You Had One Job

Posted on | September 29, 2015 | 155 Comments

Jared Rutledge and Jacob Owens.

“Our relationship was not based around sex. We went on legitimate dates. I met his friends. We confided in one another. He showed genuine feelings and was vulnerable.”
— “April”

“I vouched for him, for his character, for his business. I was so upset I had friends on that list.”
— “Candyce”

“I am angry that he saw me as a conquest. I am angry that he was dishonest. I am angry that he humiliated myself and the 50 other women on that list. I am angry that for a second I let him make me feel shame.”
— “Cara”

“Don’t s–t where you eat.”

A guy named Steve shared that bit of timeless wisdom with me in 1977. Steve was a Kappa Alpha at Jacksonville (Ala.) State University and had a steady girlfriend. He was giving me a ride home to Atlanta and we started talking (predictably) about women. Steve explained that, while he had no intention of cheating on his girlfriend Judy, with whom he had been going steady since high school, were he ever to do so, it wouldn’t be with anyone at JSU or in his hometown. “Don’t s–t where you eat,” because girls always talk. If you’re going to screw around, never do so within socio-geographic proximity of your main relationship.

Of course, monogamous fidelity is the wisest romantic strategy of all, but testosterone-crazed young bachelors determined to exploit women’s “sexual empowerment” (as promiscuity is viewed in liberal “pro-sex” feminist discourse) get hooked on the thrill of the hunt and, alas, must learn their lessons the hard way.

“Don’t s–t where you eat” also means that sexual adventures should never be conducted in such a way as to jeopardize your employment. Beware of any temptation to screw around with women at work, because if such an affair goes wrong, the ramifications could ruin your career (unless you’re Bill Clinton, in which case the liberal media will do everything possible to protect you). Young fools always insist on learning such lessons the hard way, which brings us to the interesting saga of idiotic douchebags Jared Rutledge and Jacob Owens:

Two coffee shop owners in North Carolina have come under fire after it was revealed that they were the men behind a demeaning blog and podcast that mocked their supposed sexual conquests — as women speak out against the men they thought they knew.
Jared Rutledge, 31, and Jacob Owens, 27, who are the owners of Waking Life Espresso in Asheville, graphically discussed their alleged liaisons with more than 50 women on their Holistic Game blog, podcast series and Twitter account, before they were outed by the blog Jared And Jacob Said in August and later by Asheville Blog. The men, who confirmed they were behind the site, apologized for their actions, however, three of the women who found themselves listed on their blog said they doubt their sincerity. . . .
In one of Jared’s most controversial posts, titled A Breakdown of All My Lays, he explicitly chronicled his exploits with 50 women he said he slept with since 2012.

Dude.

The layers of stupidity involved here are phenomenal, as I am certain Jared and Jacob now realize in hindsight — alas, too late!

Let us begin, gentlemen, with the recognition that the entirety of “pickup artist” (PUA) blogging is a gigantic error, ultimately harmful to the interests of heteronormative patriarchy. Insofar as PUAs encourage men to imitate successful strategies, they degrade the value of these strategies, because if every guy on the planet is running the same set of tactical maneuvers, eventually these moves become the equivalent of a bad poker player’s “tell.” Women are not as stupid as some PUAs seem to think they are, and the public sharing of strategic knowledge makes it possible for women to counter-strategize. This escalates the difficulties encountered by heteronormative patriarchy and may, in fact, be a factor in the notable resurgence of radical lesbian feminism that I have been tracking for the past year or so.

The Internet braggadocio of the “PUA community” is foolish in several ways, including the fact that it provides feminists fodder: “See? This is what misogynist swine men really are.”

YOU HAD ONE JOB!

Never do anything that harms you own interests. And if any man thinks that bragging about his sexual exploits is advantageous to himself, he should contact Jared Rutledge and Jacob Owens, who have proved the truth of Ben Franklin’s sage of advice: “Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other.”

You had one job! Never do anything that will give feminists a chance to say to women, “See? We told you so. All men are pigs.”

The psychological essence of PUA “game” theory is dehumanization, learning to view women the way a hungry lion views a wildebeest herd gathered around a watering hole on the Katanga Plateau.

Feminists call this attitude “misogyny” or “sexism” as if, by interpreting it through the warped lens of political ideology, they were actually explaining its causes. Construing PUAs as epiphenomenal to patriarchal oppression, however, conveniently exempts feminism from blame. It was feminists like Shulamith Firestone, Andrea Dworkin and Mary Daly who told women that the institutions and values of traditional morality — faith, chastity and modesty, marriage, motherhood and family — were tantamount to slavery. Feminists insisted that traditional morality was antithetical to liberation and equality.

