Now in pill form.
Life is tough for the beta male. During his twenties, as Manosphere dudes never tire of reminding us, women reject him, choosing instead to throw themselves wantonly at caddish alpha males.
Only after these cruel, callous women have squandered their youth and beauty – by the age of 30 if not earlier – do they turn at last to the betas, who’ve been patiently waiting in the “friend zone” the whole time. Those poor betas, nice guys and good providers all, are then lured into marriage with these now-ugly shrews, who are no longer interested in sex, and want only their money, often used to provide for kids sired by alpha males. (See here for Holly Pervocracy’s more detailed analysis of the “Greek system.”)
But life can be tough for the alpha male as well, driven to exhaustion by nearly constant sex with an incredible array of horny twentysomething women. The movie trailer below will give you some idea of just what the typical alpha male has to deal with on a daily basis.
![Raw Story on The Top 5 Rape-Apologist Reactions to the Steubenville Verdicts [UPDATED]](https://i2.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/rape_culture.png?resize=50%2C50)
Like, for real, thanks, dude, you destroyed Game as a concept, on your own terms, better than I would think to. That is an insultingly small number for a group of idiots who claim you need to reliably be sleeping with multiple women a week.
Mind, for those of us who aren’t mega assholes, “Does it get me sex” is not the correct way to approach conversations, but you empathy-less fucks aren’t even good at being shitty human beings.
You’d be surprised if you met me, I’m gentle, warm, empathetic, and non-pushy. Give me ten minutes to talk away my face and back, and you’ll have met a multilingual, cultured scholar.
49 out of 50 women I meet can’t get over the hunchback almost Little Person thing when it comes to dating. Their preferences are not my fault. And I do have to explain the transit dependence, which is a minus, emasculating. 2% is my liberation, better than many men will ever do. And I don’t Game with insults or dominance, when a common putdown is that someone will spontaneously joke about tossing me to shut down my conversation.
So, actually, it “works”, if only because it gave me steps to take in a concrete way. It works much better for more typical men.
“Their preferences are not my fault.”
Their preferences are also something that you should respect. If someone isn’t attracted to you and doesn’t want to have sex with you, they have every right to feel that way.
really? How do you know that is how you come across to total strangers in a bar scene? What kind of feedback from others supports this self-perception?
I ask because a number of our troll dudez, notably Brandon and MRAL, claim to be all lovely in “real life” as if internet interaction isn’t real.
If that’s true, I am left to wonder how such a disconnect between online persona and offline persona comes to exist. But I mostly think that the women they interact with are too polite to tell them what shitheads they’re acting like–which is how most of the women I know treat shithead men offline.
So, to recap: Eurosabra is completely shallow but resents shallowness in the shallow women he pursues. He lies about who he is to women to get them to have sex with him, but expresses some resentment that the shallow women he pursues aren’t interested in getting to know more about his fine qualities. And despite pursuing thousands of women based on nothing more than their looks and proximity to his bus stop, claims to have a 1 in 100 average.
Oh, and if feminists keep saying Game doesn’t work it’s going to cause men to rape.
That about the gist?
Also, let’s pretend for the sake of argument that Eurosabra is correct and he comes across as gentle and empathic in real life. It seems unlikely, given how cold and calculating his attitudes towards women are, but let’s pretend.
Why do you think that your being warm and empathic means that women should be willing to have sex with you, Eurosabra? Once again we’re back to the fact that women have physical preferences, libidos of their own, possibly boyfriends or even girlfriends, etc. They are not sex vending machines that ought to provide you with the sex that you want if you’re just nice enough and ask in the correct way.
The fact that you don’t get this is just one of the many reasons that you’re creepy.
Eurosabre, weren’t you talking earlier about how you blend in, how forgettable you are? Um, if you have a hunched back that would probably make you rather memorable wouldn’t it? Its not something seen with any regularity, even mild cases. So I fail to see how women you had spent time with would completely forget that they’d done so…
Maybe they forget him because he slips ketamine into their drinks.
And yes, Eurosabra, you really do come across as creepy enough that you might do something like that.
Riiiiiight, Eurosabra. You’re a warm and empathetic dude who “lightly” gaslights (your words) women.
Eat a bowl of bees.
