Fat Women And The Omega

Obsidian asks why fat women get so much hate in the game community-

http://theobsidianfiles.wordpress.com/2009/12/25/why-do-plus-sized-women-get-so-much-hate-in-the-game-community/

My response was the negativity was not so much specifically directed at fat women as women in general, who do not behave as men would like them to. One thing men hope for from women is that they will maintain slim figures; a fat women is, at a glance, not doing that, and thus not behaving as a man would like her to. Her failure to conform to expectations is not necessarily worse than other kinds- such as being a bitch, lacking interest in or at least tolerance for male hobbies, unwillingness to engage in sex, or kinky sex, or sex of the frequency desired by a man, it is just more obvious.

The “game ” community overlaps to a great deal with the “mens’ rights” community, which is involved in protesting the bad treatment of men by the courts in divorce. These things should not, however, because they are two different things with completely different goals.

Imagine, if you will- as Rod Serling might say- a car salesman, involved in the business of selling used Toyotas. All that matters, as far as his immediate and personal well-being, is that he successfully sell used Toyotas. Time and energy spent complaining about how people won’t buy used Toyotas is completely wasted, beyond the somewhat self-destructive effect of temporarily making him feel better. He may see a young guy with a goatee come on the lot, and try to sell him a car. This guy is not a good prospect, so he leaves. He then sees and older woman, plainly dressed, or maybe a young woman of modest means with a child in tow. He stresses the reliability and reasonable cost of the vehicle, and she makes the purchase. Some people will buy used Toyotas, and some won’t. Commiserating in the break room over bad coffee with your fellow used Toyota salesmen about all the lousy lookie-lous who won’t buy won’t put any money in your pocket.

OK, we are only concerned here with what women do, not how we feel about it. Here’s another twist to it- a guy approaches a fat woman, maybe in a bar, maybe at a church picnic, and gets shot down. His pain is much worse than if she had been hot. After all, hot women are in demand, right? They get lots of offers, and are expected to be picky. Even if you don’t think your odds are good, you’ll go for it anyway, because she may be receptive that day or moment, and you might get lucky. If you go after a fat woman, on the other hand, you expect her to be receptive, because she does not have as many options. If she rejects you, it’s a double slap in the face- not only you don’t get what you want, she is telling you that you aren’t good enough for her.

Fat women, or other low desirability women, are in a difficult position. They have egos like anybody else. They like to think of themselves as desirable like anybody else. When a low desirability guy approaches, she is being reminded of her low status. If she accepts him, she ratifies her low status. If she rejects him, she confirms for herself that she is higher in dating status than he is.

Another ugly twist- the twists never end with this, do they? We’re talking about the highly valued and elusive bearded clam here. This shy, reclusive, and yet very tasty creature does not give itself up to the hunter easily. Should you want to gorge yourself on heaping servings of this delicacy, without getting various appendages rudely and painfully crushed in its hard shell, you must learn its many twists. The next ugly twist is when a fat or low desirability woman gets approached buy a guy of not-so-low desirability. That would seem like a good deal for her, right? And yet if she is angry at men, even at one specific man, or feeling insecure about her status, by rejecting this man, she believes she affirms that her status is higher than his.

Men are not terribly picky about what kind of woman they have a causal relationship or a one night stand with- particularly if their friends don’t know. They are going to be a lot more picky about what kind of woman they will publicly announce a relationship with, introduce to their friends, introduce to their family, or marry. A man ranks himself by the best woman he can get. Logically, a woman would rank herself by the best man she could get, but women are not logical. Some women will rank themselves by the best man they can reject.

R. Don Steele talks about this quite a bit in his books, how careful a man has to be not to let his prospect think she has achieved attracting a strong level of interest. If a woman wants psychological affirmation of her value as a woman, she doesn’t have to go out on a date with a man, she just has to get asked out on a date by a man. And, once he has asked her out, she can bump it up a notch in her mind by saying no!

