You’re not Dorian Yates

Last week’s post on here was about the importance of letting SMART (Specific, Measurable, Actionable, Realistic and Time specific) goals govern your life rather than LOFTY (Limitless, Obtuse, Fictional, Theatrical and Yabbering) ideals. As it is to be expected, this always brings on the same brand of low-brow dipshits with their “akschually“, parroting the latest nice sensible sounding soliloquy that just happens to be in vogue that morning, fortunately, by making things measurable I can just block them because spending time on them is not productive. They can take something as simple as “Water is wet” or “The sky is blue” and turn it into a 48 hour twitter argument, about “What about water in it’s gaseous state” or “What about when it’s cloudy huh?” this is essentially what that “gotcha” or “owned” trend on youtube did to social media.

What happens here is that something simple, accurate enough, and effective enough is argued against because the person doesn’t want to do it, so it’s disqualified for being “bro science”, or because it doesn’t cover 100% of cases, or because it’s not elegant, complicated or convoluted, and worst of all can’t be monetized. It reminds me of that guy who shows up at the gym (god I miss the gym), every once in a while, fresh lifter, no experience, natural, no dialed in diet, either underweight or overweight, and starts wanting to do board-presses with chains, reverse hypers, platform deadlifts and power cleans as his starting program.

There is no denying that all of the above are useful, but they aren’t useful to him because he’s not there yet, if he was there he wouldn’t be on the net searching for advice on what to do, he would already be doing it. This is not to promote simplicity above all, but I wrote Gendernomics: Building Value from the perspective of a guy starting from 0, that’s why the case study of Dave was as bad as it was, grossly overweight, no job, living off fast food in his mother’s basement, that guy has no way to go except up, and many of his problems have simple and effective solutions but they take the key variable: Time.

Many of the “fear-based” marketing techniques we see all day on social media are based on the concept of “You’re currently missing out, if you don’t get huge results immediately you’ll miss out even more, so buy my program/book/coaching to get extremely fast and big results.

  • “Lose 20 lbs in 2 weeks without changing or doing anything”
  • “Get rid of your debt in 2 easy steps, first step is putting my $1257 course on your credit card”
  • “Bang 9s and 10s in hours…. by buying escorts”

They have a few things in common with “It’s too simple” guy, they are based around this idea that something has to be complex, a dark secret, something “nobody talks about”, it’s that once piece that everyone except you seems to “just get”.

It just can’t be as simple as “squats and milk”, “Just talk to girls”, “stop eating paint” and “stop spending money on dumb shit”, there has to be “The Secret”, quite frankly hard work, discipline and focus are simple, but not easy. That’s the big secret, anything that actually works is boring, monotonous, fairly simple, very easy to create goals for and very hard to monetize.

When Rian and I did our podcast this weekend on the unmeasurables we went in circles, because the things that are simple, are always measurable and if something isn’t measurable then it means you haven’t done the work with making it concrete. Once you know your desired end state, you can create a theoretical process that will get you there, once you have your end-state and your process, you can come up with a metric to measure it, once you can measure it, you can create a timeline, and once you create a timeline you can measure “expected progress” against “actual progress”.

There is no shame in trying things that don’t work, we all do. The reason why I’m as knowledgeable about philosophy, politics, sociology and psychology, subjects that I generally warn your men against, is that I wasted a ton of time on them in my youth. That’s why I’m as adamant about focusing on your current problems in a very concrete fashion, and avoiding the abstract until you have enough of a foundation under your feet.

Once you’re Dorian Yates you can start doing board presses and inventing your own lifts, once you’re Warren Buffet you can invent your own investment strategy, when you’re Don Juan you can come up with your own version of game, but until then stop putting the cart before the horse.

If you had the knowledge, experience and ability to figure out what to do for yourself, you wouldn’t be in the market for courses, books, coaching and all that other shit, you’d just know, but you’re not Dorian Yates, you’re just being a dumbass.

Make it measurable

As I relayed in last week’s post, I’ve had two distinct periods on, the early initial period resulted in Gendernomics, which was my analysis and contextualization of the sexual market place. The latter period, which we are in now has been much more focused on the practical aspects of the sexual market place, and was created for Gendernomics: Building Value.

Building Value was created because in the first 25 years of my life I very much drifted in a sense, I didn’t really have any goals in life other than short-term pleasure. I studied all those “fun but impractical” topics, politics, philosophy, sociology, literature, art, psychology, and some of this is fairly evident in my twitter feed and podcast appearances. The major motivation behind it was a desire to understand the world, and for me that all clicked once I added computer science and economics to to the mix. They are also the two most useful topics I’ve studied in my life, and the ones that laid the foundation for my current career.

The introduction here is to contextualized this essay, there is an old adage in business administration “If it can be measured it can be managed”, the inverse of this is “If it cannot be measured it cannot be managed”, this latter state is the state in which many men find themselves, and to which Building Value is dedicated. It sets out a process model to go from a man who has no idea what needs to be fixed, how to do it and how to prioritize tasks. This is driven by the fact that most men arrive in this space without defined goals, without a solid understanding of their situation, their context or what their desired end state looks like.

