David’s Comment

David left an interesting comment that relates both to that post and Rachel Nico’s Killer Question.

Your theory that women are attracted to men who are passionate about writing, or all the other things you wrote about in your previous blog is interesting. This is apart from the the well-known attractive traits: tall, dark, handsome, wealthy, high-status, witty.

“Tall” is an interesting one because there’s nothing a guy can do about his height. Most women want guys who are taller than them.

This is painful for short men, because I really think they should focus the bulk of their efforts on women who are even shorter.

Having said that, you do occasionally find shorter guys with taller women. Sophie Dahl and Jamie Cullum or Josh Camacho and the two women who fought to the death over him spring to mind.

“Dark” is only a bonus in countries where the average man isn’t already dark.

“Exotic” is a better word. For example, Roosh says that dark men are nothing special in Brazil but blond guys with blue eyes and fair skin have an advantage over there (although a good grasp of Portugese would obviously help).

“Handsome” is not as essential as you might think. Krauser is hardly a pin-up but he does very well with women despite that.

“Wealthy” can actually be problematic. If you are rich, does a woman really want to be with you or is she just a gold digger?

There is also the question of how you get rich in the first place. If you are not born into money, you’ll most likely have to work for it. That’s fine if you really enjoy the process of getting there, but it sucks if you don’t. This comes back to the whole “life purpose” thing.

“High Status” is an interesting one because most guys just don’t have it. When was the last time that you or anyone you know impressed a woman with a job title?

“Witty” isn’t the huge panty-peeler that it is supposed to be. Women say they like a man with a “sense of humour” but does that actually tally with the men they sleep with or go out with in real life?

Nope!

In most relationships, there’s a quid pro quo of give and take, sometimes hopes or expectations that the other person will change some way or to the contrary not change some way, and so on.

The classic quote is that men marry women hoping that they won’t change and women marry men hoping that they will. I think that male “development” is a better way of looking at it than “change”. Is a man making progress towards his goals – the goals that don’t revolve around her or other women?

When you mentioned your father, I thought it might have something to do with him maybe “not finding his bliss”, as Campbell used to say.

Yes, absolutely.

You wrote: “Learning about Game was horrible for me.”

I’d be interested if you could explain this further, or maybe just post links to
previous blog posts where you explained this.

The scientist Richard Dawkins once wrote:

The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousand of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so…In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.

And so it is with the sexual marketplace and the world of human relationships. The ammount of suffering is “beyond all decent contemplation”.

What makes it even more horrifying is that unlike most of the suffering in the natural world, human suffering in relationships is mostly preventable.

I couldn’t deny the truth of what I read about Game because it tallied so perfectly with my own experiences. Finally, I had a lens that explained the endlessly bizzare and baffling behaviour of women. I could no longer write women off as “crazy” because there was an evolutionary method to their madness.

Advertisements

8 Responses to “David’s Comment”

  1. So long as you don’t say I look like a potato

  2. Guestopher Says:

    Hmm, you should revisit game. You missed on “High Status” and “Witty”. Guys use game to project high status. Cool, high-paying jobs are not needed. In fact, I always try to lie about my job since 1) it’s crazy boring nerd stuff and 2) responding to a question like that with a direct answer is a) being compliant rather than a challenge, and b) allowing a woman to make another assessment of your worth (she’s already made dozens). For the next month or so I’m going to be a professional competitive eater who specializes in lamb products. High status and social dominance are not the same, but a guy who is perceived to have social dominance over a decent amount of people will push a woman’s attraction button. Guys should fix their body language and move and talk as though they have high status.

    Witty= tease the hell out of her and make her laugh about it. Focusing good digs on her has a higher success ratio for attraction than just joking about general stuff.

    • Good point about the real meaning of “witty”. That’s the kind of witty that women really go for.

      Not the Hugh Grant style of self-deprecation. But I still see plenty of sullen humourless guys with hot girls too.

      As for the high status thing, one of the articles I linked to makes the same point that you did there.

      • Guestopher Says:

        I see. The link in the “high status” section doesn’t work. That probably would have cleared things up. Now that I reread the section I see that I read “Most guys just don’t have it” as “Most men can’t get it/aren’t famous or powerful”. So you meant “Most men don’t have it (because they haven’t worked towards it – because no one told them that it’s pretty important for influencing people and attracting women).

        Oh the interesting world of Game and Seduction. Most of the time when we are talking about a vital success/fail attribute and using the phrase “Most people just don’t have it” it’s a given that people KNOW how useful that particular attribute is, but just can’t get it because of difficult barriers. An extra six inches in height is a good example. In the world of Game and Seduction the opposite is usually true; it is a matter of people not knowing that the relatively easily acquired attribute is a vital one.

  3. @Guesthoper: Thank you for pointing out the broken link. I’ve fixed it now.

    If you follow it, you’ll get an article on my old blog that references both Roosh and Kezia Noble on this subject.

  4. […] Joe – “Orientation“, “Rachel Nico’s Killer Question“, “David’s Comment“, “Emotionally Unavailable” is a Man-Bashing Slur“, “Free Online […]

  5. Attraction 50% energy 50% looks. You can get away with looking very average but if you have confidence in those looks it can bridge the gap. I like to think I have above average looks but my mental game is out of this world…Even if it isnt I believe it to be. Thats the game changer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: