The Mind Of The Manboob: Hugo Schwyzer Redux

Hugs is back in the news, and I can’t resist his mewling charms. So sue me.

Two articles of note. First, a Jezebel twisted paean to May-December romances penned by The Matriarchy’s First Lapdog himself.

Age Is Never Just a Number: How Girls Got Older Men/Younger Women Right

Though “One Man’s Trash” has been the most-discussed installment of this season (and perhaps of the entire show), much of the commentary has focused on the mind-blowingly insipid suggestion that a woman who looks like Lena Dunham doesn’t “deserve” a man who looks like Patrick Wilson. The focus on the imagined attractiveness disparity between the two actors misses an equally meaningful plot line: the appeal and the challenge of age-disparate relationships. […]

Tellingly, Hannah asks Joshua how old he is before she even knows his name: that Joshua is so much older seems to be an inextricable part of his appeal. The doctor’s affluence and handsomeness and stability are obvious, but Hannah seems more drawn by the age gap than anything else. Joshua, meanwhile, is fascinated, if a little bewildered by her boldness. Though a few male writers found the hook-up totally implausible, the mutual attraction is both believable and instantly familiar.

So Hugs is saying here that it’s totally normal for Lena Dunham’s homely character to be attracted to a high status man 15 years her senior. Ok, for a Hugo Schwyzer mental burp, this shows a reasonable grasp of the reality of sex differences in mate preference. But….

The storyline works because we live in a world where 42 year-old men are taught to find 24 year-old women more appealing than their own female peers.

Ah, that’s the old feminist water carrier we’ve come to know and loathe. Hugs, you are such a darling rimjobber. Do you even believe the runny shit you expectorate, or is it all a dog and fatty show for the benefit of your paying feminist overcunts? To ask the question is to mock you.

Like feminists, Hugo shares a propensity for boldly contradicting himself within the span of two sentences. In the confines of Hug’s hugbox, it’s normal for women to be attracted to older men, but “””society””” has to teach older men to be attracted to younger women. Women’s desires = natural, normal. Men’s desires = unnatural, societally conditioned.

It could never be the case for a felching manboob like Hugs who has sold his soul to the succubus that older men’s attraction for younger women is natural. Or that maybe… just maybe… the innate desires of both men and women, however divergent, are natural and normal and biologically hard-wired.

Yes, hard-wired, Hugo. From birth. Issuing from the hindbrain. Immune to cultural reeducation programs. Cemented in primeval neurons shaped in the crucible of evolution by millions of years of natural and sexual selection.

If it’s mentally taxing for you to grapple with the idea of innate, immutable sexual desire, think back, Hugo, to the time of your blossoming youth, when you first laid eyes on that young man with the broad shoulders, glistening chest, and conspicuous bulge in his Ocean Pacific shorts. Much to your surprise, embarrassment and volcanic shame which would sculpt the trajectory of your life, a boy boner sprouted from the downy thicket of your pubescent pride. You wept, beautifully.

Do you remember that time, Hugs? Yes, yes, of course you do. And you remember, as well, that it was no social conditioning or nebulous cultural influence or amorphous patriarchy that provoked those wild and lustful urges in you. Those urges, you will recall, rose unbidden from the depths of your being, like a thermonuclear blast through your sinew, to explode into the world and forevermore make mockery of the drivel you spew to this day.

Commenter anonymous writes:

…is [Hugo] real or some kind of sockpuppet. Surely no actual man believes that men are merely “taught” or conditioned into being attracted to 20+ yr old women?

He is as real as the beneficiaries of his delusional ego-assuaging largesse want him to be. No, I don’t think Hugo actually believes that men are taught to desire younger women over older women. But I wouldn’t bet on it. The West is filling up with simulacra of actual men who have swallowed the rancid feminist jizzbombs by the bucketload, and are begging for more. A willing mouthpiece like Hugo finds purchase today amongst a cacophony of loudmouthed losers who would have stayed ensconced in their hermit holes fifty years ago, brooding it out to themselves instead of polluting the internet airwaves. The Rise of the Hugo is a story of the Fall of the West.

