Post: #101

(11-29-2018 10:26 PM)AneroidOcean Wrote:  

(11-29-2018 09:42 PM)corsega Wrote:  

(11-29-2018 09:20 PM)Anchor Man Wrote:  I am 5'6" , brown dude, very well dressed, and average build. My game is still so bad . When I say bad, I mean very bad. I fuck up with "yes" girls . This is how bad my game is.

Either I am in the top 20% or this rule doesn't exist. Or maybe I am underestimating my quality

It's the latter.

If you are 5'6", brown, and average build, with no other distinguishing features, you're simply not in the top 20%, no matter how well you dress.

The only way to truly get an idea of the percentiles is to spend some time around guys that actually are in that top 20%. I have done so, and it is eye-opening.

We're not talking about IOIs on the street from 5-7s. We are talking about legit stunners sending them nudes with no provocation. Girls begging them to bust raw. Girls double and triple texting them. Thousands of Tinder matches, etc. It's quite thrilling to be around.

It's far simpler than that. You can likely calculate it as there is data out there on how many lifetime partners the average male or female has. If you are significantly above the average (I won't attempt to do math right now as I've had a couple beers since I last posted in here), you are likely in that top 20%. In this case I doubt he's in the 20% but with some self-improvement (especially in game) you could be in that top 20%. Remember that most guys have far lower than double-digit notch counts in their lifetime.

That's crazy to think about, but it's true.

Just like when people in the USA talk about the "1%" financially, if you look at how skewed the whole world is, just by virtue of living in the USA and not being at the extreme poverty level you are actually in the 1%. The truly wealthy in the USA are the 10% of the 1% (pulling that out of my ass but the point is that the 1% is far broader of a category than you'd think).

I think of the top 20% as 20% by opportunity, not by execution.

My laycount is 71, which puts me in the top couple percentile of men in the USA, but by no means am I in the top 20%. I'd say top 35%-40% depending on the city (I've compared myself to Tinder profiles to see for sure).

Many men have the ability to slay, but don't execute on it like I do. It still means they are higher "percentile" than me.

Post: #102

Jaxon Wrote:Meanwhile, there are probably millions of men in America and hundreds of millions around the world who are in relatively satisfying relationships with women they're attracted to and love. This is not a tiny, "dark-triad" slice of the population, this is a very large group of men who have essentially achieved the impossible in the eyes of the manosphere. Most of them have probably never heard of the red pill or the manosphere.
...
there are a hundred posts about the 80/20 rule, hypergamy,
...

Billions of men are in a relationship with billions of woman. Nothing special there. Within the Red Pill this is not considered strange or impossible. It is precisely the way theory says it should be.

Hypergamy and the 80/20 rule does not mean woman only fuck the top 20%. Not even close. It also does not mean woman will not have relations with the bottom 80%. Not even close.

It also does not mean a woman will instantly dump her boyfriend or husband the moment Chad walks around the corner.

The "80/20 rule" (and this is just a number chosen because some number had to be chosen and this number has a basis in economics) more or less states that only a small amount of men can be considered to be "Alpha". While the largest part of men can be considered "Beta".

The same theory states that woman will have sex with both Alphas and Betas. And will have relationships with both (if possible). The big difference is that a woman STRONGLY DESIRES to have sex with an Alpha. While she does not feel this same strong desire for betas. She expects something in return for this sex. Perhaps she wants a hug, perhaps money, perhaps attention. Whatever. She be getting something in return.

A woman is looking for the best specimen of male. If she has the choice between two betas. She will choose the best one depending on her needs. If she wants more money, she be choosing the richest one. If she wants more hugs, she chooses the huggiest one.

However when she gets a choice between a beta and an alpha the choice is almost made by default. She be choosing the Alpha. However, sadly for most woman, most alphas are not that interested in a long term relation because they be able to get loads of woman to have sex with them. And loads of relationship choices. This more or less forces a woman to "settle down" for a beta.

To put it in most simplistic form:
Woman DESIRE sex with Alphas.
Woman NEGOTIATE sex with Betas.

And that is where the "Alpha Fux, Beta Bux" statement comes from.

The guy who explains this best is Rollo (Rational Male Blog). If I happen to say anything that does not line up with whatever he says then I am wrong.

Post: #103

(11-29-2018 08:53 PM)AneroidOcean Wrote:  Actually, it IS your problem if he misunderstands you because you are by your own admission not a native English speaker. If you'd said that in the beginning he would've likely asked you to clarify or at least had that context when replying. Instead, you used it as an excuse afterwards and called HIM arrogant.