CassandraSays, perhaps they are just trying to politely discourage him. It just seems strange that he would say that he’s unusually small for a man almost straight off the bat, but the women don’t remember him and now this. Both traits are unusual enough to stay in a persons memory.
People keep treating me well as a regular various places and inviting me various places and into their social circles. That sort of evidence? And I tend to bond with them on the basis of shared experience and culture, whatever my appreciation of aesthetics.
So you’ve summarized Strawsabra. Big deal.
You’d be surprised if you met me, I’m gentle, warm, empathetic, and non-pushy. Give me ten minutes to talk away my face and back, and you’ll have met a multilingual, cultured scholar.
Then how come you never get a second date? You couldn’t be approaching 1000, or even 100, women every year if anyone ever wanted to see you again.
Also, what the hell could you possibly talk about that wouldn’t be an immediate turnoff? All you ever do is spout made-up statistics about a completely bunk theory. If you think and talk about dating that way, you’re going to think and talk about politics or the arts or whatever else that way, too.
So fucking whiny.
You’re the person who comes here complaining that the women you approach aren’t physically interested in you, despite the fact that you’re -according to you- charming, intelligent and empathetic. You deliberately pursue women who, by your own admission, are not interested in the hopes that if you pursue enough of them, while lying about who you actually are, you’ll wear down/temporarily interest 1 in 100.
These are your words. There’s no “Strawsabra.”
This is who you claim to be: a fundamentally dishonest person, who doesn’t think enough of himself to pursue a relationship with someone who might actually like him. You can call it “Game” if you want.
I just call it sad.
Pillowinhell, yeah, I can see that. I’ve occasionally pretended not to remember people who I met once and didn’t care for. It could also be that he’s so boring that people forget him, but I find it hard to imagine anyone not noticing and remembering a very unusual looking guy who was methodically going around and hitting on every woman at the bar/club.
Really, though, his fundamental issue seems to be that like most PUAs he thinks that if a woman/women as a whole don’t seem to want to fuck him that’s NOT FAIR, and therefore whatever unethical things he has to do to make sex happen are justified as a result of women’s unfair refusal to fuck him.
Everytime he starts yakking I hear this song in my head, but with the lyrics changed to “hey hey, he’s a creeper, people say he’s creeping around”, and so on.
He’s whiny and rather dim–who comes to a feminist blog to wank about their horrid dating luck and admit to being a total misogynist creepball? Wrong venue, dude.
I’m sure Heartiste would be happy to trade Game tips with you. His words are also gross and creepy and misogynistic!
I’m sure it will be a match made in heaven.
Eurosabra soesn’t want a girlfriend, or even just a date – he wants a number he can skite about. I wonder what he does to provide ‘proof’ to his mates that he’s not making it up?
*doesn’t
*likes*
“You know, I come to conquer Italy because I thought they were all small, you know? I thought they was really tiny guys…”
“No, no! They are freaks! Not one of them under five foot six! What kind of theatre are you running?…That’s what I like! LITTLE THINGS HITTING EACH OTHER!”
I didn’t say it was horrible. I’ve even got a few female admirers, dates, FWBs and a PUA group. It’s just that it took stripping my life of all other activities besides work to sustain the lifestyle. The “thousand to one” was the bad old days, long over.
I know Heartiste personally, and frankly, his politics are cruel. I don’t actually hate people enough to go that route. Breivik etc.
“hey hey, he’s a creeper, people say he’s creeping around”
Creeper-man, creeper-man, does whatever a creeper can…
What the shit? One minute you go from “I have a mighty 1% success rate when seducing for sex” to trying to pretend you have a coterie of women near you at all times who will sleep with you? What a transparent liar.
Rutee: No, you see it was before he got Game (though not the nasty kind, just the confidence building that comes from gentle gaslighting), he was batting .001, and now (with the help of game), he’s up to .020.
Which, hes says, is better than most men ever manage.
“Which, hes says, is better than most men ever manage.”
This is my favorite part of his argument, and the PUA argument in general.
Um, guys? Most men’s batting average is considerably better than that, without them having to attend any Game workshops (that will be $500, please). The secret is not constantly pestering women who clearly have no interest in you.
Don’t fear the creeper.
I have to say that listening to PUA’s talk, at first I was thinking, wow… there are some dudes out there who are getting all sorts of sex, because guys kike Roissy are all about how much more sex the are getting then everyone else (thus proving they are alphas).
