Predicting A Girl’s Infidelity

A reader emails:

As a rule, when the supply of eligible men goes down, female sluttiness goes up. If a girl will only date guys [who are] soccer players 6-4 or taller, then she’ll get desperate around these men moreso than a girl without this “limiting factor”. If a girl comes across 1 eligible guy a month, vs 10 eligible guys a day, then that 1 eligible guy has massive hand, and will score even if he has negative game.

The short-term dating limiting factors could be, but not limited to:

1. age
2. looks
3. race / hair color / eye color
4. height / build
5. income / class
6. musical talent
7. cultural tastes / fashion
8. social proof / notch count
9. game / humor / confidence

I know girls that sleep around, often sober, but only with guys within narrow parameters. They often exclude known cads and alpha males in the group to focus on a narrower, but not necessarily superior, sub-set of alpha males.

I propose finding short-term relationships among women that date within narrow parameters and long-term relationships with women that date all over the map.

That’s counter-intuitive.

If you qualify based on a limiting factor it seems like the logical basis for a long term relationship, but she’ll go just as ga-ga over another guy that meets this same limiting factor. If you are lucky she’ll come across this guy when your game is tight, and not on a beta downswing.

A girl that’s less discriminating is less likely to come across a man that sweeps her off her feet, and you into divorce court.

What this reader is hinting about is known as The Template, (or, in more poetic language, the Ideal Lover). Every person, man and woman, has a template etched into their brains from birth that, upon the pubertal blossoming, guides them like an invisible genital towards certain types of people who most closely match their ideal. The Template is a force to be reckoned with, because it derives its power from deeply embedded genetic imprinting passed down from generations of ancestors following their own similar templates.

Master seducers beware: once a girl has laid eyes on her ideal man she will swat away the importunings from objectively superior suitors like so many buzzing flies. Not even Jedi game has the force to distract a girl from pursuing with single-minded focus the man of her Template dreams. The good news is that The Template is very rarely fulfilled; out of 1,000 men a woman might meet over many years perhaps one or two of them will press all her buttons. So as a practical matter, The Template is no barricade to free and easy sex for a fly by night womanizer.

The reader makes a good point about the supply of men being limited not just by the numerical sex ratio but also by the self-imposed mate choice limitations of women. A romantically idealistic woman fully under the sway of her Template is a woman with dating hand, because very few men will be able to satisfy her prerequisites for love. Luckily, most women are not so beholden to the prudish pull of their Templates. Usually, women age out of slavish devotion to their templates as reality slowly but inexorably pounds into their heads that their Template in Shining Armor is more real as a fantasy than as an actual man. For examples of girls still enslaved by the dictates of their Templates, stroll through any high school corridor.

This is not to say women (and men) give up on their Templates entirely. We have all experienced that heart-quickening epiphany when the woman of our Templates dances into our vision, and for a moment our self-regard and worries vanish like tears in rain as our brains rev furiously and every nerve in our bodies readies for a shot at conquest. But we shelve the Template most days, figuring that the constant heeding of its call is often a flimsy pretext for rationalizing solitude.

Back to the reader’s premise: sluts sleep around, but only with a select few men who meet their Templates, i.e. within narrow mate criteria parameters. The premise has a kernel of truth, but is incomplete, unless we expand those narrow parameters to include most alpha males. While I have argued before that sluts are not less discriminating than chaste women, they aren’t exactly starry-eyed romantics staring pensively out their bedroom windows at the late summer moon, smug with the knowledge that their virtue remains untrammeled until a superlative cock shows up to rescue her lust from its prison of self-denial. A slut is still a slut, whether she accrues her cock notches with a subset of high status men or with randomly chosen men who just happened to be in the right place at the right time and didn’t fuck it up by saying the wrong thing.

One should remember that the alpha male, by dint of his universal attractiveness, strikes deep limbic notes in women regardless of the proximity of his characteristics to a woman’s Template. There are enough of these interchangeable alpha males on the prowl that a dedicated slut could notch quite a few cocks despite the very narrow parameters she sets for herself.

So what do we make of the reader’s bold contention that “groupie sluts” are worse long-term prospects than “inclusive sluts” because of the potential that a stray man meeting the former’s Template would quickly and easily tempt her to infidelity? Should men who are seeking LTRs drop any women from consideration who express a fascination with, say, pasty-faced activist anarcho-libertarians? Should a man who meets a woman’s template worry that he could be replaced by another, similarly templated man? Live by the template, die by the template?

No. Although I admire the reader’s logical chain of thought leading to his contrarian conclusion, in reality inclusive sluts are no less a risk factor than groupie sluts. A girl who comes across ten eligible men per day may not swoon as uncontrollably as a girl who sees an eligible man once per day, but the fidelity assurance from the lack of swooning is offset by the increase in permissible suitors.

To put it another way, would you rather compete with one (from your woman’s point of view) rare, exceptional man or with ten less rare, do-able men? Statistically, I doubt the groupie slut is any less faithful than the inclusive slut.

Then there is the matter of correlations. A jaded woman with lax standards who has a history of spreading for all taxonomy of penii is going to be a cheating risk no matter how swoon-proof she is. Her atrophied Template is no guarantee of fidelity, but it is a guarantee of a weary, utilitarian outlook on life from whom getting genuine love would be like squeezing blood from a stone. A woman like that simply has fewer hurdles to jump before being comfortable enough to relinquish her hole for plundering.

Conversely, a woman who has only slept with indie band bass players wearing guyliner is no flight risk at all if you happen to possess the emo phenotype yourself. If you don’t, you still have rarity of number on your side. Keep her away from hipster nightclubs and you significantly reduce competition pressure. And you must have done something right to bed her if you didn’t meet her stringent Template. That alone should infuse you with unstoppable confidence. Some of the strongest relationships I’ve known were unintuitive pairings between Template centered women and men who didn’t match their Templates. That is because those men brought something new, and exciting, to the table, which emboldened their women to wriggle free of the straitjacket of their templates.





Comments


  1. First

    Like


  2. that reminds me of the post of the sms by a girl

    ” talking to him is better than sleeping with my bf…imagine sleeping with him!”

    Liked by 1 person


  3. I’ve actually noticed this phenomenon in a few of the girls I’ve dated. I’ve dated a rancher’s daughter(cowgirl), while I am definitely not a cowboy. The current girl proclaims to only like beefy, dark skinned men (black, mexican, dark skinned asian) and I’m a 5’11” muscular white male.

    Like


  4. I’ve often noted that when a girl has a “type”, they’re the ones who will more often than not go after me or someone else who, if not the polar opposite, then someone who definitely does not fit the mold of their preferred type. I often like to refer to myself as the exception to the rule in the face of these professed “requirements”. It’s always a great feeling too when I catch them staring at me and ask why and they respond with “I still think it’s just so crazy that we’re dating, you’re not even my type!.” The smirk that brings is one of the satisfaction that can only come from knowing a girl is magnetically drawn to you.

    Like


  5. Fascinating. This makes me contemplate why when certain younger girls see me, the seem enamored. I always attributed this to immaturity, but maybe its matter of seeing a potential template, still thought obtainable.

    Like


  6. This article is absolute gold.

    Like


  7. my ‘alpha’ personalities, are being built mentally to perfection its possible to cover a large amount of parameters for many women’s templates. Its rare but true.

    Like


  8. Women whose sexual histories betray a “type” have tended to be the pursuers in their past, chasing after men who fit their profile. Women who pursue are higher-T and more promiscuous.

    Case study comparison: Bass-player hunting local music scene groupie slut, Vs. wallflower who dates whichever attractive man approaches them or winds up in their social circle.

    Right answer, wrong reasons.

    Cheers,

    Zdeno

    Like


  9. Curious. how do you play this “not her type” hand of cards? How do you communicate that you are a breath of fresh air to the girl invested in a straight jacket of bullshit criteria that you at least on the surface do not match?

    I’m sure having ‘tight game’ and a strong frame is the short answer, but what are the dynamics at play? what goes on in her head when she goes for someone not her “type?”

    Like


  10. […] a beautiful, scary thing to behold… December 16, 2010 Leave a comment Go to comments What this reader is hinting about is known as The Template, (or, in more poetic language, the Ideal Lover). Every person, man and woman, has a template etched […]

    Like


  11. @Ben Runkle

    What’s this “first” horseshit? Is this some new negative game you’re working on? What the fuck kind of a male types “first” to show everyone that he can post a content-free post while the other guys are out on dates?

    What the fuck.

    Like


  12. Beg to disagree with the reader. If a girl finds one eligible suitor a day, and some other girl whose attractiveness is not too much below the former’s finds 10, the mere fact that the second girl finds 10 guys eligible makes several of those eligible to the first girl

    Illogical as they are, girls do operate according to some sort of supply-and-demand law

    PS: you know how much the quality of comments have fallen by the omnipresence of the “first” comments in any post. As beta as commenting “first”is, you can do even worse, you can post “first” and discover that someone else posted before you. That’s ome.ganess by definition

    Like


  13. Thirteenth!!

    Like


  14. It seems a bit strange to talk about the fidelity of professed sluts. By definition a slut is not one to hold to a monogamous relationship for the long term correct? If she were would she be a slut? Any woman who is willing to spread her legs at random, be it for the alpha cock or for whats available is demonstrating in her proof positive actions that she is unwilling to be faithful in the long term. So if you’re looking for a faithful long term mate, why would you look to a slut?

    Like


  15. This is why the concept of a woman “rejecting” a man is:

    – context driven ,
    – reliant on the receptability of her vag’s tingle receptors,
    – depends on the spin cycle of her hampster,
    – subject to the fluid whims of her hormones
    – dependant on the varying strength of her entitlement level.

    and why you should not invest emotionally in a woman until she has earnt it.

    Like


  16. on December 16, 2010 at 7:17 pm French Connection

    Your most eloquent work in a while, your thesaurus must be screaming for mercy on its spine.

    The ‘template’ a girl actively goes after is more often a reflection of how she wants to be perceived or who she wants to be (rock chick, prom queen, whatever), rather than a reflection of who she really is. Similar deal as in your previous post about girl’s standards crumbling when given the right incentives.

    The bottom line remains that the more alpha the man is, the more he appeals to women across the board.

    The template, however, plays a larger role in what kind of relationship the girl sees herself in. While the bad boy biker type and the charming, handsome doctor might be equally alpha in their own environments, its not hard to see who the girls picks when she’s looking for a hot fling, or a serious LTR.

    Undoubtedly the template changes depending on what stage of her life the girl is in. The lust for the alpha does not.

    Like


  17. The Template is indeed powerful. It can come from other sources than a deep genetic yearning, though. At least for males. Often a super-hot, young girlfriend like a high school love or that one amazing college girlfriend, can set the template pretty firmly.

