How did you apply it's rules in your daily life, Sup Forums ?

Just finished reading this book, it was in a list of Sup Forums recommended books. I'm not sure if I'm really awake so to speak, since I had pretty misogynistic views about women and how intersex relations works in general even before knowing this book. I'm just too much of a pussy and lacking in self confidence to actually go out testing or improving myself with women.

What did you think about The Rational Male, Sup Forums ? Is hypergamy really hard coded into the psyche of every living woman ?
I'm not sure if I correctly swallowed the redpill provided by this book, ( maybe because english is not my first language ) this is why I'm making this thread in order to discuss it with fully "game aware" men.

Other urls found in this thread:

singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html
therationalmale.com/2014/03/16/preventative-medicine-part-i/
heartiste.wordpress.com/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

bump
I don't want my thread to die

Last try. Is it actually on a fucking list of recommended books that no one ever took the time to actually read ?

Latest of the last try. I'll discuss it on /r9k/ or /lit/

Yes hypergamy is hardwired into every woman bro

Have you ever thought that most of the posters on this board are illiterate retards?

Most of those book lists were also created 3+ years ago when this board wasn't chock full of 80 IQ antifa libtards and pleddit bandwagoners. If you want to discuss the literary merits of these books, you should be going to /lit/.

And you'll probably be laughed at because a good 90% of those Sup Forums recommended books are fucking awful anyways.

PS start with the greeks

There might be a statistical exception, but yes, hypergamy is a dominant sexual strategy for just about all women. Think about it in a evolutionairy way. There is no negative to a well-executed hypergamy.

>everyone is retarded now
Pls read my new book
t. Lauren southern

This. I've you can't put your message into a pepe meme then your message just goes by without being noticed

>a book
Ha pleb the streetz wah we learn, world my tutor.

First of all, thanks to all of you for replying.

I can see where you're going with this, but I can't seem to observe such cases of said hypergamy going on in my environment. Maybe it's because I just left highschool but I have female friends who are in a relationship with "beta" or ugly men and they love them. They are not alphas, but are'nt betas ( = fragile emasculated men) either. They are normal. And I'm not seeing the girls going and fucking with the chads, as I actually went partying with them.

I don't know. I hope there are people who are'nt here just because this board became a politics orientated Sup Forums replacement since Trump election. I'm trying to become a better man by reading and learning useful virtues like hard-work etc. Despite all it's flaws, Sup Forums and Sup Forums in general can be very enlightening for the soul

Spin those plates, frenchy! Only got one plate? Pretend like you have more. Regardless of you're past and present, to whatever woman you're courting, you are and have always been a stud.

This is what I actually want to know. As stated multiple times in the book, women prefer covert methods of communications over overt methods that men use in general.
In which common ways can we show to a woman that we are actually a high regarded man ? Showing her that we can leave her at any time ? Going out with female (((friends))) by making sure that she see you with them, followed by you faking that you actually did'nt plan her to spot you with them ?

( Sorry for my broken english )

>everyone is retarded now
Well... yeah.

Look at it this way: If you're used to discussion on a board with an average IQ of 115, and then in the span of a single year, that average IQ drops off a cliff, you end up feeling like you're surrounded by utter idiots.

That's what Sup Forums feels like going from shortly before the 2016 election to now. Relatively speaking, everyone here really is hecking retarded. I have to go to the smaller boards to get meaningful discussions now. I sometimes wish a baseline IQ of 100 or 105 were required to post here. Maybe hiroshimoot can do that for a new board.

Your english is fine. You are referring to jealousy. Being seen with other women is always going to peak interest, but only if those women are attractive or somewhat popular.

Beta doesn't necessarily mean fragile or emasculated. It just means guys that fulfill more of the provider role for women.
alpha and beta are not either/or categories. You can display alpha or beta behavioral trats at different times.

If you haven't already you should check out Rollo's blog, also Chateau Heartiste

You want to require people to take IQ tests to post?

>Is hypergamy really hard coded into the psyche of every living woman ?

If you read the book and you come here asking for verification on what I can assume is one of the key points of the book then that means the book was insufficiently convincing. If there weren't facts and statistics to back up the point then you can assume it is bullshit and there would be no reason to come asking here. If proof was offered in the book there should be no real need to come here asking for verification, just check the sources. If there was no proof and you still want to believe: Why? Why do you want to believe a falsehood so desperately?

I'm pretty sure that you are exaggerating. Or maybe mistaking autistic shills with actual posters

Yeah I went a little off board. But since I'm not even able to get one plate this is why I thought first about "faking" having more plates.

>but only if those women are attractive or somewhat popular

Are you sure ? I was thinking that maybe since women would think " how the hell can he be going out with someone uglier than me" that would actually activate her desire to compete.

