Gendernomics: Creative Destruction

The concept of creative destruction was popularized by the Austrian-American economist Joseph Schumpeter in the early 20th century. The concept was defined by Schumpeter as “process of industrial mutation that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one“. The idea behind the concept is that capitalism will inevitably lead to innovation and progression within industries, constantly finding new and better ways to cater to the needs and wants of the market, stakeholders and owners, which would destroy the existing investment to create new investment. A good example would be how digital photography annihilated the large market for film and disposable cameras dominated by Kodak.

To summarize creative destruction, historically one sated a need through a solution, at present one may sate that need through another solution which usurped the throne from the previous solution, and in the future we may sate that need through a new solution that took over the kingdom from the previous one. A side-effect naturally, is that the present way of life, thinking and infrastructure is constructed around the present solution, which means that for a time-being this must also be reconstructed.

For instance, prior to the advent of the light-bulb, many cities lit their streets using torches or gas, this resulted in a high demand for gas, the companies that produced the streetlamps, and a large industry of men who’s job was to walk around when it got dark and light all the lamps. Once Edison came around with the light-bulb, much of the investments made into gas-based street lights and related industries was rendered obsolete (thus destroyed), by the new creative solution, however new industries blossomed to fill the needs of the new solution. Continue reading


Gendernomics: The NAxALT Error

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

Red Pill Logic: Internal Messaging

In recent weeks I’ve written posts on hypo- and hypermasculinity and the role of the anima and animus, what these have in common is that they both deal with reactions to environmental stimuli, often in early childhood that continue to influence behavior well into adulthood.

We know that human beings are not born as blank slates, we are born with a number of genetic predispositions that affect our personality, our performance and various other parts of our lives on a day to day basis. Our genetics influence many aspects of our behavior and perhaps one of the more well-known are “The Warrior Genes” [1], known to influence antisocial behavior and predispositions towards violence.

From the day we are born, we are also socialized by our parents, our peer groups, relatives, family friends and various other sources of patterns that we internalize. Before we can think in abstract, before we can reason, before we can even speak, we are internalizing and implementing patterns of behavior and thought. The manifestations of such behaviors can subtract or add to our genetics, a famous example is researcher James Fallon who despite possessing both the neurological and genetic correlates of psychopathy, does not engage in many of the negative behaviors associated with the genetic or neurological makeup [2]. He largely credits this to his positive upbringing, and the positive patterns that he learned as part of his socialization. Such patters are among the oldest we have in our life, they are the deepest ingrained in our mind and burnt into our brain, having been repeated throughout most of our lives. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Hypo- and Hyper Masculinity

Many men find the red pill or red pill adjacent communities as a result of life kicking them in the teeth. This kick is often related to intersexual dynamics, a wife leaving them, discovering that their wife is deeply disordered, or a myriad of other stories, however these men tend to manifest a case of being “hypomasculine”. This is not surprising given that the past 2 – 3 generations of western men have grown up in a community that not only does not overtly value masculinity, but in many cases demonizes it.

Be it the boys who are medicated for manifesting behaviors that 2 – 3 decades ago would be classified as “boys will be boys“, those who are raised by a single mother without any masculine idol to form themselves after, or those who are raised in a context where they view their mother henpeck their father for most of their formative years, it is understandable that they will struggle when it comes to developing a healthy masculine identity.

A pet theory of mine for some time, is that a boy put into such a situation, tends to go in one of two directions. He will either identify with his mother’s plight, and take on a co-dependent role where he will attempt to alleviate his mother’s neurosis in the hope that this will return her to a state in which she can be the caretaker he desires, or he will grow to reject his mother’s histrionics and instead develop a hyper-masucline identity. In the case of the former, he grows to embody the traits and behaviors normally associated with positive femininity that his mother lacks. In the case of the latter, he grows to reject all female traits within himself completely.

This is part of the reason why books such as “No More Mr. Nice Guy” are doing well, many boys find that the masculine has been beaten out of them after 10+ years in public school systems, surrounded by media narratives that does little except make fun of- and demonize traditional masculinity. This book is a “gateway book” towards developing a masculine identity that is not necessarily the “house cat of maleness” embodied by beer, man-caves and ESPN. While I do think that much of mainstream “male-centered” writing of this nature trends strongly towards blue-pill or at best purple pill narratives, it serves as a less harsh introduction to red pill themes. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Anima, Animus and Jung

A while back I wrote a post on how our society is engaged in the mass-production of Beta males and female narcissists, in essence creating men weak of will and women with dogged determination. This translates into men that act more female than male, often being submissive, lacking decisiveness and rejecting the very notion that there is such a thing as “male behavior”. Likewise, the women reject the notion that there is such a thing as “unfeminine” behavior, which often manifests in behaviors such as being argumentative, decisive and insistent. This has often been pointed out in the manosphere as a case of attempting to make a sexually dimorphic species into an androgynous one, with which I agree.

In the present social climate I would argue that a misinterpretation of Jung is at fault for the concept of “Get in touch with your feminine side”, where the underlying meaning of the statement is “If you get in touch with your feminine side, you will adopt my perception“. However, this is not the meaning, nor is it the role of the anima and the animus in Jungian psychology. What characterizes and somewhat sets Jung apart is a writing style based on imagery and his use of dichotomies. For those familiar with psychological types, the dichotomous pairs of “Thinking and “Feeling” and “Sensing” and “Intuition” will be familiar, and this is something that characterizes most of his psychological work in “The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious” as well. (If you are interested in learning more about Jung’s psychological types, The Artful Man has a blog dedicated to it that is linked in my sidebar.)

The man is the bearer of logos, represented by rationality, logic and a preference for empiricism, whereas the female represents the concept of eros, the emotional, instinctive and relationship oriented. Thus, this dichotomy in some regard mirrors Jung’s thinking and feeling functions, the former which is more prevalent in men, the latter which is more prevalent in women statistically speaking [7]. However, as explained by many MBTI writers, attempting to turn a thinker into a feeler or vice versa is not a very good idea. Likewise, attempting to turn women into men and men into women, does not create a race of androgynous superhumans, finally free from oppressive social norms and expectations, it creates one group of left-handed people attempting to write with their right hand, and another group of right-handed people attempting to write with their left hand. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Pulling the Triggers

All people have weak points that if pressed causes them to react in predictable and often destructive manners.  In alcoholics anonymous for instance, a recommendation is to stay away from situations and people who have a high probably of causing a recovering alcoholic to drink.

The Red Pill is largely centered around sexual strategy and a major aspect of this strategy is centered on becoming the best man it is possible for you to become. However, in pursuit of this goal there are many ways that the world attempts to trip you up, in what I view as the Universe’s rite of passage. If attaining a high status as a man through building yourself brick by brick, was a simple task with no stumbling blocks, every man would be a high value man.

This ranges from appeals to congruence, wherein people expect you to remain congruent with their internal image of you. Shaming tactics that utilize psychological discomfort in a social setting to enforce a given set of behaviors. Fear tactics that seek to exploit fear of loss as a means to control your present and future behavior. Furthermore, exploit the triggers in your personality that they are aware of, in order to alter your behavior so that it is more to their liking.

In many ways the red pill is a conscious reprogramming of your own internal operating system, wherein one seeks to eliminate behaviors, habits and ways of thinking to better support the long-term goals one wants. As our internal operating system is something that is largely constructed by the unconscious learning from our surroundings during the socialization process, many of the default reactions support the blue pill illusion, not the new red pill aware vision.


The terms “trigger” and “triggering” have somewhat lost their meaning since Social Justice Warriors have abused them more than strategy consultants abuse the term “synergy”, however the underlying concepts are in both cases quite sound. Within psychology, a trigger is something that causes a person to relive a memory or memories of a traumatic event, often associated with post-traumatic stress disorder. In this post, I will be using a slightly different definition, where a trigger is something that causes a person to revert to previous behavioral or mental patterns that have a destructive effect on their work to better themselves.

