Thursday, September 29, 2011

Miscellaneous Points

• Dismissing someone's comments because he's bitter because he can't get laid is like dismissing the owner of a crappy car when he complains that the car is a piece of shit. DUH, when else are you supposed to complain, when the car runs well? The most natural response to a crappy situation is to complain about it, so if a guy complains about women because he "can't get laid" then maybe, just maybe it's because there are many women who create situations which make it very difficult to meet or hook up with them, and hence they are crappy. A good indicator of their crappyness is that you can't get anywhere with them, from a simple hello to getting a date, to having sex.

• We are all descended from twice as many women as men. There's a statistic measured from genetic data that 80% of women historically passed on their genes, but only 40% of men did. This means that we are descended from the most "fit" men, and men walking around today are themselves descended from the most alpha men. So it's ridiculous when PUAs say how inept the vast majority of men are when it comes to meeting women, since modern men can only be descended from the most sexually successful men of the past. This is a very under appreciated and unacknowledged fact about men. So it is absurd when PUAs say that the average man supposedly has so much to learn when it comes to meeting women, and that acting "normal" just doesn't cut it with the modern woman. This is in direct odds with the fact that the male ancestors of the average man did just fine acting "normal". The truth is that women, especially attractive western women, have become more narcissistic and demanding than their historical birthright would dictate, so to these women it only seems that very few men are good enough for them, when in fact their ancestral genetic record indicates otherwise. Hence, raising the bar on what men should deliver in order to please the modern woman is completely artificial, let alone ridiculous.

• One argument PUA proponents use for their methods is that acting normal and being themselves doesn't work, so it only makes sense to learn strategies and tricks to get women. But this panders to the spoiled world view of (modern western) women, and furthermore it doesn't even work except in very few random instances, which is a far cry from anything consistent. And it does more harm than good anyway since it communicates to women that they aren't doing anything wrong, just like bailing out wall street doesn't do anything to get them to change their ways, so they continue on with business as usual which is damaging in the long run. The truth is that only a male revolution can change things, the same way that a tyranny can only be overthrown by people banding together. A few rebellious individuals operating here and there cannot effect change.

• Consistent lack of success with PUA methods is an indicator that they do not work. If you put in the effort, and follow the script and you get poor results, then you must conclude that the methods don't work. Now for example, someone might say that your criticisms of Mystery Method (or whatever method) shouldn't be taken seriously because of your low success rate, but at the same time you cannot reach a high success rate using Mystery Method because the method itself doesn't work, or only works marginally. The same goes for other PUA methods.

• Women having contempt for men is laughable, since men, just like women, are a part of humanity (one half of it to be precise), so hating on men is the same as hating themselves.

• Sex is something men buy and women sell, which is an economic representation of the history of male and female relations. But in times past the seller respected the buyer much more than today, and the system was much more functional. However, in the modern dating scene in western societies, the buyer-seller model still applies, but is cleverly disguised with fake courtship rituals and relationship quid pro quo, with the added insult that the sellers (the women) often disrespect the buyers (the men). It's like walking into a store, and instead of being greeted by the merchant you are ignored, and even scorned just for being there. You are starting from a negative position which you must climb out of somehow. In other words, you have to prove yourself worthy before even ATTEMPTING to buy.

• Men, at least in this part of the world, lack backbone with women. The degree to which women have gotten the upper hand is not a testament to the strength of women, but to the weakness of men. In fact, it is very easy to recognize when a woman is scheming or manipulative, but it is only that men are so easily blinded by their sexual impulses that women are allowed to get away with what they do.

• Western women always say they want confident men, but when you confidently approach a woman in a public venue she brushes you off with the cold shoulder, and that's because it is a social taboo to meet strangers in public. But really, it takes a lot of balls to cold approach someone in public, which is precisely what women say they want in a man. Unfortunately, such behaviour is not rewarded, no matter how gutsy it is. So in actual fact, women are only receptive to meeting "confident" men who operate within societies guidelines and restraints, which usually means meeting someone through their peer group, which is a chicken shit standard a man must adhere to in order to meet women.

• In the west, men hating on women is mostly a response to their shitty behaviour towards men. But women hating on men is mostly due to their indoctrination and socially downloaded negative programming towards men.

• If a woman flakes on you and you call her on it she will become very upset, not because you're falsely accusing her, but because in her mind you cannot possibly know that her flake excuse is bogus. So she's upset at your arrogance at assuming something to be true when you have no proof, and it doesn't matter that you are in fact right.

• PUA thinking takes the position that the customer is always right, where the customer in this case is women you are attracted to. With this mindset it's easier to simply go after what you want and do whatever it takes. Except that it takes two to tango and the fact that women themselves (especially western women) are hardly proactive at all in getting men, when there's no reason not to be, means that the dynamics are heavily biased in their favor. To gamers (and some highly ambitious types), if you want something from someone then they are always right, and the only thing that matters is figuring out what it takes to get it from them, and if you don't do this then you will go without. It's a mindset taught as truth without actually being the truth because acting as if it's true will make you as proactive as possible towards achieving your goal.