You actually reminded me, he even explains it himself in the "contextual alpha" section... I should take another look later.
I'll make sure to look at those too, thanks.

Honestly this is more /r9k/ than Sup Forums

Here's an axiom for you to run away with:
Women want the most successful possible mate to produce the most successful possible children, because this is the most successful possible evolutionary strategy.

From that axiom you can figure out what women want and why they want it, even when women can't figure it out for themselves.

It's called "pre-selection": You've already been sifted out of the trashpile of men, so other women are more open to a relationship and see you as more attractive. This is also why women go after married men.

As a unique twist for a new board only.

Hello, french bro. I haven't read that book, but if you're interested in understanding men and women, I'd recommend you "The way of the superior man".

I was able to understand a lot of things thanks to thay book, that I previously had some suspicions.

Bump

Civilizations fall because they stop adhering to natural law. One of the hardest things for Sup Forums to understand is that there is no one behind the curtain. There is no mysterious cult bent on our destruction, we're collapsing because the fundamental ideology at the core of western world is egalitarianism - something which goes against the laws of nature. We're destined to fail because we pursue it. Hierarchy is one of the most important and far reaching laws of nature.

The first hierarchy is man over woman. Woman herself does not hold values or beliefs, she is always a messenger for someone elses views, a mirror. This next part can seem contradictory if you don't grasp the first part - woman are capable of almost anything. But they do not do things for the same reasons as men. They do it within the context of supporting/serving her authority. A woman can be a farmer, a merchant, or a scientist. But she cannot do these things because she wants to, she lacks wants, she cannot do them for her desire of self betterment. she is incapable of leading herself.

She cannot do this because she is inherantly curious about the world, no, she does this for her authority. A woman can be one of the greatest assets, but as long as we falsely believe them to be greater, or equal to man, we will not understand their value.

nah man he is just apprehensive about swallowing the red pill. It's a big deal to have so much about what you thought the world was, turned on it's head. He wants to know he is not crazy

Then he should read the sources provided with the book instead of asking people who probably haven't even read it.

>Is hypergamy really hard coded into the psyche of every living woman?
No, those claiming such do not understand the nature of women. They're still viewing women through the lens of sameness/equality. In order to believe women pursue hypergamy, you must first be under the assumption she is capable of pursuing her own interests. She is not, women are drawn towards ambition if anything. For it is men with ambition that can be served. The most miserable time a woman will have is when she's put in a position of power, she'll want to kill herself, be confused, she hates being in control. The second worst thing for a woman is to not be utilized. This is what a lot of men confuse for hypergamy, they don't understand and thus don't properly train their woman and end up thinking they have to constantly micromanage them. It would be like if a woman got a dog and instead of training it tried to treat it like a man.

Then got pissed when the dog didn't act like a man and constantly whined about wanting a dog who likes man things and acts like a man.

Oh, I'm not the OP, but thanks for the tip!

The idea isn't nessacarily to be seen with women. The thought being planted that you are desireable is enough. You can treat it like a game. Whether you are seeing other women or not, appear to be. An example being, telling her you're very busy when she knows you have nothing important going on. If she asks where you've been, say "out with a freind or friends without specifying male or female. You have to create competition anxeity to yield the best results.

>I'm trying to become a better man by reading and learning useful virtues like hard-work etc
Good, never stop pursuing self improvement. Always strive to be the best version of yourself that you can.

Thanks based nippon, I'll add that to my list. If you happen to have a .pdf available it would be for the best, since I'm not sure if I can find it in France.

It's basically what you said, yes. It's unbeliveable

I know, but I wanted to know Sup Forums POV on the matter since I would'nt have known the existence of this book without this board. Is it asking too much ?

>In which common ways can we show to a woman that we are actually a high regarded man?
This will be a reoccurring theme. Almost every aspect of our society (which hold egalitarianism at it's core) is based around the idea that women can/do pursue their own interest. If you want a woman, become her authority. But almost every woman has an authority already, which means you compete/replace the existing one. For most modern woman this authority is media or government, show you know better then her authority. What many men think are 'shit tests' is her just repeating what the authority says, you're not challenging her, you're indirectly challenging her authority. You cannot challenge her because she has no beliefs or values of her own to challenge

Women are born with inherent value, let's say 100. Men are born with no value, let's say 0. The only thing a woman has to do to retain her value is avoid doing things which diminish it, that's it. While man has to constantly work to improve his value. The minority of men pass on their genes up until egalitarianism was implemented, now nature's perfect system of eugenics is ruined and we're actively trying to keep a dysgenic system alive while seeing the consequences.