Then I saw more of what they were saying.
One… I’m pretty sure I’m doing at least as well as the “Masters of Game”, in that, more often than not, if I decide I really want to sleep with someone, we end up spending some time not sleeping together.
I might not have Roissy’s numbers (hard to say, I know how many partners I’ve had, I have no way to know how many he’s had; nor any good reason to trust his self-report. Unlike me, he’s made something of a career [albeit, not it seems a monetary one, merely one of adulatory fanboys telling him how great he is] of his mad skills with the ladies), but I’ve also not spent huge amounts of my energy trying to get laid with new women all the time.
I will wager I’ve had more sex than he has, even if he’s had more partners, because I’ve had lots of repeat business.
I managed to invoke some words of power, and tripped the auto-moderator.
Quality beats quantity.
In my experience, quality begets quantity.
🙂
Feminists and their allies can mock all they want – but women do impose a sociosexual wealth” hierarchy upon men, where there are extremely sociosexually wealthy men (alphas) who get to have no strings sex with lots and lots of women, masses of men (betas) who struggle to get much of anything – usuallly having to “pay” for sex with relationships, dates, etc with women who are not even as good looking as they themselves are – and then you have the bottom tier men (omegas) who cannot get sex/female validation if their lives depended on it. Whereas any woman of reproductive age – even if ugly, poor, disabled, unpopular etc – can easily get sex. Women (and the alpha males they give all the sex to) are entitled to sex and reproduction – only the betas are expected to be “nice” and “egalitarian” to get anything at all.
Men do objectify women – for looks/beauty – but women do objectify men – for relationships, status, power, dominance etc – and always have and always will even in a modern world. Even women with power seek out men with power – usually more in fact – because women are hypergamous. Feminism is all about women wanting to be objectified for the same reason they objectify men for – power, status, “success”, “achievements”, etc – all just codewords for alpha – the only thing women value.
Fact is – men with social status – whether that status is popularity, “coolness”, thuggery, money, high status careers, fame, power, etc – is what women gravitate towards sexually. Even if the male is ugly. Look at all of the ugly old politicians who have beautiful, young women of prime reproductive age throwing themselves at them, or the ugly serial killers and thugs in prison. While joe beta who is a decent guy struggles to get anything. Famous actors, musicians etc – even those who aren’t good looking – can have sex with hundreds if not thousands of women – again, while joe beta who is told that status is not important and he should just be “equal” and “respectful” to women and that will get him sex actually gets nothing or very little.
Feminism is Matriarchy is female sexual selection on steroids. Women are hardwired to have sex with the alpha males while using the beta males as a kind of cuckold support system. Birth control and women’s rights allows women to dispense large amounts of sex, which disproportionately goes to the top ranking males – who are often bullies that women uplift in the sociosexual hierarchy by rewarding their behavior with sex, and then women encouraging those men to abuse and dominate the softer/nicer beta men – this is feminism/matriarchy in action and what it really is about – a socially darwinistic misandrist movement masquerading as egalitarianism. Every man who is bullied and suffers social and physical bullying by alphas (who then get all the sex/women as a result of their thuggery) is really a victim of women’s violence – done to beta males via alpha males – this is how the masses of men are kept in line under Matriarchy. Only the beta males are expected to “see women as people”, “be equal to women”, “not objectify women” – required to follow the feminist rules (which make such men unattractive to women, by design). But those same women will drop their “rules” as fast as they drop their panties for alpha males. Those same women will be feminine and sexy and not mind being “objectified” by alphas. These are really the men who benefit greatly from feminism – which is essentially a system of sexual wealth distribution upwards to alpha males.
