[Dalaran1991]

(02-17-2015 04:57 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  

Quote:

Marriage/mother worthy - I won't marry, but having a child is only possible with a hot, sane, pleasant, fully Red Pill girl with good genetics and raw intelligence (education not required)

Why does she need to be intelligent?

I think because intelligence is genetic, and it would not do your child good to accidentally inherit low intelligence from the mom.

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

(02-18-2015 05:05 AM)Dalaran1991 Wrote:  

(02-17-2015 04:57 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  

Quote:

Marriage/mother worthy - I won't marry, but having a child is only possible with a hot, sane, pleasant, fully Red Pill girl with good genetics and raw intelligence (education not required)

Why does she need to be intelligent?

I think because intelligence is genetic, and it would not do your child good to accidentally inherit low intelligence from the mom.

I suppose the best thing to do would be to avoid all risks but in reality whether genes affect intelligence or not has yet to be proven with conclusive evidence; some studies seem to suggest there is a link whilst others discredit this link.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ
http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2014/...-do-school
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/...genes.html
http://www.nature.com/news/smart-genes-p...ve-1.15858

[Designate]

(02-14-2015 04:44 PM)Isaac Jordan Wrote:  

The male desire for both madonnas and whores is easily explained; just not so easily justified.

Quote:

For a man, women are vehicles that can carry his genes into the next generation. For a woman, men are sources of a vital substance (sperm) that can turn their eggs into embryos. For each gender the other is a sought-after resource to be exploited. The question is, how? One way to exploit the other gender is to round up as many as possible of them and persuade them to mate with you, then desert them, as bull elephant seals do. The opposite extreme is to find one individual and share all the duties of parenthood equally, as albatrosses do. Every species falls somewhere on that spectrum, with its own characteristic “mating system.” Where does humanity fall?

-Ridley, Matt. The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature (pp. 175-176).

The answer, as Ridley goes on to reveal, is that "we are designed for a system of monogamy plagued by adultery."

Just as women have evolved a mating system (alpha fucks & beta bucks) that maximizes their chances of passing their genes on to the next generation, so too have men developed a system suited to their own ends. It goes something like this:

A: If the woman in question is of high quality, commit to the relationship and invest in the children.

B: If the woman is of low quality, impregnate her but do not invest in the relationship or children.

This strategy (call it "quantity AND quality") is man's way of hedging his genetic bets.

Investing in your children, in the form of protection and resource acquisition, greatly increases their chances of survival and reproduction. This is particularly true of human children, with their lengthy time of development, and there's plenty of evidence to suggest that long-term pair bonding has always been a part of the human experience. If you want to ensure your genes make it into the next generation, being a devoted father has almost always been the best way to accomplish that.

Male promiscuity, however, comes with an interesting risk/reward ratio. Unlike women, where casual sex and/or cheating has historically risked 9 months of pregnancy, death during labor, and potential violence or abandonment if discovered by her partner, men have little to lose but much to gain by mating with every woman they encounter. All it takes is an orgasm, and a man has continued his genetic legacy.

While the ensuing bastards probably won't stand as good of a chance as his "legitimate" children, their reduced chance of success is more than offset by the low price he pays. Evolutionarily speaking, it's better to play with a shitty hand than not be in the game at all.

...

This all goes to say that men's mating system-of wanting to love and cherish a wife while simultaneously fucking a mistress or two-is entirely natural. That doesn't justify it, though, any more than you can justify woman's propensity towards alpha fucks/beta bucks. The fact that Mother Nature gave us these impulses doesn't justify our acting on them, any more than a natural craving for sugar justifies binge eating junk food to the point of obesity.

The simple truth is that human beings are animals. We're a couple DNA markers away from being chimpanzees, but we've evolved an incredible intelligence that enables rational thought and moral conscience. We still act like animals-murder, rape, theft, and adultery are just as natural for humans as they are for lions or lizards-but we alone have developed the unique ability to recognize and control our brute impulses.

What we're seeing today, across the board, is denial of this truth. In refusing to admit that we are animals, we are blind to the fact that we have a distinct nature, and this blindness prevents us from tackling the problems our nature presents. Civilization is built upon the restriction of certain behaviors; behaviors which, as we've seen, are entirely natural, yet at the same morally deplorable.