To demand logic, reason, good faith, common sense, or accountability from the Hugo Hordes is a fool’s errand. There is apparently no contradiction or inconsistency or hypocrisy or lie too craven for the house eunuch to call into service if it wins him a contemptuous pat on his gelatinous bottom from the circle of shrikes. Hugs, is the sacrifice of your dignity worth the accolades from a bunch of psychologically and physically defective losers? Please tell me you are at least tapping some of the better feminist ass your humiliating masochistic spectacle ought by rights to procure you.

***

Article of note #2 was not penned by Hugo, but it was about him. After a quick read, I’m not all that interested in commenting on the substance of the article (it’s stupid, as is the case of most Atlantic articles lately), but I am perplexed why the Atlantic writer — a Mrs. Raphael Magarik — would write a term paper on Hugo Schwyzer’s internet persona and his psychological motivations without consulting the authoritative reference guide on the matter.

Come on, Raph, how about throwing a link bone to your betters?

Never mind. I can see when I’m not wanted. *sniff*

PS Hey, Hugo! Are gay men taught by society to desire other men?

Gotcha!

PPS Even when Hugo stumbles on a truth, he wraps it in foul-smelling lies. Here are two quotes from that Jizzebel article which demonstrate Hugo’s inability to speak truthfully.

Ask 20-something women on OK Cupid or other dating sites how many they receive from men 15 and 20 years older; ask women in their 40s how many guys their own age seem primarily interested in pursuing much younger romantic partners. The “cougar discourse” doesn’t change the reality that most heterosexual relationships with a substantial age gap still feature an older man and younger woman pairing.

Check out this slippery eel known as the male feminist. “[T]he ‘cougar discourse’ doesn’t change the reality…” Well, no duh it doesn’t change the reality! The cougar discourse affirms the reality that men of all ages prefer younger women. Hugo, is the “cougar discourse” saying something to the opposite of that reality, or are you just an oily snake dissembling for the sake of your fat cunt readership?

As she so often does, Hannah reverses the stereotype by being the sexual aggressor —

What Hugo omits here is the more reasonable interpretation that Hannah’s (Lena Dunham’s character, a hard 4) sexual aggression is not a deliberate ploy to flip stereotypes on their heads, but the necessary forfeiture of a dumpy, unattractive woman required to capture the sexual attention of an alpha male who’d sooner pursue a much hotter woman were one conveniently available. Hannah has to literally throw herself at this dude to get him to dump a fuck in her. She has to make it EASY for him. Making it easy is the only way marginal women who aren’t warpigs manage to get laid with attractive men. And then not so much; the strategy fails as often as it works, because men exercise discrimination in choosing mates, although on average men are less discriminating than women when sex is the goal. (Men are more discriminating than women when relationship commitment is the goal, and that’s why frumps like Hannah rarely get high status men to commit to them, which is the true measure of a woman’s romantic worth.)

Even if Dunham didn’t intend this interpretation, this is what actually occurs in the real world. Hugo could note that; but that would mean he had a spine.

and Joshua’s intensely grateful reaction suggests not just surprise at her boldness but also, perhaps a kind of relief that a woman in her mid-20s finds him still desirable.

The relief is for the zero effort he knows he’ll have to put in.

Forget the dick-wringing from male writers

You rang, fucker?

about how a hottie like Wilson would never go for a young woman who looks like Dunham.

Define “go for”. In real life, handsome doctors do not go for tubalards like Hannah, no matter the age. They go for slender babes. The tubalard may occasionally get serviced by a very tired or depressed Joshua who just got off the bender of a bad divorce, but he won’t be dating her or sending her flowers, or even seeing her in public. And your strawman notwithstanding to the contrary, what Hannah does or doesn’t deserve has got nothing to do with it. It’s horny turtles all the way down.

Not only does that woefully underrate the sex appeal of the Girls‘ star,

You’ve gotta be kidding me. Oh man, you are such a lickspittle. Tell me, would you say your wife is more, or less, attractive than Lena Dunham? Try not to squirm answering this.

it also obscures the reality that having a younger woman walk into your house and make the first move is a classic middle-aged man’s fantasy.

Only if she looks like Megan Fox. Try to keep it real, for once in your life, Hugs.

#TellAFeministThankYou

Originally started by dumb feminists as a sincere effort at self-congratulation for imaginary deeds of heroism, the #TellAFeministThankYou Twitter feed has morphed into a shooting gallery for the entertainment of trolls and assorted sadists, providing a laugh a second. Feminists on that feed have been reduced to impotently bleating “wait for them to get it out of their systems.”