“This is the essence of so-called romance, which is rape embellished with meaningful looks.”
— Andrea Dworkin, “The Night and Danger,” 1979, in Letters From a War Zone (1993)

“For me, both personally and politically, sexual fidelity was anathema: Monogamy equaled ownership, which reeked of patriarchal capitalism.”
— Karla Jay, Tales of the Lavender Menace: A Memoir of Liberation (1999)

“There are politics in sexual relationships because they occur in the context of a society that assigns power based on gender and other systems of inequality and privilege. . . . [T]he interconnections of systems are reflected in the concept of heteropatriarchy, the dominance associated with a gender binary system that presumes heterosexuality as a social norm. . . .
“As many feminists have pointed out, heterosexuality is organized in such a way that the power men have in society gets carried into relationships and can encourage women’s subservience, sexually and emotionally.”
— Susan M. Shaw and Janet Lee, Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions (fifth edition, 2012)

If monogamy was just a bourgeois prejudice, as feminists insisted, and if liberation meant eschewing sexual fidelity as “ownership,” then what logical consequences could men deduce? Feminist theory condemns husbands and fathers as the equivalent of slave owners. Feminism mocks the very idea of romantic love — “rape embellished with meaningful looks” — as an illusion, while declaring heterosexuality inherently oppressive to women. If these are the premises of the feminist syllogism, what is the conclusion of their argument?

‘Heartfelt, Vulnerable and Utterly Clueless’

Jared Rutledge majored in philosophy at UNC-Asheville, and the name of his coffee shop, Waking Life, was derived from a quote by philosopher George Santayana: “Sanity is a madness put to good uses; waking life is a dream controlled.” We must therefore presume that Rutledge embarked upon his PUA career with his eyes wide open, fully cognizant of the existential meaning of his choices. He had weighed his options and rejected alternatives to the lion-on-the-Katanga-Plateau perspective.

What led him to this fateful decision? Rutledge was raised a Christian and, until late 2012, was in a serious relationship with only the third woman he had ever had sex with. He shared a romantic letter he wrote her in 2011, after they’d been dating a year, prefacing it with an introduction that includes this:

“My words are heartfelt, vulnerable, and utterly clueless. It didn’t change a damn thing in our relationship. She swore she wanted this vulnerability and then, when it was presented, she despised me for the weakness she rightfully saw.”

See? Women say they want guys who are emotionally sensitive, but the minute a guy actually expresses any such sentiment, she perceives this as weakness, which inspires contempt for him. A lot of what feminists condemn as “misogyny” stems from the observable reality that (a) all women despise weak men, (b) many women cannot distinguish between kindness and weakness, and (c) some women have a sadistic tendency toward emotional cruelty.

Could I share some personal anecdotes to illustrate this? Yes.

Could I explain ways for guys to deal with this problem? Yes.

However, publicly discussing strategy is foolish, as I say, and irrelevant to my point, which is that what feminists call “misogyny” or “sexism” quite often is the product of men’s realistic interpretation of their own experience with women who are dishonest, selfish and cruel. A worldview may be both realistic and irrational; men’s hurt feelings lead them to react in ways that are harmful to others and, ultimately, contrary to their self-interest. Yet if a guy has been used, cheated, backstabbed and humiliated by women, and if he decides that the rules of the game are rigged against him, who can say that his bitterness is unrealistic?

In 2009, Jared Rutledge launched his dream business, a gourmet coffee shop in his hometown, and he had a girlfriend he hoped was The One with whom he could share that dream, “the one I thought I’d marry.” Somehow, that didn’t work out — he “dumped” her, he says — and so, in 2012, he embarked on a remorseless career of sexual conquest. Based on his account and judged by PUA standards, he was remarkably successful. In 2013, he hooked up with 15 different women, and in 2014, he achieved 22 “scores” (a new woman every 16 days, on average). Of the 47 women he listed, he met 23 via Tinder and 6 via OKCupid, so that 62% of his hookups were arranged through dating apps, which should be a huge clue to why online dating is such a disastrously bad idea.

Jared rated each woman on the list by face/body/personality, so that #4 (“frisky little redhead”) was rated 5/5/4, while #12 (“Sexy little mid-twenties brunette with a thigh gap . . . dumb as a f–king brick”) was 7/8/4, and #37 (Mid-twenties blonde with a killer body . . . personality was a little too vanilla for my taste”) was also rated 7/8/4. Compiling this data, we find that he rated his average conquest with a 6.19 face, 6.62 body, and 5.89 personality. Of the three highest rated women (#20, #24 and #33) two rated 8/8/9 and the third rated 8/8/8. Two of those (#24 and #33) subsequently found serious boyfriends, while #24, a blonde model, “moved to the Pacific Northwest a week later.”

Distortions of the Pornified Culture

Compiling and analyzing the data Jared provides, one gathers an impression that his judgment was both superficial and excessively harsh. Is it true, for example, that none of these women had a body that would rate as high as 9 on a scale of 10? Did he really hook up with 14 women whose bodies rated at 6 or below? Or was it the case, as I suspect, that Jared was rating these women in comparison to an “ideal” so rare that he would not have awarded a 10 rating to Grace Kelly in her prime?