    My people are tall and nordic; I have three pretty, tall, nordic-looking sisters, and my mother back in her day fit that template (before she had four kids and got old). You’d think that would be my Template.

    But my two hottest long-term girlfriends were both half-asian girls in their early twenties, and that’s where I had the most intense sex of my life (excluding a few one-off hotties here or there). I didn’t have an “asian thing” in high school, but I do now. So I’m disproportionately drawn to girls who fit that Template, and regularly find that I rate girls who fit that description to be a full point higher in hotness than my friends would rate them. I also notice that I rate big-breasted blonde hotties slightly lower, on average, than my friends do.

    Hot is hot — I appreciate Roissy’s noble work in proving that truth in his girl-ranking experiments on this blog. But there’s always wiggle-room for one’s personal predilections.

    Like


  18. Thank god I’m almost every woman’s template besides dykes. That’s what we call uber-template.

    Like


  19. @Mr. C

    “and why you should not invest emotionally in a woman until she has earnt it.”

    The other term I hear often from girls is “I’m picky….” To me this sounds like a shit-test.

    I usually respond with “I”m VERY picky…” and leave it there.

    That usually is enough to flip the dynamic so that suddenly she’s not constantly shit-testing me.

    Also, it gives me a good excuse to bail quickly if somehow I’m not making any progress, my game’s not tight or otherwise she may be distancing herself from me.

    It’s the perfect out to say “myeh, you weren’t for me….”

    Like


  20. Sometimes you can have a long meaningful realtionship with a girl who has a type and you don’t fit it – but things have to be right, you have to be alpha and always hold the cards, and she has to veiw herself with a self-conciousness that sparks her “he wouldn’t be into me” rationalization. This of course is no gaurantee that she won’t spread her legs for the template, he would of course just have to say hi. But if you are playing it right in the relationship she won’t initiate, so it is primarily the Templates desires that will dictate her laying on her back and taking it. So if you are in this type of relationship, hope there’s hotter girls around the template when your girl meets him.

    the other option is this: When a girl gives a template to you and you don’t fit it, but you’re banging her, she’s basically telling you it isn’t gonna last and you are free to treat her like a slut in bed. No qualms about dumping her before she dumps you – pump her as much as you can and GTFOT. Nothing like knowing there’s no risk of breaking a heart. It’s like a Vegas Strip club with out paying.

    Like


  21. Unrelated question: There’s a lot of advice here to avoid “leaning in” to women. I find myself doing this a lot when I meet people because my hearing isn’t what it used to be, so I automatically lean in to hear them. I particularly notice it when I first meet someone and they tell me their name. Out of habit, I’ll lean in and repeat their name to make sure I have it right. Ugh, right?

    So I can’t be the only guy around here whose years of rock star mayhem (alright, bad genetics) has them struggling to catch names, especially in louder venues. Any thoughts on how to get around this or turn it into a positive?

    I’m thinking it would probably be better to just not worry about it if I don’t catch a name, call the girl whatever I think she said, and accuse her of stuttering if I get it wrong.

    Like


  22. Discussion of template concept is gold.

    That said, a girl who’s spread for a few guys is inherently a flight risk. The closer to virginity the better

    Like


  23. on December 16, 2010 at 9:17 pm Good Luck Chuck

    American chicks probably cheat in 70%+ of committed relationships.

    Married chicks? I would guess at least 50-60%.

    If you count drunken makeouts with coworkers in the bathroom at the Christmas party add another 10% to the committed womens number and another 5% to married womens number. If you count the “emotional affair” she had with her other coworker, add another 15% to the committed chicks and another 10% to the married chicks.

    Society no longer keeps women in check and they are pretty much free to follow their impulses, so count on being cheated on if you are with a woman for any length of time.

    If you want loyalty get a dog or move to a country where women appreciate men.

    Like


  24. Balzac , that’s why “club game” tends to be the younger man’s game.

    Unfortunately , nearly all of the big bars that attract women 28+ in my city are still dance club loud and a real fucking pain when it comes to talking to women without having to shout to talk and lean in to listen.

    You can get around this to an extent by getting in closer.
    Don’t stand opposite her ; instead side up to her and have your shoulder just behind hers .

    Like


  25. ” A romantically idealistic woman fully under the sway of her Template is a woman with dating hand, because very few men will be able to satisfy her prerequisites for love. ”

    Wow…this sentence sums up why for so long and having been in the presence of A LOT of men (hanging around my brothers and their MANY friends and friends) I have never been swayed by anyone. Finally, now, I truly think I have found my unconscious template. I believe we might not all be aware of our template. The mere fact that no one has ever tingled me like this guy says plenty that I was under the influence of my internal, unconscious template. Amazing! Everyone in my family said….”finally”… that I am actually interested in someone. I have dated few and briefly, and it was so easy for me to end those relationships, cause I believe they were not my template. I felt very little for them. The connection, the pull was not there, but with this guy…I feel totally different. scary different, but wonderful at the same time. My heart is singing! lalala!! hehe!

    Like


  26. Be a douchebag!

    Like


  27. “Penii”. Lol

    Like


  28. sometimes over-analysis becomes mental masturbation where the cognitive narcissist whacks off to his bizarre conclusions so counter-intuitive that only his genius can grasp it and a cadre of “equals”.

    No, it is really simple. A six foot ivy grad model who reads ayn rand (and I’ve known one) can only date very tall, very handome and very brilliant men who act like howard roark. this means if you are a tall brilliant guy who can do a howard roark impression, she will love you (and no other unless she has *some* social network). if 99.99% of men are ruled out by your woman, you’ve effectively got a chastity belt on her. This post is wrong.

    Like


  29. on December 16, 2010 at 10:44 pm The Man Who Was . . .

    A romantically idealistic woman fully under the sway of her Template is a woman with dating hand, because very few men will be able to satisfy her prerequisites for love.

    The Template is another bane of dating in religious circles, which are full of idealistic women. Particularly if you don’t fit the typical church girl’s Template. I like to call that particular template George Clooney Jesus, with a stable middle class income and no more than a 5 year age difference. And it is very true about Jedi level game not being able to dislodge such woman from their template. You’ll go on a date with this girl, she’ll be giving you IOIs like crazy, she looks absolutely besotted with you. Then you call her and she tells you she doesn’t see a future together.

    On the other hand, I’ve found sluts to be rather indiscriminating. Have you ever gone out with girl, like some hot 18 year old club rat with an IQ in the 90s or lower and started wondering what the hell she could possibly see in you? (Note that this is not the same thing as doubting your overall attractiveness.) Since objectively you have nothing in common, the only possible answer is pure game. In my opinion, while sluts are picky, they tend to be picky in a pretty indiscriminate way. Any alpha will do.

    Like


  30. All of ’em eventually. In the meantime, you’ll need this…

    Like


  31. From the latest twitter link on this blog http://ow.ly/3qwcA :

    In the light of the recent debates on gender and science, this experiment may even throw a new twist into the mix. To what extent has women’s historical role as nurturers and carers been not just a cause of their lower social status relative to men, but also a consequence of it? If so, might some loss of female empathy be a price that has to be paid for social equality?

    Which reinforces my often stated strategy of keeping a woman economically down. Keeping her reliant on you for her physical well being, with no safety net.

    Equality really will kill a girls doting attitude, and the reverse is true. She will genuinely love you more if you can keep her down.

    Like


  32. on December 16, 2010 at 11:45 pm The Man Who Was . . .

    Totally off topic, but since a bunch of Austrian/gold bug types seem to hang out here, I though I’d toss this out as provocation:

    And maybe that’s just as well. Maybe it’s true that markets hum along smoothly only with relatively active government intervention and it’s also true that relatively active government intervention is eventually inevitably co-opted, exacerbating rather than mitigating capitalism’s injustices. [Emphasis mine.] Perhaps the best we can hope ever to achieve is a fleeting state of grace when fundamentally unstable forces are temporarily held in balance by an evanescent combination of complementary cultural currents. This is increasingly my fear: that there is no principled alternative to muddling through; that every ideologue’s op-ed is wrong, except the ones serendipitously right. But muddle we must.

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/12/rigged_revolving_door

    Wilkinson has been rightly excoriated here for his equalist inanities when it comes to things like relations between the sexes, but this reminds us that he does actually have an interesting and sometimes very perceptive mind. Even when wrong, he’s the kind of guy fully worthy of beating up on.

    Like


  33. Man Who Was–
    And it is very true about Jedi level game not being able to dislodge such woman from their template. You’ll go on a date with this girl, she’ll be giving you IOIs like crazy, she looks absolutely besotted with you. Then you call her and she tells you she doesn’t see a future together.

    Well……shouldn’t it make you happy that this girl is dismissing her hamster and sticking to her ideals so she will not be ruined by the company of too many men before settling down with Mr. Churchly Do-Right? Just because you’re attracted to somebody and enjoy his company doesn’t mean that he is someone you could spend the rest of your life with.

    Like


  34. penii? you made this one up

    Like


  35. on December 17, 2010 at 12:57 am The Man Who Was . . .

    Well……shouldn’t it make you happy that this girl is dismissing her hamster and sticking to her ideals so she will not be ruined by the company of too many men before settling down with Mr. Churchly Do-Right

    Nobody is asking them to lower the moral and religious standards they have for a mate. Just stop flippantly rejecting guys who meet your moral and religious standards and whom you obviously find attractive.

    Anyway, these same girls at 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 on eharmony seem very much willing to abandon those non-moral, non-religious standards. But the saying “if the kitten didn’t want me, why would I want the cat?” still applies to a certain degree even to good church girls, even to women who have kept themselves totally pure.

    There have been girls who have rejected me for religious reasons (I’m thinking of two particular girls who I dated for a few months each, one a borderline 7 with whom I had mindblowing chemistry with, and the other a 8.5 whom I had excellent chemistry with) who I actually do respect for not compromising their principles. I disagree with their reasons, but respect them. It is rather some of the mindless frivolity that I see out there.

    I’ll give you an example, not from my own life. One of my best friends married a girl from a European country who he met in Canada. They are now incredibly happy. However, there was a point several months into the relationship at which she was on the verge of breaking up with him, but he happened appear as a musician in a little public performance being put on. That alone wouldn’t have saved him, but that night another woman happened to start talking to my friend’s future wife, making remarks about how sexy and amazing and talented my friend was. Now this girl is an amazing and loyal and wonderful person, who ended up basically moving from basement to basement and couch to couch for months so she could stay in the same city as my friend, once her work visa ran out. So she has demonstrated some serious commitment to the relationship. That even such a high quality woman, a cute virgin in her early 30s, was going to break up with a great guy, a guy she is very happily married to, on such a frivolous basis shows how silly even the best of women frequently are when making dating and marriage decisions.

    Like


  36. Man Who Was–
    Just stop flippantly rejecting guys who meet your moral and religious standards and whom you obviously find attractive.