Go for the fun, stay for the cruelty. And keep an eye out for malevolent forces committing drive-bys of spectacular carnage. The kind of carnage that can leave a feminist with barely enough strength to mewl for the sympathies and circle-wagoning of fellow travelers.

UPDATE

Feminists are deleting the sarcastic tweets as fast as they appear. No surprise. Wouldn’t want to risk a mass suicide.

Girls Love Onomatopoeia

I’ve long peppered my emails and texts and IMs with onomatopoeia — words that sound like the thing or abstraction they are describing. I drop them in conversation, too. I do this because I’ve discovered that it’s an excellent way to screen out stuck-up, prudish girls who don’t know how to have fun. Girls who dig banter about subjects other than name, rank and serial number LOVE LOVE LOVE men who can nimbly weave child-like blurts into serious adult conversation. The “sounding words” are very sensuous on the ears, and that probably accounts for their appeal to women. Using them is a step toward speaking the language of women.

(And, yes, MGTOWs, it’s horribly “unfair” that men have to go out of their way to speak the language of women but women don’t have to speak the language of men. Unfairness and lopsided, up-front investment is inherent in an evolved mating system where the reproductive machinery of women is worth more than that of men. But I profess.)

Interestingly, I see I’m not the only one to pick up on this peculiarity of female auditory preference. A reader comments:

Off topic, I ran some ‘your mom!’ game tonight. ( I mean seriously, ‘your mom game’… are the possibilities not boundless?

Solid 8 blonde cutey, my neighbor, so basically i’ve seen her naked. She had a boyfriend for a while, single as of monday. little whatever texts, haven’t had contact in a month.

It’s not reached a conclusion, I guess i just think it’s a decent way to open up younger girls. i’m 37, she’s 24. i pass for 28-30 though, that helps because i primarily only game younger women.

Me 7:58: your mom!

Court 7:59: what? Ha are you drunk neighbor!

Me 7:59: your moms drunk!

Me: 8:00: but that wasn’t for you. bonk

(for some reason texting sounds has been surprisngly useful. bonk, boink, derp, boom. See: younger girls)

Court 8:00: didn’t actually think so

Me: but your mom is dunk, prolly

Court 8:03: ha umm no shes not!

Me 8:09: its all good court. we all have drunk moms.. its the new drunk dads

court 8:10: bahahaha Kkkkk

end.

i dunno. drunk dad your mom game

Younger women are, of course, more fun-loving than older women. You’d be too if your body looked its best, you felt energized all the time, men of all ages checked you out, and the icy breath of Father Time wasn’t breathing down your neck (or squeezing your uterus in a vise). But I molest.

The reader above used a version of non sequitur text game, a CH patented technique that is LIT’RULLY guaranteed to provoke a reply from a girl. When she replies with the expected challenge, feminine dare or snarky attitude, try punctuating your follow-up with a whoosh, derp, nofap, or wheeee giggly giggle shoe shopping!#$!!#$#!!. It’s unpredictable, it’s immature, and it’s transparently patronizing. That last part is important, because a patronized girl is a girl whose self-perceived value has been deliriously, enticingly nicked.

I wonder if girls are in general becoming more responsive to goofy, glib texts from men. If true, it may signal a subtle cultural shift that girls are also becoming more fun-loving and less guarded. Or that they’re so fed up with being the breadwinner they appreciate men who can zoom them away from their dreary cubicle farm lives.

Female Infidelity Red Flags

The corn&porn arm of the MSM is catching up with CH teachings. A woman has written an article about female infidelity warning signs, (supposedly culled from women who have cheated on their partners), and the information sounds suspiciously similar to earlier Chateau Heartiste red flags for women who are high infidelity risks. For instance:

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 1: She accuses her man of cheating. This common sign is an attempt to divert the guilt away from herself, and to project her dishonest behavior onto her partner.

Ministry of PoonandGrabass CH:

She asks you how many women you’ve slept with or accuses you of being a player. One word: projection.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 2: She starts dolling herself up. If a woman suddenly starts taking hours to get ready for places like the gym or the grocery store, then there may be someone she’s trying to impress.