This is generally the problem I see most men have, they have no idea where they are, where they want to go other than away from their current state, they come looking for help, without knowing what their problems are.

The solution is what I provided in Building Value:

  1. GAP Analysis – Figure out what your life is like now, what you’re dissatisfied with and what you are happy with.

2. Prioritize problems – Some problems can be solved easily, some require more time or more thinking.

3. Define Key-performance indicators for each area.

1 and 3 are the most important the GAP analysis tells you what is not working for you now, the KPI tell you if it has gotten better. If you can’t come up with a KPI, find one. You can’t work on your “energy flows”, you can work on your bank account, your physique, employment opportunities, education and many other things. In order for something to be measured, it cannot be a feeling, it’s that simple, anyone selling you “progress” in the form of “feels” is selling you cocaine.

It feels good in the moment and makes you feel like you’re at the top of the world, but in the end you crash with an empty wallet.

The P words

As I finished up my work today, I found myself thinking about the past 6 years. I made this blog in December 2015, I signed up for twitter in Febuary 2016, and over that time I’ve met a lot of people, written a lot of essays, written two books and done countless podcasts. Most of it’s a blur, I can’t remember most of my essays, nor most of the podcast appearances, but I do remember a lot of what happened on twitter.

About 3 years ago now, I was having a series of debates both in public and in direct messages about philosophy with someone who was a friend back then and who loved nothing more to run away from the world into his head. I identified a bit with this because it took me much work to cleanse myself of that particular preference. From my perspective, I was making an attempt at saving this man from overthinking, from disappearing into a blue nothing of ideas, concepts and constructs, that had little of anything to do with the world as it exists. From a philosophical perspective it was reminiscent of analytic philosophy and continental philosophy, one focused on empiricism and reason, the other on pure reason. It was a significant enough of a schism back in the day that Kant took the time to write two tomes about the different stances.

The main contention was, as I remember it was about the usefulness of philosophy, this was around the time Jordan B. Peterson was the new darling of the manosphere, and one cannot listen to Peterson without respecting his level of scholarly knowledge. This was an aspiration I had as a young man as well, to be erudite, to be able to quote countless authors, to summarize, to synthesize and to understand the mechanics of the world. I’m still on that quest now, however in my mid-twenties after spending countless hours studying the world through the eyes of others, I came to the conclusion that one can never understand anything one has not experienced.

This is not the classic “can’t understand it unless it happens to me“, for instance Dick Cheney being anti-gay until he had a lesbian daughter, it’s more of the difference between the theoretical and the applied parts of a science. It’s fully possible to calculate perfectly what your hand weighs, and how fast you would need to accelerate it in order to knock someone out cold, however it’s quite different to actually punch someone in the face.

I was a poor teacher back then, and I still am, what I was attempting to get across was “worry about the theory later“, children understand this intuitively, they pick apart objects, struggle to put them back together, over time if they’re smart they’ll learn which parts do what, and what works. Once they’ve learned that, they can take classes, go to college or read books on engineering to figure out how and why it works.

This was my take on politics that I attempted to get across on Rule Zero yesterday as well. I’ve been paying taxes for over 20 years, in multiple countries, and who is in charge doesn’t really matter, right or left, my tax bill is more or less a constant. It makes very little sense for me to get involved, especially emotionally involved, because the other side of things, the social freedom side can be gained easily by moving to a different country.

What I attempted to say on the last episode of Rule Zero was that getting emotionally invested in politics or philosophy is going to be a negative force in your life in almost every situation. Whether that means alienating family members, co-workers, friends, robbing yourself of opportunities or of time trying to reclaim a feeling. Alternatively, spending a ton of time angry, upset, sad, miserable, because you are obsessing about something that an individual has limited influence over.

However, this isn’t to say that philosophy, psychology and politics should be ignored and one should act as if they didn’t exist, it is to say that they are systems you should understand and leverage to move towards your objective desired outcome.

Summary and final thoughts

The reason why politics and philosophy are such dangerous topics for young men, along with religion and a handful of others, is that it offers the entrance to the hero’s journey. It’s very easy to imagine oneself making progress when part of an echo chamber fighting for a political cause or an intellectual group of “wrong thinkers”, you are going to change the world, now you are small, but once your great movement makes it, you’ll be remembered in history.

This is much like the old bodybuilder being interviewed in the movie “Bigger, Stronger, Faster” who had 1 credit in an Arnold movie in the early 90s, and was still living in his Van outside Gold’s Gym in Venice 20 years later thinking he would make it or the 50 year old who has been playing with his bands since the 80s and still think that they just need that one break.