• Men have an ingrained deep need to do something proactive where women (or any other object of their desire) are concerned. And pursuing, being active, hard selling yourself, using PUA methods, etc. is a way to do something in a powerful way. That's a big part of the appeal.

• Guys learning game embody the idea of not bowing to women only in the context of doing whatever it takes to get them. It's comforting to them to feel like they are not bowing to women while also being as proactive/productive as possible in getting women. It fills two emotional needs at once even though they contradict each other.

• Being picky is not a virtue. So many women act like being highly selective is a good thing, so it's almost as if, to them, the act of rejecting is done just to feel better about themselves. This is certainly true in club environments where many women see men as bowling pins which you can knock down for self-esteem points.

• The fact that women are "everywhere" does not necessarily mean that your odds of meeting them will increase, just like having more people witness someone in distress will not necessarily mean that the odds of someone helping will increase. In fact, the exact opposite happens. This is known as the Bystander Effect, a proven yet counterintuitive phenomenon.

• In magazines and in online articles which show a picture of a man and woman, such as in a relationship context, the man is often shown looking at the woman while the woman is shown looking at the camera. This basically means that the man's focus is on her, while her focus is on the camera. It's almost as if the man is shown as an accessory to make her look good.

• Some men don't like prostitutes because the woman doesn't actually like them, and is just doing it for money. To me that wouldn't matter, anymore than I would care if my mechanic likes me as a person. As long as he can properly service my car, that's all I really want. I'm not paying him to like me. I'm paying him to service my car, the same way I would pay a woman to satisfy me sexually. However, I would want her to respect me. That is important, the same way it's important that my mechanic respects my wishes with respect to my car.

• When men complain about hard to meet women they are often called whiny or defeatist. But the defeatist argument is often used as a shield against deeper and more truthful examinations. And it's also a double standard to accuse men of being negative or defeatist when they complain about unapproachable hard to meet women. What about all the women who walk around with cold bitchy looks on their faces. Aren't they being negative and self-defeating too? How can you expect to meet someone when you carry around a fuck-off vibe? But when men refuse to approach these women because of their bad vibe they are the ones who are accused of being defeatist or lacking boldness.

• From my own experience, a woman who doesn't open up quickly is a lost cause. Yes it's possible to get some kind of positive response from her using wit and funny banter (such as by using PUA material), but unless she decides from the get-go that she wants to know you better you are wasting your time and you will get no where with her. Another point to make is that it is 10x easier for someone to make themselves approachable than it is for you to approach someone who is unapproachable. As a result, the burden should be on women to make themselves approachable rather than men having to overcome their resistance to being approached. So it makes no sense to approach a woman who avoids eye contact and has a fuck-off vibe.

• Attractive white anglo women are generally the worst. They are the British inspired, stiff upper lip, snooty, cliquish, stone-faced women whom the media sees as the gold standard of beauty. They are icy and cold in their demeanor and are highly adept at ignoring the shit out of you, especially if you're a man. You can almost marvel at this ability they have to completely and consistently ignore men in public, but only if you think in terms of how hard it would be for you (a man) to do the same thing towards them. The truth is that it's not an ability they have but rather a lack of something which enables them to treat men as invisible as well as they do. You can call it a lack of wonder, or even curiosity about the opposite sex, which is replaced instead with total indifference. This is hardly an ability worth crowing about in my book. So we shouldn't act so amazed at their ability to do this any more than we should marvel at the ability of a hamster to keep running on it's wheel for hours on end. It's nothing more than a symptom of a weak non-curious mind.

• Men have their faults too, no doubt. But when modern westernized women complain about men it mostly comes across as higher quality complaints about problems that you encounter when you already have the upper hand, and those below you are not measuring up to your standards. It is not that different from how a royal would complain about the misbehaviour of his subordinates and servants - oh look, they dropped the fruit tray again, those idiots. If you look closely at the general complaints men and women have about each other the following pattern emerges:

Women's complaints are generally that men don't measure up in some way. For example, all he wants to do is drink beer and watch sports, or he did X when he should have done Y. The complaints are often just vague descriptions, with not too much detail, and with focus on men's shortcomings (real or perceived).

Men's complaints are generally that they can't connect with women, that they aren't given the time of day, that they can't make progress, that they aren't meeting women's expectations, that they aren't getting positive responses despite putting in the effort.

Women's complaint format: "He's not good enough".

Men's complaint format: "No matter what I do I'm not good enough".

One group is focused on self-improvement and the other isn't. One group is forced to be introspective, and the other isn't. Therefore, which group is most likely to be humbled and realistic in their expectations? Which group is most likely to gain feelings of entitlement and narcissism?

• As a consequence of their bias against men, women raise the bar on what constitutes a "good man" and lower the bar on what constitutes a "bad man".

Thursday, September 8, 2011

Which Toronto Women Am I Talking About?

