Blog reader “Mr. Nobody From Nowhere” left a very detailed comment on my recent post Stealth Western whores: prude at home, slut abroad. The first part is a general reflection on how to increase your success with women, the second is about red flags. His post deserves greater attention, so I’m promoting it to the front page of my blog. Here it is:
It’s funny, because I undertook self-improvement before encountering or reading anything in the PUA-sphere or manosphere. For reference, I am a short (5’5), bi-racial male.
I am so glad that I avoided most of the “reading material.” Just by using my common sense, I realized that a) getting a top-tier physique would help me, b) finding interesting hobbies would help me, c) that obtaining a high status career would help me, and d) that obtaining a high personal income would help me.
Magically, the further I moved along the parallel paths of a-d, the better my results with women. Not only that, but I received increasing respect from other men as well.
Your material is the only material that repeats common sense. Of everything I came across (a friend was inspired by my journey and showed me a lot of the material — he hadn’t read anything by you), yours is the only true road to success.
Just. actually. be. a high value man.
An example of the silly thought process aspiring ‘PUAs’ have: my friend asked me how to pull from clubs as a short man. I told him “simple, buy bottle service at a table and go with a large crowd of people — include some women in your group if possible. Or, learn how to dance — very very well — take classes consistently for 6 months to a year.” This upset him, and he started to argue with me. He then started talking about all of this nonsense regarding DHVs, and ‘over the shoulder’ talk, and on and on.
Why argue with common sense? I will never understand. It is easy to make up a bunch of stupid stories. It is easy to ape silly ‘over the shoulder’ body language or whatever. The advice I gave him requires building a lifestyle to support obtaining women and therefore requires much more effort. He would have none of it.
With regard to having the proper ‘alpha attitude,’ I told him “yes, you will naturally exude a calm, relaxed demeanor if you crack the top 1% of income — or even the top 10% will be enough for you to notice a difference. If you gain 20 pounds of muscle and add 2 inches on to your arms, you will notice a huge difference. If you wear an expensive, well-fitted, suit, you will also notice a difference. If you find a high status career that you are both good at and proud of, you will also notice a difference.” Again, he insisted on nonsense about “inner game” as if it just springs ex nihilo.
Which brings me back to you and this OP. I notice that my thoughts regarding women strikingly mirror your own. Most of the manosphere seems to realize that Western Women (especially Western White women) in this era are exhibiting many behavioral pathologies, to put it nicely. But what you notice that many others in the manosphere don’t notice is that most men are losers. Pure and simple.
I believe that personal self-improvement is the only path toward seeing women for what they are and getting out of a scarcity mindset where you create these idealized fantasies of women to better tolerate their complete insanity.
Half of the time I want to tell aspiring PUAs or self-improvers not to do it for women — not because you will not acquire more of them but because you will realize that most of them really are not worth it.
More whore red flags I have noticed:
When a girl proudly declares she drinks hard alcohol.
Whenever a girl tells you “I’ve never done this before” past the age of 18.
When a woman demeans you because of something outside of your control and insists on continuing to seek out your attention (this happens to me a lot — a woman will, out of nowhere, make a disparaging comment about my height and when I remove myself from the situation or ignore her, she will continue to seek me out almost wondering why I’m not making any advances on her)
When a woman who barely knows you insists on discussing sex with you or asking about sex (this also happens to me a lot).
When a woman who you barely know suggests taking part in a risque activity.
When a woman aggressively makes plans with you and flakes on those same plans (this one is always a headscratcher — more common with young women I believe)
When a woman insists on talking to you and being aggressive about seeking your sexual attention and then, unprompted, expresses concerns about you developing feelings for her (this one is too unreal)
When a woman has more than one male friend or seems to know a lot of guys and is touchy-feely with men (I don’t care what she says, she has fucked at least half of those men she’s hugging and joking with — do not make her a permanent fixture in your life)
I’m sure there are more, but most women simply are not worth the time. And, if you are hard up, go ahead and get yours. Otherwise, just go on a few dates first.
The old rules about dating are true and will stand the test of time: wait to have sex if you are not hard up. Get to know the person. Putting your dick in crazy is a mistake you cannot afford to make as a high value man. It will wreck your life.
Thanks for letting me share!
