faceh
8hr ago
Yep.
Cue my Skin in the Game rant.
We are TEN FUCKING YEARS into Trump's political career and they STILL DO NOT GET why he is genuinely popular, and why he keeps 'winning' even as they characterize him as a buffoon.
People that are THIS wrong for THIS long ought to be filtered out of the court of public opinion, should not have positions of political authority. But no, they persist on the power of mass delusion (which, ironically, is what enables Trump to be successful too).
This is why one of the most genuinely useful rationalist skills to learn is "notice when you are confused" and "make beliefs pay rent."
If I'm constantly surprised by certain outcomes, clearly there's a knowledge or logic gap I need to address, rather than just stepping on the same rake over and over again.
Needing to be rewarded for doing/knowing/being good at things is the behavior of a child or a dog. Part of being a man is cutting your own path in the world for yourself, not because other told you to, rewarded you for doing so, told you: "you were are a good little boy", etc.
Cutting a path TOWARDS what?
There are some things that have to be terminal values or objective, or close to it, for people to keep charging on. Call if 'purpose,' or call it will to power, call it whatever, but there's some world-state, some emotional state, some actual place on the map that one is striving towards. What is the long-term payoff in this life?
Existential self-satisfaction and discovery
I have engaged in a lot of 'discovery' over the past 10 years. Introspection, outrospection, research, experimentation, trying things, failing, and sometimes succeeding.
And it turns out that the factors that gives me the highest amount of existential contentment and self-satisfaction are having an attractive partner that loves me and having a genetic legacy in the world that I can expect will outlast me.
Bar none. I've had the experience, and I can say with zero doubt the happiest days of my life were having a woman that I expected to marry at my side. I am not guessing, I've been there, I know how it feels, I know how motivating it was, I can remember how happy it made me.
Likewise, turns out one of the most important things in my life is my little 18 month old niece. I can only imagine how important a child who is my direct genetic lineage would feel.
Amazingly, I also noticed that these are the exact things that the modern world has made much, much harder to achieve, for completely structural/economic/political reasons that are beyond any individual man's control.
I suspect I'm not the only one who has come to this sort or realization. Far from it.
Idk, figure it out,
Yeah sure. 10 years training Krav Maga 5 of those years teaching it. I can probably physically dominate on the order of 95% of the male population. If mating rights with local females came down to a contest of physical violence, I'm likely winning a whole harem for myself. But no, society is not (currently) arranged that way. How is it arranged?
Acquiring that skill was a hard thing. Maybe someday I'll have to us that skill. I'd love to never have to physically harm someone, but the capacity to do so is good.
But... why spend time building such skills. I point towards my earlier self-discovery. If I can't find a loving partner, if I can't pass on my genes and raise and protect children of my own, what in all that is good and holy do I do with these skills? If I'm destined to be alone for my whole life then I'm missing something that I am PAINFULLY AWARE would make me happier and more content.
And if developing further skills isn't appreciably increase my chances of getting this, then the motivation to put in the effort is simply not there.
Incentives exist, incentives drive behavior no matter your philosophy on the matter. If there's some reward for a behavior, you get more of it. Full stop.
And the current incentives are lacking for going out and doing 'great things' for a world that isn't going to let you achieve the favorable outcome that most people are biologically wired to desire.
Like, dude I don't, and most guys don't need someone holding their hand every step of the way. But support, positive reinforcement, and constructive criticism are sort of necessary. Rome wasn't built by a bunch of individual dudes self-maxxing. It was cooperation, coordination, building through team efforts (and some slavery), working TOGETHER rather than just saying "I dunno, you go figure out what you want to do." In short, men helping men figure out a unified purpose, and driving in unison towards that purpose for decades on end.
And when they didn't have enough women to go around, they banded together and guess what they did. And presumably your philosophy would approve of such path-carving. It shows gumption.
But it'd really help to make the whole process easier if we can at least agree that the social baseline is in fact slanted against men, and the factors that enabled and encouraged men to succeed not even 50 years ago have been knocked out from under them. AT LEAST BE HONEST ABOUT THE MAGNITUDE OF THE TASK, and then we can maybe acknowledge that solving it/overcoming it will require some serious cooperation between men, not just a bunch of individual guys wandering around 'figuring things out' ad hoc, with most of them failing, individually.
So, how can you cooperate/coordinate with other men to improve things?
faceh
9hr ago
In terms of the larger genetic fitness level, many many women are successfully filtering themselves out too.
