An Update on Gendernomics

As many of you are aware, Gendernomics has not been available for purchase for the past 3 – 4 months. I took it down to do a little bit of work on it in preparation for the launch of Gendernomics: Building Value which is the follow up title.

I’m happy to announce that the original Gendernomics and Gendernomics: Building Value will be available again on Amazon.com, hopefully next week.

There haven’t been many changes to Gendernomics, just fixing a few issues with the previous version, however both books will be featuring new cover art by Rian Stone.

For those of you who are interested in what Book 2 is about a gentleman by the name of Jack Napier was kind enough to do a preview for me on youtube where he reads the introduction to Gendernomics: Building Value

 

He is very talented when it comes to doing audio and I’m grateful that he took the time to create the above clip.

Gendernomics: Building Value is currently being read by some of the highest profile men in our little corner on the internet and barring feedback that will require a lot of fixes, I should be good to put both books back up by the end of next week.

Best regards

Carl

 

Gendernomics: Regulations and The SMP

As I was polishing another essay, an idea stuck in my head. What is the consequence of men widely adopting red pill theory as a framework for their lives and especially in intersexual dynamics. A major argument from the “Trad-con” and “Purple-pill” contingents within the manosphere has been that if men adopt a red pill perspective, and start implementing this into their lives, is that it will send society into a negative spiral. The logic goes that game and the red pill works in terms of getting laid, the result of a majority of men implementing a male sexual strategy (unlimited access to unlimited sexuality) at the cost of the female sexual strategy (alpha fucks/beta bucks) will lead to and hasten the decline of our current social order.I agree with this argument, as our overt social order for the past 50 – 300 years is based on the model of reproductive Marxism.

Monogamous marriage, no sex outside of marriage, no divorce, children are raised in a nuclear family with their mother as primary caregiver, and supported by the father through labor. This is the old book of rules made explicit. The changes that have been made in the past since the sexual revolution is that contraception is now widely available thus decoupling sex from reproduction. Divorce is now very available and has an entire industry supporting it. The proportion of children born and raised out by a single parent is increasing. Women are steadily increasing in labor participation and men are steadily declining in labor participation. The entire structure around monogamous marriage has been eroded, the man’s authority is gone, and what is left is a woman holding all the cards in her hand.

Let me begin by stating explicitly, trad-con has a problem with the “Beta bucks” side of female sexual strategy, in fact most of them support it wholeheartedly and just want wives who nag less and fuck more. The problem comes with the “Alpha fucks” side, and the fact that these two strategies are influence each other, a woman’s successful execution of the former, defacto a poorer execution of the latter if a woman’s strategy cannot be optimized in the form of “Alpha bucks”. The goal of such men is primarily is to improve the Beta Bucks dynamic in a relationship, so that the Beta males are able to live happy, fulfilling relationships, and won’t end up with their wife divorcing them after 5 years of dead bedroom, not so much because it’s the best for the man, but because it’s the best trade-off for society. It keeps the man’s stomach full, balls empty and working hard, a woman’s wallet full, and the children’s lives stable.

In order to do this, the argument is that men have to sacrifice for their fellow men, by neglecting their own best reproductive interest and sexual strategy. It’s an argument in favor of why men should indulge female sexual strategy instead of following their own. Personally, I think the fear of “all men going alpha and the world turning into an orgy is unfounded due to natural regulatory mechanisms.

Continue reading

Gendernomics: Conversions and Drivers

If you started asking around the manosphere who is the most frequent pest in DMs, I think many of the men would point at me. I’m quite a prolific brain picker, whether that means asking Goldmund a few questions about Camera Game before I tried that the first time, checking in with Well Built Style or Tanner when I’m looking to upgrade my wardrobe, getting some day game info from Troy or TD, Beard tips from George Bruno, workout tips from AJA Cortes or this week when I asked the whole Red Man Group about an issue I was having with turning one-night stands into plates. The reason why I do this is that it’s much more efficient to ask someone who has a lot of information and experience on a subject to give you some quick input than it is to gain their experience and knowledge for myself. I consider myself very lucky that I’m in a position where I can ask these men questions about their field of expertise and not get DM blocked. I think Rian Stone found the best term for this on his blog which he refers to as “Men Swapping Notes”.

One of the main reasons why I ask all these questions is that there are areas in life where I’m an expert, and there are other areas I want to bring up to par, I don’t need to be an expert, but I need to know enough that I have that area of my life handled. A couple of years ago, I would probably be featured in an “Average Guy Style” or “Trash shoes” thread, now I won’t. I’m a far way from being GQ cover material, but at least I’m not wearing jeans  that are two sizes to big with 3 year old Nike Airs everywhere. A second reason is that the more information I can aggregate up in my head, the more patterns I’m able to discern that then can become blog content. This is one of these threads. Continue reading

Low Hanging Fruit

One of the fundamental pieces of advice that I always bring with me in business is “Always pick the low-hanging fruit first“, this is a platitude as much as any, but there is some basic wisdom in it. Most people aspire to greatness, whether they admit this or not, and there are two major ways for a person to be recognized as great, doing something incredibly creative, or doing something incredibly complex. In recent years, this has tended to become even worse in that people take the technology approach which is: “Do something incredibly creative and complex“, which brings a whole string of new problems.