The grand narratives are seductive, but very rarely useful for the individual looking to improve his lot in life, as these narratives are often constructed specifically to make men go against their own best interest. When I originally started writing here, it was mainly motivated by a desire to share my notes with other men, but also to benefit from the arrangement by learning from other men. In the past 6 years, I’ve done a lot of both, but the one thing I’m left wondering is how many men I saw, raised by women, who reacted like women, and let their emotions take control when reason would have been a better guide.

Whether that was the guys who went deep into:

A) New age bullshit like tanning your asshole, energy, crystals, astrology, MBTI, or various other things.

B) The guys who went into politics with a fervor, those who took the god pill

C )Those who went down a rabbit-hole of conspiracy theories, some did

D) Those who did all that shit

It rarely if ever ended well for them, when I look at where they were early on, and where they are now, the lucky ones are still stuck in the same rut they were in 5 – 6 years ago.

However, what makes me appreciate the way I’ve spent a lot of time over the past 6 years, are the guys who have made tremendous progress, and in the end which men ended up where depended on a single choice:

“Do what is hard because you must or do what comes easy because you can”

Fuck your pet ideal

In the aftermath of my last essay on this blog dealing with adaptability and Law 31, I received some criticism, in the wider sphere I create content on, this essay addresses those criticisms. The central theme of the previous essay was the dichotomy between politics and realpolitik, with the added variable of success of the best adapted. “The success of the best adapted” is somewhat of a hijacking on my end of the central principle in Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection, of which my interpretation is that as we are living in a Universe which is in a state of constant change as we perceive it, the “most fit” organism is that which can best adapt to these changing circumstances, quickly.

To summarize that in a manner that is generally understood, if species do not adapt to changing environments, they die. The criticism leveled against the concept of being adaptable to your present circumstance was that this makes you all sorts of nasty things, a traitor, a collaborator, a quisling, not for being successful but for not perishing with your fellow men who are unwilling to adapt. They are incapable of adapting not because their family line ran for a few hundred thousand years of men who adapted from being hunters, to being farmers, to being industrial workers, military men, leaders and countless, but because this particular generation has decided to sit on their ass and go “WAAAH”. They identified a pet ideal or a pet cause, and they’re sticking with it even if it means they die broke, alone, fat and unsuccessful as long as they can bitch on twitter.

I do realize that this is somewhat of a Patton style speech to the rogue’s gallery of dialing autism to 11, so let me break it down. A cornerstone of being a “red pilled” man, has always been letting go of your blue pill ideals, usually these are limited to “the soul mate myth”, “the story of The One”, “the white picket fence” and so on. However, it goes much farther than that. If one breaks the soul mate myth or The One down, those things are stories that act as carrots in order to make you act against your own best interest.

That’s not isolated as a concept in intersexual dynamics, it goes much beyond that. Trads are conforming to a blue pill idealism, so are the guys championing Evola, Vegans, Carnivores, Religious people, Nationalists, Globalists, Right-wingers, left-wingers, centrists, all these things are blue pill ideals, with their own dedicated narratives, hero’s journey, set of rules, morality and much more, designed to make you work for the best interests of someone else other than your own.

I would argue that every time a group forms, that group lays the foundation of their leviathan, that will grow with the group as they recruit more members to their way of thinking. The Leviathan transcends the group and becomes something beyond the mere practical and pragmatic. It becomes a thing in itself, that develops it’s own goals, ideals, wants and needs, then one starts doing things without knowing why one is doing those things. His name was Robert Paulson.

This does not mean that groups cannot be respected, I have respect for people who are vegans, carnivores, money twitter, PUA guys, religious men, regardless of our principled disagreements so long as they offer useful tools without requiring you adopt their blue pill ideas along with said tools.

Mental Point of Origin is a central Red Pill Concept, and I would argue it transcends the red pill, it got that name here, but the concept goes far back in our history, it means being the protagonist in your own life. This doesn’t mean that you can never cooperate with anyone, reasonable, limited cooperation on select issues with aligned individual incentives is what drives our species forward.

Closing thoughts and summary

Realpolitik was a term invented by a German writer named Ludwig von Rochau and it advocates politics and diplomacy based on given factors and circumstances rather than ideological notions or ethics. It’s the introduction of pragmatism and the practical as replacements for the ideological or ethical. Most of the blue pill ideals I see men cling the most to, aren’t related to women, they are related to “am I a good man”. They’ve been told “Good men do X”, “Good men think like ABC” their whole life, they’ve absorbed it, and they have acted it throughout most of their life. They are Boxer of Animal farm, steadfast, loyal, believe any problem can be fixed if they just work harder, but as they end up working for other people and causes than their own best interest, their end is being sold up the river for a pint of whiskey. However, in death they are elevated as the ideal by those who in life used them in order to inspire the next generation.

These men often think they are the protagonists in their own life, but in reality they are extras in the life of others, if they are lucky they may occasionally get to be a supporting character. However, going against this type-casting, they batter against their ego defenses, instead of doing what they deep down know they must do to get the part, they find something larger than themselves and attach themselves to it, hoping that this will finally solve their problem.