    How do you know it’s a flippant dismissal? What if a guy is great, but he chews with his mouth open and holds his utensils like a little boy, shoveling food into his mouth? The girl is going to sit there asking herself, “I like him, but do I want to spend the rest of my life with a man who chews with his mouth open and eats like he’s six? Can I live with this issue bothering me day after day? Will I be a nag if I ask him to change? If I hate this now, can I possibly hate it less in the future?” Maybe something like that is trivial to a man, but it is not trivial to a woman.

    I don’t think men realize that they can do things that have nothing to do with their moral or masculine character that seriously cripple a woman’s ability to admire them and therefore grow in attraction to them.

    Like


  37. good insights as always, and yes I remember this happening in HS to me I was a template I think, didnt finish well due to my stupidity though.

    good words of wisdom overall

    Like


  38. Ah, the “Template”. I have probably only seen (in real life) less than 10 women who fit that template perfectly.
    It is a beautiful thing and a scary one too, the reality being that your game would suffer dearly if you tried to seduce the template.

    To be honest this is one of the fundamental reasons I ever got interested in “game”; so that when I see that template I can move in and seduce her to the maximum of my capacity. A man with no game has no chance when he sees, much less tries to seduce THAT woman.

    Like


  39. “That even such a high quality woman, a cute virgin in her early 30s, was going to break up with a great guy, a guy she is very happily married to, on such a frivolous basis shows how silly even the best of women frequently are when making dating and marriage decisions.”

    Very true and I have seen this in my own life many times over. Even the “good” ones require game and for the man to maintain control of his emotional state. This is doubly true if the man falls in love with a “good” one. Always retain hand; always. Even in the midst of a poetic flight of a deep and abiding love, know that you are still dealing with a woman.

    Like


  40. on December 17, 2010 at 2:39 am The Man Who Was . . .

    Even in the midst of a poetic flight of a deep and abiding love, know that you are still dealing with a woman.

    Beautiful, and true.

    Like


  41. A major soccer players in england hang himself because of his fiancee’s infidelity.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1338852/Rushden-Diamonds-goalkeeper-Dale-Roberts-hung-fiances-affair.html

    His teammate banged his wife right in their home….

    Like


  42. on December 17, 2010 at 8:39 am Vincent Ignatius

    taxonomy of penii

    Sounds like a post for poetryofflesh.

    Like


  43. BOTY form England:

    http://www.whatsonxiamen.com/news16381.html

    A young goalkeeper hanged himself after his fiancée left him for his team mate – who is John Terry’s older brother.

    Dale Roberts, 24, killed himself after his 25-year-old partner Lindsay Cowen had an affair with his Rushden and Diamonds team mate Paul Terry.

    Like


  44. you can see the alpha body language of the TERRYs

    Like


  45. Ben Runkle: drop that girl fast, man.

    Unless she is black, a girl who openly wants black men is 99.9% of the time a massive whore.

    Girls who’ve had a preference for mexicans/asians and aren’t black are usually “experimenting,” but they usually come out of it.

    Girls who prefer men not of their race are girls with massive daddy issues.

    But non-black girls who prefer or express interest in blacks are the biggest whores on the planet. See Kim Kardashian.

    If she’s not already cheating on you, she will be shortly. NO pimp hand can stop a ghetto whore.

    Like


  46. @DJDamage

    Nice YouTube post. Pictures say a THOUSAND words, now don’t they?

    I see the point with “the Template,” but it’s just too rare a phenomenon IMO.

    Women gab incessantly about finding “the one,” but that has NOTHING to do with any sort of “Template,” 999/1000 times.

    It has MUCH more to do with making her girlfriends jealous.
    Look at meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!! It’s all about meeeeeeeeeeeee!!!

    Look, my boyfriend, groom-sucker-to-be, has money and he’s tall! He’s SOOOOOOOOOOOO tall!!

    Like


  47. Interesting theory, particularly when considered in the context of how women will literally spend lifetimes trying to “fix” their men to match their Template profile.

    Anytime I hear a man comment on how he’s “working on the relationship”, or a woman tell me “good relationships take a lot of work” I know exactly what I’m dealing with. Universally it means she’s perpetually trying to file off the corners of a square peg to fit in her round hole, and the guy has internalized that his persona is truly and fundamentally flawed in relation to her Template. This is the ultimate in frame control for a woman – to keep a guy willingly chasing his tail trying to embody her ideal.

    Like


  48. I don’t think men realize that they can do things that have nothing to do with their moral or masculine character that seriously cripple a woman’s ability to admire them and therefore grow in attraction to them.

    Perhaps, but adhering to conviction and principle is to religious girls what an LJBF rejection is for secular girls – an easy out.

    Like


  49. Damn it, man, but you can write some words!

    Like


  50. Oh, sorry. I wasn’t commenting on the comments or anything. I was just commenting on the sheer use of words of the original post.

    Blue88

    Like


  51. on December 17, 2010 at 12:18 pm Michael Gary Scott

    The field is like a jungle. And I am like a tiger. And a girl is like a monkey that stabs the tiger in the back with a stick. Does the tiger fire the monkey? Does the tiger transfer the monkey to another branch? Pun. There is no way of knowing what goes on inside the tiger’s head. We don’t have the technology.

    Like


  52. I really don’t “get” the template idea very much.

    Women NEVER know what they want, at ANY point in their lives.

    Girlfriend? You need game.
    Wife? You need game.
    Any woman anywhere? You need game.

    The fact is, I don’t care WTF her template is. The fact remains I need game to deal with the bullshit of her thinking she has a template, when in fact, she doesn’t know what the fuck she wants.

    Period.

    Like


  53. > How do you know it’s a flippant dismissal? What if a guy is great, but he chews with his mouth open and holds his utensils like a little boy, shoveling food into his mouth? The girl is going to sit there asking herself, “I like him, but do I want to spend the rest of my life with a man who chews with his mouth open and eats like he’s six? Can I live with this issue bothering me day after day?

    My experience is that this comes after the fact. Women tend to not break up due to this behavior but rather decide to break up, then look for habits to justify it.

    Like


  54. margaret

    penii? you made this one up

    actually I did, but thanks

    Like


  55. Anonymous

    All of ‘em eventually. In the meantime, you’ll need this…

    re “The Manslator”

    How incredible it is that “pros” like Saturday Night Live sacrifice their comedic presentations to be scooped by amateurs on Youtube with such an obvious riff on bitchspeak.

    PC, thy name is Network TV

    Like


  56. Like those of us with any intelligence, women have to predict the future. The “template” is an attempt to imagine what a good, matching partner would be like.

    If she spends too much mental effort on this she can get obsessive/compulsive, thinking she knows more than she does, or “knows” the wrong things like “Yea! A drummer with lots of tats! We’ll be happy every-after!”

    She can’t very well start relationships with every kind of guy to sort out what really works from what doesn’t. Some do try though.

    It is real world experience that will educate her as will a good upbringing with a strong father. Her success in learning quickly and without too much cost has survival value.

    Some of you dumb butts will have to admit that you porking a girl is not necessarily the best thing for the girl.

    So it is generally to the good that she has a loose template starting out but much more important that she knows herself and faces reality about men.

    Yes she will cheat on you if you’re not a good man for her and to her. Be dominant and the family leader so that she is part of something (the family) bigger than herself but that works in her long-term interest and she’ll make a good wife.

    Like


  57. I can’t speak for all women, but for me the template is not conscious, not like a list of any sorts. It’s more a feeling; a sense; the way I feel and am drawn to the guy. I wasn’t aware of the feelings until I met the guy. The template is not conscious at least not for me. I don’t think game can work when the template is strong, cause I am pretty sure I have been gamed before but it never worked until I met this guy. I can’t even say he used game techniques on me, cause my template was in the driver’s seat. If you know what I mean.

    Like


  58. @vincent ignatius- poetry thinks she’s been banned from this board. shame, because she is smart, interesting, and usually leaves colorful, insightful, and funny comments.

    @rollo tomassi- good insight, and a much more common realization of the female template. she finds who she can and keeps trying to change! him into her ideal perfect man. this is the cause of much unnecessary unhappiness in relationships. p.s.- nice handle, from LA Confidential if I’m not mistaken. The guy who got away with it.

    Like


  59. maurice

    poetry thinks she’s been banned from this board. shame, because she is smart, interesting, and usually leaves colorful, insightful, and funny comments.

    I like her comments too. It’s pretty stupid a girl would be so coyly sensitive who treats her vulva like an airport terminal.

    Like


  60. @what

    Game can most definitely work when the template is strong.

    Chick after chick swears under oath that a particular guy is “THE ONE,” (i.e. perfect template match) only to “cash him out” and surprise-divorce him when he least expects it.

    The womyn do this even to rich, Hollywood guy players. Yeah, they got a “template” alright. For about 5-50 days, until they get another one.

    It’s all pretty much the “BBD” circuit implanted in the female brainstem, meaning this guy is “my template guy,” until the BIGGER, BETTER DEAL comes along.

    Then all bets are off.

    Yep, it’s promises, promises, promises, vows, vows, vows, and then after the wedding ceremony and a piece of that libido-annihilating wedding cake, and ALL BETS ARE OFF.

    Like


  61. Question: what should the value discrepancy be between you and the woman so that the chancer of her cheating are not very high? ie. you’re a 7, she’s a 5? I’m personally not willing to settle below a 7 for marriage, but I do find there is a noticeable minority of girls who are 5s/6s who I would serously consider wifey/gf material because they have some kind of look/charm that presses my buttons.

    Like


  62. sha-toe

    The good news is that The Template is very rarely fulfilled; out of 1,000 men a woman might meet over many years perhaps one or two of them will press all her buttons. So as a practical matter, The Template is no barricade to free and easy sex for a fly by night womanizer.

    I dunno chief. From my experience dating hot girls, the HOTTER the bim, the MORE cocks she meets. It takes a truly hot girl maybe 1.45 years to meet 1,000 penii if she’s a bar slut.

    If she’s Bar Rafeli hot, she can meet, assess then pass/fail 10,000+ cocks in her prime cock-luring years.

    Even a adequately hot girl in a major city racks up a lot of face time with dick if she chooses; she WILL choose to because it’s her neverending happysexy princess party of validation, free drinks, dinners and attention.

    A statistician like yourself realizes the more opportunity, the more probability of her rubbing up against not one, but many Mr. Templates.

    Like


  63. @Duxbury

    “99.99% of men are ruled out by said woman.”

    But isn’t 99.99% of around 3 Billion over 30 Million?
    And with all that very tall & very handsome & very brilliant stuff you ain’t talking template, you are talking fetish.

    Even still is it really all that difficult to google some slut “size” queen being gang banged by a bunch of 10 inch dicks.

    A picky slut may be better than a less picky slut, but a slut is still a slut.

    Like


  64. The existence of the “template” means women actually are doing what’s best for them when they fear commitment and oppose mandatory paternity testing.

