Why Online Courtship Can’t Replicate Face To Face Courtship

It’s becoming clearer with every close examination of the subject that online dating is a poor facsimile of real world dating. The latest social science shows that the Dunbar number — 150, the number of people of varying acquaintance an average person could reasonably manage in his social circle — doesn’t increase on social media virtual networks. In fact, the evidence suggests that online social networks degrade the quality of our more intimate inner circle relationships because we devote more of our mental energy to maintaining connections with distant people.

With social media, we can easily keep up with the lives and interests of far more than a hundred and fifty people. But without investing the face-to-face time, we lack deeper connections to them, and the time we invest in superficial relationships comes at the expense of more profound ones. We may widen our network to two, three, or four hundred people that we see as friends, not just acquaintances, but keeping up an actual friendship requires resources. “The amount of social capital you have is pretty fixed,” Dunbar said. “It involves time investment. If you garner connections with more people, you end up distributing your fixed amount of social capital more thinly so the average capital per person is lower.” If we’re busy putting in the effort, however minimal, to “like” and comment and interact with an ever-widening network, we have less time and capacity left for our closer groups. Traditionally, it’s a sixty-forty split of attention: we spend sixty per cent of our time with our core groups of fifty, fifteen, and five, and forty with the larger spheres. Social networks may be growing our base, and, in the process, reversing that balance.

Close real world friendships suffer when we whore for attention on Facebook from people we hardly know. It’s similar to how multitasking and clickbait internet distractions corrode our mental ability to focus deeply on a single topic. Our intimate relations and our creativity are both sacrificed in this new world mordor.

On an even deeper level, there may be a physiological aspect of friendship that virtual connections can never replace. This wouldn’t surprise Dunbar, who discovered his number when he was studying the social bonding that occurs among primates through grooming. Over the past few years, Dunbar and his colleagues have been looking at the importance of touch in sparking the sort of neurological and physiological responses that, in turn, lead to bonding and friendship. “We underestimate how important touch is in the social world,” he said. With a light brush on the shoulder, a pat, or a squeeze of the arm or hand, we can communicate a deeper bond than through speaking alone. “Words are easy. But the way someone touches you, even casually, tells you more about what they’re thinking of you.”

Once again, a game concept — this time, kino and the art of touching and physical escalation — is corroborated by ❤science❤. A player will communicate a lot of his sexual intention nonverbally, through escalating violations of his quarry’s personal space. If he is skilled, the woman will respond to his touches with intensifying attraction, and erotic thoughts will sabotage her efforts at studied indifference. This tension is what will make her seduction so memorable for her in days, and maybe years, to come.

One concern, though, is that some social skills may not develop as effectively when so many interactions exist online. We learn how we are and aren’t supposed to act by observing others and then having opportunities to act out our observations ourselves. We aren’t born with full social awareness, and Dunbar fears that too much virtual interaction may subvert that education. “In the sandpit of life, when somebody kicks sand in your face, you can’t get out of the sandpit. You have to deal with it, learn, compromise,” he said. “On the internet, you can pull the plug and walk away. There’s no forcing mechanism that makes us have to learn.” If you spend most of your time online, you may not get enough in-person group experience to learn how to properly interact on a large scale—a fear that, some early evidence suggests, may be materializing.

Thin-skinned, infantile, tantrum throwing, socially retarded internet SJWs explained. A little bit of pushback, and your typical online male feminist or fatty apologist shrieks in horror and promptly retreats to the comfort of a two liter Mountain Dew with a side of Cheetos.

“It’s quite conceivable that we might end up less social in the future, which would be a disaster because we need to be more social—our world has become so large” Dunbar said. The more our virtual friends replace our face-to-face ones, in fact, the more our Dunbar number may shrink.

Online dating is the perfect match for our sperged-out, credentialist suck-up culture. Static photos, a CV, and all the nuance, grace, subtle physical cues, playful expressions, and sexual tension stripped from the initial courtship maneuverings are exactly what America’s fearful androgynes want. It’s a world perfectly crafted by, or perfectly symptomatic of, the sexually neutered and psychologically withered beta males and the aggro, unfeminine, ego-salving bloat bodies that pass for females. There is even evidence now that relationships which form from meeting online are more likely to break up.

Call me old school, but I prefer meeting and seducing women in the flesh, where the pleasant discomfort of the moment can’t be escaped, our stats can’t be aridly collated and perused, my probing hands can’t be evaded, my warm smirk can’t be missed, my wordless entendres can’t be mistaken. The incitement and sustenance of a woman’s romantic attraction demands a… personal touch.





Comments


  1. on October 13, 2014 at 8:40 am Laguna Beach Fogey

    Game is like sales: it’s more effective in person.

    Like


  2. […] Why Online Courtship Can’t Replicate Face To Face Courtship […]

    Like


  3. My buddy kills it on Tinder. It blows my mind. He is a pretty good looking guy but it still amazes me that women will spread within two dates for a dude they met on a phone app. I’ve tried it and I don’t get the results he gets which proves that photos is all that matters because i pull way better in person than he does. But whatever.

    Anyway…women continue to give away the store and continue to dig their own grave. I’ll be poolside when this place blows up.

    Like


    • Tinder is a telling phenomenon, that’s for sure. Still, how widely spread is it? It seems to me that it is mostly an American thing.

      How long will Tinder last? What kind of social networking through net and cellphone will there be twenty years from now? Hard to imagine. And forty years from now you may simply be flirting with the girl who passes the ammo.

      Like


      • >”twenty years from now” Arbiter, the nihilism of modernity is forcing a terrible culling of the herd, the likes of which we might not have seen since the last asteroid took out the dinosaurs. The making, birthing, and raising of children is an intimately PHYSICAL undertaking. And the folks who disappear into an online Wonderland and never remerge – whacking off to Japanese Hentai Tentacle Porn or to cheap Anne Rice 50-Shades-of-Grey imitation gothic crap at Alt.Bdsm.Sex.Stories, all while submerged deep in their mothers’ dark dank basements – those folks will NEVER HAVE CHILDREN!!!!

        Like


      • Where will Europeans get their gun and ammunition from?

        Like


      • Carlos, guns are available in Europe, flowing in from Eastern Europe. The commie armies left a lot of hardware behind, and with the corrupt state of things a lot of military warehouses lost a lot of stuff. No bragging, I know a guy whose brother knows who to buy a gun from, I could get one for 1,000 USD. I imagine it’s the same for a lot of people. One policewoman I talked to said, “If they [the criminals] want a gun they can always get one.”

        And aside from that, if you get a hunter’s license you can simply get a rifle or a handgun for free. Depending on which country you’re in you may be obligated to do target practice a few times a year in order to keep the license. But in both northern and southern Europe there are a lot of people with rifles. You just never hear about it because legal gun owners are on average more law-abiding than the rest of the population.

        Like


      • Do the Swiss still issue rifles to all male citizens 16 to 60?

        Like


      • Yes, they do, Greg Eliot. So they have far, far more gun ownership than the U.S. And no mass shootings. Murder is a gang problem and destroyed-culture problem, not a gun problem.

        Like


      • And aside from that, if you get a hunter’s license you can simply get a rifle or a handgun for free.

        I meant, “legally”. At the same time I was thinking of how you get training shooting and advancing toward an enemy “for free” when doing military service. (Which all countries should have instead of a mercenary army. A people should learn to work together to defend each other, the way it has always been.)

        Like


      • It took about twenty hours for Zombie Shane’s post to appear. Well, at least it did appear.

        Like


    • > “I’ve tried it and I don’t get the results he gets which proves that photos is all that matters because i pull way better in person than he does.” Behold the omnipotent power of the self-selecting statistic [Tinder attracts shallow beauty-driven fatuous narcissists?].

      Like


      • “Behold the omnipotent power of the self-selecting statistic [Tinder attracts shallow beauty-driven fatuous narcissists?].”

        yep

        Like


    • I’ve tried it and I don’t get the results he gets which proves that photos is all that matters
      ———————————————————————————–

      How much money do you have?

      Dump out a quarter oz of cocaine on a mirror, place your gun next to it, and upload that.

