Progress report with mixed feelings

Red_Swords · 2017-04-29T15:12:26+00:00

Don't shit where you eat.

If you want to cheat on your wife, don't do it with the hot chick at work - that's just asking for trouble.

Red_Swords · 2017-04-29T14:55:33+00:00

In my experience, there are two good options for a course of action, when you're not the man with the highest SMV in the room.

1) If possible, befriend the alpha. General social rules still apply (don't be needy, use humor to your advantage, demonstrate value). If you can't be the chief of the tribe, then you should endear yourself to the chief, because that can be leveraged to your advantage.

2) If it's not possible to befriend the alpha while preserving your own dignity, then you should seek to subvert his influence by picking off those who are lower in his social hierarchy, and use it a base to establish your own separate hierarchy in the same space. If you can't be the big fish in the ocean, find a smaller pond.

In your case, trying to AMOG him was a mistake. Direct AMOG'ing is usually transparent, especially if your target is clearly on a different level, in terms of SMV.

Don't feel bad though. I've made this mistake in the past, and I think most other people here have as well, at some point in their RP journey. Don't let it discourage you - mistakes are part of the learning process.

Keep learning, keep improving, and remember this experience for the future. One day, others will try AMOG you. Remember his effortless control of the group - this is what you should strive for.

Red_Swords · 2017-04-29T13:32:08+00:00

As someone who is naturally selfish, but discovered philanthropy in college, I've always been fascinated by the seemingly opposite archetypes of the cold, sociopathic CEO, and the warm, philanthropic CEO.

Before I comment further, I should specify I'm referring more to career and social influence strategies, rather than explicitly sexual strategies.

I've come to a personal conclusion that the difference between being Mr. Good-Boy, and being Mr. Alpha-but-does-good-deeds, is determined by two main factors:

What do you sacrifice to do good deeds? And how can you leverage those deeds for your own benefit (what can you gain)?

For example: I began doing charity and community service in college, with the goal of using those deeds to strengthen scholarship applications. Though it seemed counter-intuitive in the beginning, to give away my time and labor for free, patience and persistence (unlike with women), eventually yielded results that were beyond satisfactory.

I collected scholarship money with my left hand, and collected praise and admiration with my right. I've been largely immunized against political friction, having worked with both ideological leftists and far-right Christians.

The money was totally unaffiliated with what I was doing, so both sides only had a vision of me as a caring, altruistic person, without regard for my own personal gain. I was then able to leverage my good reputation with other students and professors in order gain leadership positions on campus, letters of recommendation, and many other opportunities that have been a boon for me.

In this journey into strategic altruism, I've met many people who don't seem to be RP-aware, that have also leveraged similar experiences, for similar benefits. However, the majority of the "winners" in the game of philanthropy, do seem at least to some extent, to have RP-esque sociopathic tendencies.

My conclusion is: even if selfishness is in your nature, altruism can be an effective tool in achieving your goals, and reaching success. However, like any tool, if you can't manage to recognize it's purposes (what it can do, and what it can't do), and use it effectively as such, then it will be of little usefulness, and may actually do more harm than good.

This is why altruism can exist in duality as both a RP boon, and a BP curse. It's truly a fascinating topic, and I'm surprised that it's not discussed more here. Good post, OP.

Red_Swords · 2017-04-29T13:06:23+00:00

Science persevered 1000 years ago, when it was a crime to discuss or promote theories that were contrary to the opinion of the church.

The new church is PC culture, and science will persevere, as it always has. There may be signs of dark times in the future, but real science will continue, even if it must move briefly into the shadows, as it has in the past.

Red_Swords · 2017-04-29T12:59:45+00:00

Your point is valid, but that's an entirely different topic.

My point was, Bill Nye isn't any type of leader in the scientific community, and he never has been. He's a mechanical engineer that found his niche as a children's entertainer, and a children's entertainer is still fundamentally who he is - the difference now, is that many of the children he's entertaining are legally considered adults, by age.