But this would lead us to the aside of how young ladies being on hormonal birth control probably screws up their actual desires and has them filtering for factors that aren't great for long term reproductive success.
That's only a problem if you believe that men in general or on average deserve a fair chance at accomplishing things like romantic partnership, sex, children, family, general life satisfaction.
What can I say?
I'm a man, I would like a 'fair shot' at every one of those things. I think the world that is ordered to enable the majority of men to achieve this outcome if they can follow a few relatively simple guidelines, and become 'worthy' of raising kids, will produce a LOT more human happiness and long term thriving on net than the trajectory we're on now.
If women themselves are less happy by any reasonable measure then clearly this whole experiment has failed to produce good results!
The world was never fair. But it is likely that it has become substantially less fair in this regard than most men were ever taught to expect.
So as a very basic level of fairness, if the actual 'rules' are thus:
They're concerned with finding the highest quality partner for themselves, and the highest quality partner is heavily determined by the partner's genes, and so the point of the test is purely to discriminate, not to be a system that men can learn from in order to pass it. The entire point is that they should be able to pass it without any help, despite the, again, bizarre, contradictory, nonsensical nature of the test, which also has a horrendous feedback mechanism.
THEN WE SHOULD BE HONEST AND ACTUALLY TEACH THIS AS TRUTH.
I will grant it as true for purposes of discussion.
If the entire social system does not teach men that this is how things work, and inculcates them with rules like "be yourself," "treat her with respect," "believe women," and "you have male privilege"... and these men find that adhering to these rules is not effective for achieving their goals...
This is what creates the opportunity for Red Pill Influencers to step in. The whole reason it is called "red pill" is the metaphor for 'waking up from the program' and breaking the conditioning of how men are socially expected to act... and accept the biological reality of what actually produces romantic, sexual, and genetic success!
The only reason they can claim to be providing special/secret knowledge is that society and culture have in fact been hiding this information. Hence why I said:
Its like we have a culturally-enforced Women are Wonderful Effect. It doesn't matter if they're performing objectively anti-social, destructive behavior for all to see. Women can do no wrong therefore if women are doing it, it isn't wrong. If you say its wrong and level a critique, YOU are in fact the bad person.
So in short, even if the world can't be made more fair in outcomes, we could at least teach men the reality of how the game is played.
And what we appear to be observing with Clavicular Et al. a huge generational cohort of men who have been exposed to and accept that reality, and they are trying to optimize as best they can, and (unsurprisingly) the social institutions that want to maintain the status quo revile this. But they can't refute them.
faceh
14hr ago
Neither of these require any external input, western society does not deter or hobble you from doing them.
Well that's two, then.
Of course, what's the incentive for doing them if the reward isn't there.
Men ARE in fact deterred from traditional paths that would lead to knowledge. A properly motivated guy can learn all he wants through self-driven research and reading and discussion... like we have here. He just won't get the official 'certificate' that signifies he is intelligent and knowledgeable.
But he will not earn much respect merely for his intelligence and knowledge unless he can convert that into money, which is also made very difficult these days.
And becoming skilled at 'hard things' ultimately depends on what barriers exist to acquiring the skills. And what, precisely, do we consider 'hard things' in terms of skill?
Yeah, but the feedback mechanisms are all screwed up.
Mistakes men make are probably overcorrected, i.e. punished too quickly and harshly for them to learn the proper lesson. Related to my point that women aren't good at gracefully rejecting guys (or accepting rejection) who approach them.
Attempts by men to coordinate into groups designed to advance their mutual interests and provide mutual support and advice tend to get disrupted and infiltrated if they gain any success.
Taking the correct action usually doesn't offer immediate rewards, and progress can be hard to perceive. Hell, you can even be PUNISHED for taking the 'correct' path, and the rewards only manifest if you push through that and have faith it will pay off.
A guy is going to take a LOT of lumps before he happens on the 'working' strategy, and he can't even be completely sure if the working strategy will be enough to win until he's followed it past the point of probable no return.
So its "figure it out on your own" but you dropped men into the wilderness with a mislabeled map, barely any supplies, and not even a walkie talkie, much less an expert guide to keep them from stepping off a cliff. So they can set off walking in a given direction and hope it works out, but without the actual resources to tell if they're walking to their doom or not.
And when the comparison point is VIDEO GAMES, which have very tight feedback loops, visible rewards and progression, and satisfying 'gameplay,' the real world seems intolerable by comparison.
faceh
15hr ago
There are some RedPill guys who were around since the early days who have maintained a sheen of respectability, and they aren't spotlight-seeking anymore, so they might interpret an interview invite as an unnecessary risk.
A man is a provider. A man is skilled at hard things. A man has a beautiful woman. A man is knowledgeable and intelligent. A man has a family. A man is powerful. A man is wealthy. A man has convictions. A man fights for a cause. A man appears effortlessly cool or funny. A man has a strong healthy body. A man is a good father.
Lets just take a quick audit, though.
Which of those things does western society actively deter and hobble young men from achieving these days? I'd argue almost all of them except the strong-healthy-body part, which is why so many men are now gym-maxxing, its the only unrestricted avenue left.
How much of the advice we do provide young men is actually outdated/useless under modern constraints? i.e. actively unhelpful and arguably setting them up for failure?
What if a prospective man surveys his potential paths to manhood, and concludes that the current structure of society is his primary obstacle to achieving it? What if he's correct?
What course of action does that man likely arrive at, assuming he doesn't give up and become a NEET on the spot.
And the whole problem with "the rewards are totally worth it" is that the big reward: wife, family, kids... those are objectively becoming less likely outcomes. Everywhere. So how do you convince these guys to get up and keep plugging away when they can observe with their own two eyes that it is increasingly unlikely that they'll get their preferred outcome unless something drastic changes?
faceh
19hr ago
You can say it's selectively edited to make them look bad but if you watch it, it's hard to say it does anything than show conversations with them play out in real time and leave it to the viewer to make their own judgements (which will surely be negative, because the interview subjects are objectively absolute bell-ends).
I'm not throwing any particular accusation out.
But Documentaries are always going to be 'tainted' by the choice of interviewees, the topics they actually ask about, and selective, if not deceptive editing.
I think the types who agreed to interview are also somewhat more likely to be bad examples since they are the attention-seeking types, rather than the more grounded, intelligent ones who could in theory steelman their own positions.
But hey, if Louis' sole intent is to expose a grift and undermine the status of the grifters, I can overall approve. But again, its not examining why this grift is successful.
Albeit adorkable fearless modern day Socrates may not be an ideal your average teenage boy is going to gravitate towards (although I actually did as a teen).
Dorks need role models too.
And I guess he can at least attest to being married with kids.
I've seen clips of the documentary. Not going to watch it.
Just seems like your standard scare piece, like they moved on from climate change, declining bee populations, or unhealthy fast food meals, and now its the big, scary red pill men who are corrupting the youth and we should be having a satanic panic about it RIGHT NOW.
What just viscerally puts me off is how there is, apparently, no sympathetic examination of what exactly appeals about these guys. Sure you can kind of handwave it "guys want to feel powerful, superior, and important, and these are effectively con men who prey upon those urges." Fine. Whatever. What conditions in the material world are such that young men are looking to these men as role models, what is missing in their lives that they seek to fill it with this?
And I make this point semi-often... they always fail to offer up a competing vision of true 'healthy' masculinity that men should aspire to instead. Or to point out a non-toxic male role model that actually engenders the values they suggest men ought to seek to represent.
This creates an inherently muddled message to men. "DON'T listen to the siren song of red pill grifters, DON'T give in to misogyny, DON'T become a parody of masculinity. That's VERY BAD."
"Okay okay, but what should I do instead?"
"Fuck you, figure it out yourself or die alone."
It is a critical problem if you ask me. There are very VERY few well-known, popular male figures who espouse and represent a form of masculinity that demonstrates an appealing and attainable path an otherwise average guy can follow to get a meaningful, fulfilling life. Mike Rowe tries but I also just recently learned that Mike Rowe and his long term romantic partner ARE NOT MARRIED and DO NOT HAVE KIDS. Dude.
And I'll hit on it one more time: Charlie Kirk fulfilled that function pretty well and got murdered, in cold blood, in broad daylight, on camera and there has been no real replacement forthcoming. Yes I'm mad.
And young men by and large don't seem to want to outsource this stuff to social media or celebrities. They'd rather have a father figure (ideally an actual father) in their life to personally guide them on the path and demonstrate a healthy, successful approach to romance, business, family, life. And its the fact that society fails to provide that for millions of men that we find ourselves where we are.