      Like


    • i do well on tinder too (im living in ireland), im reasonably good looking and i have over 1000 matches, add some solid text and date game to this and you have yourself a ridiculously easy way to get laid

      number one thing from tinder is to have the best photos of yourself possible on it, this will increase your match count, once you have an abundance of matches you can rely more on game than your looks

      Like


      • I’m in Ireland too, have good photos and get a lot of matches on Tinder. But almost all of the women I match with either don’t talk or talk for a bit but disappear when you mention meeting up. Any tips?

        Like


      • 1. get a solid opener (i dont want to give away my opener here but think of something thats different and demands a response)
        2. when you have a convo going, build attraction with her by joking around. once she starts showing interest do some qualification
        3. dont mention meeting up on the tinder app, get her number and text her, building some comfort and then ask her to meet for drinks.

        Like


      • “1. get a solid opener (i dont want to give away my opener here but think of something thats different and demands a response)
        2. when you have a convo going, build attraction with her by joking around. once she starts showing interest do some qualification
        3. dont mention meeting up on the tinder app, get her number and text her, building some comfort and then ask her to meet for drinks.”

        Strongly disagree with this.

        Open, banter for a couple lines, then suggest meeting up tonight. Anything you do aside from that increases barriers to meeting up, basically giving her excuses to not meet you. I bang a couple of new tinder girls every week, and doing shit like that quoted above is the main reason guys get matches but no meetups

        Like


      • that might be true for america Kant, but in ireland this is unlikely to work consistently…i have tried going for the quick meetups but most girls balk, most are adverse to meeting guys off the internet without at least some comfort

        take this from a guy who has been tindering for a year here with good success

        Like


      • get a solid opener (i dont want to give away my opener here but think of something thats different and demands a response)

        I got one that I used when I used to use dating sites. I won’t give it away either, but it was worded like a job ad looking for co-workers for a criminal enterprise. A lot of women answered with “I simply have to reply to that”, “That sure stands out from the crowd!” etc.

        In the next message I was still somewhat joking, but also asked a question or two about her. If she kept asking about the ad I always replied as if it was serious, but in a funny way of course.

        Then there were a few girls who answered in an upset way. Like, “How would that work? How do you know I would have experience of that? What exactly would your plan be? As if you could just ask people online about that.” Always a good way to weed out some nutcases.

        Like


      • Sparks
        I’m in Ireland too, have good photos and get a lot of matches on Tinder. But almost all of the women I match with either don’t talk or talk for a bit but disappear when you mention meeting up
        —————————————————————————————

        Those are faggots collecting fap material.

        Like


    • Your buddy must be in his early 20s. On Tinder, women look for young, good-looking guys for quick sex — IOW, Tinder turns women into fags.

      Like


      • No, their ASD is only slightly lower on Tinder than in real life, and mostly only because you are unlikely to have friends in common so they are less likely to be judged. You still have to game them

        Like


      • on October 13, 2014 at 3:09 pm haunted trilobite

        The plan was always to make heterosexual women into feral homosexual-esque harlots.

        Like


      • The plan was always to make heterosexual women into feral homosexual-esque harlots.

        As cynical as that sounds, I’m tempted to say it’s the Comment Of The Year.

        Like


      • on October 15, 2014 at 5:01 pm haunted trilobite

        Very kind Greg, but there’s still a large element of trying to put the pieces together. The commentators on this blog are a great source for insights into the agendas the PTB are insinuating into society, but just grabbing bits here and there has left my overall understanding quite fragmented. There’s probably no harm in reading Henry Makow’s stuff to gain a coherent overview, but I’m wary of subscribing too much to one individual’s bias. Can you recommend any authoritative resources that outline the driving forces of the decline?

        Like


    • Its all about the photos on Tinder, Match.com, ect….women are just as visual as men and sites like Tinder and such prove it. I am not the best looking guy and I am shorter than average. I have tried both over the years and totally bombed out on Tinder and Match as well. Its all about looks online. I too have a couple of buddys that that do incredible on both. Both guys are over 6ft and pretty handsome. Its like a candy store without having to pay for anything. One chick was an NFL cheerleader he hooked up with. Just a stunning chick.

      Yes in field, yeah “game” does work but only so much. Even with “game” I have not picked up a chick like that cheerleader and I have tried. Looks still are dominant in or out of field and it sucks…

      Like


      • Keep telling yourself that looks are most important to girls = “I have not picked up a chick like that.” = latent homosexuality…

        Girls are attracted to authentic, dynamic and passionate men. You need to be one of them. Forget what women say, and watch what they do. Who cares if online they “say” they like ripped 22 YO male models… they also “say” they are looking for “someone special to connect with, and not looking for hook ups”. If you can and do ignore the latter why place faith in the former?

        Like


      • ^^^ BTW – he married her when she was 16 and he was 51…

        Like


      • “women are just as visual as men.” No, they are not. All research says otherwise. And experience should tell you otherwise too. They like to see good-looking men, but that is just one factor. Looks, Money, Status and Personality are the factors.

        And if you know your evolutionary psychology, you will know the reason for why men are far more visual-oriented when it comes to attraction.

        Like


      • on October 14, 2014 at 9:29 am The Spirit Within

        In the long run, it’s status for the win.

        Like


  4. Number you can handle in social circles: 150
    Number of close friends you have time for: 6
    Number of people you will get to know in a lifetime: 2,000
    Max degrees of separation from everyone else: 6

    The last one is the Six Degrees of Separation observation. The people you know, know other people, who know other people in six steps. Considering that you’ll get to know about two thousand people in your life – multiply that with six, it’s quite possible that it encompasses your entire continent at least. Though probably not some walled-off tribe in a jungle.

    But always remember that you need people who can help you out. A friend is someone who helps you move.

    Anyway, as for the internet, of course it prevents a lot of the approach techniques. There can be no cold open in the street where you exclaim your love for the way the leaves turn yellow this time of year, there can be no devil-may-care grin at the pub. Still, as a complement, I see its use. People live different lives. There are a whole lot of people who come back home late from work and simply don’t have time to go out to night clubs. And who would never do cold approaches, even if they would read manosphere truths. And whose friends are married with children, so they don’t have time to be wingmen. The internet suits some, and more people find someone through the dating sites than through work, a hobby or the pub these days.

    As for me, I have a lot more success offline, through a hobby and through cold approaches. I am glad I don’t need to rely on dating sites. But for others, I understand it.

    Like


  5. Online dating has potential, in theory we could find a way to match ourselves up much better than we could in person, but all I have ever seen is men with no in-person options seeking out women with no in-person options. Women have men pursuing them regardless of location, they don’t need online dating. Tinder seems like an anomaly. Since it is exclusively used for sex, I think it makes any woman who uses it very unattractive.

    Like


    • No. This pure KJ. I’m guessing you’re a guy in your 30s-40s outside the dating market. I will answer this for the sake of newbies reading this

      -Young women in cities in USA are all online dating, either tinder or ok cupid or both. It gives them much more control than waiting for an attractive guy to hit on them in real life. This is how most girls in the 22+ age range get laid at all because their ASD is too high to constantly fuck randoms at clubs on Saturday nights (their friends will judge them, and they don’t want huge notch counts), and they’re no longer in college so don’t have a large number of eligible guys they are meeting daily.

      -Most girls on tinder have “not looking for hookups sorry” on their tinder profiles. If you want to fuck them on first meetup you can of course, but you still have to game them, just like any other girl in any other venue. It’s not a ‘sex app’, this is pure fantasy

      @yareally, walawala, scray etc: the level of KJ / bitter betaness in these comment boards is ridiculous. I’m considering giving up on this, you guys should come over to Sedfast where guys are actually out in the real world gaming and field testing, and don’t just talk out their ass with their M/w tinged bullshit

      Like


      • kant- I am in my twenties. If by outside the dating market, you mean I am not on Tinder, correct. First of all, I don’t know what any of your acronyms mean. Second, I don’t know why you get so defensive about Tinder anytime anyone criticizes it. I could be wrong, I don’t care, I don’t wrap my sense of self worth up in to positions I take. My experience thus far has been that of all the couples I know, the vast majority met at work and a few met while in school or at a party and I know of one couple that met online and they are both fat so I don’t have a high opinion of online dating. There is no reason that decent women wouldn’t be targeted by women, you are saying they aren’t waiting around for that but they shouldn’t have to wait, it’s not like dating didn’t exist before tinder. Also, you say tinder is not a sex app but that you can ‘fuck’ girls the first time you meet them. That sounds like a sex app. Try to understand that if any of us found that a potential partner had been used like a whore on tinder that we would think less of her. That seems like a pretty concrete truth among men.

