[el mechanico]

(12-12-2011 11:26 AM)P Dog Wrote:  

(12-11-2011 12:19 PM)The_CEO Wrote:  

(12-11-2011 02:03 AM)pitt Wrote:  

What happened to G Manifesto? Dude was a ''monster'' on this forum.

not sure but he seems to have vanished when things got too low on the political forum, and he got fed up jousting with "slaves defending their master" as he'd put it.

He doesn't blog about game as often either, and when he does it's usually about boxing or hip-hop. He needs to make a come back, he hasn't posted on the forum since October.

Maybe he's in a LTR and his girlfriend wont let him come here? J/k

[Moma]

(12-12-2011 12:00 PM)el mechanico Wrote:  

Maybe he's in a LTR and his girlfriend wont let him come here? J/k

He is a hustler, maybe he is keeping his head low until 'things' blow over.
Maybe he is engaged to be married.
Maybe he is swooping in a country with poor internet connections.

[el mechanico]

(12-12-2011 12:14 PM)Moma Wrote:  

(12-12-2011 12:00 PM)el mechanico Wrote:  

Maybe he's in a LTR and his girlfriend wont let him come here? J/k

He is a hustler, maybe he is keeping his head low until 'things' blow over.
Maybe he is engaged to be married.
Maybe he is swooping in a country with poor internet connections.

What things? I have my own opinion/theory about this that I will keep to myself

[Deluge]

(12-12-2011 12:18 PM)el mechanico Wrote:  

(12-12-2011 12:14 PM)Moma Wrote:  

(12-12-2011 12:00 PM)el mechanico Wrote:  

Maybe he's in a LTR and his girlfriend wont let him come here? J/k

He is a hustler, maybe he is keeping his head low until 'things' blow over.
Maybe he is engaged to be married.
Maybe he is swooping in a country with poor internet connections.

What things? I have my own opinion/theory about this that I will keep to myself

It's either that or he's getting bored or tired with keeping up his online profile.

The last six months have seen the lowest density of posts from him. He's been blogging since at least 2005 for christ's sake he cannot disappear now, we need him more than ever. Anyone claiming he's a fake is out of their minds as well. It would be near impossible to regularly blog for more than half a decade about the lifestyle he leads and drop all the knowledge that he does, without himself living that lifestyle. No way he's a fake.

[misterstir]

@stitch, I learned a long time ago from growing up with 4 sisters that you never have "a deal" with a woman. I could make a deal with my brother, I put it on his favourite tv show and he will do my chore. I'd make that same deal with a sister and she'd leave me hanging and laugh at how stupid I was for doing what she wanted. To women, it is all about their feelings and it just ain't worth supporting them unless you have that "Deal" in writing.

[WestIndianArchie]

(03-02-2011 06:35 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

A hedge fund cat breaks it down:

"Dating a less successful woman isn’t about wanting women to be dumb. It’s about wanting someone who prioritizes their life in a way that’s compatible with how you prioritize yours. I love my job, but I work all the fucking time. If I date an equally driven woman, we’re both working 18 hours days, when do we even have time to see each other? We don’t. I date a kindergarten teacher who works—f**k, I have no idea how many hours kindergarten teachers work. How many hours do you work? Really? Sh*t. Well, you’re a really driven person and you love work. But the theoretical Kindergarten teacher, she has a more flexible schedule, she’ll be able accommodate me, it’s going to be easier. Just on a literal level, it’s easier. Why don’t women do this too? Every alpha woman I know wants to be with a man who is as successful as her or more so. And coordinating that stuff is almost impossible. Why don’t they just date some beta male who works in a bookstore and will make dinner for them every night? Doesn’t every successful person—man or woman—see how that’s easier?"

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41872437

All due respect, but i've never actually met a truly dumb girl.

I've met plenty without education, logic, rational thought, or common sense, but i've yet to meet one that didn't know how to use her "gifts" to manipulate the people around her.

[Downunder]

(10-26-2011 06:28 PM)Nonpareil Wrote:  

Smart men dating dumb women simply know the score; smart women tend to be neurotic, combative and give you plenty of headaches, dumb women are generally very easily amused and manipulated.

I prefer a girl of average intelligence, and think it's wack when I hear some guy who never gets any pussy pining that he wants a 'smart' girl.

Agree!!!!!!

[pitt]

If you guys still havent visited G manifesto blog, then i strongly reccommend that you have a look on it, i found it to be very inspirational although some posts could be more expanded. But i definetely respect the way he rolls, dude is an inspiration for us wanting to live that international playboy life (with cash).

G Manifesto you need to reccommend some suits for us to buy, i really wonder what type of suits you wear.

