I briefly covered the NxALT error in an earlier essay on “AWALT” (all women are like that), but as it seems to be catching on in various domains relevant to, or sphere adjacent, it is time for a dedicated essay. Whenever I view characteristics of a population, I tend to make the initial assumption that it follows a normal distribution similar to the bell curve depicted in this essay.
Such a distribution is characterized by the fact that the values cluster around the mean, and the further away one gets from the mean, the smaller the population will be. For instance, in regards to IQ, 68% of the population are within 1 standard deviation either above or below the mean, meaning that they have an IQ in the range 85 – 115. 95% of the population are within 2 standard deviations either above or below the mean, meaning an IQ in the range 70 – 130. When one enters the outliers, meaning an IQ either below below 70 or above 130, this totals a mere 4.2% of the population. The extreme outliers, those people with an IQ either above 145 or below 55, are a mere 2% of the total population.
The normal distribution is present in many observations of human traits, height, weight and IQ being among them. In Gendernomics I argue that sexual market value should be viewed as a normal distribution, as this would be the distribution that ensured the maximal chance of “pairing off” when one takes hypergamy and the female pareto attraction into account. If all men are 10s, then it becomes impossible for hypergamy to select the highest value males, likewise if all women are 10s, then it becomes impossible for women to ensure that they have optimized hypergamy.
To summarize, in a normal distribution the majority of observations are within 1 – 2 standard deviations of the mean value, and the further one gets away from the mean the lower the amount of observations one makes. Thus it follows, that the probability of making an observation that is within 1 – 2 standard deviations of the mean is much higher than to observe an outlier. Continue reading
In the articles regarding the future of the blue pill illusion and the red and blue pill theoretical framework I describe the present social narrative and perspectives that are part of present constructed reality. I refer to this as constructed reality due to its existence parallel to what can be established through empirical research into biology, in essence it is an attempt to add a veneer of civility and idealism on top of what is ultimately an uncivilized and brutal system. This system is evolution by natural selection and is ultimately a system that only cares about what works, not how moral, politically correct or civilized it is.
Such veneers are quite common on the smaller scale, in fact the blue pill illusion is one such veneer that seeks to cover up the inherent tendencies that exist in the female of the species, and the manner in which our social order has been adapted to cater to the female imperative . Socialism is another, which seeks to harness the view of an idealist as a catalyst to human progress in complete and utter opposition to our inherent nature.
The Red pill seeks to draw back the curtain, and to explain that the social veneer, which obscures a man’s ability to operate in reality, and instead have him operate according to what benefits the venerated groups within the world. However, as with all attempts to conceal or to control nature, it only lasts a short period of time before the dissonance becomes too great between what is experienced or observed, and what one is told. Thus, the authors of red pill blogs and books do not “red pill” men, women red pill men through their behavior, we merely explain what happened.
The present veneer consists of the following points:
A) A belief that humans are instinctless and merely products of their socialization.
B) A rejection of the effects that our biological evolution have had one our species.
C) The rejection of the mind-independent framework that evolved during the Enlightenment as a governance system for human interaction.
D) The belief that one can override the imperatives of natural selection through socialization. Continue reading
“Not all women are like that” is a statement that most of us get in response when we present certain red pill ideas to men or women who are firmly anchored within the social narrative of relationships. Usually this is presented as a response when pointing out typical female behaviors such as branch swinging, solipsism, or hypergamy that have a tendency to cast females in somewhat of a negative light compared to their permanent state on the pedestal within the narrative.
This reaction is understandable as it challenges many deeply ingrained super-ego rules that we have internalized, in addition to many men having significant ego investment in their sexual strategy. Often the challenge has its roots in “I know a woman who is not like that” or “My mother is not like that“, which assumes that every woman manifests the same traits and behaviors to the exact same degree throughout her life.
In this essay I will argue that AWALT is more similar to a diagnostic construct in the field of psychology than it is to a law of nature in the hard sciences. Psychological diagnostic constructs are lists of traits and behaviors that manifest within this construct. Narcissistic personality disorder includes: Grandiosity, power fantasies, self-perception of being unique, needing admiration, sense of entitlement, interpersonal exploitation, unwillingness to empathize with others, intensely envious of others and a pompous demeanor. In order to receive the diagnosis one must manifest traits beyond a given threshold, for instance 5 out of 9.
Depending on situation, one can also manifest these traits in varying frequencies and intensity that changes with context and over time. Thus a person may be diagnosed one time, and not diagnosed the next time.