Where can I read more about this ideology. This is an interesting pill. I like your style.

I don't understand your disagreement with the idea of female hypergamy. How is it different from your perspective?

Respectfully Yours,

user

>That's what Sup Forums feels like going from shortly before the 2016 election to now
It's because the general public has gotten stupider over the generations. While Sup Forums has normally been a safe haven for social rejects, which because our society does not value intelligence, just mindless compliant drones, has been an idle place for intellectuals. The retardation you see is the general public hearing about this place and stopping by to visit.

>Is it asking too much ?
It's not asking too much, it's just asking for something silly. You're asking for people to reinforce your beliefs instead of thinking on your own.

lozlolozzloz rollo is a total fag

t. 2008

mooselips, you call that thing a "book"

don't insult books, slore

>Where can I read more about this ideology
>This is an interesting pill. I like your style.
Thank you, it's my own based upon conclusions I've come to from everything I've read up until now.

>I don't understand your disagreement with the idea of female hypergamy. How is it different from your perspective?
Hypergamy is the pursuit of 'partnering/marrying up' it implies that women are capable of judging what 'up' actually is. Women who have rich/successful men, or are born into a rich/successful family. May often seek out men below them. If hypergamy was the leading drive for women, not only would we never see this. But we would also regularly see women who have an understanding of what 'moving up' in the society actually was.

But we do see it, I'd even argue more often then not we do; just as we know that women cannot lead themselves or anyone else to anything but ruin. But they do not do this because they want to, they do it because they don't know how to lead, they cannot know.

rollo is fag

ch is a group editor effort that keep out people that speak super truths against the synagogue, alt kike, or retarded jewtube females...for some reason

I never thought about it from this point of view. How can you be so certain about the fact that women are not thinking for themselves or their interests ? Is it at a subconscious level ? Excuse me if I find this very difficult to believe.

Actually I read and now it's starting to make more sense in my head. I've seen a lot of times here that women are more inclined to follow group tendancies and the like, but not to this extent ( this is what I understand when you say authority, for example I know a girl who became interested in the same hobbies and political leanings of his boyfriend, maybe I'm wrong )

I'm asking here because I discovered it here. I'll admit though that I'm probably victim of confirmation bias, but the book openly state that society and normal people will disregard it's ideas if you ever try to discuss it with real people. Not much of a choice here...


Now I can clearly see what is the mechanism. Thanks !

I'll try. Better, I'll keep going

of her* boyfriend
sorry the sleep is slowly but surely coming to me

I had been dating a girl for a while (non exclusively, I was seeing other women in the mean time). She was moving back to my city and asked me if I still supported Trump after ""Charlottesville"".
I told her she knows I'd rather not talk about politics with her.
She pressed me and said she was coming back to my city and wanted to know if she could still see me.
I told her she never HAS to see me again.
The next week I was fucking an asian chick with a tight pussy that I have been "spinning" for just as long.
I really liked that girl and got along with her better than any girl i've dated. But I'm literally never talking to her again unless she comes back saying that she was wrong and that she wants me to forgive her.

So what TRM gave me was
>The importance of abundance mentality.
There is nothing wrong with optionality. It frees you from emotional pain. This give you the ability to really say what you mean and get what you want. I haven't had an argument with a girl in YEARS, despite dating them.
>The importance of reaching your potential
I am 25, good looking, and am going to be a doctor in 1 year. I was very close to "settling" YEARS before i read TRM with a total bitch.
>The Iron Rules
These are important for everyone

>the book openly state that society and normal people will disregard it's ideas if you ever try to discuss it with real people.

That should be a huge red flag. If the science is valid and the sources verifiable there shouldn't be any reason you can't discuss it with "real" people. Most people aren't absolutely batshit insane as to straight up deny reality, despite what people here on Sup Forums might have you believe. If I were you I'd check those sources to make sure you aren't just reading a huge pack of lies.

When the mind is set in its ways it really does reject new ideas. This is true for any redpill. It takes time to set in the mind, that's all he means.

Becoming set in your ways and rejecting new ideas is a fucking retarded way of living your life. Only the most absolute of shit-tier people end up this way, though, so I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here.

>And I'm not seeing the girls going and fucking with the chads
Well you don't see it doesn't mean it does not happen
This book was my first redpill, memories...
> Rollo is a good guy but too verbose.
r/theredpill sidebar has some good links for information cher compatriote (content is mostly trash)

Glad i could help.

Quick protip while it's on my mind. Do not jump the gun on telling a girl you're interested in her. Wait until she's showing clear signs of competition anxiety/being interested. One of the worst mistakes a man can make is telling a girl he has any kind of feelings for her too early.