Taking this apart carefully, if an 8 guy (however exactly women rank this, which is a lot more complicated than the way men do it) has asked her out she logically matches him in status somehow. However, if she rejects him, is she then better? I don’t think so; it only means she is hoping to get a better bid. If you offer a guy $5000 for his car or boat, and he declines to accept, it is not them worth $5500 until someone actually offers him that price.

Simply put, if a woman is objectively of low desirability, this is no guarantee she will accept interest from a man of similarly low desirability, essentially for reasons of ego.

The first thing a man must do in reference to women is cultivate an attitude of relaxed indifference. Partly because this is appealing to women; but primarily because you don’t really know what is going on in a woman’s mind and any strong reaction to her behavior, negative or positive, is unhelpful. Reacting to bad behavior only provides a reward for it, and good behavior may well be very fleeting. Never approach a woman with the idea her desirability status will make her more receptive to you.

Roissy makes another observation which complicates things, although I can’t find the actual post. He says fat women, being desperate, are more likely to throw themselves at alphas, who are sometimes willing to go for a no-effort lay. He says they then either 1) develop the idea they can somehow get an alpha to commit to a long-term relationship, or 2) commit themselves to a life of one-night stands with alphas, and make themselves unavailable to men of lower status. I have not actually observed this myself, but it’s plausible. As I have said the world is much kinder to omega women than it is to omega men- no woman needs a man, and there are entire industries that provide employment to omega women- healthcare and education most prominently, and various others. If a fat woman is poor and single, plenty of people will feel sorry for her; she doesn’t need a nice lifestyle for social respect or to attract men, so she can get by on a low wage. If she has a child, possibly resulting from a one night stand with an alpha, she gets help in various forms without social stigma. If a man is fat and poor, he will be regarded by society as a disgusting loser and shunned.

I have a bit of a fat fetish but I have never bagged a fat chick.

So if you can’t count on fat chicks as a source of sex when you are hard up where are you going to get it? Where ever you can, brother, where ever you can.

The Danger Of Popular Culture

GX1080, over at the Spearhead, talks about the unrealistic male and female behavior portrayed in Japanese manga comics and cartoons, and speculates on their effect of the behavior of Japanese men and boys-

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2009/12/22/don%e2%80%99t-watch-anime-or-manga-it-will-rot-your-brain/

The truth is popular culture in general is not intended to give you a realistic guide to dealing with life as it is. Whether the high culture of the distant past was intended to do this I don’t know; the scene where Odysseus kills the suitors is incredibly stirring, but then he has to get his ass saved by Athena, which just now strikes me as a pretty lame tacked on ending. But, make no mistake, “Die Hard” is not something you want to try in real life.

I only mention “Die Hard” because it comes to mind, but all action movies and other male oriented entertainment has the same elements- a lone tough guy, with a smart mouth, takes on well-organized groups of bad guys, defies and insults his superiors, miraculously defeats them all and is hailed as a hero.

Now, I really don’t need to tell you this is not the formula for career success in the real world, do I? We’re all, or mostly I hope, big boys here. Still elements of this are tempting when considered separately the temptation to argue, the temptation to be defiant, the temptation to go against the group. All these are suicidal, and all must be resisted.

In real life, the tough guy with the smart mouth gets quickly killed by the team of bad guys. If he’s lucky, his superiors decide to use him as a martyr or a dead hero to rally people. More likely he gets castigated as an idiot who went against policy, defied orders and deserved to die for being a moron.

But don’t alpha males dominate people? They do, but they also don’t pick fights they can’t win. I read on one of these mens’ rights sites recently “Men win the argument to win the group- women win the group to win the argument.” Bullshit. Men win the group too, that is just the way it works.

The omega has to function as a lone wolf, but must be aware of social dynamics. Get the feel for who is in charge. Be friendly to everyone, in a slightly distant way,  but don’t be servile. Studiously avoid making enemies but if you do, keep them close, per Michael Corleone.