This shows how the Pornification of Culture distorts perception. If you make the sexualized/glamorized imagery purveyed by media the basis on which you judge beauty, this makes genuinely extraordinary features seem more common than they actually are, while making genuinely attractive people seem ordinary. Jared Rutledge’s list includes several women praised for their looks, but not a single one of them had a face or a body he would rate a 9? Ridiculous. Clearly, his ideas weren’t based on a realistic standard, where the top 10% (i.e., 91% or above) rated a “10,” the next 11%-20% rated 9, and so forth downward until a rating of 1 represented the bottom 10%. Instead, he thought of some very small single-digit percentage (the top 2% or 3%) as being 10, and then altered his judgment according to that distorted scale.

Rare and exceptional beauty is rare and exceptional, but because Hollywood, advertising and other media constantly feed us images of beautiful people, this distorts perceptions to such a degree that many people don’t seem to realize how rare beauty actually is.

Go find your old high school yearbook and go through the portraits of the senior class, assigning the girls to an ordered ranking based strictly by looks, from the most attractive to the least attractive. Suppose that there were exactly 100 girls in your senior class. This means that the 10 prettiest girls would rate a 10, the next 10 prettiest would rate 9, and so forth. If you actually were to do this, I think you’d realize that #37 on Jared Rutledge’s list (“blonde with a killer body”) would almost certainly rate a 10, but at least a 9. Instead, he rated her an 8, as if at least 20% of women were better-looking than her.

Guys sit around watching a pro football game and, when the camera briefly shows the cheerleaders, guys talk about which one of them is really hot. Dude, they are all NFL cheerleaders. How many NFL cheerleaders are not “hot”? Zero. Or guys watching the Miss America pageant will disparage the less attractive contestants: “Miss Rhode Island? What a dog! Yuck!” Of course, never in his life has this guy dated anyone remotely as attractive as Miss Rhode Island and yet, when she appears in competition against other exceptionally good-looking women — Miss Oklahoma, Miss Ohio, Miss Alabama — the slightly less fortunate Miss Rhode Island is a “dog.” (I use Rhode Island as an example, because the New England states have produced only one Miss America winner — Miss Connecticut, Marian Bergeron, 1933 — whereas Oklahoma has produced six winners.) It is wrong for feminists to blame “male supremacy” for the way in which exposure to media distorts men’s perceptions, but it is up to men themselves to recognize and resist the media’s influence, which brings us to the subject of pornography.

More than anything, Jared Rutledge’s blogging at Holistic Game represents how the pornographic worldview warps sexuality. In pornography, women are presented as eager to perform (and indeed, to enjoy) “kinky” acts that are obviously degrading or painful. Now, let’s look at Jared’s list and see how he raves that #5 and #50 are “kinky as hell,” #20 is “ridiculously kinky” and #37 is “secretly kinky.”

Where do you suppose Jared Rutledge developed this enthusiasm for kinky women? Or what about #22 on his list?

Radical feminist on the outside, radical submissive in the bedroom. Loved being abused and dominated. Smart but very guarded. We never discussed it but I got hints of serious abuse in her childhood. She swore that she was polyamorous but couldn’t emotionally handle finding another girl’s hair in my bed. Freaked out and we never hung out again. Dated a guy with a heroin addiction and is now f–king randoms. Damaged goods.

Really? She has masochistic tendencies, which you seem to find exciting, yet you also decide that this makes her “damaged goods”? Or what about #33? “I f–ked her a– for the first time, and she promptly got weird on me and withheld sex the next time we saw each other.”

Uh, who “got weird” on whom, Jared?

Sodomy is deviant, abnormal, perverse — words for which “kinky” is a synonym — and does any woman actually enjoy it or, more to the point, does any woman enjoy it more than normal sex? However common this practice may now be, interest in anal sex among heterosexuals is basically a creation of the porn industry. Indeed, we can name the producer (John “Buttman” Stagliano) responsible for popularizing this practice in the 1990s. (Ladies: If you meet a guy who is “into” this, be aware that you are dealing with a guy who’s got a porn problem.)

Does a PUA Ever ‘Hit the Wall’?

Between porn culture and the PUA mentality, is anyone surprised that guys like Jared Rutledge can’t sustain a relationship? Is it any wonder that, if a woman finds herself unmarried past age 25, most of the single guys she meets will have basically the same attitude? Is it unfair to say that guys like Jared are themselves “damaged goods”?

You had one job, Jared — find a good woman and close the deal. Do you mean to tell me that none of the 47 women on this list were wife material? Ridiculous. Whatever your problems with the ex-girlfriend you dumped before you started stalking the wildebeest herd on the Katanga Plateau, by now you must realize that your real problem was you, not her. And here’s some shocking news, pal: You’re already past your prime.