Physical triggers are those that exist as one moves around the physical world. To utilize the AA example, it would be bars, clubs, and other places where the consumption of alcohol is a significant part of experience. These can take many forms and are often highly personalized, but can be summarized as putting yourself in situations where your negative behaviors are likely to manifest. While it’s often a good idea to challenge these behaviors and attempt to gain a larger degree of control over them, attempting to do so, much too early in the process of self-improvement, is likely to have larger consequences.

Mental triggers are somewhat more difficult to control than the physical ones. As the physical triggers often make their presence known in certain locations or situations, the mental ones may appear seemingly out of nowhere. Often they are the first cause in leading to a person seeking out a location that permits them to act out their physical triggers. The physical triggers can therefore be avoided as one becomes aware of them, not so for the mental triggers.

A gentleman I spoke to a little while ago for instance, had a history of serial monogamy, as does many other men. From the time he was 14 until his late 20s, he had not been without a long-term monogamous relationship for longer than 6 – 8 weeks. Furthermore, he had rarely played the field in this period, thus he had a bad case of “catch feelingsitis” where he would fall in love with any woman he slept with, and attempt to make it into a long-term relationship. This created a very interesting pattern of behavior, where shortly after his previous relationship ended, he would follow the standard advice of sleeping with a new person. So far, so good. However, he would then instantly develop oneitis for what was intended as a one night stand.

This had the consequence of landing him in bad relationship after bad relationship, because he would do no vetting and no resume check, prior to entering the relationship. These relationships would last from a few months to a few years every time, and be characterized by the cluster-B pattern. Once he became aware of this pattern in his life he could make an effort to change it, by altering the underlying psychological mechanisms that resulted in the behaviors.

The Cascade Effect and Engineering Failure

What I theme the “cascade effect” is that once a person makes a small deviation from a planned course of action, this has a tendency to lead to more and larger deviations over time. A typical example would be someone who has a cheat meal, that then becomes a cheat day, then a cheat week and finally ends with discarding the diet completely. New behaviors will at this point be conscious choices and consists of acts contrary to your internalized patterns, and thus may result in reverting to the old mode of behavior. Someone who recently took up weight lifting may instead prefer to relax, and thus may make a string of excuses for why they should put off the gym until tomorrow, only to repeat the same internal dialogue the next day.

Backsliding into past behavior patterns is simple and this is the reason why the physical triggers should be avoided at first and focus should be on securing that the new, more productive habits are repeated until they are firmly established. Scott Adams mentions building “systems” and what that breaks down to, is that one should engineer life around maintaining the good habits that lead to achievement of the end-goals.

The idea behind Total Quality Management (TQM) is that a process should be created in such a way that it’s very easy to do it right, and to do it wrong requires effort. For instance, if one is assembling computers, there is only one way that parts will fit, as opposed to it being possible to put them in multiple configurations. The reasoning behind such a process is that most humans seek to do their job right, and most humans seek the easiest path, thus if they must expend more energy to do something wrong, they are less likely to do so.

Nobody begins a self-improvement process seeking to fail, but there are ways that they can engineer their own demise. I spoke of this in “Stuck in the middle“, where the focus was on trying to make many monumental changes in parallel, in a very short period of time. This means that they have set themselves up to fail as a result of having built too steep of an incline for themselves. Building the potential for cascade effects is another way of failing, so is maintaining their old haunts and habits. Testing willpower against temptation is an important step in the process, but doing so constantly is likely to increase risk of failure.

Stuck in the Middle

In last week’s post the topic was a man stuck in the middle between too many concurrent self-improvement efforts, resulting in not getting results in any of them. However, one can also become stuck in the middle between the new self, the old self and the best self. The Purple Pill is a prime example of being stuck in the middle between the red pill and the blue pill. One accepts red pill truths, but attempt to work around and with them in order to realize the blue pill fantasy. This is a conflict between the socially mandated and reinforced world view and the newly adopted world view.

Anyone who has ever undertaken a major self-improvement project in their life is familiar with the reaction “You are not being the real you” or some variation thereof, this is often spun as coming from a place of concern, however what is taking place is that the construct of you a person has in their head, does not match what they observe. Thus, they decide to encourage, threaten or guilt you into reverting to patterns that reflect their internal image of you. This reaction often comes from the relative loss of power they feel as a man goes from being the presently dictated socially approved version of a man, which is often based in the view of men as flawed women.