The arrogant one is the one that has a poor grasp on a language and instead of letting the others know that, he tells them it's not his problem that they don't understand him. That's hugely arrogant.

Ive never called him arrogant and I said precisely that Im not fluent in english.

(11-29-2018 08:53 PM)AneroidOcean Wrote:  It would be more accurate to say that you started to learn game because you are not getting the girls you want. This is the same as for a guy who is not getting ANY girls and would settle for girls you wouldn't consider.

To say you would need to be paid in order to be in the top 20% of the guys that are getting the majority of the women is a fundamental understanding of the principle. I'll explain more below:

(11-27-2018 01:12 PM)Zoso Wrote:  What is the proof that 20% guys are fucking 80% girls?

Fellas, even if I have a group of 100 random girls, most probably I would find hot and fuckable just 20-30, being generous.
So, I would not want to be in the 20% of guys that are banging not so pretty girls.

For this 4-6 girls, I would prefer P4P.

There have been good posts showing how we know that 20% of the guys are getting 80% of the women so I won't go into that further.

The very fact that you are talking about only the girls you would find hot and fuckable (the more attractive ones who have the qualities you desire) shows that you misunderstand the principle. The 20% of women that the 80% of guys are getting are by definition the lowest quality, foremost in terms of attractiveness, but also in other secondary qualities.

The reality is that the guys who are fucking the hottest but sluttiest girls (or that have some other quality you find a turn off) are likely a small subset of this 20%. Likely within the top 2-3% of the ENTIRE pool of men.

What you want to be is somewhere in that 20% but NOT in the very top who don't care if a woman has the qualities to be a good seamstress (or whatever quality you're looking for).

Think of it this way. You want to be in the top 20% of income. This means you're likely going to need to be working for yourself (such as a freelancer/contractor) or have your own business. Just because you choose qualities that are more important to you (such as flexibility of your schedule or long-term contracting/job stability) doesn't mean that you'd want to be in that bottom 80%.

Also, we do not advocate P4P here, so that's a bad idea to encourage in any way.

Well, I got finally your point. I muss admit I was wrong, although I really think that the figure is not so contrasted.. Thanks for making it clear.

Post: #104

(11-29-2018 08:53 PM)AneroidOcean Wrote:  No, it's not. It's not even close to that. Assuming they used good methodology it's representative of Tinder users and likely most dating apps like it. Considering that these dating apps are the most common way to meet someone (at least the lowest effort method), it's at minimum something to consider.

Your defeatist/negative attitude is not going to get you anywhere with women and certainly not all that far in life. I suggest you knock it off and try a different approach.

I don't get it. I simply don't like Tinder, not at all. How is it being defeatist/negative about gaming women?
I don't know about USA but here in Perú it's not the most common way to meet people, so I think it's not too representative.

I also am not desperate to fuck the 80% of women, not even the half. I don't care. I just care about certain type of women. And, at a point of my life, I needed to learn game, of course. I think that is wanting to approach something instead of being defeatist or apathetic about it. Don't you think?

Well, im open any suggestion.

Post: #105

(11-30-2018 04:52 AM)BadBoyGamer Wrote:  

Jaxon Wrote:Meanwhile, there are probably millions of men in America and hundreds of millions around the world who are in relatively satisfying relationships with women they're attracted to and love. This is not a tiny, "dark-triad" slice of the population, this is a very large group of men who have essentially achieved the impossible in the eyes of the manosphere. Most of them have probably never heard of the red pill or the manosphere.
...
there are a hundred posts about the 80/20 rule, hypergamy,
...

Billions of men are in a relationship with billions of woman. Nothing special there. Within the Red Pill this is not considered strange or impossible. It is precisely the way theory says it should be.

Hypergamy and the 80/20 rule does not mean woman only fuck the top 20%. Not even close. It also does not mean woman will not have relations with the bottom 80%. Not even close.

The relationship argument is silly. The 80/20 concept is NOT about relationships. Not at all.

It is referring to people having sex. It's simply stating that only 20% of the guys manage to have sex with about 80% of the girls. Put another way, Tim might have had sex with Angela and Sheila, but Chad also had sex with Angela and Sheila, but further had sex with Mary, Sue, Janet, Amber, Tiffany, Cassidy, Lauren, and Cindy.