For all the PUA talk about how women “hit the wall” as they approach 30, the reality is that, despite men’s more durable reproductive potential, social factors tend to decrease the quality of his marital options if he doesn’t close the deal before he’s 30. No matter what anyone tells you, the supply of good women is not infinite, and the demand always exceeds the supply. The real keepers have no trouble finding husbands by the time they’re in their mid-20s. In 2010, the median age at first marriage in the United States was 26.1 for women, 28.2 for men. Because most couples date at least a year or two before they get married, this means that about half of women are dating their future husbands by the time they’re 24. And if we take the median ages as reflecting a general preference, most women prefer to marry a guy about two years older than themselves. Therefore, in terms of his “potential future husband” status, a guy reaches his peak between ages 24 and 28. If he hasn’t met The One by the time he’s 30, he’s likely to find himself picking through the “damaged goods” selection of women rejected by other guys as “pump-and-dump” or “catch-and-release” material.

Jared Rutledge uses the phrase “riding the carousel” to describe women who engage in casual promiscuity, but this raises the question, who is the horse and who is the rider? Who is the commodity in this marketplace and who is the consumer? Who is the predator on the Katanga Plateau and who is the prey? Is any man so foolish as to think that women are incapable of manipulating the game to their own advantage? Let’s look at what Jared concluded from his experience:

Most of these girls tended towards monogamous relationships, regardless of what lip service they paid to being “casual” or “open” or “fun.” Even the damaged girls skewed towards being monogamous — they were just monogamous with abusive or f–ked-up men. Some of them overplayed their sexuality in order to seem wilder than they were. Only three girls were really riding the carousel in a blatant way . . . The rest valued stability and comfort more than they valued excitement.

Gosh, it’s almost as if women have a natural preference for monogamy, stability and comfort. Keep in mind that Jared found a majority of these women via Tinder or OKCupid — digital dating apps no sane woman would ever use — so that even most of these desperate/crazy women were really looking for love, not cheap thrills.

Alas, Jared dumped his girlfriend at 28 and spent three years riding the carousel, no doubt thinking to himself, “I’m a successful businessman. I can pick and choose. I’m winning.” But pride goeth before a fall, eh?

Asheville cafe run by misogynistic
bloggers might shut down for good
Turns out misogyny is bad for business.
The Asheville, NC cafe run by two dirtbag dudebros who were outed for running a chauvinistic blog might soon be shutting its doors for good.
Waking Life Espresso has been closed ever since owners Jared Rutledge and Jeremy Owens were exposed last week as the men behind Holistic Game, a blog and podcast where they bragged about sexual conquests and obsessively insulted women for their looks and for having emotions.
Now several local investors are interested in buying the cafe’s space and putting something else in its place, the Citizen-Times reported.
The female owners of Asheville’s Short Street Cakes and Battlecat Coffee wrote on Facebook they want to buy Waking Life’s lease and equipment and open a new cafe, where some proceeds will be donated to local nonprofits “with a focus on empowering women.” . . .
Even if the business doesn’t disappear, it definitely won’t be growing. After a local small business lender withdrew its loan to help open a second Waking Life location, the owners said the expected expansion was canceled.

No more business. No more “game.” Zero. Zilch. Nada.

All because you had to brag.

“Put that coffee down. Coffee’s for closers only.
You think I’m f–king with you? I am not f–king with you.
I’m here from downtown. I’m here from Mitch and Murray.”

PUAs employ a lot of Darwinian sociobiology talk in explaining how to “win” the game. However, the whole point of the exercise — the raison d’etre of life on the Katanga Plateau — is reproductive success. The object of the game is not to run up the score for the sake of numbers. The object of the game is to close the sale, to find The One, and if that means marrying the first girl you ever kissed, congratulations. You’re a winner. Let other guys deal with the heartbreaks and hassles of stalking the wildebeest herd. Do not envy those guys. They should envy you.

“I’m here from downtown,” see. Could I tell you stories? Yes. Yes, I definitely could, but I’m going to resist that temptation, because Mitch and Murray didn’t send me here to brag. They sent me here to tell you PUA assclowns that you’re not winning the game, you’re losing it.

How do you think all these “damaged goods” women got damaged in the first place? Don’t you see that playing “pump-and-dump” is contrary to your own interests? Every time you play a girl like that, you are inflicting damage that some other guy is going to have to deal with. There is only so much damage the system of heteronormative patriarchy can sustain before the system breaks down completely, and this catastrophe with Jared and Jacob at Waking Life is your wake-up call, gentlemen.

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE!

You had one job, Jared Rutledge, and you failed.

Why are you apologizing to feminists? You actually helped their cause. And the rest of us guys can never forgive you for that.

<br />

Category: Sex Trouble

Comments

155 Responses to “You Had One Job”

Quartermaster
September 29th, 2015 @ 5:08 pm

I’d say it’s more like 5-7%. Barna’s surveys say those are the approximate numbers of actual Christians in the country. That’s in the face of about 80% saying they are Christian. The number of people for whom it really means anything is quite small.

Even when I was in hi skool in the early 70s there were chicks that were known as “fast.” I wanted nothing to do with such women, then or since. My circle of associates were the same way.
Quartermaster
September 29th, 2015 @ 5:13 pm

I know a woman who is 49 or 50. Never married, and she was one of those “put a ring on it fella” kind of girls. I’m sure she was a heart wrecker when she was 20, and she is still a good looking woman. But, elegance is something that is not merely about looks. If I were free, she would be #1 on my list because she is an elegant woman. A beauty inside and out.

To me, that’s a 10.
DeadMessenger
September 29th, 2015 @ 5:14 pm

Here’s one: my parents met on a blind date, then eloped 2 days later. They’ve been married…well…forever. I’m the oldest child, and I’m 56. And to see them together, you can tell they’re true soulmates.
DeadMessenger
September 29th, 2015 @ 5:16 pm

We all do. Denounce thyself, foul patriarch! : )
Jason Lee
September 29th, 2015 @ 5:22 pm

It’s not a matter of standards and freedoms. That’s an old feminist saw.

It’s a matter of innate sexual preferences. Women are innately attracted to men who have a history of sexual success. Collectively, women reward sexual winners with access to more sex.

Men, on the other hand, have no interest in rewarding sluttiness.

Each sex acts in accordance with the preferences of the other.

Now that old-fashioned sexual mores are dead, women are happily rewarding successful players with access to virtually limitless sex.

That’s the real problem with today’s sexual market. We can blame and shame the player, but that’s not likely to change things much because…

1. Players don’t care.
2. Even if you could convince most players to give up the game by applying intense social pressure, the remaining players would have even MORE access to sex with LESS competition.

Why would a player give up the game just to make it easier for other players?

Until women cut off (or reduce) supply, nothing really changes for the better.
DeadMessenger
September 29th, 2015 @ 5:23 pm

I’ve always preferred nerds, and I don’t think I’m freakish in that regard by any stretch. I just can’t abide brainless idiot boys. Besides, not all nerds are pencil-necks.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MCK8WHkbvvg
Jason Lee
September 29th, 2015 @ 5:31 pm

Of course, but like Elon Musk are pretty rare.

https://www.google.com/search?q=elon+musk+with+wife&client=safari&hl=en-us&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAWoVChMI8uamjqWdyAIViNOACh244AW3&biw=768&bih=928&dpr=2#hl=en-us&tbm=isch&q=elon+musk+with+girlfriend
Mike G.
September 29th, 2015 @ 6:13 pm

Even back in the 70’s in Amsterdam, it was hard to tell the women from the men from the back.
Mike G.
September 29th, 2015 @ 6:23 pm

You are exactly right. Too many times, men don’t take into account personality and intelligence, whereby a woman who might be rated a 5 or 6 actually rates as a 7 or 8 when you add those other attributes into the formula.
mole
September 29th, 2015 @ 6:32 pm

My first exposure to PUA stuff was back before it was a “thing’ by one of the most charismatic, dangerous and strage chaps i have ever met.
Mick was his name and he was a drug dealer, pimp and scllywag of the first water.
He became attached to my family when dad hired a lawyer to get him bail (we were short on boat crew and needed him), the lawyer managed to turn 20kg of pot found buried in the yard of the house mick was staying at to not really belonging to anyone by the wondrous powers of the law (IS: Using words like a squid uses ink, to conceal not enlighten).

He became devoted to dad for that.
Now at this stage Mick was about 45, druggie thin, grey hair with greyish stumps where most of his teeth used to be (bad acid he claimed)
Long story short we had 2 ladies on the crew of 15, and right from the start Mick started out by insulting the pretty one. (who told everyone how much she hated him). When she reacted by attacking him back he acted hurt and paid attention to the other one.
Now being confined on a small boat he could run this routine over and over, within a week she was sleeping with him and by the end of 2 weeks had agreed to go and live in a shack and grow dope for him.
It was an absolute eye opener into how to manipulate people.
He had run brothels in Queensland and just knew how to manipulate, it was lucky he was a drug fiend or he could have become some sort of super villain.

Another example: The husband of the lady mich seduced tourned up, he was a speed dealer and thought to be armed and dangerous.
We were having beers in the cabin when he burst into the cabin “wheres the asshole whos been sleeping with my wife” we all sat there like stunned mullets as Mick was in the cabin under our feet.
Mick popped his head out and in a cheery voice asked who he was after. He then offered the speed fiend a beer and started talking to him. Within an hour Mick was the speed fiends best mate (he still didnt know who he was talking to) and he was going to leave the state because Mick had heard the coppers had a warrant out for him.