Complexity and creativity are two things that often land businesses in trouble, because people often want to be recognized for doing something revolutionary and people often view some creative as being more innovative if it also appears complex. They aspire to be the Steve Jobs of their industry before they’ve gotten their business off the ground. The idea behind the low hanging fruit is to do those things that are simple, uncomplicated, come at a low cost and risk, but promise safe, guaranteed returns before doing the things that offer greater returns but carry much higher risks.

For instance, if you are running a small manufacturing operation making pasta sauce, you can probably improve your bottom line by improving the production and distribution process incrementally, ensuring smooth operations throughout your value chain before attempting a market expansion. This accomplishes two things, first of all it ensures that you have control over the resource usage in your value chain, and secondly it removes barriers to scale. Many companies have tried to expand before they were ready to expand and it leads to a souring of relationships within their value chain due to either having to sacrifice product quality, being unable to deliver, or not being able to keep up with their inputs.

In the same way, many men who are new to the red pill tend to go after the big things, that come with equally big costs and risks first, rather than fixing the little problems. For obvious reasons, often we think that major changes give major results, and major effort has major effect. However, 10 small changes can often have much greater positive effects than one major change, for less effort at a lower risk. Furthermore, those many, small and easy changes serve to enable the big changes. Continue reading

An Update on Black Label Logic

I took some time off for the past month after putting out a blog post a week, even two posts a week for a while during my high productivity periods and I actually sat around reflecting quite a bit on what I want to do going forward with this blog.

Richard Cooper of Entrepreneurs in Cars said something on a Red Man Group pre-show that I somewhat took to heart. Since we started doing The Red Man Group, I’ve done it just about every week for 2 – 3 hours, on top of spending a lot of time crafting my essays, especially those that require a lot of research, and statistics. On top of that I’m currently writing the next Gendernomics book that I expect will be out around December.

This is a heavy time investment, I calculated that I’ve written around 400.000 words just on the blog, and around 50.000 combined in Gendernomics and Gendernomics 2. I would like to be able to put more time into writing, because it’s something I very much enjoy doing, however what Rich said was “If you get paid like a hobby, you will treat it like a hobby“, so for that reason I’ve decided to expand into more sources of revenue for the Black Label Logic Project.

However, it’s not my style to ask for money without offering additional value, so here are the 3 new value propositions from Black Label Logic.  Continue reading

Of Online Game and Omnichannels

Those of you who read my essay on doing some AB testing on Tinder, will know that I’m quite a recent adopter of online dating apps. I did try some of the sites back in 2007 or 2008, but found it to be quite a wrenched hive of scum and villainy. I’ve always been more partial to day game, social circle game or night game as methods for meeting women, because you can screen your targets much more effectively, so fatfishing is more or less non-existent in those forms of game prior to 2 am at the bar when all bets are off.

The thing I’ve found is that styles of game are a lot like workout routines, people find one they like, stick with it, defend it zealously and regard anyone who has a different routine as having it just to insult them. I’ve always found this to be a rather non-pragmatic approach both to training and game.

I tend to take the approach that you should learn as much as you can, test as much as you are able and keep what is useful. To use an example I’ve got a weight training program and I have a body weight training program, I prefer the former but I use the latter for active recovery, rehabilitation after injury and when I’m unable to access a gym. Continue reading

Gendernomics: Products and Markets

Rollo recently posted an essay where he talks about the concept of value added, more specifically about a tendency among women to conflate their sexual market value with their worth as a human being. This is largely a function of women having reduced themselves to sexual commodities, and one key characteristics of a commodity in a market is that there is little if any differentiation. For instance, if I were to purchase aluminum ingots or oil in the spot market, no company really offers a differentiated product, they are all sold based on lowest cost. In the same manner, if the only  thing being “sold” in the sexual market place is the act of sex, one could argue that such a product is largely undifferentiated.

Naturally, for the act of sex one prefers a packaging that is aesthetically pleasing, this goes for both men and women. In today’s online sexual market place, it doesn’t matter much how great your personality is, as most purchasing processes start with determining whether a product passes the hurdle rate for appearance, and then if it does one explores other product features.

Much of product design is based on an idea for a product, and then after the idea generation and prototyping phases, one comes up with the value proposition to the market. My preference is to begin with a market analysis, and then creating the product, in order to ensure that will be customers for the product. It is generally also much cheaper to conduct market research than it is to develop products. From this approach, one can develop a good sense of the market in which one will operate, and which product characteristics are important to the potential customer base. One can even identify the price ceiling, potential volumes and various other important input to the product design process.

If one compares Vodka to Whiskey for instance, the former is ethanol and water, the latter is also ethanol and water, but the process of production has a large influence on the end-product. Vodka is differentiated 90% using brand building and marketing. Whiskey is differentiated in the same manner, however, much of the marketing is based on differences in the production process. These differences range from the grain bill (malt, rye, corn, etc), malt processing (peat levels), type of distillation (pot still or column still) time spent cask aging, type of casks that the whiskey has been aged in, and single malt vs. blended. Continue reading