You gotta at least go through 100 girls to get their swing.

Bash the pick-up art community. Challenge the assumptions and techniques used by pick-up art, discredit the effectiveness of pick-up art, expose ripoff products, and reveal secret info of dating gurus.

Of cuntiquette.

Essentially no one can talk to girls without losing their innocence of feeling, childish playfulness. Even chads get swindled and dumped. Life is all about pain. The nourishment we received from our mothers was meant to instill something in us never found anywhere else in the world.
Image

Image

“I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the progress of civilization than you seem inclined to admit. Remember what risk the nations of Europe ran, not so many centuries ago of being overwhelmed by the Turks, and how ridiculous such an idea now is! The more civilised so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world.”
― Charles Darwin

"A prevention of the faculty and opportunity to procreate on the part of the physically degenerate and mentally sick, over the period of only six hundred years, would not only free humanity from an immeasurable misfortune, but would lead to a recovery which today seems scarcely conceivable."
― Adolf Hitler

"The way of nature has always been to slay the hindmost, and there is still no other way, unless we can prevent those who would become the hindmost being born. It is in the sterilization of failures, and not in the selection of successes for breeding, that the possibility of an improvement of the human stock lies."
― H. G. Wells

"It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind....Three generations of imbeciles are enough."
― U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., Buck v. Bell, 1927



Legit. Being naive and optimistic is a death sentence.
My advice is to radiate happiness while being extremely cautious and alert on the inside.
When due process fails us, we really do live in a world of terror.

AstroPill wrote:Legit. Being naive and optimistic is a death sentence.
My advice is to radiate happiness while being extremely cautious and alert on the inside.
Happiness is shit, always being uppy daisy no matter what happens leads to complacency. We only turn on our brain through exertion, through challenge, through growth.

Conditional positivity. That's serenity not happiness. Find happiness at that point where we pillar our minds on what makes us productive, and energized depending on the condition. Be enveloped in negativity/ insecurity so long as you have the fortitude to make it into a perk/ keeping you ever aware without being overly stressed. And that will bring you power.

Though being overwhelmed by stress does sometimes bring resilience and drive/ motivation/ energy that can be beneficial.

A lot of us are born soft and incompetent because we haven't adapted our minds and body to go at the rate of our predators/ competition/ obstacles.

Women are the biggest wake up call in our insulated soft cushioned society. A wake up call that our subconscious mind reads as eugenics at play. And what they predicate their focus on is primality capital. Or dominarchical directive. Humanity is by and large eugenic, vile, cruel, selfish, etc. It's a part of primal nature somewhat tendered by other primality signals of empathy that are again still just as primal.

Primality tenderness towards chads, children, babies, infants, etc. Ratio.
Then you have primality hashness directed towards incels, pedos, niggers (in general/ offhandedly except when you're trying to be a libtard), oldcels, etc.

The primality pinnacles are of course, what people colloquially call "shallow".



You can't work well with a girl without hating them. You can't work without despising them. Like most things. But resentment of weakness/ fear of failure/ love for power are the focus formers. It's discomforting because you're supposed to be motivated by the negativity being an anathema. Pulling away/ striking against negativity is a better motivator than love. Against the negativity is an urgency. Love doesn't make things as heavy/ significant/ pillaring on difficulty/ turmoil as fear/ hate do. That's why fear and hate are so essential. They snap you into action. Stress is a small price to pay for focus, and it definitely outweighs sluggishness. Girls want guys who didn't have to go to this extent of making things this heavy/ relevant/ surged up in their brains. And hence see fear/ hate as unessential because they already have the focus they need, they don't need to inspire the anger/ fear. For those people I say that they are cowards/ stress shirkers/ people who shirk the responsibility of pain/ stress for imperfection. They will never be as invigorated by their natural faculties without anger/ fear/ love for power, as someone who mounts those abilities will be, and gains momentum. It's just people are vigilantly against being forcible with themselves and make being natural/ uncontrived being the only valid measure of worth as a cop out.

Being dazed in what you love makes you floaty and flamboyant. Girls want that feeling from men because their charm might come off more natural/ uncontrived. Ironically women want that which is contrastive to the best thing for them (men shedding their innocence to be better prepared to impress/ charm them)

Eugenicist wrote:Primality tenderness towards chads, children, babies, infants, etc. Ratio.
Then you have primality hashness directed towards incels, pedos, niggers (in general/ offhandedly except when you're trying to be a libtard), oldcels, etc.

The primality pinnacles are of course, what people colloquially call "shallow".


And isn't it rather ironic that they call these factors of judgement "shallow"? LOL!

But seriously you remind me of my time at uni when I got really angry with the guys around me. Most of them were all trying to push the "beauty is subjective" shit into me. And at the time I was naive and had other things on my mind that I didn't bother to look into it and sort out the nonsense. To these retards because of this "beauty is subjective" fact it means that anyone can potentially get to be friends with anyone else, to get to know them. In other words more Marxist crap being pushed. But when I looked around all I saw was that most of those who were pushing this crap were rather ugly and they never got to know the pretty girls at uni, the pretty girls avoided them. And the funny thing is when a particular girl did that to them their excuse was that she had a bad personality or some other lame shit. Having observed this, I just couldn't help feeling that Political Correctness is what stops people just saying the things that need to be said, but people seem to be afraid of hurting other people's feelings.

In your other thread you state that people are assholes/cunts/snoots - and I totally agree. I would add that to get to know a particular person on an intimate personal level is IMPOSSIBLE if the person won't let you do so, and if they do let you get to know them then it's a non trivial event in your life But somehow this simple, elementary and obvious fact seems to escape these cultural marxists, because their excuses would be that you acted wrong, or had the wrong personalty, anything other than call attention to the primality pinnacles factors of the person being rejected. We just seem to be living in a world where telling the blunt truth in public is a social crime.