And with Chad that was just the last year and a half, Tim was in a few relationships and will end up with a lifetime notch count of 6 while Chad does better than that YEARLY.

I mean, if the 80/20 rule applies just in order to be able to get a response back on a dating site/app (which is much easier to do than actually getting a girl out and having sex with her), then why do any of you even begin to question this so? It's not really a strange idea that there's a smaller group of men that bang most of the women on a fucking game forum, is it?

Boggles my mind.

LINK: 80/20 rule clearly applying in online messaging.]80/20 rule clearly applying in online messaging.

Quote:Finally, to be 99% certain she'll receive a response, a woman must send 25 messages to men her own age.

A man will have to send 114.

(11-30-2018 01:04 PM)Zoso Wrote:  

(11-29-2018 08:53 PM)AneroidOcean Wrote:  Actually, it IS your problem if he misunderstands you because you are by your own admission not a native English speaker. If you'd said that in the beginning he would've likely asked you to clarify or at least had that context when replying. Instead, you used it as an excuse afterwards and called HIM arrogant.

The arrogant one is the one that has a poor grasp on a language and instead of letting the others know that, he tells them it's not his problem that they don't understand him. That's hugely arrogant.

Ive never called him arrogant and I said precisely that Im not fluent in english.

I misunderstood. I realize now you were saying that what you said may have come across as arrogant because of not choosing the appropriate words. Thanks for clarifying.

(11-30-2018 01:19 PM)Zoso Wrote:  

(11-29-2018 08:53 PM)AneroidOcean Wrote:  No, it's not. It's not even close to that. Assuming they used good methodology it's representative of Tinder users and likely most dating apps like it. Considering that these dating apps are the most common way to meet someone (at least the lowest effort method), it's at minimum something to consider.

Your defeatist/negative attitude is not going to get you anywhere with women and certainly not all that far in life. I suggest you knock it off and try a different approach.

I don't get it. I simply don't like Tinder, not at all. How is it being defeatist/negative about gaming women?
I don't know about USA but here in Perú it's not the most common way to meet people, so I think it's not too representative.

I also am not desperate to fuck the 80% of women, not even the half. I don't care. I just care about certain type of women. And, at a point of my life, I needed to learn game, of course. I think that is wanting to approach something instead of being defeatist or apathetic about it. Don't you think?

Well, im open any suggestion.

You are being defeatist/negative by saying that you wouldn't want to be that top 20% of men by assuming that in the 80% of women that those guys date/bang/whatever that there are no quality girls or girls with the qualities you find attractive.

It's extremely unlikely that even being a really picky guy you'd be attracted to that mostly bottom-tier of women that 80% of the men have access to.

I think you can have a much better attitude in other aspects too, but that is part of coming here to improve your knowledge and use of game. Mindset is a big part of it. Negativity is easy to have in your life and attitude. Positivity and challenging yourself is far more difficult, but far more rewarding.

Being in that 20% of guys and having specific qualities and having a high standard for the women you date are NOT mutually exclusive things.

Post: #106

what exactly do people consider a chad?

is it 100% just looks?

Post: #107

(11-30-2018 10:11 PM)AneroidOcean Wrote:  You are being defeatist/negative by saying that you wouldn't want to be that top 20% of men by assuming that in the 80% of women that those guys date/bang/whatever that there are no quality girls or girls with the qualities you find attractive.

It's extremely unlikely that even being a really picky guy you'd be attracted to that mostly bottom-tier of women that 80% of the men have access to.

I think you can have a much better attitude in other aspects too, but that is part of coming here to improve your knowledge and use of game. Mindset is a big part of it. Negativity is easy to have in your life and attitude. Positivity and challenging yourself is far more difficult, but far more rewarding.

Being in that 20% of guys and having specific qualities and having a high standard for the women you date are NOT mutually exclusive things.

I think I got your explanation that I must be inside this 20% to get acccess to a certain range inside the 80% of women. But let me disagree that it is negativity.
I can't see why being a bit picky has to be negativity. It's all ok. Maybe girls in my city aren't the stereotype of what a poosy paradise would be for me, and that's all.

Post: #108

(11-30-2018 10:15 PM)real98 Wrote:  what exactly do people consider a chad?

is it 100% just looks?

Seriously , what would it take to be in the top 20%?

Away from the things, we can't change ( height , color, ...etc)

Can we get a response on this ? I think the qualities can be divided into three main categories :

1- Physical appearance
2- Personality
3- Lifestyle

Can anyone list the qualities under each one of those catorgries ?

