Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
are puas human garbage
yea of course
i disagree
hmm...not sure op
goku
gas thread
View Results
 
  • Locked thread
ZergFluid
Feb 20, 2014

by XyloJW
Listen, you guys.

It's now become apparent that hardcore "PUA" was a fad. The very existence of "puahate" made that clear. While all those PUA gurus might've all been narcissistic in one way or another, it was clear from the very fact that they were gurus that these dudes were already predisposed to being extroverts who didn't have trouble getting attention and being the center of attention. If you look at videos of Tyler Durden, for instance, it's clear that he's a naturally charismatic fellow and wouldn't have had a hard time being a pussy slayer. Those dudes made money from the subtle false advertisement that, through sheer will, boring neckbeards could be that charismatic. A lot of those boring neckbeards probably tried all those pua methods, disastrously failed, and then started asking why all of this poo poo was necessary in the first place, why women didn't appear to be having as much of a hard time, etc. And then "The Red Pill" was born.

There is still some inertia in The Red Pill community about it being taboo to bash PUAs, but the fact that the dudes at PUAHATE subscribed 100% to Red Pill tenets and loathed PUAs as frauds is a sign that things are changing and that the era of the PUA is almost over.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Wicker Man
Sep 5, 2007

Just like Columbus...


Clapping Larry

Sabel posted:

Wicker Man you suck at expressing yourself and have ridiculous, contorted reasoning.


Much like the section on the Vickery-Clarke-Groves mechanism in MWG's canonical graduate-level microeconomic theory text.

Huh?

babypolis
Nov 4, 2009

ZergFluid posted:

Listen, you guys.

It's now become apparent that hardcore "PUA" was a fad. The very existence of "puahate" made that clear. While all those PUA gurus might've all been narcissistic in one way or another, it was clear from the very fact that they were gurus that these dudes were already predisposed to being extroverts who didn't have trouble getting attention and being the center of attention. If you look at videos of Tyler Durden, for instance, it's clear that he's a naturally charismatic fellow and wouldn't have had a hard time being a pussy slayer. Those dudes made money from the subtle false advertisement that, through sheer will, boring neckbeards could be that charismatic. A lot of those boring neckbeards probably tried all those pua methods, disastrously failed, and then started asking why all of this poo poo was necessary in the first place, why women didn't appear to be having as much of a hard time, etc. And then "The Red Pill" was born.

There is still some inertia in The Red Pill community about it being taboo to bash PUAs, but the fact that the dudes at PUAHATE subscribed 100% to Red Pill tenets and loathed PUAs as frauds is a sign that things are changing and that the era of the PUA is almost over.

you know what those ppl could do to get laid

go outside and get some social skills like every other person in the world

ZergFluid
Feb 20, 2014

by XyloJW

babypolis posted:

you know what those ppl could do to get laid

go outside and get some social skills like every other person in the world

Unfortunately some men will always lose.

http://wizardchan.org/v9k/src/1sd7fca2.wizardchan.1374736662858.jpeg

One of the founding documents of Red Pill thought is a compelling long article called "Sexual Utopia in Power."

Here's an interview with the author of that essay. He touches on the idea conveyed by the above image.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMd1kf3OSuU

Love Rat
Jan 15, 2008

I've made a psycho call to the woman I love, I've kicked a dog to death, and now I'm going to pepper spray an acquaintance. Something... I mean, what's happened to me?

ZergFluid posted:

Unfortunately some men will always lose.

Good, the world needs losers.

We don't need to pass these peoples' genes on.

the Pixies fukken SUCKED
Jul 16, 2003

Figure 2 in a series of 3

In Zero We Trust
Jul 14, 2011
I bet zergfluid literally looks like Frankenstein.

Al Cowens
Aug 11, 2004

by WE B Bourgeois
Exactly.

Tarkus
Aug 27, 2000

ZergFluid posted:

Unfortunately some men will always lose.

http://wizardchan.org/v9k/src/1sd7fca2.wizardchan.1374736662858.jpeg

One of the founding documents of Red Pill thought is a compelling long article called "Sexual Utopia in Power."

Here's an interview with the author of that essay. He touches on the idea conveyed by the above image.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMd1kf3OSuU

That diagram that you keep throwing around is so fundamentally flawed, it's actually quite funny that it makes sense to people like you.

Wicker Man
Sep 5, 2007

Just like Columbus...


Clapping Larry

Sabel posted:

Exactly.

Okay.

ZergFluid
Feb 20, 2014

by XyloJW

Tarkus posted:

That diagram that you keep throwing around is so fundamentally flawed, it's actually quite funny that it makes sense to people like you.

This is an empty post. Please be more substantive next time.

abigserve
Sep 13, 2009

this is a better avatar than what I had before

ZergFluid posted:

Unfortunately some men will always lose.

http://wizardchan.org/v9k/src/1sd7fca2.wizardchan.1374736662858.jpeg

One of the founding documents of Red Pill thought is a compelling long article called "Sexual Utopia in Power."

Here's an interview with the author of that essay. He touches on the idea conveyed by the above image.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMd1kf3OSuU

I'm the male 7 hooking up with female 3s (fat, ugly women), because this is a situation that happens constantly

Al Cowens
Aug 11, 2004

by WE B Bourgeois
ZergFluid, have you considered focusing on parts of your life other than putting your penis into a vagina?

Tarkus
Aug 27, 2000

ZergFluid posted:

This is an empty post. Please be more substantive next time.

Ok, here's some substance. The chart implies that women are a 'one time use' commodity. It also equates pairing with reproduction. Also, there's no reason why the bottom ranks of men can't get with the bottom two of women. This is a typical Glen Beck style chart, if you don't think about it and you're in accordance with the topic, it makes sense. Think about it for even 10 seconds and it doesn't make a lick of sense.

Love Rat
Jan 15, 2008

I've made a psycho call to the woman I love, I've kicked a dog to death, and now I'm going to pepper spray an acquaintance. Something... I mean, what's happened to me?

Sabel posted:

ZergFluid, have you considered focusing on parts of your life other than putting your penis into a vagina?

This is the magic formula they just don't understand.

univbee
Jun 3, 2004




lol at that chart. I know so many non-7 guys who are dating or have dated 8+ girls if we're going to start pretending that this 1-10 scale isn't meaningless and subjective (for example, are there pictures anywhere of what a 2 girl looks like, as well as a 1 and a 3 so they can be told apart? What's a 6 guy (can't get laid) and a 7 guy (barely can)?)

ZergFluid
Feb 20, 2014

by XyloJW

Tarkus posted:

Ok, here's some substance. The chart implies that women are a 'one time use' commodity.

Women have a limited number of years in which they're attractive and fertile, perhaps 20 at most (if we start at 16) and then their fertility and looks take a nose dive. In fact, they start rapidly losing their looks in their late 20s. The basic idea of the image is that in a sexually libertarian system, a lot of men lose, because women's "best years" in terms of attractiveness/fertility are monopolized by top males.

Human nature tends towards polygamy.

And polygamy often occurs because both parties are interested in it -- the woman is interested in the patronage, resources and genes of a top male and the top man is merely making use of an opportunity to indulge the male's more pronounced desire for sexual variety.

It is simply natural for a great deal of males to lose out. However, it is also natural for those "loser males" to cause problems by banding together and destabilizing their societies in pursuit of mates. Successful societies have solved this problem by clamping down on female sexuality as to insure a one-to-one male/female mating ratio.

The Sexual Revolution freed female sexuality and we have, since, slowly been inching towards arrangements that are having the same effect as polygamy: Mainly, a shortage of prime aged females. We now have an arrangement where a subset of men dominate the lion-share's of most women's "prime years." Consider Bob. Bob is handsome and popular and, from the age of 16 to 30, almost always has a girlfriend close to his own age. At age 31, Bob marries Susanna, 5 years his junior. See the problem here? Not only did Bob consistently experience women in their prime from the age of 16 to 30, but at 31 he dips back into that "prime aged" pool of women.

In the U.S, we don't tend to begrudge people their wealth because of an underlying optimism that if we work hard we too can have good things. But the supply of "prime aged women" is limited at any single time, and Bob's behavior comes at the direct expense of other men who'll all collectively have it harder on the sexual marketplace as much as "Bob" gained through dominating multiple women's prime years. Pussy is zero-sum.

We may not have exact polygamous arrangements, but the consequence of women delaying marriage and spending their best years partying/having relationships with men they won't marry is that female erotic capital is hoarded by a subset of males at the expense of other men, and the only solution to this problem by feminists/liberals who are happy with the current arrangement is to tell those loser men "you're not entitled to sex/relationships."

sleep with the vicious
Apr 2, 2010

Tarkus posted:

Ok, here's some substance. The chart implies that women are a 'one time use' commodity. It also equates pairing with reproduction. Also, there's no reason why the bottom ranks of men can't get with the bottom two of women. This is a typical Glen Beck style chart, if you don't think about it and you're in accordance with the topic, it makes sense. Think about it for even 10 seconds and it doesn't make a lick of sense.

