An Observation

[zekko]

We don't live in tribes anymore, so there is no one guy who is an alpha or The Alpha. Like Krauser says, most guys have a mixture of alpha and beta traits. And a guy might be an Alpha in one situation but a Beta in another. Michael Jordan was unquestionably The Alpha in the Chicago Bulls locker room. But when he's at a meeting with other venture capitalists, or he's just another NBA owner with far less net worth and experience than other owners, is he still an Alpha in that scenario? A guy might be an Alpha as a result of being a supervisor at work and having to show leadership and get stuff done and order people reporting to him to do certain tasks, but around his friends, he might be more of a follower type.

I agree with all that.

I think Alpha is more or less just being comfortable in your own skin

This I don't agree with. Being comfortable in your own skin is a good thing, but I don't see how that makes you a top male. The mentally handicapped guy bagging groceries down at the grocery store might be comfortable in his own skin, but he's no alpha. I think this forum sets a pretty low bar for being alpha, honestly. I don't think women will do the same.

 

[SharinganUser]

10 years old?!

You are clueless lol

China and India are the oldest continuous civilizations on Earth 8000 and 7000 years old respective..thats a good run i'd say....you need to study up

And as far as opportunity....dude seriously....why do you think marco polo went there in the first place?! $$$

He said their success is about ten years old, not their civilizations. Most of China's history has been fraught with war, famine and poverty. While there are a lot of billionaires in China, most of that money has been made off of the labour of people who are dirt poor and working insane hours to support their family(including their in-laws).

I'd say that for every rich arranged marriage guy in China, there are about 10 000 dirt poor guys also in arranged marriages, and that is a very conservative estimate.

 

[backbreaker]

actually india is the 2nd oldest known civilization on earth... try 35k years, not 8. the coasts of india was the first place that the home sepeians out of africa settled.. people assume they went to europe but that is not correct. too cold.

india is virtually the cradle of human civlization, spoken language, religion amoung other things were invented there. Hinduism is the oldest religion on earth.

actually india is one of the most.. let me rephrase india for a very very long time was just a collection of city states.. have been very successful for a very long time. the first large metropolitian city was india. india has been very rich for a very very very very very long time. their spices, their silk were exotic and imported to all of the known world. i.e the silk road/spice routes. to suggest that india has been been broke and savaged by war really shows ignorance.

alexander the great had one campaign against the indian army and turnee d his white ass around and went home lol.. a man who crushed the persians and their army drawrfed anything he had ever seen. they spent the vast majoirty of their time waring with themselves much like china but when united against one enemey no one stood a chance.


india in the last 1500 years have had 2 problems...well, really 3. the first were the mongols who cut off their trade routes. the second were the europeans who stopped going to india for goods for fear of being killed by turks and mongols which brought economic instability to the region and later was too weak to defend themselves against british conolization

last but not least the invention of modern medicine has boomed the population faster than the economic infastructure was ready for.

but india has a very rich history, one of the richest in the world. i'm not going to sit here and let white arrogance and ignorance damn that. lol @ germans and english people ****ting on a country being savaged by war and famine.. lol grab a mirror buddy.
one of the things i always founnd facinating about white pepole is that they clame successes that aren't their own. most white's americans are what, german, irish, english.. what's that.. gauls, anglos, e vikings, etc.. hell they were worse off than most african civlizations until the late middle ages, living in ass backward villiages, dealing with plauges, no technology, the avg person lived to be 20 years old in the dark ages in europe, yet most white people have no qualms about claiming greek or roman successes as their own. unless you are italian or greek you can't do, that, no more than i can claim king tut even though we have skin color

and you definly have no business ****ting on china.. where the bronze age was started over 3000 years ago or india a country who stopped killing people over religion millenniums before you were even conceived. confuses invented the world's first walfare system, putting a percentage of the city's money back to feed the city's poor


over 2000 years ago. learn about a country's hsitoryi you **** on it

 

[zekko]

I agree with what Royal Flush is saying. For one of the first times in history, women can support themselves economically. That was traditionally the man's job. Now we have the male role vacated, basically. We've lost that leverage, and gained nothing to replace it. As it is now, women don't really need men - not for a whole heckuva lot. No wonder they're so quick to divorce. It's no surprise so many think women have the advantage in the gender wars.

In fact, since we've gone to a service economy, women could end up with more economic power as well. Too early to tell with that.

Regarding the fatty surplus, I wonder if this undermines the whole "abundance mentality" concept. Once you get to a certain age, almost all the attractive women have either married, or at least have boyfriends. Throw out the single mothers, and what do you have left to choose from? Unless you're living in someplace like New York, where is this great "abundance" coming from?