“The old rules about dating are true and will stand the test of time: wait to have sex if you are not hard up. Get to know the person. Putting your dick in crazy is a mistake you cannot afford to make as a high value man. It will wreck your life.”
Isn’t it completely against what you wrote in Minimal Game? As in getting sexual as early as possible?
The person you quote isn’t me. Further, if my memory serves me well, Minimal Game is not a book on how to pick up crazies. Your claim is further a stark misrepresentation of my work. Getting sexual as early as possible is for picking up club sluts. In Minimal Game I advocate a different approach.
When a woman has more than one male friend or seems to know a lot of guys and is touchy-feely with men (I don’t care what she says, she has fucked at least half of those men she’s hugging and joking with — do not make her a permanent fixture in your life)”
Some of those dudes probably even think that they “can stay friends” after having broke up with her. What the fuck is wrong with such guys? Were they dropped when they were babies or something?
This post is one of the reasons why I find this blog to be quite contradictory. So readers are in agreement to get women you need to be a high SMV man, yet a few posts back I see readers obsessed with discussing computer games. And guys playing computer games is typical betamale behavior… Do you guys think Steve Jobs, Bezos, Gates, Musk etc even play/discuss computer games or have the time for that?
Personally I wonder how aaron even finds the time to manage this blog, play computer games next to it and date women if hes a high SMV man. But he does write books, a verifiable achievements, so I guess hes at least moderately successful with a medium level SMV.
I should take my own advice. Now that ive nudged ben and aaron away from fascism I should exhibit ruthless focus on becoming a high SMV asap, as the alpha male that I am, that is going to save an exotic white woman from loneliness. So I should not be commenting anymore.
Thats how all you guys should act if you want to be worthy of a great woman. Cut computer games, netflix and tv from your life, build a business. BECOME ALPHA
Man up! 🙂
Some extra advice for the readers: Remember the 10.000 hour rule to become an expert. Time is the most valuable resource in the world, it can never be refilled, its more valuable than money. Computer games and even netflix indicates to me a personality that undervalues their own time and wastes it. Dont be that person who is a beta male. Be the alpha male that saves a woman like a prince on a white horse.
(the only exception I give to esports millionaires but I know they dont play games for fun. They train tediously as its a job)
Didn’t you tell us last time that you’re still in high school? The 10,000 hours rule is bullshit, by the way, because you need innate talent, too. Ahmed, the IQ 80 goat herder won’t become a cracking mathematician ever.
I cant remember ever saying that, but Ive said alot that I dont remember. No im not at the moment. That said, I regret playing computer games in high school instead of increasing SMV by starting businesses. If only I knew then what I knew now, I would already be successfully married and racemixing with my dream woman.
In high school one has so much spare time which is great for getting a headstart.
And aaron I guess thanks for worshipping my IQ but it is worthless when all one does is play computer games, like I did once. IQ is not worth much without iron discipline. One needs be be ruthlessly efficient in working not just hard but working smart. Like the 10.000 rule, one must be aware of their strengths and learn how to learn, using common sense. The goat herder could put 10000 hours into cow herding, for example. Ofcourse Im still working on my discipline because I broke my promise just now. But its important to me to whip the readers of the blog into action. Theres no time to lose for them to become high SMV, so they can marry and become the dream man of a dream woman, instead of being neckbeards who play computer games all day.
Msn up guys! Good luck all!
I’m certainly not “worshipping” your IQ, but thanks for providing continued entertainment. Your comment about the goat herder made me laugh.
“And guys playing computer games is typical betamale behavior… Do you guys think Steve Jobs, Bezos, Gates, Musk etc even play/discuss computer games or have the time for that?”
Do you really think alphas don’t relax at all?
You stupidly conflate playing videogames with playing videogames all day
You argue against video games with changing the premise, from a successful person playing games to an unsuccessful person doing it, then you blame the activity.
Also for Musk not playing:
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/495760430870978561
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/739631614100004864
You fool.
Projections are the main source of strawmanning. So because you overdid gaming, it means that anyone who plays or enjoys a video game must be overdoing to the point where they become a loser?
Do you not see what you’re doing there?
There is no contradiction, just your projections, in fact it’s very much in line with one of the main themes here “Don’t minmax, it’s a big risk, balance works better”.
1a) Minmaxing is a ridiculous risk
It is true that most of the top 0.01% of people in a given field got there by having ABSOLUTELY no fun in their life (they dedicated themselves 100%) and minmaxed the fuck out. Didn’t play video games, didn’t watch a single TV show in years, had no other hobbies etc etc…
This is where faulty reasoning comes in “Oh, so if I minmax, I will become the best in the world and get all those benefits”… Well no, it’s a pre-requisite, but not a guarantee.
For every one minmaxer who makes it, you have thousands that wake up one day at 50 going “fuck I gave 100% of myself to this, and I never experienced life, but I didn’t get the result, I screwed myself bigtime”.
1b) Many of these people are miserable
Even if you achieve 0.01% results in a field by minmaxing, you’re likely to be miserable. You’re likely to feel you wasted your life chasing a rainbow. It’s not an accident many of them commit suicide and/or get addicted to drugs in order to cope.
2) Fun isn’t a “beta low-status activity”
Years back when I first start breaking into higher status circle, I was a brainwashed moron, just like you. Imagine when I befriended the best playas in the city, and found they frequently were enthusiastically discussing video games.
These two guys had banged half the celebrities in my city (they were famous themselves). They were accomplished in their craft (though not because they were especially good, mostly due to charisma and networking skill). And their main hobbies were gambling, video games and binge-watching TV series.
Just like you this hit me as a shock. I spent 16 hours a day busting my ass off. But these guys always got much better results than me by being chill and maybe doing 4-5 hours of real work in a given day. It pissed me off, like how is it that I work 3x harder, got 3x better technically speaking, but they get better recognition, more gigs etc?
Because they spent more time having fun and being pleasant to be around. Maybe 1-3 hours a day on video games. Then 2-3 hours a day socializing and networking. They watched 3-4 hours of tv… etc… etc.
Here’s a hint, people prefer working with balanced people. If they have to choose between a grumpy workaholic and a chill dude who gets things done in a relaxed way – they often choose the latter. People are emotional like that.
This is even true in highly technical fields. They’ll actually choose to work with a person who’s less good technically speaking, just because they’re not a grumpy fuck like the workaholic.
3) Discussing something once a decade isn’t “obsession”
I think this blog has existed for something like 10 years? Most of the regulars have been around for 4-5 years… You saw one thread (first one in 10 years) where some of the regulars discussed their favorite games.
You then projected that they’re obsessed with video games and must be spending 8 hours a day playing them. Video games are like moves dude.
Sitting down with someone and talking about the movies you liked most in the past 4-5 years ins’t “being obsessed with movies”. Neither is discussing the best games that came out in the past 4-5 days. Doing 2-3 games a year isn’t obsessive…
Minmaxing on the other hand IS obsessive.
Thank you for your comment Alek, maybe youre right maybe not. All i know is working hard makes me happy, reading books (especially science books) is alot of fun. I came across one of your old comments that said the average guy wont become a billionaire when thats my lifes goal. That shocked me, why would you hold these limitimg beliefs Alek?
Last time you told us that you wanted to embark on a STEM degree, now you are “reading” scientific books.
Pursuing a STEM degree is alot of fun Aaron, to me at least. In my spare time I read science books and wikipedia for fun, or fight fascism.
So now you are pursing a STEM degree already? That’s odd, because there is no way you could have started such a degree between the time you made the claim that that was your goal and now, according to my knowledge of the educational system in the Netherlands.
I have to add to what Alex is saying. For me personally, I gave up gaming and watching TV for quite a while, believing that it was a waste of time and that I’d be better off allocating my time in other ways. I was only fooling myself in the end as I just ended up replacing those things with other distractions.
Anyways, once I decided to enter a certain field and was putting in 60-70+ hours a week with education, study and working part time in the field, I started to feel like that even though I was doing something worthwhile and productive, that I was missing out on a lot of enjoyment and sort of ruining my health in the process.
With what little free time I had left, I found a multiplayer game that I really enjoyed and could veg out to, and it was really enjoyable. I also started watching shows again. At some point, gaming would even cut into my study time, but I still managed to graduate at the top of my class.
Now that I have more free time, I’m starting to enjoy things like nature, meditation, exercise, music, reading and cooking once more. Hanging out with friends and “wasting time” checking out gaming videos and what not. Sure, I’d love to be a rich rockstar or whatever, but I’m happy right now with a minimalist sort of lifestyle and doing normal type of shit here and there.