    The truth hurts.

    Now, what is the male response? The easiest is don’t get married and roll with the punches when Mr Template is Facebooking or Twittering your girlfriend. If you act aloof and indifferent to your girlfriend, then you won’t lose face if the relationship ends.

    The hard part is what do you do if you want legitimate kids, what we used to call a family? Its possible women only “settle” for betas when their template is no longer interested in them but if you want kids, you want a wife below age 30, a woman still attractive to her template.

    You can roll the dice and marry a woman openly interested in another type of guy, risking divorce and cuckolding, or put strain on society and have kids outside of wedlock.

    Seven out.

    Obviously you can focus on girls that say you are the template, but how do you know if she’s telling the truth?

    Like


  65. @Josh

    The value discrepancy should be your game and not your looks. If you are a 7 and she is a 5, you will cheat, eventually.

    If you are a 7, you should shoot for a woman who is higher than you looks-wise but is lower than you in sexual experience, and is lower than you in economic status. I am starting to agree w xsplat on this one.

    Also, you should be higher than her when it comes to social status. You should have more friends, a more ‘dynamic’ life so to speak. Something that she can look ‘up to’.

    Like


  66. @OhioStater.

    My personal advice… don’t ever get serious about a girl who did not go grow up going to church almost every Sunday as Hellfire is about the only modern social control left that keeps women from being whores.

    Like


  67. @EVIL ALPHA

    99.99% OF 3 BILLION = 2999700000

    WHICH LEAVES 300,000 not 30 million remaining.

    But your points are good.

    Like


  68. “A woman like that simply has fewer hurdles to jump before being comfortable enough to relinquish her hole for plundering.”

    Hahahaha, love it.

    On topic, the last girl I’ve been with has a preference for skinny hipsters. I’m the polar opposite: thick-set, fairly jacked, non-hipster in every way.

    At a bar, where I met her, I was with my friend – a skinny hipster. She told me (and I’ve gotta respect her honesty) that she had zero interest in me and was really interested in my friend.

    That is, of course, until I opened my mouth.
    That’s the power of “game”. My skinny emo friend has ok “game”; I’ve got it much, much better. I ended up banging her a few hours later.

    About 8 months later, the girl is still nuts for me – I stroked more than her clit. Seducer’s paradox: I don’t really give a shit about her

    Like


  69. And I agree with the “hellfire” comment, too.

    The “last” of the good women who actually believe (or were at least taught) about Hell, are probably about 28-30 years old right now. (meaning they were eighteen in the year 2000 i.e. before the Internet and electronic life took off.)

    After that, you can forget it. The electronic, “digital” internet women since then are putting up strip videos on Youtube.

    Not wifey material, I’d say.

    Like


  70. I haven’t gone into my own personal struggle to develop better game on this blog yet, but the the men commenting on the Churchy George Clooney Jesus template thing has stirred me to discuss it and see what the folks here have to say.

    Let’s start with an honest statement of the main factors (as I perceive it):
    I am a mid-thirties White male, standing 5’9″, slender to average build, tend to be more ‘dressed up’ in public then the average guys, work in a low-wage service job with lots of contact with the public. Most people here would assume that I am an atheist, since I am not a Christian or positive about Christianity by any stretch of the imagination, nor am I a Jew ( I actually suspect that being Jewish in this heavily religious area would be considered a huge DHV in most quarters). I was a military brat who moved around growing up, so although I did live in the Tidewater area of Virginia (what a fucking Negritude ghetto hellhole) I never acquired any of the characteristics most commonly associated with a “Southron”…and around my parts today, a lot of these folks have coming from the Southern USA.
    The other major grouping of White people in my current area are of Nordic descent— who tend to be muthafucking TALL, and who simply L-O-V-E non-Whites as if they were dropped off into my area by Jesus himself.
    Can you already tell that I feel totally out of place in this location yet? I’m a East Coast Yankee “atheist” White man of average height and build, stuck in the midst of rednecks, Jesus Crispies, and Amazonian-tall Nordic mudshark central. If not for my racialism, you’d probably think I would fit in perfectly within a East Coast or even West Coast college community—and it would be true that for the vast majority of my adulthood, the type of friends I had and the types of women I dated would be the kind of folks that you’d immediately suspect of being eccentric middle-class Leftists. Sorry folks, but that was the kind of crowd that I flowed well within. Meanwhile, the people who tend to hold similar views to my own about race tend to be very unlike me in personality, interests, aesthetics and “values”. I’m just not that into them, and they tend not to be that into me.

    My “template” is a young slender raven-haired stylish Goth chick with artistic interests, who loves to go out and party regularly AND is a great conversationalist, who is sexually uninhibited (sorry folks, but I honestly love filthy sluts), and whose moral/religious/political ideas (if publicly revealed) would probably get her burned at the stake for being “in league with the Devil” anywhere in the world in 2010! That’s my kinda girl! I had this kind of women before (on the East Coast and in Germany) and I LOVED IT, but I haven’t detected the slightest hint of any chick that even comes close to getting my motor running in similar manner here in the MidWest. So I find myself not particularly turned on by most of the women here, and thus put little effort into pursuing and gaming them. I realize that I am rarely turned on by a woman’s physique ALONE (she has to be incredibly hot for me to be turned on if we have virtually nothing else substantial in common).

    Am I wasting my time here in the Midwest with these people? The half-way good-looking chicks out here tend to be “George Cloony Jesus” types as described earlier here by other commentators. The rest seem to be mudsharks—they’re more interested in hooking up with any “exotic” colored person they can find. The vast majority of the feather-type Injuns in this area are hooked up with White girlfriends/wives, and I could say the same holds true for the increasing number of Blacks in the area. Am I outta place or what?! This may seem strange and even a bit counter intuitive, but I have noticed that there seems to be more implicit racial loyalty and race-consciousness amongst Whites in places where there are FEWER Whites compared to non-Whites. When I lived on the East Coast in ‘diverse’ urban areas, rarely did you see the level of non-White worship on the part of so many White women as you’d find now in any significant town or city in the Upper Midwest. If anything, you’d more likely see White men messing around with Juanita or Suzy Chopsticks in the major metro areas of the East Coast, and only the ne’er-do-well warpig White chicks would be caught messing with ghetto Negroes. But here in the MidWest Bible Belt, you will often see decent looking White women pushing strollers with halfbreed Obamanations-to-be, and you’ll see all sorts of goodie-two-shoes Churchy White people glow like they were having an orgasm about how “cute” those coffee-colored mixed-breed larvae are. Seriously, here, I have had several occasions where I started talking to a pretty young White chick here, then she told me she has a kid, then I asked for a picture and was shown one…guess what I saw in those pictures EVERY GODDAMN TIME?! You’d think that they were offered millions of dollars to breed mixed kids or something, it happened so much!

    Now, I’m sure you are saying that all the White chicks in my area can’t be mudsharks, right? Of course you are right. But the ones who don’t prefer the dark meat prefer (drum roll please)…a wealthier, taller, more “Christian”, more “mainstream”-oriented and/or more “Southern” redneck kind of guy. I have none of the things or qualities they value so highly, and frankly I’m just not very interested in the kinds of women who do highly value that stuff.

    This really has me thinking that I might be in the wrong place amongst the wrong people, wasting my life in a place that I will not find as opportune or interesting as the places and people I once fielded myself among. Situationally in this location, I am “out of their league” or “not their type’. Is it true or untrue that someone who could be a great successful alpha man enjoying life and women in some areas and amongst certain sets of women may have jack-shit going for him in other areas and amongst other sets of women? I guess what I am trying to get at here is that it may be that hardly any man is a big successful alpha player everywhere and amongst all women. In fact, even those few universal alpha players may not want to play in certain places and amongst certain sets of women…perhaps he’s just not that into them and thus he doesn’t care to put on a sham show for them in order to get the pussy.

    If I know that “my sorta women” and “my sorta crowd” live elsewhere, where my own personal characteristics and interests are valued much more then here, should I be truer to myself and just move? Should I just admit to myself that while the area I live in is still heavily White, their ‘White’ and my “White” just doesn’t have enough in common to make it worth the trade-off? I suppose it is similar to the difference ,say, between an Englishman and and Italian and a Russian. Sure, all are White, but there are still massive and important differences that distinguish them, and the Italian or Russian is never going to completely fit or be entirely at home in an place that is 100% English. These people here in the MidWest are mostly Whites, but I have so little in common with them that I feel like a foreigner here. Apparently I’m not the right color to be one of those foreigners so adored by the women here, and I have far too much pride and far too little interest to paint my dick black or to pretend to be a Jesus Crispy just to please these women. Like that Italian or the Russian would feel if they were stuck in England, I still want to be who I actually am and don’t want to pretend to be anything else, and I want to be around people who are more like me and who are interested in the sort of things I am. For chrissakes, I want to be around and engaging the sort of women who really turn me on, where the squeeze really is worth the juice to me, and where my natural and developed personal attributes give my more opportunity and more options! I feel like I am dying of drought, my social life and my mind is suffering from famine, and I’m just getting older and more bitter out here.
    What stings the most is that my life was so different and so much happier before. I had my scene, I found folks with similar interests and personalities and aesthetics, I had decent regular success with the kind of women I am actually into. In fact, if I’d just stayed the fuck outta political shit and white-knighting causes (god knows how many times I have stupidly burned MYSELF on such things and should’ve known better), and if the economy hadn’t gone so far into the shitter, I’d probably still be out there living and loving life like I used to.

    I’m studying up on Game, and to me it is the inner game stuff that is the most interesting and challenging at this point. I am not Nick Strauss, I am not Mystery, I am not any one else but me…and I wouldn’t really want to be anyone else but ME at my maximum potential.
    Nick’s “Rules of the Game” challenging and practical book is excellent. The part where he challenges the readers to develop their own interesting narrative “story” really got to me. Not because I have trouble telling that interesting personal story…but because I realized that it would be highly interesting only in certain places and only conducive to attraction amongst certain women (who it seems do not live in any significant numbers in my current locale). I know for a fact that some cosmopolitan college-aged hot Goth chicks in NYC or Washington DC would be eating up my story like a fine delicacy, and we would click seamlessly. I know that I’d be valued even higher and score even better in certain parts of Europe, especially amongst some college-aged Gothic chicks. As I said before, this means that I can do well within my own ‘template’ types of women, but not nearly so well universally. Am I fucking crazy not to go chasing my “template” with a type of Game and characteristics that my “template” type highly values and that come quite natural to me? Perhaps I am too picky and overspecialized…but that is who I am, and Nick’s “story” challenge has provoked me to finally just fucking admit it to myself that I’m not a universal alpha. I can’t attract “every women” and I really don’t want to. I can’t be the life of the party at every type of party…and I really don’t want to be. I’m out of place in a sports-bar or amongst sports spectators, a redneck bar, a hip-hop club, country-music honky-tonk, a church, or a snobby prudish reserved country club setting, and just about anywhere else you can think of where lots of old White people or whole families tend to go.
    Well well well…you may have noticed that this means that almost all the types of places and crowds that typical right-wingers feel quite at home with are just not “my thing”.
    It has continuously plagued me that the folks who seem to have more in common with me about racial issues have virtually nothing in common with me on other important interests of mine, and outside of racial stuff they travel in circles that are utterly alien to me, where I am usually “low on the totem pole” and where even if I did suck it up and applied excellent outer Game there, I would be a miserable total-fraud and disgusted with my “fake-it-to-get-along-and-fit-in” beta behavior. Isn’t it beta to be untrue to oneself and make oneself miserable by “settling” for the sake of fitting in and getting along with others?
    To me, trying to Game in one of the places and crowds that I don’t truly click well with is basically like ‘settling’ for some fattie warpig because “at least she is White and has a pussy and is available”.