[BadgerHut]

(03-02-2011 06:35 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

A hedge fund cat breaks it down:

"Dating a less successful woman isn’t about wanting women to be dumb. It’s about wanting someone who prioritizes their life in a way that’s compatible with how you prioritize yours. I love my job, but I work all the fucking time. If I date an equally driven woman, we’re both working 18 hours days, when do we even have time to see each other? We don’t. I date a kindergarten teacher who works—f**k, I have no idea how many hours kindergarten teachers work. How many hours do you work? Really? Sh*t. Well, you’re a really driven person and you love work. But the theoretical Kindergarten teacher, she has a more flexible schedule, she’ll be able accommodate me, it’s going to be easier. Just on a literal level, it’s easier. Why don’t women do this too? Every alpha woman I know wants to be with a man who is as successful as her or more so. And coordinating that stuff is almost impossible. Why don’t they just date some beta male who works in a bookstore and will make dinner for them every night? Doesn’t every successful person—man or woman—see how that’s easier?"

http://www.cnbc.com/id/41872437

I am going to challenge the premise of this question.

First, very few men have real options, and thus most men are not making the decision to date a woman at all - the woman is deciding to date him, he is simply living the result of her choice. (Sure, he may have had to approach her or ask her out, but she decides whether the relationship continues.) So it's usually silly to impart selectivity onto the man's part.

But we are talking about hedge funders, lawyers, etc, men of high status, so we do have to consider their agency in dating.

There's projection going on here on the part of women complaining that men aren't valuing them for their intelligence. The fact of the matter is that men aren't selecting for intelligence in women the way women do in men*, the way women love to tout their boyfriend is "really smart."

But even then, women don't go on dates with computer programmers and run home vag-a-twitter calling their girlfriends about how "smart" he is. Women want intelligence in certain arenas - in fields that hold status,
and as a proxy for social dominance via mental craftiness (the ability to solve social problems with his wits). Pure intelligence is not an attraction marker, and there are plenty of smart people who are street-stupid. And plenty of hot women have dated dumb-as-rocks douchebags so it's not like they are even universal consumers of a smart-guys-are-hot syllogism.

Because feminists are so paranoid and know nothing about men, they see smart, accomplished men dating models and figure the guys must be intentionally targeting flighty women, as predators, so as to exploit them somehow. The truth is much more mundane - guys meet women, and date the ones they enjoy being around. Being attractive and pleasant buys you a lot with a guy, and the thing is that you don't have to be dumb at all to be both of those. But academic chicks seem to have a kink in their circuitry where they think being attractive and pleasant is selling out somehow, that men should love them for reading Faulkner and writing stupid journal articles and forget about their boners entirely.

It's the cry of the female beta. The sad thing is with just a little work on their style and personality, these women could be absolutely stunning. (Many films have this simple transformation as a plot inflection.) THEN their intelligence would be sweet icing on the cake, a killer garnish on the whole package - a woman any educated man would be proud to have at his side.

But it all starts with mindset, if their knee-jerk reaction is to vilify the hardwired male preferences and march in the streets instead of learning to maximize their competitive value, they'll keep asking questions like this instead of curling up with a man to pillow-talk about Napoleon's invasion of Russia and the consequences of the next Bernanke press conference**.

*I am probably something of an exception here, I demand a lot of intellectual stimulation and the bar for smarts for a woman I'll seriously date without getting bored is pretty high. There's a proximal point where dumbness and boredom shrivels my dick no matter what she looks like. But it has its limits, I'm not dating an intelligent beast.

**lozlzlzlzlzoozlzlzlz

[Caligula]

(12-18-2011 10:21 PM)BadgerHut Wrote:  

It's the cry of the female beta.

Brilliant post.

I'm always amazed by how unattractive women seem to think beauty and brains (or attractive personality traits) are mutually exclusive. Their ego-saving self-deception knows no bounds.

[pitt]

Caligula so you saying personality doesnt matter at all? i dont care about her personality if i just want her for a one night stand, but if i want to see her often then she better have some ok personality or at the very least bearable to be around me.

[Caligula]

(12-19-2011 12:11 AM)pitt Wrote:  

Caligula so you saying personality doesnt matter at all? i dont care about her personality if i just want her for a one night stand, but if i want to see her often then she better have some ok personality or at the very least bearable to be around me.

Where did you get that from? I merely pointed out that many ugly girls think you can either have personality or looks but not both at the same time. They do this to make themselves feel better about not being pretty.

I value personality a great deal in girls. And the good news is that hot girls can have lovely personalities.

[BadgerHut]

"I merely pointed out that many ugly girls think you can either have personality or looks but not both at the same time. They do this to make themselves feel better about not being pretty."

I actually see the opposite, I see girls who are not very pretty who think it gives them the right to be really bitchy and stuck up. It's like they think only ditzy shallow hot girls use the pleasant personality, so if they use it they are shallow too. Just like beta guys who don't want to be socially dominant because they think it makes them a douchebag.

You are correct to note that many hot women are quite nice - they've been the recipients of nice behavior all their lives, and repay in kind.

[Caligula]

(12-19-2011 12:25 AM)BadgerHut Wrote:  

"I merely pointed out that many ugly girls think you can either have personality or looks but not both at the same time. They do this to make themselves feel better about not being pretty."

I actually see the opposite, I see girls who are not very pretty who think it gives them the right to be really bitchy and stuck up. It's like they think only ditzy shallow hot girls use the pleasant personality, so if they use it they are shallow too. Just like beta guys who don't want to be socially dominant because they think it makes them a douchebag.