PUA is just manipulation devoted to one sub-set of the human race, it works because everyone has vulnerabilities which can be abused to make you feel more empathetic or needing of approval from another.

Mick by the bait of “lets go down south and party” managed to manipulate me into being the donkey carting 20kg of dope 700km along a major highway without me even working out how id been manipulated into doing this until years later.
Never met anybody as skilled at using people as that man.
Dana
September 29th, 2015 @ 7:00 pm

I’ve had 36 years, 4 months and 10 days to repent a quick marriage, and haven’t done so yet.
Dana
September 29th, 2015 @ 7:03 pm

Oh, very well! I thoroughly denounce myself.

Happy now?
DeadMessenger
September 29th, 2015 @ 7:24 pm

Yeah, I am. 😀
DeadMessenger
September 29th, 2015 @ 8:03 pm

That guy is meh. You know who the quintessential nerd hottie is? The young Steve Jobs. I met him once, in a meeting. He was so nice. And attentive. And deliciously nerdy. I totally had heart palpitations. : )
CruisingTroll
September 29th, 2015 @ 8:03 pm

Getting in the habit of treating PEOPLE like toilet paper makes for a lonely old age.

FTFY
mole
September 29th, 2015 @ 10:56 pm

Crazy talk,
Just like the only couple I know who have lasted more than 20 years were virgins when they met.. And he pursued her for months before she “gave in”.
Quartermaster
September 30th, 2015 @ 4:30 am

Your handle is well chosen. I posted what I meant to say.
ajpwriter
September 30th, 2015 @ 7:28 am

The likely PUA/Red Pill riposte to this will be to argue that marriage is, for men, a sucker’s bet. You put in the time and trouble and capital, and she throws your ass out when she’s sick of you, seizes the kids, and garnishes your wages for the next two decades and beyond. No percentage in it.

Dr. Helen wrote a book about it, as I recall.

Now, I myself took that sucker’s bet, so I’m not preaching what I practice. But it’s going to take a bit to convince these boys of your conclusion.
Dana
September 30th, 2015 @ 8:52 am

It’s actually a smart, if unofficial, policy. I new one office manager who hired only women uglier than herself, which excluded like 87% of the female population. The result was that, in a company which was heavily male dominated, the guys weren’t hanging around the office chatting up the fatties and uglos, and the fatties and uglos tended to stay with the company longer, because they had fewer other opportunities.
NCMountainGirl
September 30th, 2015 @ 9:26 am

A friend of mine who had modeled to pay the bills on her way to a la degree used to joke about the men who expected sex to look the way it did in the movies- artistically tousled hair, no smeared lipstick or runny mascara, the entire scene perfectly lit with a picturesque sheen of sweat and no marks or indentations from elastic straps and seams even though the clothes that were hastily shed had been skin tight. .
NCMountainGirl
September 30th, 2015 @ 9:34 am

It’s a very strange city. The trendy part is exactly like these two, but at middlebrow places you’ll find people saying grace before eating. Last year a new Chik-Fil-A opened a block away from a new Trader Joe’s and both are packed.
NCMountainGirl
September 30th, 2015 @ 9:56 am

It is not uncommon for some men to do the promiscuous thing after a marriage or long standing relationship had ended. Most of them are not total jerks about it, however. Some of this may be innate in their personality. I can recall a couple of politicians who had bachelor periods after a marriage ended and amazingly all the women they ran through at that time have nice things to say about them.

I suspect the social media contributes a lot to the jerk trend because it helps angry disaffected types to maintain secret lives. Online they can find that small portion of the population who mirrors their sick attitudes. Then the one-up-manship begins. The pursuit of likes from anonymous strangers doesn’t usually end well, no matter what venue it is in.

If all one’s meaningful social contracts are in the real world, there will often be an intervention of sorts. After the initial period of blowing off steam, true friends and family start to advise that the pursuit of already damaged women is not a good thing. They may even steer the man towards someone they think would be a good match. This is usually accompanied with a stern warning this is my friend, co-worker, cousin, whatever, so be nice to her, or else.
Lulu
September 30th, 2015 @ 9:56 am

I would not want to marry a “player” — all I can think of is the diseases and the hatred of women, same way I would not marry someone who frequented strip clubs or prostitutes
Lulu
September 30th, 2015 @ 9:57 am

That may be reality in terms of men not wanting promiscuous women although the number of men I encounter who marry women with illegitimate children seems rather larger than that thinking would suggest
Lulu
September 30th, 2015 @ 10:00 am

