The Gaming Den

//

ubernoob wrote:Discuss.

News Flash: Roissy is still an asshole.

//

PoliteNewb wrote:
News Flash: Roissy is still an asshole.

And you're full of ressentiment.

It looks like utter arse of the highest magnitude to me, but then again, I don't go out clubbing or whatever it is people do to find casual sex these days, and even if I did, it would be at a gay place (where you needn't worry about a men:women ratio as there's an all-male crowd and an all-female crowd, save for a few bisexuals. Also, the politics are very different in gay society).

So it's possible that I just haven't really experienced this... phenomenon? But if it were true in America, then I'm sure it would be the same over here because Australia leads the world in obesity. AUSSIE AUSSIE AUSSIE!

I thought the yanks took that title back?

His arguement would make sense if men weren't also fat and unattractive.

College is a super weird demographic. You regularly see several thousand people in your age group at the height of their youth and beauty per day and it skews your perceptions of attractiveness. Basically, 75% of the women are chasing the same 5% of the guys and complaining that there are no good guys out there. The other 25% are in a serious relationship or not currently interested in a relationship.

Once you get out in the world, things change. You may regularly interact with at most several dozen people in your age group. Once that happens, people pair off pretty much the way you'd expect it.

But not at bars. Bars are an artificial construct where only physical attractiveness matters, so 100% of both sexes are targeting 5% of the opposite sex and that 5% is super picky because they can be. That's why the music is so loud.... it prevents charm from being a factor.

I also think bar sex is something that happened mostly in the 70-80s before AIDs and has persisted as a myth. It still happens, but the default is that no one is going home with anyone.

Gee. Thanks Ubernoob.

That was one of the stupidest things I've ever read skimmed through in bored disgust.

No really. Give me back my 1 Minute. I demand a refund.

PhoneLobster wrote:Gee. Thanks Ubernoob.

That was one of the stupidest things I've ever read skimmed through in bored disgust.

No really. Give me back my 1 Minute. I demand a refund.

This, one thousand times this.

//

Right so theres another 2 minutes wasted. I should stop falling for this.

Look Ubernoob here is a hint that this guy is fucking crazy and stupid he has an obsessive hatred of "fatties" AND he goes on and on about it endlessly.

That is not balanced and normal behavior. That is not the behavior of an observant expert on human behavior and society. He has NO IDEA "why European women are thinner" he has no idea about ANYTHING because he spends all his time fantasy wanking obsessively over how much he hates fatties.

THAT IS NOT NORMAL BEHAVIOR. I have met people like this before. They are creepy, they are sick, they endlessly go on about fatties in basically the same way that creepy sick homophobes go on about Homosexuals.

You know, those creepy sick homophobes who constantly get caught fucking male prostitutes.

ubernoob wrote:

K wrote:Some stuff I said.

I'm actually focusing more on the psychology side of this. When I transferred schools I thought something was weird besides the rampant whales around. The much smaller percentage of women that are actually attractive acted differently. That blog post is the only thing I've seen that really sums up why the few remaining attractive women would have such inflated egos when surrounded by manatees.

Has anyone else noticed a similar phenomenon in areas where whales outnumber humans?

Why I'm not referring to beached whales as people. Please do the same and make the world a better place.

First, let's just say that Roissy is a raging, hateful fuckwit and that's probably why no one wants to have sex with him. Emulating anything off that site is not going to get you laid, and using his turns of speech is not advisable.

That being said, the important lesson in psychology is that attractiveness is not objective. A person's attractiveness is directly related to the pool they are in. For example, in Japan I was a goddamn golden god because I was a tall, white, blonde, blue-eyed American. In California, I'm average and I need to be charming.

The woman you are encountering do not have inflated egos. They have the appropriate amount of ego for the pool they are in.

I actually had a friend come to law school in California from Nebraska and get really discouraged because men weren't going after her like she was used to in Nebraska. That's because law school has a glut of smart and attractive people and the Bay Area of California tends to be famous for the same, so her expectations were skewed.

K wrote: Emulating anything off that site is not going to get you laid

Actually, this is not strictly true. Roissy is fascinating because his website actually fairly frequently runs acceptable-to-good advice, though generally with a wrong explanation of why it works and always framed in the most disgusting language possible. You can safely ignore anything he says about ego and "fatties" and looks ratings, but when he talks about romance and maintaining relationships he does somewhat better.

Look at his "Sixteen Poon commandments.." About half of them make sense, or would be good principles if implemented less legalistically. [/spoiler]

K wrote:College is a super weird demographic. You regularly see several thousand people in your age group at the height of their youth and beauty per day and it skews your perceptions of attractiveness. Basically, 75% of the women are chasing the same 5% of the guys and complaining that there are no good guys out there. The other 25% are in a serious relationship or not currently interested in a relationship.

Also, this is so weird I have to pick at it. Maybe it was different when you were an undergraduate, or maybe you went to a very different school, because that's not what I'm seeing.

--Over 50% of the students I know are in relationships
--The "no good guys" complaints are about finding a man who's not flaky not one who's sufficiently hot
--Men of average attractiveness don't seem to have any trouble getting play. In fact, I'd say that the average woman here is more attractive than the average man, so most men are dating up.

Also: do you *really* think college students are at the height of youth and beauty? Because in my experience, college students have acne, college men have unfinished musculature, and college women have odd fat distribution. I'm pretty sure 25yos of both genders are hotter than 20yos.

As i've gotten older, what I think of as the "height of attractiveness" seems to go up. Right now, it's 35-45 yo women. I find that pretty much all 20 year olds look like babies to me.

Attractiveness is COMPLETELY perception based. I find girls who weigh less than about 150 as being just too damn skinny, and unattractive. Not everyone thinks that Twiggy is hot. Some of us like Jane Mansfield

Re: Women talking about flaky guys vs hot guys.

That may be what they say they mean, but it`s not what they actually mean. Do you really think that they can`t find a guy who isn`t flaky? How many single fat guys do you know who aren`t flaky and yet mysteriously are never considered or dated by women who have so many problems finding non flaky guys?

I say that I have difficulty finding smart women who are single, and attracted to me.

But it`s not true, I am friends with multiple smart women who are attracted to me, But they don`t meet the minimun standards or attractiveness that I set, and then never mention as a criteria.

Hot guys are flaky because we* can afford to be, and ugly people are never given a chance.

*I say we even though I am not hot because I am intelligent, funny, arrogant, and charming, and it works out pretty similarly.

Also, I'm both flaky and significantly overweight* and I have nearly no problem getting sex if I choose it these days. I'm taking a break t the moment, but I currently have two women that are actively trying to get my attention at work. I'd say that I'm not doing too bad.


* A few observations I have made in this regard:

-A guy can get away with being overweight; a beer gut is actually a sign of high testosterone levels. A guy CANNOT get away with not working out though. You don't have to be a powerlifter, but you do need an hour of vigorous activity of some sort a day.

-I would honestly consider myself flaky, but considering that I'm the only person I know of my generation that moved out of their parent's house and never moved back in seems to somehow put me above the curve. Yay for lowered expectations!

-I would concur with K in his observations. College "game" is different than "adult" game. I find myself being ill-suited to high school game and college game, but very adept at adult game once I broke some old habits and learned to be more outgoing. (That was really the only lesson I took from reading Neil Strauss' version of the game, but breaking myself out of the rut I was in seemed to be the only thing I needed).

K wrote:But not at bars. Bars are an artificial construct where only physical attractiveness matters, so 100% of both sexes are targeting 5% of the opposite sex and that 5% is super picky because they can be. That's why the music is so loud.... it prevents charm from being a factor.

I also think bar sex is something that happened mostly in the 70-80s before AIDs and has persisted as a myth. It still happens, but the default is that no one is going home with anyone.

It's not that uncommon. The funny thing about bar sex is it's a lot easier to pick someone up when there is less people in the bar. The combination of less noise and less competition tends to work out pretty well.

Kaelik wrote:Re: Women talking about flaky guys vs hot guys.

That may be what they say they mean, but it`s not what they actually mean. Do you really think that they can`t find a guy who isn`t flaky? How many single fat guys do you know who aren`t flaky and yet mysteriously are never considered or dated by women who have so many problems finding non flaky guys?

One? I mean, there frankly aren't that many fat men at my school, at least in the groups I know well enough to know anything about their dating lives. Off the top of my head I can think of about five. And most of them are doing pretty well for themselves.

But here's what I really don't get. You're asserting first of all that fat men can't get play in college because women are chasing the hot guys. But you're also saying that if you're smart, charming, and funny, that's as good as being hot. So presumably, intelligent charming fat men should have no problems, right? And indeed that jives with my experience.

But you appear (correct me if I'm wrong) to be agreeing with K that college women waste their time chasing after the 5% hottest guys. But is smarts and charm are just as good, how can that be? I'm guessing that, charming though you may be, you do not have a monopoly on attractive personality at your school. I know that at my school, way more than 5% of the men are smart and funny. Probably more like 50%. So if we assume that 5% are hot, 50% are charming, and these variables are independent-- then college women are actually chasing the top 52.5% of the men.

Which sounds about right to me, since that's about the percentage of men currently in relationships.

ubernoob wrote:http://roissy.wordpress.com/2008/03/07/ ... -for-game/

I couldn't understand the school I currently attend until I read this. It seems pretty spot on for the rampant ego inflation and flakiness of women ranking below 8. Discuss.

Roissy wrote:Which brings me to my theory: Game has been refined, taught and embraced by men in direct proportion to the shrinking pool of attractive thin girls.

According to the latest WHO statistics {OK, WHO, Effort, Ranking], the US is 7th in the world for obesity in males over the age of 15 (prevalence 80.5%). The US ranks 14th in the world for obesity in females over the age of 15 (prevalence 76.7%).

Which brings me to my theory: Game has been refined, taught and embraced by men in direct proportion to the increasing pool of males who believe themselves to be rendered unsexable by obesity.

Or Roissy could just be full of shit.

Orion wrote:

K wrote:College is a super weird demographic. You regularly see several thousand people in your age group at the height of their youth and beauty per day and it skews your perceptions of attractiveness. Basically, 75% of the women are chasing the same 5% of the guys and complaining that there are no good guys out there. The other 25% are in a serious relationship or not currently interested in a relationship.

Also, this is so weird I have to pick at it. Maybe it was different when you were an undergraduate, or maybe you went to a very different school, because that's not what I'm seeing.

--Over 50% of the students I know are in relationships
--The "no good guys" complaints are about finding a man who's not flaky not one who's sufficiently hot
--Men of average attractiveness don't seem to have any trouble getting play. In fact, I'd say that the average woman here is more attractive than the average man, so most men are dating up.

Also: do you *really* think college students are at the height of youth and beauty? Because in my experience, college students have acne, college men have unfinished musculature, and college women have odd fat distribution. I'm pretty sure 25yos of both genders are hotter than 20yos.

It depends entirely on the school. One school I went to had like 25% married students and 50% in relationships, leaving 25% available.

Law school, on the other hand, was like 50% of women completely uninterested in relationships because law school requires stupidly long hours spent studying. The other 50% were chasing the same 5% of men who were cleaning up like madmen.

As for odd fat distributions and acne, I have to assume that you don't live in California. The frequent sun means we tend to have young people that work out a lot and have good skin. California beach towns really do look like episodes of Baywatch.

Orion wrote:One? I mean, there frankly aren't that many fat men at my school, at least in the groups I know well enough to know anything about their dating lives. Off the top of my head I can think of about five. And most of them are doing pretty well for themselves.

But here's what I really don't get. You're asserting first of all that fat men can't get play in college because women are chasing the hot guys. But you're also saying that if you're smart, charming, and funny, that's as good as being hot. So presumably, intelligent charming fat men should have no problems, right? And indeed that jives with my experience.

But you appear (correct me if I'm wrong) to be agreeing with K that college women waste their time chasing after the 5% hottest guys. But is smarts and charm are just as good, how can that be? I'm guessing that, charming though you may be, you do not have a monopoly on attractive personality at your school. I know that at my school, way more than 5% of the men are smart and funny. Probably more like 50%. So if we assume that 5% are hot, 50% are charming, and these variables are independent-- then college women are actually chasing the top 52.5% of the men.

Which sounds about right to me, since that's about the percentage of men currently in relationships.

You must have very low standards for intellectual ability and charm, or you live in a "college" that is actually Asgard.

Because I am talking about a level of charm and intelligence that puts me in the top 5% of shit that I have never even tried before even though I'm the laziest fucker you've ever met, and I consider only Frank and K to even have an argument for intellectual superiority over me here in TGD, with some other people having strong arguments for equality.

I think that supreme levels of awesome can account for not being really hot, but it only works on a smaller subset of women, who you can interact with on a regular basis.

I think in general that people have secret hotness lines, which they are willing to cross for exceptions, but in general determine their choice of attempted mate to be a smaller subset than everyone. So for example, when people complain that all the guys are flaky, they mean, all the guys that are attractive enough that they would consider dating them, and even pursue them, are flaky, and they have no idea what the eighteen fat guys are doing.

Now, my determination is made primarily based on college and law school, and some general experience in the workplace between. And college and law schools A) vary, and B) are pretty different from what occurs outside them. I think that in general, most women end up dating guys who are less attractive than them, but are still relatively ballpark, and have some other endearing qualities (when I see no endearing qualities, I assume they are great in bed). Men on the other hand generally set unreasonably expectations in their hotness level, and then eventually find some girl who is actually better looking to settle for them.

In this case, it's sort of a tragedy of the commons in reverse, because guys who did lower their standard would get more play, but for some reason don't.

I don't know if people are chasing the top 5% or the top 20%, But I think in general, people "chase" better than than themselves, and settle for someone who is outside that range they chased, attraction wise, but has other features.

So when someone wines about not finding an X, the solution is almost always "Then Lower your standards."

Kaelik wrote:I don't know if people are chasing the top 5% or the top 20%, But I think in general, people "chase" better than than themselves, and settle for someone who is outside that range they chased, attraction wise, but has other features.

So when someone wines about not finding an X, the solution is almost always "Then Lower your standards."

People literally go through a mate selection algorithm that consists of:

1) Attempt to get with hottest person you think you can
2) Did 1 succeed?
Yes: hooray!
No: decrease hotness threshold and try again.

Kaelik wrote:I consider only Frank and K to even have an argument for intellectual superiority over me here in TGD, with some other people having strong arguments for equality.

What's the name of that cognitive bias where people who think they're awesome at something are actually crap at vice versa?

Just saying you may wish to consider that before making such statements. I'm not saying I should be placed up there in intellectual power, and okay, thanks to the 4rry invasions it probably isn't hard to be in the top 20% or whatever, but still, saying "I AM ONE OF THE SMARTEST" kind of gives people the impression of the reverse.