|
>>
|
No. 3304
A huge part of the manosphere, whether you're talking PUAs or Redpillers, is decent, but relatively bland dating advice wrapped up in advanced-sounding jargon to make it sound more impressive, bathed in counterproductive misogyny and misandry. It's as dehumanizing to men as it is to women. It also only represents a small part of the dating/sex/relationship advice scene. If you're looking for an alternative, look at published columns like Dan Savage. The dude is all about casual sex, but he's not a sexist dickhead. It's hard to give a critique without knowing exactly which subgroup of the manosphere you're talking about, but I'll do my best.
Many of their techniques are rooted in pseodoscience, and the manosphere is littered with scam artists taking advantage of desperate, lonely men. Most of this happens with PUAs, but they're closely intertwined with other manosphere communities, like Redpill. The guy who runs Return of Kings (Roosh V) also has a blog about PUA and sells videos and books.
Julien Blanc, the PUA recently in the news for forcing women to put their heads against his crotch, uses language similar to what you'd expect of someone selling a miracle weight loss cure. "Infallible" methods. The ability to "short-circuit a woman's rational and emotional mind". All for the low, low cost of 197 bucks for access to some, but not all of his videos. Another 200 for access to more videos, plus a ticket to just live event. Another 100 to have access to an 'exclusive' Facebook page. He justifies that by arguing that the full value of his package is 5,500. Wow, what a deal! He believes a series of Youtube-quality videos are worth 270 bucks an hour, but he's just discounting their true value for the sake of the consumer. He's not as subtle as others, but it mostly amounts to the same thing: buy this thing, and it can fix all your problems. He's a scam artist in blinking lights. Some of them aren't. But they all have a vested financial interest in getting you to adopt their philosophies, even if they're counterproductive to your dating efforts or leave you unhappy.
They also have a vested interest in lying to you and exaggerating their claims. People think that because it's a video, it's definite proof they're ladykillers. But just like reality TV shows can invent conflict by heavily editing the footage, PUAs tend to show a handful of brief clips that make their interactions seem smoother than they are. Taking pictures with a girl or kissing a girl or walking off with a girl isn't necessarily the same as sleeping with a girl. Neither is talking with one. It's also misleading because they tend to have a much higher failure rate than most men. They simply approach a very large number of women. Some RSD mentors suggest approaching at least 10 women in the first 15 minutes of entering a nightclub. Suppose their technique works on 1 out of 10 women, and an average guy works on 1 out of 3 women. If they approaches 60 women in the first hour and an average guy approaches 3, it'll seem like they're blowing the average guy out of the water, but in reality, they're really shitty at picking up women. If the guy had just stuck to his natural methods and spent less time looking at his drink, he could've easily blown the PUA out of the water.
That's just a general critique of PUA, which is again, deeply intertwined with Redpill and other manosphere material.
>it is imperative that men be as unaware of their slower, but progressively increasing SMV for as long as possible in order for them to achieve the prime directive of female hypergamy; realize the best genetic options and the best provisioning options she has the capacity to attract in that peak window. If Men become aware of their SMV before a woman can consolidate on her options with monogamous commitment her sexual strategy is defeated.
The very phrase "women's ... short peak of sexual viability" is something that needs more evidence than a chart and a link to the front page a Redpill blog. Humans are diverse. Some people age like milk. Some people like wine. This is what Tina Fey looked like in college versus now:
http://cdn2.thegloss.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/tina-fey-in-college.jpg
http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/Tina-tina-fey-447938_1439_1920.jpg
She was a complete dating failure through college. She was a virgin until 24. Now she's wealthy, famous, accomplished, and very attractive for someone that's 44. She could realistically date most top-tier comedians out there. Hell, even people like Louis CK are probably out of her league. Am I seriously supposed to believe that her SMV was higher in college? Am I supposed to believe that some hot college girl who's destined to be a retail store manager has a higher SMV than her? Is the average 36-year-old male's SMV higher? Most 23-year-old women I know are attracted to men their own age. So if that's the peak of their value, then why are they choosing men with such low values instead of older men? Likewise, why do most older men choose older women as partners if that's not the women's peak? Mathematically it's total nonsense.
Humans are incredibly diverse. Do all men you know act the same when dating? No. They like all kinds of women. Blondes, brunettes, redheads, skinny, fat, tall, short, muscular, masculine, dainty, feminine, smart, artsy, sports-lover, gamer, book worm, movie fanatic, music lover, politically involved, philosophical, religious, kinky, loyal, polyamorous, hotwife, scat lover, abuser, on and on. Men are attracted to all sorts of women with different personalities. It's the same with women. The women who you find in nightclubs don't act the same or age the same as a woman you'd find while at the library or while working at for a political campaign, nor are they attracted to the same types of men.
If you're trying to date a hipster girl, being an awkward, introverted musician will get you ten times farther than a PUA with abs. A girl who's going for her PhD in Physics is, likewise, going to prefer a fellow scientist with a handful of long-term relationships who she knows she can trust over some guy that approaches every girl in the bar, even the extremely drunk ones. PUA/Redpill complains about women being hypergamous, but when you pick up women that are attracted to men that aggressively approach women in nightclubs (again, the majority of women reject them, they just approach more women), well, sorry to say, but those are the same type of women who are likely to cheat and have sex with lots of men.
Most people are most attracted to people like themselves, and the most successful marriages are between people of similar backgrounds and futures. Marrying someone of a different age and educational background are correlated with a greater chance of divorce. Do you think the Alec Baldwins of the world are going to be happy or interested in some 20-year-old airhead in a nightclub? No. They're going to have a higher relationship success rate and a more fulfilling relationship with the Tina Feys. It's very telling that men at the 'male SMV peak' are not happiest or most functional in a relationship with women at the supposed peak of the women's SMV.
In the same way, changing yourself from an awkward nerd that plays too many video games to a PUA isn't going to make you happy. It's just going to set you up with a bunch of unfulfilling short term relationships with women they told you you were attracted to. If you're that type of guy, you're better off looking at an anime convention than a bar with overly loud music.
|