Lol at implies one time use

How many uses u gonna get outta some ho, dawg?

Indubitable Leg
Aug 9, 2013

TL:DR, hosed a girl, thereby contributing to the hoarding in the sexual marketplace.

I like that you said zero sum, which is more commonly used in regards to gambling, which seems to be a common view point among the PUAs/MRAs. That women are only a one time commodity that once used up is worthless, like a slot machine that's already paid out.

ZergFluid
Feb 20, 2014

by XyloJW

Indubitable Leg posted:

TL:DR, hosed a girl, thereby contributing to the hoarding in the sexual marketplace.

I like that you said zero sum, which is more commonly used in regards to gambling, which seems to be a common view point among the PUAs/MRAs. That women are only a one time commodity that once used up is worthless, like a slot machine that's already paid out.

Yes, zero-sum, because the quantity of fertile women is limited at any time. The scenario I outlined in that post makes clear why one man engaging in that behavior quite obviously leaves another man deprived. Yes, women can be used up, some men use up multiple women at the expense of other men. This is perfectly in accord with nature, but civilization itself is a rebellion against nature. I think there's going to be more incidents of beta male rage (Elliot Rodger, George Sodini, etc) in the future. If for nothing else, all of this is is quite interesting sociology.

ZergFluid fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Jun 7, 2014

In Zero We Trust
Jul 14, 2011
lol zergfluid is so obviously wrong. it's really funny how he has to come up with all these reasons as to why science and nature says he cant get laid instead of just becoming a normal person.

Wicker Man
Sep 5, 2007

Just like Columbus...


Clapping Larry
Used up? What happens after sex, do they crumple up and go in the nearest waste basket?

Love Rat
Jan 15, 2008

I've made a psycho call to the woman I love, I've kicked a dog to death, and now I'm going to pepper spray an acquaintance. Something... I mean, what's happened to me?

ZergFluid posted:

Yes, zero-sum, because the quantity of fertile women is limited at any time. The scenario I outlined in that post makes clear why one man engaging in that behavior quite obviously leaves another man deprived. Yes, women can be used up, some men use up multiple women at the expense of other men. This is perfectly in accord with nature, but civilization itself is a rebellion against nature. I think there's going to be more incidents of beta male rage (aka Elliot Rodger, aka George Sodini) in the future. If for nothing else, all of this is is quite interesting sociology.

It's always fun to reduce the messiness of human relationships to points on a graph. At some point you need to shut down the "statistical analysis" robot brain and develop a personality. Otherwise you're pretty much doomed to your dire calculations. You don't increase your changes by obsessing over probability, you do it by being a three-dimensional person.

In Zero We Trust
Jul 14, 2011
it's really not hard for a guy to get a girl who is out of his league as long as you do something interesting with your life. for instance, even ugly men can get hot chicks if they play guitar.

univbee
Jun 3, 2004




Post a picture of a guy who's a 6 and a guy who's a 7.

Stunt_enby
Feb 6, 2010

by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

ZergFluid posted:

Yes, zero-sum, because the quantity of fertile women is limited at any time. The scenario I outlined in that post makes clear why one man engaging in that behavior quite obviously leaves another man deprived. Yes, women can be used up, some men use up multiple women at the expense of other men. This is perfectly in accord with nature, but civilization itself is a rebellion against nature. I think there's going to be more incidents of beta male rage (Elliot Rodger, George Sodini, etc) in the future. If for nothing else, all of this is is quite interesting sociology.
noob spotted

In Zero We Trust
Jul 14, 2011
where do weird rear end fetishes fit into all this? like what if a 10 guy was into really fat chicks, wouldn't a hambeast be a 10 for him? or what if the same guy liked diapers but no self-respecting 10 woman would ever do that.

Indubitable Leg
Aug 9, 2013

ZergFluid posted:

Yes, zero-sum, because the quantity of fertile women is limited at any time. The scenario I outlined in that post makes clear why one man engaging in that behavior quite obviously leaves another man deprived. Yes, women can be used up, some men use up multiple women at the expense of other men. This is perfectly in accord with nature, but civilization itself is a rebellion against nature. I think there's going to be more incidents of beta male rage (Elliot Rodger, George Sodini, etc) in the future. If for nothing else, all of this is is quite interesting sociology.

lol the only reason for the rage was that they were hugely insufferable shitheads, especially Elliot who never even thought to actually talk to a woman.