CH:

She undertakes beautification projects. [A] girl who suddenly begins an exercise program or wearing carefully applied makeup or buying new sexy cocktail dresses is prepping herself for a return to the market.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 3: She tells her husband she needs space.

CH:

Chances of re-notch success are much lower once she has verbalized her need for space, but with proper post-relationship game you can improve your odds dramatically.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 4: She drops hints that she’s not happy.

CH:

A woman is honed like a machine to be a first responder to relationship crisis. She uses her intuition to pick out subtle nicks in the relationship armor that could grow to chasms if left untended. […] Women therefore have evolved an exquisite sense for sniffing out warning signs that a man is losing interest, or that his love, and hence his commitment, is cooling. Women therefore have evolved an exquisite sense for sniffing out warning signs that a man is losing interest, or that his love, and hence his commitment, is cooling.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 5: She has a new BFF her partner has never met. For starters, this new “friend” may not even be a girl at all. The friend could also be a single gal pal looking for a wing woman… and sometimes a woman is all too eager to go along for the ride.

CH:

She has a lot of slutty friends. Ye shall know her by her support group.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 6: She changes her plans… at midnight. If she consistently ends up staying out all night, then it’s time to question her loyalty.

CH:

This red flag is so obvious — hey, my girlfriend/wife is out again at midnight without me! — that I don’t need to dig through the CH archives to find a record of this blog stating the same thing.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 7: Someone else thinks she’s cheating. “I knew someone who had firsthand knowledge my girlfriend was cheating,” Mark says. “But I believed her when she said it was a lie, because nobody wants to believe the worst, no matter how obvious it may be.”

CH:

This is a milder version of catching her in flagrante delicto, *when it’s from a third party*. But there’s the rub. Many of your girlfriend’s or wife’s friends will not be your friends. If you hear something that suggests your wife’s infidelity from an oblivious sidewalk grocer, you should take the accusation seriously. If you hear it from her BFF who secretly hates you (or loves you), default to skepticism.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 8: She has a sudden increased interest in her partner’s whereabouts. A woman carrying on an affair needs to cover her bases. If she starts wanting to know her man’s plans for the day, especially when she’s supposedly at work or otherwise busy, then she could be making plans of her own.

CH:

This is pretty good advice for an MSM fem entity, but its accuracy as a warning sign depends a great deal on who’s downlow-ing whom. A wife will show increased interest in her spouse’s whereabouts if she suspects *him* of cheating, too. So if you are a faithful dude, and your wife is suddenly asking a lot of questions about your schedule while sounding like she’s pretending to ask in a spontaneous manner, as if it “just popped into her head”, then you may have something to worry about.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 9: She gives excuses to not have sex.

CH:

[W]e now know the number one dead giveaway that your wife or girlfriend is about to cheat on you:

Is she withdrawing sex during days 10-16 of her monthly cycle? Then you, my friend, are about to be betrayed.

If you hear from your woman “I have a headache” any time during her peak fertility, she has either cheated on you, is thinking about cheating on you, or is getting sufficiently turned off by your burgeoning betaness that cheating will soon become an option in the calculation of her moral universe.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 10: She’s checked out. If another man is meeting a woman’s emotional needs, then she will lose her enthusiasm in her current relationship, even when it comes to things like arguing.

CH:

[M]en are capable of fucking more than one woman concurrently without losing that loving feeling for any one of them. Women, in contrast, tend to have to fall out of love with their man before they can comfortably move on to fucking another man.

So, did this MSM fem entity plagiarize CH, or is it just a coincidence that there happens to exist in the world a woman who can speak as truthfully as the lordship of Chateau Heartiste?

Ps You have to love the spate of articles in recent years about cheating women. Is this a subject that would have been broached so explicitly in any putatively mainstream outlet fifty years ago? Either the culture has become less queasy about parading in print the true nature of women, or more women are cheating and the need to discuss the topic has reached critical mass, or both. Whatever the reason for the trend, it doesn’t do much for American women’s marriageability.

Status Whoring SWPLs And Pitbulls

I’m not the only one to notice the latest ridiculous SWPL fad of adopting abandoned ghetto-educated pitbulls as reclamation projects and status whoring symbols.

