Why are we programmed so badly?

[bat soup]

A common theme in game is that you have to act in a way that is counter-intuitive - you have to avoid showing too much interest, avoid being too nice and avoid falling in love with women. It seems almost as if the less you care and the less you want it, the easier it is. So it makes me wonder - why are we so badly programmed? Why did God or whatever created us mess us up in this way? Why don't we all just naturally know how to deal with women, as other animal species seem to do?

 

[Atom Smasher]

A common theme in game is that you have to act in a way that is counter-intuitive - you have to avoid showing too much interest, avoid being too nice and avoid falling in love with women. It seems almost as if the less you care and the less you want it, the easier it is. So it makes me wonder - why are we so badly programmed? Why did God or whatever created us mess us up in this way? Why don't we all just naturally know how to deal with women, as other animal species seem to do?

For centuries we knew how to deal with women and we DID. Women need to be ruled with a firm hand.

In the 20th Century, men abdicated their rightful throne of leadership and authority and now we see that the genie is out of the bottle. Women are destroyed, and men have allowed it for one reason only... Fear of Rejection.

Politicians wanted the female vote. Uncle Sam wanted them paying taxes in the workforce. Men have become afraid of their own shadows and afraid to offend women.

God created women to be a helper for men and to be ruled by men. This is their natural state, for which they were wired. Women cannot govern themselves or others in any way, shape, or form. Things are this way because men willingly walked away from their position of authority.

 

[Xenom0rph]

Men are biologically hardwired to have the white knight complex because it increases the survival probability of the family unit. Unfortunately in today's modern world the white knight complex is becoming a hindrance in mating.

 

[AttackFormation]

Men are biologically hardwired to have the white knight complex because it increases the survival probability of the family unit. Unfortunately in today's modern world the white knight complex is becoming a hindrance in mating.

That's become true in some areas but others seem to be mating just fine...



Then you have to break it down into demographics. As this site says:

"By contrast, the [religiously] unaffiliated tend to have smaller families than other groups. Religious “nones” between the ages of 40 and 59 have had an average of 1.7 children during their lives. Atheists have had an average of 1.6 children, and agnostics have had 1.3 children. Mainline Protestants also have below-average fertility rates."

Assuming there is nothing to undermine this, the far future looks like it will eventually be religious.

 

[death_wish. .]

A common theme in game is that you have to act in a way that is counter-intuitive - you have to avoid showing too much interest, avoid being too nice and avoid falling in love with women. It seems almost as if the less you care and the less you want it, the easier it is. So it makes me wonder - why are we so badly programmed? Why did God or whatever created us mess us up in this way? Why don't we all just naturally know how to deal with women, as other animal species seem to do?

the creator isn't at fault here, he gave us a brain to use and make wise decisions about picking the best mate available out of a wide selection we are blessed with free will to make our own choices but i do see where you are coming from.

now you should be really careful and picky since man are programmed to stick around and increase the life expectancy of the seed, you must be really picky about who you give your seed to. now you know everything that doesn't work so abandon it.

the reason why most guys get caught up now is because they fall in love with the first woman they meet instead of dating out of a LARGE selection and finding the option that best serves THEM.

 

[forcerecon01]

A common theme in game is that you have to act in a way that is counter-intuitive - you have to avoid showing too much interest, avoid being too nice and avoid falling in love with women. It seems almost as if the less you care and the less you want it, the easier it is. So it makes me wonder - why are we so badly programmed? Why did God or whatever created us mess us up in this way? Why don't we all just naturally know how to deal with women, as other animal species seem to do?

In nature there is no game only in society is where things are complex. Without society many would revert back to hunter and gatherer mentality make fires by rocks etc etc.

 

[Kotaix]

We DO know how to deal with women. However, our biological urges are suppressed by social conditioning. Boys play with cars and girls play with dolls, this is not social conditioning, it's the way the genders are.

 

[forcerecon01]

We DO know how to deal with women. However, our biological urges are suppressed by social conditioning. Boys play with cars and girls play with dolls, this is not social conditioning, it's the way the genders are.

Very true

 

[forcerecon01]

We live in a consumer driven society. Lots of feminism, marketing,etc. The movie fight club reveals this .

 

[Kitttydiet88]

It’s a societal thing. Most of us have spent our entire lives in “beta” environments, be it home, school, or work. Any kind of assertive or dominant behavior is frowned upon by our society unless you’re in the top 0.01% of the population calling the shots.

This is why it feels so unnatural to be dominant or “alpha”. We have been conditioned our entire lives to obey and play nice with others. It’s the same thing with lying. We’ve been taught that lying is bad, so lying feels very uncomfortable to the point that some people get physically sick when they lie. It has nothing to do with biology. It’s called social conditioning.

 

[Dash Riprock]

I think men to some degree are hard wired to "provide and protect" per our DNA, as it helps maintain and propagate the species. This, plus the fact we as men are driven sexually by MAINLY a woman's looks and body--and it can be a toxic mix. Some average guy meets a super hot woman, he defaults into the hard wired provide and protect mode, getting all beta and jealous and supplicating, woman gets sick of it and dumps him. This is the case in probably 80% of instances where women dump or divorce men.