You are correct to note that many hot women are quite nice - they've been the recipients of nice behavior all their lives, and repay in kind.

You're right about unattractive girls being more bitchy and taking relishing bitchy behaviour.

These girls are attracted to socially dominant men and think that they can become more attractive by being more socially dominant. They strive to make up for those 2 points of attractiveness they're short from getting long-term interest from the alphas they long for.

Of course, when they become more socially dominant they also come across as huge bitches and scare off the men they pine for.

[BadgerHut]

(12-19-2011 12:35 AM)Caligula Wrote:  

(12-19-2011 12:25 AM)BadgerHut Wrote:  

"I merely pointed out that many ugly girls think you can either have personality or looks but not both at the same time. They do this to make themselves feel better about not being pretty."

I actually see the opposite, I see girls who are not very pretty who think it gives them the right to be really bitchy and stuck up. It's like they think only ditzy shallow hot girls use the pleasant personality, so if they use it they are shallow too. Just like beta guys who don't want to be socially dominant because they think it makes them a douchebag.

You are correct to note that many hot women are quite nice - they've been the recipients of nice behavior all their lives, and repay in kind.

You're right about unattractive girls being more bitchy and taking relishing bitchy behaviour.

These girls are attracted to socially dominant men and think that they can become more attractive by being more socially dominant. They strive to make up for those 2 points of attractiveness they're short from getting long-term interest from the alphas they long for.

Of course, when they become more socially dominant they also come across as huge bitches and scare off the men they pine for.

Everyone's right. There are ugly girls who are nice because like beta males it's all they have to offer. Ugly girls who are bitchy because they're bitter. Hot girls who are bitches because they can get away with it. Hot girls who are nice because they are enjoying their charmed lives.

[iknowexactly]

I've also found really hot girls are nicer on average. First of all, facial expression on a chick is part of what makes her hot-- not just her innate bone structure. If she's dim-witted ( stupid people's eyes move less and they move slower) bitchy ( scowl etched in) she may have perfect cheekbones but you can see the warning signs.

Lively eyes that move, some curiousity in the expression, combined with good genetics may mean she'll come harder and with less difficulty; and have handled enough men so if she's going to put you off she'll be diplomatic and practiced about it.

Of course, recent research indicates there are more female sociopaths than previously believed, ( because they're less physically violent they don't attract as much attention.) Sociopaths give humans of both sexes a bad name, they're essentially reptile-level characters in human bodies ( to grossly oversimplify.)

Badger, great rundown on academic chick bitterness. It sucks that a lot of smart chicks can't get into being submissive.

[Caligula]

Iknowexactly - how do you spot a female sociopath?

You're right that dull people usually have less expressive eyes / faces.

[xmlenigma]

Besides the attractiveness scale..

I'll add a new element here.. its not her IQ or her academic degrees or her profession or Well-read or well-traveled she is...

Its her EQ - Emotional Quotient. How GROUNDED, CENTERED, SECURE & TRUELY HAPPY, CONTENT SHE IS.

The opposite of a DRAMA QUEEN.

Maybe WISE & SPIRITUAL.

Very rare to come by.. in addition to having physical attractiveness and conversational chemistry.

If she is not fighting with herself WITHIN and owns herself..

A lot of women tend to have a "feminista" complex where they are always in competition with men. Which at times can stem through some past bad experience or seeing with their mother etc.. or at workplace where things arent fair.

But, if they see it as a one of the issues as part of the world that they have to live with.. Some things may never be equal. But you dont have to FIGHT or ONE UP people who LOVE you & support YOU.

True, many women have been abused in the past, but then again.. if they carry that MENTAL EMOTIONAL LUGGAGE.. they are always fighting. .. like they have SOMETHING TO PROVE.

Its always an EGO kick born out of insecurity.

For e.g. Stitch's wife. God, I loved an Ex-GF like that. Thank god never married. ... Those are DAMAGED GOODS.
INSECURITIES.. that they cant get PAST and end up making it someone or something outside, when its actually some LACK inside.

But, her SELF-WORTH & SELF-ENTITLEMENT was so messed up that she was always trying to tell me
"You dont respect me"
"What do you think I am some dumb blonde?"

They dont love & accept themselves enough and are always trying to prove themselves.

OTOH - Ive seen men & women who are so accomplished in lot of ways, but are very down to earth, humble & secure. They are.. They have nothing to prove to others.

BE v/s WANNA-BE

I know a friends wife. They dated in college, both engg. ,
he got an MBA,- business dev - consulting etc.
she worked with a Tech Consulting firm & was adjunct faculty at college, got married, kids, left her Tech job, started her own business in arts/crafts.. (HE supports her in doing that etc)

They are happy because they are grounded.. simply speaking DRAMA FREE.

I am not saying they might not have had issues as such, but its WORKING & MOVING together.. as a FAMILY. Not as Competitors.

I used to hear this & now believe it. TWO people should not be together if they are better off alone. TWO people should be together if they boost & raise each other more.. Multiplier effect.