Normalization and generalization in dating.

[mr_engineer]

In my last thread that got locked, the point I was making to debunk redpill is about the various big-picture generalizations and how detrimental it is for individuals to hold onto such broad-picture theories. Because dating is an individual endeavor, not a collective one. And how much of the reality of women gets missed because of this 'numbers-game' attitude, like you're trying to capture a marketplace of sorts and you have to run with trends. 

I find it interesting that the people who chose to shut me down on that thread were doing more of the same. Perpetuating stereotypes, shaming of 'inexperience' (by their definition, assuming that their values are king), throwing around normalizing statements with broad-stroke assumptions in them. Welcome to cancel-culture. Where everything is personal. 

I don't claim to have any authority. I'm just the little kid pointing to the Emperor saying 'Why is that man wearing no clothes?!' That's it. 

Edited November 7, 2022 by mr_engineer

[something_else]

Look dude I don’t wanna start this again so I’m gonna make one simple comment and leave it at that:

The only reason I got involved in the last thread was because it annoys me seeing people give advice about stuff they don’t have any experience with.

You were talking about how wrong, untruthful, incorrect certain dating advice is, meanwhile you apparently have never been in a relationship, and don’t have any experience with dating (what you told me a while ago in another thread)

Edited November 7, 2022 by something_else

[Tyler Robinson]

What exactly are you trying to debunk? Be more concise, clear and elaborate. 

I'm a woman and  I can (maybe) offer a woman's perspective on whatever dilemma you are having. 

 

[mr_engineer]

@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

 

[Tyler Robinson]

@mr_engineer I don't want to read that thread. Just tell me specific points in this thread. What's your take and what are you trying to debunk? 

 

[mr_engineer]

@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. 

[Tyler Robinson]

@mr_engineer what do you mean incompatible women?

[mr_engineer]

@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'. 

[mr_engineer]

3 minutes ago, KH2 said:

In your head, maybe.

Whatever makes you sleep good at night, I suppose

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]

@mr_engineer how would you define or describe a compatible woman? 

Describe her. 

 

[mr_engineer]

1 minute ago, Tyler Robinson said:

@mr_engineer how would you define or describe a compatible woman? 

Describe her. 

 

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. 

[Tyler Robinson]

@mr_engineer what has all of this got to do with redpill? 

Compatibility screening is what everyone does in dating anyway? 

 

[mr_engineer]

Just now, Tyler Robinson said:

@mr_engineer what has all of this got to do with redpill? 

Compatibility screening is what everyone does in dating anyway? 

 

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. 

[Tyler Robinson]

@mr_engineer but there are certain things that aren't exactly individualistic. For example everyone likes chocolate maybe except a few. 

Same applies to dating as well. 

 

[mr_engineer]

Just now, Tyler Robinson said:

@mr_engineer but there are certain things that aren't exactly individualistic. For example everyone likes chocolate maybe except a few. 

Same applies to dating as well. 

 

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. 

[mr_engineer]

3 minutes ago, KH2 said:

Cope

Inexperience, especially as a man, will hinder you, not help you. "Looking for a love" is an imaginary goal, and a cope. You don't even know if your potential love interest would want you the way you are right now. Probably not

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. 

[Tyler Robinson]

24 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

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. 

I guess you took it the wrong way. What I meant is just the way most people love chocolate, in dating too, we have general trends and preferences that work for most people. Most women are attracted to strength in men. Most men are attracted to cuteness in women. 

Compatibility is more of a private area. You can't get to the core without being at the fringe. You can't get into a mansion without passing through the gates. 

If you cannot barely manage to attract women in general, getting the woman you want is going to be twice as hard. 

At the same time I understand that dating too many people loses naturalness and originality, kinda makes you washed up and you lose that cuteness or innocence. 

That's why I always stayed a virgin. I knew sex would ruin my attraction to men. 

Dating too much can be like eating too much chocolate, after a while you're sick of it! 

 

 

[mr_engineer]

@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. 

[Tyler Robinson]

@mr_engineer @mr_engineer so what's your dating strategy or how should male dating strategy appear as per your outlook? 

And what adjustments would you be making to red pill? 

 

[mr_engineer]

Just now, Tyler Robinson said:

@mr_engineer @mr_engineer so what's your dating strategy or how should male dating strategy appear as per your outlook? 

And what adjustments would you be making to red pill? 

 

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.