    I hope you get the gist of what I am rambling on about here. It must seem like a ramble because it reflects the inner personal struggle and conflicting thoughts about my situation…I laid it out honestly without holding back intentionally, so I would have the greatest chance of getting honest useful feedback from the Chateau Roissy crowd.

    Fire away.

    Like


  71. @Josef Jonze:

    It’s kind of a zen thing, like much of game is. Usually, if I find out that they have a type, I realize I’m not that type and drop any kind of gaming at all. I go to put them in my female friend zone (Which is a powerful move in and of itself) and they see this and all the work gets done for me. I guess it would be what Roissy calls “Aloof, Disinterested game”. It’s much like setting an obvious trap for someone in a game of chess that they just fall into, and watching what happens.

    Like


  72. @Hux:

    You are absolutely correct, As a matter of fact, I was talking to someone last night about how most guys go wrong, and relationships sour because the guy stops gaming the girl once he gets her.

    Like


  73. @ Balzac:

    Have her repeat herself until you can hear it.Tell her you couldn’t hear what she was saying. Also, you can still lean in and maintain alpha frame. In my mind “Don’t Lean In” corresponds to: Don’t keep your shoulders forward, don’t continuously hang on every word she says, and don’t keep your attention on her. My favorite move to avoid leaning in is to have her in a position where she’s gaming me, I.E. leaning with m back against the bar, elbows propped lazily on the bar counter. I still run into the same problem, in a bar it’s loud and hard to hear, so I’ll just turn my ear towards her, and point to it, signaling I can’t hear what she’s saying. If that doesn’t work, then I get close to hear what she’s saying.

    Like


  74. Christ you sound like an awful twat.

    Like


  75. @B.

    “@Ben Runkle

    What’s this “first” horseshit? Is this some new negative game you’re working on? What the fuck kind of a male types “first” to show everyone that he can post a content-free post while the other guys are out on dates?

    What the fuck.”

    Getting mad at an anonymous stranger on the internet because he posted “First” on a comment? Your Beta’s showing 😉 Also, I posted that at 3 in the afternoon ( I know it says 5something, but I’m not in the D.C. timezone) when I woke up (Yay Christmas Break). If you’re out on dates at 3 in the afternoon, then you’re on a lunch date, which definitely equals friend zone, unless you’re running some new kind of game where you completely disqualify yourself, give the girl a chance to realize she has no attraction for you and LJBF you, which you then take years and much effort to get out of and show her how awesome you are, save the day, get the girl and then get cheated on.

    Also, I feel that you’re too focused on these “dates.” You should be going for the lay, not the date. the date is a means to an end. Additionally, the term “date” has officially been phased out in the 18- 25 year old range, and implies an event with a lot of pressure, and mentally prepares a woman to spend an evening judging and evaluating you instead of just hanging out and having a great time. Terms I use instead of “date” are: “Hang out”, “Chill”, “Let’s go get drinks tonight”, “what are you doing later? (Answer), well, come do (insert fun outing here) with me instead” and “Bring the Movies”.

    Like


  76. Alex, my advice to you, on all fronts:

    Lighten the fuck up, dude.

    Like


  77. @Alex

    Take your own advice. It’s all there. Move. Go out and seek happiness. Don’t sit there and bitch.

    That’s what women do. Come on, man. MOVE.

    Like


  78. @ HUX

    Yup. Of course. I just did that for effect, not accuracy. It’s rhetoric like the “hellfire” comment.

    The women I’m serious about don’t actually believe non virgins burn, but they do believe that being a slut is a ” really bad thing” as opposed to an unfair double standard that needs to be corrected by reeducation

    And when you get a chance this weekend a quick question about “digital”… do you actually welcome it?

    I find myself loving that whores can’t stay in the closet anymore. Karen Owens types and other damaged goods are easy to disregard for marriage and also easier to find when you wanna pump and dump. Overall I think “digital” has more benefits for me than not.

    I guess in a nutshell I’m asking do you think “digital” makes whores or reveals whores?

    Like


  79. @A. Nonny.mous

    She has daddy issues and is an emotional trainwreck like you wouldn’t believe, lol. Given the details she’s told me about her past and the fact that she’s currently married (separated) and seeing me, I have not illusions about the fact that this relationship’s not going to last long and that she would probably stray if I let my alpha slip even a little bit. That said though, this girl is fun to be with and has been instrumental in me learning and internalizing game and alpha traits since I discovered Roissy’s blog back in April.

    I’ve been able to witness social proof in action, modify my previously crappy body language, I’ve learned how to deal with hot girls in relationships (lots of ass smacks, cocky smirks and “Come here, Girl”, returning her texts/calls hours later, blatantly flirting with other girls right in front of her and then denying it), dealing with Amogs, (lol, a guy actually started gaming her right in front of me at the bar, so I asked her a question, got her attention and stood right between them, Amog walked off defeated). I even caught myself beta backsliding here at the end of the semester. When I was stressed with finals, instead of being supportive of my stress, she stared throwing out shit tests. I finally realized she was wanting me to game her, so in bed on night I ran some rapport game with her (What do you want out of life?)and she’s been happy as a clam ever since.

    Sorry, I started rambling there for a second. But I gues what I was saying is yes, you are completely right, I know this isn’t leading to marriage, but I’ll enjoy it for as long as it lasts. =)

    Like


  80. Alex,

    Yes, you could move or, better, you could change. The religous type will have it all over the emo chick or the sarcastic hipster in the long run. Don’t even get me started on hippie chicks! Conservatives do make better lovers.

    Next life, I’m either going to marry a Mormon or a Jewish accountant.

    Also, long, emotional, public tear-jerkerish postings are soooo beta.

    Like


  81. you’ll see all sorts of goodie-two-shoes Churchy White people glow like they were having an orgasm about how “cute” those coffee-colored mixed-breed larvae are.

    LOLZZZ! you’re a good writer Alex!

    … and ignore the internet tough guys calling you names. I understand you’re trying to figure stuff out; been there myself. Good luck man.

    Like


  82. I wrote about this a while back and it tracks to the Bell Curve Model I came up with. Basically for every George Costanza there’s a Marissa Tomei in waiting. On the other end of the curve are women that no matter what, you’re not going to fit that narrowly defined checklist they have in their head, so no matter your looks, game, etc you’re just not going to win with them. Most women fall somewhere in between and that’s where good game really makes a difference.

    Like


  83. HUX,

    Who knows what the future will hold. You’re right, we may never know. There could always be someone bigger, better deal, but I believe we all have choices… to follow our impulses or to be rational and not to forget and take people for granted. I could only speak for myself. I can only focus on MY own game and how I am to keep him interested and hope he will succeed to keep me as interested too. One piece of my template that I am certain and conscious of is I do admire a man who has good impulse control and that hopefully will add to the PROBABILITY that he will less likely act without thinking. Perhaps it is advisable to you guys to pick a girl who also has a good sense of impulse control so she will PROBABILITY wise fall less prey to the BIGGER, BETTER deal. I can only focus on what I can do about something and hope for the best. I can’t control everything, especially someone else.

    Like


  84. “Perhaps it is advisable to you guys to pick a girl who also has a good sense of impulse control so she will PROBABILITY wise fall less prey to the BIGGER, BETTER deal.”

    The problem with your logic is that you just described all women. They are biologically hardwired to ALWAYS be on the lookout for the bigger, better deal. It’s called hypergamy.

    Which is why game, negging, jealousy plotlines, DHV’s all attempt to check her hypergamic impulses.

    Like


  85. Alex, good post. Going through similar things myself. It’s like, WTF?

    Like


  86. @The Man Who Was… (Thursday)

    Thursday, I sent my contact info to Roissy. I live in your area and am targeting the same demographic you are. Please contact him so he can give you my info. I’d like to meet up, strategize, compare notes, etc.

    Like


  87. Julian,
    “The problem with your logic is that you just described all women. They are biologically hardwired to ALWAYS be on the lookout for the bigger, better deal. It’s called hypergamy.”

    If our thinking is rigid we may be setting ourselves up for “self fulfilling prophecies”…”All women; Always.” It’s sad when i read how negative you guys are and perhaps rightly so based on your experiences with women. But, be open, you might just meet a woman who is not what you presume. Could be a good thing. My attitude is always be open, flexible, curious and believe that my presumptions can at any moment be proven wrong.

    Using game as a way to identify who has a good sense of impulse control is great!

    Like


  88. @OhioStater

    Good post, how DO you tell? Kids are necessary, but without fathers around, they run wild. Not good for society.

    Ever hear the story about the 14 year olds drinking together in the boonies? One fell asleep, stone drunk. Two jerks masturbated his big dog, pulled down his pants, and let nature take its course. Blood everywhere from his bleeding rectum, and none of the 20 kids present were willing to tell the police who did it; the adults just thought the dog did it all by himself.

    Like


  89. If it swims, flies or fucks… lease, don’t buy. Promise her anything but get her Skittles.

    Like


  90. And, for you married dudes who drank the Kool-Aid, again…

    Womanspeak for Married Men:

    You’re “oblivious” = Can’t seek milk carton in the fridge.

    “Oh, it’s okay.” = You’ll pay… dearly.

    “Oblivious” (multiply) = She’s fucked another guy.

    “It was a mistake.” = Your best friend, anal creampie, in your bed, while she screamed “Yes! It’s your ass, yours!”

    “I’m not happy.” = Regularly fucking another guy.

    “I need space.” = Wants her own place (that you pay for) to openly fuck single/married men like she’s single.

    “I’m confused.” = Likes fucking that ceratin other guy (or more– Choo-choo!) while you support her.

    “I want a divorce.” = Wants to take all your money/kids to add to those of the hot unemployed guy she’s found.

    Like


  91. Anonymous44 said: “Ever hear the story about the 14 year olds drinking together in the boonies? One fell asleep, stone drunk. Two jerks masturbated his big dog, pulled down his pants, and let nature take its course. Blood everywhere from his bleeding rectum, and none of the 20 kids present were willing to tell the police who did it; the adults just thought the dog did it all by himself.”