They would rather attend 1000 rallies than clean their room.

As a finishing though, I don’t really care about your blue pill ideals, in fact fuck ’em. I care about helping you get the practical tools you need in order to establish the pragmatic life you want. There are no knuckle-pushups, no compulsory Evola courses, no slogans, no t-shirts, no mugs, no Truck nuts, just a rejection of ideology and ethics as the Star of Bethlehem of your life.

If you’re going to ditch 1 blue pill ideal, you may as well throw the others out with it.

The Conundrum with Change

For those who follow my twitter feed, the fact that I’m quite far from a conservative should be quite obvious by now. Part of this is driven by the fact that if one looks to history, I think one would face a monumental challenge to argue that a majority of changes have had negative human consequences. Of course, once can cite issues such as the breakdown of the nuclear family, the fact that most of us are at best tacitly tied to our communities, and quite a few others, however from my view the cost of these issues is dwarfed by:

  • Penicillin and modern medicine in general
  • Lifting people out of poverty in the third world at an accelerating rate
  • The democratization of information in the form of the internet

And many others, the fact that people can throw off dictators through the use of social media is quite astounding quite frankly. However, I do understand the concern, while change has always been a central part of the human condition, rapid change has been less so. I consider myself an adaptist, I view humanity’s greatest competitive advantage as being able to adapt better and faster than most. We have the capacity to adapt the environment to ourselves, which gives us a great edge vs. other organisms in that they adapt through generations, we adapt through neural plasticity.

When our species moved from hunter/gatherer to agricultural this took tens of thousands of years. When we moved from agricultural to industrial, it was faster but it still took 200ish years from the dawn of the industrial revolution to what I’d consider as it’s peak around 1970. The information revolution started in the 70s and now a mere 50 years later, virtually everything about our lives have changed, and we are struggling with adapting to this new area.

I notice a great difference in the generations, from a handful of “boomers” who have adopted technology on the surface level, to Gen X who are doing decently depending on early or late Gen X, to millennial generation who span the space from those born in the early 80s who are doing quite well but struggling with the social landscape changes more than the tech, and late millennials who are our first generation of “digital natives“. The key here is that people have the capacity to adopt to the current environment, and by doing so they can adapt that environment to them.

Both Gendernomics and Gendernomics: Building Value are books based on the fundamental axiom “Men can change”, which leads to the premise that “Men can change their sexual market value”, if men cannot change, then men cannot change our sexual market value, which means that your reproductive success is 100% based on your luck in the birth lottery.

What I’ve come to realize is that while all men can change, many men (and women) do not want to change. They want to adapt their environment to them, so that they do not have to do the uncomfortable thing and alter themselves. In order to accomplish this, they seek allies who have similar views, and push for their desired end-state. Of course, this isn’t a purely “left or right” issue, it’s a human issue and we see the same tendency on both sides. It’s all a fight to adapt the environment rather than the individual. The downside of this is that even if they realize their goal about their desired end-state the law of unexpected consequences tends to screw it up for them.

If we take the idealized structure of the 1950s in the United States, you need 2 things that the “We have to go back” people never account for:

  1. You have the bomb the shit out the manufacturing infrastructure of every other industrialized nation.
  2. You need to kill enough of your men to create a meaningful lack of men.

Even if you did that, #2 would still be dependent on the various social structures that existed around marriage, contraception, pre-marital sex, and various other things that meant that the only way to have a kid was to be married. If we did 1 + 2 in the modern United states, odds are we’d land on more polygamous relationships, or more likely a modern social democratic welfare state, where everyone works to take care of Chad’s kids. There is simple no way to push the toothpaste into the tube.

So, why do people want to go back?

Ultimately, I think much of this comes down certain inborn traits in us that we all tend to value. Most of us have a preference in risk vs. reward, stability vs. volatility, new experiences vs. stable experiences and so on. Many of these things factor into our preference the old social order is comforting because everything is broken down into a set of rules, that are supposed to never meaningfully change. Sure a few new things are introduced but in isolation they do not change things by a lot.

The washing machine, the water heater, the gas/electric stove, the dishwasher didn’t change the families that got them much, but they did free women from housework to be able to think about other things they would like to do, which in part, if not completely drove much of the “female liberation” movement in the 60s and 70s that continues to this day. One could in fact argue human history as periods of great and rather rapid change, followed by a calm period of quiet and incremental change.

Certain groups of men are born to be the forces of order, some are born to be the forces of chaos, and they are born in varying proportions all the time. When the forces of chaos outdo the forces of order we get large changes, when the forces of order outdo the forces of chaos we get incremental change.

Final thoughts

I’ve joked that in order to change anything meaningfully in medicine, a generation of doctors have to die. This isn’t because doctors are stupid, do not take in new knowledge or are extremely resistant to change, it’s simply because of our tendency to become ego-invested in things. It takes a average man to build a career in any field, it takes a great man to move his field forward through investing in it over a lifetime, it takes a rare man to admit that he’s spent his life on the wrong path.

I’m sorry to say it, but in order for the world to change, conservatives have to die. By that I don’t mean that we should hit the streets with pitchforks to promote change. What I mean is that just like in a negotiation, humans have anchor points in their life. Most people start off as liberals, then become conservative as they invest into things they want to conserve.

As an example, a conservative born in 1950, wants to preserve that imprint of the world, that is his anchor point. In the same way a liberal born in that same year, wants to build on and move on from that imprint, but not too far. This is where those old labels like “Radical” and “Reactionary” used to serve a purpose, in that they denoted either a liberal who wanted to … radically progress the structure, or a conservative that wanted a time machine. There are degrees to change and degrees to which we are comfortable to move away from those anchor-points.

The reason why conservatives never really conserve anything, is simply that when the conservative born in 1950 had his kid in 1970, his kid imprinted on the values in the 70s, so that becomes his anchor point. When the conservative born in the 70s has his first kid in say 1995, that kid imprints on 1995, and so it goes.

So, knowing all this, what is the best and most pragmatic approach? Adapt to your environment, you can attempt to influence it as well, but you’ll never be able to adapt your environment sufficiently to realize a competitive advantage. Once that environment is adapted to your liking, you have to start competing with other people within it, and we start the adaptation cycle again.

We have to go back!

I was going to do this as a twitter thread, but about halfway in I realized it would do better as long-form content. Now, I’m not going to share tweets in here, because I’m for the most part against giving people who cry for attention what they crave.

To summarize how I’d define “Trad Twitter” the best summation is “Appeal to tradition”*, this is an informal fallacy that usually takes the form of “This is right because we’ve always done it this way”. We could go into depth about the presumptions of this fallacy, and why they create a problem, however I find it much more interesting to make an analogy.

One of my more pleasurable pastimes when I’m not participating in this community or working, is playing old games from my childhood. Within the community for such games, there is always “that guy“, the guy who got dominated at the game when he was young, so now he’s come back to get his vengeance and the status he deserves, 5 – 15 years later, with perfect information, on how to dominate. The problem with this player is that he assumes that the context around the game has been static and he’s the only dynamic variable. What I mean by this is that if he travelled back in time with his current knowledge, he would most likely dominate, but in the years that have since passed, all variables around the game have been dynamic.

  • The way people play it has changed
  • The type of people the players are have changed
  • New strategies for meta-gaming have been created
  • New game-modes have been introduced such as speed running

Upon discovery of this the player type in question engages in complaints of “how the game isn’t played the same way“, “People are ruining the game” and so on, despite the fact that most players are simply doing what he was planning to do, and he’s still coming up short. The fundamental truth being that, what this player was after was an edge so he could dominate at the game. Once he goes back, fails again this usually results in emotional “fuck you guys, fuck the devs, fuck this game, I’m leaving” posts that litter various game forums all over the web.

I went through that rather long anecdote, because I think it illustrates the “trad-mindset” very well, generally they are men who struggle with adapting to many of the “changes to the game” that have been introduced in the past 70 years or so:

  • No longer having economic power over women
  • Working your whole career for one company not being the modern way
  • Being able to get a job at the factory right out of high school, then have a house, 2.5 kids and a wife for life

However, instead of accepting that the world has changed, this person advocates that we should revert to how to game used to be played, back when he understood and knew the game and where he thinks he has an information edge.

I can understand the impulse, with nostalgic glasses on, it’s easy to imagine a “perfect” time in history where you think you were perfectly adapted, a time where they’d appreciate a faithful, loyal, hard-working, dad, who puts God, Country and Family first. I’d personally love if all the unhealthy foods I like had the nutrient profile of eggs or broccoli, but this is the game we are stuck playing.

Even if we could revert back to the values of old, perhaps just to the 1950s, they still wouldn’t be the 50s, because European and Asian manufacturing hasn’t been bombed flat, we have smartphones, the internet, and many other technologies and ideas that we can’t just put back into the tube of toothpaste. Even if we by magic found ourselves with social values and ideas set back 70 years, your future “good wife” would have a smartphone, how long until she started taking ankle pics for her Instagram?

Summary and Final thoughts

I’ve often entertained myself with thought experiments of how I’d react if I was transported back to a given time in history. The appeal of it is that if you could keep all the knowledge you currently have, which is far beyond people who lived a mere 200 years ago in terms of technical fields, you could easily set yourself up in a high status and very wealthy position.

Heck, if you could go back to 2016 you could buy bitcoin at $380, hold that until Dec 19th 2017, short the crap out of bitcoin on the same day, close out your short Dec 18th 2018, then ride it back until now where bitcoin is $18K per coin. The people I know in finance usually laugh at such theoretical moves, because they are just that, theoretical. Can you luck out like that once in your life? Sure, are you more likely to mistime the market in your attempt to catch a falling or flying knife? For sure.

