new

1. Develop and/or mimic a sex-satisfied, not a sex-desiring, mental disposition.

Women don't consciously agree with this but their psychological firmware nevertheless insists on being attracted to men who are already getting laid. This is a very primal form of pre-selection as her mind conducts this subconscious logical syllogism: "I don't know whether this man is fit for reproduction but the fact that there are signs that he may be already getting laid (he's not desperate, he's barely trying, he's already happy and cheerful) would suggest that other women have already made the assessment that he is."

There are two differing and mutually compatible ways of cultivating this sex-satisfied state (abundance mentality). One is to actually induce it by having sex with women regularly, going as low on the SMV totem pole as is needed to get laid. The other is to mimic it by artificially altering your behavior and demeanor to match the patterns of someone who is getting laid. There is no shame in this: Just avoid like the plague any behavior that she could identify as needy, desperate, or sexually frustrated. This requires you to constantly watch yourself, which is exhausting, so I don't recommend adopting this 2nd technique exclusively.

Heartiste illustrated this point well when he said (paraphrased) "When you don't know what to say to a woman, imagine that you're already lying in bed with two of them." There is a lot to be gained by haggling your way down in the sexual marketplace just so you can be getting laid regularly. I am open to the idea that other male personality types might prefer to not have sex at all than to have sex with a low-SMV female but I would argue that that preference is born of low testosterone or an over-reliance on masturbation and pornography. There appear to be two camps in TRP. One says "fuck women" and the other says "fuck women." I am of the latter.

2. Treat her as if she was born to serve you.

The most attractive combination of psychological traits in a man are narcissism and happiness. The latter has some overlap with our discussion about sex-satiety but the former is separate.

Narcissism for our purposes here is delusional self-confidence and reckless self-interest. It's the characteristic of a man who has massive double-standards regarding himself versus the women he dates, and he knows it, and he laughs when he's called out on it. Developing a specific, strategically deployable form of narcissism with respect to the opposite sex is tricky and every man will integrate this property into their existing social personality differently, but one trick I've found useful is to use a sort of affirmation or article of faith to undo and rewire the beta programming that the mind uses when interacting with women.

An anonymous comment in the manosphere once described it this way: "Act like you are the star of the #1 reality show of all time: cameras following you around and millions watching it because you are so damn interesting." In short, brainwash yourself into believing that you're a god. Eventually you may learn that this lie is actually true.

Learned-narcissism mirrors pre-selection closely. In pre-selection a woman doesn't have enough information to know whether you are fit for reproduction so she uses the judgments of other women to make that evaluation. With narcissism and delusional self-confidence, a woman doesn't have enough information to know whether you are fit for reproduction so she uses the judgment that you have made about yourself to make that evaluation. I assume it goes without saying that a woman isn't consciously considering you as a reproductive mate when she's discovering whether she wants to fuck you. This is all subconscious psychological phenomena that she herself has no direct awareness of. All she consciously experiences is a desire to fuck you.

While betas exist to serve women, women exist to serve alphas. Sometimes this dynamic is subtle; othertimes women will explicitly enjoy being or feeling used up by their alpha male partners. Treat her a little bit like she exists to serve you to establish the desired alpha-to-female relationship pattern.

3. Ignore anything and everything she says that you would have preferred she didn't say.

The most efficient and benevolent method of extracting the desired value out of the interactions you have with females is to punish and reward her by giving and withdrawing your attention. Counter-intuitively, ignoring a woman when she acts or speaks in an undesired way is more effective in disincentivizing than is confronting her verbally or even using physical violence.

This is because ignoring a woman communicates a greater readiness to withdraw from her permanently. This demonstrates value and instills insecurity in her; whereas verbal confrontation communicates to her that she is his only option and that he's more inclined to try to control her than he is to merely gravitate away from negativity and undesired behavior and in the direction of other females from whom he knows he can procure a preferable relationship.

If a girl you're interacting with asks an unwanted question or makes an unwanted statement, flatly ignore it. I'm not suggesting that you fold your arms like a frustrated kid and give her the silent treatment. I am suggesting that you literally act exactly as if she had not said it at all. This is frame-reaffirmation. It's the most effective and efficient way of dealing with her bullshit and is especially preferable to verbal confrontation if either of you are prone to the slippy slope of escalating negative emotions.

There is a recurring and compelling sentiment here that the sexual marketplace is a zero-sum game. I believe this is only the case when men fail to learn how to calibrate male-female interaction patterns to satisfy the self-interested nature of the male and the alpha-pleasing instincts of the female—instead of the self-interested nature of the female and the female-pleasing instincts of the male.

In this mad, mad, mad Marxist world of ours, leave it to Sulzberger's Slimes, in the immediate aftermath of the murder of a New York City female police officer, to praise the "progress" that has been made with regards to the hiring and promoting of female police officers.

From the article:

"And across the nation, women have pushed their way into policing’s most demanding jobs. To them, Officer Familia’s death was seen as a grim signifier of their growing front-line roles."

There are now 6,394 female officers on a force of just over 36,000 in dangerous New York City. That's almost 18%. The percentages in other cities that are even more dangerous are about the same and growing -- with more and more of them being killed "in the line of duty" every year. This is all part of the "progress" that "women's liberation" has brought to today's miserable, manified, modern woman. Thusly "liberated" from the "yoke" of marriage and traditional family life, the loony ladies now get to dress up in blue, carry a gun, chase bad guys through dark alleys, and then get killed -- often with their own gun.

A blast from the past, from the article, about a hyped-up event which your New York metro-area high-school aged reporter here remembers very well:

"In the early 1980s, the New York City subways were forbidding, with robbers lurking in graffiti-covered cars. Very few women were on patrol, but Officer Irma Lozada took one of the most dangerous jobs: She hid her badge and draped fake gold chains around her neck, courting robbers to come after her in some of the most desperate parts of Brooklyn.

It was on one of these plainclothes assignments in 1984 when something went terribly wrong: Officer Lozada chased a suspect, got separated from her partner and was killed after the suspect wrested her service revolver from her and shot her twice."

She became the first female officer killed in New York City history. So jolted was the police force by her death that, in the aftermath, some officers spoke of women being better off reassigned to office jobs, several people recalled."

Yes indeed, you've come a long way, baby!" How's it workin' out for ya?

In a healthy pre-Marxist society, dead officerettes Irma Lozada and Miosotis Familia would have been home cooking dinner for their husbands and checking the kids' homework.

As it was with the mentally sick reaction to the death of Officerette Lozada then, so it is again today with Officerette Familia, who was shot and killed execution-style by an admitted cop-hater, just last week. Rather than reassess this abominable practice of sending women off to fight criminals and enemy soldiers, the unisex Marxists act as if it's part of the normal course of business and continue to praise the "progress" that these misguided police-gals and Marine-ettes are making.

The societal perverison of cultural Marxism / libtardism offers oppression to women, not "liberation." How much happier, safer, and alive would Ms. Lozada and Ms. Familia had been if they were stay-at-home wives and mothers. Of course, given how the corresponding economic hands of Marxist taxation & the Fed's debt-currency racket make it increasingly impossible for a woman to stay home -- because a huge chunk of her husband's earnings (if she even has a husband), are taxed and inflated away -- these ladies are often forced to work. How hypocritically ironic it is that the Left condemns the Taliban for banning women from the workforce, as we here in the oh-so-enlightened West essentially, through economic policies, ban women from becoming traditional housewives!

Even when faced with the horrible murders and ghastly battlefield casualties of the fairer sex, very few of today's "men," especially those in the public realm, will dare to question the perverse policy of depriving strong men from 18% of police jobs just so that mostly infertile women can take them, and get killed. Chivalry truly is dead -- as is sanity!

The Great One (that's Hitler for you all newbies and normies) had a few observations on this matter. And his truth, no matter how out-of-fashion it may seem to the modern libtard, will always be the truth. Tell it Great One, tell it:

"If I think to myself that a woman should make an appearance at a trial, then I have to say: if that were a woman close to me, and if I wanted to imagine my mother were still alive and has to sit in front of a murderer in a court and decide the verdict,... never, never! We don't want that.

I do not want a uniformed female police officer to walk around and run after scamps or criminals. These are things we naturally don't want. Then they say, 'Excuse me, you don't allow women in the parliament as well.' Certainly, but only because I am satisfied that the parliament does not raise the value of women, but it would only degrade her. I also removed the men from parliament because they were all rotten. (Reichstag laughter)

Then they say, "Why not put some good women into parliament." Because they would turn rotten too. (more laughter)

...

A women's regiment of snipers is being trained in the Soviet Union... grenadiers in Spain (pre-Franco). All I can say about this type of female equality -- I have experienced war. I know how hard it is. I know how many men’s nerves have been shattered by war. I have often seen them return by the dozens, doddering, completely ruined and broken. The idea that a girl or woman should take this upon herself --- I could have no respect for German men then. As long as we have a healthy male gender in Germany, no female sharpshooters or grenadiers will be trained in Germany. That is no equality, but rather, inferior rights for women because it is much harder for her than men. We won’t do it – because for us, the woman has been the most faithful work and life companion of the man at all times."

Hitler: "The catchword “Women’s Liberation” is merely a phrase invented by the Jewish intellect, and its contents are marked by the same spirit. The German woman will never need to emancipate herself in an age supportive of German life. She possessed what Nature gave her automatically as an asset to maintain and preserve; just as the man, in such an age, never had to fear that he would be ousted from his position in respect to woman."

No wonder why women loved Him so. The Great One cherished and protected them from the "progress" that Jewish-Marxist "liberation" offered them.

Boobus Americanus 1: It' a shame what happened to that female police officer.

Boobus Americanus 2: Indeed. Unfortunately, such tragedies are the price for the tremendous progress that women in law enforcement are making.

Sugar: "Progress, my asss, Bobusss!! Thesse deluded dames sshould have sstayed home and raissed a litter -- like I did!

Editor: How come your kitty children never call you? The bastards.