Post: #101

(12-19-2012 02:59 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(12-19-2012 02:23 PM)Samseau Wrote:  I believe the game is zero-sum, in that the total amount of alpha males will never exceed a certain small percentage, such as around 15-20% of all men.

(12-19-2012 02:23 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Game for the most part works because few men actually do it and find a niche where they can shine

(12-19-2012 02:23 PM)Samseau Wrote:  you need a personality and motivation that is found in 1 out of every 100 guys.

Agreed. Most men do not have to motivation and desire to really improve their game. Most men are lazy. Most men are wallowing in self-doubt. Most men will stay beta forever.

They are not willing to put in the necessary work to get results.

For the guys who actually do work hard on improving their game, this is good news!

There is very little competition!!!

You are only competing against 10%-20% of guys. The other 80%-90% are home jerking off or playing fantasy football with their friends.

Even more reason to start working on your game!

Whatever works for the individual. Day, night, online, whatever. Just Do It!!!

You will be doing something that most men are afraid to do!

Although that is good for guys like us, it is not good for men as a whole, which is what I've been lamenting about in this thread.

Post: #102

I haven't had a chance to read the entire thread, so I'm repeating someone please consider this an endorsement, but one thing that I've noticed is that even on lower end TV programs and other places that use young women to get people's attention, the obesity epidemic has gotten so bad that they can't afford thin young women.

When I was at Pentagon City a month ago, they had the display for some new high end sedan like you would see at a car show. The showgirls were all fat and ugly.

Post: #103

(12-20-2012 12:07 AM)Samseau Wrote:  Although that is good for guys like us, it is not good for men as a whole, which is what I've been lamenting about in this thread.

So your point is that life is a zero sum game? That there are winners and losers in life, that 20% of the men will bang 75% of the women?

That most men will fail in the sexual marketplace?

I agree! In life, there are many losers but few winners!

Most guys are not willing to look themselves in the mirror and identify their weaknesses, change their habits, change their thinking, change their diet, develop their body, etc, etc.

This is not an easy thing to do! It's hard, it takes years of work and focus. Some guys are born lucky, others are born unlucky. But, how many guys reach their full potential? Not very many!

Those that do, can live like kings, while those that don't, live like slaves.

It has always been this way. It's nothing new.

I'm just happy to be in America where I can actually do something about it and change my life.

Thoreau said -- "most men will lead lives of quiet desperation".

I first read this as a little boy. I saw everyone around me slaving away at jobs they didn't like, living a life they didn't want. Most people seemed unhappy to me.

I vowed that I would never live like that. I need freedom, I need passion, I need adventure.

I would rather die living my adventure then live a life among the walking dead!

Samseau and I could have been just like everyone else. We could have chosen to be betas, we could have been "average frustrated chumps". But, we refused. We took action. We went to work on ourselves. We did something about it. We chose to fight.

We know, life has many losers, we refuse to be one!

Post: #104

(12-20-2012 12:07 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

(12-19-2012 02:59 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(12-19-2012 02:23 PM)Samseau Wrote:  I believe the game is zero-sum, in that the total amount of alpha males will never exceed a certain small percentage, such as around 15-20% of all men.

(12-19-2012 02:23 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Game for the most part works because few men actually do it and find a niche where they can shine

(12-19-2012 02:23 PM)Samseau Wrote:  you need a personality and motivation that is found in 1 out of every 100 guys.

Agreed. Most men do not have to motivation and desire to really improve their game. Most men are lazy. Most men are wallowing in self-doubt. Most men will stay beta forever.

They are not willing to put in the necessary work to get results.

For the guys who actually do work hard on improving their game, this is good news!

There is very little competition!!!

You are only competing against 10%-20% of guys. The other 80%-90% are home jerking off or playing fantasy football with their friends.

Even more reason to start working on your game!

Whatever works for the individual. Day, night, online, whatever. Just Do It!!!

You will be doing something that most men are afraid to do!

Although that is good for guys like us, it is not good for men as a whole, which is what I've been lamenting about in this thread.

I agree.

Post: #105

(12-20-2012 01:51 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  Those that do, can live like kings, while those that don't, live like slaves.

It has always been this way. It's nothing new.

But see this isn't true. There was a time when things were a lot better for the average man, which is what this thread is about. The 1960's were objectively better for men of all ages. The average woman was thin and desirable, feminine and friendly, open and oozing sexuality.

Men didn't need game because the culture wasn't destroyed yet.

Post: #106

Maybe what Giovonny meant was that even in the 60's the top alphas often had *first* pick of the most beautiful women (though the alphas were more likely to be providers and not cocky-funny ones). But at least an average guy could easily get a decent girl back then, which is getting harder now. I bet it was also way more common that an average guy got a hot girl.

Post: #107

(12-14-2012 09:01 AM)Apollo2 Wrote:  Was cockblocking common in the 60s and 70s? If I went up to a girl at a bar and started talking to her, would her friends pull her away?