You can dip into the stats and studies, its beyond obvious that whatever impact social media influencers have on guys, you can assume there's double that impact occuring on the female of the species. Its not even really controversial to say that science confirms that women are more susceptible to groupthink, peer pressure, social shaming, and use conformity to maintain social status. Whatever you want to refer to the social mechanisms for consensus formation as, its women who are being guided by it.
Sabrina Carpenter gets thousands of women to sing a lyric about men being 'useless' and we don't get thinkpieces delving into what impact this has on impressionable young women.
And of course, if you're so worried about the takeaway men get from redpill culture, please, feel free to tell me how you think men should react to THAT. What exactly is the 'healthy' male response there?
Its like we have a culturally-enforced Women are Wonderful Effect. It doesn't matter if they're performing objectively anti-social, destructive behavior for all to see. Women can do no wrong therefore if women are doing it, it isn't wrong. If you say its wrong and level a critique, YOU are in fact the bad person.
So Louis Theroux tossing ANOTHER parcel of cultural baggage onto young men's backs is simply not going to help the situation much. And I daresay its emblematic of cowardice, to a certain extent. If he wanted to court controversy and invite discussion, do the approximate equivalent of this documentary on the female side, look into what they're pulling from tiktok, from the media they consume, and how THEY are being taken in by bad actors for personal profit at the expense of their mental health and relationship with the opposite gender.
faceh
1d ago
Yep. And maybe the SAVE act isn't the right solution.
But its the one that's actually being offered.
I've said that I would actually be okay with the death penalty for anyone caught fabricating some large number of votes.
The system is THAT important to maintain faith in it.
And I also suggest sanctions for trying to overturn an election based on spurious claims of fraud, since that also undermines faith in the system.
This is what I genuinely despise about the discourse on this matter (and many matters like it).
The standard of proof for every single element of the claim of election fraud gets escalated to an unreasonable level, and every time you 'prove' some particular element of it, they insist on strict proof of some even more granular point of fact. Plus motte and baileying from "oh there's no proof of voter fraud" to "Well you can't show that the outcome was effected!"
"Okay sure they pulled ballots from under a table... prove those weren't legitimate ballots that were just... unconventionally stored." "Okay, this ballot can't be traced to an actual voter... but you can't show that it was intentionally filled in by a third party."
Or whatever.
When the meta point is we really need to make sure important elections don't have the scent of fraud, even accidentally.
faceh
1d ago
Lets say it was a bit unreasonable.
Instilling faith in the 'sanctity' of the vote tallies is critical to the successful functioning of any democratic system, at any scale.
It seems objectively worth whatever burden it adds to the average citizen to make it significantly harder to cheat even a small quantity of votes. And its a very visible measure too. People should be more willing to believe and accept the outcome, absent other anomalies in the count.
And as long as there's a well-established and trusted method for obtaining ID, then its not even something 'arbitrary' like a poll tax or poll test, it really can't be abused to restrict who has the ability to vote.
Anyway, Democrat opposition to voter ID without any coherent argument for it has noticeably raised my suspicion/belief that they rely on some level of cheating to win. Adding on my experiences with Florida elections once they were made more secure.
faceh
2d ago
Agent was successfully able to submit a public record request via an online portal, given sufficient detail and just a little nudging.
The power this potentially unlocks is quite sizeable, actually.
faceh
3d ago
I buy most from Sam's Club, I generally trust that the products will be quality and won't kill me.
And you get bulk pricing.
If its grey-market stuff, I intentionally look for sellers that have a physical presence that is close enough to me that I could, if needed, show up and confront someone personally and/or burn down their building.
Or, more seriously, that makes it easy to attempt legal action on them, although if you dig into how these entities are structured, its clear they're really trying to make it hard to pin them down.
Beyond that, repeated positive interactions and referrals from trusted friends are the go-to.
faceh
6d ago
Its very fair to ask a friend "this person sounds great... why are they single?"
There's a few fine answers to that question.
One of my buddies got his GF from our friend group b/c the current GF asked her friend, who is close friends with my buddy, if he was single and looking and then had the friend nudge him in her direction, and things worked out well because the friend was a good intermediary and could vouch for both parties.
But they'd had a decent amount of time to assess each other from somewhat afar. It wasn't a cold/blind introduction.
faceh
6d ago
I initially agreed because I thought I could change her mind back.
Been there.
Its odd that I used to (and somewhat still do) believe that there was a specific sequence of words I might be able to utter that would 'fix' things and get them back to where I wanted.
But attraction really don't work that way.
and I learned that this woman was a terrible person to be friends with because her extreme dogmatism combined with terrible mental health.
Also been there. Had a really awkward Friends -> mutual crush -> 'breakup' -> friends -> FWB -> breakup/blocked sequence with one girl. Took me like 5 years to realize she was irretrievably messed up in the head and she was happily using me as a psychological crutch, which was causing a drag on my mental health. She reacted poorly to my attempt to create a boundary, which confirmed that cutting her out was the right choice.
I think having female friends who you have no intention of sleeping with ever is perfectly fine and perhaps even good.
I've got a solid handful of such friends, and the thing they have in common is I have negligible levels of sexual attraction to them (like, I wouldn't turn down an offer, but I get no arousal just from being around them) and they're usually partnered to someone and thus I mentally sort them as 'off the market.'
I think the friendship->lover boundary should never be crossed, because unfortunately you can't really go back.
I think you can, but in my experience you need like a solid 18-24 months of virtually zero contact and of course lingering feelings can flare up so you have to keep a boundary in place on how often you hang out.
Me, I am loathe to give up a connection with someone I share a lot of pleasant memories with.
I honestly can't blame anyone they get into a relationship with from being antsy about it, though.
Romance is just a messy thing, tied in with our baser instincts. Even having a fully intellectual comprehension of how it works you'll still be susceptible to the standard traps and pitfalls.
faceh
7d ago
I've basically resorted to telling any women who suggest mere friendship "I literally have all the good friends I need or want." Nicely, but making it clear I'm not that guy who will remain in orbit indefinitely.
Now, if I know them as part of an existing friend network or through work or because I happen to run into them on semi-regular occasions, fine. I can pop by, be friendly and engaging, and see where it goes. I just won't be fielding long, emotional text conversations or helping them move heavy objects.
The effort required to put up even the facade of friendship with multiple women doesn't seem worth it unless she is actively wing(wo)manning for you. And maintaining mere 'facades' of friendship is way too manipulative/dishonest for my taste.
And my experience with women wingmen is laughable. They'll bring this one friend who is "single and super nice that you should meet" to a gathering. And she's 50+ pounds overweight or a major butterface and usually poor social skills to boot (i.e. there's reasons she's single). So you have to politely reject without either insulting your friend or the referral.
Happened to me 2, maybe 3 times in the past 5 years? And if you're out and about they'll suggest the most insane approaches to you. "You should talk to that 45-year-old cougar-looking lady with the back tattoo!"
Yes, having female friends is important so you can have a some social proof you're not a creepy loser and have access to her potentially single friends, but don't expect them to be that big a help in landing one.
faceh
7d ago
This is my diagnosis.
There's a solid number of women who are absolutely down to clown if you get them in the mood. They don't just talk the talk.
But many, MANY of them get engrossed in the fantasy, they read the romantasy books, watch the shows and movies, maybe even watch the porn, and will engage in massive amounts of dirty talk, digitally, but are terrified of having the actual physical interaction. Maybe they dip a toe in and then immediately retreat back to the safe, comfortable world of fiction.
And in some cases, if you end up part of their fantasy world, and then break that fantasy in some way, either from rejecting them, or giving them the ick, or, hell, you actually help them act on the urges but your performance isn't up to snuff (good luck living up to minotaur standards), and they get incandescently angry at you.
Something about the collapsing of the ideal they imagined to the dirtier, lacklustre reality leads to disappointment that manifests as anger.
Its something like accepted knowledge that women get off way more on the mental side of sex whereas men, despite being very visual, really need physical interaction to be completely sated. Hence why strip clubs for women aren't really a thing. And current tech is much more catered towards entertaining the mental aspects of sexuality, whilst keeping the physical at a 'safe' distance. So I'd guess many women now have a completely enclosed, fantasy-centric approach to their pleasure, and the thought of making the jump to realspace is daunting.
faceh
7d ago
Men will have interest in it insofar as it can lead to meeting attractive women.
I just think 'you're only doing this to get in my pants' is a reaction women often have when the guy enters the female-oriented space.
From what I've seen, mom is the source of the problem, wants to control her so she doesn't get into trouble but also wants to be 'best friends' with her.
The habits she's built up are probably quite set now.
faceh
8d ago
I have managed to find a balance where I can have a jovial atmosphere around the office, keep morale up by occasionally going out to dinner with staff but otherwise keeping healthy distance such that I don't engage with their personal lives much and definitely don't have text conversations about non work stuff that might lead elsewhere.