Neurolinguistic programming- credited, accurately or not, as a source by some promoters of game- has a concept called “modeling”, which is simply copying the actions of someone who is competent and successful. Some people claim absurd results for modeling- like you can be a surgeon just by watching one for a few hours.

Observing and copying what works is harder than that, but at least it is a good start. Your life is not a drama, and it’s definitely not a bad movie. It’s reality in all its grimness and glory, and referring to reality is always the first step. If you can at least take a step back and look dispassionately at it, you will be well ahead of the average fool.

Let’s Talk About Sex!

I think my anonymity is pretty well protected here- and I want to be as informative as possible, so I’ll share even more unflattering personal information about myself. Remember- this is for educational purposes only, so if you can benefit from it, or know someone who can, great. If you want to point and laugh, well that’s just rude. But I’ll take that chance.

I got laid last night! Woohoo! Even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while, as the rustic saying goes. That’s the good news. The bad news is it didn’t go to well.

The hookup was made via Craigslist. She was looking for a guy with size to rock her world at a neutral location, and I assured her I was the man for the job. She was very pretty and nice. We talked a little and got down to business.

A word on Viagra, or other drugs for erectile dysfunction. I have used them for performance anxiety, or maybe just sexual anxiety in general- I can get an erection alone, but with a woman I often have trouble. I suspect most of these drugs are sold for this, rather than complete ED. Young guys take them to enhance the experience, older guys take them for a little help. They are easily obtained online or from your physician. But- if you have a lot of anxiety, or a lot of repulsion they won’t do anything, or at least Viagra won’t. I met a woman a while back, 50′s but looked OK with her clothes on, although she was a little fat. When I got a closer look at her it turned out she was completely wrecked from having a lot of kids and I was really turned off. 50mg of Viagra and I couldn’t get anything going. I backed off and left after a while. It will give you a nasty headache though. I plan on trying Cialis, which may have less tendency to give headaches, and I’ll report the results.

I pulled off her skirt and got a big whiff of shit- she had either just farted or hadn’t wiped herself very well the last time she took a dump. That’s something you don’t get in all the porno- sex is actually pretty messy and involves getting close with places not always ideally clean. The smell didn’t linger so either she had farted or I tuned it out, I’m not sure which.

All the foreplay went very well. I had taken a quarter of a 100mg Viagra to help things along and seemed to be getting a good erection.  Then came time to put the condom on- I hate condoms, they are the death of sex, but a universally accepted precaution. I lose most of the erection.

I toss off the condom and we just keep fooling around. My erection returns. Eventually she gets on top of me and rubs her labia on my erect penis, and she seemed to be satisfied with that. Then I got on top of her and fucked her a bit sans condom- probably not a good idea, but we were in the heat of passion.

Eventually we stopped and just cuddled. I was thinking how we were going to wrap this up and finally she said she was getting sleepy and didn’t want to fall asleep there, so we got dressed and left.

I’m afraid I disappointed her, and one of the codependent leftovers of my childhood is I hate to disappoint people- especially women in bed. Here’s something that you don’t see discussed much- good sexual functioning requires that you do it on a regular basis. If you have not had sex before, you will likely have trouble with it, and if you have not had sex in a long time, you will have trouble with it. A guy I met once, a virgin in his mid 20′s, told me how he went to a hooker but couldn’t get it up. The hooker commented the married guys never had trouble, but the single guys often did.

Masturbation is not the same as intercourse and to some extent will interfere with your ability to fuck. So I’m going to have to lay off the jerking off, with no guarantee of when I’m going to have a chance to fuck.

It also depends on the situation. I have had hookers tell me after 40 minutes of good pounding they can’t take it anymore- sometimes with Viagra I can maintain a good erection with a condom on, but have great difficulty reaching orgasm.

Women like guys who are already getting lots of sex because they know the guy is in practice and they are going to have a good experience. Do they know this intuitively, or from experience? Either way they know.