The alpha/beta/omega sociosexual class system is real and something experienced and perceived by men individually and collectively. Most men know clearly what one is talking about when this is described, and this hierarchical class sytem as experienced by those who describe it is just as valid as any other. Women/feminists are simply being deliberately obtuse i.e. “playing stupid” – but clearly know that the men who get the no strings sex are the ones who women value as studs, masculine, cool, – alpha- whereas the men who don’t get the sex are laughed at as having small penis, not getting laid, weirdos, nerds etc. Women know that sociosexual wealth, sex, beauty, femininity and all of the things men like are something they only give to the top ranking alpha bully dogs – at the expense of the rest of the men. Women know – and the truth comes out in moments of anger – which is why I – unlike most men actually welcome women’s shaming attacks on beta males. It gives us insight into female sexual selection and what feminism is really about – enslaving the majority of the men as relatively sexless, genderless, “egalitarian” worker drone beta males – while giving the sex and power and gender/masculinity to a few top dog alpha males. It is about purging the betas from the genepool. It is female sexual selection and matriarchal social darwinism in action. Humans are descended from twice as many women as men for this reason. Women(even ugly, fat, poor, etc) and alpha males are entitled to sex and reproduction – while the beta boy chumps are expected to be the nice guys who aren’t “allowed” to want sex, beauty and femininity – who are expected to just enjoy being at the bottom of the sociosexual hierarchy while women and alphas live it up.
Well, I’m definitely not an omega, as I have sex regularly and have a large number of good female friends, some of whom go back decades. But I also can’t be a beta, as I don’t “struggle to get much of anything” and have been more than satisfied with the quality of partners I’ve had over the years.
Which means I must be an alpha. Woohoo!
Either that or you’re talking absolute crap, of course. Grudgingly, I have to accept that the latter might be a possibility.
You see, making this sort of claim without any evidence (you present NO evidence whatsoever, just a bunch of claims, and no, a bunch of men believing these claims to be true does not make them true) shows the absolute sterility of your argument:
Whereas any woman of reproductive age – even if ugly, poor, disabled, unpopular etc – can easily get sex.
There are many women who can attest that this is not true, including myself.
You also completely leave out all the lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, etc from your stupid little theories of the universe.
Citation fucking needed.
It’s really sad that there are people out there who think this of dates and relationships.
I don’t think of them as collecting a fee but as, you know, spending time with my sweetie. We provide company, emotional support, a trusted confidant, and lots and lots of cuddles for each other. And he gets these things too. When we cuddle, he gets cuddled too, and as he is not a sex-seeking robot he actually enjoys that.
…This is one of those things that’s hard to explain, it’s so obvious.
Also obvious? When a guy thinks of relationships as the price of sex, and has no interest in actually, you know, relating. I can kinda spot that a mile away and no wonder you don’t get sex then.
If guys like this want to see relationships as purely transactional, they shouldn’t be surprised when women are pragmatic shoppers looking for the best deal.
Indeed. Where’s that “like” button?
No, dude, I promise you, your problem is not that you’re too nice.
I really wouldn’t even worry about that one.
Also: Never mind queer people, never mind single women–the Greek system doesn’t even account for relationships. I don’t go around judging all men sex-worthy or not-sexy-worthy at all times, because I have a boyfriend.
The question of “who am I in an established, positive relationship with?” influences my sex decisions a lot more than who has the silverest back and pounds his chest the hardest. And not because that relationship is “payment” but because it means I trust him more than I trust some random silverback. And this is kind of the normal way things work and I can’t believe I even have to explain this.
Holly, it does seem like we’re running a seminar on basic humanity this morning, doesn’t it?
That’s some wall o’ text. I salute you sir, it takes a special mind to be able to put that much quantity on the page, and manage so little quality; and maintaining something which resembles coherence.
It’s all balderdash of course. If the Α/Β/ Ω were true… I wouldn’t have been getting laid when I was in my twenties, stone broke and looking nothing like Brad Pitt (or, more to the point at the time, Tom Cruise/, though I was compared to Matthew Broderick, if you made him skinny).
But I was, and I wasn’t using Game. I was treating women as if they were people. I talked to them, got to know them, enjoyed their company for the sake of their company.
And I was getting sex. For looks it went from stop traffic to plain. What they all had in common was I liked them. I didn’t objectify them. I appreciated their looks (why not, they were/are attractive).
You, and your ilk, however DO objectify women. You treat them as objects. That’s the difference. I can look at a someone walking down the street, and think, “Damn…!!!” I may even turn and watch for for a bit; because I am likely to never see them again.
That’t not objectification If, however, I go into a bar, or the grocery, and say, “10 on the left, a pair of 8s on the right… I can cut the 9 off from her 6 partner and then we can shag till dawn.”, that’s objectification. They aren’t people anymore (NB, that both descriptions were gender neutral: it’s not who does it, it’s what gets done).
