Post: #1

By class I mean economic class, as in working, middle, upper class. Whilst class structure varies in various countries I can speak from my experience of what I notice in the UK. I grew up in a lower-class family in a low-class neighbourhood and the schools I went to were generally the same.

What I noticed was that guys around me, even some since age 14 had an interest for girls and were losing their virginity early, girls were very promiscuous at a young age too and most of my friends I remember from school pursued girls and most guys would openly talk about them - so this was all normal to me - in fact the first time I discovered game was at age 14 when a guy in my neighbourhood (age 15) showed me how to pick up random girls on the street (his tactics weren't far off from what this forum teaches and this was a long time ago).

After that I got into a better school where much more of the people were middle-class and this is where I saw less of the guys pursuing girls. I had some friends who I could talk about game with but most guys who happened to be middle class didn't show much interest for women. If you asked them about a pretty girl they would give answers almost as if they're gay, they also would never think to approach women on the street.

Next stage (currently) I am in university (a very well ranked one in the UK) - no surprise, the majority of the my classmates are middle class, none of them grew up in lower-class sketchy neighbourhoods with diversity like me and out of over 100 classmates I can only talk about girls with maybe three, the rest seem almost gay or too beta. For example i've went to clubs with my middle class group of guys and they don't focus on girls at all but only on shouting and drinking in the club. On the other hand I have a friend who grew up in the same neighbourhood and from a family who's also not very well off and to him gaming girls is normal, he's done it since a young age. Of course not everybody talks about girls openly cos what's the benefit of gossiping about girls as a guy (that's feminine behaviour). Are more 'players' formed from lower-class backgrounds or not neccesarily? Of course this may be relative but i've noticed that for sure lower class men have always pursued females more, do you agree?

Post: #2

(11-08-2017 12:33 PM)Mikestar Wrote:  What I noticed was that guys around me, even some since age 14 had an interest for girls and were losing their virginity early, girls were very promiscuous at a young age too

This, along with teen pregnancy, etc., is generally considered a lower-class thing, at least in the United States. I've seen "looks like he lost his virginity at 13" used as a metaphor to imply someone is an addict/criminal-type from a broken family.

Quote:and most of my friends I remember from school pursued girls and most guys would openly talk about them - so this was all normal to me...most guys who happened to be middle class didn't show much interest for women. If you asked them about a pretty girl they would give answers almost as if they're gay

I'm not sure what "as if they're gay" means to you, but I think it's common to both the UK and the US that people from white-collar social classes are taught to be discrete about certain topics like sex, money, politics, and religion. People might not be talking to you about women because they don't really know you that well and consider it a private matter.

Most women from that background tend to value men they can trust to protect their privacy and reputation. For all you know, that guy is already banging her, but what does he gain from telling you that, other than maybe her denying it and not banging him anymore?

Post: #3

^Thank you, that explains it a lot.

Post: #4

I am a big proponent of class and how it is linked to mate selection and male+female dynamics. It is becoming more and more obvious of how much this all factors in as women become unmarried and cat women as they pole vault themselves upwards into higher income settings and then match themselves up to try and attain men from much higher class and income settings.

Most upper classes have preselected prospects. For example, if Jimmy does not meet his eventual wife while he is at Yale his parents have a Rolodex of girls within the circles to parade around for him. It's where middle and working class dudes struggle because there is not the same level of organization and resources to create pre-selection candidates. Also if men typically "date down" the class, the prospects of Joe who came from a working-class household, worked hard, did the school thing, and got himself up there, the prospects of dating down to some basic sue who is a paralegal is not that exciting. So what Joe will do is make the attempts to date and settle horizontally within class lines, but this can be a trap if the girl in question who is linear to him has tingles to move vertically towards a higher classed man.

The game was never needed for the high-class man as they always had a plan b set out for them. For lower class dudes men still always lurked around, dudes started late, or many men didn't ever leave the "nest" and still mulled around the neighbourhood. Lots of single mothers and young girls coming up the pipeline which resources an abundance mentality with women and the competitive atmosphere that manifests into game and other ways to get women into bed.