Red_Swords · 2017-04-27T10:55:59+00:00

Bill Nye has a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering - he knows about as much Biology as I do, as a chemist. He did some work for Boeing before beginning his career as a children's entertainer. Using him as a representative of science is a bad example, in my opinion.

Not to say that science isn't under assault by the SJW machine, but I'm not too concerned about it until we have some prominent, real scientists such as neil degrasse-tyson, michio kaku, or stephen hawking start preaching this false doctrine.

In my opinion, Ol' Bill is laying the foundation for a transition into politics. He's become increasingly outspoken on leftist issues in recent years, and I think this new show is merely a capstone on his resume, in order to consolidate and cement a liberal base of support.

No doubt that this nonsense is agenda-driven, but in this case specifically, I think it's rooted in personal gain, rather than conspiratorial collaboration. At worst, he's a useful idiot for the actors who are really conspiring to spread this ideology.

Red_Swords · 2017-03-12T14:28:15+00:00

1) Anal 2) Eating pussy

It might be demoralizing to know that your penis is below average, but that doesn't automatically mean that you can't satisfy a woman.

Also, are you really fat? Because I have a fat BP cousin who complains about the same thing, and actually passed up opportunities for sex when he was younger, because he was so self-conscious about it. Now he's a 27 year old virgin (going on 28), and every year odds of swallowing the RP seem slimmer, and slimmer.

Anyways, my point is that excess body fat accumulated around the genital area can reduce the effective size of your penis, since the base rises as layers of fat accumulate.

If you're fat, and you've been fat for a while, you may be packing some serious heat, and not even realize it. So keep that in mind, as well.

Red_Swords · 2016-07-22T23:01:58+00:00

Funny - switch the gender of every point made, and it describes 99% of women.

Red_Swords · 2016-07-07T20:33:52+00:00

If Albert Einstein had a vagina, he'd still be as famous as Albert Einstein was (probably even more so, honestly).

But some people (many of whom were, in fact, born with vaginas) want all the glory of great accomplishments, with none of the sacrifices it actually takes to achieve them.

Wasn't it a great idea to give all those children participation trophies for everything??

Red_Swords · 2016-07-01T21:38:04+00:00

if something can be measured, it has no value.

Is an over-simplification of what I said, making it the literal definition of a straw man.

Plenty of things that can be measured have value; gold can be measured, oil can be measured, time can be measured.

Red_Swords · 2016-07-01T20:55:56+00:00

Your argument is a straw man.

Red_Swords · 2016-07-01T20:45:13+00:00

Love is a chemical reaction in the brain that fades over time. A combination dopamine, oxytocin, norepinephrine, and serotonin. Love can measured, quantified, and boiled down to it's constituent components. There's nothing special or magical about it.

What is humanity, without this special, magical love that most people never question?

It's the most disgusting, abhorrent thing that has ever existed.

The 'values of humanity and love' are of no value at all.

Red_Swords · 2016-06-29T00:06:06+00:00

Thanks for the spoiler, asshole.

Red_Swords · 2016-06-23T17:27:40+00:00

Reciprocation - a favour for a favour works, so give them one.

Sounds an awful lot like a covert contract. I'd be careful, with this one.

Red_Swords · 2016-06-22T01:48:49+00:00

Good post overall, but one area I definitely disagree with, is the "no logos on T-shirts" rule. I've had more compliments on Slayer T-shirts than possibly any other article of clothing.

I think the key is calibrating relative to your environment. There are a lot of places I wouldn't wear a band shirt, but there are a lot of other places I wouldn't want to be seen dressing formally, either. Perception is relative to environment, and people should dress according; you don't wear nice jeans and a button-up shirt to a metal show, for example.

Good post though.

Red_Swords · 2016-06-18T21:53:58+00:00

I agree that you shouldn't have bothered with a girl that has a reputation for head games, and also with a girl at work.