Pitbulls are one of the ugliest, nastiest dog breeds in circulation. The modern pitbull has been bred by upstanding, law-abiding citizens for aggression and a powerful bite. The pitbull is the thug of dogdom. It even looks like a fucking thug. Hence, its appeal to human thugs.

But now SWPLs, humanity’s insufferable burdenbraggarts, sensing another golden opportunity to flex their neoPuritan cred, have taken up the crusade of adopting ultraviolent, impulsive pitbulls and whisking them away from their ghetto cellar killing arenas to a brighter future in loving charter homes serviced by low wage, No Dog Left Behind hipster dog walkers.

Goddamned these herbalicious SWPLs. They really are a nauseating cult of pukes. Having failed at rescuing not one, but two mega-underclasses, their insatiable savior complex and hunger for balletic moral posturing, (usually satisfied at the expense of those other dog owners), have driven them into the blood-soaked paws of unpettable killer dogs. The SWPL’s soft, plush, Yoshi ego must gorge, and a multigenerational failure of positive thinking, supercilious sophistry, and self-good intentions has made SWPL Yoshi very very cranky. Not content with leaving ill-bred animals alone, and apparently incapable of enjoying the simple pleasure of normal dogs like labs without  experiencing an existential crisis, the pitbull has become the newest cause celebre for urban SWPLs who can’t make it through a day without a pat on the back from their fellow missionaries.

To understand this sudden and perplexing SWPL adoration for pitbulls, you must know the SWPL psyche. The SWPL’s greatest fear is confronting the demands of her ego and discovering that everything she believes is a pile of horse shit. Oh no, can’t have that, no way no how. Equalism is the gargantuan hamster pellet that feeds her head, and the pitbull is a fortuitous animal proxy for the underprivileged humans that the SWPL happily (and relievedly) carries on believing are equally capable, equally worthwhile, and equally oppressed (except for that one group, yuk they’re soooo creepy).

Dog “breeds” are a social construct. The pitbull is just like any other dog! The pitbull is misunderstood! The pitbull is a victim of the caninarchy! The pitbull just needs the right training. You’re a pitbullist! Gross, pitbullist! Look at the pitbullist! Point at him! Isn’t he evil? Evil evil EVIL PITBULLIST! Now watch, gross evil pitbullist, how tolerant I am. See how I benevolently guide the pitbull through medical school, out from under your pitbullist oppressive bigotryprejudicefearinsecuritynarcissism…

CHOMP!

ooow, my face… it’s missing.

I will smile every time I read of a stupid white SWPL getting her face chewed off by one of her pitbull redemptions. Does she deserve it?

Yes. Yes she does.

I was planning to include a graphic photo of one such victim as a coda to this post, but it was so visually disturbing I decided against it. You can google for yourself to see a mauler’s row of pitbull attack victims. It’s not like there is any excuse for being ignorant about the ingrained and genetically bred pitbull temperament.

Like human trash, pitbull dog trash needs to be removed from society, neutered with extreme prejudice, and dropped to the bottom of the ocean. But I suppose if you’re the sort of smug shit who loves the warm feeling of lifting the animal world’s bloodthirsty psychopaths from the tyranny of low expectations, you’d go ahead and adopt one of these filthy beasts, and then execute the most impressive triple lindy back-rationalization in the history of smug shits when you wake up one morning to see your infant son half eaten.

One wonders, when there is nothing non-white or tangentially non-white left in the human or animal kingdom to “””save””” aka save in posturing only (SIPO), to which desperate, in-need group will the whitely superior SWPLs turn their outstretched, priestly arms in welcoming redemption next?

Wait, lemme guess. Gypsies.

Reader Mailbag: Dewy Vaj Edition

Email #1

To get the formalities out of the way – it took me 2 years but I’ve ascended from horrifying betahood into what I like to think is the domain of the lesser alpha. Either way, these days I GET things, and I see things for how they are.

However, there is one question that I keep wondering about – what is the perceived effect of omitting some alpha male rules? To be specific – showing up late. I understand the workings behind it, the DHV, and I have no problems with it if I am arriving into a social circle (“We’ll meet up at XXXXXXX at 8, see you there!”), but I loathe it when when people are waiting for me, and on one-on-one dates, I tend to arrive on time more often than not. Just how big is the effect of turning a blind eye to this or that game concept in favor of a more personalized style? How unbendable is any of the concepts depending on context?

