Monday, June 24, 2013

Girls Make Me Lazy



The amount of time I spend in close proximity to females is inversely proportional to my desire to grind. When I'm alone on a weekend, I have a powerful urge to exercise, read, make money, socialize, and produce. With a female in close quarters, I want to eat food, lay around in bed all day, sleep, and consume pointless media. 

My guess that this relates to our evolution as a species. Why does your ventral tegmentum shoot dopamine into your midbrain? Because you did something to make yourself a more desirable mate. These reward mechanisms have evolved to reinforce behaviors that promote reproductive fitness. Everything we do is directly or indirectly linked to the need to procreate. Our mood rewards us when we do things that advance this goal and pushes us to seek this fulfillment. 

Once these mechanisms are being satisfied, though, there is less motivation to seek higher levels of reward. I suspect this contributes to married people gaining weight and taking fewer risks in their lives, since the basest impulse for the sex at is (at least in theory) being satisfied. This is coupled with the societal expectation to settle down and devote your life to our family instead of your own interests, which goes against a man's hard-wired urge to maximize his reproductive fitness through risking failure for accomplishment.

I like the occasional "girlfriend weekend" because it's nice to take a break form the game, but it ultimately goes against my nature. When Monday morning comes, I always choose personal fulfillment and productivity over comfort.

Friday, June 21, 2013

Mailbag: Day Game or Online Dating? Part 2

Continued from Part 1:

The third part of your question is about online dating. It has its place in the gaming arsenal, but I'll give you two reasons not to devote precious time to it:

1) It's not a good ROI if you're a "normal" guy looking to date "normal" girls
2) It doesn't give you any real-life skills

I define "normal" thusly: you're in decent shape, but you're not an underwear model. You're a good enough writer, but you're not going to beat delicioustacos in an essay contest. You have some reasonable hobbies, but you're not the Dos Equis guy. You may have to message 15 girls before you get a single response. It may take responses from 2 or 3 girls to get a single date. It may take dates with 3 girls before you can escalate to whatever physical/emotional goals you have. This assumes you want girls who are at lest presentable (5+ on the 1-10 scale), and that you have at least average "first message" game. Do you like those odds?

That segues into point two -- if you've sent out nearly 100 messages to get a few measly dates, you've spent hours of your life typing words into a computer, few of which will ever see the light of day. Not dealing with your anxiety about rejection. Not improving your body. Not starting a business or improving real life skills

Online dating will not only discourage you from making changes; it actively makes your game worse. Seeing pictures of girls online saps your motivation to seek novelty and to talk to girls in real life, the same way porn saps your desire for real-life sex. You are a beginner, and you WILL use it as a crutch that prevents you from approaching girls in real life. You already mentioned a problem with fear of rejection. You will never conquer it using online dating.

Perhaps the most well-covered negative to dating online is the schism between a girl's expectations and her realistic value. I'll level with you -- even modestly decent-looking girls online see themselves as way out of your league. They get 50 messages a day from solid-yet-unremarkable men. It encourages a window shopper mentality, makes them find reasons to reject you, and gives them an inflated sense of their value. A fringe 6 in the club gets treated like a 9 online. Don't believe me? Set up a fake profile with a couple cute girl pics and track how many messages you get.

I've had some success with OKCupid and met some high-quality girls. But the (hundreds of?) hours I spent crafting messages, waiting to reply, working on my profile, thinking about when to respond, etc. could have been put to better use, both in pursuit of women and of real life goals.

A last note -- if you do decide to go this route (and I wouldn't recommend it to start out), for goodness sake don't PAY to be on one of these time-sucking websites. They have a financial incentive for you to fail.  

I suspect you might be a decent guy just looking for some control over your love life and, ultimately, a relationship. Even so, it behooves you to develop yourself and your game first, and only then use online dating to supplement. Thanks for the question, and best of luck.

Readers: Please send your questions to manexmachina at gmail dot com

Thursday, June 20, 2013

Mailbag: Day Game or Online Dating? Part 1


A reader writes:
---
A lot of people from the "manosphere" imply that "day-game" where you cold-approach women during the daytime is completely acceptable - and women even "like it".  Yet, women ("feminists" - judging by their blogs) suggest that this sort of behavior is something to be frowned upon, where cold-approaching women during the daytime is not only deemed unacceptable, but also as something that is dangerous.

What is your take on this?

Would it not be better to maybe utilise an online dating website where women advertise their availability and also don't fear being "harassed" by strangers?

Of course, what compels me to consider online dating sites is recommendation from my friends (who argue that these are now more acceptable as dating tools vs the traditional dating game).  Also, I don't want to be humiliated in public by being rejected by the woman, where there are witnesses, and where there might be the chance that she might go off the boiler.
----

There are a lot of things going on here, so I've split it up into two posts. From your emails, it appears that you are new to the game. Congratulations on at least getting out there and trying to soak up some ideas that aren't endorsed by everyone in your day-to-day life.