Jon, good luck with your billionaire goal. But realize that by coming to this blog and wasting your energy trying to prove Sleazy, Novy, or anyone else here to be erroneous hypocrites or whatever, or by arguing with the material of the blog in general, you’re just distracting yourself in the end.
Hey guys… u sure wanna keep feeding the troll?
I dont see him adding any value to the thread so far
His recent comments ended all up in the trash.
“This is even true in highly technical fields. They’ll actually choose to work with a person who’s less good technically speaking, just because they’re not a grumpy fuck like the workaholic.”
Correction: even TRUER in highly technical fields…
Very nice post, thanks!
Unfortunately, you are correct. It is even more prevelant in technical fields. I guess on some level I still don’t want to accept this reality, because I don’t want to believe humans can be so illogical. But they are in fact emotionally driven.
I would question this. In non-technical fields, personality goes a long way, but in technical ones candidates can normally be evaluated based on past (quantifiable) achievements. Sure, you shouldn’t be a complete dickhead, but being less outgoing, or having a less balanced life will hurt you not nearly as much as in non-technical fields.
I thought that was because mediocre people (aka most people) fear being overshadowed at work by someone else.
They can be evaluated on quantifiable criteria, sure… As can most areas of life. Such as nutrition. But people still make emotional choices and backwards rationalize them. Let me give more concrete examples of what I was thinking about…
When I say technical fields, I primarily mean roles that are technical in nature. For example (a story from a friend) there’s a small telecom company… they were looking for a guy to handle their linux installations.
The bitch who handled the interviews choose the bullshitter who was far less technically capable, because he had this dunning kruger where he acted like he was a linux god. She picked him over actual linux experts who were a lot more modest in their presentation.
Now you might say “But that company won’t get very far if they do that”… And you’d be right. But most companies never get far. That’s the point.
Just like most people never get anywhere in life due to self-sabotage and unproductive illogical decisions, same is true for most businesses. The ones who make it are not representative of the majority. Most companies in the world are mediocre, and that’s primarily due to making mediocre decisions.
Just because people can make decisions on quantifiable data, doesn’t mean they wont. Now in terms of whether it happens more in technical fields/roles… I don’t know. I don’t have a study.
But it just “seems that way to me”. Or maybe it just “seems that way” because it’s so idiotic that it sticks out more when they do it. Maybe it sticks out less when done in less technical places.
There are plenty of studies that this is prevalent in business*. But I don’t know if they broke it up by type of job. Is it less prevalant in some categories than others.
*- The book charisma myth goes into this.
I have no doubt this happens, but the difference is that they could ask one of their engineers or IT guys to interview candidates. While sympathy certainly would still play a role, the chance of a bullshit artist getting such a role would be greatly diminished. A common defence of that kind of scenario is that those people won’t survive long, but this is decidedly not the case. Really incompetent people can have long and prosperous careers. Remember all the guys who didn’t contribute to STEM group projects? Yes, plenty of those got good jobs, particularly if they can play the ethnic minority/vagina/diversity card. (I even know of cases where large corporations reached out to completely useless students who had barren LinkedIn profiles, but who were approached simply for “diversity” reasons.)
“I would question this. In non-technical fields, personality goes a long way, but in technical ones candidates can normally be evaluated based on past (quantifiable) achievements. Sure, you shouldn’t be a complete dickhead, but being less outgoing, or having a less balanced life will hurt you not nearly as much as in non-technical fields.”
Well you have joined the workforce longer than I do, so maybe you can provide some nice insights here.
But isn’t tech companies, especially startups, are about attracting investors just as much as delivering good products timely? They will need people who can have good social skills and interpersonal skills, If a guy scores a bit quite high on the autistic spectrum, isn’t it a little incompatible?
Sure, depends on the company, of course.
Regular tech people, e.g. your rank-and-file software developer, don’t talk to investors, so there’s no issue. Besides, really good people in STEM are normally quite introverted. Tech is a big field, though, and there are plenty of areas that don’t demand that much in terms of hardcore technical skills and where bullshit artists can thrive; think of “change managers”, “scum masters”, “agile coaches” etc.