Ok, spergs and strawmen, it’s time for a quick lesson in basic human reality. I can’t believe this needs saying, but apparently it does. You’d think some of this stuff would be inferred in CH writings, but never leave to inference what a hater with a chip on his shoulder will twist into a self-serving ego fap.

Alpha and beta are not discrete categories of man. They are not precisely numbered and annotated bullet lists of behaviors that, should you fail to fulfill one item or execute another item twice more than advised, will automatically shuttle you up or down the male sexual value hierarchy and leave you stranded there permanently. Alpha and beta are ecological designations with fuzzy boundaries but which are still nonetheless readily apprehended, much like a desert is distinct from a grassy plain yet one would be hard pressed to identify the exact border that delineates the regions.

So it is with your question. CH, and others, have suggested that it is good alpha mojo to show up five fashionable minutes late for a first date, because doing so subtly signals your higher relative value to the girl, and higher value, when you get right down to it, is the name of the game. But if you prefer to show up on time for dates, it isn’t going to deep six your sexiness AS LONG AS you have enough alpha characteristics in the kitty. If she arrives later than you and sees you at the bar waiting patiently, the immediate value differential she may perceive won’t matter if she also gets to watch you yukking it up with the patrons, and you greet her confidently and suavely and lead the date toward a sexual apex.

Furthermore, you can get away with committing a whole slew of bland beta errors if you have enough compensating alpha traits acting as a balance. This is why you will often hear alphas charmingly self-deprecate; they have so much value in store that it doesn’t hurt them to lose (in a controlled manner) a couple points here and there. In fact, it can help them, by making them seem more attainable to women.

To put it succinctly: The core tenets of game are universally applicable, but the culturally or individually attuned applications of those tenets can vary. Within reason.

***

Email #2

It’s well known that masculine men and feminine women are natural partners, but are extroverted men and introverted women also natural partners?

An extroverted men is confident and well liked. He’s comfortable in conversation and can approach without being awkward. His popularity likely leads to social proof, and his social grace gives him high earning power in management, sales, and negotiation. He can provide emotions and resources to his mate.

An introverted woman is less likely to talk to random strangers, and therefore there are fewer opportunities for her to accumulate a count, or to stray in a relationship. The introverted woman sounds boring, maybe in bed too, but that is a trade-off many men make for a pure woman.

Quick take:

Extrovert man-Introvert woman: Good match. Strong love polarity. Dewy vaj at sight of him expertly working a room. Rock hard protective instinct for shy, modest woman. But she’ll wanna know just how much cheating, fucking around, and general mayhem he commits on his social sojourns.

Extrovert man-Extrovert woman: Explosive match. Strong sexual polarity. Will fuck in public locale on second date. Will never stop playing head games for the upper hand. Overpowering jealousy could lead to criminal indictment or revenge infidelity. Long-term prognosis: nonexistent. Paternity assurance: nonexistent. Domestic violence: Awkwardly likely. Anal sex: Guaranteed.

Introvert man-Introvert woman: Beta male fantasy match. Tepid sexual polarity, strong sensibility polarity. Best relationship in the world three weeks out of the month. Worst relationship in the world one week out of the month. Cuddles and kisses substitute for hot, penetrative sex until he goes Anders Breivik and acquires the inevitable mass murderer SMV boost.

Introvert man-Extrovert woman: Strong complementary match, if introverted man is more stoic alpha than retiring beta, and extroverted woman is more social circle glue than thrill seeking slut. Warm powerful love with puzzling bouts of sexual drought. High risk of cuckoldry. Must be comfortable dealing with flirtatious woman, i.e. avoid excessive mate guarding. Could be beta male’s first introduction to sniffing cocaine off a hot babe’s pert ass cheek. Powerful incentive to trade for lowered relationship expectations.

***

Email #3

So I know the things a natural, alpha man *should* be doing. There is surface-level stuff that during my ongoing transformation I’ve directly incorporated, that I feel I’m still only midway from beta to alpha. There’s underlying, inner game that I have yet to become congruent with.

Reading posts on the ways naturals think and perform makes total sense, but actually *becoming* like that is something else entirely. What is the best way to actually make the transformation from beta to alpha?