Post: #109

(11-30-2018 10:41 PM)Anchor Man Wrote:  

(11-30-2018 10:15 PM)real98 Wrote:  what exactly do people consider a chad?

is it 100% just looks?

Seriously , what would it take to be in the top 20%?

Away from the things, we can't change ( height , color, ...etc)

Can we get a response on this ? I think the qualities can be divided into three main categories :

1- Physical appearance
2- Personality
3- Lifestyle

Can anyone list the qualities under each one of those catorgries ?

Basically the more attractive your face, the less everything else matters for women, if we're talking purely hookups.

10/10 face? Pretty much nothing else matters, except maybe height. Average height at least.

9/10 face? Same as 10/10.

8/10 face? You have to act like you're an 8/10 and look the part.

Below that? Most other stuff matters. Height, hair, style, body language, wealth, all that other shit.

That's how I see it, at least. When I was shredded, I would get viciously eyefucked wherever I went, regardless of how hot the girl was. Basically, I found out what it felt like to be a Chad. Felt fucked up, because if I'm not shredded I get none of that attention. I think Chad is 8/10+.


Bottom line is that it's all about the face. If you have a gorgeous face + smile, you can get away with anything. That being said, true Chads are rare. Very rare. Chads that are intelligent, charmismatic, muscular, well dressed, religious, wealthy, and humble, are literally .000001%. That was my best friend in college, still think about him every day, dude was like a brother but meh going off on a tangent here.

Post: #110

What about this body ? Never mind his height though
No homo , I am trying to make my point

Post: #111

(11-30-2018 11:50 PM)Anchor Man Wrote:  What about this body ? Never mind his height though
No homo , I am trying to make my point

What about it? Looks like something you could achieve in a short period of time depending on how knowledgeable you are about training, and where you're starting from.

Post: #112

(11-30-2018 11:53 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  

(11-30-2018 11:50 PM)Anchor Man Wrote:  What about this body ? Never mind his height though
No homo , I am trying to make my point

What about it? Looks like something you could achieve in a short period of time depending on how knowledgeable you are about training, and where you're starting from.

I mean would this put me on the top 20 %?

Post: #113

(11-30-2018 11:56 PM)Anchor Man Wrote:  

(11-30-2018 11:53 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  

(11-30-2018 11:50 PM)Anchor Man Wrote:  What about this body ? Never mind his height though
No homo , I am trying to make my point

What about it? Looks like something you could achieve in a short period of time depending on how knowledgeable you are about training, and where you're starting from.

I mean would this put me on the top 20 %?

No. My body is better than that. More muscular, similar bodyfat levels, and I am around top 35-40%.

Face/head matters quite a bit.

Post: #114

(12-01-2018 12:51 AM)corsega Wrote:  

(11-30-2018 11:56 PM)Anchor Man Wrote:  

(11-30-2018 11:53 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  

(11-30-2018 11:50 PM)Anchor Man Wrote:  What about this body ? Never mind his height though
No homo , I am trying to make my point

What about it? Looks like something you could achieve in a short period of time depending on how knowledgeable you are about training, and where you're starting from.

I mean would this put me on the top 20 %?

No. My body is better than that. More muscular, similar bodyfat levels, and I am around top 35-40%.

Face/head matters quite a bit.

What !!
Man, it seems it is tough market out there lol

Post: #115

real98 Wrote:what exactly do people consider a chad?

This is Chad Thundercock. The Alpha Buddha.





Pay close attention to his natural frame control and not giving a fuck attitude.

Post: #116

(12-01-2018 05:33 AM)BadBoyGamer Wrote:  

real98 Wrote:what exactly do people consider a chad?

This is Chad Thundercock. The Alpha Buddha.





Pay close attention to his natural frame control and not giving a fuck attitude.

He's like 5"5 in real life and he was really Incel-like when he was on Big Brother Australia and he ended up marrying a fat ugly chick (shotgun wedding if I recall).

If he's your idea of a Chad then I don't know what to say...

Post: #117

(11-30-2018 03:19 AM)corsega Wrote:  I think of the top 20% as 20% by opportunity, not by execution.
My laycount is 71, which puts me in the top couple percentile of men in the USA, but by no means am I in the top 20%. I'd say top 35%-40% depending on the city (I've compared myself to Tinder profiles to see for sure).
Many men have the ability to slay, but don't execute on it like I do. It still means they are higher "percentile" than me.