Very few men are "natural" alphas or DJs but women find them HIGHLY desirable because of the woman's DNA screaming "excellent mating choice!!" whether they even want kids or not. In nature, the strong, cunning alpha will have a much better rate of survival than the supplicating beta. Women are hard wired to know this, it's not learned. It's evolution and biology and even mega doses of social media, feminism, and/or OLD will never undo it.

So, some guys can learn and execute alpha/DJ traits and qualities to make themselves more desirable (maybe 10-20%, the remaining 80-90% stay beta or worse no matter their efforts). Hence, why we have this site and 1000's of other sites teaching guys how to be more "alpha." Women DO find it attractive.

 

[Georgepithyou]

If we weren't programmed like this humanity would be extinct

 

[AttackFormation]

In nature, the strong, cunning alpha will have a much better rate of survival than the supplicating beta.

You don't know that.

The selection can simply be sexual selection, like in the Fisherian Runaway, Sexy Sons or Handicap Principle hypotheses, and not be based on sheer survival value. And if you google "species that went extinct from sexual selection", you can see that just as the term indicates species have gone extinct from runaway sexual selection and the more exaggerated it becomes the shorter the species lasts.

Also if you look at human evolution we have become more neotenised compared to our ancestors... we have developed traits that are similar to what domesticated animals develop, basically indicating that we "domesticated ourselves". And since that's what happened to make us get here, if anything it indicates the opposite of your (common caricature in the pseudoscientific manosphere of the antisocial "alpha" supercaveman) hypothesis.

 

[EyeOnThePrize]

A common theme in game is that you have to act in a way that is counter-intuitive - you have to avoid showing too much interest, avoid being too nice and avoid falling in love with women. It seems almost as if the less you care and the less you want it, the easier it is. So it makes me wonder - why are we so badly programmed? Why did God or whatever created us mess us up in this way? Why don't we all just naturally know how to deal with women, as other animal species seem to do?

You're missing the point. If the action seems counterintuitive then you should ask yourself why. Focus on discovering the precursors for the game you read about. I.e. 'What can I do to cause these things to come naturally?'

When it comes naturally the literature will seem boring, overdramatic, or otherwise obvious because you'll have already done the inner work for it to manifest on its own.

 

[PeasantPlayer]

"the creator" lol...

 

[Medina]

I like hindbrain theory

It kinda explains everything about women. When you care, when you chase, when you put effort in, when you don't walk away etc

The alarm starts ringing in her hindbrain because it suggests that you are actually on her level

Women are not designed to find someone on their level. They are designed to find someone superior

 

[AttackFormation]

I like hindbrain theory

It kinda explains everything about women. When you care, when you chase, when you put effort in, when you don't walk away etc

The alarm starts ringing in her hindbrain because it suggests that you are actually on her level

Women are not designed to find someone on their level. They are designed to find someone superior

It does sound like it makes a ton of sense from your summation of examples there. Even if it's not the complete scientific truth it's a very good model for guys to go by in practice.

 

[Who Dares Win]

I think women are used to behave when someone above them and ignore/mistreat someone below them and think thats how it works.

For this reason when a man is very accomodating and gentle toward them, they subconsciously consider him a lesser tier man.

Most women are like low IQ men, the confuse gentleness for weakness and aggressivity for strenght and given that they always side with the strongest...

Anyway this whole behavioural analysis comes only after the physical one, those who have the right size and the right look already have a much higher tolerance when it comes of uneffective behaviours.

 

[RangerMIke]

That's become true in some areas but others seem to be mating just fine...

View attachment 4695

Then you have to break it down into demographics. As this site says:

"By contrast, the [religiously] unaffiliated tend to have smaller families than other groups. Religious “nones” between the ages of 40 and 59 have had an average of 1.7 children during their lives. Atheists have had an average of 1.6 children, and agnostics have had 1.3 children. Mainline Protestants also have below-average fertility rates."

Assuming there is nothing to undermine this, the far future looks like it will eventually be religious.

Religion has little to do with population growth. Areas where the infant morality is high, and relative education is low... have higher birth rates. High poverty and absence of a social net are the biggest factors in higher birth rates. In these areas, CHILDREN are what you need in old age to care for you, so people have more kids, especially when life expectancy are low in under-developed countries.

Religion mirrors cultural areas: religion does not shape culture. It is the other way around. People develop religious belief that fits their culture. Islam did not spread into Europe because Islam, as a culture does not fit Greco-Roman philosophical belief which dominated the west. Protestantism spread first in Northern Europe since these parts of Europe are philosophically different than Southern Europe.

God may have created man, but man created religion to fit their culture.

 

[Who Dares Win]

Religion has little to do with population growth. Areas where the infant morality is high, and relative education is low... have higher birth rates. High poverty and absence of a social net are the biggest factors in higher birth rates. In these areas, CHILDREN are what you need in old age to care for you, so people have more kids, especially when life expectancy are low in under-developed countries.

Religion mirrors cultural areas: religion does not shape culture. It is the other way around. People develop religious belief that fits their culture. Islam did not spread into Europe because Islam, as a culture does not fit Greco-Roman philosophical belief which dominated the west. Protestantism spread first in Northern Europe since these parts of Europe are philosophically different than Southern Europe.

God may have created man, but man created religion to fit their culture.

Agree, its no coincidence that lazy popolations happen to have a religion that demands "rich guilty ones" to get robbed to help the "poor virtuous ones".