Fake it till you make it was the mantra of game practitioners until it was supplanted by an even better aphorism:

Fake it till you create it.

You see, doing all that “surface-level stuff” will not just improve how you are perceived by girls; it will actually create a new alpha identity from your beta clay. An identity that is more than verbal calisthenics, one that instead goes to the id, and lodges itself in near-permanence. That identity goes by another name: The Attitude.

It’s never easy becoming something you’re not in your natural, lazy, default state, nor is it easy becoming something more than you are. So expect that the effort you’ll expend and mental anguish you’ll endure will be more intense if your starting point is omega male rather than lesser alpha. But you shouldn’t think in those terms. Instead, think that no matter what the shape of your final destination, your journey will bring improvements every step of the way. You may not land a hard 10, but you can date girls a bit hotter and a bit younger than you would normally had you remained stuck in the rut of your betatude.

If you think that’s no big deal, try asking a guy who’s used to dating 3s what he felt when he got a shot at that 5. Actually, don’t bother asking. You’ll see it in the way his eyes sparkle with life.

Anyhow, to answer the grist of your question:

1. Hang out with naturals.
2. Avoid losers.
3. Follow the 16 Poon Commandments at the top of this satanic repository.
4. Break up with a girl once in a while just to get a feel for the Awesome Power of Alpha.
5. Create a fake alpha male profile and taunt girls online with promises of dates to get a feel for the Awesome Power of Alpha.
6. Remind yourself that women are essentially interchangeable, and that there is always another one around the corner.
7. Outcome independence is a fancy term for believing that you are God’s gift to women. Take it to heart. It works.

***

Email #4

A cute cashier gave me too much change ($12 too much). I was in a couldn’t-care-less-about-humanity mood so I took the extra change without shame even though she’d been friendlier than your normal cashier with a kinda shy greeting and goodbye.

Now that I’m back on terms with humanity (with my shame back) I want to square this with her because 1) the money will come out of her meagre pay so it is the right thing to do and 2) she was good looking so an excuse to talk to her again and only her not anyone else who works there would be welcome.   It’s the kind of store you only go to once a week, twice at most, so I can’t go there every day to see if she’s working like I’m a nice guy desperate to give her the money back – her colleagues might remember me if I did – but if I don’t I might not see her there again for two, three or maybe more weeks which would be too late – or would it? What to do?

PS – There was some confusion during the cash transaction so saying I didn’t pick up on the mistake at the time is plausible. Maybe enough confusion that she remembered it was me she gave too much change too.

Most Valuable Commenter nominee PA used to say that his preferred method of tipping was to handsomely tip single, older men and be stingier with young, single women. The subtext in his strategy is obvious: single older men who are working service jobs need the sexual market value boost a lot more than do single, younger women. In addition to that noble motivation, enriching young, single attractive women makes it harder for beta males to woo them, and easier for alpha cads to use them.

Naturally, most men do just the opposite. That is because most men are mediocrities.

So, in your case, Emailer #4, I wouldn’t fret that your foul mood-induced ill-gotten pocketing of a cute girl’s coin is some sort of karmic offense that will redound to your reincarnation as a field mouse. If anything, you did the world some good.

But you want to violate her holes date her in a gentlemanly manner, so here is what you do:

Go back to her shop, $12 in hand. (Or, if you’re a craven SOB like me, $6 in hand.) Look her in the eye. Hold the pimp daddy wad of money up. It doess’t matter how much she remembers of the previous transaction, or when it happened. Tell her, “You gave me too much change. Here. You know, you don’t have to treat me like a male stripper to get my attention.”

Or: “I’m getting tired of girls paying me for dates.”

That should be enough to coax a smile and get the ball rolling. Report back to us.

Always Be On

We’ve all had publicly embarrassing moments. This one time, in band camp, I was skipping gaily jogging past a woman with my hands full of shopping bags. I glanced for a split second in her direction but it was enough time to miscalculate and tumble face first into the sidewalk. Hiding the pain in a most manly way, I bounced up and said “Made you look”. She laughed. A few more accusations against her propriety, and her number was procured.

Possessing a “game mindset” will help you make mash notes out of mashed potatoes. Always be on.