Did not exist in the early 80's to early 90's. Girls did not go out in big packs and did not discourage men from approaching their friends.

Cockblocking is a 21st century concept. It is an extension of the current sex strike by women against certain kinds of men. It is fucking awful. Newly divorced at 45 I was a bit shocked by it all.

Post: #108

(12-18-2012 07:47 AM)Roosh Wrote:  I can tell you that 33 is not the age where it's difficult to get late teens and early 20s women.

At least in EE/SA.

Neither is 47.

Post: #109

(12-16-2012 07:28 PM)Blackhawk Wrote:  And of course, Mama Cass. Who was a sex symbol in the 1960s somehow.

No. She was always this fat anomaly that people kind of accepted as this overly fat singer.

Today she looks like every other woman you see on the street.

Post: #110

(12-19-2012 11:10 AM)Roosh Wrote:  Also, not all college campuses are equal. Some are just made for you to approach with an abundance of common areas, and others not much.

I'm living next to a univeristy right now. Libraries are hilariously empty, and there is no good common area where I can camp out. Outside most girls are in packs. I get five times more opportunities at the mall.

I live near a large size State U in California. There seems to be a big surplus of women, a lot of them look kind of desperate, and only the 8+ ones strut around smug in how hot they are. There are grocery stores and so forth near the campus where I see them, I feel more out of place on the campus.

I am sort of off the market, I leave for EE in a week, and don't want to bother with them because I'm over 50 and my success rate would be too low for me to want to deal with. But there's a lot of very sexy 5 or 6 chicks who aren't Barbie blond (eg very sexy Mexican or Asian middle class girls, who have some drawback-- perhaps like a big nose. They stare mournfully, probably think I'm maybe 40) They flirt with even me.

I imagine the guys are so beta it is REALLY hard for girls under 6 to get laid with a middle class guy here. A 20 year old sweet ,unspoiled 6 who will cum like crazy and get off calling you Daddy is very appealing when you're 50.

Status is important to these college girls. If you're a yahoo who can only talk about football and isn't worldly at all, they are embarrassed to fuck you-- they'd rather fuck a cosmopolitan 40 year old ( or someone who could PASS for 40) I think. I just bond too easily and don't really want to fuck someone one or two times until she finds out I'm ancient.

Post: #111

(12-21-2012 04:43 PM)Samseau Wrote:  The 1960's

I'll give you that the 60's were better for the average guy. The 1960's.

But, lets go back further...what about the 1860's - the 1760's - the 1660's- the 1550's..???

In those days, we really had kings and we really had slaves. Extreme winners and extreme losers. Not much hope for upward mobility. The average guy had limited sexual options.

Nowadays we can do whatever the fuck we want. Travel, work on our game, focus on money, etc.

Right now has gotta be one of the best times to be a playboy, but I'll admit the the 1960's were better.

(12-21-2012 05:21 PM)solo Wrote:  at least an average guy could easily get a decent girl back then, which is getting harder now. I bet it was also way more common that an average guy got a hot girl.

Of course the high status guys, the good looking guys, and the famous guys got all kinds of pussy. Was it easier for the average guy? Who knows? If you are not getting pussy today, don't assume you would turn into George Clooney just because you went back to the 1960's. Girls were skinnier and more feminine but thats not gonna help your confidence, awkwardness or poor conversational skills.

Easier for an average guy to get a hot girl back then? Yeah, maybe. But, that also sounds like the mental masturbation of an "average guy", doesn't it?

Post: #112

Welcome to 2k12
http://www.efukt.com/21018_Mother_of_the_Year!.html

Post: #113

(12-22-2012 02:11 AM)Giovonny Wrote:  Of course the high status guys, the good looking guys, and the famous guys got all kinds of pussy. Was it easier for the average guy? Who knows? If you are not getting pussy today, don't assume you would turn into George Clooney just because you went back to the 1960's. Girls were skinnier and more feminine but thats not gonna help your confidence, awkwardness or poor conversational skills.

Easier for an average guy to get a hot girl back then? Yeah, maybe. But, that also sounds like the mental masturbation of an "average guy", doesn't it?

Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that it's true. I totally see your point about not using it as an excuse, though.

Post: #114

Do we have a random American woman thread anywhere?

Post: #115

(12-22-2012 12:12 PM)solo Wrote:  

(12-22-2012 02:11 AM)Giovonny Wrote:  If you are not getting pussy today, don't assume you would turn into George Clooney just because you went back to the 1960's. Girls were skinnier and more feminine but thats not gonna help your confidence, awkwardness or poor conversational skills.

Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that it's true.

Whats true..? That girls were skinnier and more feminine? I'm sure that was true, but my point is that just because girls were skinnier in the 1960's doesn't mean that your game would be any better back then. I mean, if you can't pull skinny girls now, what makes you think you would be able to pull skinny girls back then. If you are a dork today, you would still be a dork in 1960.

If you have game in 2012-2013, you could probably kill in the 1960's

However,

If you don't have game in 2012-2013, don't expect to pull hotties just because you went back in time.