Middle-class dudes grind away for the beta dream of a house and happy marriage, but unless they settle downwards, they set themselves up for divorce traps trying to lock down women who can be getting much better prospects.

In saying this. There is only place where both men and women are more or less on equal footing class wise and where men have caught up in the SMV ladder, and this is University. If dudes are in that 'marriage and house' game, then it would be advantageous to get a College Sweetheart while she is young and then lock her down. Some studies show that these setups end up in marriage and stay together (if the dude has good frame, picks a non-upperclass girl who is just in her 1st or 2nd year).

Overall, in my view class is the biggest factor that will determine your outcome. New narratives push men towards getting high incomes which is essential, but there also has to be the nuanced approach that is only a result of generational class settings. No point in working hard to be the rich banker who has no frame (low-class dude does), no point being the dude who goes from rags to riches but cannot plan and strategize to create long-standing opportunities and wealth that will last beyond him (upper-class people get taught this by their elders). Money isn't the end of it and knowing the nuances can help men advance a bit if they truly want to push the goal posts up a notch or so.

Post: #5

(11-08-2017 03:49 PM)kosko Wrote:  I am a big proponent of class and how it is linked to mate selection and male+female dynamics. It is becoming more and more obvious of how much this all factors in as women become unmarried and cat women as they pole vault themselves upwards into higher income settings and then match themselves up to try and attain men from much higher class and income settings.

Most upper classes have preselected prospects. For example, if Jimmy does not meet his eventual wife while he is at Yale his parents have a Rolodex of girls within the circles to parade around for him. It's where middle and working class dudes struggle because there is not the same level of organization and resources to create pre-selection candidates. Also if men typically "date down" the class, the prospects of Joe who came from a working-class household, worked hard, did the school thing, and got himself up there, the prospects of dating down to some basic sue who is a paralegal is not that exciting. So what Joe will do is make the attempts to date and settle horizontally within class lines, but this can be a trap if the girl in question who is linear to him has tingles to move vertically towards a higher classed man.

The game was never needed for the high-class man as they always had a plan b set out for them. For lower class dudes men still always lurked around, dudes started late, or many men didn't ever leave the "nest" and still mulled around the neighbourhood. Lots of single mothers and young girls coming up the pipeline which resources an abundance mentality with women and the competitive atmosphere that manifests into game and other ways to get women into bed.

Middle-class dudes grind away for the beta dream of a house and happy marriage, but unless they settle downwards, they set themselves up for divorce traps trying to lock down women who can be getting much better prospects.

In saying this. There is only place where both men and women are more or less on equal footing class wise and where men have caught up in the SMV ladder, and this is University. If dudes are in that 'marriage and house' game, then it would be advantageous to get a College Sweetheart while she is young and then lock her down. Some studies show that these setups end up in marriage and stay together (if the dude has good frame, picks a non-upperclass girl who is just in her 1st or 2nd year).

Overall, in my view class is the biggest factor that will determine your outcome. New narratives push men towards getting high incomes which is essential, but there also has to be the nuanced approach that is only a result of generational class settings. No point in working hard to be the rich banker who has no frame (low-class dude does), no point being the dude who goes from rags to riches but cannot plan and strategize to create long-standing opportunities and wealth that will last beyond him (upper-class people get taught this by their elders). Money isn't the end of it and knowing the nuances can help men advance a bit if they truly want to push the goal posts up a notch or so.

How much is it about money, and how much is it about intelligence? That's the question. Creating wealth that lasts beyond you isn't difficult to do if you have the brain and drive for it; you certainly don't have to learn it from 'elders'.

I think that's the Marxist coming out of you. As far as reintegrating into society once you've amassed wealth, yes, it has it's challenges, but it's doable.

I believe Marx was a charlatan, that struck a nerve with the insecurities of people. There is no such thing as classes, only natural hierarchies that are based on people's abilities to handle responsibility. If you're born in the so called 'middle class', but have a need for more responsibility, power will find you and use you rightfully, and then, higher quality women (wife material) start to hunt you.