For years I had this indoctrination drilled into me by my peers, but I rejected all of it because I knew deep down it couldn't be true, but it still festers in our society at least in the social media scene and public spaces. I'm still very angry at these idiots.

And isn't it rather ironic that they call these factors of judgement "shallow"? LOL!
It isn't. Another marxist throwoff to dull and ripen the massess through nullification by naivete. It is the center. It's only the stupidity of the world that wants to put it into a peripheral context.


But seriously you remind me of my time at uni when I got really angry with the guys around me. Most of them were all trying to push the "beauty is subjective" shit into me. And at the time I was naive and had other things on my mind that I didn't bother to look into it and sort out the nonsense. To these retards because of this "beauty is subjective" fact it means that anyone can potentially get to be friends with anyone else, to get to know them.
Since beauty is an abstract tag/ascription of the mind, then it is calculated subjectively. Doesn't mean though that human beauty doesn't have objective stipulations. Rosie O' Donnel people would agree is less beautiful than Christina Hendricks. Doesn't take much to see why that's true genetically.


In other words more Marxist crap being pushed. But when I looked around all I saw was that most of those who were pushing this crap were rather ugly and they never got to know the pretty girls at uni, the pretty girls avoided them.
They're copefolding all phenomena to make themselves have the confidence/ clearance of conscience to jack themselves off at night.

And the funny thing is when a particular girl did that to them their excuse was that she had a bad personality or some other lame shit. Having observed this, I just couldn't help feeling that Political Correctness is what stops people just saying the things that need to be said, but people seem to be afraid of hurting other people's feelings.
Also they're cope and the fact htey have to create a false map of how they dimension the territory of reality contrary to their underlying thought process. They nip whatever uncomfortable thought comes their way in the bud.

In your other thread you state that people are assholes/cunts/snoots - and I totally agree. I would add that to get to know a particular person on an intimate personal level is IMPOSSIBLE if the person won't let you do so, and if they do let you get to know them then it's a non trivial event in your life
Ppl are stone cold snoots until you meet their primality capital criteria. And usually the stipulations of them being decent human beings isn't really fully edified (opposing primality) because it's often regulated by hormones. Very few people are capable of a logical process of humanitarianism.

It shouldn't be a non trivial event if you expect what's ideal. But at the same time it should be because despite hte fact that people choose based on primality, human beingsn eed hteir space away form people who nature has ordained as undesirable to protect what they have and to stop the gene harvesters from bringing down humanity. Humanity needs to be compartmentalized and categorized. It's just an inevitability. Some plants and animals get eaten in life. It's the cycle of exitential logistics bringing about an element of unfairness in our individual distinctiveness.

But somehow this simple, elementary and obvious fact seems to escape these cultural marxists, because their excuses would be that you acted wrong, or had the wrong personalty, anything other than call attention to the primality pinnacles factors of the person being rejected. We just seem to be living in a world where telling the blunt truth in public is a social crime.
The primality properties that are the pinnacle of the positioning of people are against marxism because they want to fool people, or if they cede to the truth of it, then they're overly idealistic/ feelistic/ sweetistic about the context to the point of you just being happy gappy and never removing the ultimate problems.

The problems of life can't be solved by being filled with positivity. You need a firm hand of resentment towards the issue to keep you strong and striving.

For years I had this indoctrination drilled into me by my peers, but I rejected all of it because I knew deep down it couldn't be true, but it still festers in our society at least in the social media scene and public spaces. I'm still very angry at these idiots.
Let the hate flow through you Darth Perkins. Or should I say... PORKINS?

Image

I knew you survived old friend, to destroy the SJW evils that plague my favorite franchise today.



Quite honestly I have met plenty of women who are less cuntish than you.

Their fantasy world is at least more enjoyable relatable and fun than yours.

You are just as delusional and close minded / unreasonable as women, minus the fun and sex factor.
Loose Goose

100+

PussySlaughter wrote:Quite honestly I have met plenty of women who are less cuntish than you.

Their fantasy world is at least more enjoyable relatable and fun than yours.

You are just as delusional and close minded / unreasonable as women, minus the fun and sex factor.
If you can't see how my shit ties into reality then I feel sorry for you.

Judging by you I think your discernment system may be as plebby as your perceptions. If you think that being a swagmeister makes you truechad... then I'll just develop the mannerisms of captain planet and think that waving my hand will clean the nuclear waste America keeps dumping into deserts in 3rd world countries.

Ain't gonna work. Yes, you can create funpreneur but that hormonal zone gets old to a woman. We are human beings. We need food, work, dealing with mortgage, bills. Do you think just wit, charm, charisma constitute everything? Yes they can have feelings but ultimately they base their feelings on phenomena of reality. Relying on that alone is gonna make the phenomena pretty stale, and depressingly inadequate.

A ton of women, who are intelligent and have a high resilience don't need compliments/ beta-clivity means to get a girl to like her. They want solid substance because they live in such surplus/ insta access to enough stimulus that they can get companionship/ swag easily from the multitudes of men who are forced to use it. They want something rarer/ more on the pyramid scheme of human selection. The high/ narrow area of primality/ dominality capital.

In the human psyche, phenomena of great danger/ difficulty are more prominent. Hence why primality factors are important. We make it into a sport/ into an art to be superior beings. Movies, and bad asses trampling over betas. Sports were essentially alpha males showing off being alpha. Not really communal practice. No. People get bored of that too. People want to stride in to the serene primality scape.

Women get companionship all the time by guys. A lot of the mcan socially hit the mark with them too. In the primality pyramid, it's friendship/ communality, then primality/ dominality. Women are egotistical creatures and will want to upscale their grade of existence as much as possible you fucking idiot. Do you think an acquirable trait given enough research and reflection can give a girl what she wants... swagswinging? No.