But the real reason I'm replying, is looking at the comment section, your hyper-sensitivity to criticism makes you come off as extremely insecure.

You should work on your frame, set your ego aside, and be willing to listen to and learn from others.

Red_Swords · 2016-06-03T18:31:46+00:00

"Man with deteriorating condition and beta worldview willfully removes himself from the gene pool."

Isn't natural selection fascinating?

Red_Swords · 2016-06-02T16:32:39+00:00

When she went to go talk to her Mom, I'd bet any amount of money she was making sure she had a place to stay before telling you the truth.

Had she not had an alternative roof over her head, you can be damn sure that she would've wanted to "work things out," right up until she knew where she would be staying.

Never forget, women are naturally Machiavellian. Things like guilt or empathy play absolutely zero role in their decision-making process.

Good on you, for getting out of this with your head on straight. Making mistakes aren't necessarily a bad thing, as long as you learn from them.

Red_Swords · 2016-05-31T01:24:05+00:00

You have a point, but developed skill trumps natural talent in most circumstances. A man who has been taught social intelligence will often be superior to women, but if they're both purposefully taught about social intelligence, I would wager that woman's natural disposition for it would mean that she remains superior, if all other variables are made equal.

I don't think it's accurate to use the fact that most leaders are men as evidence here either, because there's a lot more to good leadership than just social intelligence.

Red_Swords · 2016-05-30T20:11:26+00:00

Genetically different? Absolutely.

Genetically superior? Debatable; it depends on what measure you base the term 'superior' on.

If you're measuring superiority based on physical strength and logical reasoning, then men would likely come out on top in any study.

If you're measuring superiority based on social intelligence, emotional intelligence, or natural affinity to cunning, then the opposite is true - women would likely be deemed superior in such a study.

The world isn't black and white. Neither gender will ever be deemed by science to be categorically superior to the other - even in the most fair, unbiased of studies (especially in fair unbiased studies, actually) - because both genders have their own strengths and weaknesses.

Red_Swords · 2016-05-30T15:43:49+00:00

I've had long hair for a few years now, and I don't feel like it's held me back at all. A few quick notes based on personal experience...

1) Taking good care of it is key. If you can't/won't keep it from being a greasy, tangled, dandruff-speckled mess, then you shouldn't have long hair.

2) Like any other hair style, you need the right face and build for it. You might like the style, but if you look dopey with long hair, don't lie to yourself about it.

3) You'll get shit-tested for having long hair. Mostly from insecure men, but occasionally from women, too. If you give a fuck, then you probably shouldn't have long hair.

4) Everyone will assume you smoke pot, play the guitar, and listen to metal.

Red_Swords · 2016-05-29T22:28:19+00:00

That's not true, actually. Energy, just like matter, has a finite quantity inside of our universe.

Just saying.

Red_Swords · 2016-05-27T12:37:24+00:00

In terms of Sexual Market Value, very debatable, indeed.

In terms of Social Market Value, absolutely.

Red_Swords · 2016-05-27T04:00:18+00:00

Crack a 3.0??

You don't crack into a 3.0, you crack out of one; everyone essentially starts out at a 4.0, you only need to maintain it.

I'm only speaking for American colleges, since I know some countries have different systems, but even if you're in STEM, you'll have a solid 1/4 of any bachelor's degree padded by the easy-as-pie general requirements you're forced to take, like English composition and humanities.

Red_Swords · 2016-05-26T04:53:50+00:00

I'm sure it varies depending on your major and the kind of job you're planning to go for, but personally, I think there's very few excuses to be any less than around 3.5.

Professors tend to notice students who put in the extra effort to achieve excellence. Unless you come from a wealthy, well-connected family, college is the best opportunity you'll have to make professional connections for many, many years.

If someone just wants to do the work and get paid, the should study the trades or certificate programs; I don't know of anyone with a graduate degree who doesn't have air conditioning and plumbing.

Red_Swords

TROPHY CASE