Most wealthy people today are self made - the fact completely destroys Marxist theory.

Post: #6

wealth -- to an extent.

Not power.


Some people will grow disenfranchised at the idea of being "only" wealthy when they realize they really have no power, and cannot attain it.

Post: #7

The Greek system on college campuses functions this way. It's built-in pre-selection.
My freshman year I was awfully confused why short / ugly frat dudes were getting hotter pussy than me. Only later did it all make sense.

I don't think the female brain has any curiosity or abstract thinking about social value; they go along with whatever is socially presented to them as valuable. That's why its much easier to get laid at a house party than at a bar, it signifies you have social value to some extent.

Women have 0 self-awareness about how social positions trigger their attraction. The biggest factor in getting a girl is if the guy is in a socially adjacent / similar place to her.

Men like this eventually crash and burn because once they leave their ecosystem where they had social value (highschool athlete, frat, etc) girls aren't into them and they don't understand why.

Post: #8

The emphasis on class in Britain is massive, it is almost the same as belonging to a certain ethnic group. And that is talking about modern Britain which is multicultural. You can't even begin to explain it to people outside of the U.K.

At the same time, being too class aware and discussing your own background only works to impress middle class kids in university. Take that conversation to outside of the U.K or to foreigners and they will see it as being insecure and weak, or just plain strange.

Middle class British people are obnoxious on the whole because they have amalgamated into this weird hybrid. Extreme class snob on one end and rabid social justice warrior on the other, with an insincerity that starves any personal relationships you have with them of authenticity. The working class still carries British values and authenticity, meanwhile the underclass is multicultural and americanised. Somewhere along the lines people transcend through all three of the groups I before mentioned.

Post: #9

Quote:I believe Marx was a charlatan, that struck a nerve with the insecurities of people. There is no such thing as classes, only natural hierarchies that are based on people's abilities to handle responsibility. If you're born in the so called 'middle class', but have a need for more responsibility, power will find you and use you rightfully, and then, higher quality women (wife material) start to hunt you.

The word "class" can be found in Aristotle's Politics. It's an old term. That said, Marx was a fraud in that he reduce all of life into class. He was a reductionist, as such, his theory is totally inadequate to describe reality. While some class is inherited, a lot of class movement occurs through luck and hard work. Marx gives the impression there is nothing anyone can do because the only that exists is class, and once you're in the lower classes you're doomed. It's victim mentality bullshit.


Kosko:

The fact that women date up classes but rarely do they date down is why it makes no sense to give women positions of power or wealth generation. If a nation wants high birthrates, then women must be deliberately left out of the economy as much as possible in order to promote betas enough to be marriageable.

Post: #10

(11-08-2017 04:54 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  The Greek system on college campuses functions this way. It's built-in pre-selection.

School presents itself as a community. There's a certain minimum level of trust/comfort that is assumed. The same is true in the workplace, which is a big factor in why workplace romances are so common.

Are these assumptions women make very smart? No. They're pretty lazy. But the same way guys tire of asking women out, women tire of having to actively screen guys, so that's probably why they are vulnerable to these mental shortcuts.

This is also why nepotism works, btw. Filter through hundreds of bad resumes and you're likely to give a friend of a friend a shot.

Post: #11

Through social circles, people tend to know others from their class, and are more accustomed to talking to them. People may have shorter term relationships and hookups with those of fairly different classes, as it could be a novelty, but when it comes to something long term like the institution of marriage, class is huge. It depends on what a man is pursuing with a woman.

Post: #12

(11-08-2017 03:49 PM)kosko Wrote:  I am a big proponent of class and how it is linked to mate selection and male+female dynamics. It is becoming more and more obvious of how much this all factors in as women become unmarried and cat women as they pole vault themselves upwards into higher income settings and then match themselves up to try and attain men from much higher class and income settings.

