says does not indicate that she is sexually attracted to him. Nor will she be attracted to you if you manage to amuse her in some manner by your clowning. In fact, the genuinely funnier you are, the less likely it is that a woman's laughter means that she is attracted to you.

Saturday, July 4, 2015

Delta Perspective: Don’t be that guy

This is the opening weekend for the new Terminator movie and whatever you do; do not do Arnold Schwarzenegger impressions. In fact, never do one again the rest of your life if you’ve done one. They aren’t good or funny unless you are professional comedian and no girl on the entire planet out of billions will think you are funny for doing it and be attracted to you.

Instead, if your friends do them watch the women around you grow increasingly uncomfortable and want to leave the area. Silly voices and impressions are for professional comedians, puppet shows, and Gammas.

Friday, July 3, 2015

Delta Perspective: Yesterday at the coffee maker

There is no way to escape who you are, as you can only make efforts to change how you behave. Our formative years and past experiences are always there and the behaviors we learned come back quickly and naturally.

Yesterday morning when I went for coffee there was a new girl in the office, she was blonde and a solid 6. We made good eye contact, and when I went to fill up my cup she inquired about the unusual design. The answer to her question was, “No”, and that should have been the end of the conversation about the cup. Of course my old, helpful Gamma past came up and I had to give two sentences about why the answer is “No”. It wasn’t needed and I could see in her eye she wasn’t interested in knowing about the cup, but rather was just making small talk.

When I sat down at my desk, I just laughed at myself about it. I’m happily married with a family with no designs on the girl; I have no fear of women, and don’t take shit from them. But there it was like a bad penny showing up, my old Gamma “Me have information, me useful to you!” inclination hiding in the bushes and just dying to get out. 

So two lessons here: First is, you can’t escape your past completely and it will be a recurring battle, and second, when you lose a minor skirmish with your past, don't beat yourself up over it, just laugh it off, learn from it, and vow to do better next time.

Vox adds: This is true no matter what sociosexual status you happen to have. Reprogramming our instinctive reactions is considerably more difficult than reprogramming our intentional behavior. The trick is to restrain the former in order to control the situation with the latter, assuming the latter is to be preferred.

Thursday, July 2, 2015

They're not all whores

But a surprising number of them are at heart. And it's always amusing to see how angry some women get when they find out how much their bodies are actually worth in the real world markets:
Grisha Mamurin, the grandson of one of Russia’s richest oligarchs, Igor Nekludov, has been the subject of online rage for posting videos of women kissing him and showing their breasts for money. Various outlets, decidedly or implicitly feminist, or just covering the regular news cycle, have described the different scenarios as “degrading” or “humiliating”.

Virtually no mainstream commentators, unless you count members of the public in discussion sections, have sought to hold the girls accountable for their conscious choice to strip naked for or kiss Mamurin in view of perhaps hundreds of fellow Russians.

Because Mamurin’s asking price was only the equivalent of $120 (a larger sum in Russia but by no means massive), the scenes raise alarming questions about the extent to which many women will perform certain sexual acts for money. In addition, there has been a subsequent and all-encompassing infantilization of these girls by feminists.

These compulsive SJWs, unsurprisingly, solely blame the male offering the financial incentive for the perceived degradation and humiliation. The logically pervasive theme of their explanations, though they would deny it, is that large numbers of women cannot control themselves when asked to perform for only a moderate sum of money. So imagine the lack of self-control and self-determination if that figure were $12,000 or $120,000, not $120.
At the end of the day, if you're going to look at things from a material perspective, it's all supply and demand. And the thing about attractive young women is that they are literally making more of them every single day. The supply is far from infinite, of course, but there are no involuntary monopolies.

Ironically enough, it's the very women who are most angered by those whose equalitarian policies are to blame for reducing young women to valuing themselves, and being valued, for nothing more than what they bring to the sexual table.

Wednesday, July 1, 2015

Alpha Mail: dynamic sociosexuality

TB had two questions:
1)  In your opinion/to your best guess, is changing sociosexual tendencies (omega/gamma to delta, delta to beta) something akin to homosexuality where it'll be something a person will struggle with their whole life, trying not to fall back into their old rank yet being very tempted to?  Or is it something closer to 'if you're still tempted to do old rank stuff, you haven't quite left it'?

2)  You are of a very different temperament than I.  Regardless, it may be very instructive for me to ask, in your experience how does one deal with a fear of the unknown
Because we are shaped by our experiences, and because those experiences do not disappear simply because we have new experiences, there is always the danger of reverting to previous patterns of behavior. Sociosexuality is dynamic, situational, and relative, so sociosexual rank is neither a life sentence nor carved in stone.

As far as dealing with a fear of the unknown goes, in my experience, the only way to successfully eradicate fear is to face it. When I was young, I quite reasonably shied away from contact on the soccer field. I was half the size of the defenders guarding me and I wore glasses to boot.

It took several years of heavy contact martial arts to shake that instinctive fear of contact, but directly confronting it worked very well. It worked so well that now I'm moderately notorious in our veteran's league for physically punishing defenders; it is a rare game that I don't leave two or three defenders on the ground as a result of challenging me for the ball.

Brian Billick gave the best advice anyone has ever given on confronting fear.

"When you go in the lion's den, you don't tippy-toe in. You carry a spear, you go in screaming like a banshee, you kick whatever doors in, and say, 'Where's the son of a bitch!' If you go in any other way you're gonna lose."

Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Delta Perspective: Zero by Choice (ZBC)

 
 
 

Zero in the heterosexual market encompasses much more than the Omegas, but generally that is what one thinks of when at that lowest of numbers. Instead any man who is not actively involved with women romantically, sexually, or in pursuit of a relationship is a zero as well.

The first subset who score at zero heterosexual sexual market value (SMV) are zero not by choice. This group consists of Omegas who are social outcasts for whatever reason. The lone weirdo comes to mind but also encompasses those with severe physical or mental handicaps. The second subset is homosexual men who of course do not participate in the heterosexual market.

The second set which is where this post focuses: men who are Zeros by Choice (ZBC). This group is actually quite large, but very fluid in nature as there are many temporary members.

Rebellion
The ZBC subset who rebel against the market are made of up men who are frustrated, bored, angry, or disappointed. Some examples:

  • A man who recently divorced or had a hard breakup and swears off women for a while
  • Japanese herbivores
  • Western MGTOW supporters who explicitly support the movement
  • Frustrated men who give up but have no affiliation with any movement
  • Men who are bored with the women around him and take a break
 
They key distinctions for this group are they get out of the market for negative reasons rather than positive ones and they chose to leave without being forced out. Sometimes this is a permanent move, but most of the time it is temporary and they decide to re-enter it at some point.
 
Higher Calling
The other ZBC subset is men who find a greater purpose in life which completely consumes them, sometimes for a lifetime. Examples:

  • Religious callings like celibate priests or monks
  • Career focus
  • Personal introspection and improvement (typically temporary)

Rather than being angry, frustrated, or bored this group finds that something else replaces the need for female companionship and becomes their focus. Outside of religious vows this is almost always temporary except perhaps in workaholics whose dedication to their life’s passion simply pushes away any women unintentionally.

A good example is JJ Watt who intentionally didn’t have a girlfriend and hinted he wasn’t even dating for the first year or two of his career. Football completely consumed him and he didn’t want the distraction. As odd as it may seem, at that time a Gamma who ranks a two had a higher SMV because the Gamma was participating and not sitting it out. You have to be in the game to have a rank, or otherwise you default to zero.

Joe Montana is not a NFL Quarterback
Joe Montana is one of the greatest football players of all time, a hall of famer, and arguably even the greatest NFL QB of all time, but he’s not an NFL quarterback as he’s not currently playing in the league. He has no current contract or team and he will produce no stats for 2016 because he’s not playing. It’s a tautology, but players are people who play. If your rank is zero in the market place you are no longer playing. Perhaps you once were the Joe Montana of the sexual market and have more notches on the bedpost than anyone, but if you choose not to participate anymore you are a zero. Being in a monogamous relationship with a woman is participating, it’s not just about numbers.

The Importance
The most important aspect of game is honesty. You simply cannot improve your game if you are not honest about where you currently sit in the market. “I could have banged 10 chicks last year, if I wanted to.” May be true however unlikely, but if you turned down every opportunity and aren’t playing anymore you certainly aren’t an Alpha. “I used to date a lot of women, but now I don’t. I’m a Beta.” Nope. You aren’t a Beta, you are a ZBC. Even if you aren’t looking to improve your game and are happily ZBC don’t lie to yourself.   

ZBC Can Contribute                      
A Catholic priest probably can’t help you much when it comes to meeting girls at a club, but they can give good marriage advice. If you are a former player who is now sitting it out then you can still help those who are playing. Maybe some guys can learn from your mistakes or success so it’s not like you have nothing to say, just don’t say you are something you are not.

Monday, June 29, 2015

The mystery of credit card debt

Who could possibly fathom the mystery?
A 2015 National Debt Relief survey of 1,107 adults with credit card debt revealed some interesting differences between the sexes. In the survey, the main difference between men and women was the amount of credit card debt they carried.

For instance, 63 percent of women ages 18 to 24 carried some credit card debt, but only 36 percent of men in that age category had any debt. Similarly, 66 percent of women ages 55 to 64 carried credit card debt, but only 33 percent of men in that age bracket had credit card debt.

So why the split, and what can women do about these troubling statistics?

Adam Tijerina, consumer advocate for National Debt Relief, says several potential reasons for this gender gap exist. However, he speculates that the most likely culprit is that women are still paid less than men.
The reason is obvious. Women have a not entirely unreasonable expectation that they can expected to have their debt paid off by a man at some point in the future, so their risk tolerance is higher in this regard.

Which, of course, is exactly why men need to make it clear that they will not involve themselves with women who are heavily indebted.