Nothing is independent from a system. It's just that having the dominarchic demeanor is essential for swag/ slut's and their vibrations. Which means that to sustain it, the closer you get, you'll have to take your dick out and show your grade of existence on the hierarchies of primality. Dominarchy/ Personalitarchy/ Staturarchy (stature/ status), all these hierarchies are only valuable insofar that their own respective hierarchies translate into primality dominance.

And women pillar their feeling on this. They pillar their engagement on this. They are putting pressure on people around them, for those who are resonant with their engagement span being sustained (because they don't want to have the girl leave) based on their pendulum of engagement being pillared on the level of primal momentum that sates her very capricious/ fickle hormonal hungering.

You're retarded if swag can generate that feeling in of itself. While it can help, it's ultimately peripheral all things considered. You're just too autistic to see it.

Lol someone is too retarded to know that swag goes hand in hand with looks

If you can't see how my shit ties into reality then I feel sorry for you.


It doesn't. You're just a arrogant self righteous retard.

Did you think you accomplished something because you realized that people care about LMS instead of pure morality?

It's like knowing that to play basketball, you put a ball in a hoop.

Sorry but that doesn't make you a good basketball player, and quite frankly, resting your ego on it for over a year is pretty lame.

You're stupid enough to conflate my statements about attracting women with my viewpoints on objective reality.

I don't feel like you are competent in either regard really.

And then you accuse me of being "unable" to read into things.

What are you going to do, achieve things with ridiculous made up words?

If you can't see how my shit ties into reality then I feel sorry for you.


It doesn't. You're just a arrogant self righteous retard.

Did you think you accomplished something because you realized that people care about LMS instead of pure morality?
I'm able to explore the reason/ biological basis of it. I don't just deposit it as a subconscious dormant deduction. I have the intellectual command to make it a conscious notion.

Bro why are you so butthurt lol.

You're stupid enough to conflate my statements about attracting women with my viewpoints on objective reality.
How...?

What are you going to do, achieve things with ridiculous made up words?
You'll be one of the first and last to know. Depends on what I want for you.

I'm able to explore the reason/ biological basis of it. I don't just deposit it as a subconscious dormant deduction. I have the intellectual command to make it a conscious notion.


I'm not aware of any posts you've made about biology or understanding of it.

And you haven't explored anything, you just made a bunch of posts about "primality" basically saying that looks are important.

You've been doing this for long enough though that I thought I'd see if it had any weight behind it but don't really see it man.

And you haven't explored anything, you just made a bunch of posts about "primality" basically saying that looks are important.
I'm already finished clarifying your fabricated fratdaddy vibe flaunting. How can someone I am really feeling worthy of debating with be so generally lazy and dense at this point. I'm not saying it's just looks. Primality in mankind emphasizes the dynamic of what our animal nature loves. Which again can be conveyed with being a swagster/ PUA delusional self-seer. But it works only as far as women "feel" that the person is the shit. You can imprint that feeling only for so long when of no substance. You can carry it on sure, if you have social status you can be a person who represents a social anomaly/ an authority on the validation of a certain thing that women want to qualify/ be seen as. A woman will want a valid metric of self-worth and if you play like an aloof rebuker then you can be important to a girl, but this is only if girls have a value metric that concerns people inner nature and not just looks. And not all of them do, a lot of them are superficial/ tyrannogamous and stop all mental interrelationality with people who aren't of value.

But the common pattern with all people's primality is that nature wants us to be full of looks, money, status, competence, achievement, glamor, prominence, prowess, power, etc. All of the things that give into our narcissistic nature. And yes, even in the most drunken/ dulled up hazes in the party/club women will prioritize having a good time. But hedonistically/ naturall it's the personality pattern of all people to derive fun/ love by being relational to other people.

Women are generally mentally unrefined/ hormonal/ fickled. They would rather live in a cloud of pleasure and feeling of value. Not all, but many. They wanan live with no additional advancement of hteir mind for intelligence's sake, but they move for primality for power's sake. Women don't do what they do, get makeup, talk to people, have high status, to just chill and have fun through togetherhood and dancing. It's to manifest their dominance through hypergamy.


You've been doing this for long enough though that I thought I'd see if it had any weight behind it but don't really see it man.
negging me about my knowledge and notions is another fratdaddy social stringpulling skill that the PUAs taught you what to do? Sad.

What benefit with the pattern of what you see women value does having someone who has high - social - skills really do? Are you so ignorant of the biological basis of women? Again, it's not a universal essential factor to have social skills. Being a fat potato without a dull personality but the fun and swag of louis C.K. and Eminem can get you far. But again, everything considered, there's so many other catches to the puzzle peice to bring on the stream of gravy that women will perceive for fair compensation I.E. sex.

>Women give SELECTED people social footing based on primality value because women want to be around people who have no social footing unless they fit a certain criteria of quality. They wanna reflect the esteem system of the person they ideally want to be, and so they by these traits can have those who are of the same manner/ personage value them. Association by eliteness. Women try to tower up as much primality capital/ dominarchical capital/ tyrannocapital they can and then use it to create the "tyrannizing torrent" that bleeds into their overall impressions so that people fear, obey, treat with significance. This primality power promulgation pattern isn't just necessarily conscious/ overt... can be very subspoken/ latent. Women act selective to be the elite, to be akin to the people who are to be selected. It's amusing that

Women want to be critical of other people's primality property value (the underlying view of valeu we biologically hold in esteem, like being taller, stronger, faster, more of affluence, etc.) but some will have doubts that they can take the heat they dish out so they try to fly up the ladder as much as they can to make people see them as arare catch, and to hurt eveyrone down so that eveyrone's access to the top of hte primality pyramid that they can provide is difficult/ dangerous.
Even ugly women do this without understanding that their primal capital is highly predicated on looks, but still want to come off like they're 1st class people/ primal tyrannizers. Espeically when they can't change their looks and just will try to milk the istuation as best they can. Evne though they aren't able to withstand (in judgment) the same amount of criticism they're dishing out to others they still feel like they can give improportionate amounts of criticism to a man because they have got it easier. That women have the right away and can act rash with their selection... because of affirmative actio nfor women and male roles.

> Women take a lot under horomonal consideration but essentially it's a male role to be a provider, dominator (to herself and others), prize, exception (in ways that she'll cumulatively examine as the relationship progresses). You can't really project this by being just a swagster and playing the chillaxer game all the time. You can but you still need substance behind it. It's foolish to believe that eveyrhting is ltaent and beneath a system.

>Women, like people, don't wanna be losers. They're very subconscious about their status/ their role that people generally contextualize people through. We're social creatures constantly vying for superiority among our peers dude. While being a swagster master can work out and help you you still gotta have the substance of an alpha somewhere for people to believe you. All the best swagsters I met were tall/ big/ strong had primal capital embedded in their body/ their connotation of ability. And people often want to make these kind of people the winners in life so that life can be more simple for them. They don't wanna award betas with the value that they don't deserve.
The primal convention of what is supposed to be of power is essential.

I'm not saying it's just looks.


We don't need to discuss it as a either or. Just like you don't need to discuss holding the handlebars on a bicycle vs pushing the pedals.

Just discuss the whole system.

But it works only as far as women "feel" that the person is the shit.


Yea that's the fucking point man. That's what they are feeling from these guys.

I mean there is nothing whatsoever that is particularly wild with saying that behavior affects others people's thinking and feelings and behavior.

Isn't that like common sense?

Maybe the specifics are in question, but who would really think such a absurd thing?

I don't think it's especially strange to say that it affects the feelings and emotions of sexual desire and attraction either.

You can imprint that feeling only for so long when of no substance.


Not really. The feeling itself is the substance. That should be clear and understood here.

The question is just what is creating it, not wheter it is valuable.

but this is only if girls have a value metric that concerns people inner nature and not just looks. And not all of them do,


Not really. If they have a normal functioning female brain, then they are going to be affected by a persons behavior, because their brain is wired to be.

And yes girls are not always the same or want the same things. We are in no disagreement about that either.

a lot of them are superficial/ tyrannogamous and stop all mental interrelationality with people who aren't of value.


Social vibe and impressions are of value though. So is the feeling they get from it.

That's not too complex is it?

But the common pattern with all people's primality is that nature wants us to be full of looks, money, status, competence, achievement, glamor, prominence, prowess, power, etc. All of the things that give into our narcissistic nature. And yes, even in the most drunken/ dulled up hazes in the party/club women will prioritize having a good time. But hedonistically/ naturall it's the personality pattern of all people to derive fun/ love by being relational to other people.


People mostly just want to feel good. Including you.

Why would you even want all that stuff in the first place?

Probably because of how it feels.

Although I actually disagree that this is all that it is.

Arguably there is a certainly hollowness to just that lone, like something is missing.

And by the way I am not the only person to recognize this, it has long been established to be true.

Humans have developed alot of different ways of thinking and attempting to achieve these things.

What you describe is just one of them.

They would rather live in a cloud of pleasure and feeling of value


Everybody would. Although some people would say that pure pleasure alone is not actually the best human experience or existence.

But really even if that is true, it's still about feeling the best, just that that is not the ideal way to achieve it.

I am not even taking a particular viewpoint in saying this, just attempting to enlarge the discussion and add more thinking to it.

They wanan live with no additional advancement of hteir mind for intelligence's sake, but they move for primality for power's sake.


Yes this is certainly a marked difference between men and women.

Not that all men are this way either, but that almost no women are.

For some reason they do not appear to value or enjoy pure intellectual pursuit or investigation.

Even though I use "feeling" liberally to really refer to experience in general, including rational pursuit, there is obviously a difference between that and "feeling" in the sense of emotions versus rational thought, even though they are both experiences.

Women seem to really have no interest in that domain, and even when they do, it's not really a genuine one but a socially oriented one that is not actually about the rational thought itself, but rather how it relates to social affairs.

Women don't do what they do, get makeup, talk to people, have high status, to just chill and have fun through togetherhood and dancing. It's to manifest their dominance through hypergamy.


You should understand though that regardless of the underlying dynamics, the outward experience, which all they actually experience, feels like that, so it doesn't matter to them "why" they are actually doing that in a evolutionary sense.

And that actually is objective. That "false" experience is as objective as it actually gets. How is it not?

negging me about my knowledge and notions is another fratdaddy social stringpulling skill that the PUAs taught you what to do? Sad.


I am not negging you :lol:

It's a funny thought.

I have to wonder if you are actually being serious when you say things like "fratdaddy".

Does it rationally or objectively change the validity of your arguments?

No. But lets be real here, that is a strange way for someone to speak. You are probably the only person I have ever heard speak like this. I am not even insulting you just saying that I find it funny.

I have nothing to do with PUA's whatsoever, I've been of the biggest critics of PUA in fact.

Social skills and vibe are not necessarily the same thing as PUA. That is to say that their teaching and interpretation of it is just often stupid and ineffective.

It is true though. You have seemed to be saying the same thing for quite awhile. That's not really a neg it's just a truthful observation.

What benefit with the pattern of what you see women value does having someone who has high - social - skills really do?


It does all sorts of things. How do you even think life works? Alot of it is social skills. It's how people feel about you, what kind of relationship they have with you, and all the benefits you gain from that.