Part of performance anxiety is “Oh crap, I have put so much effort into this woman, for so long, and I really like her, and now THIS!” But actually I wasn’t too worried about it. This has happened to me before, I knew it was some combination of lack of recent experience and anxiety, and I didn’t have much invested- I met her on Craigslist, I hadn’t spent any time or money on her, and if I didn’t see her again I might be disappointed but it was no big deal.

As Mike Brady would say, “I think we’ve all learned a valuable lesson!” One, get as much sex as you can, from whoever you can, because you need all the practice and recent experience you can get. Two, back off the masturbation, and when you do try to make it as much like intercourse as possible.

True Lies In The Mating Dance

Obsidian comments on deceit in game, and womens’ concern with such-

http://theobsidianfiles.wordpress.com/2009/12/18/is-game-deceitful-and-why-women-are-so-concerned-about-it/

Modern courtship involves a lot of- not exactly lying, but not letting it all hang out either. If you’re a carpenter, and you want to tell women you’re a framing contractor and you’ve been so slammed with work lately you haven’t had any time to go out on your new 40 foot boat, well I’m not going to tell you it’s wrong. But that’s not what I’m talking about. Allow me to digress a bit and explain how courtship has evolved.

In the old days- I’m talking farming and small village days, not much more than 100 years ago for many of our ancestors- marriage courtship was a pretty open process. You knew everyone you were likely to get married to, and had your whole life. A woman knew how big your farm was, how many cows you owned, whether you were a drunk, whether your father had been a drunk and beat his wife, who if anybody you owed money to, well, you get the idea. If you were from the next village over a woman could get all this information in a few days.

All the face-to-face interaction required to complete the relationship was conducted in public, at dances and community festivals, and by home visits with the parents present. The couple wouldn’t be alone together until after the wedding.

Now, there was another kind of courtship going on at the same time, that for illicit relationships- which then of course would be anything outside of marriage. My grandmother recorded an oral history of her life, and recalls when she was young how some girl got knocked up by an old farmer- “People were the same then as they are now!” she said- and indeed they are.

In this type of courtship, there was little if any transparency, little if anything was said directly, and the outcome was a matter of chance and doubt. A milkmaid might get propositioned by a prosperous farmer’s son- she might spurn him, or not, might get fired in revenge, or not, might get pregnant, or not, and pregnant or not might or might not turn the relationship into being a prosperous farmer’s wife, which would be the Cinderella outcome, or be branded a slut and shunned for the rest of her life, which would be the nightmare outcome.

You can imagine many other similar scenarios involving the characters you’d find in such a social environment. The same thing of course went on more easily in a big city, such as Paris- Honore de Balzac wrote a book called “The Physiology of Marriage”, which is essentially how to keep your wife from cheating on you. Balzac says if you’re some lumpy bald dude who has acquired a young, beautiful wife by virtue of your money and social standing you’d better get some game on to keep her from getting boinked by some musketeer or other dashing rascal.

This is pretty risky for the woman, isn’t it? The upside is excitement, fun, and possibly a better husband than could be obtained through socially accepted means. The downside though is being what is now called a “single mother”, and then would have been called  a slut, whore, home wrecker, tramp, back when those words had the full sting of social censure. Such a woman would be finished for life, quite likely being forced into prostitution. Why would any sane woman take such a risk?

For men, personal relationships are something that sustain you as you go through the adventures of life. While you’re out slaying dragons, you need a couple of good, reliable friends, and between dragon-slaying trips you need a dependable wife to feed you, wash and mend your clothes, and relieve you of some sperm. For women, interpersonal relationships are the adventures of life. For them, marrying, or at least having sex with, the dragon slayer is the equivalent of slaying the dragon.

OK- we have two models of courtship, marriage and illicit, one involving complete transparency of motives, qualifications, and outcomes, and one involving lies, deceit, hidden motives, and phony posturing. Which does modern courtship more closely resemble? Pretty clearly, the second. You have not known the person your whole life, you do not know very much about them at all, not their true social status, employment status, financial status, their personal history, their character, their true motives and goals.

For a guy? Not that much of a problem. Your main concern is does she have herpes? AIDS is an extremely unlikely prospect unless she shoots drugs, and other things involve a trip to the doctor, possibly with a stern lecture about using condoms. For a woman? Hell it may as well be a Raymond Chandler novel. She must find all kinds of things out about you, holding back enough to keep herself safe, but not so much as to jeopardize the relationship, at least until she makes a decision on it.

Again, let me emphasize, no one’s status in modern society is obvious. In the old days the Choadley family had a manor house, overlooking the estate they owned, so at a glance anybody from the village idiot on up knew exactly who they were and how much money they had. If you’re Mr. Choadley, or Mr. Choadley’s oldest son, no game is required. Second son? Got to have game. Today, if you own a hundred million dollars worth of stock, how does anybody know that? By what you wear? Anybody can buy passably expensive clothes, and as I have mentioned many rich guys dress terribly. By your car? Don’t buy, lease! The only exception I can think of to this is Donald Trump- he puts his name on every damn thing he owns, I suppose for just this reason.

It gets more complicated still. The lovely young Parisian girl, daughter of a lawyer, has successfully identified a man with great wealth in stock, and married him. She now has the big house, the servants, the fine silk dresses, the lavish parties every young girl dreams of. But the guy’s pretty boring, always working and not much in the sack. So her eye wanders, and the dashing young musketeer, who has no money and little social status but lots of game, gets her attention.

So not only is status ambiguous, there are two different kinds of status, both desirable to have, the second more than the first for romantic and sexual purposes. Roissy addresses this contradiction-

http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/12/02/the-ideal-lover-can-never-be-the-great-boyfriend/

Actually there are three things here- 1) social and economic status, 2) kindness, loyalty, fidelity, and love, and 3) sexual charisma. #2 and #3 are the conflict Roissy is talking about. A guy with lots of #3 is not much inclined, many times, to provide #2.

Time for a bit of review. Status in the modern urban world is ambiguous and to a certain extent simply subjective. Since it is ambiguous it is to your advantage to project the highest level you plausibly can. This is not lying, this is simply putting the best possible face on things. And even if the woman you’re projecting to knows it, it still works, because she respects the fact that you are trying to project the best possible status! That leads into the second part, the simply subjective nature of status. A self-assured software engineer has higher status than a timid software engineer, simply by virtue of being self-assured, because our society arbitrarily assigns higher social status to the self-assured. It’s ridiculous, but that is the way it is.

Since I’m writing about game I’m practically obligated to make a detour into sociobiology. Every animal makes itself look big when it needs to. A cobra has a hood; a male lion has a mane, and chimps make the hair on their shoulders stand up. Part of the game is making yourself look as big as possible, portraying everything about yourself in the most flattering light, and avoiding making known things about yourself that aren’t flattering. Is this lying? It’s marketing, and whether that is lying is a philosophical matter. Ads for consumer products- cars, soda, detergent, whatever- always show attractive people being made happy by their use, the implication being you will be attractive and made happy by buying the stuff. That’s BS, but people go for it everyday.

“There Are No Men Available! Where Are All The Good Men?!”

The Onion is a good source of humor. Here’s a bit on the well-worn subject of the “shortage” of “good men”-

http://www.theonion.com/content/radio_news/epa_puts_good_single_men_on?utm_source=onion_rss_daily

The female psyche has various problems and one is the idea of what a “good” man is. Roissy has posted some good stuff on this, in that the ideal these women are seeking is some contrary combination of alpha and beta traits. Game addresses this to some extent, but in the end you can’t satisfy somebody with unreasonable expectations.

Forget About Women

I think I have implied, but not clearly stated the most basic concern of the marginal, low status man.

If you want success with women- as you assuredly do, unless your survival is right now under serious threat- you must first completely forget about women.

You, and your life, must come first. Relationships with women are a luxury that is #3 or #4 on the list. And I think this is true for the masters of the universe as well. A rich, famous guy knows the first concern of his life is to stay rich and famous, and takes care of that before he worries about women at all. Because he knows if that’s taken care of women will follow.

I’m sure if George Clooney is drinking champagne and groping some supermodel, and he gets an important call about some film he’s trying to put together, he puts down the flute, unhands the broad and talks business for a few minutes. Being George Clooney- or Kanye West, or Donald Trump, comes first.

It’s axiomatic to say if you’re rich or famous or both, you don’t worry about women because they flock to you. In part that is because women like these things. It’s also, at least in some part, because the rich or famous guy has taken care of himself first, put himself first, to achieve success.

You may be the junior assistant copy room attendant but the same principle applies to you as well. If you are going to be able to attract and interact successfully with women it will be because you have taken care of the things you need to have your own life in order, your needs and some of your wants met, and you can approach a woman as an added benefit to your life and not something you need to feel OK. Would getting “The” woman make you feel better, more secure, more satisfied, and more happy, allowing you to run your life better? Maybe, but I can’t think that happens very often.

Forget about women- take care of yourself, your problems, your needs, your wants, and find a way to be content where you are- and only then think about rounding out your life with female companionship.

Social Reality And You

Susan Walsh recently introduced a 24 year-old female virgin, upset by the fact her status is not accepted in New York. I got a bit testy with her, for which I can’t completely apologize since nobody seems to be talking any sense to her-

http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2009/11/30/hookinguprealities/an-american-virgin-goddess-or-circus-freak/

Recently at “In Mala Fide” a commenter fulminates against game-

http://www.inmalafide.com/2009/12/01/my-kingdom-for-a-piece-of-tail/

These two people have one simple thing in common, which is that they don’t want to deal with the way the world actually, currently works, right now in urban America. The social reality you live in must at least be acknowledged. You can then deal with it intelligently, understanding what tradeoffs you are making.

The basic problem Jaqueline (the 24 year-old voluntary female virgin) has is that in her social context, her choice is regarded as abnormal. If she lived in Dallas, she would have more social support for it. If she lived in a small, rural, conservative community she would have yet more, even if most other people weren’t actually behaving the same way. Yuppie New York is a different story. As much as these people claim to be tolerant and open-minded, they have pretty limited ideas about what is acceptable behavior. Jaqueline just wants people to be the way they claim to be, a typical young person’s mistake. Hypocrisy is the norm, that’s the way it is.

John isn’t just unrealistic, he is downright silly. He wants all the guys who are currently having sex with loose women to stop, for his idea of the social good. I think I can safely say it’s not going to happen. Is the current sexual marketplace a dirty, destructive game? I’ll agree it is but neither John or I is in any position to change it.

Girls Behaving Badly

Roosh relates an incident in a nightclub in Brazil where a friend of his approaches a group of girls and is treated very rudely by an ugly one-

http://www.rooshv.com/dont-disrespect-my-friend

I’m glad Roosh put the bitch down. (Yes, bitch is an appropriate word for someone who engages in this type of rude, hurtful behavior toward someone who is behaving in a perfectly normal and respectful way. If you don’t want guys to come up to you and attempt to start a conversation don’t go to a nightclub.) He describes his friend as an engineering student, and I’m guessing he displayed an earnest, polite demeanor that is viewed as low status by women.

The low status male runs the risk of not just being ignored or rejected by women but actively hurt and insulted. The women who do this are not going to be the beautiful ones, but the homely ones who might actually benefit from a relationship with a low status man.

Why is this? A lot of women are angry at men and looking to pay back one- it doesn’t matter who, just anything with a penis. They have an opportunity to do this where men are most vulnerable- bars and clubs obviously, but other casual social situations also. To a chubby, homely girl/woman, being approached by a guy who seems to display some weakness is not necessarily an opportunity to get to know somebody whose place on the food chain is similar to theirs, and possibly establish a mutually gratifying relationship. She may see his soft underbelly and decide it’s an opportunity to prove her value and strength by humiliating him.