Not all of them. I will admit that I say some pretty negative things about women in this city, but that does not apply to all of them. There actually are quite a few genuinely sweet and nice women in this city, but my feeling is that the overwhelming majority of these women come from the pool of the older and/or less attractive ones. These women are sexually unattractive and/or are 40-50 years old at least and although some of them might be "cute", they usually aren't the kind of women that men desire the most sexually. However, this does not mean that men only desire the hottest model types, and therefore if THOSE few women act like bitches then ALL women must be bitches. The truth is that there's actually a minimum level of attractiveness a woman in this city needs to have in order to start crossing the threshold into entitled bitch territory, so there's a fairly big range of women who act this way. Hence my venom is mostly directed at these women

A woman's propensity for being a stuck up bitch is directly related to her level of physical attractiveness. The more attractive she is, the more likely she will develop narcissistic traits. This is true for women of all nationalities, but it is most true for young, white, anglo women. Young, white, attractive, anglo women are in a class of their own and display an alarming level of coldness in their daily interactions. You could say they are all "business" when it comes to how they view the world and what they expect from others. As a group, they are the coldest females around. Do not expect any warmth from them if you're a stranger, unless of course you're in a professional setting and it is their job to be polite and feign warmness. These women are the British inspired, stiff upper lip, snooty, cliquish, stone-faced women whom the media sees as the gold standard of beauty. They are icy and cold in their demeanor and are highly adept at ignoring the shit out of you, especially if you're a man. You can almost marvel at this ability they have to completely and consistently ignore men in public, but only if you think in terms of how hard it would be for you (a man) to do the same thing towards them. The truth is that it's not an ability they have but rather a lack of something which enables them to treat men as invisible as well as they do. You can call it a lack of wonder, or even curiosity about the opposite sex, which is replaced instead with total indifference. This is hardly an ability worth crowing about in my book. So we shouldn't act so amazed at their ability to do this any more than we should marvel at the ability of a hamster to keep running on it's wheel for hours on end. It's nothing more than a symptom of a weak non-curious mind

Now, some would say that (for attractive women in general), being a bitch is a defense mechanism used to ward off creepy aggressive guys, but I beg to differ. For these women, being a bitch is an inward reaction to her outward attractiveness. It's a self-induced pumped up egotistical state, something she carries around with her constantly and which bleeds through her entire personality, even in environments where there is no chance of a man hitting on her. As mentioned, this attitude is totally proportional to how attractive a woman is, and this society caters to this attitude. For example, you sometimes hear a guy complain about a certain woman who acted like a bitch towards him, and then saying that she's not hot enough to behave like that. This implies that in this culture, an attractive female is allowed, accepted and even encouraged to be a stuck up bitch.

Even moderately attractive women in this city carry around these cold expressions like permanent ice shields. Some of them might be nice in a professional setting, but when it comes to meeting men it's "game on" and they become ruthless. The attractive nurse who nurtures and looks after sick people in the hospital becomes a stone-faced ruthless bitch when placed in an environment which contains men who might want to date her.

Ironically, your best chance at meeting a nice datable woman in this city is to focus on the unattractive women and those women who are at a stage in their life where they are no longer physically attractive. And the latter is not necessarily strictly related to a certain age range. There are attractive women in their late 40s and even 50s who still act like stuck up bitches. They haven't yet reached the stage in their life cycle where they are ready to become genuinely nice human beings who aren't drunk on their sexual market value.

But since most single men want to meet women who are at least somewhat attractive, then your options are seriously restricted, and you must focus on finding the right niches. This could be meeting foreign women who recently moved to Toronto, or play the numbers game and just approach like crazy until you meet someone you like and who likes you.

"So What Do You Do?"

This is how Toronto women start off their relationships, by asking men what they do for a living. It's a quick way for them to size us up financially, socially, and economically. And unlike what some say, it's usually not a "get to know you question". It usually goes well beyond simple curiosity. They want to evaluate your social status, pure and simple.

Now, I will admit that it is understandable that as two people get to know each other they find out things about each other, like what each does for work. But that should come up naturally.

But when a woman asks the question in the first few minutes then you should suspect that she is evaluating your status. And this has nothing to do with your sexual attractiveness, as some would say. If a woman wants to fuck you she will not care what you do for a living. I know this from personal experience. This becomes very obvious on Lavalife, when I'm chatting with some chick and a few minutes into the conversation she asks me "what do you do?" At that point I know immediately that her interest in me is mostly not sexual, and therefore we have nothing further to discuss. Because even if I tell her my profession, all it does is trigger her hypergamy instinct which gets me absolutely nowhere.

So like I said, when a woman just wants to hook up she doesn't care what you do for a living. Sure, it might come up later, but it's not in the front of her thoughts. This is how I screen, and it's especially easy to do this on the internet. If she asks what I do a little too early she is OUT. But if I write a profile that basically says I don't want anything serious (i.e. looking for sex) then the women who respond never ask me that question. It's quite fascinating really.

So there you have it. An insider tip on how to find the women who want you for sex is to avoid those women who ask early on "what do you do?"