That said, since legal assistants tend to either be young women in their early 20's OR older, 50+ ladies, I do see the temptation that arises when you've got a nubile young thing around a bunch of Type A personalities.
I know of at least one attorney who imploded his personal life (not his law practice, funny enough) by getting an assistant pregnant.
We do a Christmas party that involves our other offices every year, and like 5 years back one of the attractive younger assistants got pretty drunk and was hitting on me slyly but openly. The means and opportunity was there, but equal parts concern for my job AND the fact I was still with my ex at the time kept me from acting. In all retrospect, since the assistant left the firm not too long thereafter, and the Ex broke up with me, it probably wouldn't have done much harm in the end. But its the principle of the thing.
It didn't even leave that much impression, since I cannot even remember the assistant's name. Else I might have tried to look her up after the breakup.
faceh
8d ago
I sometimes ask LLMs to do Fermi estimates on the number of single women in the U.S. who meet certain sets of criteria in terms of their eligibility as a partner.
Those results are usually disheartening on their own. But I haven't dared ask what percentage of those women are actually 'on the market' in any real sense, that is, available such that you might encounter them if your social surface area is reasonably large.
I fear that a relatively chaste/modest, low maintenance woman is also less likely to be out and about and open to meeting people. If you do see them in the real world you'll pass like ships in the night. AI boyfriends might exacerbate this.
I go to restaurants and bars these days and the phenomenon of "woman sitting by herself but dressed up like she wants attention" doesn't seem to be a thing (if it ever was?). You see older adults (in my area, anyway), a few mixed groups, usually one (1) lady's group sitting all together, and a smattering of couples or lone dudes.
More and more young adults living with parents gives a hint here.
Last year I encountered an extremely tragic case of a young lady, cute, petite but pleasantly curvaceous, smart, but her entire life was just working in her parents' business, taking classes, then home to live with her parents, where she played LoL or Overwatch until like 1 a.m.. If she went out it was usually with the same 3 people. Desperately seemed to want a relationship, but didn't know a damn thing about flirting and... get this... at age 25 her mother still controlled her bank account.
I don't think she realized how much of a honking red flag that last bit was, a guy won't want to date a woman whose mother has that much sway over her life at that age. She didn't get out to social events often enough to meet many guys, and wouldn't know how to converse with them if she did. And, alas, she turned my own offer/request for a date down.
She's like 80% of the way to being the complete package for a stable, friendly type of guy, but I daresay she'll hit 30 without a serious relationship under her belt unless she gets out from under Mom's thumb and puts herself out there while avoiding the pitfalls of modern romance.
Yep.
Dance classes/socials at least anticipate that you'll be interacting with the other members, and physically touching them, and getting to show off a skill.
The logic as to why single men would be able to pull attention there is at least sound... if there's a decent gender ratio.
Classes where you just show up, do some work on your own at an instructors behest, then leave without much of a fraternization period might encourage familiarity over the course of time. But that means the guy has to keep showing up, repeatedly, to show he's not just there to pull women, and HOPE that one he finds attractive is open to approach. Not a very active approach angle.
I teach Krav Maga classes at my gym, and when people, especially women, are new they tend to come in two minutes before class, do the class, then bolt, but warm up over time to the social aspect of it. If they don't, they often disappear within a few weeks.
But I've noticed a somewhat unfortunate selection effect where the single ladies who want to take the classes often have sexual assault, stalkers, or similar trauma that compelled them to seek out such training. And they thus have personal issues that make them a little wary of male attention in general.
So ultimately, the sort of event where:
A) Attractive, single women would attend;
B) They're actually actively looking for partners/accept approaches;
C) Aren't damaged goods;
D) Interaction between men and women is encouraged;
and
D) There's a balanced gender ratio.
Just do not seem to exist hardly anywhere, even when people try to intentionally create such spaces.
One's workplace might be good for this but huge risks there.
I think its somewhat less about being easy and more about being legible.
Redpill guys make the art of attracting a woman legible.
Looksmaxxers make the status game being played legible.
Bodybuilders make the process of slapping on absurd amounts of muscle very, VERY legible.
Science as a whole makes the basic biological/evolutionary/psychological underpinnings of our otherwise inscrutable traditions and social rules more legible.
If there's no legible rules, if the game being played changes on a dime or on the whim of some fickle women, or because political parties change, it becomes completely impossible to play this game in a 'rational' way.
And then people's fates are decided entirely by luck and a few factors they may or may not be able to control.
More options
Context Copy link