Guide to dressing like a loser

I had to advise someone on a pretty interesting situation some weeks ago: good-looking dude, but he was getting too much attention from the women in his office. This was causing some problems for him, so he asked me what he should do about it. Our discussion moved towards behavior, but at the end I jokingly remarked that it would probably have helped had he dressed like a loser. That wasn’t really an option in his line of work, though. Yet, the other day a friend of mine told me about a problem he ran into at work. He doesn’t have a customer-facing role, and the startup he’s working at doesn’t really have a dress code.

Thus, if you work at a place were there is a lax dress-code and where, for whatever reason, women work who might cause some trouble, this post is for you. Let’s say you end up banging an intern who only got hired because your boss wanted to fuck her. Yes, those things really happen. Unfortunately, banging her is a potentially career-ending move, at least at your current company, so it’s not necessarily a bad idea to avoid getting too much attention at work. In order to help you out, I therefore present Aaron Sleazy’s Guide to Dressing Like a Loser, which is totally not tongue-in-cheek.

As we all know, it’s a tough world out there. You’re not one of the libshits, and living off welfare isn’t what you imagine yourself doing. Thus, you most likely end up in a situation where you have to work with women, under a female boss, or maybe you’ll have female reports at some point. If you go down the entrepreneurial route but think you’ll just hire men, you won’t be able to win government contracts, because the government drone charged with doling out tax money will eventually ask about the composition of your workforce, and bin your bid for a project while humming “muh diversity, muh strengths”.

So, you won’t be able to avoid working with women. If you end up in a customer-facing role, then you better pretend you’re gay. Otherwise, you’ll find yourself in a double bind: if she fancies you, but the feeling it not mutual because you are really into chicks with fantastic glutes and a deep voice, it’s discrimination based on gender. If she fancies you and you bang her, the orgasms you’ll give her in the copy room at 8 pm may be interpreted as sexual assault by her at any point in the future, and if you hit on her but she isn’t interested, it’s of course sexual harassment.

If you are working alongside neck-beards, you are in a better position, though. Due to diversity bullshit, your boss will have to hire women, and you probably have an all-female administrative staff, some of whom may fantasize about having a member of the STEM master race put a ring on her finger. As a reader of my blog, you’re obviously in the top 5% of men, so women chase after you no matter where you go. “But what do I do, am I screwed?”, you may ask. No, you are not. The solution to your problems is as simple as it is effective. Dress really poorly. By that I don’t mean to dress like a hobo, but to commit every sin in the book of fashion.

For starters, make sure some of the colors you wear clash with your skin tone. To give you a simple example: bright colors and dark skin don’t work so well. Similarly, dark colors on pale skin don’t look so hot either. For extra credit, make sure the colors of your pants and shirt clash. To up your game, make sure your clothes don’t fit well. I think that wearing clothes that are too small makes people look stupid. You still want to look competent at work, so that’s a bad direction to take. Luckily, slightly oversized clothes only make you look negligent. You’re obviously so focussed on your work that you haven’t noticed that you’ve lost weight. The dude in the shitty tight clothes can’t claim that because his clothes are rather uncomfortable, and he regularly has to loosen his belt a couple of notches when he is hunching in front of his computer.

In order to move to the top of your class, pick branded T-shirts and sweaters. No, not Polo Ralph Lauren or Hollister. Tech brands is where it’s at! Nothing screams “loser!” like walking around in an oversized T-shirt with a Microsoft Windows print:

Uh, baby!

You can score this on basically any tech or business conference out there. No matter where you go, some Microsoft drones will be there. They tend to have a have a hard time getting rid of their crap and are overjoyed if you ask them for another T-shirt for your brother or a friend. Maybe try hunting down some Microsoft Zune swag on eBay, while you’re building your new wardrobe. Then again, a reference to the ill-faited Zune could be perceived as an ironic statement in hipster circles. Google swag is getting more and more valuable for our purpose, too. They are becoming uncool as they are increasingly being perceived as yet another BigCorp, which, frankly, is precisely what they are.

I can’t stress enough the importance of clashing colors. By matching your clothes color-wise, even if they are slightly oversized, you would not look like much of a loser, but pretty much like a regular guy. On the other hand, with some nice really washed out light blue jeans that are slightly too big, beaten brown leather shoes or sneakers, and a sweater with a nice fat Oracle or SAP logo print on it that does not go at all with that outfit, you will be golden. If you want to perfect the loser style, go to a cheapo hairdresser in that outfit, and he’ll give you a haircut to go with it. I would only recommend that if you want to “ghost”, as our friends in the MGTOW community call it, but not if you only want to put on the loser persona merely for your 9-to-5.

In all seriousness, though: there are many sitations in life where you are better off not standing out, and not being perceived as a thread of any kind. So, let’s say you work in an office environment where everybody is a geek and looks like a geek, but not in the supposedly flattering way. Do you then waltz in with tight jeans so that the secretary checks our your ass as you walk past? Of course not. Your colleagues will only resent you, and that’s without the can of worm you open if you end up banging a colleague because she turns you on and it’s convenient. Feel free to stand out if you are at the top of the hierarchy. If you are not, and want to survive in a hierarchy, your best best is probably to put in a good enough performance to not get fired, while also not working so hard that you are being perceived as a threat. On that note, it is also often good if you are able to make people feel intellectually superior. They shouldn’t think you’re a moron, but if they think that you are moderately smart, while they are a bit smarter, you’re likely to get by with very little drama.

33 thoughts on “Guide to dressing like a loser

  1. Maybe I’ll just play by their lib rules when I start a business and I’ll hire all neckbearded STEM master races who on paper “self-identify” as different races, genders, and handicap criteria. A truly diverse staff. If that doesn’t go over and I get hired, I can always just dress like an American tourist with cargo shorts, socks with sandals, and a fanny pack.

  2. I don’t work. I am retired for all intensive purposes. So I am not regularly put into a place where I have to pretend to like people so that I am job satisfied.

    I am however hit on by women I wouldn’t touch with a rusty pole. Funny thing is these are the bitches that bring up marriage the fastest. Which is a thing they don’t deserve from me and probably don’t deserve at all.

    I know that this article is for educational purposes only, however I have to mention, I don’t dress like a loser to throw them off. I instead friend zone them as soon as they make a move. I think friend zoning is a better way than simply dressing like a loser yourself.

    1. Yes, “friend zoning”, or something even better, is the core of the behavioral part of this approach.

  3. Well, Aaron, this was certainly a fun post, but the thing is–it’s entirely possible that if a guy is good-looking and well-built and has decent social skills and a good reputation around the office, your advice might have the opposite desired impact with women:

    a–you get cred as the aloof, cocky “ZFG” hipster who marches to his own drummer (yes, I probably am sounding a bit manospherian here, but assuming the guy is hunky and has his crap together, I think there is some truth to this stereotype)

    b–you actually wind up strongly attracting a specific type of nerdy girl

    I’m probably way overreading this, but depending on the size of the company and the level of its pool of talent, I don’t think either are terribly unlikely at all given a bit of time.

    1. I left out the behavioral part. It’s certainly possible that some girls will want to make a move regardless, which is particularly true if your fundamentals are good (height, working out, good income).

  4. What’s your view on hopping from job to job?
    In the finance industry it seems to be the easiest way to increase your salary, although bosses keep telling me to stick with the current role and show perseverance, “cuz it don’t look good on your CV if you change every two years, son”.
    I had a chat with an older colleague of mine last Thursday and he had been doing this job-hopping over the last 15 years and stated that his base salary (read: salary ex-bonus) was 50k higher than the salary of his peers.
    So where is the line between loyalty plus showing that you can consistently stick with something and between the fact that big corps lay off people regardless of age or skill just to do save some bucks. (oh wait there’s a fancy name for putting people on the street: restructuring)
    Sure there are differences in industries, yours is certainly different from mine, nevertheless I’d like to hear your thoughts.

    1. This largely depends on your industry or even your specialization within your industry. In general, if your employers don’t show any loyalty to you, which is certainly the case in large companies, you shouldn’t show them any loyalty either. In that case, you jump ship after 1.5 to 2 years. Normally, this should come with a bump in salary, i.e. a much higher one than the yearly adjustments you would get from your current employer.

  5. Agree on the bump in salary.
    How do you deal with stupid HR questions like why you actually jumped ship?
    It’s not like you can tell your future employer that you preferred to fuck your old employer before he fucked you…
    I guess it’s along the lines of “searching for a new challenge bla bla bla”.

    1. Looking for a new challenge, great opportunity, desire to work on exciting project X, … It’s just a great opportunity (here’s that stupid word again) to feed their own bullshit back to them.

  6. Lol, this blog is becoming even more hilarious than some manosphere blogs.

    The delusion of grandeur here, unbelievable. You’re above everyone and you’re so great that you need to downgrade your value on purpose, right? That reminds me of the PUA trying to make their task harder by dressing like clowns, as if it even worked when they were doing their best.

    And you have this STEM obsession again, like anyone looks up to these nerds. I know some engineers and their job eats up all their lives, no social life, and barely more money than me who got a master in communication (you mad?).

    I have friends who work for the government of my country and man, they got it made: not much work, tons of holidays and a great salary (again, you mad STEM nerd?!).

    Like you guys are some Casanova’s who have to avoid making other jealous so they don’t sabotage your career, give me a f-ing break! I don’t on for what kind of company you work for, but that’s not my experience with mine. But it’s a well-established worldwide company, not some STEM BS start-up that’s going to go bankrupt in the next 3 years.

    The only way to attract that kind of jealousy is to have male-model looks, and no one here has that, otherwise they certainly wouldn’t be reading that kind of blog.

    This is getting more entertaining than the Roosh V forum (that seems to be slowly but surely dying). I enjoy some of your analysis, but this kind of article, come on, it reads like a parody.

    And stop with bashing people who didn’t want to make the same choices as you. Not everyone wants to be a STEM nerd that works for a born-dead start-up (interesting challenge though, LOL) day in day out to barely make more than a smart government employee for example.

    Like there are attractive women in those companies anyway. Sometimes you have to wonder if the content of your articles is just a fantasy of yours.

    1. Greg,
      your insecurity traps you in a bubble. Even more disastrous is your incredible hubris. You think you’ve figured out the world: government is where it’s at! You can sleep at your desk for five hours a day, get a nice pay check, and 7 weeks vacation. What you don’t seem to be taking into account is that smart people want to challenge their mind. In fact, everybody seeks challenge commensurate to their intelligence. For someone of rather average mental facilities, a government job may provide plenty of stimulation. Yet, put someone with an IQ of 130 or more on that chair, and they’ll be bored out of their mind.

      Your STEM bashing is downright bizarre, by the way. To provide you with a data point: I work as a mathematician in industry. Pay is excellent. I may not have as many vacation days as some moron working for the government. Then again, I’m a white male so I would have a very hard time getting a job in government anyway. Yet, if I need more vacation days, I can just take a week or two off without pay. In the end, I still make more than someone working for the government. The work itself is stimulating as I work on the kind of problems someone with an 130+ IQ and a technical background finds interesting. Even better is that there is a very high barrier to entry. There is no shortage of affirmative action applicants, but applied mathematicians working in optimization? Not so many, my friend. Your cushy government job isn’t so secure if there is a drop in tax revenue, or if there is political turmoil. How secure do you think a job at the European Commission is, over a ten or fifteen year horizon?

      Now you could play the “STEM is a career dead-end” card, which I would only laugh at. While it is true that I capture only a fraction of the value I provide to my employer, and my manager makes more than me – let’s say an optimization I work on leads to a cost reduction of 500,000 EUR year in, year out, or some automation makes three or four employees superfluous – there is certainly the potential to strike out on your own. Some of my ex-colleagues run a successful spin-out, for instance. Me? I’m happy with my cushy STEM job, sitting in my own office, solving optimization problems that have the side effect of saving my employer a ton of money. If the time is right, I may well start my own little company. But what would your government buddies do, launch their own rogue government? I somehow doubt that, as revolutionaries are hardly to be found among the spineless cucks who dream of working for government.

      By the way, Sleazy’s post was obviously not meant to be taken seriously. He provides more than enough hints for the non-STEM/government worker fraction of his readership.

    2. 1) Less than a guy who has to mention the ‘STEM master race’ as opposed to the “government drones” every other article and who has to take a dump on everyone who has not make the same life choices as him.

      2) I’ve said before that my intelligence barely made me get by to land a master’s degree in humanities (communication), I’m not insecure about that, that’s just how it is. Someone with an IQ of 110-115 just cannot pursue a STEM degree. I’ve accepted this and made the most of my strengths.

      Insecurity and delusion of grandeur are written all over your articles though.

    3. Thank god someone said it. Keep posting, Greg. Sleazy’s blog went to crap when he became the angry political guy with an opinion on everything. His nerd colors are shining through. Guy just likes to point fingers an call people stupid. Totally incapable of being a normal person who can see other perspectives. Probably a nerd who got picked on as a kid, and this blog is his tiny island from which to anonymously broadcast his anger with the rest of the world.

  7. “otherwise they certainly wouldn’t be reading that kind of blog.”
    says a lot about you that statement.
    Toi comprendre, ou toi pas comprendre?
    faux cul…

  8. Greg,

    STEM is very well suited to people with IQs in the 110-115 range. In fact most people in STEM have roughly that IQ – I personally know several highly successful people with tested IQs of 115 in STEM – one who created his own very successful STEM company.

    For a while I began to think that STEM attracts “mid-level” intellects since I’ve met so many who seem mildly bright but not very intellectual. The “brilliant” STEM guy is found in the tiniest upper level of the profession – nearly the entire profession is for mid-level intellects.

    STEM is about preference and personality mostly – of course, you need to be slightly above average intellect, but if you are above 105 you’d probably do fine in STEM, and 115 seems to be the sweet spot.

    Anything higher and you’re likely to be bored by STEM.

    1. I agree with this. In STEM, people are probably around one standard deviation smarter than average, but it’s hardly a field in which you need to be brilliant. Yet, there are niches in which a very high IQ will be helpful. Then again, the curse of a high IQ can kick in hard, as people may cling on to an academic career for too long (the odds are simply against you, and luck plays a big role too), or focus on areas they find intellectually challenging, even if there is little demand in the market. For instance, you will much more easily get a job as a front-end developer or database admin, two distinctly mundane fields in which a comparatively low IQ will be a benefit, than a formal methods expert.

    2. In most professions, an above average IQ and a solid work ethic are all you’ll need to succeed. Even an average IQ in combination with a solid work ethic will take you far. The highest concentration of really smart people are in abstract disciplines, like theoretical physics, pure mathematics, theoretical computer science, philosophy (logic, not the bullshit that is taught in Continental Europe), etc. There are quite a few articles on IQ vs college major that go into greater detail.

  9. A while back I read a newspaper article how more and more romantic relationships start at work. The article put a pretty positive spin on what I can’t help but see as the professional equivalent of BASE jumping.

  10. @Neutralrandomthoughts:

    ““otherwise they certainly wouldn’t be reading that kind of blog.”
    says a lot about you that statement.
    Toi comprendre, ou toi pas comprendre?
    faux cul…”

    I have seen some of your posts and I would like to say frankly that you should learn to reply to other people with respect instead of putting up a macho facet. That won’t make you look anymore intelligent than a fool who thinks he is wise. Shut your mouth up and think carefully about what I have just wrote. It is to be meant a constructive feedback.

    And spare me your half-arsed French, it smells neither French nor Flanders.


    It would take you quite sometimes to get used to Sleazy’s writing style. Please understand that he does not mean to call all those people who graduate in Humanities to be morons and a leech. It is simply a wake-up call for people who might have potential to do something better in life than to spend years studying a bullshit major that has little demand in the market.

    I have NEVER believed that he means to say ALL Humanities are bullshits. EVER. Humanities are obviously an enormous umbrella term used to denote quite a great variety of subjects, some are as old as the length of existence of human mankinds, others are simply found a few decades ago on a rather shaky foundation. I would like to call old Humanities such as Philosophy, History, Classics, etc as the “Classical Humanities” since their values have persisted up to our times and beyond. Despite the inherent flaws in, say, History, to call this whole subject “bollocks”, to name-call respectable historians as “social welfare leech” is just as preposterous and insolent as to demand an absolute Objectivity in History, for such a demand is at odds with the nature of the discipline (that is to study what is survived through times, while what is lost is forever lost).

    I would like add a further comment that I have seen a sizable number of graduates who at first finished their degree in Classical Humanities and then jump to STEM (some even are willing to start from scratch). The reason is obviously that they feel unsatisfied with their current discipline (nothing with their discipline, you just have accept that rigor in some humanity disciplines is more laxed than in Natural Sciences).

    The way Sleaze communicate may sound a bit snobbish at times, but this is because his acquaintances and friends must be mostly intellectual and highly intelligent people, whom he met in a university environment.

    @To Sleazy:
    I think you still remain a sharp and witty guy as before. But your current style is, in my opinion, rather insensitive and trivial. Within this article alone, I find that you employ way more vulgarities than before. I genuinely do not believe that this is caused by pumping the iron. The cynical side of you seems to get the upper hand at times. Vulgarity, of course, when being deployed correctly, can become a powerful koan to wake somebody up from their long daydreams, or it can turn itself into a great mean of persuasion, not to mention its humorous value. But misusing it would obviously downgrade its users to the level of a mere uncultured sod.

    I really miss your earlier style, full of nuances, and while it could be harsh at times, it always contains a sublime sense of mercy directed at those who are misguided in life. Your forum in the past is a great medium for intellectual exchange, a pantheon of knowledge and a castle in which people feel safe to speak their minds ( that spirit still exists here, when you allow our comments to be left untouched).

    We have had a long history of exchange before, and while we have never met in person, there is certainly a feeling that we both share certain similarities in characters. I know that you might feel dissatisfied with the current state of affairs in Europe. But if this could somehow console you, or arouses your intellectual mind, then perhaps it is time to let the clock wise back to roughly 100 years ago. What do we have in Europe then? Blood, gas, mörser, mitrailleuses, diseases, hunger. Compared to those dreadful days, just 100 years ago, we still enjoy a rather comfy life, don’t you think?

    1. Thank you for your comment Isidia. It speaks from my heart. I really enjoyed your, Aaron’s, Cani’s as well as all the other perspectives in the forum for many years. The vibe in the open discussions is a very different one today.

      Why you think “this is because his acquaintances and friends must be mostly intellectual and highly intelligent people, whom he met in a university environment” is an excuse for that kind of style is beyond me.

      But hey, I should not complain. Aaron was spitting wisdom for many years for free. The classic post section and his books are still the best content on the subject. Maybe with the old GLL posts. I am very thankful for that. And we can always choose to stop frequenting this website.

    2. Isidia,
      Your understanding of French language is what seems to be half-arsed. The dumbing down is on purpose, I’m fully aware that the expression is gramatically incorrect. Spare me your lecturing with regards to French language. Having spent four years in France (speaking French at a such a level, that even locals didn’t identify me as an expat) unless you are a native speaker, I doubt your input is of much value to me.

      Thank you for your feedback, I’ll think about my tone.

  11. “philosophy (logic, not the bullshit that is taught in Continental Europe)”
    Any names?
    Karl Popper for example?

    1. That’s a good start. In the anglo-sphere, philosophy isn’t tied to author names, by the way.

  12. “Why you think “this is because his acquaintances and friends must be mostly intellectual and highly intelligent people, whom he met in a university environment” is an excuse for that kind of style is beyond me.”

    Let me explain it clearer, I don’t mean to say that this is an excuse to his recent style of writing. I only mean to say that this is a possible cause for that style, namely his lack of sympathy for those who aren’t particularly successful in the STEM fields, or those who struggle quite a bit to understand basic mathematical concepts.

    However, I do share his contempt to those who decide to settle for a rather empty degree just to get by in life. Please bear in mind that he is talking about the situation in Europe, where he currently reside. Over here in the US, you must think very carefully what you want to pursue in life, because one wrong move will make you pay with the rest of your life.

  13. A few past comments about the difference between Sleazy’s writing style and himself in person:

    By Illuminatus:

    “Sleazy’s writing is very blunt and often lacking in emotion, but he is not like that in real life. In fact he is a very warm person.

    He is also German and they tend to be blunt in their language.”

    By himself”

    “Do you really think that my writings are “generally” rather arrogant? I think a good part of it is rather impartial. But of course I do prefer voicing strong opinions, and how I write might not necessarily reflect my attitude but express how I want to write. For example, if someone wants to argue that the teachings of some questionable pick-up company are not all that bad, he’ll get a rather aggressive reply, because I have no intention of encouraging him or others to spread similar disinformation. While writing, I am not fuming, however. I think I’m generous enough for not banning those people right away. (In real life, I am much more agreeable, though, but of course there is a big difference between a business meeting and keeping my forum clean.)”

    So please differentiate between the writer and his style. His style doesn’t necessarily reflect his actual attitude nor his personality in real life. However, writing repeatedly about some rather hopeless situations such as Muslim immigration to Europe or feminism can make your head enter a train of negative thoughts. It of course does affect the mood of the readers.

  14. I found a nice site/blog to achieve the opposite of what is stated on this blog post. What do you guys think? In my opinion he has pretty solid advice, and resonates with what i think women find stylish and sexy.

    I wanted to test reaction of and also posted about it on their forum to see if they’ll come right away and tell how looks don’t matter! What a pity that I couldn’t post url because I would have pointed them straight to more rsd provocative articles.
    At one point I was watching their bs-material for over a year…

    1. Moments ago I replied to the comments of some dude who is unable to reason critically, now you show up and prove that you can’t even read.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.