If that's not mental masturbation, I don't know what is?!?!?

Post: #116

(12-25-2012 01:51 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(12-22-2012 12:12 PM)solo Wrote:  

(12-22-2012 02:11 AM)Giovonny Wrote:  If you are not getting pussy today, don't assume you would turn into George Clooney just because you went back to the 1960's. Girls were skinnier and more feminine but thats not gonna help your confidence, awkwardness or poor conversational skills.

Yes. But that doesn't change the fact that it's true.

Whats true..? That girls were skinnier and more feminine? I'm sure that was true, but my point is that just because girls were skinnier in the 1960's doesn't mean that your game would be any better back then. I mean, if you can't pull skinny girls now, what makes you think you would be able to pull skinny girls back then. If you are a dork today, you would still be a dork in 1960.

If you have game in 2012-2013, you could probably kill in the 1960's

However,

If you don't have game in 2012-2013, don't expect to pull hotties just because you went back in time.

If that's not mental masturbation, I don't know what is?!?!?

Giovonny, the point he was trying to make is simply that the average beta with little game (who now has to work super hard to get a chubby 5), would not have had it that hard to get a decent, feminine and slim 6.

Also, just showing that he could be a good provider would have landed hime a decent girl. And with luck and a bit of experience he might have pulled a 7 once in a while.

Has nothing to do betas pulling hotties regularly or mental masturbation. Though I am sure some guys are thinking that way.

Post: #117

The video did nothing for me as I remember the days when it was normal.

Post: #118

What I meant was that while it is mental masturbation to rationalize your shortcomings by saying "it's so much harder to get thin girls now than in the 60's", there is also some truth in that. But like I said, I agree with Gio that this isn't a valid excuse because with game you can still get thin girls. Anyway, I think we're all in agreement here though, just that we may have misunderstood each other.

Post: #119

(12-13-2012 03:55 AM)houston Wrote:  I don't think you need to go that far back, I would be happy if I was transformed to the early 90's. Life was a lot different before cell phones and the internet got huge. Plus, I hate hairy pussies.

I loved the 90's.

Broads were easy, not engrossed in their phones, and didn't have the attitudes like they do these days.

They were naturally submissive. One didn't have to make them submit as they naturally knew their place.

Post: #120

(12-26-2012 11:23 PM)solo Wrote:  What I meant was that while it is mental masturbation to rationalize your shortcomings by saying "it's so much harder to get thin girls now than in the 60's", there is also some truth in that. But like I said, I agree with Gio that this isn't a valid excuse because with game you can still get thin girls. Anyway, I think we're all in agreement here though, just that we may have misunderstood each other.

More available/desirable targets naturally makes the game easier as there is less competition for each.

Think of a bar that is a sausagefest compared to one with a 50/50 ratio.

Same idea.

Post: #121

(12-27-2012 02:14 AM)Hotwheels Wrote:  

(12-13-2012 03:55 AM)houston Wrote:  I don't think you need to go that far back, I would be happy if I was transformed to the early 90's. Life was a lot different before cell phones and the internet got huge. Plus, I hate hairy pussies.

I loved the 90's.

Broads were easy, not engrossed in their phones, and didn't have the attitudes like they do these days.

They were naturally submissive. One didn't have to make them submit as they naturally knew their place.

In the 90´s you still had residual effects of the AIDS scare so it was ok, but not that great. Also the fatty epedemic was starting.
70s and 80s seem much better.

Post: #122

Ummm, the 80's is when the AIDS hysteria was at it's peak so I don't see how it was better.

On the flip side, I was a fearless rawdogger in the 90's and remain so today.

As far as fatties go, when I graduated in 87 I could count the number of fat chicks in my class on one hand. Granted, my class was only 150 people but you get the idea.

Fattie shaming was de rigueur back in the day.

Post: #123

(12-27-2012 10:37 AM)Hotwheels Wrote:  Ummm, the 80's is when the AIDS hysteria was at it's peak so I don't see how it was better.

On the flip side, I was a fearless rawdogger in the 90's and remain so today.

As far as fatties go, when I graduated in 87 I could count the number of fat chicks in my class on one hand. Granted, my class was only 150 people but you get the idea.

Fattie shaming was de rigueur back in the day.

Exactly, in the late 1980´s the fatty epedemic was barely starting....so all was still good. The 90´s is when you started to see a real steady increment.

AIDS awareness barely started in the late 80´s. It was when Magic Johnson (a true monger) got AIDs in the early 90s that the hysteria was at its height. The 90´s were not that good.

Post: #124

The 90's were GREAT for me dude.

No idea if you are speaking from experience, and really don't care.

Post: #125

Can you compare the 90's to 2012 Hotwheels?? I remember how beautiful it was without cell phones and internet even though I was a kid. My mom would get pissed when girls would call late at night haha. Some chicks left a voicemail in middle school saying that they loved me and my dad gave me a pat on the back. I specifically remember young fatties getting made fun of and it forced them to be nice so people would take it easier on them.