Marriage sucks on two levels. Firstly, you’re essentially making a 50% bet on losing half your stuff, as well as sometimes your kids, home and dog. Secondly, it is enforced monogamy. You are together because the law says so, which is good if you want to be, not so good if you don’t.
“So? If it sucks you can get a divorce!” one might say; but given that most men get married with a view to raising a family, it would be irresponsible to risk fucking up your kids because you no longer like your partner. Children thrive best in a nuclear family with two parents.
Frost writes on how to mitigate the first problem, through choosing “the right woman“. If you read that link you may be uncomfortable with the level of privacy invading and game playing. Doing things such as getting her passwords is twisted, but realise this is because the institution of marriage itself is twisted.
I hereby offer an alternative that avoids the risk of divorce rape, which in turn means you can trust your potential partner much more. My proposition also addresses the second, less talked about issue of enforced monogamy, so that those of us who like variety in our romantic lives have a chance to raise a family.
Both parties sign a contract with the following terms.
That’s the basics of it. This allows two people to come together and create a family, without having to fuck the same person every day. If you are deeply in love you can chose to be monogamous or not, and if you fall out of love as time drags on, you can have other romantic relationships whilst still raising your kids together (and probably more amicably given the lack of sexual frustration).
In all honesty I doubt it will catch on, because you’d need to be ok with the thought of your partner having sex with someone else (but not in your house). Personally I’m fine with that, I like unfenced relationships. The hardest thing is gonna be finding a girl who I can convince this is a good idea, but by god I’ll try.
Sex 3.0 is a book by JJ Roberts, and has an accompanying website: sexthreepointzero.com.
The book describes how sex has changed throughout human history, starting with sex 1.0 with only unfenced relationships (200000 years ago until 10000 years ago), then leading to sex 2.0 with the invention of agriculture – leading humans to settle in one location rather than being nomadic, which then led to the near death of unfenced relationships and the rise of fenced relationships (10000 years ago until present day). Roberts argues that sex 2.0 is no longer relevant because it goes against what is natural for humans, and because all of it’s benefits have been overridden by social and technological progress.
His proposed way forward is sex 3.0, a model in which people have the choice between fenced and unfenced relationships. The choice isn’t the critical point though, Roberts addresses issues such as jealousy an possessiveness, “relationship duress” (I bet a lot of manospherians suffer from this), as well as evolutionary theory and the conflict of interests between male and female genetic imperatives.
My verdict – everyone should read this book. Not because I think everyone should be in unfenced relationships, but because it changes your mentality about sex and relationships. Roberts highlights people who consistently fail in relationships (ie most people). Whereas a typical game author would tell you to work on your relationship game, Roberts calls the very model of relationships into question. Arguing that most people suffer from “mapping errors” and that a change in mentality will offer better results for most people. I think he is right. Although game guides can get you laid, they don’t normally cover long term sexual fulfilment. This void has been filled by Sex 3.0.
My only criticisms of the book are that there are a few typos, and that the author tends to repeat himself for a bit. I did buy the book when it first came out so these issues may or may not have been addressed in the current edition. I also think that Roberts makes it sound easier to get rid of jealousy and possessiveness than it actually is. I managed, but I’m more emotionally detached from life than most people I know. Either way, read it for the information because it will have a profound impact on the way you view sex and relationships. The book is very well researched and you can tell that Roberts’ knowledge extends far beyond what is included in the book.
I don’t do fenced relationships, and am therefore not capable of cheating or being cheated on. I do however believe that cheating within the framework a fenced relationship is wrong. That said, the only wrong part is the dishonesty; the actual act of having sex with someone else is not morally wrong in and of itself – because humans are not each other’s sexual property.
Whatever, if you know me or read this blog much then you’ll be familiar with my slightly abnormal sense of right and wrong – this is not a philosophical post.
This is a post about how people who get cheated on are, by and large, idiots when it comes to reacting to and dealing with infidelity.
First lets examine the typical reactions of men and women.
She’s a cum guzzling slut for cheating on me, she is clearly psychologically deficient. He is evil for stealing my girl from me.
What does she have that I don’t? I can’t believe he chose her over me. She is a filthy slut for stealing him from me.
Bad vibes all round.
Anger and sadness aside, these typical reactions demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of infidelity, its likelihood and its causes (which differ massively based on gender).
Why do people cheat?
Men are naturally polygamous, women are naturally hypergamous (people who claim to be naturally monogamous should consider the difference between “moral”, “natural” and “normal”). This means that when a man cheats he is fundamentally seeking a new experience.
Men cheat when they have a high enough desire for a new partner*. The desire can be increased by sudden increase in the number of sexual options available, and/or by the woman becoming unattractive or withholding sex.
Yes, women who “punish” their boyfriends by withholding sex are practically asking to be cheated on.
The crucial point, though, is that unless the woman is completely not worth being with, the man will stay with her while his affair continues on the side. This is where the idea of a mistress or concubine originates from.
In contrast, women cheat when they find a better partner than their current one*. Their desire to cheat derives from an increase in the quality of their sexual options, and is further boosted by the man DLVing over the long term.
A woman having an affair is ready to leave her partner. While women and men both can love one (or more) person(s) while sleeping with many – a woman who specifically cheats on her partner, ie commits and act of grave dishonesty and violates the implied sexual ownership of a fenced relationship, no longer loves her partner and is ready to move on.
When men are caught they end the affair – when women are caught they end the relationship.
This difference is the root of people’s dumb reactions to cheating.
As with many things of a sexual nature, people love to project their own thoughts and feelings on to other people.
So how do we solve this? Unfortunately there is no system for it, just the cold hard truth.
If you get cheated on, it means you weren’t good enough. A better man came along, or at least a man who offered something you couldn’t. If you catch her, your relationship is over.
If you get cheated on, it means that you alone cannot fulfil the man’s sexual appetite. This isn’t just frequency of sex, different women are different in bed. Your likelihood of getting cheated on depends on your bedroom skills vs the mans desire for variety. If you catch him your relationship can continue, if you forgive him.
Men & Women
Cheating is a consequence of people’s natural sexual urges, and despite all that I’ve just said – circumstances change. A woman may think a man has higher value than her husband until she sleeps with him, then realising that she should have stuck with her first choice. Similarly a man can overestimate his own desire for variety and realise that his wife was more than enough. Either way, people make mistakes.
Over 30 years of marriage, the likelihood of infidelity by at least one partner tends towards 90%, also people who have cheated on one or more partners are more likely to cheat in general.
Some would say that information like this demonstrates that people need to learn to forgive and forget. Personally I think it shows that the way the majority of people conduct their love lives is flawed, but rather than try a different approach the majority just keep flogging a dead horse in the vain hope that “maturity” will iron out the sexual urges ingrained by millions of years of evolution.
People sometimes call me weird for not minding that my partners have sex with other people (although not all of them do – more evidence for hypergamy vs polygamy theory). The irony is that many of these people have probably been cheated on numerous times without even realising it.
* providing there is mutual interest, good logistics and a low – medium chance of getting caught.
Our culture has lied to you about what constitutes a strong independent woman. Real feminine strength is what our grandmothers had while their husbands were fighting for their country. How many “strong independent women” could handle an emotional burden like that? My guess is very few. I want strong, independent women in my life, but when I say strong and independent I mean:
I want a woman strong enough to resist relationship duress enough to facilitate an unfenced relationship.
I want a woman independent enough to not require the input of her friends for every major decision.
I want a woman strong enough to get her validation from within, not her job, her social status or wealth.
I want a woman independent enough to not narcissistically worry “what she’s done wrong” in the event that I don’t want to hang out.
I want a woman strong enough to lower her bitch shield and be honest, open and vulnerable. Someone brave enough to bring the walls down.
I want a woman independent enough to have actual, constructive hobbies. Shopping does not count as a hobby.
I want a woman strong enough to always make the effort to look feminine and sexy, even if she isn’t feeling up to it.
I want a woman independent enough to not require constant external validation from facebook, texting and other social media.
I want a woman strong enough to put up with sexist humour, emotional roller coasters and rough sex (that’s how most of my relationships with women are).
This is not the same as the “Strong Independent Woman(tm)” promoted to us by Sex in the City, Cosmo and various other manifestations of societal decay. Being a catty, neurotic, shallow bitch who acts like a man but with a vagina is not strength, it’s cowardice. Taking shelter in a fortress of asocial and unnatural behaviour is a defence mechanism for people without the strength to present themselves as they truly are. Climbing the corporate ladder doesn’t take strength, it takes manipulation, ass kissing and sociopathy. Having an emotionless, sex only love life is nothing but a sign of a lack of willingness/ability to connect with the opposite sex. Overcoming this takes strength, as does letting go of any jealousy about your partners other lovers.
Of course you’ll never read this in Cosmo, because to them strength is neurotic, self absorbed validation seeking. The result is a lot of lonely, deluded women and a lot of sexually frustrated men. It’s lose – lose.
Happy shame the beta month.
I’ve decided to join in on Mentu and Ashur’s fun by detailing my own journey of relative betatude, and how that compares to now. I don’t identify as an Alpha, so I’m going to talk about how I became what I call a Sigma instead.
This could be a cool tattoo.
Once upon a time, I was 13 years old. This was when I got my first proper girlfriend. We never had sex, although recently we caught up and I have now finally slept with her. She has actually read this blog and is coming to visit again this weekend.
Even at this tender age I was quite the narcissist, but as far as I knew there was a correct way to act around women. This was to supplicate and cuddle your way into their vaginas. My one saving grace was that I was persistent because I was horny as shit (high T levels + being 13 = lethal). Between my 13th birthday and the age of about 14 and a half, I had a string of typically teenage relationships: lots of fooling around but no sex, starting out feeling cool and being nice, ending up jealous and needy. I emphasise that at this age I acted that way because I thought I was supposed to – I was not acting through my own intentions. However, nearly 6 years later I found out that I had unknowingly “played girls off” against their friends. Pimp in the making? Probably not. Deez bitches be over analysing my shit.
Over time, the learned nice guy behaviours became internalised. I actually became nicer. At the age of 14 and a half, things really changed. I met a girl on a school trip to Italy (romantic init). I liked this girl a lot and fell pretty quickly. I was still a nice guy, but I had one saving grace – I still had strong personal boundaries. I think this came from my argumentative personality and getting my fair share of shit in school.
I was 14 (and a half) when we started going out. We were together for 3 years and 8 months.
I became a massive beta over this time. She was a headstrong “independent” girl who, although she was nice, spent a lot of time telling me how I should act and feel. The worst part was that I listened. I lost my virginity to that girl, so I felt like I was invested and should listen to her. She was also a year older than me so I thought she knew her shit.
Then she called a break, because I got too needy. I thought “fuck this I’m gonna chase other girls”. She didn’t like that, and we ended up back together after a week. Relationship continues as normal, but she’s now more jealous and I feel a bit more independent.
I was in 2 bands over this time. The second band was better so girls liked us more – this lead to more jealousy.
Fast forward to me being 17. She left for university and we decided to try and “make it work”. I don’t know if she cheated, but I can’t really blame her if she did. I got needy quickly. We broke up a second time, for a month. In this time I started smoking weed and became friends with Wolf, who is a textbook example of a natural Alpha. He had just dumped his ltgf because he got sick of her shit. What followed was this – he went on a fucking spree, I didn’t get laid at all.
So I got back with her AGAIN.
But she was now worried I’d “try to be” wolf. Trying to be someone is silly, but seeing a friend get laid easily is still pretty inspiring.
Then I started reading Roissy and Roosh. Shit went down.
Over a few months I came to dominate the relationship. Suddenly she was reacting to me and telling me she loved me all the time. Suddenly she was ringing me from uni to tell me she missed me, when it used to be the other way round. I was cool with her. When I turned 18 (UK drinking age for you americans), Wolf wished me happy birthday on facebook, adding “ladies, lock up your daughters, Dulst is out”. I thought it was hilarious, my girl got pretty upset.
The relationship continued and we went on holiday together, I really enjoyed this. It was a nice chill time we had in Turkey and I look back and smile – though I have no doubt that I enjoyed it because for the first time in my life I had hand in the relationship. After the holiday I went clubbing a lot and realised I wanted to get with other girls. Things went downhill from here. She realised and tried everything to keep me. Including shouting “fuck you, I could get with anyone here if I wanted!” in a club. I walked out on that and she chased.
Things slid downhill further, and I dumped her ass.
Then I went to Amsterdam. This is like August 2011, not the more recent trip. I may or may not have fucked a hooker, and I definitely had a one night stand with a slightly embarrassing girl. My friends laughed at me and mocked me, but I didn’t care – it confirmed that I didn’t need my ex to get laid. Between that ONS in mid August and going to uni at the end of September, I slept with two more girls, including a virgin. I also began fooling around with a girl I had known a long time. She was a virgin also, but not as up for sleeping with me.
I slept with two girls in my first week of uni, ending up with both as FWBs. One got a proper boyfriend after 3 weeks, I’m still sleeping with the other. Between then and now I slept with those two, the virgin I’d known a long time, a girl from my class, another ONS and the ex from when I was 13. Those aren’t Casanova numbers, but it suits me. My course load isn’t conducive to going out all the time (and I’m more responsible than this guy was).
Between Amsterdam #1 and going to uni, I learned the skills. Between starting uni and now I built the core. I’ve written a lot about sleeping with girls, but in terms of self improvement sex doesn’t mean much. I’m proud of it, but I’m more proud of the fact that at a relatively young age I changed in 4 fundamental ways.
I predict that most of the journey to Alpha posts about to come out this month will, when distilled, be based on those four things. Now I’ve reached this point, sex is easy – and no longer important. It’s like food and water – you only think about it in times of lack. Whereas in September pussy used to be my sole focus, now my drive goes into uni, my band and my blog. My casual sexual relationships are a fun distraction – just like my other hobby, cooking.
Moral of the story? There isn’t one, but a bit of reflection is fun. The only problem is that the more I write the more I wonder if I’m slightly sociopathic.
People have needs.
This image is an oft-cited example of those needs, and their hierarchy. (Google Maslow’s hierarchy of needs for more info)
Essentially, it’s like a video game. In order to advance to the next level, you need to complete all the tasks in the level before. For example, someone who is dying of thirst won’t give a shit about being sexually intimate.
The problem with beta provider game is that you aim to account for needs that most modern women can account for by themselves.
You’re average girl at uni or with a job has probably got breathing, eating, drinking, sleeping, homeostasis and using the toilet down. And if she wants she can get sex (as in getting her hole filled, not good sex) pretty much at any time.
Safety is where the beta comes in. Ignoring security of morality, health and family, as they tend to be more personal, a beta will try to provide resources and property. Even though the modern woman can sort that shit out easily. Probably more easily than a young man.
The beta’s woes don’t end there though. The far greater problem with this approach is that he’s trying to satisfy a physiological need (sex) by providing safety. How can someone stuck on level 1 help someone else complete level 2?
Compare this to an alpha. The alpha has at least the first 4 levels covered. This means that anything he does give a woman is a treat. His higher level allows him to help people on levels up to his. A guy who can get laid easily (level 1) is in a far better position to provide a woman with friendship and sexual intimacy (level 3) than a guy who can’t get laid at all.
What’s the lesson of this drawn out video game analogy? Simple:
There is nothing wrong with providing for a woman, as long as you’ve got your shit handled first.
P.S. When trying to build a good lifestyle, working upwards through that chart is a useful way to check you have all your bases covered.
Standard issue conventional dating wisdom that is pretty much useless to the common man. The thing is, despite the fact that it’s useless, it’s still right. It’s also gravely misunderstood.
The misunderstood part is “be yourself”. Thanks to (among other things) egalitarianism, the self esteem movement and the tendency of our culture to preserve people’s comfort and feelings over their actual achievements, “be yourself” translates to “be like everyone else”. Be boring, be consumerist, be one dimensional.
The other night I had a chat with a computer science student who was taking a girl out on a date. I reeled off the standard stuff about not paying for drinks in order to please her and being worth sleeping with. The girls of the group did not agree with my advice (surprise) and neither did my friend. So I rephrased thusly:
“Advice on specific techniques isn’t useful unless you put a lot of time in, the best short term advice is that getting laid is about who you are, not what you do.
“But who you are isn’t about the layers of social conditioning that have built up over the years. I mean ‘who you are’ when you strip back those layers to reach your core essence.”
This kicked off a bit. On team Dulst you have what I just said, on team SWPL you have the notion that who you are is defined by social conditioning. Also that current humans are more highly evolved than hunter gatherer homo sapiens (if that were true where does that leave modern hunter gatherer societies?).
Standard SWPLesque implied shaming language ensued.
“So you’re saying that if you want to fuck your sister or an animal, that should be ok because it’s only social conditioning stopping you?”
No, fucking your close relatives is evolutionary suicide, that’s why you don’t do it.
Then gays were used as an example. I casually mentioned that homosexuality, while perfectly acceptable (I live in Brighton for god’s sake), is unnatural.
Several offended sensibilities later and the subject changed.
There is a game related lesson from this though – team SWPL confused who you are with what you do.
Social conditioning is a good thing a lot of the time. It stops us DOING stupid shit. But it should never change who you are.
You are not your fucking khakis – Tyler Durden
You are not the years of social conditioning. You are not hollywood love advice. You are not fem-centric. You are a fucking man. A caveman. In a suit.
And as you strip away all the bullshit, and stop accepting conventional thought without a good reason, being yourself comes to mean being fucking awesome.
When you reach that point, everything you do becomes effortless.
Be yourself and have fun. Just make sure that you have a clear idea of what “yourself” is, and that “yourself” also happens to be one cool mother fucker.
Physics: The tendency of a body to resist acceleration; the tendency of a body at rest to remain at rest or of a body in straight line motion to stay in motion in a straight line unless acted on by an outside force.
Colloquial: Resistance or disinclination to motion, action, or change.
Me: The third biggest threat to our generation.
In case you were wondering, the top two are feminism and information overload. Consumerism is fourth.
Inertia is like a viral infection. It has some specific causes, but sometimes strikes out of the blue. Known causes include sudden change, traumatic life events, the aforementioned information overload, stress, and distraction. It is highly contagious; your risk of infection increases with exposure and proximity to the infected. Symptoms include depression, DERPression, laziness, apathy, decreased productivity, time wasting, excuse making, over thinking, and most importantly: not getting a single fucking thing done.
Take this week as an example – I started new job and started smoking weed again. This shift led me to stop writing blog posts. I’m not gonna make up bullshit excuses, I couldn’t be fucked because I was getting stoned, having sex and sleeping in (evening shifts ftw).
This is a small scale example, but inertia can also cause problems of epidemic proportions. Our resistance to change is what leads to blind acceptance of conventional wisdom about productivity, diet/exercise, sex and relationships. Then, even as we are surrounded by unproductive, fat, celibate loners, we cling to our faith in conventional wisdom.
This is because we are prone to inertia. Change can be hard, change can be risky, so we settle for what is comfortable rather than what is good.
We can partially blame ourselves for this, but we live in a society that shuns risk taking and encourages us to settle for what is “safe” and easy. The thing is, if we were accustomed to getting shit done rather than seeking comfort, our inertia would work with us. Our resistance to change would make us find being lazy too boring and uncomfortable to tolerate. Being “on a roll” would be a normal part of life.
The means is inconsequential, as everyone will find their own way of becoming someone who gets shit done. It doesn’t matter what you do either; providing it means something to you. A job you enjoy, voluntary work, a blog, songwriting, painting. Just become an effective and productive person.
I don’t have the definitive answer for how to do this – all I can say is get shit done and make it a habit. I’d also suggest looking into a guy called Cal Newport, and a book called “The Now Habit” as two starting points.
“What’s the point?” you may ask. The point my friend is that when civilisation teeters and finally tips over the edge, lazy people will be the least survivable. Those who have internalised the act of getting shit done will rise to the top. Our generation is severely lacking in this type of person, so solve that shit.
Without being a massive pussy.
If you’ve been sleeping with a girl for a while you can end up over amping the asshole end of your game. Sometimes you may get asked for genuine advice or comfort. The problem is these requests look like shit tests. For example:
“Have I done something wrong?”
This could be a standard shit test, to which you could either sarcastically agree and amplify, evade and reframe, or if it’s by text just ignore. But there is also the chance that your lady friend just wants some genuine comfort.
The problem is that it’s very easy to slip into supplication and ego stroking, which lowers your value. You need to think of a response that adds value for the other person whilst simultaneously maintaining your high value.
“Nah, you’re fine for now.”
This adds value (consolation) whilst maintaining yours (by appearing discerning). This can also be used as a standard neg, the importance is in the delivery. Said with a smirk, the above line is a neg. Said with a warm smile, it’s comfort.
This leads to part 1 of being nice: alpha reassurance = light negs with warm smiles.
At this juncture I’ll point out that this isn’t actually what goes through my head in these situations, it’s become internalised as a part of my personality. The important thing is to break any habit of supplication you may have, this thought process is a tool to do that. If after 6 months you still think this shit through step by step – you might be a sociopath. More likely autistic.
So that’s reassurance covered, how does one give advice without being a pussy?
The problem here is that even if you aren’t a pussy you can still piss people off by giving advice the wrong way. This method should prevent that.
Step 1: Let them vent.
A lot of the time when people ask for advice they really just want to get things off their chest. They’re not actually interested in your advice, they just want someone to share the mental and physical load of their problems. It’s not their fault, they don’t realise they don’t want your advice – fucked up right? Women tend to be worse for this than men.
Step 2: Non evaluative listening.
Now you’ve been presented with whatever problem your friend/partner/coworker faces, you need to explore it to find possible solutions. Ask them to delve deeper into specific issues, and sit back as they vent some more. CH has an excellent post on this skill, so read that shit. The point is to listen, without judging the content of what the other person says. You are simply trying to get as much information out as possible. Once people verbalise information, they begin forming links and coming to their own conclusions. You can end up with them solving their problems and thanking you for the advice without you ever actually instructing them to do something specific.
Step 3: Only give direct, specific advice if asked.
Unsolicited advice is annoying. Sometimes people want to tell you all about their problems without hearing your opinion at all, other times people ask you for specific guidance because they see you as wise or knowledgeable about a specific subject. In the latter case, go ahead and speak your mind. If they react well keep going, if not do some more non evaluative listening then try again. If they still don’t react well skip to step 4.
Step 4: Identify underlying problems.
If they didn’t ask for specific advice you should skip step 3 and go here. The aim of being nice without being a pussy/annoying is to on one hand not be a supplicator, and on the other hand not impose your beliefs on someone.
Let’s say your friend got dumped. Saying “quit being a bitch and adopt an attitude of abundance, you fucking pussy” isn’t gonna be as effective as “I know it hurts mate, but there’s like 3 billion women in the world, why get hung up on just one?”
The key difference here, apart from tone, is the use of a question. Consider less extreme examples:
“Don’t get hung up on one girl, there are 3 billion girls in the world.” vs “There are 3 billion girls in the world, why get hung up on just one?”
“I think your problem is fear of rejection.” vs “Do you think fear of rejection is involved?”
By phrasing whatever point you’re trying to make as a question, it forces the other person to analyse your point (so that they can answer your question) rather than ignore it. It also means that they won’t think you’re disparaging their character (people are so sensitive these days).
Step 5: Let them draw their own conclusions.
People remember the advice that they come to by forming logical links. If you lead someone to a conclusion, they’ll always remember it better than if you just flat out tell them what to do, because they remember the mental journey to their conclusion and the emotions associated with that journey.
Step 6: If they don’t want to hear it, back off.
There’s no point trying to “fix” someone. There’s a certain type of girl that does this, and they also love giving unsolicited advice. Those girls are annoying, and are often projecting their own imperfections onto their hapless boyfriends.
If the person you’re trying to advise starts dismissing or strongly opposing what you say, end the conversation. Neither of you are getting value from it and unless you are in a pro debate, there’s no point. You can fall into what I call the “Theists vs Atheists trap”. This is where both sides are convinced that the other side is deliberately trying to subvert them or disagree with them.Leading to no progress being made. The important thing is to not be a bitch about it. Saying “fine, suit yourself” suggests that you are a passive agressive faggot, and shows that you need to preserve your ego. People like that shouldn’t be giving advice in the first place. Just be courteous and change the subject.
The classic example of someone who doesn’t want to hear it is the friend who “doesn’t believe” in game. You point out that it gets you laid. They in return start making excuses either about how it only works for certain kinds of people or that it’s manipulative and evil (by that logic I asume they believe that make-up, hair extensions and high heels are also evil). This person does not yet want to be helped, and the more you try to help them the more they resist. Ultimately you can only advise a person that wants advice, so with these people only take it up to step two. Eventually, if you’re not chatting shit, they’ll allow you to go further and you can end up really helping people. I did this recently with a female friend who was verging on depression (see, it’s not always game relate, promise).
The next time someone asks you for advice, try this shit out and see how it goes.
Everyone who reads this blog should be familiar with this post.
The idea of value, and its 3 components, is central to understanding why some guys pull every time they’re out, or why some guys can sleep with multiple girls regularly without them minding, while other equally attractive and personable guys are effectively celibate. The higher your value, the better people will treat you and the more they’ll let you get away with. People won’t necessarily like you for it, but high value will never make them like you less.
Having covered what value is, the next step is implementing it.
Short answer: Always add value to an interaction, and seek interactions in which the other person adds value as well.
Long answer: This advice applies to a wide range of things. Sex, relationships, business, friendships, negotiation, job interviews, and any other situation where two or more people interact seeking mutual benefit (ie what JJ Roberts defines as a relationship). This advice applies equally the straight, gay, male, female and hermaphrodite readers (but remember that my definition of value refers specifically to straight men). A good interaction is one in which all parties add value, without giving up their autonomy.
I’ll break that down for you. Part 1: all parties add value. You are “adding value” if the other person is glad the interaction took place. You may have given them good advice, caused a tingly ‘gina, cut them a good deal or fucked them senseless. As long as they’re glad it happened, you added value. Generally if someone comes back for more (conversation, second job interview, sex) then you added value.
The important part is that all parties add value, not just you. If you, as a high value male, fuck a girl who you aren’t attracted to (guilty) then you are adding value without her adding value. This is a bad interaction for you because you’re being mugged off. Interactions in which you don’t add value are the same, because the realisation that you’re taking advantage of someone will bring you down. There is a common misconception that players take advantage of women – this is not the case providing he adds value to her life.
Part 2: without giving up their autonomy. This means that you are interacting with people because you want to, not because you have to. I recently got a job at a supermarket because I want money, they hired me because they wanted me. Obligation is a pain in the arse, and saps value from your life. I would never sleep with someone out of obligation, and I wouldn’t want a woman to sleep with me out of it either.
I appreciate that this post is very abstract, so here’s an example.
Boy meets girl, the boy approaches girl and runs tight game, the girl is attractive and pleasant. Both parties are adding value, and are acting autonomously (because either is free to walk away). They fuck (adding value via good sex, autonomy via choosing to sleep together). Pretty simple right?
The only remaining question is whether there exists a clash between sexual aggression (primal/emotional value) and autonomy. There doesn’t, because sexual aggression should always be in a context where the girl is free to go. Erotic asphyxiation is one thing, knocking someone out and fucking their unconscious body is a different, morally reprehensible, kettle of fish.
If you make judgements about who to associate with based on value and become a high value person, you will get infinite happiness forever and level up every tuesday.