And even how you feel about yourself socially. Even your own self cares about it.

"Primality" is arguably socially designed and wired in the first place. Even looks is a social thing to some extent because it's a way for humans to interact with each other and regulate their behavior, which is not done in isolation but socially.

IE having a kid with a good looking person because it means they have good genes, which is itself a social process.

I think it's fine to factor it in, but lets just describe the real social process, instead of isolating factors, which people love to do for some reason.

Alot of the pleasure of looks is how it effects your socially designed brain. You care about it in a social sense, IE how it relates to others.

Are you so ignorant of the biological basis of women?


Are you of the human social brain?

Again, it's not a universal essential factor to have social skills. Being a fat potato without a dull personality but the fun and swag of louis C.K. and Eminem can get you far. But again, everything considered, there's so many other catches to the puzzle peice to bring on the stream of gravy that women will perceive for fair compensation I.E. sex.


I have never said that looks weren't huge either.

Of course a really good looking guy can do pretty well off that as well.

Although I do think you underestimate that it matters even for good looking guys.

I've seen plenty of even good looking slayers and they all struggled with shit that other guys too. Maybe that made it easier but it wasn't like it wasn't there.

It's not like life takes no effort or skill just cause your handsome. Or that you suddenly are imbued with all these other traits like say having balls or being aggressive, or having a good personality.

That's just PSL myth has no support in any reality I've seen.

And I've seen alot of legit slayers in my day, including some really good looking ones.

And who even cares about separating it?

Just max all your shit, no need to argue all day about what's ideal. Start doing what works, and in your personal situation.

They wanna reflect the esteem system of the person they ideally want to be


I don't think that it's always the case and I know you like to say "I know it's not conscious but this is still what's underlying" but I don't think it's that either.

Sometimes they just are having fun, not everything is related to that.

I do plenty of things I enjoy that don't have anything to do with "primality" but I still like them. I'm sure you do.

"tyrannizing torrent" that bleeds into their overall impressions so that people fear, obey, treat with significance


Yet again I think this is just getting too excessive and out there.

The evolutionary factors in general matter but sometimes they really are just having fun, in ways that are not fully explained in terms of "evolution".

In fact even thinking about it like this, makes it less enjoyable.

Even ugly women do this without understanding that their primal capital is highly predicated on looks, but still want to come off like they're 1st class people/ primal tyrannizers. Espeically when they can't change their looks and just will try to milk the istuation as best they can. Evne though they aren't able to withstand (in judgment) the same amount of criticism they're dishing out to others they still feel like they can give improportionate amounts of criticism to a man because they have got it easier. That women have the right away and can act rash with their selection... because of affirmative actio nfor women and male roles.


I don't really think this is actually just inherent with them, I think it's largely the result of social engineering the current situation we are in, of which men are mostly to blame to begin with.

This is really just men acting like a bitch basically, in mass numbers.

Women take a lot under horomonal consideration but essentially it's a male role to be a provider, dominator (to herself and others), prize, exception (in ways that she'll cumulatively examine as the relationship progresses). You can't really project this by being just a swagster and playing the chillaxer game all the time. You can but you still need substance behind it. It's foolish to believe that eveyrhting is ltaent and beneath a system.


You can be cool and also make moves and be dominant. I'm not sure I actually see the contradiction.

We're social creatures constantly vying for superiority among our peers dude.We're social creatures constantly vying for superiority among our peers dude.


Yes I know this.

All the best swagsters I met were tall/ big/ strong had primal capital embedded in their body/ their connotation of ability.


Personally I've known at least a handful of guys who had none of these things and still killed it.

I used to go out with them sometimes.

I'm sure your jaw would probably drop if you would have seen them in action.

They don't wanna award betas with the value that they don't deserve.


If you have value to people then they will usually pay it back to you. And yes that value can be other than looks.

You can imprint that feeling only for so long when of no substance.


Not really. The feeling itself is the substance. That should be clear and understood here.
When I say substance I figuratively refer to solid/ non abstract substance. And women get vibes off of that. Both somatic and abstract substance go hand in hand. I'm basically just saying that if there's no somatic substance, even verbal skills are somatic because the conception of skills is referential of outward phenomena. Both somatic substance and intellectual substance are their own subcategories. Feeling substance is something they abstract.

For example, a PUA artist is jiving right and talking a pretty good game. It's his motions, his body, his words, they create the intellectual signal of judgment which produce the feeling. But neither can be made without the somatic substance first. Intellectual is the reactionary process and Emotion is reactionary effect that seethes into the psyche. Both intellectual/ feeling processes of logic are pre-ordained and this is essentially what primality is. You wouldn't get what you want from the girls unless you have the somatic substance to produce it.

Not really. If they have a normal functioning female brain, then they are going to be affected by a persons behavior, because their brain is wired to be.
I don't disagree but it's a question of emphasis. Human beings have angles of emphasis. You ceded to something that already refutes your view. You said that women have highly functional brains, yes. You can produce a lot of hormonomomentum to warp their minds, but it comes in sets. Being just a swagmaster where again a team of football players are around you isn't gonna work in the club. Even PUAers need to dodge vast chadnergy. (chad energy). Infields are pretty much all staged and singled out. In an environment like I just spoke of you can't be a hormonohook when women are seeing all the surrounding primarchs that exceed you around you. You can't really believe that this is an end all be all isolated factor. I think you might just be using your examples of it working where you THOUGHT that it was just swaggy laxy fratty behavior that got the girls. Make an 80 year old or a dumpy hobo who smells like shit do it and clearly you'll see different results.