Also it's hilarious how only a woman can be the one to be used up, what if I blew my first ever load? does that not count? Or is your penis magical in that it can sense when a vagina's been entered before? (they still feel fine even if they have, so don't worry.:ssh:)

Wicker Man
Sep 5, 2007

Just like Columbus...


Clapping Larry
Zerg, what is your idea of an idealized world?

Love Rat
Jan 15, 2008

I've made a psycho call to the woman I love, I've kicked a dog to death, and now I'm going to pepper spray an acquaintance. Something... I mean, what's happened to me?

Wicker Man posted:

Zerg, what is your idea of an idealized world?

State distributes free women (numerically matched) to antisocial creeps to keep violence levels down.

Vincent Van Goatse
Nov 8, 2006

Enjoy every sandwich.

Smellrose

red19fire posted:

Nope, Guidos have self-confidence, which is the supreme ingredient in social interaction even in the bubble of Jersey Shore Clubbing Culture. Look at Mike Sorrentino, he was a dweeb until he shot up steroids and created his The Situation character. Like this dude, but much more successful.

PUA's are more focused on figuring out the cheat codes to defeat the 'primitive female lizard brain' like it's a video game rather than a human being. Everything about kino and negs is more for projecting confidence, playfulness and being interesting; PUA dipshits just muddle through it like they have stage fright in a middle school play, then bitch on reddit that it's not working and all women are awful. The book The Game gets into it a bit more, Mystery is more interested in controlling and manipulating women rather than cultivating grownup relationships and has nervous breakdowns when his 'girlfriends' want something more than magic tricks and being told their teeth are weird.

Mystery's VH1 show is also an awesome example of how vapid PUA culture is. The show was cancelled 3/4 of the way through because it was revealed that he owned the bar where the contestants were 'sarging', and all of the women the contestants ran game on were local actresses he had hired in order to show that his method was successful.

also, he calls himself "Mystery"

Tarkus
Aug 27, 2000

ZergFluid posted:

Women have a limited number of years in which they're attractive and fertile, perhaps 20 at most (if we start at 16) and then their fertility and looks take a nose dive. In fact, they start rapidly losing their looks in their late 20s. The basic idea of the image is that in a sexually libertarian system, a lot of men lose, because women's "best years" in terms of attractiveness/fertility are monopolized by top males.

Human nature tends towards polygamy.

And polygamy often occurs because both parties are interested in it -- the woman is interested in the patronage, resources and genes of a top male and the top man is merely making use of an opportunity to indulge the male's more pronounced desire for sexual variety.

It is simply natural for a great deal of males to lose out. However, it is also natural for those "loser males" to cause problems by banding together and destabilizing their societies in pursuit of mates. Successful societies have solved this problem by clamping down on female sexuality as to insure a one-to-one male/female mating ratio.

The Sexual Revolution freed female sexuality and we have, since, slowly been inching towards arrangements that are having the same effect as polygamy: Mainly, a shortage of prime aged females. We now have an arrangement where a subset of men dominate the lion-share's of most women's "prime years." Consider Bob. Bob is handsome and popular and, from the age of 16 to 30, almost always has a girlfriend close to his own age. At age 31, Bob marries Susanna, 5 years his junior. See the problem here? Not only did Bob consistently experience women in their prime from the age of 16 to 30, but at 31 he dips back into that "prime aged" pool of women.

In the U.S, we don't tend to begrudge people their wealth because of an underlying optimism that if we work hard we too can have good things. But the supply of "prime aged women" is limited at any single time, and Bob's behavior comes at the direct expense of other men who'll all collectively have it harder on the sexual marketplace as much as "Bob" gained through dominating multiple women's prime years. Pussy is zero-sum.

We may not have exact polygamous arrangements, but the consequence of women delaying marriage and spending their best years partying/having relationships with men they won't marry is that female erotic capital is hoarded by a subset of males at the expense of other men, and the only solution to this problem by feminists/liberals who are happy with the current arrangement is to tell those loser men "you're not entitled to sex/relationships."

Wow! Just wow!

First off, I have to laugh ate being entitled to sex/relationships. Fact of the matter is that you are not entitled to anything, even sex or relationships. Even in a strictly monogamous society you were not entitled to that. You guys seem to live in a little bubble where you hearken back to the days where everyone paired up based on some magical formula. Men had to put work into themselves and into wooing women just as they do today.