The converse to the trads are the people who appeal to novelty, I like new things, but not all new things are good and the implementation of new ideas should be done in a reasonably controlled manner. However, we cannot fight progress, the world will develop whether or not you accept it, so the best thing to do is adaption, as our world favors those who are most able to adapt to changing contexts.

The funniest thing about the whole situation to me, is that all sides, including the status quo group, are all fighting to bring about a world where they have an innate edge that they didn’t really have to earn. Instead of learning how to play the game, they work very hard to change the game.

  • If you suck at playing the mating game, you probably want arranged marriages or a state mandated girlfriend so that someone else solves your problem for you.
  • If you suck at playing the money game, you are more likely to support communism or UBI, since that means someone else solves your money problems for you.
  • If you suck at playing the lifting game, you can always go on TRT at 18 and use fake weights for your instagram profile.

The jock wants to play football, the nerd wants to play chess, the cheerleader wants to create spirit, and the badboy… well the badboy gets laid regardless so whatever.

The most important point is that these are all strategies to try and outsource the things you are responsible for, but not competent at, so instead of stepping your game up, putting in work and effort, you try to outsource it under a “noble narrative“. The argument boils down to “It would be better for EVERYONE, if ALL OF YOU support my ENTITLEMENT COMPLEX“.


This shit is a slog

Something I’ve picked up on the last few years is that a lot of men use their journey in this space as a buffer, it’s somewhat ironic that despite Rollo’s great article on it from some years ago, it seems many readers aren’t aware that indulging in the content produced by the manosphere can be a buffer in and of itself.

We have live examples every day of men who spend much of their time consuming podcasts, reading blog posts, following twitter, facebook, insta and so on. They are always 1 gumroad course away from being 6 ft, 6 figures, 12 inch dick and 24 inch rims.

Why Are You in the Manosphere?

I think this is an important question to answer, because if you can’t answer it then you’re not going to derive a lot of value from being here. You need to know what the ideal end-state for you looks like, otherwise you cannot make decisions and act on them without running a major risk of ending up where you don’t want to be.

On top of that, a barrier against outside influence is a strong vision that acts as a guide, every time you get an offer to buy a gumroad course, a book, take on an internship or a job, you ask yourself “Is investing time into this conducive to realizing my vision for myself?”

If the answer is no you move on, if the answer is yes, you do a little bit of research then you pull the trigger on the product or action. This space has a lot of resources for improving most aspects of life that men are interested in, money, sex, excitement, strength, and power. Deciding which you want and which are the low-hanging fruit for you is important.

First you identify the problem, then you establish an understanding of it, then you identify potential paths forward, then you make a call and put that into action. It’s an OODA loop, and a very solid problem-solving tool.

The Nature of Problem-solving

When I wrote Gendernomics Building Value , it was a response to many questions on “Now that I have this knowledge, I have no idea where to begin or what to do“, I totally understand where these guys are coming from, they are hurt, we know that since no normal men ever enter the manosphere. Every man here has suffered some damage, that they want to avoid in the future.

The problem for many of them is that they have no idea what lead to their wife leaving them, their girlfriend cheating on them, their male friends not respecting them, being everyone’s bitch at work, or all of the above.

So I decided to write Building Value as a step-by-step guide to how to productively work forward, because in the end knowledge does not generate value unless applied, but you can’t apply knowledge without understanding your situation, which requires knowledge. Seems a bit chicken-and-eggish doesn’t it?

The issue with knowledge is that while it can add a lot to your ability to problem-solve is that it can also buffer action since as long as you are gaining knowledge on a subject, it feels like you’re working on the problem. In reality many men work themselves into analysis-paralysis, or find themselves enjoying the “boys club” in this space so much they lose sight of their initial problem.

“Did you hit on any girls?”

“No, not yet but I did read 2 blogs, watch 4 hours of 2 dudes talking about red pill legos and 8 hours bitching about the election on twitter”

That’s not working on your problem, that’s like the people who post “Finally got a gym membership, 20xx is the year I get into shape” on Jan 1st, who then spend 2 – 6 weeks curling pink dumbbells in the squat rack, only to never be seen again. They get the good feelz from saying they are doing something, they do a little bit of it, then they live off that for a year or two, sinking further into the bottomless pit of Netflix.

Rian is a fan of OODA loops, “Observe, orient, decide, act”, a concept invited by military Strategist John Boyd. I like this concept and Building Value in a sense is a detailed guide to executing an OODA loop related to your sexual market value.

Meaning first you observe the situation, in order to build a comprehensive picture of it, with a maximum amount of accuracy. I.E. you have to understand your context and where you fit within it.

The second step is orient, which is all about connecting with reality through mental models, adding more mental models and improving the accuracy of your existing mental models in order to lay the foundation to make a good decision.