Most upper classes have preselected prospects. For example, if Jimmy does not meet his eventual wife while he is at Yale his parents have a Rolodex of girls within the circles to parade around for him. It's where middle and working class dudes struggle because there is not the same level of organization and resources to create pre-selection candidates. Also if men typically "date down" the class, the prospects of Joe who came from a working-class household, worked hard, did the school thing, and got himself up there, the prospects of dating down to some basic sue who is a paralegal is not that exciting. So what Joe will do is make the attempts to date and settle horizontally within class lines, but this can be a trap if the girl in question who is linear to him has tingles to move vertically towards a higher classed man.

The game was never needed for the high-class man as they always had a plan b set out for them. For lower class dudes men still always lurked around, dudes started late, or many men didn't ever leave the "nest" and still mulled around the neighbourhood. Lots of single mothers and young girls coming up the pipeline which resources an abundance mentality with women and the competitive atmosphere that manifests into game and other ways to get women into bed.

Middle-class dudes grind away for the beta dream of a house and happy marriage, but unless they settle downwards, they set themselves up for divorce traps trying to lock down women who can be getting much better prospects.

In saying this. There is only place where both men and women are more or less on equal footing class wise and where men have caught up in the SMV ladder, and this is University. If dudes are in that 'marriage and house' game, then it would be advantageous to get a College Sweetheart while she is young and then lock her down. Some studies show that these setups end up in marriage and stay together (if the dude has good frame, picks a non-upperclass girl who is just in her 1st or 2nd year).

Overall, in my view class is the biggest factor that will determine your outcome. New narratives push men towards getting high incomes which is essential, but there also has to be the nuanced approach that is only a result of generational class settings. No point in working hard to be the rich banker who has no frame (low-class dude does), no point being the dude who goes from rags to riches but cannot plan and strategize to create long-standing opportunities and wealth that will last beyond him (upper-class people get taught this by their elders). Money isn't the end of it and knowing the nuances can help men advance a bit if they truly want to push the goal posts up a notch or so.

I see this very cleary at the Ivies - a lot of the high-class kids pair up early on and get married in their early twenties. Yes, early twenties! A lot of the kids I TA'ed got married a year or two out of college and are still going strong.

The most fascinating part for me is that they don't have to face the consequences of feminism, open borders, homosexuality/transgenderism or other liberal bullshit.

They're absolutely immune from the larger cultural forces that take part. It's why despite their intelligence, they vote D and were absolutely shocked when Trump won.

Post: #13

Lower class, lower wealth, closer to the survival threshold = earlier mating strategy.

Less parental investment as well.

Post: #14

(11-08-2017 12:33 PM)Mikestar Wrote:  Are more 'players' formed from lower-class backgrounds or not neccesarily? Of course this may be relative but i've noticed that for sure lower class men have always pursued females more, do you agree?

From my experience, a higher social class is a big help in getting pussy. To give an example, I'm a late 80's baby. I've written posts in the past where I've said I got far more pussy in high-school with zero game, than I did post high-school with game. In fact, I got into pick-up in 2007 after reading 'The Game' and even though I've been gaming for over a decade, I still got more pussy, of higher quality, with far less effort in my final two years of high-school than I do today [I'm talking FAR, FAR more]. I've said a big factor was that social media wasn't mainstream yet [Hence women weren't yet getting celebrity level attention] but IMO social class was a greater factor.

I grew up quite poor, but my final two years of high-school I was on scholarship at an elite private school. The parties I went to, the events I attended. All I had to do was say 'hello' and then run about five minutes of basic small talk and I could usually hook up with an 8+. After high-school finished however, that slowly dried up as I lost contact with those from school. By the time 2007 hit I was having to put in ridiculous effort just to get a number from girls I found extremely unappealing. I remember thinking: "WTF is going on... Did I suddenly turn into a mutant?". I was getting no pussy. Literally none. I got extremely depressed for around 6 months before finally discovering game.

Over time you start to put the pieces together and realise a big factor back then, was that I was already preconceived to be of a higher status. I've learnt that to [kind of] replicate that today, the same rules of game still apply. As your status grows [Whether than be money, improved looks, connections, game etc], your ease of attracting top shelf pussy grows. The interesting factor for me however, is that while I look much better today and have decent game, my status is still clearly lower than it was perceived to be in high-school. Just goes to show perceived wealth is still at the apex of the status totem pole. Once upon a time it would have bothered me, but today it's just another thing to work towards.