Also, it's pretty loving clear that you guys know absolutely nothing about women. Believe it or not, they are living, breathing, thinking people just like us. They have different biological imperatives when choosing a mate but ultimately they think exactly the way we do. They are not sitting around counting their sexual dollars and bartering and trading them. Granted, some women do but for the most part they don't. Having talked to many actual, real women I can tell you that they have a hard time finding decent guys as well. Yes, even well adjusted pretty women! In fact, women have the added stress because of their limited years of fertility.

Also, with your example of Bob. It was always, since time in memorial, common for women to marry older guys. Older men are in general more stable financially and are often not as immature. Even genetically speaking, if he has lived to be older, he must be more fit for survival. Is it any wonder why a woman would want to have children with somebody like that?

Something to ask too is, when Bob has sexual relations with all of these women, do the women vanish? Did they spend their Sex Bux? What you forget in a modern sexually liberal society is that the vast majority of sexual relationships DO NOT result in child bearing. Especially with the wide array of options available such as condoms, birth control, the ring, the sponge, morning after pill and even abortion.

Also, your idea of years fertile is both skewed and doesn't take into account modern fertility drugs. Secondly, what I find funny is that you don't even realize that as you get older, you still find women your own age attractive. Granted, they're not as alluring as a girl in their 20's but you're discounting women in their late 30's and early 40's

Anyways, I don't know why I'm arguing with you about this. Maybe it's because I actually want to help you guys understand that things are not as bad as they seem. Trust me, I'm a 34 year old man who's nearing 300 pounds, drives an economy car and I'm a huge nerd but I manage to get lots of women, they're fairly cute to boot, not really 8 or above (by your scale) though but whatever. Hell I even had a couple month long fling with a 20 year old that I broke off a couple weeks ago.

I'm not trying to brag but the trick is to:

1) Be a decent person!
2) Be passionate about what you do, even if it's boring to others, having passion makes it interesting.
3) Be positive and don't piss and moan about women!
4) Don't be after sex. They can smell your desperation.
5) You can have goals like having kids or a family but don't treat women like a tool to achieve that.
6) Be funny, even if in a self-deprecating way. To a degree anyways.

Tarkus fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Jun 7, 2014

Ellie Crabcakes
Feb 1, 2008

Stop emailing my boyfriend Gay Crungus

ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:

also, he calls himself "Mystery"
I have personally seen that jack off get rejected by an entire bar. It was hilarious.

Nog
May 15, 2006

I actually unironically like that chart that ZergFluid keeps posting.

I've banged more than one hot chick, hence, I must be at least a male 9 or 10. Pretty good ego boost imo. Thanks Zergfluid, never knew I was such a major pimp.

Vincent Van Goatse
Nov 8, 2006

Enjoy every sandwich.

Smellrose
My favorite part of his chart is that even under his ideal system, ugly people still have to gently caress other ugly people.

Al Cowens
Aug 11, 2004

by WE B Bourgeois
http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pubs/paper277.pdf

univbee
Jun 3, 2004




It also doesn't account for disparity between the sexes, since to use actual :biotruths: there are 106 males born for every 100 females. Also what happens if your assigned spouse dies? Tough poo poo?

And I'm still waiting on my pictures of two guys who are just distant enough in attractiveness that the uglier one gets no action and the slightly prettier one can only pull a 3.

Nog
May 15, 2006

ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:

My favorite part of his chart is that even under his ideal system, ugly people still have to gently caress other ugly people.

Yea, if the 1s bang 1s and 2s bang 2s normally, why can't they do that in our dystopian sexless present? what is keeping zergfluid from finding his dream elephant girl and banging her?

Nog
May 15, 2006

univbee posted:

It also doesn't account for disparity between the sexes, since to use an actual :biotruths: there are 106 males born for every 100 females. Also what happens if your assigned spouse dies? Tough poo poo?

And I'm still waiting on my pictures of two guys who are just distant enough in attractiveness that the uglier one gets no action and the slightly prettier one can only pull a 3.

stop trying to fight it, embrace the chart and join the ranks of the elite sexhaver oligarchy

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Tarkus
Aug 27, 2000

ripped0ff posted:

Yea, if the 1s bang 1s and 2s bang 2s normally, why can't they do that in our dystopian sexless present? what is keeping zergfluid from finding his dream elephant girl and banging her?

What I find funny is that the chart for un-reproduced males starts at 6, so above average males. I'm sure Zergfluid and his ilk all consider themselves 5's or 6's and are simply denied the pussy they're entitled if it weren't for the pussy hoarding males. When in fact, regardless of their appearance, they are so unbearable that they fall into the 0 pile regardless of the 'Un-regulated sex' or 'Regulated sex' era.

  • Locked thread