Blue Pill behaviour puts magic before accountability.

Whether it’s in the form of feminism, Marxism, or what the Red Pill describe as “Beta”, Blue Pill behaviour seems to be born of blind idealism. They deny reality for pleasantries that defy reality. However, I put it to you that blind idealism is not completely blind. Instead, it is a sort of casual self-deception, a willful ignorance designed to protect oneself.

Take, for instance, the concept of a “soulmate”, ubiquitous wherever Blue Pill mentality emerges. Whilst it is indeed possible to be in a relationship with someone you are highly compatible with, and even many more realistic people will accept the possibility of developing a unique bond from which a couple may enable each other, it is only under Blue Pill mentality that the soulmate becomes:

  • ineffable
  • unconditional
  • eternal
  • predestined

Thus, the assumption is that your soulmate was chosen for you before you knew about it, cannot have a flaw, will love you forever and no matter what.

The reality of “soulmates” is that you chose your soulmate, that you crafted each other into what you needed, that your love is conditional and that whilst you accept their flaws, you can still see them… even if they are not flaws in your eyes.

The reality requires you to work hard. You must be a desirable person to the sort of person you wish to attract. You must accept their flaws – whether you personally take issue with them or whether they are flaws on a societal or cultural level. You must be open about your own flaws. You must accept their conditions for love and they must accept yours.

But that isn’t pleasant, or easy. The Blue Pill ideal of love is almost parental instead. They want a sexual partner who loves them intrinsically and unconditionally, for their shining, eternal, invisible, intangible soul. Thus, a “soulmate”, to them, is someone who requires no work to conquer, to love and to care for. Someone who brings no grief, no worries, no conflict, no pressure, intentionally or incidentally, for better or for worse.

When they see a pair who have achieved a balance through hard work and focus and deep love, all they see is some magical aura which unites the two, a red string between their fingers, a zodiac alignment, a mystical bond. They seize this as proof that soulmates exist exactly as they would define them.

Because to accept that everyone who has something good, on some level must work for it, is to accept that they are not putting in the work.

And that might require them to change.

TTFN and Happy Hunting!

 

For help starting out homemaking, check out The ESSENTIAL Beginner Homemaker’s Guide. For help budgeting all your everday and not-so-everyday essentials, from food to transport to clothes, check out On A Budget: The good homemaker’s guide to economizing.
Advertisements

The Smarts Count, How You Use Them Counts More.

A common refrain in many dating and relationship forums, as well as often in real life, is that men do not like or want smart girls, women do not like or want smart guys. Men just want sexpot bimbos and women just want obnoxious jocks. Being smart or educated just counts for nothing, guys!

Sometimes it’s phrased as a complaint towards the discriminator: “All these girls want is idiot obnoxious Chads!”

Sometimes it’s phrased as a criticism towards the would-be-partner: “Nobody needs girls to be smart, just show cleavage and smile.”

Sometimes it’s just matter of fact: “People just don’t care if you’re smart or not.”

But it’s always wrong.

You see, humans are a brain animal. That means that for eons our survival depended on being smart. For the last few million years, we have admired intelligence and it has embedded itself in our definitive “hotness ranking”, even in ways you would not imagine. For example men like women with wide hips because wide hips = higher omega storage = more omegas for baby = smarter babies, or women like men who take risks because more risks = more chance at reward = strong natural selection = if he’s alive and risk-taking, he’s smart. We are literally horny for smarts.

So what gives? If we like brains so much, why aren’t sci-fi nerds and PhD feminists and people who can recite Shakespeare backwards at the top of the sexual hierarchy?

Simple, because it’s not about the brains you have, it’s about the brains you use.

If you are a sci-fi nerd and science fiction is out of fashion, then you are signalling that you value science fiction more than you value group membership. Which rings alarm bells unless you’re chasing an Other Girl who’s into Sigmas. And in the latter case: you had better be able to chameleon your way into social settings properly before retreating to your spaceship man-cave, because even Sigmas need to survive the social order. That’s right, there’s no opt-out, you have to be social.

If you are a feminist with a PhD, you had better be young and cheerful and interested in a broad range of subjects. Because throwing away your fertility on an education and becoming bitter and jaded is a surefire way to look like a human failing at life. And if you look like you’re barely surviving life, your smarts are worthless on a sexual level, because your actions suggest your children will also barely survive life.

If you can recite Shakespeare backwards, but that is your only skill, then you are wasting your brain. It’s great to have a party trick, a gimmick, something weird and fun for starting conversations. But if that’s all there is to you… then what are your survival prospects? How will you feed a baby? What genes will your descendants inherit? If you’re legitimately smart, you need to start using your brain for more than just gimmicks. And if you can’t afford to learn some equally important skills alongside your reverse barding, then maybe you’re not smart enough to pull that stunt off.

And that’s the crux of it. If you desperately want to have sex, get married, have kids perhaps, then the smart thing to do would be to work out how and do it. Perhaps the blonde bimbo cheerleader gets the hot guys because she is pleasant and smily and sensual, not because she is an idiot. Perhaps the dumb obnoxious jock gets the hot girls because he’s confident and connected and successful, not because he doesn’t do maths. You can be smart and attractive. If anything, smarts should be used to make you more attractive, seeing as that is the whole point of human evolution.

Your brains do count. If you can make a boatload of money in a year, or save a boatload of money in a day, if you can properly guard against wild animals or deter them from visiting, if you can save your own and your partner’s time, if you can navigate life successfully and hand those skills onto your kid… then you have brains and they do matter.

But for all that is holy, don’t advertise them by making your entire life about arithmetic. That’s not smart. That’s dumb.

TTFN and Happy Hunting!

 

For help starting out homemaking, check out The ESSENTIAL Beginner Homemaker’s Guide. For help budgeting all your everday and not-so-everyday essentials, from food to transport to clothes, check out On A Budget: The good homemaker’s guide to economizing.

Being One Of The Others. Part II. Partnering.

The concept of “otherness” is based on the idea of “us vs them”. In short, when we have established what we are, everything else is not us, and therefore must be “them”. The “other” is the individual who has not yet found a place where they belong, or who primarily deals in an environment where they do not belong.

In Part I: Stepping Out, I explored how Other Girls (OGs) are less often an absolute reject and more often the female equivalent to the male rogues: capable, gender-conforming individuals who feel at odds with the main group they live among. In this second part I explain some of the relationship dynamics of OGs and how normal human sexual behaviour manifests or fails to manifest among us.

PARTNERS.

Rollo posits that “Nerd culture represents an environment where a girl’s otherness makes them a prized commodity.” He goes on to suggest that these girls may have been outcompeted in the popular SMP. Which does hold true in many ways. However, in my personal experience, it is not quite so simple. Not all OGs will leave the popular SMP, still playing or competing in it even once they have opted out of every facet of modern society. Many, possibly around half, of opt-out OGs are average or below and seeking a field where they have better leverage. Yet at least half of OGs were romantically successful and sexually desired by high ranking males before becoming othered. And often they are still desirable as they attempt to exclude themselves. Thus, I put forward the four reasons I have observed OGs leaving the popular SMP for:

1: Unattractiveness or low femeninity.

It’s always an issue. As Rollo correctly stated, when a girl is below average attractiveness she will look for a pool where she has more leverage. This unattractiveness might be simple physical characteristics: facial deformity, being just about below average, overweight, etc. However it may also be a social cue: poor makeup, unfashionable clothes, strange hair, lack of tribal markers. It can also be psychological or behavioural: aggressiveness, brashness, anxiety, emotional flatness, sarcasm, nihilism, etc. All of these can make a female seem genetically unfit to potential male suitors, meaning she either cannot pair up, cannot pair up to her standards or cannot pair up openly.

Thus, she will seek a pool where she ranks higher, a pool where the men she desires are less valuable and more available or a pool where she can play the part of trophy rather than the part of mistress.

2: Introversion or conservativism.

This follows on from the psychological andbehavioural side of unattractiveness, but deserves a mention all of its own in current society. However attractive a girl is, if she does not step up in appropriate time for a guy, based on his experience and observations, she will drop social qualifying points. The girl who knows you for a year before working out if she even likes you, whether she can trust you or seeing you enough to make up her mind is not the most desirable one. She is likely to wait around as her love interest dates other girls, wondering when to make a move. Unless he is interested in her from day one, this is one of those rare cases where even a cute, average or feminine girl can end up in the “friend zone”, more appropriately described as the “sister zone” or the “child zone” for the absence of any sexual desire from him for her.

The second issue is related to introversion, but a bit more serious, especially for girls who are younger. The girl who flirts and dates like an extrovert (even if she is not) yet does not put out soon enough for her romantic interest will lose his passions. There are two types of conservative girls: naturally conservative and socially conservative. The naturally conservative girl may be giving off the wrong cues because she cannot distinguish between friendly, coy and flirty, as she does not have the different behaviours herself. She can be friendly for years before developing sexual interest, and still accidentally imitate the other girls’ flirting behaviour, displaying social sexual attraction cues. The socially conservative girl is in a more awkward position. She naturally still seeks sex, but has conditioned herself to hold out. Therefore, her body is displaying basic, natural, instinctive sexual attraction cues, the sort of cue that is picked up on automatically and considered a safe guess as to her nature. When either of these girls fails to live up to what her social cues or natural cues implied, they can find themselves losing the attention of males around them.

3: Disagreement as to the qualifiers of a male.

As I already explained in Alpha Girls, Sigma Girls, although all women want the best man we can “catch”, what defines “best” depends on the woman. A more introverted woman may view a true to type Alpha as a threat to her safety, an excessive amount of socializing and a source of stress. A woman who does not worry too much about comfort or wealth may be just as happy with a poor musician as with a rich one, provided he meets her other criteria.

The same goes for “other” girls. Rollo has touched on this also with his concept of the Exceptional Emo. Here a girl seeks a man not for the usual indicators of success (wealth, status, physical prowess), but for markers of creativity and independence. These males can be situational Alphas or Sigmas themselves, and are very desirable to girls who want a quieter life compared to the Alpha Girl, or who simply do not like the array of Alphas available. There are many Situational Alpha and Sigma archetypes that are as desirable to OGs as the standard Alpha archetypes (entrepreneur, patriarch, jock, politician, rogue) are to main society girls. To boot, the things that main society girls consider to be these men’s “downsides” can be strongly attractive to OGs. For those reasons, it would take a while to describe them all in depth. However here is a summary of the six main types, as far as girls are concerned:

  1. The starving artist. A rogue creative type: flighty, sensual, sensitive, stern, possibly bipolar, drug or alcohol issues are a genuine threat, many ideas that start and are never completed, his art consumes him entirely leaving limited affection and time for women, despite this he will pursue many.
  2. The death cultist. A religious heretic: blasphemous, anti-cultural, independent, attracts many followers, persuasive and charismatic, many ideas that he never acts on, can as easily be the starter of a vegan-hippie-diet-peace-movement or of a branch of Satanism, so long as it shocks.
  3. The switch. The bottom-dom: soft, sensual, sensitive, highly manipulative under the surface, demands perfection, a master of the carrot and rod, may engage in submissive sexual play, follows his plans and ideas through.
  4. The mad scientist. The technical creative: off-kilter, possibly schizoid, nervous tics, constant flow of ideas and conversations, puts things into practice as soon as the idea strikes, unorthodox methods of getting results, sometimes cannot explain or recreate his processes.
  5. The mathematician. An introvert with dominant traits: nervous-looking and quiet, more physically imposing than he should be, possibly practices martial arts or another form of physical combat, sweet yet somehow he is obeyed, an expert in an undervalued or often mocked field.
  6. The warlord. A situational Alpha who values violence: big, strong, imposing, commanding, he understands that violence and its suppression and expression are actually key to maintaining peace, he enforces laws of his own or prior design, holds his woman to a high standard of independence.

An OG is vastly more likely to want to be with one such male, as he more closely resembles her. And these males are unlikely to be true to type Alphas even among subcultures, let alone in popular society. An OG may leave all social connections behind in order to pursue a Sigma starving artist who has limited interest in her.

4: Cultural contrasts.

Tying all these points together, the end point is that an OG is a culturally separate entity from the main group. If she looks oddly, does not engage in typical female habits, does not follow standard relationship patterns or cues and has a stronger preference for a death cultist or a mad scientist than for the jock or the entrepreneur, she simply will not view the dating pool afforded to her as sufficient. The cumulative result of various differences between her and her competition will make her simply opt-out of competition.

This might be because she thinks competition is too strong or too weak, because she thinks the most socially valuable males are undesirable, because the males she thinks are appealing are not attracted to her or because she thinks the popular girls will essentially cockblock her every effort. But, at the end of the day, when you want a coffee you go to a coffee shop, not a smoothie stand.

Next week: OGs beyond education: marriage, employment, family.

TTFN and Happy Hunting!

 

For help starting out homemaking, check out The ESSENTIAL Beginner Homemaker’s Guide. For help budgeting all your everday and not-so-everyday essentials, from food to transport to clothes, check out On A Budget: The good homemaker’s guide to economizing.