Here is the thing... you may be top 35% in raw looks... but you get laid better than most men because you have game. That matters.

I notice how frequently and vehemently feminists bitch about beauty standards and I sometimes wonder to myself how much of an impact they make on our attractions. As a society we generally focus on the often trivial trials and tribulations of females and generally don't give a shit about the situation of males. Women have fairly easy and socially acceptable ways to improve their attractiveness. I mean all they have to do is wear makeup and not be fat. How fucking hard is that? Yet, male standards of attractiveness border on insane. We get graded on so many things that cannot be changed. If you have small tits... get implants. If you are a short guy... you are fucked. You have a short dick... you are fucked. You want to fit the ideal male image... you pretty much have to be 2% bodyfat and do steriods.

The good thing is that many of these issues can be somewhat compensated for by having game. But my overall point here is that when you look at the 80/20 situation it seems Western women are significantly more hypergamous than other countries. My question to the forum is this. Do you think that American women for example have higher standards for male attractiveness because the media constantly feeds them images of men that are virtually unobtainable for average guys?

Post: #118

(12-01-2018 07:22 AM)BaatumMania Wrote:  

(12-01-2018 05:33 AM)BadBoyGamer Wrote:  

real98 Wrote:what exactly do people consider a chad?

This is Chad Thundercock. The Alpha Buddha.





Pay close attention to his natural frame control and not giving a fuck attitude.

He's like 5"5 in real life and he was really Incel-like when he was on Big Brother Australia and he ended up marrying a fat ugly chick (shotgun wedding if I recall).

If he's your idea of a Chad then I don't know what to say...

Nothing more sad than a natural losing his mojo.

But this guy is Chad.

Post: #119

I agree with Zoso, who gives a fuck about 80/20, it's the top 1% or even 0.1% of women that we should be concerned with. And when I do come across those women, they're not usually fucking some ripped millionaire with a big jaw. I mean take footballers for example, most would expect them to be able to take their pick, and yet the quality of their wives and girlfriends is dogshit. On the other hand I know of absolute nobodies that just go out a lot, have a lot of friends and are the life of the party, and get quality on a regular basis.

Post: #120

I just keep adding to this thread. Its a good thread. Loving it.

It is not about being one of "top males" the way society looks at it. That is why I keep saying that money, looks and social status mean shit. You can be a homeless, one legged midget and be in this top.

(Please do not get me wrong. Above two statements are incorrect. But I am trying to make a point. I hate disclaimers.)

Because it is not about society. Or about what society deems to be a "top male". It is about sex. And sex is biological. Nature decides who is a "top male".

If you follow societies standards for being a "top male" then Mark Zuckerberg should be banging hotties all day long. Woman should be standing in line before his office. But this is not the case. Woman find him disgusting and would only fuck him for his money.

Compare this to the video of the guy I posted above. Forget about his looks. And I do not know if the dude actually fucks girls or what happend to him. But he sure should be. Girls find guys like this immensly attractive. They be standing in line for him. He is one of these "top males".

Again. Sex is biological. And woman be looking for biological indicators of fitness. Just like us men.

Dominance, Strength, Pre Selection, Initiative taking, Fearlessness, Social freedom, Leadership, Emotional control, etc are attractive qualities. And none of these can be bought by money. Have little to do with looks (only a bit). And are a primary requirement for having this "high social status".

The opposite of these qualities are: Submission, Weakness, Reactiveness, Fear, Social compliance, Follower and being emotional. Qualities that are usually associated with woman.

Quote:it's the top 1% or even 0.1% of women that we should be concerned with.
...
the quality of their wives and girlfriends is dogshit

What do you consider quality? One man his trash is another man his treasure. Take a look at this thread:

/thread-65238.html

Most guys select girls they consider to be "good girls" or "girlfriend material" and consider these girls the quality girls. But then other guys select for "bad girls" and "sluts" and consider these girls to be the quality. And others just assign a number purely based on looks and consider the highest number to be the highest quality.

Post: #121

All this analysis about what percentiles men fall into is futile. It was mentioned here recently (I forget by which poster) that women assess attractiveness in binary terms-they are either attracted to you or not. That is just how they are wired. They don't rate men on scale of 1-10 unless they are forced into it in a contrived way. Besides, while looks are important it is just one factor- one factor in what drives dating habits of women. For men you don't have to have model looks or be at whatever stupid percentile you select as a cutoff-you just have to be attractive enough, not to get ruled out.