        Like


      • meant to say “no reason decent women wouldn’t be targeted by men”

        Like


      • I don’t have a problem with you criticizing anything, my problem is with you talking out your ass about something that you just admitted you have no experience with. We call this KJ, keyboard jockeying. If newbies who are trying to learn how to get laid or get girls read your stuff they will be misinformed and think they can’t meet quality girls to bang or date from online game, which is completely false.

        “That sounds like a sex app. Try to understand that if any of us found that a potential partner had been used like a whore on tinder that we would think less of her. That seems like a pretty concrete truth among men.”

        I guarantee that virtually all the girls you’ve been with have one night stands with alphas in the past, whether that be from meeting in real life at a club or a party, or from online dating or whatever else. But they don’t tell YOU about it and they don’t do it with YOU because they can tell you would judge them for it. This is why experienced players have completely different perceptions of the world than non players, we have different reference experiences than the average guy, we get to see a world that you don’t.

        Like


      • Kant is full of shit we’ve pretty much already established that.

        I haven’t used tinder either. Most of my plates are from social circles or in person gaming and it’s way more than enough to keep me busy.

        The people who I know on tinder are tools. They were my buddies in highschool and college who didn’t get notch points and who didn’t know how to approach.

        On top of that. A girl I had classes with through college just made a tinder b/c “she wanted to boost her self-esteem and get attention” literally word for word.

        All she does is COMPLETELY FUCK AROUND with these guys and make shit up some believes me and some ridiculously unbelievable but funny. She literally screen shots the convos and sends them to me I feel bad for the guys.

        She’s hot and claims she gets like 50 messages a day at least. She lives on the east coast in New York area.

        Like


      • @kant

        Oh I’ll have to check out SEDFAST. Looks like a decent community. I enjoy reading the comments here, though. Learning to spot KJs and non-KJs is a sign of progress.

        Now I can separate a lot of commenters further into people who think they are using game when they are actually just cruising on passive value.

        Since it is exclusively used for sex, I think it makes any woman who uses it very unattractive.

        Try to understand that if any of us found that a potential partner had been used like a whore on tinder that we would think less of her. That seems like a pretty concrete truth among men.

        My experience thus far has been that of all the couples I know, the vast majority met at work and a few met while in school or at a party and I know of one couple that met online and they are both fat so I don’t have a high opinion of online dating.

        Nah man. Just nah my naive dudebro.

        First of all, you are right that a lot of men are ignorant of how online dating works. But, for the dudes who know how to increase ROI it’s awesome. Spam C&F messages to whatever cute chicks are on the site. Whoever responds likes you.

        Imagine that. In real life, if a chick responds to you, it’s a good sign, but you still have to wait a few seconds to figure out if she likes you. In online dating, if you get a response, it’s pretty much on. The “fat couple” consists of a man who is probably so afraid of rejection that he only sent messages to chicks he thought were likely to respond — fat chicks. This man is just ignorant.

        Also, most couples meet in lame and predictable ways. At work, at school, at a party. That right there should clue you in on what’s happening. Both the fat man who is online dating and the “work, school, party” guy have one thing in common — little, if any, cold approach skill. The fat man just naturally has a smaller pool of “likely to respond” individuals to choose from. The normalfag/AFC has a wider pool, but just like the fat man, he could probably do better if he was less of a bitch.

        I only bring this up because your comment just seems to demonstrate ignorance of some basic social dynamic/game-related shit. Hence, the reason kant labeled you a KJ.

        Like


      • kant- You misunderstood what I meant by ‘unattractive’. To clarify, the more sexual partners a woman has, the less attractive. There may well be a physically attractive woman on tinder but a physically attractive whore is still a whore. I can and I will criticise things I haven’t experienced personally, all I need are some observations and statistics. Further, you are not in the least bit alleviating the suspicion that women on tinder are using it to indiscriminately have sex. Maybe you disagree about what is attractive about women, but being used by ‘players’ is inherently a lowering of value. Why don’t you just state plainly that you can find physically attractive women on tinder, that they have slept with countless men, I wouldn’t doubt it, and perhaps put up some numbers to prove it rather than putting up insults. And you are absolutely right I would judge women harshly for one night stands, that is what men tend to do, this is precisely what I am talking about. So you seem to be claiming that tinder has completely taken over the dating market and I simply do not see the evidence for it.

        Like


      • @Martin

        “This board is trying to tell you AWALT, but will you listen?”- WF

        Martin – you need to understand that women LOVE sex. They are BUILT for sex. They can have NONSTOP sex. The only thing that’s stopping them fucking as much and as openly as guys is the FEAR of pregnancy by a sub par mate, and the historical costs associated with carrying and caring for a child… hence they have developed psychological protocols to weed out the sub par mates.

        Picture this – I am calling it the Rubik’s Cube Construct – to help you guys wedded to blue pill thinking, mores and ways, and those with Asperger’s. When you look at ANY girl, imagine a Rubik’s Cube in her brain, if that puzzle can be solved by a guy, any guy, her legs will open. Some Cubes are easier to solve, depending on where they are, they may need only a few manipulations. some may need many. The length of time to solve the puzzle is a function of your skill.

        Most guys really suck at solving the Rubik’s Cube puzzle. They get irritated and walk away, hiding behind their ego saving “high value” comments. Other guys can solve it only when it requires a few turns (the girl is ovulating, is a Yes girl, etc.) and have no idea why it is getting solved, they put this down to “looks, or money”, and their male observers do as well. That is all they can see. Some guys take a really really long time to solve it, like 4 or 5 dates, and they think well this is how long it really takes to solve this puzzle. Another set of guys can solve the Cube easily, recognizing where they are in the process right away and quickly getting to the outcome. Bingo – legs open.

        Denialists (i.e. the less talented puzzle players) call these girls “sluts” instead of recognizing the skill the guy used to solve the puzzle.

        There is no contradiction to what Kant is saying about Tinder. Girls are posting their puzzle online, hoping it can be solved, because ALL girls love sex, and it is STILL up to the guy to solve the puzzle. Some guys still cant, but many others can.

        The only thing holding you back from solving as many puzzles as you want are your own beliefs… Can you see yourself as a guy who can solve this girl’s Rubik’s Cube, and can you NOT blame her for having it solved?

        Like


      • on October 13, 2014 at 3:53 pm haunted trilobite

        The schism seems to occur when an element of moral propriety is introduced into the equation. PUA’s don’t introduce this element, and pursue sex with lots of women, often with a ‘bone and disown’ attitude’, regardless of how many nobs have loosened the treads in their snatches. For the less indiscriminate, who might harbour ambitions of having ‘relationships’ with girlfriend material women, well the information provided here from PUAs can still help depedestalise any ‘special snowflakes’ they might encounter.
        An example of the treachery of women is illustrated by how american women fucked nazi prisoners being detained in the USA, while their husbands were getting riddled with bullets in Europe during WW2. French women had sex with nazi invaders who killed their fathers and brothers.
        It’s very disheartening to realise that women have little to no moral agency, but it’s every man’s own choice if he wants to partake in the race to the bottom. Nevertheless, this blog is somewhat scientific in nature, with PUAs quantifying their findings, and others postulating the existential ramifications of certain developments.

        Like


      • I agree with Immanuel Kant, online dating has its uses. I also agree with CH that it makes game-learned approach impossible, so when you are good at game you are naturally hampered online. But. Most of the women you see online are women you wouldn’t have met out in the real world. So why not do both? It doesn’t have to be either/or.

        I used to do online dating, but with game I have a lot more success with cold opens or approaches through a hobby or social circles, so I do that. But I understand the use for online dating. Especially for those who come home late from work and simply don’t have the time to go out to the pub. And who may be good conversationalists, good at relationships, but not good at cold opens. And maybe their friends are married and won’t go with them as wingmen.

        “My experience thus far has been that of all the couples I know, the vast majority met at work and a few met while in school or at a party and I know of one couple that met online and they are both fat so I don’t have a high opinion of online dating.”

        Martin, your limited experience is not representative. More people meet a partner online today than at work. Or at a hobby activity. Or at the pub.

        “and they are both fat”. You need at least 200 individuals to get a representative population sample. TWO PEOPLE are not a representative sample.

        If I know two guys from Mongolia who are both geniuses, does that mean all Mongolians are geniuses?

        Like


      • @Sentient: Very nice comment regarding the Rubik’s cube analogy.

        As in any game between opposing teams (men vs women) with different goals, successful strategies by one side will be counteracted by changing strategies on the other side. Once the widespread knowledge of how to solve the Rubiks cube gets disseminated, then girls’ will change the game to foil the clever puzzle solvers.

        Perhaps one way the game is trying to be reclaimed by women is the campus rape laws being promoted. Women can now decide the morning after if they were seduced by a true alpha or an adroit Rubik’s cuber.

        I guess that is the only point I’m making. Girls will change the puzzle.

        Like


      • @JR “As in any game between opposing teams (men vs women) with different goals, successful strategies by one side will be counteracted by changing strategies on the other side.”

        Except it’s not adversarial, zero sum. Understand women WANT to be fucked by suitable suitors… It’s literally in their DNA. It’s a game you all can win with.

        Men – want to spread their seed. Women – want to be impregnated (i.e. FUCK) by high status men.

        You just need to be viewed as that guy. everybody wins…

        Like


      • I mean really , have you guys had sex with a woman? Who is losing in that transaction? If she is losing you are doing it wrong. LOL.

        Like


      • “Most girls on tinder have “not looking for hookups sorry” on their tinder profiles.”

        sorry to burst your bubble here but saying they aren’t looking for hookups doesn’t mean they aren’t. if a girl is on tinder, she is looking to hook up. don’t listen to what women say, watch what they do…remember?

        they say they aren’t looking for hookups so they can feel better about slutting around and so they have plausible deniability after each hookup. i’m sure they tell you that they don’t usually sleep with guys so fast but you’re so effing alpha and your game is so tight that they just couldn’t help themselves. oh yeah, i’ve heard it too.

        don’t get me wrong, tinder is a great resource for sex but it is not a dating site where decent respectful women go to meet men. it’s a site for hook ups straight and simple and anyone with half a brain or who hasn’t been living in a cave knows that.

        Like


      • for the most part online dating seems to be geared towards beta males.

        Additionally, Ive heard its a pretty large waste of time trying to convince girls you have the best profile and can message them best

        Also, a lot of the girls on online dating are there for ATTENTION as in they feel like shit because they were just pumped and dumped

        Like


      • And if you keep in line with your ‘rubics cube’ analogy, then how do you keep the hot girl chasing once you fucked her? Keep the value high, but I know many players who had girls disappear even without them lowering their value

        Like


      • people here are simply, as kant says, talking out of their asses about online dating. Ok, I guess you guys can’t score online either, so you just rant about it and deny what it is?

        Like


      • Ha @trav777, nah. My plates don’t come from online. They come from my social circles or cold approaching a hot girl I don’t know when I’m with my social circles or by myself.

        I was hooking up with a girl and after we hooked up she was showing me some funny messages of her and some guys on tinder. She had probably 50 messages in her inbox and was showing me convos of her making shit up and fucking around with the guy (I.e. Wasting the guys time and attention whoring).

        The girls that you find on online dating or usually the post-break up post pump and dumped girls who likely have ASD and are looking for a self-esteem boost.

        I’m not saying this is all of them. I’m just saying that this is why it’s probably a bigger waste of time than you’d think

        Like


      • @Haunted Trilobite wrote An example of the treachery of women is illustrated by how american women fucked nazi prisoners being detained in the USA, while their husbands were getting riddled with bullets in Europe during WW2. French women had sex with nazi invaders who killed their fathers and brothers.
        It’s very disheartening to realise that women have little to no moral agency, but it’s every man’s own choice if he wants to partake in the race to the bottom. “

        =======

        This is what you guys need to really really get, and then get over. Women are not acting with “treachery” they are acting according to their nature… Things like “treachery” and “morality” are MALE constructs. Women are not long haired men.

        Women are built to fuck and have and raise children. They have no means of provision or protection independent of men. This is why they respond to fear and strength/power. The most Alpha = He Who Has The Power of Death… This is why women have a Responsive Desire for sex… it serves to weed out unsuitable mates as well as provide bonding to a “captor”. On the plains of yore, Grog raids neighboring tribe, grabs him a woman, takes her back and “makes” her his mate. And she is. This is why women respond to dominant men, dominant sex, orgasm from a rape etc. It is how they are wired.

        It is also the reason they are hypergamous … they are used to being conquered and will happily trade up out of fear and responding to greater strength (protection). They need to propagate life… they can’t do that if they are not alive. Solipsism gives them the ability to engage in this endless loop without damaging their minds.

        So guys – just recognize what women are, embrace that, cherish that (yeah I said it) and never ever forget it. If you do so you will have zero problems with women, fuck as many as you want and dare I say it, actually enjoy it and them.

        TLDR – Women are like cats, men are like dogs. Don’t treat a cat like a dog.

        Like


      • Sentient- Does female virginity have no value? According to the others in this thread, there is no such thing as a slut, it is a social construct that blue pill men invented. Whereas I utterly disagree, I think sluts very clearly exist based on the number of men they have been with. I also think that men value sluttish behaviour less than chaste behaviour for simple biological reasons. Do explain your take on this.
        Arbiter- It depends what was measured. I measured relationships, not internet-started relationships. By measuring relationships, I can conclude with some reasonable certainty that it is not the most common way to meet. The bit about the fatties was hyperbole but at the same time, I think it makes sense that if you must expand your search to the web, that you are lacking in potential partners and a truly high quality person would never be lacking in partners. I said I was willing to revise my opinion on this, and certainly I have no intention of polling 200 people on dating sites.

        Like


      • @martin – “Does female virginity have no value? According to the others in this thread, there is no such thing as a slut, it is a social construct that blue pill men invented. Whereas I utterly disagree, I think sluts very clearly exist based on the number of men they have been with. I also think that men value sluttish behaviour less than chaste behaviour for simple biological reasons. Do explain your take on this.”

        =========

        Female virginity has very limited value, and not the value you are thinking of. Virginity is not a bar to a woman’s nature. Virginity will not protect you from hypergamy. Virginity does NOT mean she isn’t a “slut” using your word, it just means she hasn’t acted on her nature YET. Her nature is her nature, there are logical reasons for it, that I outlined above, and it is immutable.

        Consider this, you find your N Zero girl, marry her and commence to fucking. 5 years into your wedded bliss, let’s say things aren’t going so well for you, you lose your job, you gain 20 pounds, you sit around playing video games. She is off working to support you. You abdicate your child raising responsibilities and all decision making to her…

        She is working with an “Alpha” boss, a dynamic, confident guy, who is going places. This guy likes what he sees in your wife and being confident, pursues her. When she does fuck him, is she a “slut” or is she rationally doing what she needs to do, as a fearful weak sex, to move to a strong protective partner? If the situation is reversed would you be a slut, or would you be acting on your nature?

        All women are “sluts”, again using your word. Sex depends on the circumstances, and a big part of that is the men that they meet AND the men they have. Remember the Rubik’s Cube, it is there, whether she is an N1 girl or an N20 girl, and can still be solved by the right guy. You always need to make sure YOU are that guy. If you are, “high value” in the parlance of the site, she won’t let a lower value guy solve her puzzle and risk losing you. Remember, women use the monkey branch approach to relationships, rarely drop a guy without another to move to.

        The only value in virginity or a low N count is that after a very high number count, there is some evidence/risk that she will be unable to bond to anyone. But the bigger value to virginity to the blue pill guys is they don’t have to think about a woman’s nature and the cock she has had, so she can always be your special snowflake.