Post: #15

Speaking on the topic of socio-economic background (i.e. "class"), I recall reading a study once that found that women from lower socio-economic backgrounds were attracted to hyper masculine men. Muscles, tattoos, tough, etc.
Whereas girls from middle, and especially, upper class backgrounds did not have as strong a preference for hyper masculine men.

I don't remember what their preferences were or if they were even stated, it was years ago that I read on this study.
Just something that is interesting to think about as well.
The "go-getter" player guys that you talk about seem to be doing well because the girls from their background prefer these types of men. A sort of selective pressure if you will.
Whereas the more refined, discrete (or perhaps beta and gay, depending on how you look at it) character seems to work okay for middle and upper class men.

Post: #16

This is huge when it comes to the perceptions of some men. Banging too many low class girls without properly compartmentalizing them, can lead to a distorted view of women.

The classification of a human being's value, and their purpose, is essential, or you'll never be able to find a high class, intelligent woman to marry. It's all mental, success comes from within--not from outside circumstances.

Post: #17

I see a lot of excuses in this thread.

it's difficult to gain or even make friends with people who are out of your class, whether they are above or below you. that is just human nature. People are more comfortable with people who have a similar age, race, class, similar everything. this is so pervasive in human nature, that most middle children end up marrying a middle child.

People who are upper class have less access to the other classes. they don't have some instant social circle game where they are getting laid easily every second. Stop making excuses.

Yes, fraternity is a great social scene. You can do the same thing in college by volunteering, being active in a church group, student government, varsity sports, whatever. Just be active. After college, the same opportunities are there. The humane society doesn't care if they're volunteers are rich poor or middle-class.

Post: #18

Absolutely for some. I've seen guys on Wall Street Oasis expressing abhorrence at the idea that "the mother of my children was a waitress".

Post: #19

I grew up in both middle and working class circles due to my background and it's not really the case that the middle class are being discrete with it. There's a lot of them that are just too soft to approach women, and a lot that don't have much of a sex drive. There are plenty of exceptions of course such as the lads that play sports and are competitive normal men. The working class tend to be more masculine with higher sex drives, but you also get a lot of obnoxious dickheads.

I also grew up in an area with a large Caribbean population and so a lot of my oldest friends are Jamaicans and for them getting girls was and somewhat still is everything, I remember even as young as 12 going to the city centre together to look for girls, or ice skating, etc., and we were all working out with push ups and sit ups, and saving up to get the clothes that would impress the girls even at that age.

Post: #20

(11-08-2017 12:33 PM)Mikestar Wrote:  By class I mean economic class, as in working, middle, upper class. Whilst class structure varies in various countries I can speak from my experience of what I notice in the UK. I grew up in a lower-class family in a low-class neighbourhood and the schools I went to were generally the same.

What I noticed was that guys around me, even some since age 14 had an interest for girls and were losing their virginity early, girls were very promiscuous at a young age too and most of my friends I remember from school pursued girls and most guys would openly talk about them - so this was all normal to me - in fact the first time I discovered game was at age 14 when a guy in my neighbourhood (age 15) showed me how to pick up random girls on the street (his tactics weren't far off from what this forum teaches and this was a long time ago).

After that I got into a better school where much more of the people were middle-class and this is where I saw less of the guys pursuing girls. I had some friends who I could talk about game with but most guys who happened to be middle class didn't show much interest for women. If you asked them about a pretty girl they would give answers almost as if they're gay, they also would never think to approach women on the street.

Next stage (currently) I am in university (a very well ranked one in the UK) - no surprise, the majority of the my classmates are middle class, none of them grew up in lower-class sketchy neighbourhoods with diversity like me and out of over 100 classmates I can only talk about girls with maybe three, the rest seem almost gay or too beta. For example i've went to clubs with my middle class group of guys and they don't focus on girls at all but only on shouting and drinking in the club. On the other hand I have a friend who grew up in the same neighbourhood and from a family who's also not very well off and to him gaming girls is normal, he's done it since a young age. Of course not everybody talks about girls openly cos what's the benefit of gossiping about girls as a guy (that's feminine behaviour). Are more 'players' formed from lower-class backgrounds or not neccesarily? Of course this may be relative but i've noticed that for sure lower class men have always pursued females more, do you agree?