I went to a school dance in 7th grade and asked a girl named Valerie to dance. She just looked at me with disdain and said “No.” She wasn’t good-looking or popular, but she was able to establish she was better than me. Not much of an accomplishment. A few years ago my job had me spending a weekend at a Caribbean beach resort. Rum punch was served on the boat to the island and we all got a buzz pretty quick. My coworker (a natural if there ever was one) quickly hooked up with a woman. I hooked up with her chubby friend, and ended up making out with her on the beach, but she wouldn’t let me grope or have sex with her.

She sort of hung out with me the rest of the weekend, but she was always kind of dissing me and wouldn’t have sex with me. Finally Sunday night I asked her- “Beth, can I ask you something?” She allowed that I could. “Was the other night just a drunken mistake?” She made some lame excuses about being alone with a guy she barely knew, and she was afraid I was some big player, blah blah blah. At least I called her on it. I just googled her; she’s still in the same industry and apparently still single. She’s not ugly and is in sales, so she should have elementary personal skills.

Hey Beth- you could have had fun weekend, either by telling you weren’t into it, and spending it with somebody else, or by having fun with me instead of being a bitch. I’m actually very good in bed and well-endowed, and you may remember my excellent physical condition. I’m guessing you hadn’t gotten any in some time and a weekend fling would have done you a lot of good. I’m guessing you still haven’t had any in a long time. Having a few great lays with me would have been a great confidence booster and you could have gone back to Chicago and dated more successfully. Or maybe if you had been nice to me and had sex with me I would have actually wanted to come visit you, as you suggested when I confronted you.

The typical answers to this are don’t let it bother you, ignore, plow through her bitch shield, etc. But incidents like this are hurtful and bruising and should be avoided. If you’ve had a lot of success with women it won’t bother you much but if you’re learning and inexperienced it will be harmful.

The important thing to remember is because a woman is not very attractive is no guarantee she will be glad to have attention from you. Another is bars and clubs are dangerous places for this, but you shouldn’t be there anyway.

Crime as Game

Gavin DeBecker is a security consultant who was often in the news as a commenter on cases involving celebrities in the 90′s, and he wrote a book about crime titled “The Gift Of Fear.” I have had a copy of this for a long time but am only now getting into it. In the chapter “Survival Signals” he talks about some of the tactics criminals use to break down the defenses of their potential victims.

I’ll let you get the book if you want the full rundown but they are the kind of manipulative phoniness commonly seen in salesmen or young men picking up girls. Many people, particularly those with an excessively optimistic view of human nature, are unable to appreciate that bad people are usually not ogres but generally quite good at appearing to be friendly, helpful, and nice when it suits them. DeBecker rips on the concepts of “charming” and “nice” particularly- they are usually just strategies for getting something, he says, and he cautions women that because someone appears charming or nice is no reason to trust them.

There are a few items on his list that have a direct counterpart in game. One is what he calls “typecasting”- the perpetrator implies something negative about the target, who is then expected to justify herself. On a superficial level this would seem like a “neg” but it’s more directly comparable to “qualifying.” Another is “too many details” where the perp puts a lot of effort into explaining himself to the target. Game often involves “routines” which may involve a lot of irrelevant detail as a distraction. Another is the “unsolicited promise” where the perp assures the target he will be leaving soon- just like a “false time constraint” where the PUA tells the woman he is meeting a friend in a few minutes.

DeBecker sees this as a problem for women because they are conditioned to chat politely with men who approach them rather than distinctly tell them they are not interested. He qualifies all this several times, even saying “I don’t mean to cramp the style of some crude Casanova.” He admits this type of behavior is engaged in by many people “without sinister intent”- although I would say trying to sell you something unsolicited is sinister intent. I remember a guy I knew casually and worked with invited me to lunch once, and I thought he actually wanted to be friends. Then he brings up some multi-level marketing thing.

DeBecker confirms game in that he explicitly dismisses “charm”, the word most often used in society to describe the kind of skills that game teaches, as an inborn character trait, but instead classifies it as simply a device, strategy or skill anyone can use for any reason, in his view probably bad.