        Red pill is merely seeing things as they are and not how you want them to be.

        Like


      • ” I think sluts very clearly exist based on the number of men they have been with.”

        The definition of slutty behavior is using sexiness and sex inappropriately.

        “By measuring relationships, I can conclude with some reasonable certainty that it is not the most common way to meet.”

        No, you can’t. And that’s not what you said. You said it was very uncommon and the only two people you knew who had met online were fat. Now you retreat to saying “I don’t think it’s the most common way”. Because I had just mentioned that statistics show it is more common than meeting at the pub, more common than meeting at work and more common than meeting at a hobby. So you pretend that the issue was something else – whether it was the MOST common way, which was never claimed. No, the issue was whether it was as highly unusual as you presented it.

        “The bit about the fatties was hyperbole but at the same time, I think it makes sense that if you must expand your search to the web, that you are lacking in potential partners and a truly high quality person would never be lacking in partners.”

        Bullshit. There are a LOT of high-quality people using online dating. I have used it myself, though I don’t do that anymore. As others have said, this kind of claim you are making is just made up, you don’t know what you are talking about. There are a lot of people who simply don’t have time to go out and do cold opens, and who don’t happen to have someone in their social circles to date. Then what? Online dating is a very big thing and has been for more than a decade because it greatly expands the number of people you can approach. Yeah, there are losers using it. There are losers everywhere. Those are quickly weeded out.

        Like


      • >The definition of slutty behavior is using sexiness and sex inappropriately.
        Not quite, promiscuity is included in the definition. Look up promiscuous.
        >Now you retreat to saying “I don’t think it’s the most common way”.
        No, this was no face saving plot but simply trying to be more civil by using less strongly worded language. Clearly people are offended and they have done nothing to convince me of any of their claims like that high-quality women use dating sites, that dating-sites are used for anything but hookups,
        or refuted me in my original claim. You assumed I said all people using online dating are fat. I never said that. I said people using online dating have no other options and in fact you agree because you said “There are a lot of people who simply don’t have time to go out and do cold opens, and who don’t happen to have someone in their social circles to date”. There are a wide variety of reasons people may not have other options, I will concede that to you, but one reason is being fat. But I stated repeatedly that I would like to see some sort of evidence that high-quality people are using online dating to prove that it has changed from the past. You will just have to take my word that in the past it was not used by high quality people.

        Like


      • on October 15, 2014 at 4:29 pm haunted trilobite

        Sentient, I provided those examples to illustrate what women are capable of. I also noted that the stories one can read here, and the revelations of the behaviour of women, can help prospective romeos avoid getting too bedazzled by special snowflakes.
        However, I don’t buy that women have no moral agency. They’re more susceptible to influence and are solipsistic, as you’ve described, but they’re not beneath being judged.

        Like


    • Wow, some truly excellent replies in this thread by Sentient. This in particular is gold, and not something you’ll find in typical PU materials–merits a repost, or comment of the week:


      Women are built to fuck and have and raise children. They have no means of provision or protection independent of men. This is why they respond to fear and strength/power. The most Alpha = He Who Has The Power of Death… This is why women have a Responsive Desire for sex… it serves to weed out unsuitable mates as well as provide bonding to a “captor”. On the plains of yore, Grog raids neighboring tribe, grabs him a woman, takes her back and “makes” her his mate. And she is. This is why women respond to dominant men, dominant sex, orgasm from a rape etc. It is how they are wired.

      It is also the reason they are hypergamous … they are used to being conquered and will happily trade up out of fear and responding to greater strength (protection). They need to propagate life… they can’t do that if they are not alive. Solipsism gives them the ability to engage in this endless loop without damaging their minds.

      Like


  6. Found my foreign bride in 5 minutes on vietnamcupid.

    Like


  7. In Asia, the quality of women online is high. Online game is a way for both sides to pragmatically and proactively sift through losers. But game is still required. I’ve met a lot of great women I’ve banged often first time we met. No, I think online dating requires tight game but is an effective way of managing your time.

    Like


    • it doesn’t require “tight” game at all…just don’t eff up before you get to a F2F and then allow your charm to take over. I’m assuming some of you must have some charm.

      My first date bang rate of online meets approaches 100%. The sole exceptions are ones where I did a “not a psycho killer” 30 minute coffee meet n’ greet first. There has never been a wait until 3rd date. I do get DQd by a fair number of chicks for trying to advance more rapidly. But I am pretty clear that I am not going to wait around through this whole courtship bullshit ESPECIALLY when these girls are on dates with other guys all week. Hell no.

      There is so much volume that you must develop skills to sift DTF chicks versus those who are LTR obsessed (despite not being worth a shit). Many times, you can use vidchat as a fake meetup and it costs zero. Then when you get to in person, you have already gone virtually across most of the basepath.

      Like


  8. “Call me old school, but I prefer meeting and seducing women in the flesh, where the pleasant discomfort of the moment can’t be escaped, our stats can’t be aridly collated and perused, my probing hands can’t be evaded, my warm smirk can’t be missed, my wordless entendres can’t be mistaken. The incitement and sustenance of a woman’s romantic attraction demands a… personal touch.”

    Hear, hear! That’s the stuff of life, right there. It’s a tragedy to miss out on it.

    Like


  9. The peculiar part isn’t that people would seek others online (after all, in a world of ever-expanding information accessible to all, you’re more likely to find someone you get along with online than in your town or city), but how long they go without meeting up. Watching something like Catfish or reading “long distance relationship” advice makes it even more curious. You have people who have been “dating” for sometimes five years who have never seen each other in the flesh and sometimes never even Skyped. Yet they feel amazingly close to that person.

    When online dating, I’d say the first thing is to think about what you want and when you meet someone who meets the requirements, to chat for a short while online and move ever onwards towards meeting in person. By a month of happy interactions and clear intentions you should have at least seen their facebook and talked on Skype, if not arranged a date to meet or met already. If you spend a year “in love” with someone without ever seeing them, that’s a recipe for disaster.

    Like


    • A month is way too long. If a woman will not agree to a date within two weeks with maybe 4-5 messages from both, she most likely never will. Many women just like to draw out the online contact for the sake of getting attention.

      Like


      • I totally confirm that observation. If she only texts while at work at her convenience, nuke that friend zone with an expectation to socialize further only if you meet in real life. Also, not sure about tinder, but at ‘dating sites’ it is adverse selection. Real life allows women to size men up more efficiently and accurately, so they prefer it if they get enough play.

        Like


      • Yep. Those girls are obvious after the first few messages. Next.

        Like


      • Maybe so. I find relationships sometimes escalate slowly though. So a woman can show slight interest a week in, but only set her mind on something a week after that. On the other hand, the closer to Tinder-like the site is, the more likely it is that the waiting period will be short. I’d say a month is fair for encounters on non-dating sites or relationships that develop from a friendship and a day or three for Tinder.

        Like


      • Maybe so. I find relationships sometimes escalate slowly though.

        But it’s not a relationship. When you haven’t even met yet. You have to meet to see if you are attracted. The first minute of meeting face to face tells more than ten emails.

        The PMing on the dating site should only be to weed out those you know you definitely would not want to date. Everyone else you have to meet in person to know.

        Furthermore, too much electronic contact kills attraction. Women like it because it is safe and they get attention (while not calling it that of course), but if a guy allows himself to become a girl’s emotional tampon she will be much, much less likely to ever let him get to the point where they sleep with each other. Much less have a relationship.

        Like


    • “When online dating, I’d say the first thing is to think about what you want and when you meet someone who meets the requirements, to chat for a short while online and move ever onwards towards meeting in person. By a month of happy interactions and clear intentions[…]”

      This is exactly why we don’t let women post in actual seduction forums. There’s so much bad chick logic here it gives me a headache to read. Any guy tailoring his efforts to this advice would lose any existing interest / attraction fast, would never get laid, and then wonder what he’s doing wrong

      Like


      • This is what ruined the MMSL forums… taken over, literally now, by women mods…

        Like


      • I was just going to say something like that, but Kant beat me to the punch.

        ” I’d say the first thing is to think about what you want and when you meet someone who meets the requirements”

        No, no, no. It doesn’t work like that. What are you gonna say?

        GUY: “Hello, I want sex and maybe a relationship.”
        GIRL: “Hello, I want a relationship and maybe sex.”
        GUY: “Close enough! Now we should meet and see if we go well together in person. Then we can decide which of these two we should do first.”
        GIRL: “Yes, I agree. That is the logical way to proceed.”

        A guy needs to hit the girl’s buttons, not present himself on a platter for her to choose from. (Or, he can do just that and go single for years while “waiting for a girl who wants me for me!”) Browse through Château Heartiste’s tags, read some of the advice, and you’ll get a notion of what this means. CH calls it “give her the tingles”. As good a description as any.

        Like


      • This is what ruined the MMSL forums… taken over, literally now, by women mods…

        Had to look that up: “Married Man Sex Life Forum”. Looks interesting, I see manosphere awareness in the OPs there. But women mods, that’s incredibly stupid.

        Forum posts talk about “the MAP” all the time, I can’t find what it stands for, but I understand it’s a plan for improving game in a marriage.

        Like


      • @kant totally agree with both the KJ comment and the above comment.

        Regarding KJ’s …I make a ton of mistakes but I also have a huge success rate. I share my experiences to help dudes sift through their own stuff to get to where I am now. Posting for the sake of it is KJing…

        With rare exceptions, women posting here are just bored and offering the WRONG advice to guys about game because they’re responding from a position of their “ideal” alpha. The point of these posts is to educate guys, especially newbies about what to do and not do.

        Having endless conversations before meeting up…waste of time. There is a strategy of “long game”…but to focus on one girl online…then “move towards meeting in person”—is the woman leading and driving the interaction. Wrong.Wrong.Wrong.

        Like


      • What’s wrong with it then? That’s how it worked for my LTR and the only other couples I know who met online.

        Like


      • Typical pattern observed: Two people meet online and start talking. After a while interest is made clear (may be within 30min if on a dating site where they can see your profile, or even five months if outside of dating sites where you would need to explicitly state whether you were into them or not), once interest is made clear there is a brief period of continued interaction followed by sudden escalation of interest (photos, social networking, sometimes skype), culminating in a date. If there is no date by a month, then there is something off. If there is no social network or skype by a month, then there’s likely no chance.

        Like


    • @superslaviswife the only episodes of catfish I’ve seen involved one very low value person using fake pictures to trick someone attractive, or two people whose best romantic option was being in a sexless relationship that existed into a chat window.

      Like


    • Have you seen the movie, Her? Its a very interesting look into virtual bonds.

      Like


      • on October 13, 2014 at 7:50 pm the latent sadist

        i thought it was good. In an emo kinda way. But i dont think its any endorsement for online (or virtual) for a substitution. If anything, it pointed out how unnatural we are as a society…or where we are heading. But i thought the movie was pretty engaging, with good acting.

        Like


      • No, it wasn’t an endorsement, but it was a fascinating exploration of what love really is.

        Like


    • Online dating is wasted effort. A detailed and in-depth text conversation or videochat isn’t a date, and the longer it lasts the more your odds of meeting face to face go down. Women want attention and ego-stroking, and the company of an attractive man. I use the texts or the videochat to move promptly towards a get-together, so she has to meet me to have any hope of getting what she wants.

      Incentives, folks. Use them wisely.

      Liked by 1 person


  10. Online Courtship Can’t Replicate Face To Face Courtship

    Of course not – for a simple reason, when you are face-to-face they don’t compare you to their mythical ideal, they feel attraction and viola, the panties come off. But with an app they compare you to their “idea” of what they should date. That is much more limited, if you meet that criteria, you’re golden, if you don’t you won’t get any trim… Simple…

    Remember, women cannot control whom they are attracted to – and it’s often almost the opposite of what they think they want. Heck, no young 18 yo old thinks, “What I need is a 50+ year old to plow me like a field.” And if they thought about it, they would walk, but when they are there and feeling the attraction – all of that doesn’t matter, their little rationalization hamster goes full speed later to justify what they are feeling, “Sure, he’s older, but that means we can do more, and it’s FUN.” I have one that loves it when people will refer to her as “your daughter” when we’re out, as she’ll practically attack me and then say something like, “He’s my step-father.” Just to shock them… That is what women live for – the excitement, and an “app” on a phone can’t deliver that.

    It is that simple…

    Like


  11. This tension is what will make her seduction so memorable for her in days, and maybe years, to come.

    Or maybe she’s horny from ovulating and she doesn’t give a 5h1t about a seduction fantasy and all you need to do is ask; maybe she has a summer fling bucket list item. Maybe it’s about revenge sex. Maybe it’s about feeling a need to shuck her virginity. Maybe she wants to compare sex with a bf to sex with someone else.

    Sometimes all you need to do is ask. Sometimes all you need to do is say “Ok” if she finds you hot enough.

    If you think that sex for non-seduction-fantasy reasons is all that rare, think again.

    Like


    • yeah. The notion that you have to “talk women into” sex is foolhardy. MORE women would prefer that you just dominate and go get it if you want it. Women WANT to be swept away by the passion and fury and all that crap. Look at the covers of romance novels, FFS.

      The rape fantasy comes from a man DESIRING them so much that he cannot resist. Again, women want to be desired more than anything else; this is the sine qua non of their entire self-image.

      Like


  12. on October 13, 2014 at 10:23 am Captain Schlamered

    Man I got like 10 people in my social circle, and that is too many

    Like


  13. In person engagement has advantages and disadvantages.

    Besides kino, advantages include using your voice to induce tingles, showing off your dominance through body language and facial expression, showing off your dominance through your walk, showing off your dominance through your social interaction, DHV: showing skills including dancing, singing, playing musical instruments, etc.

    Disadvantages might include not being able to hide social problems due to ADHD, Bipolar Disorder, autism, extreme shyness, etc. Maybe appearance issues become obvious in person, which would be good if you see a problem in the woman and bad if she sees a problem in you.

    Like


  14. Online dating sux ballz compared to meatspace. Always has, always will.

    Two big reasons right off the bat: first of all, photos never look as good as in real life, which is why there’s so much cheating going on, especially on the female side. Also, I do just fine with early-20s women in real life, but since I’m in my 30s, women in that age range will usually reject me online, and since the unattached men in their 30s I’ve met are usually fat and painfully beta, I can’t exactly blame them.

    Like


    • yeah…the age is a problem online.. Do what women do: lie.

      I am 27 online on a site right now. IRL I’m 43. A chick actually bought 27, god bless her. I retreated to 33 and she bought that too. No, I am not this delusional. I could reliably pass for 35ish. Even my ACL therapist had literally NO clue, as in I need to see the ID to believe this, that I was 43, and she saw me in I-just-crawled-out-of-bed condition. Stay out of the sun and get sleep.

      The age gap is gonna be a problem in the real world as well. I do best when chicks know the story first, then see me. It’s a chance to sail over low expectations. If they don’t know and they meet me and I pour on charms, they tend to get stars in their eyes. Then they hear I have kids and shit and it’s an emotional letdown…the perfect princess life fairy tale BS goes poof. I’ve watched it in their eyes, sometimes just for kicks because they pissed me off so much being idiotic that I want to blow their stupid fantasy apart just to watch it explode.

      But online…40+ with kids? Forget it. I have done tests to see response rates at various ages. Once you hit 36, it goes WAY down. At 40 online you may as well be dead except for getting matches with women who look like dinosaurs. A well-traveled man like me knows that I can pull 19 year olds from a dozen countries filled with actually hot, decent women who in many cases actually LIKE a guy who has kids because it is a marker of both fertility and responsibility. It’s like the USA is upside-down these days or something.

      I’m pretty jaded at this point having been to south America and eastern Europe. Everyone on this site looking for tips should go.

      Like


    • @corvinus

      Yes, in general online gaming will be easier for young guys. Girls have all these mental checklists that logically disqualify guys due to age, height, occupation, etc. but all those things go out the window when a guy is in front of her in real life gaming her and he’s an alpha.