Social class re England and places should be part of red pill discussion more on RooshV IMO.

Anyway, its like the saying:-
"When I was a kid we were poor. I said to my dad that I wanted something to wear and something to play with for Xmas.
So he gave me a pair of trousers with holes in the pockets".

Moving on, there IS a slight element of truth in it all. Lower middle class kids are more focussed on homework, reading, hobbies "for the UCAS form", building a "future". Working class kids have to live for the moment, because they don't forecast giant leaps forward at 25 or whatever. And getting exam results mean shit if you want to be a plumber. With lower middle class girls there's the added "bs" of appearing "classy" and a bit less obtainable than working class girls.

I know a fair number of working class kids who fucked at 12, and masturbated the other sex at as low as 8 or 9 or 10. Lower middle class kids weren't getting much at 16 or even 17! Mid middle and upper middle class kids etc, its a different dynamic again.

I lived in a middle class area and was staggered at how "friendly" girls were when I visited a council estate at 8/10/12 years.

The other aspect is that working class often equates to being streetwise and social skills being necessary to succceed. Middle class is more about being a disciplined, focussed cog in the machine.... on many occasions, atleast. I can think of one guy who makes £1 million pa (certified) but his social/game skills are absolute zero. Then I can think of guys barely scraping £18k pa in a factory and the hoes just flock around him.

Post: #21

Yes, in the UK it is everything. It outweighs ANY other factor such as race, religion or place of birth within the UK.

A protestant middle-class white guy from Southampton is more likely to marry a middle-class catholic girl from Northern Ireland than a working class girl who lives in the next street over from him.

This is marriage, but it carries over in to the whole sexual marketplace.

Post: #22

(12-17-2018 08:51 AM)britchard Wrote:  Yes, in the UK it is everything. It outweighs ANY other factor such as race, religion or place of birth within the UK.

A protestant middle-class white guy from Southampton is more likely to marry a middle-class catholic girl from Northern Ireland than a working class girl who lives in the next street over from him.

This is marriage, but it carries over in to the whole sexual marketplace.

There are many invisible strictures on behavior in the UK that are incomprehensible to anyone from somewhere else.

Class is only the beginning of English weirdness.

I found this book to be helpful in figuring them out.

Watching the English

Quote:In "Watching The English" anthropologist Kate Fox takes a revealing look at the quirks, habits and foibles of the English people. She puts the English national character under her anthropological microscope, and finds a strange and fascinating culture, governed by complex sets of unspoken rules and byzantine codes of behaviour. The rules of weather-speak. The ironic-gnome rule. The reflex apology rule. The paranoid-pantomime rule. Class indicators and class anxiety tests. The money-talk taboo and many more ...Through a mixture of anthropological analysis and her own unorthodox experiments (using herself as a reluctant guinea-pig), Kate Fox discovers what these unwritten behaviour codes tell us about Englishness.

Post: #23

Rich parents generally hire babysitters, housekeepers and maids whom the boys can practice game upon - they have the upper hand in the sense they have the power to get them fired. And not to mention, most of the girls are only being paid 10-15 bucks an hour. All a kid has to do is flash a couple Benjamins, which many get as a weekly allowance.

(12-17-2018 08:42 AM)BelyyTigr Wrote:  I lived in a middle class area and was staggered at how "friendly" girls were when I visited a council estate at 8/10/12 years.[b]

In America there called "Section 8" "HUD" or the projects. But yeah, instead of collecting baseball cards or video games most boys start banging Hookers at age 12. Dudes in the hood never get in the habit of masturbating cause of the desperate/needy women. While you need at least $500 to tempt a middle class girl, in the hood $50 will work especially if she has a pill problem. $10-20 bux if she's on "ice" "hard" or "boi" (visit urbandictionary if you don't know)