I find DeBecker’s protests a little weak. Doesn’t he know this kind of thing, however tawdry, sad, or phony, is the grease of a great deal of human interaction? I’m sure he does, but he sees things differently. He relates his experience growing up in an extremely violent and abusive family and how it helped him learn to predict violence. When you have seen this behavior from the other side, you can never look at it in a benign way again.

As a low status male, you have probably seen a boy you knew well in school as a violent, sadistic psychopath talking to a girl, with a simpering smile, head tilted, body sagging to one side, weight on one foot, acting- I don’t know what to call it, but it looks pretty gay, and frankly it looks ridiculous coming from a guy who likes hurting people. But the girls go for it. (I’m not saying this is game, just this is how blue collar and lower class people act. It’s most obvious in black guys but lower class white guys do the same thing.) The logical conclusion is people are stupid and crazy. The primate behavior explanation is that faux submissive behavior toward a female by an aggressive male is a courtship ritual, that she is being honored by it.

DeBecker recommends women explicitly reject all unsolicited advances but admits this is hard to do. Social conditioning to be nice is the easy, politically correct explanation, but what he doesn’t take into account is that women are always looking for a better deal. A woman has access to a certain pool of men in her social grouping, but unless she is a supermodel or a beautiful heiress this pool will be suboptimal. You see this in personal ads all the time- Christian women, for example, seeking highly Christian men. You go to a church don’t you? With a singles group probably? So why are you here? Those guys not good enough for you? No, and the subtext is there in all female personal ads- “I want a guy richer and better looking than those I meet on a daily basis and can attract with the looks and personality I display in person.”

This blog is all about getting what you can, so don’t mistake this for social criticism, which is of little interest to me. My point is get over the revulsion for this kind of behavior that you have as an omega- and that DeBecker has as an alpha with an omega childhood. Guidos and life insurance salesman do this because IT WORKS! It shouldn’t, but it does.

The objective truth is women associate nice clothing and these types of behavior as high status markers. They are wrong but you can take advantage of that fact. I work with rich people and they generally dress hideously, in expensive but ugly clothes, or casually because they don’t need to impress anyone. And they are often boorish assholes. A middle class, 25 year old “9″ would likely get out the Mace if approached by the typical multimillionaire.

Men’s Rights And Dealing With Reality

If I get one point across in my drunken barstool rantings I hope it’s that you have to deal with the world as it is, not as you wish it was. People with resources can afford some illusions, but those with low status cannot.

The horrors of divorce are a commone topic in the mens’ issues blogosphere. The rotten, evil injustice of it all is decried daily. It’s all true, and it’s all pretty bad. And yet no one who has gotten married since the 70′s has not known what the deal was and how it works. Unless you are a hermit (which will include some omegas, but they aren’t at risk of getting married) you will also know married people, divorced people, and how their lives go.

I suspect many guys get married with a lot of trepidation, seeing the potential for problems but hoping things will somehow work out. They have been with the woman awhile, don’t see the possibility of a better one, don’t want to be alone, and “take the plunge” with the hope it will get easier and things will smooth out later.

There are an array of bad choices, and this could lead to a mildly bad result or a disaster. In my experience things always work out worse than you expect and worse than you hope. Starting out with serious doubts practically guarantees a bad outcome.

The guys who complain endlessly about marriage are likely the ones who made a bad decision, and knew they were making a bad decision. The often repeated advice “Don’t get married!” would probably be better stated “Don’t get married unless both you and your potential spouse are mature, mentally healthy, have a stable, positive relationship with little conflict and are not crossing your fingers.”

Not getting married is a good option, but it is not the only option. If you have a healthy relationship (notice I did not say “good” relationship) you may get divorced but it won’t be extremely emotional or traumatic.

My special, high intensity training has ended but now I’m on the road with sporadic internet access so it will take me a while to catch up. I still have plenty to say though.