Social vibe and impressions are of value though. So is the feeling they get from it.
Something I call primality pyramid pertinence. Where women get greater feelings form higher value people. Women are innately hypergamous/ regalgamous because people with that kind of value mirror hte kind of person they want to be. THey're more attracted to people with traits how exhibit more of the traits they want in themselves. Quality collecting essentially. Women end up doing this in their end game more than resigning to someone with beta bucks. If they're very systematic, which many are.
Women are both hormonal and systematically efficient. It's just that one doesn't really come without the other a lot of the time. Not as much as the PUAs think. Though I won't doubt that women are hormonal without being systematic in many places in their life. But almost none of them are systematic without being hormonal. STEM sluts are weird and even they are only where they are because they couldn't get their more narcissistic sorority narcissistic pleasures met.





But the common pattern with all people's primality is that nature wants us to be full of looks, money, status, competence, achievement, glamor, prominence, prowess, power, etc. All of the things that give into our narcissistic nature. And yes, even in the most drunken/ dulled up hazes in the party/club women will prioritize having a good time. But hedonistically/ naturall it's the personality pattern of all people to derive fun/ love by being relational to other people.


People mostly just want to feel good. Including you.
Tell that to a psychopath or a pedophile, and then my points will begin to make sense to you. People are pursuing some measure of gratification that's defined by what kind of person they are. Again you seem like you're trying to just put a fratty laxy swaggy slant on the situation by giving a platitude instead of a thorough realistic analysis of the situation. Conventional Wisdom. A colloquial clarification, not a formal or reasonable one. This is the normie mentality at hand. The kind that doesn't believe in the deep dissection of things. I see this probably impacting your thought process if this is truly you intending to be analytical.

Why would you even want all that stuff in the first place?

Probably because of how it feels.

Although I actually disagree that this is all that it is.

Arguably there is a certainly hollowness to just that lone, like something is missing.

And by the way I am not the only person to recognize this, it has long been established to be true.

Humans have developed alot of different ways of thinking and attempting to achieve these things.

What you describe is just one of them.

They would rather live in a cloud of pleasure and feeling of value


Everybody would.
But at the expense of prolonguing instant gratification for the sake of putting their altar down to serve the altar that helps stabilize and thrive society? They're too individualistic for that shit. They're not really convictious at all. Again, every idea/ intangibility is something they don't have the evolutionary attention span for. It's like giving a ghettocel guy in the bronx or oakland to read shakespeare. They just perceive it as this niche nerdy uninteresting triviality to have any culture aside from having the competitive cutting edge in social spheres.



Although some people would say that pure pleasure alone is not actually the best human experience or existence.
Women have an evolutionary incentive to be short with anything that doesn't give them gratification as the evolutionary mechanism for preserverence of humanity. Nature knows what incel goes through. Coldness/ Stoneness/ Aloofness.


That "false" experience is as objective as it actually gets. How is it not?
It doesn't matter because your criteria of it mattering is another subjective standard/ arbitrarian. Which we both are. But you're pillaring your arbitrarian emphasis around it mattering in accordance with how it translates to the swayance of women. I'm pillaring this a bit more on what women are in actuality. And I will caveat the position instead of letting it go without saying that this is what they do or don't care about. Because I'm primarily pillaring my engagements on women when I don't provide context and the biological basis of their nature.

I have to wonder if you are actually being serious when you say things like "fratdaddy".
I address the topic with terms equal to its level of seriousness. Think of onomonpeia terms concerning bamboozle/ duped/ etc. The articulation was parallel to the sounds we arbitrarily gain from certain phenomena.

No. But lets be real here, that is a strange way for someone to speak. You are probably the only person I have ever heard speak like this. I am not even insulting you just saying that I find it funny.
It is because we're having radically deep discussions with words like that popping up in there. I think it's more true to the nature of the topics we have at hand. Adds a more contextual flare.

Social skills and vibe are not necessarily the same thing as PUA. That is to say that their teaching and interpretation of it is just often stupid and ineffective.
Why so?

What benefit with the pattern of what you see women value does having someone who has high - social - skills really do?


It does all sorts of things. How do you even think life works? Alot of it is social skills. It's how people feel about you, what kind of relationship they have with you, and all the benefits you gain from that.
Unfortunately so many of it isn't even dependent on how you act. If a 20 year old and a 40 year old were acting the same way and wearing the samae clothes towards a girl there is a little bit of an emotional disparity isn't there? Yes. And no matter how swaggy you wanna do it, it'll still underlyingly reside and cascade into the conscience in a manner which impacts her behavior. Nearly nothing in behavioral fratty laxy swag can exist independent from the context of the person who is saying it. It's not independent in of itself.



"Primality" is arguably socially designed and wired in the first place. Even looks is a social thing to some extent because it's a way for humans to interact with each other and regulate their behavior, which is not done in isolation but socially.
Dur. It's not arguable, it's certain. Primality comprises inexorable basic human functions also. Basic sentient functions. Even the microexaminations of picking someone who doesn't have a disagreeable smell is a primality function, but it's also evolutionarily rational.


Are you so ignorant of the biological basis of women?


Are you of the human social brain?
Social brain is a byproduct.

Again, it's not a universal essential factor to have social skills. Being a fat potato without a dull personality but the fun and swag of louis C.K. and Eminem can get you far. But again, everything considered, there's so many other catches to the puzzle peice to bring on the stream of gravy that women will perceive for fair compensation I.E. sex.


I have never said that looks weren't huge either.

Of course a really good looking guy can do pretty well off that as well.

Although I do think you underestimate that it matters even for good looking guys.
Let me clarify this for you. It matters intensely. If you put up a chad dummy in the middle of the girl with all of the right starting off factors you it will be a very concrete influence if he can't talk, function, act properly.
Girls who are desperate on the primality pyramid will want chad if his Primality capital is a rarity that they want more than budging out of the detriments that come with the person. Often though any flaw has a girl looking elsewhere becuase girls can be rest assured that in this age where quality women 6+ are a commodity from God because of selection pool constraints/ 1st world liberty constraints... then they'll receive much more attention from guys than guys to a girl unless the guy is a rarity. Female attraction is relational. The guy has to be superior in relation to other men. Female attraction to men is a fickle resonance. It's also that way for guys, but far much so for women. As female attraction is predicated on dominance which are moving factors. Guys will be satisfied with a good looking girl especially when receiving one is a luxury of luck and probably lightning won't hit twice at once. A man is usually only Stably if you're stably dominant/ high primality prospected...
Using swag still makes you walking on eggshells to some extent, or some kind of rickety substance. For again it's only one piece of the puzzle.

In our age of high social interractionality/ constant feed of all of the attractive people on earth being available at the swipe of a phone/ click of a mouse you will NEED to show you are distinctly of prospect in relation to all of them.
This is definitely rare and I'd say that personality matters almost just as much as looks at this point even if you are good looking. But when I say it's more important I'm saying in relation to the scale of meeting the criteria of even being available/ of potential in the first place.
It will be just as essential for you to have good personality. But when I say it's important, I'd say it's far more of a difficult/ trippy/ slippery line of factors to have good looks, genes, etc. which a lot of girls will require to even initiate interaction with you, but from thence on you will need personality.
Personality is like the people who work at the front desk of a good restaurant. Sometimes on occasion people will come to fraternize and enjoy the atmosphere the people who work there. And maybe that can be the whole reason. But the reason most go/ initiate is because of the food. No food/ no somatic substance... welp, sorry people who were there, we like you but the detriment of being without food isn't worth missing out on even with the benefit of you all being there. (On occasion) some people will get the number of a few of the people who worked there and just have nice coffee dates. but the ratio of that happening is about the same ratio of women who will choose a guy based sheerly on his inner character.
HOWEVER, sometimes it can be hard for restaurants to get quality chauffeurs, waiters, etc. but it's usually the hardest qualities/ traits/ etc. to attain that are the most difficult. The fact that something is in of itself is possessed holds exceptional novelty for women because it is so uncommon and a symbol of high status. It's rare for people to have elephantiasis but does that mean it's valuable? no. Having blue eyes is, which less than 10% of the world has and is an aesthetic plus in almost ALL cases. It holds the mantle of refinement and striking grace.
Female attraction is predicated around eliteness which means having everything there is and ideally people want of have this as well in their self-discernment to get the "feeling" of success, happiness, significance, power, etc. To be in the position where eveyrthing is taken care of and there's no foreseeable future event on their horizon which can stop them. Where primality gives you primacy.

I've seen plenty of even good looking slayers and they all struggled with shit that other guys too. Maybe that made it easier but it wasn't like it wasn't there.
I'm not disagreeing. The hormonal flow has different highs and lows. I'm honestly glad you're here to help me put these things into my mind. Hormonomonotions are haphazard and has it that certain mood swings/ stimulus created different hungers. The hormonohungers are dependent on haphazard hurdles of the mind, body, soul, etc. The hormonoclivity of women is primal. Yes. The hormonopreference is haphazard and fickle. It follows the person in power, who has the resonances that make them feel whole. And in the information age, women don't have to be considerate of others. They can go for what they want and fear generally no reprisal in this high headway for the oppressed society.


Just max all your shit, no need to argue all day about what's ideal. Start doing what works, and in your personal situation.[/quote]You seem to take a lot of nuance to a lot of stuff but you also seem to be disjointed in that you pillar your idea of what's valuable about what gives you not so much insight as just success. Yet the things you talk of, while valuable to my own reflections, don't seem to be the best approach in achieving your success that you hold up as the ideal for genuine rumination.

Again there are grains of truth in PSL, but it doesn't fully encompass eveyrthing. But it's a better more realistic platform than most I've seen, especially PUA at getting to the biological basis of mankind's darkness.

They wanna reflect the esteem system of the person they ideally want to be


I don't think that it's always the case and I know you like to say "I know it's not conscious but this is still what's underlying" but I don't think it's that either.

Sometimes they just are having fun, not everything is related to that.

I do plenty of things I enjoy that don't have anything to do with "primality" but I still like them. I'm sure you do.
We are what we love. Someone can pillar their loves/ passions around what htey find ideal about htemsef if they're highly narcissitic and need eveyrthing to be a titillating accessory for their image. I think half of the time it comes from desiring something and having the traits they're innately born with. But then they like to dress up their identity the added aspects. We have this innate proclivity for our species to conform dude. We don't like being the people who are tolerated/ given footing in society including out of pity prize/ mercy/ etc. We want to be the ones who have the social footing befitted/ given to those who are favored.

I'm not talking about primality. We have the impulse to be primal. That's our line of logic we proceed by. But our interests are somewhat reminiscent of primality. Men like things of high masculinity in most cases because it reflects what our ideal identity is. Same with women and makeup/ gracile forests/ trees. Everything we like is an extension of the ego that we want it to be wit very little exception. You don't see many niggas in the hood lining up after a perfume store do you? Or women running over to a rap concert talking about drugs and hoes.

You regard having fun. yes. When they develop the standards of being elite, then that's a different story. But why don't you think it's subconscious? Dude as I said, the primality mentality is what we derive fun by which is innately interrelational and we try to attain our contextualization of ourselves in relation to other people. With us usually being the superior How many damn times do I have to say this. lol

Well yes, sometimes women do have fun, but again there are subconscious processes of elitism they derive fun by. Is every girl doing things on behalf of hierarchy? no. But those things are still a part of it being there. Yes fun is what they wanna have. But the higher degree of elitism is still ever present and turns up more concentrated when you include more people into the sampling pool.