    To quote Homer Simpson, seriously, “I believe that children are our future… unless we stop them now!” Without fathers, they’re a little f*ckin’ bunch of savages– ever read Lord of the Flies, anyone?

    Like


  92. “I may be drunk;, but in the morning I will be sober; and you will still be fat – and ugly.”
    Like a lot of the best quotes ever, this one was stolen outright from W.S. Churchill. And besides; it is all a joke idennit? That is, except for all of you fat and ugly fuckers.

    Like


  93. Alex,

    Good post

    Like


  94. Responses to multiple posters:

    @Evil Alpha

    The “digital age” has essentially ruined women completely. (Modernism and Feminism also decimated them pretty well before the arrival of the Internet, but the ‘Net has certainly accelerated things).

    What do I mean? Well, ALL women have that “hidden whore” inside them. The internet allows them to express it anonymously (so they think – heh,heh, google “Duke Karen Owens” ).

    So, the “Millenials” and “Generation Z” have done nothing except grow up with the Internet and social networking i.e. Facebook.

    This electronic exhibitionism both “reveals” and “makes” loose women. The question really is WHY do women text much more frequently than men, WHY do they use their cellphones soooo much more (permanently glued to the ear – invariably while driving a huge SUV), WHY do they live on Facebook, and WHY do they kill their babies for interrupting their Farmville game? (We all heard about that one.)

    Why? Because it’s “electronic whoredom.” Kupcake gets to be friends with EVERYONE, tease EVERYONE, provoke EVERYONE, and she can do so anonymously (haha) and from the safety of her home.

    The internet has thus effectively exposed a female mask of deception that has ALWAYS been there anyway.

    My bottom line is that the last potentially good, marriageable woman was probably born in 1982. Why? Because she spent the first 18 years of her life WITHOUT the Internet. She still developed somewhat organically. ANY woman born after 1982 has developed her hidden whoredom on electronic media and consequently is now RUINED as a potential marriage partner.

    Food for thought.

    @Ben Runkle

    You’re dead on, dude. Don’t even spend a moment thinking about her “template.” Just fine-tune your Alpha game. You will need it always, always, always with ANY women, at ANY point, in ANY relationship.

    The poster “what” is trying to claim that there are women out there with impulse-control who are less likely to cash you out for the BBD.

    She is clearly on crack. Ignore her comments because she has no mind. Only emotions. In fact, her whore-dom here (constantly seeking interaction with multiple guys is EXACTLY my point to Evil Alien above.) She’s a woman, and will actually hate your guts if you believe she’s intelligent and has something to say.

    That’s the way it is, and NO, I’m not sorry.

    Like


  95. Ghost-surfing strikes again!

    The comments above are from HUX.

    Hang tough, bros.

    Like


  96. Haha!

    “Evil Alien” sounds just as cool as “Evil Alpha”!

    I can just hear the chycks now. (Oooooohh! Something different! Something new! Something bright and shiny from China! Must buy! Must buy!)

    C’mon guys. With women, it’s ALL brainstem hard-circuit wiring. PERIOD.

    Like


  97. I have about ten to twenty top posts of yours and this one is vibrating against that list, trying to break in. So many damn truths! It’s your ususal topic– but refreshed, peered at through a different viewmaster, and inspired. Fantastic post. I hate that you’re evil, but you are a damn fine thinker.

    Like


  98. on December 18, 2010 at 12:30 pm Obstinance Works

    Just because you’re attracted to somebody and enjoy his company doesn’t mean that he is someone you could spend the rest of your life with.And why would an American woman have to? She can cheat on his sorry ass all she wants with no reprecussions. Just more proof that married men are FUCKED.

    Like


  99. on December 18, 2010 at 12:33 pm Obstinance Works

    anoukange pussy is wet

    Like


  100. on December 18, 2010 at 12:43 pm Obstinance Works

    Some of you dumb butts will have to admit that you porking a girl is not necessarily the best thing for the girl.

    So it is generally to the good that she has a loose template starting out but much more important that she knows herself and faces reality about men.

    She’ll know herself better the more men she fucks is pretty much what you have said.

    Like


  101. Alex:

    I sympathize with your struggle.
    My advice: move to San Francisco!

    There, you will find the template girl you describe. Most other guys here are looking for something opposite that type, and are dismayed at how many of those girls are here. You might have an advantage because of that.

    However, you will probably have to hide or water down your ‘racialism’ with 90% of these girls because like the rest of SF they are far-left liberal fucktards. The only exceptions I can think of are the small (tiny) subset of White Nationalist goths.

    Can’t have your cake and eat it too. If you want a godless whore she will probably be a loony liberal!

    Like


  102. Speaking of female infidelity, what about a girl keeping old valentines cards from an old boyfriend with old papers and the like in a drawer, without mentioning it to her current fellow. Card is years old, long before current relationship, in which she lost her cherry.

    She’s been watched like a hawk, and accepts willingly having to account for her whereabouts. and no evidence of her being in contact with the guy
    (phones checked etc.) No evidence of cheating,
    but why would she keep the card?

    Like


  103. White nationalist goths: the worst of both worlds

    [Editor: What’s your opinion of Malcolm X?]

    Like


  104. @Ben Rankle, yeah, but you should be dropping her now . You should not be in a relationship with her—no matter how alpha, she is a gutter whore. you’re rewarding her unnecessarily, making her believe that even though she’s a monkey fucker, she can snag a beta white male to pay for her zebra offspring—or roping you into it.

    I know you’re in deep right now–probably way more emotionally involved than you’d like to admit, since the alpha move would be to drop her like a hot potato/pump-and-dump when you first learn of her proclivities. You say you’ve been learning game through her, which means you’re probably less alpha/greater beta right now.

    I only hope you’re cheating on her weekly. Because odds are she is as well.

    Note: this is not to criticize you; all men on their journey deal with this encounter at some point. Just a warning and prayer for you.

    Like


  105. @ JohnnyDrama
    “Can’t have your cake and eat it too…” I know…story of my life, man!

    Well, with left-leaning Goth chicks, I’d avoid bring up any direct political angle, because they’d immediately associate me with “far right” and that is when all possible fruitful conversation is shut down (just like a typical rightwinger will totally shut down his conscious mind and become dominated by emotion when his senses detect anything he associates with left-wing politics). Most real political association is akin to gangs displaying their “colors”/ symbols and marking their territorial turf. It is mostly primal and emotional—most “political people” are NOT thinking things through at all when an issue is framed as a partisan political issue. Instead they are feeling the issue and “their side” versus a perceived antagonistically opposed “other side”. Lemmings eat this shit up, much the way they’ll root for their favorite football team and cheer for the defeat of the “other” team. Rank-and-file political partisans may seem on the surface to be “thinking” just because they can parrot a bunch of trivia and political ‘talking points” (political “pick up” or “negging” lines) which they picked up at their favorite political watering hole. Seriously, rank-and-file partisans, no matter what flag they wave or where they claim to stand on the political spectrum, aren’t much different from the Crip gangsta ni66er who hates the Blood gangsta ni66er. Hey…they are both just criminal ni66ers, and the only real different is that they belong to different organizations with different leadership that are both dedicated to the pursuit of organized Negro criminality for profit. This is obvious to you, but how is it any less obvious when I say much the same is true of the left-liberal Democrat protester and the busy-bodied loudmouthed Republican Tea Partier. They are the ni66ers of their political organizations and leaderships, and in the end they both love and cling to the System status quo. It’s only a matter of time before Dems and Republicans are taking each other out like the Crips and Bloods do…just rank-and-file ni66ers doing the dirty work on the ground while their masters profit and position for more power from a relatively safe vantage point in an elite enclave.

    Engaging in politics as it is usually framed in this society seems to only play directly into that fucked-up loser dynamic, when dealing with most people. Thus, reframing things to our advantage and coming from a different angle is required. I won’t start on the things I know are contentious. I start by establishing my value and hers, and by establish rapport and comfort. I bring the person(s) I am dealing with onto my team and into my world, and show appreciation when I get indications of interest and loyalty to my team from the other person(s).

    So, for instance, I wouldn’t start talking about how some left-leaning Goth chick is a total race-traitor scumbag for voting Dem, and I wouldn’t go straight for the heart by engaging in a quixotic fight WITHIN HER CURRENT POLITICAL PARTISAN FRAME around race (running straight into her ironclad political bitch-shield is a useless amateurish over-emotional rightwinger move). Instead I try to figure out the best things about her current identifications and the things I hold in common with her, then I use that as the springboard for getting close enough to laying effective siege to the bullshit and then starving or ejecting it bit-by-bit. So she says she cares about the environment, ecology, freedom? Bingo…don’t be like an unthinking typical rightwinger, because this is a glowing green light for a strong infiltration/co-optation/intervention…and you can even directly link this to the importance of race in ways that will shatter her old lefty worldview from its foundations while appropriating her conditioned/acquired moral infrastructure and emotional attachments she once had and turn it into YOUR pro-White mighty fortress instead. It never made any sense to me why a White racialist would come off so hostile to environmental and ecological concerns—only an other-worldy imaginary diety of ancient Semetic origin could cause us to be so blind to this best fucking most compelling opportunity ever to pull the rug (and the moral high ground) right out from under the lefties inner house of cards.
    Then, when they eventually try to fall back on their usual ‘anti-racist’ shit-test staples (as a last gasp of desperation to cling to their old conditioning and their ‘enlightened’ ‘just’ lefty identity), you can again respond by not playing right into these PREDICTABLE traps the way you’re seen right-wingers do it and fruitlessly fail thousands of times.

    Here are a few helpful hints to dealing with a White leftist’s most common ‘anti-racist’ shit-tests:
    * “Indians” (the feather kind): “I’m really glad you brought the Indians up, because it’s totally disgusting how multiculturalism, so called “diversity” and the lack of independent ethnonational self-determination of those peoples are causing the rapid extinction of their unique peoples. Seriously, how many can claim today to be 100% Amerindian today? It will only get worse for them if we continue to force them into the ‘melting pot’ and compel them to give up their ways for the Hollywood garbage culture and identity…and we should be against that sort of genocidal and supremacist course, don’t you think?” Oh man, you’ll really enjoy watching the lefties squirm and get away from anything that could potentially nail them as supporting supremacist attitudes and the genocide of the Indians after you reframe the whole issue and deliver this multi-warhead nuke. Remember that the lefties tend to have a lot of instilled White guilt and a highly cultivated identity of being the “good guys’ who stick up for the ‘poor little guys’. USE THAT to your advantage in your reframing work. Here you are, a white racialist, and yet you are the only one just enough to coming firmly out in defense of the preservation and self-determination of the Indians (and then you insist that the same principle universally applies to every other distinct people, including European-Americans and others of European descent).