There are a million ways you can rationalize pumping and dumping sluts, or breaking the hearts of "good girls" through serial monogamy, or cheating on your wife with the yoga instructor. But at the end of the day, you're left with the same problem: that of reconciling your animal instincts with the knowledge that these instincts are often diametrically opposed to the very un-natural idea of morality. You don't get to have your philosophical cake and eat it, too.

I am, however, sympathetic to the posters who insisted that they only turned to the player lifestyle after realizing that their current environment was not conducive to a life of monogamy. It makes sense, biologically-if there are no women worthy of investment (or if investment brings with it risks that outweigh potential gains), then you might as well forget about that half of your strategy and focus on the other half. You can't fight the terrain.

In a perfect world, people would recognize their instincts and desires for what they really are-biological programming designed solely to ensure genetic continuance. They would realize we are designed for survival and reproduction, not happiness, and would fight their internal programming when it acted against the better interests of their family and society. (Replace "internal programming" with "original sin" and you'll see that religion has been attempting to achieve this for millenia.)

Our world isn't perfect, though, and it seems more and more every day that the only rational way to live is to pursue individualistic desires, even at the expense of society and civilization at large. I myself seem to be on that path, and I'm not attacking those who choose to take it. I simply prefer to do so with my eyes open, and perhaps with a hope that if the world changes, I too could change with it.

Great post.

[Isaac Jordan]

(02-12-2015 07:06 PM)Dalaran1991 Wrote:  

We never chose the player life. The player life forces itself on us.

I bet my ass the majority of men here would be willing to shake off the player's lifestyle if they manage to find one such feminine traditional girl AND they have society's insurance and reward/punishment system to encourage her fidelity.

But because that's a dream long lost, we are left with the only choice of pumping and dumping sluts until we run into such a girl.

I was reading through the Chateau's archives and came across this post, in which Heartiste theorizes that the welfare state has helped craft a generation of players:

Quote:

When provider males who are predisposed to marry and support a family are worth less on the market than they used to be they are slowly replaced by playboys taking advantage of the sexual climate. Women who have their security needs met by Big Government (in combination with their own economic empowerment) begin to favor their desire for sexy, noncommital alpha males at the expense of their attraction for men who will foot the bills.

Prediction: As women’s financial status rises to levels at or above the available men in their social sphere, they will have great difficulty finding an acceptable long-term partner. The men, for their part, will turn away from emphasizing their ability to provide as they discover their mediocre-paying corporate jobs are no longer effective displays of mating value. They will instead emphasize the skills of “personality dominance”.

The betas either learn to adapt or learn to love celibacy. The “seduction community” has grown organically out of the cultural soil to help these guys adapt. Now, instead of spending their money on diapers, these guys are spending it on in-field instruction in nightclubs.

Our genes only care about one thing: What is the winning reproductive strategy?

Also worth noting is one of the comments:

Quote:

Let’s take a generic scenario. Imagine you’re given some task — what it is exactly isn’t important. You’re told to go about this task in a certain way and not to deviate from it; you’re assured that you will achieve results if you do as you are told. And it’s not just a supervisor telling you this: it’s the books you read, the movies you watch, and in fact is the general view of society that the task should be performed in this one way.

You attempt to perform this task in this way, but you’re not having much success. You occasionally succeed, but it’s far from frequent, and you can never ascertain what made it work one time and not work the next. You’re basically in the dark, but you don’t question the method you’re using, because everything you’ve learned is telling you to do it that way.

Then a guy comes up next to you to do the same task. But here’s the thing: he’s doing it a different way. He’s disregarding the received wisdom on how to perform the task, and guess what? He’s getting much better results than you, and when he fails, he’s able to identify why and correct the mistake in the future. Sure, his method isn’t foolproof, but it has a vastly higher success rate than yours.

Now, if you were in this situation, what would you do? Would you continue to use your method? Or would you observe what the successful guy is doing and adapt your approach so that it’s more like his? If you’re smart, you’d adapt, right?