Your first issue is with whether women want to be approached during the day. The answer is a resounding "yes." As usual, you must disregard what women say ("don't talk to me during the day") and pay attention to what they do (have drinks with me after I talk to them for 10 minutes about their coffee tumbler in Starbucks).

Have you looked at the pictures of some of the feminist writers who decry harassment during the day? Methinks the hog doth protest too much, and most of their spittle-flinging about dangerous men saying hello to them is sour grapes at their bargain-basement sexual market value.  You live in a safe, westernized country -- where is the "danger" in another person attempting to have a pleasant conversation with you in a well-lit coffee shop or grocery store? You're not hollering at them like a construction worker, you are trying to form a basic connection with another human being in a safe and public area.

Your second issue appears to be a problem with rejection itself rather than a distrust of day game. I have bad news -- if you make a commitment to getting better at talking to women, you're going to get rejected. A lot. Being "humiliated" in public is uncommon, but it does happen. 

I can tell you that if you honestly make a commitment to working on this, your fear will greatly diminish. With each approach, your heartbeat will be a bit slower, and you'll find the words come a bit easier. This confidence will spill into other areas of your life. Think about it this way -- if you go out tomorrow and say hello to 3 girls during your lunch break, you will have practiced more "day game" than 95% of males on this planet. It's all improvement from here.

At the risk of sounding too much like an advertisement, you should really buy Roosh's Day Bang. It changed the game for me, and over the past year I've been able to date some of the best looking girls of my life after approaching them in the coffee shop or supermarket. Roosh goes over mindest, venue selection, what to say, and how to guide and close an interaction. It's really a terrific resource that I cannot recommend highly enough. The book helped me develop a strong preference (and a better success rate overall) for approaching during the day.

You can buy Roosh V's Day Bang through this link to support both Roosh and Man Ex Machina.

Online dating? That's a whole different story. Part 2 is coming tomorrow.

Don't Miss: The Trap of Someday

Monday, June 17, 2013

The Look

I walked into my building elevator only to see a stunningly beautiful girl. Sundress, tight body, gorgeous face. And no ring on her finger.

I was in my running shoes and basketball shorts, sweaty from a hard-fought afternoon run.

In the bygone days of blue pill existence, I ignored a lot of the world. In this situation I would have hoped so fervently that the girl noticed me that her body language would have escaped my perception. Nowadays, knowing the true nature of women helps me to be more aware of my surroundings and sensitive to their nonverbal cues.

That was when it was flashed. The look. Sometimes it comes when you share an elevator or pass a woman on a street. Other times, during day approaches. Most frequently at night at the bar or club. The looks is one of dismissive self-righteousness. It says: "You want me so badly, but it will never happen. I am way out of your league, and I know it." The girl flipped through Facebook updates on her iPhone, ruthlessly delighting in her perceived superiority over the sweaty, poorly-outfitted mess sharing her space.

I thought about how I might see her at a bar later that night. My muscles would be well-outlined by my polo shirt rather than hidden by a ratty dry-fit running tee. My hair would be gelled instead of covered in sweat. My breathing would be calm and measured, instead of gasping for air after a grueling set of intervals. I would tell her that it looked like she was having the best time of anyone, and make a witty observation about our surroundings. Maybe she would give me her number, or even put up minimal resistance to a makeout on the dance floor.

I thought about how she would not see the thousands of hours I put into changing myself. Improving my body. Reading. Writing. Approaching. Investing time in worthwhile skills and hobbies. No matter the outcome of the approach, I wouldn't tell her that in five years she would be pining for a man with looks, charm, money, and intelligence. I wouldn't tell her that it would become increasingly difficult for her to fulfill her childish desire for a self-indulgent wedding and the perfect combination of badboy, family man, and easy ATM. That her "look" would become less and less applicable as the years piled on. I thought that she should enjoy her moment of superiority, an ephemeral triumph in an otherwise front-loaded and disappointing reality.

Of course, I didn't need to tell her any of this. It was all written in the look on my face.

Friday, June 14, 2013

Pleasure Spots



"Much of what goes by the name of pleasure is simply an effort to destroy consciousness."