The OP is likely over-rating the women he is referring to being with sub-average to average looking men in Chicago. Men are guilty of falling into the pre-selection habit just like women. Furthermore, he should focus more attention on women who are actually suitable targets to pursue. I spent a little time in Chicago and there are plenty of single cute women to focus on. The city is wide open from my estimate.

With that said, lets assume they are legit cute girls (e.g. 7),-it isn't difficult to figure out. They are probably mid-western girls who have prioritized men who are more suitable for a LTR. The men the OP describes while likely herbs are a safe bet-they are good worker bees, all of their non-work mental energy is spent on watching and discussing sports. They will accompany their girlfriends to baby showers, brunches with friends, work barbecues, and pose for goofy pictures with a plastered fake smile on. Again, they are a safe bet. The riskiest behavior they might undertake is drinking too much beer at a sports bar with their friends. If they lock down their high school or college sweetheart, they are unlikely to stray. They live a boring, nondescript life-which is safe for a woman who prioritizes a LTR. Respect for those women who lock down a beta-herb early in life and can avoid the Instagram nonsense about living and "exciting life" and finding yourself in your 20s.

Post: #122

(11-30-2018 10:15 PM)real98 Wrote:  what exactly do people consider a chad?

is it 100% just looks?

I would say the old sexy man coke commercial describe the Chad the best, looks wise.





Chad is also the guy that rocks up in the Bugatti Veyron drawing all the attention with no effort from the females and convinces your girlfriend to go for a ride with little resistance.

He is the Boss of the Corporation that has all the cute office girls scurrying for his favor and attention when he enters the room, gratuitously flirting.

Something an average looking, average wealth low status man has little chance of competitively overcoming no matter how strong the smooth pickup lines and confidence he leverages.

Post: #123

(12-01-2018 08:50 PM)Aszhaeleos Wrote:  Something an average looking, average wealth low status man has little chance of competitively overcoming no matter how strong the smooth pickup lines and confidence he leverages.

You are Black pilling the forum.

Post: #124

That's what it is.

Do you have to be Chad to get the ladies? ofcourse not.

But Chad also has NO PROBLEM getting ladies.


80% of guys have to work to get the ladies, and with enough hard work he could be apart of the 20% that doesn't have to work to get ladies.

Fictional but I view chads as people like: The most interesting guy in the world, James Bond, Bruce Wayne etc etc.

In real life they're the bad boys, The multimillionaire, The fitness Model, The adventurer/artist all of which have much more to worry about than women.

Most "chads" have this abundance mentality which helps them focus on other things other than women. Thus making them even more desirable.


Women want MANY things, sometimes a woman simply wants a beta boyfriend, sometimes women want the sweet talker that makes them feel good, sometimes they simply want a guy that brings them food. "Chads" however are the type most women desire, and many pursue.


I know it sounds like im "all of chad's nuts" but it's the simple truth. There are guys out there that can get almost any woman without trying. Guys that have women triple texting paragraphs for days without a response. Guys that women literally worship.


In MGTOW Chad is always the guy that the wife or gf wants but can't have because they're in a relationship. (ultimately jeopardizing their relationship for him) I read this in a comment of a MGTOW youtube video "Chad/Tyrone is the guy that many women would risk a whole relationship for, if only for the night)

You can't fake being chad, it's something you're either born with or gained over YEARS and YEARS of experience. Women aren't necessarily saving themselves for a "chad". They live their life, meet lots of guys, settle down, and can be happy. The perfect 10 might not ever meet a "chad", but she might have found somebody else that made her happy.


Again you don't have to be a chad to get women. Hell you don't even have to be a chad to get high level 10/10 women.

Post: #125

(12-01-2018 08:50 PM)Aszhaeleos Wrote:  Chad is also the guy that rocks up in the Bugatti Veyron drawing all the attention with no effort from the females and convinces your girlfriend to go for a ride with little resistance.

He is the Boss of the Corporation that has all the cute office girls scurrying for his favor and attention when he enters the room, gratuitously flirting.

Something an average looking, average wealth low status man has little chance of competitively overcoming no matter how strong the smooth pickup lines and confidence he leverages.

Chad has little to do with money.

Look at that black dude that got out of jail and got a modeling gig - as far as I remember, he married a billionaire or something of that sort

Quote:Guys that have women triple texting paragraphs for days without a response. Guys that women literally worship.

This made me chuckle. I've experience stuff like this before. Women are incredibly dense and somewhat creepy when they REALLY want a guy.