Now, here’s how to apply this example to the subject at hand:

Task = Attracting women

Traditional method = The strategies for attracting women that are generally accepted: Niceness, flattery, loyalty, acquiescence to her desires, and downplaying sexuality

New method = Pickup strategies: Disinterest, teasing, pursuit of your own desires, and being unashamed of sexuality

Does it make sense now why men use pickup strategies? To put it more simply, men employ these tactics and attitudes because they attract more women more consistently than the traditional methods. It’s a simple matter of efficiency.

To clarify: I'm not bashing the player lifestyle. Hell, I just posted in the +1 thread about how I'm excited to be back in the game after ending a one-year LTR with a conservative, Christian virgin. I couldn't be more thankful for game and the red pill.

However, I know I wouldn't be here if I hadn't reacted to numerous rejections earlier in life exactly like the commenter above. I have no doubt that had I been born 50 years earlier, I'd be living the typical married beta life.

[jamaicabound]

I notice this as a conflict within my self as well as on the forum as you pointed out. I'm a fairly traditional and conservative guys, prefer traditional gender roles, traditional family, want a good girl to settle down with.

At the same point I think I realize at this point in my life I don't have the pateince to develope something longterm. Honestly if I come across a good girl I'll probably grow tired of waiting and move on and then continue to bitch about why do I only get sluts and troubled girls lol.

I think its about doing some self reflection and figuring out what you really want at this time in your life. Do you want casual hookups or do you wnat to meet a good girl?

[CH-Toronto]

Let's let Ludacris discuss the matter:

[draketton]

Quote:

I always wondered the same. The majority of the forum is conservative leaning: traditional family models and femine women who keep themselves pretty and don't ride the cock carousel are respected and celebrated. There is a lot of nostalgia around here for a 1950s style society.

Paying attention to poll results and upvote counts in the game and everything else forums leads me to believe that most of the forum's readership is liberal hedonists looking to get their dicks wet and nothing else.

The no censorship, no nonsense discussion style about social dynamics invites a handful of well read conservatives to come here and speak their piece, but they don't win over many hearts and minds. Most of us don't give a damn.

[Ingocnito]

Men are explorers. Since most everywhere except space and the bottom of the ocean have been conquered, it's no fault of ours to be frontiersmen of pussy... a never ending frontier till death.
The key is to bang your regular, but keep the relationship just loose enough that you can get away with banging side ass that appears, if caught in contact with by your LTR girl, to be just a friend from the past, or co-worker, or school peer, etc... plausible deniability ensues.

Also, to do this you must enter your LTR with some social credibility, and an established social circle. Never be a TOTAL loner. That way your swath of relations runs too far and deep to set off alarm bells and always have an excuse that you're "busy fishing with the boys."

There's no doubt in my mind I can truly love my main LTR girl (to an extent based on verifiable trust), and be nailing other chicks without feeling remorseful or like a bad person. Sounds sleazy right? Nada. I've NEVER met a woman who has the tri-fecta of fidelity. Those are: Sexually (Physically) Faithful, Emotionally Faithful, and Financially Faithful (if married or co-habitating) ALL THE TIME, forever, just to me. Women break verbal contracts 24/7.

Think of the Chronicles of Riddick:"You keep what you kill..." I prefer the women I kill (hypothetically with my dick and good sex), to be all mine and Tri-fecta faithful, but only a fool would believe that is a possibility nowadays, it's just not what a woman is.

A major reason I can justify desire for traditional femininity and easy bangs, is we live in a changed era where almost no women are willing to give a man all that he desires even if he is the greatest man on Earth. Therefor, you're not with "a woman," you're relationship is with the aggregate concept of "women as a group." Since women are herd thinkers and actors on behalf of herd decisions, a man who thinks and acts on behalf of himself, has no choice but to clump the "herd" into one whole cohesive unit.

Feminine girls and sluts think remarkably alike. Both mindsets act on behalf of what, they a minimum "think," other girls have done (banged this guy.. he gets a lot of pussy), or for the more chaste women (date this man long term because my friends find him appealing and approve of him). Going back to beginning, again this is why social circle cred is extremely powerful. I've had numerous bangs where the girl literally got the green light from a friend, and I felt almost like she was fucking be "on bahalf" of her group of friends. I.e. If she did't fuck me, her friends would.. same goes with shots at LTRs.