The third step is decide, step 1 and step 2 should have created plenty of ideas on which decisions could be made, now you decide. This is not as simple as just deciding, at this stage you have to test your decisions to spot their flaws and include issues that pop up in future observation stages.

The fourth step is simple: Act. All the steps lead to this one, your goal here is to put your decision into action and take with you what you learned from that action.

Connecting with yourself

My goal with this post is to get you thinking and being discerning about what things contribute positively to your vision for where you want to be, then start executing those OODA loops in order to move forward. The primary reason why I’ve been anti-politics and anti-culture war for the last few years is that I’ve seen too many men get involved in the grand project of owning the libs or beating the SJWs as a buffer for the things they need to do in their own life.

While I do recognize that politics and the culture war has a negative influence on masculinity in aggregate and the context within which we operate, all they are doing is making rules, and women make rules for betas. Jordan B. Peterson pointed out the problem in his metaphor of “clean your room”, that means fix the things in your own life before trying to fix the world. For most men, it’s very easy to get involved in the grand undertaking of fixing the world, it’s very hard to look at yourself with an objective lens and trying to fix that trainwreck.

To quote my King James


It’s very easy to point out what’s wrong with other people, the world and the universe, it’s even easy to hot-take in solutions or fall into the thrall of the greater organism and spend all the time you could have spent on yourself on something that seems to offer progress, admiration and accomplishments, but which is really just slacktivism.

Life After The Red Pill

Last week I dropped into Red Evening with Jack Napier and Rob, I’d like to go back it was a solid talk. During the course of the broadcast we had a talk on how their content is almost completely free of jargon, there is very little red pill conversation even though they are very knowledgeable about the topic, it’s not the focal point of the show. For the most part it centers on interests outside of the red pill space. I found this to be quite interesting, because from my perspective and a major reason I stopped writing here is that I’m sorta over “Looks, Money, Power, Status, Game” thing, that seems to repeat itself on a never-ending 3-6 month cycle. I could churn out “Gendernomics” articles twice a week on topic for profits, I just don’t want to, it’s not original and just boring, basic, bland and formulaic. Quite frankly it’s back breaking bargain basement material.

The plot is the same, the structure is the same, the characters are the same, the soundtrack is the same, and every-other city we go, and every-other video, it’s the same ho. Looks, money, power, status and game haven’t changed in importance since 2006. Yet, if you want hits, write an article or do a skit on “[insert one of the 5] is the most important shit” and you’ll get rich.  “Women in 2020 are the most savage and feral ever, they go HAM, You need my program. It’s brimming with plenty, plenty of hard posts beating the average peril being clever, you’ll fuck hoes of the gram or you get a free sluts 2020 sweater”  

My view is that the red pill space is purgatory, it’s like Rick and Morty, if you catch the story, get out before you turn douche and we have to start the mourning. You want to spend as little time here as possible before moving on to a better place. This place wasn’t designed for you to hang around here forever, the fire code is ereased, there are not enough bathrooms to go around and for some fucking reason the showers are always cold. Our buffet only has steaks and tofu, it’s on you to pick between black coffee and even blacker coffee, not to mention there are enough fuckers wilding out on a weekly basis that we should be hosted by Nick Cannon and sponsored by Worldstar.  Think of the red pill like a bank robbery, if you’ve been here longer than 2 mins, the alarms sounded and the cops are on their way in.

We have 20 years worth of videos, audio books, podcasts, books and essays, but have anyone written what are you supposed to do after you’ve actually done the red pill rat-race, tried to save food and not look like a boob? What do you do once on the first day of Red Pill your true coach sent to you, an email calling you n00b. On your second day of red pill your true coach sent to you, two emails calling you a screwed, and an email calling you n00b. On the third day of red pill, your true coach sent to you, a DM with 3 girl’s nudes, two emails calling you a screwed and an email calling you noob.

How many 6 foot dicks, 6 inch height requirements, 6 lambos, 6 figure notch counts do you need to fail at before you realize it’s a scam?  Do you continue to hustle or do you fall for the next hyperbolic douchebag who points out that your beard growth is patchy and buy his “how to grow a beard like mine in 7 days” (hint day 2 – 4 is recovering from the hair transplant). Is this shit turning into the Groundhog pill? Is this for real? Even Final Fantasy has a max level to the skills, it’s sorta fascinating how the red pill is morphing into a game where Asian nerds get themselves killed.