A brilliant short essay by George Orwell: http://orwell.ru/library/articles/spots/english/e_spots
If one started by asking, what is man? What are his needs? How can he best express himself? One would discover that merely having the power to avoid work and live one's life from birth to death in electric light and to the tune of tinned music is not a reason for doing so. Man needs warmth, society, leisure, comfort and security: he also needs solitude, creative work and the sense of wonder. If he recognised this he could use the products of science and industrialism eclectically, applying always the same test: does this make me more human or less human? He would then learn that the highest happiness does not lie in relaxing, resting, playing poker, drinking and making love simultaneously. [ ...] For man only stays human by preserving large patches of simplicity in his life, while the tendency of many modern inventions-in particular the film, the radio and the aeroplane-is to weaken his consciousness, dull his curiosity, and, in general, drive him nearer to the animals.
Orwell was, to say the least, ahead of his time. He decried the corruption and hypocrisy of communism, correctly predicted the advent of the technocratic police state, and in this brief treatise identifies much of our leisure objects as pacifiers and stunters of humanity.

Do your hobbies and pastimes make you more human, or less human?


Wednesday, June 12, 2013

Pickup At 25,000 Feet


Everyone hates flying. The fact that airlines are beginning to charge by size should clue you in on the clientele for the average commercial flight. However, if you travel enough you will inevitably be presented with opportunities to game. When the airline gods smile upon you with the proximity of an attractive lass, here are some strategies you can use:

Getting a Number

It's best to establish a quick positive rapport shorty after sitting down. I usually do this by poking fun at someone on the airplane who deserves it (e.g. a man talking too loudly on his cell phone, a woman with a dog in a handbag, etc.). After you exchange pleasantries, disengage. If you're used to pushing through an approach at a bar or club this will feel unnatural, but is absolutely imperative unless you are on a very short flight. Even if you could ramble enough to cover a 5 hour flight from Pittsburgh to San Francisco, it's unlikely that your seatmate wants to hear you talk for hours on end.

Work on your own stuff, preferably something that involves reading or working rather than playing video games. When the flight is about 10-15 minutes from landing, re-engage the girl and ramp up the chitchat. Day Bang's "elderly opener", "ramble", "big bait," and GALNUC concepts are key here. If she responds positively to your vibe, getting the number shouldn't be difficult. 

Girls abuse the word "creepy," but in this scenario you must avoid embodying that tired adjective. The image you want to portray is "confident, laid-back interesting guy." Note that this is a different mindset than at the club. Err on the side of being boring.

Mid-Flight Makeout

Opportunities to actually escalate physically over the course of the flight are few and far between, but it does happen. I have done this twice. These were the common threads in both instances:

- The girl was young (<25)
- She expressed a fun/flirty vibe early in the interaction
- She responded positively to continued teasing. 

This works almost exclusively on younger girls, who are attracted to the "danger" of making out with a complete stranger on an airplane and are not as concerned about their image. The key here is grinding out the approach and steady compliance testing. Unlike going for the number, you're going to have to build attraction and push the boundaries a bit throughout the flight, which can be exhausting and tedious. If she rebuffs you in a playful way you are on to something. The image you want to project is "Mischievous but non-rapey bad boy."

The in-plane makeout requires boldness, savvy, and a lot of luck. Make light touching as the first physical move, and keep escalating. Pull back a bit here and there and be bold about everything before the kiss, which you need to be reasonably sure of for obvious reasons. The good news is, if the girl likes you enough to make out with you on the plane, you should be able to transition it into an instant date if you're staying in the same city.

Unless you identify your seatmate as a prime target, it's best to forgo this routine because of the time involved and the low-percentage nature of the move. In a normal night approach you can often bust through initial social resistance if your game is tight, but the confined environment of air travel can magnify any negative feelings toward you. Trust your instincts and tread carefully, lest you get arrested and strip-searched by a Sky Marshal.

Pulling A Flight Attendant

I have little experience with this, but I consulted a friend who has done this several times. She has to have initial interest in you, and it's best if you're seated near the front or back of the plane, giving you more face time and opportunities for interaction. This is similar to hitting on a bartender, where innumerable other jerks are jockeying for an attractive girl's time while she is at work. You need something to separate yourself, and this game is best played by men who are very good looking or eye catching in some manner. This situation has the highest upside though, since flight attendants can travel anywhere for free and can thus become part of your rotation despite geographic distance.

Ultimately, airplane game is difficult to practice because it is so dependent on circumstances outside of your control. You can fly for months without sitting next to a single reasonable target, but on the rare occasions where the circumstances line up properly you'll know that it's possible and how to maximize your chances.


Friday, June 7, 2013

Four Things I Observed At The Company Gym



Having read about commercial gyms that outlaw squat racks and "grunting," I feel grateful to have a company gym outfitted with top-notch equipment. For the first time, though, I have witnessed the workout habits of Herbus Americanus firsthand. If you've frequented a company gym, you have likely seen all of these obvious mistakes:

People hate weights - The average person is afraid that they will either hurt themselves by lifting heavy, or they will get "too bulky." So they do a couple sets on the leg extension machine, hit the elliptical for 8 minutes, and call it a day. Wouldn't want to get too big. Ironically, fear of getting "bulky" seems inversely proportional to time spent in the gym.