I might also add all these men are hooking up with women so there are lots of women out there with an extensive history shall we say and many of them do get married — all the girls I knew in HS and undergrad who were fairly active (nicest way to say it) are married so pretty much whose to know if you don’t film and post it
Lulu
September 30th, 2015 @ 10:02 am

the thing is the women are still doing it or else the men are lying about the number of partners they’ve had — so either they are all sleeping with the same small group of women or there is a lot of don’t ask, don’t tell going on
Ilion
September 30th, 2015 @ 10:11 am

It would have that effect. Unofficial, of course.
Ilion
September 30th, 2015 @ 10:24 am

“But if a couple women did the same thing (unlikely, I know) …”
Actually, it has been done by at least one few college-age skank. The feminist-controlled consensus was that the women were thereby “empowered” and that the men whom they had disparagingly evaluated were “losers” who deserved to be publically shamed for failing to meet the expectations of the skank(s).
Lulu
September 30th, 2015 @ 10:28 am

Two observations (completely anecdotal) about where I think this lifestyle ends for many men. Background: I am middle-aged and Gen X — my peer group in terms of generation, school classmates, colleagues, family of like age, etc. maybe spans 35 to 45 anything outside of that I consider outliers. Anyway, my female friends, family, and acquaintances span the spectrum of life experiences although all are married some for 20 plus years some for just a handful. Some have children, some already have grandchildren, and some are childless and very career focused. Many of my female friends had their last child in their late 30’s or even 40’s. Some were promiscuous, some married the first boy they dated, and most were in between — sorry to go on but they are all at a good satisfied place in their lives in middle age. That being said many had a sort of biological clock, what have I done with my life moment/crisis in their middle thirties if they were as yet unmarried or had not yet had children (and wanted too). First Observation: My male peers did not seem to experience this angst no matter their life status. Well low and behold the men who were unmarried and childless at 40 started to display worry and angst like their female peers did at 33 or so by their mid-forties they were suddenly marrying the woman of the moment (declaring her to be the “love” of their lives) despite 25+ years of dating, etc. And better still they are rushing to pop out kids and posting pictures and updates as if they are the first men to ever father children. I don’t think men and women in the end are that different. Second observation: about 6 months ago a HS classmate died of cancer in his early 40’s — He was popular in HS played football in HS and college — successful in his career and with women (was once a professional photographer surrounded by models for all sorts of advertising), had longtime friends and a very active social life. Anyway, what I noticed in social media when he died and in the obituary and comments on the funeral page was that after lots of acquaintances and a few actual friends posted condolences and went to the service — there really wasn’t anyone to genuinely mourn him (other than his mother) as he had failed to form that intimate connection with a spouse or beget children (which are for 99.9999% of people their only legacy) and this made his death almost sadder than other peers who have died in the recent past who left a spouse or children behind. So pretty much this guys was popular, got laid by a lot of hot women, and was financially well-off and in the end that was all so much crap.
Lulu
September 30th, 2015 @ 10:35 am

lol — a lot are many a closeted actor used to vacation or own second homes there
Jason Lee
September 30th, 2015 @ 10:51 am

This is not any man’s first choice. These are the guys who have finished last.
Jason Lee
September 30th, 2015 @ 10:58 am

I don’t know how you define “player” but if your attitude were more pervasive, there would be fewer of them. But I don’t think there’s any shortage of women who would settle down with a former player. As long as the percentage of player-friendly women is favorable for the percentage of men who could be cosidered players, no amount of preaching to the choir will make a dent in the hookup culture.
Jason Lee
September 30th, 2015 @ 11:15 am

Yes, deception and denial is undoubtedly rampant. But “fairly active” women do pay a price. Even if they do manage to find a hsband, their risk of divorce is MUCH higher: http://socialpathology.blogspot.com/2010/09/sexual-partner-divorce-risk.html
Jason Lee
September 30th, 2015 @ 11:21 am

More on that:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/2003/pdf/Bookofcharts.pdf
texlovera
September 30th, 2015 @ 12:13 pm

+1000
Eric Ashley
September 30th, 2015 @ 1:07 pm

A number of things wrong with this….
1. PUA seems more about attitude than strategies. However you naturally exhibit ‘I’m important’ may or may not be a strategy, but the underlying ‘tude is not something that is easily strategized against.
2. Have some mercy, RSM. You may have been a natural Alpha, but most guys aren’t, and they could use some help.
3. Your scale adjustment fails because a 10 has never meant, ‘best looking ten girls of a hundred.’ The scale adjustment due to Hollywood you highlight is real, but not really that important. Most guys are well aware they are not going to be dating a 10 even if visions of supermodels dance in their heads like sugar plums.
This harsher scale is useful because it knocks women down a peg.
4. Feminists are going to criticize men no matter what we do. Which is why laughing at them as you do on other occasions is rational.
5. The reason sluts are angry about these doofusii is that they are the equivalent of the drunk guy who told the truth in front of everyone that everyone knew, but was ignoring.