Right now I can think of a number of available women I know. But guess what? None of them are physically appealing. And when I say that I mean they're all far below the "doable" line.

 

[backbreaker]

for ni have a real life perable so to speak that hapepnt ed to me that happened to me that best explains what i am trying to sae lo

I have been doing my web design business since 2008. i started off with no portfolio no clients and no programmers.. but i had a goal. my long term goal in this regard is to run/own a web development company that deals exclusivy in equine/thoroughbred realted website design as that's what i love and there is serious need for it (at least talented ones lol). but to get there i knew it would take some years becuase we had no portoflio and when i make that switch over to just doing that type of work i not only want i a killer portfolio i want all the kinks out of my system. this is one peg in my overall goal list and i have much more ambitous plans than even this but this does combine the 2 things peek my interest the most; horse racing and being a techie / nerd lol. so i have taken great interest in it.

anyway, about 2010. we had a decent portfoio, we had a steady stream of clients, still working still learning as I go on. by now i had like 4 programmers and 1 grahpic guy on staff. we were getting good enough to get bigger jobs. we started taking these jobs on and. did not go as planned at first. there were 3 jobs in particular. all three huge. 2 of the clients were just jerks and were extremely picky and one of the clients just got pissed that my programmer kept asking for stuff and he was busy doing other life ****. we lost all three jobs. 2 of they m were at least 80% done and i ended up sending them all their money back.

while i was not thrilled about sending refunds and still having to pay payroll out of my own pocket i could afford to do such and it wasn't my biggest issue. my biggest issue was that we spent time on work that did not get done. we lost cilents we had. something was broke.

we took another project that was big and lost it. it was the same programmer so i let him go. i hired someone else and the same thing happened.

for a good 4months i held grudges against the clients.. i mean, they were very very ****ty. one client approved every last thing we did only tos ay he did not like it when we were done and refused to pay. one client disappeared for a month and came back and wanted us to still hit the same deadline we had started the project. in 2 cases i had done such a good job of documenting all the udpates and conversations i am pretty sure i could have taken them to small claims court. and almost did.

but i did not. one day i was working and we were working on this job, this job that wasn't even that big, but the design was extremely extremely funky and it made programming difficult. not only that, she was very very very very picky and anal. she was very difficult. it was happening again right before my eyes, we would send her an udpate and she would get pissy.

i remember sitting at my comptuer thinknig how can i diffuse this situtation and make her happy and keep the job. from a technical standpoint i knew the programmer could do the job. but she was the type of client that expected, even though the design was very funky, things to be done right the first time. THAT is waht was pissing her off, not that it was not getting done, we were about half way done at the time so she could nto say it was not getting done. but every time we woudl send an u date she would get issy and piont out **** and i mean we would fix but she did not want to have to point it out.

so i got the idea... i called my best programmer, the most detail oriented one i had, i told him look you are taking over this job, and i do not care how long it takes, only work on one page at a time, and make sure it's EXACTLY right before sending it, exactly how she wants it laid out.

i never had another complaint out of her again and we finsihed the site in less than a week and paid within an hour of us being finished.

then i realized, why i had lost the other jobs.. it was not that we could not do the work, but i realized, i had to match my clients up with my programmers, i just could not take a j and see who was the less busy and give it to them. we have clients tihat aren't in a hurry at all, we have some that are very much in a hurry. we have some that expect things to be done right the first time regardless of how hard it is and some that could care ioless if revisons have to be made as long as they get addressed. so i amade a chart and started changing up resonbilities to give my most difficult jobs and most important ones to my most 2 detail oriented programmers and the ones that were good but just not very detail oriented, the ones who would do what they would ask but would not bother trying to double check their work or try to interpret feedback that was not 100% clear i gave them the projects with clietnts who were in and out of town, who were doing this in their spare time, etc. which most jobs. if we had 12 jobs total the good 2 guys might work on 3 or 4 combined.

the next 2 months income MORE than doubled without me spending a dime on marketing. 2 things happened. first, we were not losing projects anymore. also because i could now give bigger jos/ jobs that like i knew a large firm was farming out to get done i could give those to the really good ones, they would throw repeat business our way whereas in the past they would pay for something because we did it but we would not get repeat business.

what i am trying to say.. yeah women have issues. just like some of my clients have issues. i am not saying that women do not have issues i am saying it is not produtive to waste time pionting them out. you focus on what you have done wrong and what you can fix and you can keep growing, or you can be teh guy who keeps losings and keep blaming people beucase they do not get it.

i know my spelling is always horrible but this is partuarlly horrible on my wife's laptop and it has though very soft/sensitive keys and she hates it when i change the settings

 

[ebracer05]

Disagree with what you are identifying as the problem. Men are not the problem. Men are the same now as they were 1000 years ago, setting aside the effect of dramatic changes in women on men. We have a demand problem of what women are asking for and acting like and a supply problem of too many fat chicks.

That wasn't the point of this thread. I was talking about the problem being both sexes becoming so caught up in this "dating war" to the extent that it is causing them to miss out on what they actually came to the game looking for.

I do emphatically disagree that men are the same now as they were 1000 years ago. That's about 30 generations and there would have to be some, however minor, changes in the male population over that sort of time. Our modern society has changed things too. I think men 1,000 and even back to our earliest ancestors developed prehistoric versions of things like oneitis, but they got put out of the gene pool. They were ostracized from their tribes/societies and usually died. Their genes were not given to the next generation. Men had to defend their woman(s) with defensive force, often times requiring the death of at least one other man.

This sort of thing doesn't happen anymore, at least in the US, because we have laws against things like murder. In our relatively recent past, natural selection literally worked according to the popularly misunderstood phrase "survival of the fittest". Not so anymore.

Probably coupled with the economic emancipation of women, it's probably a relatively unheard of phenomenon that men can act like such wusses and not be killed. I don't know how many man die naturally without having passed their genes on to the next generation, but I would surmise the number is much higher now than it was back then.

And bottom line is, women demand what they demand because of the value we self ascribe as men. I don't think the entire sphere of women is irrational, and no rational person is going to demand higher value for something than it is advertising. The only way to change this is to stop telegraphing this notion that we are low value. This is the same reason why there are so many fat girls. Why should they care when they can do (looks wise and provider wise) much better than their value based on their appearance should dictate? It doesn't make any sense.

If we're going to call the sexual marketplace a marketplace, we should seek to understand our relative levels of value. If there is a discrepancy, we should probably look at the value being projected rather than what we think the value is.

 

[zekko]

I do emphatically disagree that men are the same now as they were 1000 years ago.

Well, relative to women they are. I think that's the point Flush was making.

it's probably a relatively unheard of phenomenon that men can act like such wusses and not be killed.

Actually, supposedly acting like a wuss is a survival mechanism. If you act like a beta and keep your head down, the alpha will not see you as a threat and may even find you useful. This is a way for the meek to survive.

I've even read pickup material that says that things like approach anxiety has its roots in things like this. If you are a beta, you don't want to be going after a lot of attractive women because you might draw the ire of the alpha and get yourself killed.

 

[Burroughs]

Regarding the fatty surplus, I wonder if this undermines the whole "abundance mentality" concept. Once you get to a certain age, almost all the attractive women have either married, or at least have boyfriends. Throw out the single mothers, and what do you have left to choose from? Unless you're living in someplace like New York, where is this great "abundance" coming from?

Right now I can think of a number of available women I know. But guess what? None of them are physically appealing. And when I say that I mean they're all far below the "doable" line.

And even the fatties have 10 dudes 2 points hb above her chasing her just to get their d!ck wet...this gives the fattie undue social leverage.

The true hotties have very small windows of availability...2-3 weeks at most between boyfriends from when they are 20...by the time they are 28 the real hotties are taken..married living in the suburbs...or alcoholic addicted to pain pills living on the upper east side...either ways off the market.

A man has to work within that framework....ie have his money and house game on point. If you are famous or wealthy you can grab women out of committed relationships or even marriage...but if you are not quite movie star john mayer caliber you will have an uphill climb to find abundances of hotties over 35 who are not bat$hit crazy.

 

[Werman]

alexander the great had several campaigns against Indian kings, even somehow getting his cavalry to charge war elephants, defeated them all, founded several cities in his name, but was finally forced to turn his white ass around when his advisors, referring to the flawed maps of the day, reported that the world ended at the Himalayas, and his Macedonian troops began to mutiny because they had been away from home for so many years.

Fixed that for you.

 

[zekko]

And even the fatties have 10 dudes 2 points hb above her chasing her just to get their d!ck wet...this gives the fattie undue social leverage.

Sometimes I read this forum and I think I'm living in a completely different universe than everybody else. The fatties I know are not successful with men...at all. It's true the occasional desperately horny guy might give them a pump and dump. But that's not what they're looking for.

Maybe you guys are really talking about girls who have a little extra weight on them, who maybe aren't in the best of shape, but still retain some feminine charm. The fatties I know are true wildebeests.

 

[Burroughs]

Sometimes I read this forum and I think I'm living in a completely different universe than everybody else. The fatties I know are not successful with men...at all. It's true the occasional desperately horny guy might give them a pump and dump. But that's not what they're looking for.

Maybe you guys are really talking about girls who have a little extra weight on them, who maybe aren't in the best of shape, but still retain some feminine charm. The fatties I know are true wildebeests.

yeah we're not talking rosie o'donnell brontosauruses here

I mean decent face...ok eyes...but 30-40lbs over weight (shorter girls)..think snooki italian/greek/spanish types...not as much pancake makeup although sadly that seems to be on the rise as well...and these girls are 25 years old!

these fat chicks have 10 desperate dudes hitting on them at bars everynight....so you see how rarified the actual hb 7+ and up chicks become

In 10 more years they will be a 100lbs overweight for sure. and i think thats what you're seeing zekko.

 

[zekko]

In 10 more years they will be a 100lbs overweight for sure. and i think thats what you're seeing zekko.

Yeah, Snooki's Elizabeth frigging Taylor compared to the fat girls I know.
Right, I could see desperate guys hanging all over Snooki types.

 

[ebracer05]

Actually, supposedly acting like a wuss is a survival mechanism. If you act like a beta and keep your head down, the alpha will not see you as a threat and may even find you useful. This is a way for the meek to survive.

I've even read pickup material that says that things like approach anxiety has its roots in things like this. If you are a beta, you don't want to be going after a lot of attractive women because you might draw the ire of the alpha and get yourself killed.

I phrased that wrong. I mean, it's probably a newer phenomenon that guys can act like such wusses and still procreate.

If you are a beta and approach a woman, you might draw the ire of an unknown alpha and get killed. But the corollary to that is if you don't approach the woman, your seed will never be sown.

I wasn't around, but I still think it's pretty obvious that male/female interactions have changed, particularly over the last 100 years. Maybe it's because women, achieving a new level of independence began exerting it and men didn't/don't know how to react to that. They've been so used to women functioning in a more dependent position that they don't know how to deal with women who do not need them.

I personally don't think that changes much about attraction. If anything, it makes the skill of being able to attract a woman more valuable because women don't have to marry their father's business partner's son or the man who happened to be rich enough to buy her dowry. Now women can choose the man she wants, and that's not nearly as bad as a lot of guys think it sounds. All it means is that we need to be conscientious about being better men ourselves.

But back to point, I can't see how staying off the radar in prehistoric societies would be of any biological fitness to an organism. I can see how it might keep you from getting killed by an alpha, but I don't see where generates the opportunity for you to mate. Life was conflict... there was a reason Hobbes wrote that the "state of nature is war". Even a beta guy who landed himself a marginal woman would still fight to defend her. And just because you're a beta doesn't mean you can't kill another beta. The alphas tended to snatch up the best women and leave the ones he wasn't attracted to to all of the betas. There had to be fighting among the betas and many of them probably didn't get the chance to mate. Evolution is not a directed process, but the whole theory is based upon the fact that nature will select the best genes in a population over time that best suits an organism to survival and replication. It would make more evolutionary sense for the alphas of that day to produce a tremendous excess of children relative to the betas, and thus, generate a much larger population with alpha genes (sexy sons and Fisherian runaway hypothesizes).

In modern society alphas still probably sire more children than betas, but because we have laws against polygamy and killing a person without just cause, betas have a lot more opportunities to reproduce. This has had to have a big affect on the prevalence of "alpha alleles" in men. Even if you cut the ratio of alpha:beta children in half from where it was in prehistory to where it is now, that means beta genes have gained significant ground, and they have probably gained more ground than that.

All you have to do to see that men don't know how to deal with women is go to a club and watch how many of the guys spend the whole night glued to the side of the wall with their arms crossed. Websites like this exist precisely because guys suck with women and are looking for a way to tip the scales in their favor.

There weren't websites and resources like this even 50 years ago, unless you had a strong male figure in your life or a good dad. Guys either figured it out or they didn't... and the guys who got it had more children than the guys who didn't... and their genes are more prevalent in society.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

too many men equate looks = value. I know rollo likes to say that looks are all men care about and i admit it is a lot of it if not most of it but there are some very low quality good looking women out there.

Our greatest danger is not that we aim to high and fail, but that we aim too low and succeed.

Be less concerned about the pitfalls of the few exceptionally hot, low quality women, and more concerned with the far more common mediocre women you convince yourself are high quality and commit to.

 

[Zarky]

It's interesting to see 20-somethings pontificate.

 

[seasonedplayer]

Liberalism has empowered women beyond their natural capabilities and the result of any distortion in a natural equilibrium is a dysfunctional market. My philosophy in life is not to fight or get angry with unfair markets but rather to adapt and exploit.

So bottom line is I simply view women as prostitutes, approach them as such and operate in a manner which maximizes my utility I.e as much sex with as little effort as possible