Such interventions will often seek to take advantage of your previous programming, in many cases by exposing you to those situations or psychological positions that had previously worked as a means to control you. This mirrors the extinction burst often observed near the end of Cluster-B relationships, when the cluster B person will utilize every single tool that had previously worked as a means of controlling you in rapid succession to regain control.

Summary and Conclusions

When a man first finds the red pill they are often able to identify and explain many of their previous failings. Men’s deductive problem-solving approach is highly useful in that once we are made aware of an error, the path towards correcting it often becomes clear and it comes down to execution. The challenge comes in the fact that most of the previous failings have been established over a long period of time, and thus are the default behavior. When attempting to correct these failings, the man faces not only challenges within himself, and internalized patterns, he also faces social reinforcement of those old and destructive patterns.

One of the keys to lasting change is the engineering of life and mind in a way that reinforces and maintains the new patterns with a minimum of effort. A man beginning a self-improvement process does so full of energy and determination, and thus can maintain sub-optimal processes for a time, however as the process extends in time, his probability of failure increases. This may be those who get within 5 – 10 lbs of their goal weight, and then decides that they can relax a bit, only to yo-yo back up to their previous weight. Men who decide that they need to play the field after a break-up only to find themselves in a new monogamous relationship with their one-night stand. Men who have gone from a 4 to a 6, and are now getting attention from female 4s and 5s, deciding to cash in their chips instead of playing another round.

These men may be moderately satisfied with their results so far, and thus see less value in getting that last 20% of results, not realizing that the last 20% are also those that bring the most value. Thus, they expose themselves to their triggers again, find their old programming slowly seizing control of their behaviors and in half the time those results took them to get or less they are back to “just be yourself” and the blue pill illusion.

Red Pill Logic: Stuck in the Middle

Stuck in the middle comes from an observation by Harvard strategy professor Michael Porter regarding companies that attempt to compete on two fronts that are mutually exclusive. This results in the company not being able to focus their energy towards a single objective, and thus not performing in an optimal way. In a general principle this comes back to the fact that a Jack of all trades is a master of none. When men find the manosphere, they find the biggest self-improvement community on the internet, that deals with self-improvement in many areas of life. What started with the simple scripts of presenting yourself as a high value male, has morphed into a community focused on constructing high value men.

Many of the men who enter this sphere find themselves wanting in multiple regards. If they are lucky there is merely one glaring issue staring them in the face, but often there are a mix of psychological, physiological and social issues that they find themselves having to resolve. In an effort to rectify these issues rapidly, they find themselves frantically attempting to improve on every front at once, only for their willpower to run out and the inevitable backsliding takes place. Much of the time I see this written off as weakness on the part of the individual man, rather than poor planning in the initial stages.

The sheer volume of red pill literature these days is so immense, and a man who is recently awoken from the blue pill illusion is rapidly made painfully aware of the many bricks that built the walls illusion and that he must now disassemble. This wall that served him throughout his life consists of mindset, physiology, psychology, habits, principles, learned scripts, innate scripts and many other pieces that in their totality serve as the causality of his life. His view that karma sorts out everything, that he doesn’t need to exercise and eat real food, innate issues with self-esteem, the habit of putting other people before self, or principles about how to behave all work together in synergy to create a weak, sick, submissive, supplicating man.

This wall that in some regards was constructed as a means to sequester himself within his own world, where he is safe and comfortable, as the 48 laws of Power says about fortresses

The world is dangerous and enemies are everywhere— everyone has to protect themselves. A fortress seems the safest. But isolation exposes you to more dangers than it protects you from—it cuts you off from valuable information, it makes you conspicuous and an easy target. Better to circulate among people, find allies and mingle. You are shielded from your enemies by the crowd.

When faced with reality that this wall obscures his view of the world, and forms a construct that leads to him undertaking actions and making choices that were at best ill-informed in an effort to remain in control of imagined risk, he often undertakes to deconstruct in a day that which was built over a lifetime. Continue reading