Gym-goers don't push themselves - I get a sick pleasure watching coworkers take a leisurely stroll on the cardio machines or do a couple pull-ups while barely breaking a sweat. This makes me feel better about collapsing after my last deadlift rep, Tim Tebowing on the floor out of necessity until the room stops spinning. Most people are lucky to work out an average of 20 minutes a day. If you're going any less than 100% during that time, you are a fool to expect any realistic gains.

Record keeping is poor - People drift from machine to machine, sometimes hitting 8 or 9 different stations during their hard-fought 14-minute crucible of pain. Despite their regimen containing more exercises than I knew existed, I rarely see them record how many reps they are doing at what weight. They care about putting "gym time" in in the abstract, but do not care enough to track their progress or pursue fitness goals.

Most people are looking for excuses NOT to get a workout in - I have seen people amble into the gym, talk to a coworker about the weather for 15 minutes, work out for 5 minutes, and leave. The vast majority of people are incurably lazy. By distracting themselves, they get the feeling of accomplishment that comes with getting into the gym without any of that unpleasant sweatiness, loss of breath, or soreness the next day.

Don't let this be you.

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Surely You're Joking

Be sure to read this post over at Return of Kings


On Fat Acceptance


This fat acceptance thing is really getting out of hand. 

I am fit, but I don't fully agree that fatness is a lifestyle "choice" -- this word implies a non-iterated decision, like choosing what to eat for breakfast in the morning. Obesity is a "lifestyle habit" or "lifestyle series of decisions," the culmination of hundreds or thousands of small choices that add up to one large (heh) impact. It therefore follows that if you are a lazy person that cannot sustain other small positive lifestyle habits, you are more likely to be fat.

I also agree that there are large genetic and environmental components. Some people are naturally more insulin-resistant and prone to pack on extra pounds, and with the demonstrated toxicity of America's food environment it's surprising that anyone naturally stays in a state we consider to be thin.

That said, if you're a well-off, educated person in America, there is no excuse for you to be obese. There are so many blogs, books, articles, testimonials, and treatises on the science on obesity that if you even scratch below the most superficial veneer of lobbyist-driven government eating recommendations, you realize that our food supply is fundamentally poisonous and that there are easily achievable diet alterations will make large differences. If you're reading this blog, you're not living in the ghetto and buying food at gas stations. If you fit this demographic, you are also smart enough to realize that being fat destroys your quality of life -- physical attractiveness, ability to find a high quality mate, ardor of your daily life, self-esteem, respect from others, the list goes on and on.

The speaker is able to graduate suma cum laude from NYU, go to a top 5 law school, and work for large New York law firms, but can't be bothered to go on a juice fast or give up carbohydrates for 6 months in a concerted effort to change her body.

Our life outcomes are a direct reflection of our priorities.

Rather than acknowledging and changing priorities, people would rather deform our culture to accept fatness. The video begins devolve into this self-congratulatory defeatism is when the speaker says:  "Diets don't work for most people, so you shouldn't worry about trying." She suggests that since 95% of people put weight back on after a diet, you shouldn't feel like a failure if you can't lose weight in the long term.

This is wrong. The food that we eat can alter the long-term expression of genes in our body, predisposing our cells to store fat and make us feel like we are starving. A 6-week or even 6-month crash diet to lose 20 lbs is not going to rewire years of careless neglect, just as 3 months of weight training is not going to get you deadlifting 400 pounds. There is a good reason that "diets" don't work -- because people don't apply them properly or consistently.

The speaker goes on cite some laughably bad science about how fat Type 2 Diabetes patients manage the disease more effectively than thinner people. In this statement, she completely neglects the baseline rate of the disease in the different populations. Type 2 diabetes is frequently the result of obesity-induced insulin resistance, and is a debilitating disease that accounts for $200 billion in medical costs annually. The best she can say is that fat people are more resilient when dealing with the horrible diseases caused by their fatness.

You get the sense that the speaker doesn't even fully believe her own rambling, self-serving monologue. Make no mistake: despite her rationalizations, the speaker hates herself and would give nearly anything to be average weight. That is, anything that didn't involve putting in consistent work.

At its roots, this video is emblematic of the worst placating, individuated, equalist features of our culture. Instead of fixing the problem, the growing army of fatsos seeks to change the definition of "healthy" and "attractive" to the detriment of our culture. Letting go of "judgment" in the aggregate contradicts common sense epistemology --  the idea that some things are, elementally, desirable while others are undesirable. A "wellness coach" who ignores science is not someone to be trusted, especially when her appearance defies all reasonable definitions of the word.

Read more: Monsanto Ruins American Bodies