[jariel]

I don't think you're ready for this one, but here at Real Talk Sessions, you get nothing but the realest of talk. This one is so real, it has to be divided into three parts.

Part 1: Pre-Game
Part 2: Game Time
Part 3: Post-Game Wrap Up

For this special edition of RTS, I have a First Ballot Hall-of-Fame teammate who's going to lace up his Nikes and hit the Real Talk trenches with me come Game Time, so first let me prepare you for what we hope to be an outstanding discussion on female neuroticism and how it feeds the culture of Game.

Exposure To Neuroticism Via Popular Culture


A lot of us in this community are Seinfeld fans. It was a classic show ahead of its time, even today, it's still a better comedy than damn near anything new that Hollywood has managed to create. This is in spite of the fact that the show didn't really have a story to tell, it was just nothing more than the random misfortunes of a small group of friends living in New York City in the 90s, mostly prior to the dot-com bubble of the late 90s-early 2000s.

When you get down to it, while the show itself was funny, as it managed to find humor from everyday life situations, the characters were not actually likable people; in fact, they often acted in ways that were inherently combative and thus toxic to what were supposed to be the deepest of friendships they had with each other.

Those friendships, and their toxicity, are easier to understand when you realize that the common trait that they as individuals shared was their neuroticism, which enabled them to understand and relate to each other.

They almost had to be friends, because nobody else really wanted to be friends with them -- in most cases people either didn't like them immediately or they ultimately would show their true colors after initial positive interactions, and people would eventually dislike them.

For example, Jerry dated a lot of women, and he ended a lot of those relationships for bogus, inexplicable reasons, such as a girl liking cereal just as much as he does, or a girl using a toothbrush that he knocked into the toilet unbeknownst to her -- he would even try to reconnect with some of his past flings if he later crossed paths with them, like Dolores aka Mulva.

Without belaboring the point, and bringing up a number of different examples in the process, all of the central characters of the show exhibited that type of irrational, act first, think later attitude, and it was great because we found the humor in it.

However, now men are dealing with that level of nonsensical behavior from women in their personal lives, and it's not as funny. To combat said behavior, men have taken to studying Game, which has become a tool that a man must utilize in order to deal with female neuroticism, behavior that is inherently toxic to healthy, interdependent relationships that people need and want to thrive in a world that functions entirely on interdependence.

The Film Room

Several years ago, Lori Gottlieb wrote a book entitled Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough that of course, just on the title alone, received a mountain of backlash from females.

Modern women want it all, and they want it all, exactly the want they want it. With men, women have developed an I don't want to play this game so I'm going take my ball and go home since I can't play it by my rules to assure victory in the way I want it mentality.

Anything short of that is considered settling, and modern women look at settling as losing. The author's point wasn't just to accept any man who would have them, but to curb their enthusiasm, tailor their expectations to levels more reasonable, and actually give themselves a chance to get to know people, instead of disqualifying them immediately based off pointless whims.

One of the comments the author makes during the interview is about a survey she conducted, in which she found most men said they'd be more than happy if a woman had 80% of the traits they desired in a partner, while 93% of women said they would not, as they considered being with a man who only had 80% of their desired traits as settling on their part.

Furthermore, she found that when men went out on a date with a woman, they were down to take her on a second date if she met just three conditions: they met their personal threshold for attractiveness, they were kind at nature, and they were interesting people to have conversations with.

Meanwhile, women listed 300 different reasons as to why they wouldn't go out with a man on a second date. These reasons included a fashion faux pas such as wearing a brown belt with black shoes or a guy doing an impersonation that they didn't find attractive, even if the guy had all of the other qualities they typically look for.

One of the mistakes men make in Game, is they often blame themselves for interactions not ending with their desired outcomes. They think they did something or said something, and in the end that one thing is the reason the relationship is not going to happen they wanted it to. What these men don't understand is that women are looking for something negative, anything, they can find to cross you off the list. At the end of the day, that is their issue, and not yours. If you wore an H&M polo to the date, and she's more of a Lacoste fan, that's not your fault. If you ordered an Amaretto Sour, and she feels like you should have ordered an Incredible Hulk, so she has no desire to see you again, that's her fault.

Women are actively denying themselves opportunities at happiness with men who would/could change their lives for the better simply because what's important to them is to cross off arbitrary checkpoints and get immediate 'gina tingles even if neither has absofuckinglutely nothing to do with having a productive, successful relationship with a man.

The author is correct in asserting that part of the problem has to do with the fact that women, regardless of age, buy into the illusion that there are millions of "soulmates" out there for them, so they don't have to settle for the guy who wears the brown belt with the black shoes. She's further on point when she points out that the next guy might be more stylish, but he'll have some other issue that they'll find fault with and the cycle will continue.

Before I continue, I did some research on this author. She's no Esther Vilar. She's a single, middle-aged woman who used her own personal background as a reason to write this book. She later wrote another book in which she used the guy she was dating as the subject to write about, and she fabricated most of the information in that book to fit her agenda. I applaud her effort here because the book is highly informative, but that's where my personal praise stops.