>How can you be so certain about the fact that women are not thinking for themselves or their interests?
I have seen no evidence to indicate this

>Is it at a subconscious level
I think it may simply be an inherent biological difference. Though I cannot support that by pointing out the exact reason for this. I have read plenty of literature on differences of men and women, but the topic and such research which would answer these questions has not been conducted to my knowledge. Something I hope to be able to do in the future if I'm able to fund my own research.

>Excuse me if I find this very difficult to believe.
I would be surprised if you didn't, as mentioned, every aspect of our society is based around the false notion of sameness. Sameness of gender, 'race', class etc. If it makes you feel better much of mainstream 'science' of which our 'common sense' is based is not supported using the scientific method or not even testable. The amount of lies or misinterpretations of everything you'll find the more you read can drive you mad.

>women are more inclined to follow group tendancies and the like, but not to this extent
>this is what I understand when you say authority
Hmm let me expand/clarify. Women view all their social relationships through three lens
-Authority
-Family
-Children

Because no man can know anything, currently and historically women fill in gaps in what information they store by speaking with 'family'. So say you're a peasant and what your woman knows is only what you know. She can seek out the wives of the merchant, the lord, perhaps even the nobleman and learn from what their men have taught them.

While you are right that the dictionary definition of hypergamy is 'marrying up', within the context of Rollo Tomassi's work and the Manosphere generally hypergamy has come to have a broader meaning. The idea is that women have a dual sexual strategy. They seek to secure the best material provisions and long term stability on the one hand while also seeking to obtain high quality genetic material through short term mating prospects. This means that women are maximizing for two variables which makes their behavior complex. Women are subconsciously impelled in a way that makes them seek out the best reproductive deal, with no regard for the civilizational usefulness of this behavior.

In this way women also reinforce societal norms/knowledge. But she does not do this for herself, she does this so she can be better source of support for her authority. In a healthy society, her authority is first her father, then the man her father gives her away to. In our society generally a girls authority is media (which instructs her to be a good consumer) and government (which instructs her to act like a man). Think of what public school even is, the entire idea based around it, much like dating, is that women are capable of pursuing their own interests.

It's why we have women that go career in the first place, they're told to act like men. But why they suck as employees in the work place, because they're not men.

no i mean it's a truth when people are confronted with new ideas. Try to remember what 15 y/o self would argue about with your current self about a variety of topics.

>book openly state that society and normal people will disregard it's ideas if you ever try to discuss it with real people.
This is true for almost any topic which questions the norms. Places like this are so great because men who may otherwise feel inclined to avoid discussion of such topics out of fear of social consequences can be free to do so. Think of the king without clothes story, many people in our societies may be thinking or wanting to question the same things. But all will stay silent or pretend not to out of fear of the others around them all wondering the same thing may react

Look at these fucking graphs

This one is the most well-known, but the first one is fucking accurate

Monogamy isn't a dysgenic system - it's successful in nature, it's just one of several evolutionary strategies.

>If the science is valid and the sources verifiable
Try to question any 'established' science and see how rational people can be. I was originally looking at a career in genetic engineering but steered clear of the sciences all together after getting a good look at the academic culture. The pursuit is not learning, or even applying anything which is learned. It's about prestige, which comes through scrubbing rodent cages and citing papers you've never read so they'll cite your paper and positively review it sometimes without ever reading it too.

What are the Development and Redevelopment phases?

hardcoded? no

we are not robots. we are germanic people people. if the will cannot triumph over the body we are no better than animals.

Sincere thanks for your thoughts. It's anons like you, why I come to Sup Forums (or Sup Forums for that matter)

Dude look at this link, "the misandry bubble" you will like it
Old redpills
> singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html

Here is the post where Rollo explains it I beleive
> therationalmale.com/2014/03/16/preventative-medicine-part-i/
IIRC 45-50 women usually have made their children, so security (beta provisioning) is not the top of their priorities anymore, they usually get back on the sexual market place SMP, divorce and / or cheat their husband with older alphas and do everything they have not done yet before they are too old and die

I already "knew" that but since I was never in this situation, I'm not sure if I'll be able to not sperg out this one. But thanks, a little reminder does not harm.

I see. It makes more sense. Is this maybe why there are people on Sup Forums who are so much anti welfare in fear of the state/governement replacing the role of a father in providing for basic needs etc ? Anyway thank you for your insight, you seem very knowledgeable and nive enough to answer my interrogations, as everyone who replied in this thread by the way. Thank you all

Merci mec, j'avais vu le deuxième graphique mais le premier s'affichait pas bien dans le .pdf

That reminds me, whatever happened to the big period people were having over Redpill in the sense of Men's Rights. I think that shit happened the same time as GG. It was like every day somebody trying to shit on men.

Dude you are so wrong.
Alpha Fucks Beta Bucks is mostly taboo, it is impossible to discuss it overtly in society.
Go to party with drunk people, especially girls. They will tell you how they think and act.

>They seek to secure the best material provisions and long term stability on the one hand while also seeking to obtain high quality genetic material through short term mating prospects
Except there is no evidence to indicate this occurs, or that women are capable of understanding these things. The manosphere is mostly composed of men who realize the lie of sameness for gender (sometimes they realize it through negative experience which taints their interpretation). But despite knowing there is a difference, they still tend to view women's behavior through the lens of thinking they're like man, that they think like and operate like men, when they don't.

Think of why women's value decreases as she engages in poor behavior. It's tied to why older women tend to have trouble having healthy babies. It's why men can generally have children at any age with no health consequences (if they remain healthy themselves). Men continue to produce sperm, the load he would shoot inside her today will be different if it was done tomorrow instead. A man's sperm can be improved in quality based upon the behavior and actions of the man. But the woman is stuck with her contribution to reproduction, her eggs. If a main smokes cigarettes through DNA repair mechanisms (if they remain intact) he can correct any damage later on. A woman who smokes, or is exposed to smoke, she may accumulate mutations in her eggs which will be passed onto her children.

The reason older women produce poor quality offspring is because of the amount of mutations accumulated over time. All though I cannot prove it, I hypothesize that older women with eggs may be able to reproduce healthy offspring later in life if they abstain from all mutagenic environmental influences. However, in the modern world most women are already likely to produce unhealthy offspring by early/mid 20s now.

Rollo's second book (Preventative medicine) is acutally more useful for noobs and redpilling normies. His first book is basically a collection of blog posts which assumes some prior knowledge of "game". But if you're posting here you probalby know all this.

BTW I've read both and learned a lot from reading Dalrock's hundreds of comments on each of his posts and rollo's comments as well.

I wonder if this is a modern phenomenon. In more traditional societies, women have less economic freedom so their security anxiety never goes away the way it can these days.

That's a good read. I'd recommend it

>Monogamy isn't a dysgenic system
I disagree, monogamy is dysgenic for the same reason democracy is always a failure. Monogamy means the men with the best traits will not pass on genes to more children then the men with poor traits. Democracy and monogamy often goes hand in hand, the men with poor traits may kill off the men with good traits, or vote themselves into power over the men with good traits. A healthy society is one which naturally will engage in eugenics, you don't have to try.

An example would be - polygamy is allowed, you can have as many wives and children as you want. But, you can only have as many as you're able to provide/protect. This gives incentive to not only succeed, but also means those with the best merit will naturally take their place higher on the social hierarchy.

>It's successful in nature
So is polygamy for the same reasons I listed above. Seals, lizards, lions, insects, dolphins, birds, etc. Sure you may find animals which may only pursue one mate.

But if that species which has only been observed to participate in monogamy was placed into an enclosure. Given access to an abundance of resources and mates, do you think you would still observe monogamy?

Aucun problème mec ;)

Other good sources for redpills on females natures and game / pickup:
> heartiste.wordpress.com/ old articles before he got political, still good blog now
> yareally archives for pickup and game and PSYCHOLOGY, this guy is good.
> r/theredpill sort by best (ignore the noise)

You're on the right track. But it's just because people age, and aging isn't just 1 factor, its several things affecting each other. Your cells stop working as well because of nutrient deficiency, prolonged stress, etc.


Was talking to a dr and she works with people who have lots of toxins (anything from mold waste, heavy metals, dead cells not handled by lymph system etc) and the effect is cumulative. She periodically gets women that are infertile due to being so toxic. After 12mos getting the lymphatic going again, identifying contamination removing it (and their sources), same women go on to have multiple kids.

Toxin accumulation leads to localized cancer (which happens in everyone) but usually is handled by a properly functioning immune system. Occasionally it doesn't, and it metastasizes.

The sad part is this is very basic, obvious stuff and yet "modern" medical science categorically denies all of it. It was only until recently that they admitted there might be beneficial bacteria that live in the GI tract.

Thank you for saying so, I almost always lurk here. Once I finally sorted out my own world view I wanted to try and share what I've learned from here and outside here to give back. I would encourage all other lurking anons to do the same if they're able

They don't have to be able to consciously understand it to behave that way. They don't realize that they are acting out a certain sexual strategy but nevertheless they are.

But there is lots of evidence that women pursue alpha fux beta bux. Have I misunderstood you?

Just be patient. Your opportunity will come

>Is this maybe why there are people on Sup Forums who are so much anti welfare in fear of the state/governement replacing the role of a father
Perhaps one reason, but government is still composed of men. To change our society we need only to change the views of men, women have no power despite the illusions to the contrary we may be under. Libertarianism is a reactionary ideology though, they may well know and understand that no man is an island. But when a society becomes sick, when it fails to see the mututal gain which a healthy society is supposed to provide. They have a 'fuck it, I'll do it myself' kind of moment. If our society became healthy over night, you would likely see all libertarians praise the new system and it's government.

It's why there is so much crossover between facists and libertarians. It's part of the natural law of hierarchy I mentioned, our societies lack good leaders. Our aristocracy is currently composed of 'celebrities' who become famous by being an empty puppet and spewing the lines of writers/making faces directors tell them to the best; and athletes. Those who can run down a field the best. Yet even the smarter anons may still hold such people in high regard because hierarchy is natural.

If smart anons replaced these groups as the new aristocracy, we could probably fix our societies.

>thank you for your insight, you seem very knowledgeable and nive enough to answer my interrogations
No problem at all user

>>They seek to secure the best material provisions and long term stability on the one hand while also seeking to obtain high quality genetic material through short term mating prospects
>Except there is no evidence to indicate this occurs, or that women are capable of understanding these things.
Again, this is a recurrent problem for anons. They have taken many redpills, but are not humble enough regarding women.
So I'll say it again, go read some PUA shit for some time (yareally, rollo etc...). They know better than you. They are basically truth seekers, like anons, but highly specialized for feminine psyche.

Not that I'm only talking of female psyche AKA hardware.
I'm not talking about current culture consequences (aka software), for which most of Sup Forums common knowloedge is good.

I'm going to sleep, good night or have a nice day.
I'll keep some posts in pasta or in screenshots. Thanks everyone for actually replying to a 18 year old french [spoiler]nigger[spoiler/]

>>
I wonder if this is a modern phenomenon. In more traditional societies, women have less economic freedom so their security anxiety never goes away the way it can these days.

Spot on, this is exactly right.

>It's just because people age, and aging isn't just one factor
Yes, there are currently six different mainstream theories on why/what aging is. I personally want to 'cure' it or contribute to it's 'cure' so I can never stop learning about our world. I also am interested to see if humanity can escape the cycle of civilization collapse due to forgetting the lessons which built it in the first place.

>She periodically gets women that are infertile due to being so toxic.
Diet is a major cause for many health problems we see today. Diet started suffering when women where told to leave the home and enter the work force (to flood the labor market and reduce cost). The obesity epidemic we now see, along with the low fertility rate is tied to women leaving the home. But the left (normally for egalitarianism) and the right (normally short sighted capitalists) both would see returning women to the home as wrong. It would mean the service, restraint and other industries would collapse or be massively reduced. It's the same reason oxygen therapy would would likely restore most health problems is not pursued - it could potentially be the end of the medical / drug industry. Same reason the idea that most 'mental disorders' not actually being tied to any physical basis is not discussed/acknowledged.

>obvious stuff and yet "modern" medical science categorically denies all of it
Yes because both sides of the political isle which make up the majority of society has vested interest in certain truths not being known or become common sense.

>that they admitted there might be beneficial bacteria that live in the GI tract
Indeed, which contradicts germ theory to a degree which holds all disease stems from microorganisms. But new research is showing that our health is tied to possessing a wide range of bacterium which in other circumstances we tied to disease.

Yes !
My redpilling process, and the one of many others, was r/theredpil + the manosphere, THEN pol.
Many people got redpilled from GG and imageboards directly (Sup Forums Sup Forums Sup Forums idk)

Different roads, but it is converging now.

nice try schlomo

>They don't realize that they are acting out a certain sexual strategy but nevertheless they are.
>But there is lots of evidence that women pursue alpha fux beta bux.
I disagree, if what you say is true - they follow it instinctively without being consciously aware of it. You would still see the vast majority of women being capable of guiding themselves or others towards success. From a biological standpoint it doesn't make much sense too. As instinct is very general, mostly dealing with specific mindsets in which reactions occur. While the modern understanding of what constitutes success is tied to critical thinking done via pre frontal cortex, a very 'conscious' process.

From a societal stand point, women still fuck over weight, poor, dysgenic men even if they come from rich/successful families. Just as poor women may do the same thing. There is no wide pattern other then that they follow the directions of their authority and aim to please it.

The reason the 'pick up artist' approach is successful is because it relies on this. The man asserts himself as her 'authority' and then guides her. (normally to the bed room, and when he doesn't follow up as being her authority, the authority prior to him kicks back in and she responds to the actions of the previous night under the lens of her previous authority). It's why women can go from "yes I want to fuck you" to "you just raped me" the next night, seemingly as if changing their mind.

They didn't change their mind, the previous authority (government) tells them they where 'raped' because men and women are the same, and you instead 'lead' her as a man is supposed to. While the ideology of her authority (egalitarianism) is reinforced from other women.

Women simply embody the ideology of their authority, whatever/whoever that might be. We tend to think women are more complex then they are because we refuse to see them as anything but what we would see other men as

>They know better than you. They are basically truth seekers
If they wish to see the truth then they must understand the nature of things. Men guide, women follow/support. I don't find myself interested in the manosphere because it's mostly composed of men who haven't 'sorted themselves out'. Whatever patterns in female behavior they may identify, they still view it through viewing women as men. While largely using the information to pursue hedonism. I could be mistaken because I don't spend time in the 'manosphere' but it doesn't seem like any of them have their own long term women, or children they've produced with said women.

It's mostly just guys who you'd see going to Thailand to get their dicks wet.

>Thank you, it's my own based upon conclusions I've come to from everything I've read up until now.
Mind putting together a list of your top 10? Both in regards to psychology + female nature and overall non-fiction.
Your perspective is quite intriguing, and even though my brain is pretty burned out at this hour I can still appreciate the quality of your posts. I'll definitely go through them again once I get some sleep.

>In more traditional societies, women have less economic freedom so their security anxiety never goes away the way it can these days.
In more traditional societies women tend not to be forced to act as men and act as if they can guide their own lifes so their anxiety is lower in general.

Do you mean that people can overcome their instincts and subconscious inclinations, especially in the aggregate? If so, then I think we have reached a fundamental disagreement about human nature.

Your criticism of the Manosphere is is not totally untrue, but guys like Rollo and Roissy definitely do not subscribe to the false mentality of egalitarianism.

>Schlomo
Provide your own personal criteria for what qualifiers someone to be considered a "Jew". Which "ethnic" variety of "Jew" is included? Ashkenazi, Mizrahi, Beta Israel, Kaifeng, Sephardi? Which of these is considered to be "Jew" to you? Additionally, does this criteria include ideological Judaism, if so what variety, if not how 'reform' or non-practicing can they be to still be considered?

The simple fact is, there is no "Jew", believing there is someone evil behind the curtain pulling the strings is comforting for people. Because it means all they have to do is destroy this evil and everything will be solved. The truth is much harsher to accept, that the society is fundamentally broken and needs to be repaired. That there is no evil, just tribalism. Every European nation is composed of tribes that united willingly or because one conquered the others. Just look at how "France" was formed since that's where OP is from.

I read it but I didnt really implement it. Plato, Evola and mgtow helped me alot. (not the angry mgtow stuff) And now I have a healthy relationship with a girl whom I enjoy hanging out with. And I dont compromise any of my values. I lead.

>Mind putting together a list of your top 10
Depends upon what subject, for history primary sources should take priority. I personally despise 'historical fiction' it's fiction which pretends to hold some sort of artificial validity. Any history books which does not cite primary sources or you can follow up and read the primary source yourself (even if it requires learning another language) should be disregarded or meet with caution.

For anything related to the sciences I would only say there is plenty of literature written by scientists which are good entering points. But you need to learn how to read scientific papers yourself in the long run. Every book written by citing papers will be still with the perception/belief of the author. A good thing to remember is that the 'validity' scale is something like
Statistical significance -> Causal association -> Underlying mechanisms identified -> Recreation of phenomenon based upon identified mechanisms

Most non-scientific papers report on statistical significance. It's why the general public has the view that science is contradictory. It's why the 'red meat is bad' and the vegan fad where allowed to take off in the first place, same with the gluten one.

Religion and philosophy too should be done with primary sources. Understanding of the source material should be done by getting as close to the original meaning of the original language as you can.

>Regards to psychology
Psychology as a field is almost entirely non-testable guess work by observant individuals. I would regard psychology with caution as a general rule. However I would recommend learning about complex systems theory and trying to apply it to fields outside machine learning.

Probably because that's just your perception of the world, skewed by your biases. Please confirm this "Alpha Fucks Beta Bucks" with statistics and sources, please.

You are very polite, very strange for someone on Sup Forums. l like you.

>female nature
Any literature which instructs about behavior for different genders. Religious, scientific, historical, insight can be gained by learning the approach of the past and then trying to anserw the questions of why they held that behavioral norm in the first place. Then coupling it with existing research on gender differences. Just be aware that when you go into such research that all influencing factors are not always taken into account.

That the conclusions of the authors may not reflect what their data shows. You cannot have 'politically incorrect' conclusions in science generally without getting blacklisted by the scientific community or backlash from the public. A good example is James Watson being thrown under the bus by his collages and the target of a massive witch hunt by making comments to the effect of 'in my experience, black grad students seem to struggle and do poorly then their white and asian counter parts. Research should be done to follow up on the differences which could explain this' he was forced to try and sell his noble prize he got for discovering/outlining the structure of DNA

>I can still appreciate the quality of your posts
Thank you user, I intend to start writing books based upon everything I've learned in the future if I'm in a position that can take the heat of the politically incorrect conclusions

There used to be book threads on Sup Forums everyday before the election. Worst thing that has happened to this board and site in general.

>Do you mean that people can overcome their instincts and subconscious inclinations, especially in the aggregate?
Most of healthy human interaction is based upon doing just that. Overcoming instinctual inclinations, but that depends entirely upon what you'd consider tied to instinct. What your view on the role the 'subconscious' plays on the human condition.

Three primary tiers of brain function, listed by lowest, with lowest defined as low conscious effort to carry out

Instinctual is the lowest
Emotional is next
Critical is final

If you watch a movie or play a video game, 'immersion' will trick your instinct into wanting to react a certain way. Your 'critical' however disregards this instruction by consciously being aware of the fact that the movie and video game do not pose an actual threat to you.

This is an experiment anyone can try
If you're in a situation in which you're feeling emotionally charged. Start trying to 'transition' to the 'critical' portion of your brain. Ask yourself questions about history, or fact, even if completely unrelated to the situation causing the emotional influence. Your brain will 'transition' from 'emotional' perception, towards 'critical' perception. Allowing you to respond properly

This is one of the processes that has helped me stay sane through out my life and incorporate the conclusions I've come to as I learned into my world view without destroying myself.

>guys like Rollo and Roissy definitely do not subscribe to the false mentality of egalitarianism.
Perhaps not, I do not know those two people well enough to say with a degree of certainty that they do. But if their instructions are coded with bitterness, or/but longing for women who share their views, then they do without realizing it.

I've never read this book, give us the tl;dr versoin plz....

The nature of women is fundamentally different from men. So much so that all scientific papers which does not factor in the differences between male and female control / test groups should be viewed as 'incomplete'

>I dont compromise any of my values. I lead.
Good job user, this is the proper approach

Funny enough Sup Forums's default approach to conversation is normally(or it used to be) very laid back. The open hostility is and posting of gore is a defense mechanism against outsiders which may seek to change the free market of competing ideas which is allowed here

Agreed, you'll still come across good threads like this at night or under a pile of other threads occasionally though.

>Most of healthy human interaction is based upon doing just that

I think the stuff coming out of cognitive psychology demonstrates that rational thought is the exception rather than the rule.
We're pretty off topic now so I'll leave it there, gotta go to bed.

stay euphoric ;)

The original Red Pill (women = niggers of gender) is a gateway drug to Sup Forums.

Hell yes it's right on.

but....many of the people in the movement are Marxist agents. Going full TRP (i.e. spinning plates i.e. mentally breaking as many women as possible) is basically an act of war against civilization. A few of the thought leaders of the movement are legit, but the most famous ones are obvious Jewish shills. Wish I was kidding.

So: follow TRP if you want to make White babies, but we will need to repeal the 19th Amendment sometime in the next 50 years if we want our children to prosper. It's gonna suck.

>coming out of cognitive psychology demonstrates that rational thought is the exception rather than the rule.
Keep in mind that
1. Most pharmaceuticals work by limiting access to the higher tier of brain function
2. Most studies do not separate female/males or factor it in when interpreting data, same goes for 'race'
3. Modern science has a tendancy to examine the 'parts' outside the greater picture of the system it plays a part in helping to function
4. That cross-discipline research is rare and mostly fruitless because the people within them cannot cooperate very well on individual levels
5. The efforts to overcome that to understand the bigger picture are normally done via the goal of the funder /organizer

Rational thought is the 'exception' with all that considered. As mentioned above, women are largely not capable of rational thought, at least not in the same way men are. Negros are always tied into instinct or emotional, and most people in the west are on at least 1-2 mind altering substances.

>We're pretty off topic
Depends upon how interconnected you're willing to admit things are :^)

>Gotta go to bed
Alright, good night user, thanks for the chat

>stay euphoric
Appreciate the meme but I'm actually not atheist and my personal world view is very strongly tied to the belief in the existence of a soul and other dimensions of reality

> oy vey goy
> anti-White racism isn't the problem
> nope, European tribalism is the problem
> open your borders, goy, to end tribal racism

jesus christ bless this thread and give us good goys the strength to name the Jew. go back to your desert.