      Some older guys still do online well though, like blackdragon, you just have to play the numbers game effectively

      Like


      • @kant I do well online. But yes ,I lower my age. When I meet the girls it’s never an issue when they find out. Most girls don’t want to know or don’t care if they see I’m in good shape, fit and dress well and of course game them.

        Also, not sure what it’s like in the west but in Asia, age is actually a plus not a turn off for girls who associate it with “experience”…that being life, sexual etc.

        This year I set out a goal for myself of only dating girls under 30. Some I’ve met in person, most online. Online sites like OKC and Tinder no longer carry a stigma. Girls are busy and want to literally save time. You need game online to get to the meet-up. I have a fairly high success rate from initial outreach to meet up.

        As for “long game”….for me this is a different concept. I’ve found some girls need more comfort. That doesn’t necessarily mean beta…it means sexual intent, then being an interesting guy…then getting physical….then disappearing.

        Logistics, my job, my travel schedule, time constraints and other factors get in the way of banging a chick. I go out, get physical but then it’s late or some other rational reason. It’s the real world. I have said no to girls who wanted to come over and bang me: “Gotta get up early babe…”

        Like


      • “Girls have all these mental checklists that logically disqualify guys due to age, height, occupation…”

        having a wet back.

        no HBs say “ooooh, a beaner. i got tingles. let’s meet right now.”

        kant sticks it in chickens and then eats them with gay mole.

        Like


  15. I just created my first online dating profile on a dating site this weekend. It’s cool so far. Nice for a very reclusive person like myself.

    Like


  16. Pro-tip – Find her worst picture, she looks worse than that in real life.

    Like


    • Yet another reason to only pick up chicks in real life. Screw Tinder. I tried it briefly, even while traveling in a well-populated area, and no girl was higher than about a 6 or 7. In line with CH’s observation that sluts tend to be girls in the middle of the bell curve.

      Like


  17. Upload a prison cell photo to your Tinder and your phone will explode with girls.

    Like


  18. Another tip – women over 25 will invariably use photos from when they were 25 or younger. Years ago when I used online apps, only two were better looking than their photos. Most were worse for exactly the above reason.

    Like


    • I knew someone who met a ‘girl’ for a drink who he had contacted online (match?) She showed up and he was speechless. She didn’t use an old picture of herself, she used her daughter’s freaking picture! As he was walking out of the bar, he asks her ‘what the **** were you thinking of, doing that???’ her response: ‘i thought if you saw what i really looked like, you would not want to meet me!’ No sh*t, Sherlock!

      Like


    • “only two were better looking than their photos.”

      yup. but kant doesn’t care. he’ll bang a tranny no matter what it looks like.

      Like


  19. Not only can you not game them online, they can’t be properly socialized. iphones are causing women to forget where they naturally stand in the pecking order. In nature, a woman who is needlessly flakey/rude/cunty to a suitor might find herself on the wrong end of a caveman club. A girl who’s a 4 with guaranteed protection and provision from the state, a few hundred beta orbiters, and a thousand matches on tinder loses touch with reality. At least while gaming in person you can use the reptilian brain to convince the hamster brain that its time for sex.

    Like


  20. “They talk to the brain, but the brain doesn’t communicate back. “We think that’s what they exist for, to trigger endorphin responses as a consequence of grooming,” Dunbar said. Until social media can replicate that touch, it can’t fully replicate social bonding.”

    The market for haptic devices is going to explode. click to Like. click to Stroke.

    (I think the idea that a haptic device near your side, stroking or grooming you at your desk, knowing that it is animated by another human, even though not physically present, would be very stimulating for women.)

    Like


    • Ya think?

      Like


      • Well, there you go. I’m sure when the GE engineers get together to design the Internet of Things, they are not contemplating an interconnected dildo cum vibrator — multi player version — but now you mentioned it, this could be the next big thing.

        Like


  21. Call me old fashioned…but I like meeting women in the flesh and not touching them. They have cooties and all. But if one wants to feel my power…well who am I to stop them.

    Like


    • I don’t avoid the company of women… but I do deny the vast majority of them my essence.

      Like


      • on October 13, 2014 at 4:28 pm haunted trilobite

        I’ve heard it said that flouride is a key ingredient in diazepam, or marzipan.. whatever it’s called

        Like


      • on October 13, 2014 at 4:55 pm mendozatorres

        ^This. My sentiments exactly! Gonna borrow this phrasing.

        Like


      • In all modesty, I have to give credit to whoever wrote the screenplay for Dr. Strangelove… it’s one of the better lines from General Jack D. Ripper.

        (((gotta tell you young-uns everything)))

        Like


  22. One good thing to use online for is if you want to advertise as a “bull” looking for a cuckold couple. There are increasing numbers of such couples today, a good number of them young. You get to fuck the girl no strings attached, no drama, if you’re good and have a set-up going, the guy won’t even be there to watch every time. Occasionally though it’s an extra thrill to fuck a guy’s gf or wife in his own bed, with him watching. Online is best for this setup for obvious reasons. If they’re rich they may even buy you stuff. You usually have to be handsome and/or in great shape for this to work though.

    Like


  23. Your blog is too good, man

    Like


  24. Hooked on phonics worked for me!

    Like


    • KateButtox,

      Hooked on phonics worked for me!

      Did it now? How about this Limerick :

      There was a woman named Kate,
      She was famous for how much she ate,
      She found a man in his winter
      His last name was Minter
      And now,…..she can enthusiastically gain weight.

      Like


  25. on October 13, 2014 at 4:19 pm The Spirit Within

    Online dating is more efficient for many people like me (read: busy). Make sure you have a really good photo, by which I mean your facial expression — alpha smirk — is more important than your degree of handsomeness.

    Once you meet up, all the usual rules of game apply. The two worlds aren’t mutually exclusive; they’re complementary.

    Like


  26. If she didn’t exist they would to invent her. Poster girl for a falling empire. No fecund star jumping ice maidens here.

    Like


    • on October 13, 2014 at 6:03 pm Hair Slicked Back With Swag So Fresh

      America’s answer to Adele. Sickening.

      Like


    • plz…make it stop! The existence of such creatures, the inhumanity! And she luvs it?! Women are so equal and better than men.

      Like


    • What I’m trying to figger out is… from whence, by all that’s holy, doth that smug, self-satisfied look arise?

      NO hamster can be THAT delusional.

      Like


      • This is 2014. Every single fat girl I see has that look on her snout. Around here, half of them have handsome prole boyfriends.

        Like


      • as we all know, handsomeness does not a winner make a man. anyhow, i hear stories like this occasionally and i really have to wonder what earth everyone is living on. all i see are fat girls with losers… or fat girls with no one. and lo and behold, studies SAY… fat chicks have trouble getting dates! whodathunkit?

        Like


      • I guess I just wasn’t made for these times… sigh.

        Like


      • Wrong, Greg Eliot. You were made exactly for this time, as one of those who carry on the truth and spread it. And your main duty hasn’t come yet.

        Like


      • Kind of you to say…

        But our ilk are men between worlds at this juncture.. disdaining both the current malaise realpolitik and the nihilistic poolside escapism.

        Ah, well… for tonight I raise a last glass to you, mon frere:

        Vive le mort! Vive le guerre! Vive le sacré mercenaire!

        Like


      • on October 13, 2014 at 8:39 pm The Spirit Within

        You two sound like you should be high-fiving each other at a cosplay convention.

        Like


      • But our ilk are men between worlds at this juncture.. disdaining both the current malaise realpolitik and the nihilistic poolside escapism.

        Pretty much. Judiciously-applied game can yield a lot of notches, but some of us have moral objections to banging everything within reach. It’s a neverending battle to restrain the worst impulses of the inner caveman, especially when the caveman understands game and society is corroding toward primitive behavior.

        Talk about temptation!

        Like


      • “all i see are fat girls with losers”

        They are. Some of those losers are in good shape though and that is enough to inflate the fatties’ egos. A fat white chick in prole areas really does think she’s an 8.

        Like


      • You two sound like you should be high-fiving each other at a cosplay convention.

        Spoken like a sperg who never had a bro… and never had anyone’s back, nor anyone his.

        Like


    • Sad thing is she’d actually be rather fetching if she lost 60 pounds or so… Very sad.

      Like


    • Catchy song tho. Sad that it’s all about celebrating our flaws instead of being better humans. It’s not about hiding or being inauthentic, it’s about being fucking better.

      Like


    • Whenever most girls say, “I’m bipolar” what they really mean is that they have Borderline Personality Disorder. Bipolar sounds edgier, dynamic, yin and yang. They can also claim victim status. Whereas saying you are Borderline PD is admitting you have disorder in your personality. Who wants to admit that?

      Like


  27. Just another tool in the toolbox

    Like


  28. Re “don’t vote” tweet: I’ve come around to this point of view. On a related note, Morrissey (who has made a few racissss statements in the past) has a new and interesting album out. The title song “World Peace is none of your Business” has two interesting lines:

    “Work hard and sweetly pay your taxes” and

    “Each time you vote, you support the process” x4

    Like


    • I’ve never voted in an election… I guess I was alpha before alpha was cool.

      Naw… I admit it was a tenet of my beloved Witnesses.

      lzloxoxlxoxlxozlzozlzozlzozlzozlzozlzozlozlozlozlozlozl

      Like


    • every time i tell liberal SWPLs (redundant?) that i don’t vote, they act personally offended. that’s how i know i’m doing the right thing.

      Like


      • the only sane act in an insane and toxic culture….. segregation and a lack of participation becomes visionary. efforts best spent elsewhere and all.

        Like


      • Hard to tell what offends them more: never voting, or never voting for Dims.

        Like


      • When someone questions my non-voting, I just say:

        “Voting is an act of faith in this system of things… has YOUR faith been rewarded, nigh these past several elections?”

        Tongue-tied SWPLs are most amusing.

        Like


      • The common objection from conventional conservatives is that you’re wasting your vote. They also say this when you protest-vote for a third party candidate.

        My response is that voting R or D is the real waste of vote because the two major parties are not substantially different from each other; contributing to the “white voter strike” is how you get their attention and make your vote count.

        Like


      • The only legitimate reason to back the GOP over Dems is gun rights. But even there, you’re better off supporting the NRA than voting. Lobbying > voting.

        Like


      • on October 14, 2014 at 8:04 am The Spirit Within

        Not voting > voting Repub.

        At the very least, this keeps the worst foxes out of the henhouse.

        Dems have a ton of problems too — the whole system is screwed up — but at least they don’t quite so brazenly loot the public coffers for plutocratic gain.

        Like


      • “but at least they don’t quite so brazenly loot the public coffers for plutocratic gain.”

        This is idiotic. The entire White Genocide project (some also refer to it as civil rights and diversity) championed by Dems is a looting of the century.

        But go Team Blue!

        Like


      • on October 14, 2014 at 9:04 am The Spirit Within

        What’s idiotic is referring to a country — the US — that has provided the highest standard of living to the greatest number of white people in the history of the world as being genocidal towards that same group of white people.

        Like


      • What’s idiotic is referring to a country — the US — that has provided the highest standard of living to the greatest number of white people in the history of the world as being genocidal towards that same group of white people.

        You realize you could say the exact same thing about Germany and the Jews in 1930

        Yesterday isn’t today or tomorrow. Your inability to grasp simple concepts makes thwack look erudite.

        Like


      • Godwin knew best.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

        Thank you for informing me of Godwin’s Law. In all my time on the internet, not once have I ever heard of it.

        Like


      • As usual, The Sperg Within (thanks, CH!) wields lances that are but straws.

        Like


      • on October 14, 2014 at 10:31 am The Spirit Within

        Greg Eliot, if you’re going to cheerlead from the sidelines, at least put on a short skirt and do your makeup.

        Otherwise, STFU.

        Like


      • TSW’s achievement here as advocate of neofeudalist globalism (no, his side is not “liberalism” or even “leftism”)

        – persuading others to his point of view: fail

        – effectively mocking his ideological opponents: fail

        – disrupting discussion: fail

        Like


      • on October 14, 2014 at 11:06 am The Spirit Within

        Yrs truly is a neofeudalist? Hardly. Project your fears elsewhere, neocon.

        Generally you have to win by some objective measure before you can announce another’s failure. In an open comments section, “winning” and “losing” don’t exist.

        Like


      • Dems have a ton of problems too — the whole system is screwed up — but at least they don’t quite so brazenly loot the public coffers for plutocratic gain.

        Heh. Instead, Dims screw straight white males every chance they get. Tell me again as to why any straight white male should ever vote for the donks?

        Like


      • Yrs truly is a neofeudalist? Hardly. Project your fears elsewhere, neocon.

        Generally you have to win by some objective measure before you can announce another’s failure. In an open comments section, “winning” and “losing” don’t exist.

        More leftists clap trap.

        Like


      • Greg Eliot, if you’re going to cheerlead from the sidelines, at least put on a short skirt and do your makeup.

        Otherwise, STFU.

        Enjoy what you wouldn’t say to a man’s face from the safety of your keyboard, dweeb.

        And take a hint about STFU when half the board is handing your head to you, CH foremost.

        Like


      • Greg Eliot,

        Tongue-tied SWPLs …

        Hmmm, sounds like bondage (NTTAWWT!)

        Like


  29. Online dating is useless crap.
    Virtually all attractive profiles are either fake or way too far away (= 9 time zones) or both. Usually both.
    And pretty much all the profiles that may actually be real and local are exactly the type of people who have always given personal ads a bad name. Fugs, fats, SingleMoms, weirdos, pot activists and other debris.
    OKCupid in my area is land whales only, PregnantOrFat have removed whatever potential usefulness they may have had with their age restrictions, DateHookup now has almost as many phonies as 4ppl used to have, only not from Africa.
    The only person I know who has actually been successful on such a site got an invite for a 3-day free trial from Match, clamped herself to the computer over a long weekend, contacted every guy within x number of miles she found appealing, left them a way to get back to her and deleted her account before she could be charged a dime. She’s a Trekkie nerd who found- you guessed it – another Trekkie nerd.

    Like


  30. […] It’s becoming clearer with every close examination of the subject that online dating is a poor facsimile of real world dating.  […]

    Like


  31. Finding poon is a search problem at heart. There’s a group of DTF females looking for you in any population and your task is to find them or for them to find you. The odds obviously are better with a larger population to sort – New York or the SF Bay Area are better than Ogden or Rochester. Frankly, I can’t spend enough of my life in bars or nightspots to keep myself satisfied.

    I’ve been hitting Craigslist (and before that, Yahoo Personals) for over two decades. I’ve found LOTS of real winners there too and I’d say 80% have been first meeting bangs. But then, I’m not pushing for notch count, I want to get a healthy woman with a high libido and a good heart to bang for a year or so.

    The secret is to write a great marketing ad. Make it about what you are that pushes her buttons, not what you need. Witty and entertaining are also necessary attributes. A catchy title is your hook.

    Like


    • on October 14, 2014 at 7:58 am The Spirit Within

      ^This.

      One of the hottest women I ever banged came off Craigslist. She became a professional model after we broke up. It’s a weird site: you can buy used golf clubs while swooping grade-A poon for free.

      Like


      • All good websites for scoring poon, and Sites in general have a “lifespan” of a certain amount of years (if they lucky) before they become overrun with fraud, spoilers… Craigslist was like this when it first started. Early Youtube was ridiculous, Even ZeroHedge fell off and became annoying to read.

        Its like club life. Clubs are cool when they first start out because of the cool people their. THEN the uncool people start coming to see the cool people and the cool people leave cause now the club has become uncool. Between lawyers, attention whores, spam and the monetization process, most valuable websites are lucky to make a good 18 month run.

        Like


  32. “There’s no forcing mechanism that makes us have to learn. If you spend most of your time online, you may not get enough in-person group experience to learn how to properly interact on a large scale”

    This could also go far to explain the seemingly increasing number of violent psychopaths that dont seem to be clinically insane, but rape & kill with a complete lack of empathy & remorse. like the dude that killed his mother then fucked her corpse OR the dude that stole the little girls bike then killed her & stuffed her into a recycling bin

    Like