These guys aren’t great heroes, but they are part of the social readjustment. Femisnism destroyed Female High Culture and reinstiuted Barbarism, and now Men are following the equation downhill. The Social Equation has to be balanced.

Showing women in the most vivid way possible that they are worthless is probably needed, just like some idiots won’t stop drinking until they’re facedown in the gutter.

I use to wish and support the recreation of Chivalry, but it seems like we first must go whole hog into Barbarism before the possibility of something better is available.
dustbury.com » Heat indexing
September 30th, 2015 @ 1:09 pm

[…] I have to admit that this never would have occurred to me: […]
Eric Ashley
September 30th, 2015 @ 1:28 pm

Also, Steve Jobs….supposedly he had this ‘reality distortion field’, an insane level of self-confidence. PUA theory holds that woman like such, and would not be at all surprised that the Evil Cow liked Jobs.
Dana
September 30th, 2015 @ 3:17 pm

A list? Let’s face it: women talk about men and sex just as much as men talk about women and sex, and if a guy is a good lay — or a bad one — his reputation will spread at a speed directly proportional to population density.
Daniel Freeman
September 30th, 2015 @ 6:53 pm

either they are all sleeping with the same small group of women or there is a lot of don’t ask, don’t tell going on

Everything indicates the opposite of the former, from anecdotes, to evopsych, to herpes statistics: a smaller group of men sleeping with a larger group of women.
Daniel Freeman
September 30th, 2015 @ 7:02 pm

Really? I would expect it to be inversely proportional. It’s the small towns, where everyone knows everyone, where gossip spreads at the speed of light. It’s in the densely-populated big city that you can always find someone who never heard of you.
Josephus
September 30th, 2015 @ 8:52 pm

What were they apologizing for? Getting caught? They did it for the heroics, so they might as well stand behind their actions. Now they want to be nice guys, and seem “remorseful” which they aren’t, especially about nailing all those gals. They’re remorse is tied to their business going under and the bad press. If the women feel used, well tough shit, they were basically giving their asses away in Tinder, and I have no sympathy for them.
Dana
October 1st, 2015 @ 5:24 am

Directly proportional, because there the girls have more girls with whom to talk. College campuses are the absolute epitome of this.
Daniel Freeman
October 1st, 2015 @ 9:58 am

A college campus is like a small town with apartments. It’s a special case, and I would argue the exception that proves the rule that it’s normally inversely proportional.

Once you get off campus, higher density is directly proportional to higher quantity, and people in a big city form sub-communities since you just can’t know everyone. So, if a guy strikes out with one sub-community, he can move on to the next without changing his address. It’s the “anonymity of crowds” effect.

Whereas, in a low-density area, the quantity is also lower, and people have to get out and talk to people somewhere. One person will tell something to someone at this church, who will tell it someone at that bar, who will tell it to someone at the other social club. Even before Facebook, there was no privacy.
Daniel Freeman
October 1st, 2015 @ 10:12 am

In the only case that I can recall like that, it was exactly the opposite of this one. Instead of putting the list out there anonymously and then being doxxed, she sent it privately to her friends — one of whom thought it was funny enough to forward to someone, and then it went viral.

The feminists may have applauded it, but it was pretty much a trainwreck for everyone involved (except the highly-rated guys).
Dana
October 1st, 2015 @ 10:16 am

I sort of see your argument, in that you are claiming that higher density creates a larger number of smaller communities, and the reputation stays within a given community, but it ignores the fact that the smaller subcommunities are not completely isolated from each other; where the overlap occurs, talk can pass between communities.

If it is inversely proportional, the smallest community, one, means that everyone will know, but the largest community, a zillion, nobody will know.
Daniel Freeman
October 1st, 2015 @ 10:27 am

Apologizing was a big mistake, as anyone who has read SJWs Always Lie knows. Instead of forgiving, they take it as an admission of guilt and move on to the show trial.

Incidentally, I read some game sites — I’d like to actually know what I’m doing before I try dating again — and one person said that the language of the apology was straight out of a game technique, acknowledging feelings and empathizing with them. It was horribly misapplied.
Daniel Freeman
October 1st, 2015 @ 10:35 am

If it is inversely proportional, the smallest community, one, means that everyone will know, but the largest community, a zillion, nobody will know.

It isn’t that no one would know out of the zillion, but that any given person can only maintain relationships with hundreds and be aware of thousands. This pseudo-celebrity case is an exception; the average cad’s bad behavior could be known by everyone in a small town, but less than 1% in a city of a million.
Quartermaster
October 1st, 2015 @ 10:38 am

If you take the game sites seriously, the most effective tool for dating is a sniper rifle. Barrett Makes a really nice one. 🙂
Quartermaster
October 1st, 2015 @ 10:45 am

Ha! More like he chased her until she caught him.