Exhibit A

After the book came out, Ms. Gottlieb hit the talk show circuit to market and support her effort. In this particular episode, the host had her staffers come out and give a recounting of their dating experiences that mirrored what was discussed in the book.

The female staffer featured in this video was the first to speak, and even though she spoke for several minutes, it doesn't take thirty seconds to see the point that this edition of RTS is making.

She told the story of a man she dated, who in her words was a "great guy" who actually, for whatever reasons, wanted to marry her, yet she was not having it.

The "great guy" had a lot going for him. He was not only good-looking, and obviously into her, but at the time, he was working and going to law school, he likely had a lot to look forward to, including a better-standard of living which he could offer her as his partner.

On the contrary, she was a fucking mess; she had nothin' poppin'. At the time, she had recently moved to L.A., was working a dead-end job, and was more likely than not broke, dusted, and disgusted. However, she had a man in her life who was more than happy to look past all of that.

Allow me to make a clear distinction between men and women, and it's one I've covered previously in the second installment of The Grown Man Hour:

Quote:

When men look for teammates, they're willing to take ones who they see as "potential", in other words, the teammate has some good qualities that aren't fully developed, and they're willing to have them on the team while they develop, and they're willing to carry the team during that process. However, women want all-stars on their roster. They don't want "potential". Potential can bust. Potential can be a waste of time. She wants you to step to her when you're ready to ball, not when you still need to learn how to play the game.

In this woman's case, she was just potential at best, but the man loved her anyway. He said, "Baby, I'm ballin' hard enough for the both of us, get on the team, you'll get yours in time, I'll help you get there."

She ejected because she was insecure. She rationalized her ejection by looking him over and creating deficiencies that weren't even there, like "He's too boring" -- the real problem lied with her, she wasn't good enough, she wasn't ready.

In the aftermath, her hamster rationalization continued with the typical lie of not having any regrets, but if she doesn't regret it, why is she still thinking about it?

She's still thinking about it, because she's still single, and she's still single, because she's still not really ballin'. She's just another one of these neurotic fish out here swimming in salty waters, and whenever they get hooked, they find a way to end up back into the water.

What men have to learn is that these fish do them a favor by hitting eject before men press fast forward and find themselves in a life they wouldn't really want to have with a person they wouldn't really want to be with.

[StrikeBack]

I've been mentally tagging those neurotic women as female losers. I've been through a number of them lately (mid-20s to about 30 y.o WASP females). Even if you consider them strictly as P&D materials, outside of literally sexytime, they contribute no value to your life and even add interruptions that take away value from you (e.g the BS flaking, the TXTing annoyance that disrupt your flows while youré doing business). They cost you a lot of time (and thus money, if you're worth a decent amount per hour) and kill your productivity.

In another reality where I'm not Game aware, I'd be like that "great guy" above, wanting to marry such a female loser despite her having nothing to contribute to the relationship while I bring everything to the table. For that, I'm forever grateful to people on sites like RVF that talk the real talk, which opened my eyes.

I distance myself from male losers, and so I want nothing to do with female losers as well. The solution is obviously to target high caliber women who actually bring values to my life, but sadly I find them very hard to locate. If you look into the under 30 crowd here, most are in BS studies, doing dead end jobs or feminist retarded careers, living in shitty shared houses or still at home, with no feminine skills to speak of. Their life is a horrible mess. Yet they are super picky and always try to find a reason to flake on you.

Fellas: there is nothing wrong with your Game. You are simply dealing with losers.

The only thing that drives me to game them at all is, like Roosh said in one of his recent blogs, being seriously horny (by my own standard anyway), possibly from all the lifting and other physical stuff I do. It's both a gift and a curse!

[brick tamland]

This is blog standard writing. Good work.

[UroboricForms]

Excellent stuff as usual. All game advice is "real talk" but I like the way you seem take it to a deeper level of understanding and scrutiny.

[realologist]

Great post as usual Jariel.

I feel there are so many neurotic women in America and other countries in the West is because the culture and mentality of these country breed it.

All these women are at a higher risk to be neurotic then combining that with a culture and mentality that makes them believe they are gods greatest gift to earth leads them to a never ending search for Mr. 100%, Prince Charming, Mr. Perfect.

That's why they get pumped and dumped throughout their youth because they find the tiniest fault with a man and say "Oh, he was never really right for me." Then they continue the never ending search for Mr. 100% instead of Mr. 90%.

Next thing they know they are 35-40 years old, way past their prime, and can't even garner the attention of their Mr. 50%. That's the main reason why they are so unhappy. They actually have to settle instead of earlier when they thought they were settling and that truth hits them that they are not so special.

[Fortis]

Thanks For this man.

[MMM]

Good post. This is an interesting concept, a blog within a forum. And a well written one at that. Most women are losers , but we tolerate it, at least in the short term, to slake the thirst. To paraphrase Patrice O'Neal, we, as high-value men, are Lovable, but these low value women are merely Likable.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vC9KJwcnJEo