But go back to your playground, and talk to the other kiddies; get them to tell you what sex is all about. I’m sure they know more than the grownups.
I should clarify: I wasn’t, in my twenties, getting all the sex I wanted. I’ll even say there were times I was thinking “shit, I’m not getting any”. I was also looking at other people and assuming they were getting laid left, right, and sideways. Looking back, they were probably getting no more than I was (and perhaps less, I tended to be quiet about whom I was sleeping with).
But I was getting it, and I was getting it at a lot higher rate than the Α/Β/Ω System allows for. I was broke, had no car/a ten year old Toyota (before they were “classy”) was working pizza/security/au pair/studio projectionist and going to school.
Not a “catch”. But that didn’t, when all was said and done, matter. Because it seems I was nice, and liked women for themselves. I didn’t have an agenda (desires, yes, but no one owed me anything. If I went horseback riding with Karen, it wasn’t because I wanted to get into her pants, it was because class was cancelled and she needed a riding partner; and I too wanted to go riding).
That’s where you, and yours, are fucking up (and why you can’t seem to get to the fucking). You see it all as a quid pro quo. It’s off-putting, and bemeans the people you are trying to get into bed. Why should they want to have sex with you? You don’t really see them as anything more than a conniving, scheming cheat, out to take you for everything you’ve got and leave you by the side of the road.
You’re an asshole. With an attitude like that you don’t deserve to get laid.
Hellkell – For serious. Brandon has to learn to stand in line and share his toys, and vsh has to learn that “love” is when two people like each other very much and want to do a lot of things together.
There are some kindergarten teachers and Cub Scout leaders who have some answering to do to us.
A fundamental problem with the Α/Β/Ω system is that it seems to take no account of people who’ve had a very small number of longstanding and very high quality partners – in some cases just one, because they struck lucky first time.
It seems to me that these people are not in any way anomalous – in fact, I reckon they’re a very substantial slice of the pie chart representing the whole of humanity – and yet they’re completely ignored. Presumably because this is because they’re not “buyers” in this “marketplace” that PUAs and their ilk seem to think is normal?
I don’t get people like vsh247, seriously. I’m a guy who has never had sex, and not because I am asexual, but because I am extremely socially awkward. I was somewhat bitter about it when I was younger, but I didn’t blame women for it.
And I have been friends with several women, some of which also had problems having sex, either because they were also socially awkward, or because they were not conventionally attractive. Even if you somehow manage to not be friends with any of the women you meet, you just have to look around to see that there are women having similar problems. It makes me wonder what planet they’re living on where all women everywhere are constantly having orgies with all the “alphas”.
Myoo: It’s because they project. I’m going to try to get into their heads.
1: Everyone want’s lots of sex. (we shall ignore the “why”,and merely focus on the what. The differences they ascribe in motivation for wanting sex are mind-boggling, and completely incompatible; the internal logic is so full of fail as to beggar all hope of description).
2: Anyone who isn’t in a relationship is, therefore, always on the make.
3: Women can always get sex.
4: Since all women can get sex, and everyone wants lots of sex, and there are a lot of guys who aren’t getting sex, there must be a some guys getting tons of sex.
5: If some guys are getting all the sex, then women must be unfairly apportioning it.
6: This is wrong, and it’s the fault of the women.
That, in a nutshell, is, “the Sexual Marketplace”. There are a lot of modifications, and attempts to rationalise the incompatible elements (most of which hinge on the several, but non-severable, theories of female sexuality), but in a nutshell the theory is, all women are fucking like rabbits, so any lack of sex on the part of men is because women are refusing to have sex with them, which is unfair.
@Pecunium
Well, yes, I understand that they have those premises, what I don’t understand is how they can reconcile them with reality. I mean, a simple examination of the world shows those premises to be incorrect. It’s as if you met someone who was convinced the sky is green, but never looked up to confirm. Is it simply intellectual laziness, or are their perceptions distorted by their beliefs to that extent? It’s odd.
I’m having dinner tonight with a woman who hasn’t had sex in over a decade – she realised one day that she just didn’t enjoy it, decided to opt out, and that was that.
I’ll have a close look and see if she’s got a horn growing out of her forehead, because she’s clearly some kind of mythical fairytale beast.