It's a basic human function for us to want to be elitist. Do some wanna have fun? Yes. Do some dogs wanna be pet? yes, some dogs have the impulse to want to have fun with their owners but not without the back of the brain sense of impression that people have about being properly contextualized. I guarantee dude that women don't just care about their own primal capital because they wanna be included and have fun with it. The fun is innately relational.

Honestly dude, imagine that that same girl is in the middle of the bar, but she's ugly. She's gonna have self esteem problems. If it were ONLY about just chilling/ having fun/ no primal relation or feeling evolutionarily impressive whatsoever then IT WOULD NOT BE EVEN RELEVANT.

The evolutionary factors in general matter but sometimes they really are just having fun, in ways that are not fully explained in terms of "evolution".
Just having fun is what I call pleasure by primalstriding. They're essentially showing they're goods and being underlyingly relational in front of other peopel. WOMEN CAN'T have fun unless they're of value in this way dude ugh shouldn't this be self explanatory? Why even put on makeup or be self conscious as almost ALL women are if the objective is to just enjoy themselves? This is where you're putting another colloquial platitude above the logistics of this. It would be stressful and tiring to go through this to have fun, and not a feeling of conquest and achievement. Women base the fun on primalconquest satisfaction momentum. Then they begin to have fun. Women need fun and thrill because htey have a low negagement span concerning anything deviating form the incentives of their soulzone. Yes women wanna have fun but it's exclusive to a few and hormonally haphazard. You gotta learn to pick of the slackings that their slant will see. The hormonal rush won't last FOREVER. And the fun factor will dissipate. Fun is just female indulgence, and what do females indulge in?

There's no mystery factor here of what women want that somehow is latent in their individual peculiarities. At least one that deviates from the rule of their primality wanting this kind of value capital.

In fact even thinking about it like this, makes it less enjoyable.
Irrelevant but exactly. Which is why you can't get women to course correct from who they are. They pillar enjoyment over ideals.

Even ugly women do this without understanding that their primal capital is highly predicated on looks, but still want to come off like they're 1st class people/ primal tyrannizers. Espeically when they can't change their looks and just will try to milk the istuation as best they can. Evne though they aren't able to withstand (in judgment) the same amount of criticism they're dishing out to others they still feel like they can give improportionate amounts of criticism to a man because they have got it easier. That women have the right away and can act rash with their selection... because of affirmative action for women and male roles.


I don't really think this is actually just inherent with them, I think it's largely the result of social engineering the current situation we are in, of which men are mostly to blame to begin with.

This is really just men acting like a bitch basically, in mass numbers.
People are shown what they really are when they have the affluence to not follow anything for survival, but the affluence/ space to choose who they want to be.

Women take a lot under horomonal consideration but essentially it's a male role to be a provider, dominator (to herself and others), prize, exception (in ways that she'll cumulatively examine as the relationship progresses). You can't really project this by being just a swagster and playing the chillaxer game all the time. You can but you still need substance behind it. It's foolish to believe that eveyrhting is ltaent and beneath a system.


You can be cool and also make moves and be dominant. I'm not sure I actually see the contradiction.
I'm saying that all coolness has to tie in with dominance. And not result in being try hard and embarassingly contrived. It needs to fit with the alpha arrangement and not be a beta bolsterment.

All the best swagsters I met were tall/ big/ strong had primal capital embedded in their body/ their connotation of ability.

Personally I've known at least a handful of guys who had none of these things and still killed it.
I'd ask how but your next response won't clarify because your probably couldn't explain it.
Again, a handful. The whole point of them I think you're getting at is because it's not logical not even they know how to do it. They probably hit the hormonal hunger spot. It's about juggling their engagement span on you by quenching their hormonal hunger hubs. Then you will gain primal pleasure momentum to the point of them developing a fondness for you.
You gotta remember there are selective stipulations to any girl. Very elitist girls want to have fun with the best. Even being a swagmaster is essentially a crucial aspect of the primarchy that they pendulum favor with a suitor with. A swagmaster shows curtness, inner game value, etc. A girl probably isn't consciously thinking of anything, you're right. But what subconsciously slakes their thirst for fun/ thrill is what they do want and there is a consistent science behind it that DOES have to do with primality. You NEED to do something dominarchical in the swagarchy which is essentially showing your value through swagness.

Again women wouldn't let every guy hit it. Women in clubs have seen it all. You can gain primal momentum through other mediums which, although can't fully subvert materialistic primality, can still hit their hormonal high of happiness/ fun they hunger for. If a girl is at a bar they're looking for sex and instant gratification. Elitists can't be swaggerswayed so easily.

Fun they can have, reserve, and arrange for their own personal pleasure in dominating and controlling others. To be honest with you. I know you're trying to contextualize what you're seeing. But swagging is a thrillride value that eventually burns out in accordance with logistics that must also be calculated. Essentially having to do again with not so much primality. Although that does matter. But essentially a thrillarch.

Swagarch is someone who prevails in the art of creating thrills.
Thrillarch is the hierarchy of someone who women subconsciously see as thrilling and thus under that kind of stimulus will join.
Primarchy is essentially the primal instinct for women to seek thrills in the first place. The evolutionary incentive/ and usually what is thrilling.
Dominarchy is a component of the primarchy which thrillarchy and swagarchy can be tied to. A dominant demanor is thrilling hence why bikers, rockstars/ musicians etc. work out so well in attraction. As opposed to someone who works I.T.
And a tenderarchy, which shows love, compassion, grace, and this make you look easy/ conquest/ betacard for most people. And a creepy weirdo in white knighting/ orbiting with tendertactics.

Main trees of Femipsyche.
Contrasting with Andropsyche (male psychology)

Return to Bash the Scene

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests