mr_engineer

Consider the possibility that right-wingers are human beings living in a democracy and they may have genuine concerns with the agendas that are being repressed. And I didn't see enough nuance being used in doing so up until this point. I'm not saying Elon will do something about it or do anything good. But, at least, he's acknowledging the issue. Social-media censorship isn't this closely guarded secret anymore. So, are you saying that if you're not rich, you shouldn't have the right to be heard? Most people aren't rich, but they do have some financial self-respect. Everyone isn't a commie who wants big daddy government to do everything for them.

The way I see this, low-consciousness advertisers were very happy that echo-chambers existed on the internet, prior to free-speech being a talking-point. But now, with free-speech, they're not happy that they can't target audiences in certain rabbit-holes cuz they don't exist anymore. This does open the door to higher-consciousness advertisers who can think holistically, who can actually talk to the people and not just milk them. Especially when people start valuing free-speech. And, so much moderation won't be needed either, cuz you need more moderation to moderate separate echo-chambers than to moderate one united town-square. And, one final point - there is a lot more good than evil in this world. If you set the standard for 'hate-speech' where it actually belongs, objectively speaking, not really caring about the low-consciousness advertisers and Karens, people will like it better overall!! And there definitely will be better advertisers itching to come to a free-speech platform. Advertisers who had previously been blocked out by Karen-media Twitter.

@Leo Gura Why do you think that people are cheering him on, in that case? Are they all morons? Just to be clear, I'm not one of them. I don't buy his BS either.

If what they want is to do pumping and dumping, yeah. You can be 'great with women' and have no ambition! It's just that the higher-quality women will see through your BS. (By higher-quality, I mean in terms of maturity. Not necessarily physically higher-quality, they can get hot women. I'm not denying that.) Yeah, but I put in a lot of work into this and I gotta see payoffs physically too! I need to be motivated to do it. It won't work with women who aren't physically attractive precisely for this reason. There is an abundance of really amazing women in the world. It doesn't have to be one way or another. In fact, the hotter women have more of a chance of being conscious than those who aren't hot, cuz they're practicing greater self-love and self-care. I believe I figured this out in my 4th year. That is when I believe I actually became a catch for women. I didn't rely on games or trickery. Pure authentic masculinity did it for me. I have not had a shortage of positive female attention after that. Cuz I've always had a fundamental self-confidence after that. My issues have been with the compatibility-thing. And that in order to meet the standards of the women I was attracting, I had to lose myself and my values around money. Because that's what happened in my childhood with my mom. So, this repeated in dating. This is why I had to come back to my mom and radically change the money-dynamic with her and fix these issues at the root! (I'm not saying everyone has to do that, I had to, cuz I could.)

In the 2nd year of my university, I took a salsa-class. The masculine/feminine dynamics didn't really work, I was clueless. Also, I didn't really have a sense of direction for my career. But then, in my 4th year, I found my passion on the career-front. And, I decided to go for it no matter what problems came my way. This is when I started getting a lot of positive female attention! But, I was too busy to be distracted. I don't believe in thinking with my dick. And I don't see the point of talking to girls I'm not attracted to. This deeper connection strategy is for romantic-relationships, for attachment-relationships. I will check out the women I talk to! For sure. It's a question of priorities, honestly. I think that the order of stage 1 being about attraction and stage 2 being about the deeper connection, is male-biased. Because men feel insecure investing feelings into someone who they haven't fucked yet. Women actually invert these stages! Because they have to screen you for safety. On a physical, mental, emotional level.

I am 'stuck not taking action' from a pick-up perspective. The way I see it, my vision is more long-term. And I'm not 'stuck'. I'm working towards it every single day. Pick-up focuses on instant-gratification, honestly. It's for guys thinking with their dicks. But, that's for another conversation.

The first thing you do, is define yourself and your strength as a man. And what you want to offer to women. Let's say your strength as a man is that you are an achiever in your career. And that your strength, can be money. So, what you offer to women, is providing. Then, the next step is to find and live your Life-Purpose as a man. And find a survival-strategy that is authentic to you. This will make your authentic personality come forth. And, this personality will be your avenue through which you deliver value. The point of doing all of this prep is that women will be looking at all of this stuff, thinking about what you can do for them. This is how you appeal to women! And this will work to meet women and attract female attention. (I've gotten to this point in the past.) Then, you look into what you want from your woman and how that'll make you better at your role, so that she has an incentive to offer you what you want. Let's say, what you want from her, is that she is a team-player and she's supportive. Then, you look at your dating-pool and you select the women with whom your masculine/feminine dynamic works, this team-dynamic clicks. Those are who you ask out. (I didn't get to this point because I hadn't defined the kind of money-dynamic I want with my partner, cuz childhood-traumas got in the way. Cuz I didn't have a father, I had to build up all of this from scratch in my mind and test it out. I've been doing this for the past few years.) Then, in the first few dates, you figure out love-language compatibility. And you keep going with those who you have compatible spiritual values with. It'll probably be only 1-2 women by this point. (I have done all of this in platonic relationships on my own time.) Then, you develop your game with that specific woman! And, final screening - for sexual compatibility. You go for the one who is sexually compatible. This is where you commit.

Yeah, I know. I'm talking to the people freaking out about 'Oh no, what happens when the Dutch farmers and Canadian truckers get a platform to express themselves?! We can't repress their voices anymore!! We can't ignore what went down in Sri Lanka anymore.'

@Tyler Robinson My point is that when you get the basics of how things work wrong, you misapply this stuff and your advice isn't that great. In theory, you're right. Most men are attracted to cuteness and most women are attracted to strength. But, for it to work in practice, your definitions of these things must be compatible to each other! And, for that, you need to have a needs-compatibility, i.e. you have to know what you have to offer that is unique to them, you have to know what you want from them and you have to figure out how to have that work out. Redpill-like ideologies and generalizations take these trends and offer the Ockham's razor simplest possible explanation for them, which can be systemically inaccurate. In fact, the reason we're even looking at these general trends and not squarely at the unique circumstances of our own lives, is because we live in a shallow Instagram-culture, where we know what hundreds of other people are doing! That's pretty much it.

At least, he pretends to have some high-consciousness values. And he isn't blindly bending over backwards to the advertisers. There is a lot of legitimate dissent towards the globalist agendas (like lockdowns, the jab, the sanctions, etc.) that's being repressed in the name of 'hate-speech'. Because Karens just act out emotionally, this gives them plenty of margin for error for defining 'hate-speech'. Therefore, they define it the way that suits their agenda. I think he'll get new advertising supporting good ideas that promote more freedom and democracy.

I daresay that pick-up and chasing sex for its own sake is the 'cope' for loneliness, if love is what you want. You can go for love directly, actually. And no, it's not a 'goal'. Love is everywhere, it is what everything is made of. It doesn't have to be a 'goal'. To see it and receive it, though, you need compatibility in love-languages. I'd rather have that as a dating-goal than sex itself.

If you're selling chocolate, yeah. You have to appeal to a lot of people. This is just not the case in dating! You have to appeal to one or maybe a handful of people. And, chocolate is a very simple product with one job - to sweeten your tastebuds. People are complicated and they have complicated roles in each other's lives. Making things work is just tricky even with the right person.

Compatibility-screening is not common knowledge, actually. Cuz most people don't know who they are or what they want. The way most people enter and exit relationships is based on feelings. In a world of such ignorance relative to relationships, redpill attempts to commodify people and paint them in a broad brush. And PUAs are mostly focused on sleeping with whoever they're sexually attracted to, without really knowing why they're attracted to that specific person to begin with! Then, things don't work and they ascribe that to 'bad game'. When, the reality is that because they're objectifying women, they don't get that different women are different individuals and you have to screen for compatibility if you want to make something work.

That's like asking me to define 'health'. No description of 'health' will do it justice. You can't really define 'health'. What you can do, is define 'disease'. And, define 'health' as the absence of disease! A similar logic can be applied to this talk about compatibility. You can identify and change your dating-strategy based on your understanding of who's incompatible and why. You can directly look at compatibility-issues and solve them by knowing the kind of person to go for in the next relationship. Now, will that person turn out to be 100% compatible? You don't really know. In fact, there really is no such thing as perfect compatibility, like there is no such thing as perfect health.

And advertisers will respond to the Karens the most. Cuz they want to please the public. So, it does boil down to the lowest common denominator of snowflake if Twitter doesn't have free speech, right?!

@Leo Gura Here's the thing, though - 'hate-speech' can be subjectively defined. And who gets to define that? Is it the lowest common denominator of snowflake who defines 'hate-speech'?

Depends on what you want. That's how your standards for 'good game' get defined. If what you want is love, sleeping with hundreds of hot narcissistic women doesn't count towards that end. You may develop bad habits in this process that hinder this goal of yours! But, finding and connecting with women who want connection, can.

@Tyler Robinson There are countless types of incompatibilities. A really fundamental one is the incompatibility in love-languages. I think this is something that PUAs grossly overlook when they're 'developing their game'.

@Tyler Robinson The main point I was trying to debunk was the idea of 'hypergamy'. That people aren't commodities that can be arranged in a hierarchy of low-value to high-value. And that compatibility plays a huge role in it. The point of me talking about this is that there are countless insecure young men struggling with pick-up not because their game is bad, but because their childhood-traumas are making them attracted to incompatible women. And redpill whitewashes this issue and makes everything a whole lot harder for men.

@something_else You were asking me what results I care about, right? The result I care about is, having better game. Through gaining a better understanding of women and what they want. That's what my opinions are geared towards. You can have 'dating-experience', slept with hundreds of women and still suck with women. You can be someone without 'dating-experience', so to speak (what if I don't want to follow your dating-norms, by the way) and still be good with women! And you are not entitled to proof from me. I don't care how much it annoys you. You don't get to invalidate my personal experiences. Is that clear?! @Tyler Robinson

It sees dating as a 'marketplace'. Which is fundamentally wrong. Because it commodifies people. This makes people disposable. And just one more option on a dating-app. And it feeds into people's egocentric view of 'other people being there to satisfy our needs'. This is a problem for making relationships work. Cuz to truly have a loving relationship, you can't be in your ego. Both sides have to be willing to set aside their own ego and focus on making the relationship itself work.

@something_else And, you people think you have a lot of results. You really don't. Not the ones I value. Checkmate.

I have 'deep connection'. We're talking about a theory here. Not 'achieving results'. The priority is the truth here, not 'results'. Whatever little experience I have, contradicts your opinions that come from a lot of experience, but very little observation. If you're right about redpill, this should not be happening. Just so you know.

You personally attack me again and I will report you. Learn the difference between a person and their opinion. There is such a thing as learning from observation. You don't have to burn your hand to know that fire is hot.

If you don't tell me which specific point you disagree with, you're trolling. Don't come here and tell me I have no experience with women. I do. Just not the kind that fits your bill. I don't play by your rules. And here are my opinions. Take it or leave it.