“Red Pill acolyte”: “OMG I just got a 6 foot penis all it took was hustling 22 hours a day for a year

Coach 2 mins later: “Is your cock under 11 ft? You’re not even a boy, I’ll teach you how to get here

Are we there yet? The illusion of a path is that it goes from A to B, but see, the profit isn’t in the cure, it’s in continue to receive, admire excess for free, want a piece, pay up sucker and excise it. I’d hate to be divisive, but what I see and what strikes me, is that it might be, that we encourage dependency, for a certain fee, we tell a man that he can be free, and receive his dreams. It’s crack philosophies, where the first hit is free, but after the change is undergone, and not before long, the man just out to get a home, needs red pill methadone, because the meta-approach, is to make some bones, and when the light is shone, it’s all hinged on the next step of the bridge, LEVEL UP, THE NEXT LEVEL, THE NEXT STEP. Every hero’s journey has a beginning, middle and an end, but if the interest is in selling riddles, there is no payoff at the end. If they no longer need Pfizer, but Pfizer needs them, to remain high in a sense, the pill is a circular friend. Am I making any sense with my 2 cents? That a passing interest to solve a problem, should not hold you hostage and then some?

Us as content creators, we aspire to greatness, it starts just wanting to aid friends, but months or years in have we gained any traction? When our content keeps point out the same sins and problems? Seems senseless to not push onward, hoping that our readers will soon be gone with the knowledge the pill offers, but off it, in that they cured their afflictions. Do we want to cure them of their demons or just keep them coming to meetings, in all seasons, always citing the pledge of allegiance,

Hi I’m Carl I’m a bluepillholigic, it’s been 2 years since I bought a girl flowers, I don’t think of baby showers, I just want to plow and choke girls. I earn 7 figures driving a hearse, I can deadlift 1000 lbs for reps while wearing a “I’m a spartan” T-shirt, my sidechick had a baby early and I ate the afterbirth, PROTEIN. I’ve been on the scene since Style’s hair had a nice sheen and “VH1 the pickup artist” was just a pipe-dream, but I put out auto-logic like Rage against the machine.” 

Am I the only one who sees the problem with this, when people have been here for 2 years and haven’t talked to a chick? Think about it, gym membership for 2 years, didn’t lift any weights. Been on Jenny Craig for 2 years, didn’t lose any weight. Been a Catholic all my life, don’t have any faith, girl shot me twice on our date, finally some penetration, this must be fate, Oh did I mention she’s late? At what point do we see that this approach ain’t working, when after years of reading, and guys are still stuck jerking like Peewee Herman, and being jerked by craftsmen like a penis-ad person?

The question is, are you a problem solver that holds men accountable and do not absolve them, a man who leads who make men better in their own life, or are you are problem-creator, with no accountability, who builds your life on men’s lives.

House of Spergs





Focus on Receipts over Content




  • Directors at major companies who influence corporate policy.
  • Politicians, elected officials and people within the political space.


Oversaturation of the Market


Raw on Mondays

Smackdown on Tuesdays

NXT on Wednesday

Main Event on Thursday

Superstars on Friday

Monthly Pay-per-views on Sundays


Continued Commercialization




Closing thoughts






Balancing acts

As I sit here preparing to cook this year’s News Years dinner, I found myself contemplating the year that is soon to be behind us. It’s been a very eventful year, starting with great strife within this space, and culminating in myself almost passing during the fall. During all this, I found myself teetering for lack of a better word between the various parts of my life, and how it’s constructed. I say “constructed” because as I outlined in Gendernomics: Building Value, I believe that men build their lives, women have life build them. Man happens to life, life happens to woman.

Once you find yourself in very much a weakened state, you find yourself challenging many of your previous assumptions and coming to some new perspectives, which is what I want to talk a little bit about today.

One of the more regular questions I used to get, was “How do convert other men so that they may become Red Pill men?“, “How do I teach men what I now know to be the truth of male-female sexual dynamics?“, “How do I change myself to become more red pill?” and many variations on what is essentially the same question. “How do I integrate The Red Pill and my current life?

A major cause of the schism earlier this year, was how to answer this question, prescriptively and concretely VS. descriptively and abstractly. I tend to prefer the latter, for the simple reason that each man has some shared variables and quite a few unique variables. However, I’ve also come to realize that the downside of the latter, is that excessive abstraction and description of abstract concepts, often renders ideas unable of application. Whereas, the downside of excessive prescription and concreteness tends to become dogmatism and control. Thus, with Gendernomics: Building Value, I attempted to bridge the two sides of the chasm through leading out principles and prescriptions from the abstractions.

This was a balancing act, as with many others we deal with from day to day, but we do not think about. We balance our personalities between our family life, our friends, our work, and our general social image, however we also have a personality that often becomes dominant when we find ourselves alone. It is this balancing act a man must find between his new-found perspectives, and those of his old life.

One of my own balancing acts that I struggle with is investment, not as in financial investment, but with time management and how personally invested I permit myself to become. As I had my reflective period post-problems, my perspective shifted a bit in that I saw that while this space has been exceedingly good to me, as of the most recent year it had morphed into something else. Rather than a mostly cooperative space founded on volunteer work by many men who offered their time, thoughts and experiences, it had become an avenue for telemarketers and evangelists. I suppose a way of putting it would be in the beginning helping yourself and helping others was the goal and any financial gains were incidental, as of last year financial gains and helping yourself became the goal and helping others was incidental.

Continue reading