    *”Immigrants”: Again, tackle this by reframing instead of approaching the thick-headed over-emotional rightwinger frustrated chump way. We all know the biggest undisputed reason given to motivate support for mass Third World immigration amongst the ruling elites—CHEAP LABOR! USE THAT well-known motivation to your advantage for fuck’s sake, rather than stupidly playing into the current framing of a bunch of greedy xenophobic White haters holding up middle fingers at brown people who are just trying to find a better opportunity for themselves and their children. Again, rightwingers have a golden opportunity on their plate but they blow it and take losses instead. Instead, we should be seething with outrage at the fact that both Left and Right in the current Establishment have no qualms at all with the super-exploitation of Third Worlders, nor do they actually oppose the underlying imperialist/supremacist worldview that permits and buttresses such outrageous superexploitation of Third Worlders. And to top it all of, the ruling elites are playing different peoples against each other in order to affect downward pressure on all working people. That is to say, you come at this immigrant issue by showing that it really fucks over everyone but a tiny elite few,and not just that the harm is only done to White people. This immigration issue is a golden opportunity to steal the rug and the moral high ground away from Leftists and Rightwingers at the same time! “So what you’re saying is that we should bring in all these Mexicans so they can be OUR slaves? I never thought you were a supremacist who considers the mexican immigrants to be a bunch of wetback that we should bring in to exploit. Besides, I thought you were a friend of the working people and cared about justice…what happened to that?” Reframe and shame. Nobody expect a pro-White racially aware person to come at it like this, so hardly anyone will have a contingency plan to respond with. You took their sword and their shield, you used their high ground and their beacon, and used it right back on them…and they aren’t prepared for it! Now they are the supremacist imperialist a-holes put on the defensive, and their only way out is to explicitly forsake their cultivated old worldview and stances on immigration for the sake of justice and good (as you have reframed and redefined it)! It’s not rocket science folks, but it eludes rightwing dittoheads nonetheless.

    Today, there are so many ways that the adept pro-White advocate could seize one of the Leftists’ favorite issues and rhetorical stances and biggest topics of concern away from them, reframe and turn them on their head to your advantage in ways that the Leftists themselves have been conditioned to respond FAVORABLY too while using this same conditioning to profoundly turn them away (at the gut level) from the stances and paradigms that they once held so dear. But it seems like most pro-White folks really need someone to write the book and show the field proofs on dynamic air-tight Racial Game for them. I’m not fully there yet myself, but the combo of inspiration from learning Game with women plus my own long-time experience with both White Leftists and Rightwingers has sparked a Eureka lightbulb-over-my-head moment. With acquired Game, you don’t have to be a frustrated chump beta anymore, you learn to change your attitude and behaviors and the whole social situation to your advantage, and often the gamer discovers that women he once thought he could never pull are now eating out of his hand. I suspect something similar may be true with White racialism, if it had some fucking Game and stopped being so afraid or amateurish about approaching left-leaning whites.

    If Hitler was here in America today, wouldn’t he be considered a radical left-winger on many things? Well, ask Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. I’m just trying to stimulate some minds out there. Hitler had more adept applied Game than anyone in the pro-White racialist scene has ever had since. Period. There is a reason he and his crew rose to power, while pro-whites throughout the European world have been powerless frustrated chumps fiddling around within the right-wing box ever since. I call it Game.

    Like


  106. on December 18, 2010 at 6:43 pm The Man Who Was . . .

    Jim Kalb on a politics based completely on advancing the interests of your race:
    http://turnabout.ath.cx:8000/node/2835

    [Editor: His solution, like that of most appeals to religious transcendentalism, seems vague and unworkable. There is a bit of a strawman argument going on here about “interest of the race” politics that sees it as invariably reducing to arbitrary will. But as a point of contention, a practical and rational racial consciousness can leave plenty of room at the margins for expanding the demographic scope of a nation.
    Or: Numbers matter.]

    Like


  107. Malcolm X?

    A race-baiting demagogue from a loony-toon sect that makes Scientology seem a model of intellectual rigour.

    And Goth kids show why we need the draft restored.

    Like


  108. Folks, if we want our civilisation to survive, then
    We need to get breeding. Demographics is king

    Like


  109. Some say always assume attraction, but I say always assume you are NOT the Template. A lot of times girls are friendly and touchy with guys in the friend zone, since they aren’t taking any risks, but slightly nervous around guys they really like, since they don’t want to make any mistakes.

    Women should play more poker, you really don’t know what they’re thinking.

    Roissy talks about aloof and indifferent game, but in my experience that works best if you have some other sign of quality, like social proofing or good looks. Since we are talking about templates, we can safely assume aloof and indifferent game is killer if you fit her template.

    I don’t like aloof game, not because it doesn’t work, but because it’s pretty passive and puts the ball in the girl’s court. She has to bite, or you have to peacock. I prefer active game, which makes the guy the chooser, selecting girls at the bar as if sushi from a menu.

    We gotta remember women look to the template expecting to find signs of quality, but game is all about showing her signs of quality when her guard is down or from directions she least expects.

    A lot of times women dump the template if the tip she’s getting is not an iceberg.

    I think unyielding eye contact is huge, especially when you are doing the talking. She thinks you are asking for the time, but moving the ball down the field, getting first downs along the way. You can see her mouth slightly open, in rapt attention, as you ask which aisle has canned soup.

    I also really like what John Alexander says (in the book “how to become an alpha male”) about being exciting and expressive when talking to women. He says you want to connect with a woman’s emotions, eschewing logic, which should build the rapport needed to progress to a lay.

    Of course you don’t want talk to women in an overly camp way. A good example of masculine expressiveness is the Chargers Philip Rivers, or Shia LeBoeuf from Transformers. Not every guy can be as aloof and boring as Tom Brady, but maybe it’s something we can aspire to.

    Like


  110. Chicks dig this sh*t, call today…

    Like


  111. Remember, this is “Alpha” because John Wayne or anybody like that is just a “Beta” loser-boy today…

    Like


  112. Hey, ya’ll mo-fos, check it… game made EZ, yo!

    Like


  113. on December 19, 2010 at 12:57 am The Man Who Was . . .

    There is a bit of a strawman argument going on here about “interest of the race” politics that sees it as invariably reducing to arbitrary will.

    “A basic problem with the view is that what men find worthwhile in life cannot be reduced to the survival and multiplication of an extended kinship group. For that reason, the latter cannot serve as the guiding principle of social order. That is why people who put nation and race first have ended up emphasizing arbitrary will more than biology, and relying on theatrics, irrationalism, and violence to overcome the intellectual weakness of their position.”

    This all seems pretty unassailable to me. In order to get people to care enough about race to base a government on it, you have to posit an immediate enemy, start a war etc. Otherwise people will prefer to get back to within group status jockeying. Therefore any government that bases its legitimacy purely on race will pretty much end up manufacturing crisis after crisis just to keep itself relevant. Religion seems a much more stable and benign way to get people to sacrifice for the good of the group. And of course Kalb is not saying that race should not be an important part of the ideological underpinnings of any state, just that it cannot be the the only or even the main ideological pillar of any decently functioning society.

    His solution, like that of most appeals to religious transcendentalism, seems vague and unworkable.

    While he is somewhat vague there, Jim is actually pretty concrete in his other writings; he thinks traditional Catholicism is the only really stable ideology on which to base a governing order, though he has had some occasional good things to say about other religions like Calvinism and Islam (in its own countries, of course).

    Like


  114. on December 19, 2010 at 1:06 am The Man Who Was . . .

    Robin Hanson on why it is going to be really hard to raise the fertility of high status (and thus high intelligence) people:
    http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/12/fertility-looks-bad.html

    Goes well with the analysis at the end of this article on the massive failure of Singapore’s pro-natalist policies:
    http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/america%E2%80%99s-one-child-policy

    People care more about status than money, so monetary incentives won’t necessarily help get people to settle down and have kids.

    Like


  115. on December 19, 2010 at 1:42 am The Man Who Was . . .

    Interesting experience last night.

    Went to a bar/club for the first time last night in the smallish city (100, 000 plus people) I’ve been working in this fall.

    Just about every guy in the place was either a ball cap wearing redneck or an ed hardy wearing douchebag. The only exceptions were a few suit and tie wearing guys, who looked even douchier than the ed hardy guys.

    Got told by a couple guys I talked to that the city is notorious for VD. “Keep it wrapped. It ain’t pretty in ************.” Looking around the bar, I believed him.

    Talked to one interesting girl in the whole bar. I think she ended up leaving with one of the ed hardy douchebags, this one with a mohawk. He at least looked a bit different from the other guys.

    The girls looked somehow looked skankier than in the big cities I’ve been too, even though they were showing less skin.

    Most of the girls were freaking hammered. Sloppy drunk. Literally staggering around the bar and nearly falling over. Way worse than the big city bars I’ve been to.

    Nobody was making out. I didn’t see one makeout in the whole bar. And it was fairly large place, comparable to a lot of places I’ve seen in the bigger cities.

    Small town politeness is still in effect at times, even at the bar. A few girls would sometimes say hi to you, even if you just bumped into them. They weren’t interested in you, it was just a reaction, and they would quickly, but ever so politely scoot off with their friends if they didn’t want to talk to you.

    Bar people can be pretty revolting at times, but small town/small city bar people seem to be the worst of the worst. This was truly a disgusting experience. I don’t even think it would be worth going back, even just to practice. It the middle of the night I just started openly laughing at people. It was horrible.

    Anyone else with similar experiences in bars in Red America?

    Like


  116. As far as sluts, go, check this out. Says a lot.

    Apparently, even the concept of “whore” or “slut” is bad news. Makes no sense.

    The evolutionary biology here is interesting, and valid: But it’s also only half the point. The other side of this is happily ignored because it doesn’t fit this meme.

    http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2010/12/17/whore-stigma-makes-no-sense/

    RC, you might want to comment on this.

    Like


  117. “women studies”, that sums up the dire state of modern universities. They probably have porn studies and polynorphically perverse one legged midget studies too

    Like


  118. @ The Man Who Was

    If you don’t mind me asking, what state was this in? I live in a small-ish town in a red state as well and this pretty much sums up my weekends as well, filled with rednecks and douches. Oh, and chicks definitely dig the mohawk 😉

    Like


  119. O.T. Is Roissy an advisor on “Blue Mountain State”? It’s the only show I’m aware of that depicts the Roissy Reality…

    Like


  120. I liked the blogger’s post until the end where it got a little pollyannaish. I think the problem with “strictly templated” girls is not that they’ll sleep around indiscriminately on you, but that they’ll suddenly “fall in love” with a dude (who looks remarkably like you) and leave you.

    This happened to me when I was 21. A college love interest who was totally on my jock for years left me in the blink of an eye for a guy who could have been my brother (except slightly taller and slightly more handsome). He hit her template just a little harder than I did, apparently.

    Whereas the “loosely templated” women are more likely to just screw around and not care so much, because they’re not as “in love” with you (or anybody) since nobody really zaps her template perfectly.

    Loosely templated women are easier to screw but never really get all that into you. Easy come, easy go. Whereas strictly templated women do get all that into you, but when they leave (for your twin), they suddenly lose all that great interest.

    Like


  121. on December 19, 2010 at 4:52 pm The Man Who Was . . .

    Western Canada. Prairie provinces.

    Like


  122. I think, too, that game works better on loosely templated women. I screwed a new girl about a month ago. We were talking about physical “types,” I mentioned that her body was my “type” (long and skinny with small tits) and she said she didn’t understand the concept of “type.” We were in bed, I asked what her type was, she said, “I don’t know, I guess you’re my type.” Clearly I wasn’t, but to her at that moment I was. This is the sign of a loosely templated girl. Fortunately my game was on, it was our second date, and I basically gamed her into bed.

    Whereas if I had been out with a strictly templated girl, it would either be on or off, depending only on whether I was her type. Strictly templated women can be told by the fact that they come on strong, and fast, and seem very into you very quickly; or they tell you they’re “picky” and boom, you’re out, no matter what you do. Whereas the chick above wasn’t really into me, but she screwed me after I ran hardcore game on her because “might as well.”

    I generally go for loosely templated women, because that’s where game comes into play. The other ones are pure crap shoots. You just have to show up.. if you fit her template it’s on, if you don’t, there’s nothing you can do.

    The trick is recognizing the difference. I’m not an expert at that yet. Most guys I think assume that all women are strictly templated, and don’t realize that loosely templated women can be gamed into bed even if they’re not really interested in you. But the sex is often kind of blah because, well, she’s only ever 75% into it. Whereas when a girl is strictly templated and you happen to hit that template, the sex is 100% mind-blowing.

    I’m dating a woman, too, whose template I fit. We had sex on the first date and it was great, sex today a year later is still great. She showed me photos of her prior boyfriends and they all looked like me, my same height (not very tall), dark brown hair, full eyebrows, etc. It was hilarious.

    I had a date with a girl about 2 months ago who was strictly templated and whose template I did NOT fit. It was awful. There was no interest, even though I was running mad game, and she said that she’d been out on about a dozen dates over the past couple of months and she hadn’t had any “chemistry” with any of them. And she was still pining for some guy who’d dumped her months ago (who fit her template, I assume).

    Like


  123. For those of you who suck at game and are complete losers, you can check my blog:

    http://sexmisery.wordpress.com

    Like


  124. on December 19, 2010 at 5:55 pm The Man Who Was . . .

    You just have to show up.

    I wouldn’t go that far. You still need some game.

    Like


  125. […] Chateau – “Womens’ Standards Crumble Easily Given the Right Incentives“, “Predicting a Girl’s Infidelity” […]

    Like


  126. “Sluts”, or women with a more unrestricted sociosexual orientation , tend to have more of a desire to have “good gene” type males (1). The article that I referenced stated that those with a more unrestricted sociosexual orientation tend to desire males that have both the somatotype and facial masculinity that indicates high testosterone. This is not true of women with a more restricted sociosexual orientation (“prudes”), who are more concerned with the male being both able and willing to provide resources, and thus desires more of the “good provider” as opposed to “good genes”.
    From this it follows that women with a more unrestricted sociosexual orientation will be more selective when it comes to the good gene attributes (dominance, facial masculinity, creativity, high verbal IQ, mesomorphic somatotype) as opposed to those with a more restricted that will be less concerned with these attributes and more concerned with “good provider” (willingness and ability to provide resources).

    1) Provost, Meghan, Christine Kormos, Graham Kosakoski, and Vernon Quinsey. “Sociosexuality in Women and Preference for Facial Masculinization and Somatotype in Men.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. 35.3 (2006): 305-312.
    link

    Like


  127. Sometimes daughters and their mothers are both carrying around more or less the exact same fuck-this one now -template in their heads. And if anything, the mom will be the one more in a hurry. Or so I have heard…
    I cannot in good faith advise anyone to start down this; this high-risk, high-reward path leading to multiple orgasms for a virtuous mother AND her alledgedly semi virgin daughter. Because t can easily get you killed. And in so many ways.
    But until the bullets find you; mein gott, think of the possibilities.. I mean, it is not a sex crime if the mom rents the room and at some point tells her daughter to brace herself to her duties…while she films it, while getting off herself afterwords in private..
    Sometimes guys have to man-up to meet the needs of the situation.

    Like


  128. Ok Gentlemen , someone had to do this …

    Like


  129. Mark

    Mark

    “Sluts”, or women with a more unrestricted sociosexual orientation , tend to have more of a desire to have “good gene” type males…

    So sluts prefer cads. This goes along exactly with the statistics. The people, both male and female, that are doing the most fucking are the people doing the most fucking.

    Like


  130. Jayman, my guess would be that any woman with access to birth control who is 23 forever and has personal financial resources will eventually get a new man. Could be the usual one or two years, could be twenty. In very rare cases more. Sooner or later, monogamy dies or moves on.

    One or two years, for people with unlimited opportunity and resources, is about right.

    Like


  131. Which leads to another point, Jayman. Many cads prefer sluts. I know, I know, marry the Madona, fuck the whore. But still – many cads simply all around prefer the whore.

    Guys who prefer virgins and guys who prefer sluts can never understand each other. We are born with our innate predispositions.

    Like


  132. woops – above point following through with Marks notions about who fucks who.

    Also deserves mentioning that in good times women tend more towards the cads. I think. And in times of the uncertainties of war too? And in times of famine or economic hard times the providers?

    Like


  133. being attracted to pasty-faced activist anarcho-libertarians is not a narrow template, there are millions of them, simply hiding.

    on another note, template theory is interesting because it applies to a women’s SUBCONSCIOUS; whereas it is universally accepted that a woman’s conscious standards collapse like a house of cards in the face of game.

    Like


  134. @ xsplat

    Some cads may prefer sluts since taming a slut is a stronger signal of quality than attracting a faithful good girl.

    Roissy noted sluts are not less discriminating, a world with sluts is not a boon for beta males, and a virgin might be easier than a woman with 80 alpha males in her sordid past.

    Roissy also observed a woman will have a hard time getting attached to a guy with less status than the highest status guy she’s been with.

    Sienna Miller has been involved with Jude Law, playboy Balthazar Getty, and maybe even Diddy.

    Whether or not those guys “dumped her”, a la Duke rejection list, her emotional attachment to you means your alpha-ness is as high as those guys.

    Like


  135. Off topic, but a must see. Alpha bird?

    Like


  136. There are so many sorry-ass betas around that an Alpha sticks out like a sore thumb.

    And we’re becoming increasingly rare (*grin*).

    The American/modern/western diet is full of too much soy-estrogen.

    Thus, the emergence of “man-boobs.”

    Here’s the link:

    http://www.oxfordjournals.org/eshre/press-release/freepdf/den243.pdf

    Boys ain’t what boys used to be. Protect yourselves, gents.

    Like


  137. darn
    this place has goten so boring
    i’ll have to go read roosh

    Like


  138. Good post. Though I think you should differentiate between the Template, and “standards” as described in the previous post.

    Like


  139. With the rise of fattiesgrrlz, and the corresponding mass wave of alpha attention given to the fewer remaining slendergrrlz… aren’t those slendergrrlz far more likely to be sluttigrrlz?

    I mean… are there any nonsluts left? It seems to me that this diseased situation has led to the mass sluttification of the American girl.

    Like


  140. clarification:
    “I mean… are there any QUALITY nonsluts left? It seems to me that this diseased situation has led to the mass sluttification of the ATTRACTIVE American girl.”

    Like


  141. Also, on an unrelated note… check out this abomination:

    Like


  142. @Science

    Good points, but don’t forget about the rise of Internet pornography.

    The entire culture and society have been degraded. The womyn right now are just trying to keep pace with the competition. Any guy, from teenager to dirty old man, can access sever competition with the click of the mouse.

    Witness the devolution of Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, and now Miley Cyrus.

    In other words, they all dress like $10 dollar hookers now for a reason.

    It’s lamentable. And the worst losers of it all are WOMEN.

    Like


  143. I would like you to do a similar post about men, Roissy. People are attracted based on emotional attraction and sexual attraction, and if they are very picky then they will become more desperate when they come into contact with a mate that meets their standards.

    The truth is that women are taking over in real ways:

    Like


  144. Science

    Also, on an unrelated note… check out this abomination:

    That just means
    she won’t give an Old Fashioned

    Like


  145. @Science

    That “hand model” is beyond pathological.

    Talk about self-obsessed. Talk about condescending tone. Talk about arrogance. Talk about “serve me, the Queen of all.”

    Wait a minute. I just summed up all Amerifiends in 3 sentences.

    I can only imagine the Beta she’s married to. Wait a minute, I can. I see them EVERY DAY.

    Like


  146. “My whole LIFETIME is dedicated to the protection of my hands.”

    THIS IS A WORD-FOR-WORD DIRECT QUOTE FROM THIS PSYCHOPATH.

    I thought your whole lifetime was supposed to be dedicated to your GOD.

    Oh wait.

    Like


  147. @Firepower
    “darn
    this place has goten so boring
    i’ll have to go read roosh”

    You’re not going a n y w h e r e ! (lips pressed together, eyes squinting, disapproving look) hee! hee!

    Like


  148. >I thought your whole lifetime was supposed to be dedicated to your GOD.

    ??? is this some sort of religious fundamentalist web site now?

    This is why on my blog I don’t allow comments. Too many loons on the ‘net.

    Like


  149. @Rarfy

    That’s why your blog is so B-O-R-I-N-G

    Leave Hux alone. He’s making a good point about how this skank is making herself into a god.

    CR is an intellectual blog. If you can’t handle a little theology, back to the Playstation homey.

    Like


  150. “I mean… are there any QUALITY nonsluts left? It seems to me that this diseased situation has led to the mass sluttification of the ATTRACTIVE American girl.”

    @Science. There are plenty good girls still out there, but the numbers are indeed dwindling. At one point I even made it a habit to find out which coeds attended Sunday Service at my university. To find modern good looking chicks who aren’t sluts you have better odds searching among the right demographics

    Atheist > Religious

    Old > Young

    Precocious > Late Bloomer

    Urban > Rural

    Feminist > Traditional

    Party Girl > Romantic

    Like


  151. @ The Man Who Was:

    That’s interesting, I’m in the southwest United States amd that very accurately describes my bar experiences, is the Ed Hardy wearing douch/ Redneck crowd becoming the staple of bars all over the world? Only time will tell I guess..

    Like


  152. Come to think of it, “Template” would be a great PUA nickname.

    Like