Office Supplies and Dominance Hierarchies

When I started my first corporate job, two of my mentors who had a tendency to contradict each other, gave me the same piece of advice “Don’t dip your pen in the company ink”. This is a piece of very simple advice that helps protect a man who is about to enter a corporate environment for the first time. Back when I finished college prior to the Victorian Moral Panic that has swept across Universities in the last few years, you got used to mixing business with pleasure on a near constant basis. This is actually a major difference between school and work, as throughout your schooling there is really no clear-cut distinction between work-life (school) and private life (outside of school).

The distinction between work-life (corporate) and home life (outside of corporate) was a very clear-cut distinction for many years, that grew from the industrial revolution. Back when most people worked in agriculture, or hunting/gathering prior to that, there was no real split between “work” and “leisure”, because most days would be a mixture of both. With the industrial revolution came the factories, you came in the morning, left when the bell rang and came back the next morning. This was also the structure of more “white collar” professions, you came in at a set time in the morning, left at a set time in the afternoon or evening.

However, with the advent of the computer age, this has gradually changed. As constant connectivity has become ubiquitous, the line between work and not-work has been slowly worn down. Most modern corporations expect the employees to go the extra mile, for instance coming in on weekends, evenings and even to pull all-nighters in order to make deadlines. When you add in events such as Christmas parties, team-building events, conferences, travel schedules, and various other things, many employees may spend 50 – 70 hours a week in the office in some capacity, plus work from home, spend time together outside of normal work hours and normal work environments, therefore its unsurprising that the personal and business bleed together over time.

It’s also no great surprise that 38% of workers who were surveyed admitted to dating someone they worked with at some point of their career. 28% dated someone further up in the company hierarchy, and a whopping 18% admitted to dating their boss [1]. Women were more likely to date their boss with 35% of women who had dated someone at work (compared to 23% of men), dating up in the hierarchy. Continue reading

Advertisements

Red Pill Logic: Illusions of Grandeur

This post went through multiple revisions when it came to the title. This is quite abnormal for me as I usually just title a post when I start writing it and leave it like that. It started off as “Delusions of Responsibility”, then it became “Illusions of Control” then it morphed into “Toxic Doses” and then it became Illusions of Grandeur.

A major cornerstone of life that many men are raised without these days is accountability. In fact, many problems in our modern world stems from risk being disconnect from reward, power from accountability, and actions from consequences. We saw this in 2008 in our financial system where those who had made millions and more, have yet to face any consequences for their role in what almost sank our financial system.

We see it in politics where the goldfish memory of the great majority of voters means that there is hardly ever a debate regarding “What has the incumbent accomplished?” but rather a series of sales pitches about what both candidates are promising that they will do. This is funnily enough a cluster-b seduction tactic as well, known as “future faking”.

It’s also quite present in intersexual dynamics, best summarized by Rollo Tomassi as “The goal of feminism is to maximally restrict male sexuality while removing all restrictions on female sexuality“. One of the core ideas of feminism is the “subject-object” dichotomy, wherein a subject can only act, and an object is acted upon. While I think this is very much flawed philosophy, in that every single human in all of history will have lived their life on varying and shifting degrees of the area in between. It does create an interesting perspective. In that it does in essence free women from the risk and consequences of the actions pertaining to intersexual dynamics, not in actuality but in social perception. However, as risk can never be eliminated, only managed or transferred, it means most of this risk has been placed on men.

Continue reading

Gendernomics: Bachelor Nation

I came across some interesting statistical observations recently regarding singles [6], that show that for the first time, the number of singles are outnumbering the people in relationships. While the decline in marriage can be explained through concepts such as risk. Meaning that in the current climate a man can be “zeroed out” as Rollo put it, quite easily if he makes a poor choice in mate, but largely I think it comes down to men intuitively avoiding marriage due to having seen their families, and friends go through bitter divorces. If one watches 9 people jump off a cliff, splat against the ground, and then is told “I’m sure you’re different”, a sensible person would step away from the edge.

From a needs-perspective this is very interesting though, because the needs that are satisfied by marriage, have to be sated somehow. The sexual need can be satisfied outside of marriage for both sexes, the same is true for the need for friendship and companionship to some extent. Even reproduction outside of marriage is possible through the use of surrogates and sperm donors. The one need that persists though, is the same that men have always provided for women, namely provision and protection. Likewise, it is probable that if women could be entirely provided and protected without having to contract a Beta male to do so, they would prefer to share Alpha males.

However, the need to consolidate comes when a women realize that they are no longer commanding the same market value as they did in their younger days, and feels that she must settle down now in order to avoid being left on the market.

The question is, how can women ensure provision without having to make the trade with men?

Continue reading

Gendernomics: Emergent Strategies

I use the concept of emergent strategy in the Gendernomics book when explaining and to some extent describing the various ways in which a strategy can form as a sum of individual actions.  “Strategy as a pattern” is perhaps the more interesting one, and the one that forms the foundation of the book, “The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning“. This book is a critique of strategic management literature, often based in Drucker, Taylor and Porter, the titans of planned strategy, where the chief argument presented by Henry Minzberg is that in a rapidly changing world, long-term strategic planning is destined to fail. Instead he argues that the interactions of the company with outside forces over time will form the company strategy.

The novel approach by Minzberg was a stark contrast to the top-down strategic planning literature in vogue at the time. In the planned strategy camp, retreats where executives buried themselves in a mixture of analytical work and creativity to determine Visions, Missions, SMART goals, KPIs and strategies for how to move the company to new heights were the prescription for how to build a great company. Minzberg’s position was much more simply that in a rapidly changing world, by the time the executives and strategy consultants emerged from their retreat, the data they based their decisions on may already be outdated. Thus, the only way to “do strategy” in a world marked by rapid change and innovation is to train your staff well, set goals and assume that the parts will form a coherent whole.

I’ve on occasion referred to this as “Chaos theory strategy” in that order is expected to arise from chaos, and the actions, choices and thoughts of potentially thousands of people must align in order for the strategy to be coherent. A key factor of emergent strategy is that it can only be identified when one looks at the development of the company over time, historically speaking. This is a much more fluid way to think about human behavior if one takes the vantage point of extreme macro. Our cultures and societies are shaped by billions of individual decisions, chains of reasoning, emotional reactions and actions taken. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Basic Premises – Biology Part 1

I’m happy to concede that we can include many fields as areas of interest and as foundations for red pill theory, such as sociology, anthropology and psychology, but before we had the brains to form societies, a history and a psychology, we were animals in nature like other animals in nature. A preference of mine is to go as far back as possible to achieve a view from as early in a process as possible as this tends to offer a less watered-down view. In a somewhat flippant formulation one could argue that sociology is just the study of applied psychology in groups, and that psychology is merely the study of practical biology among individuals.

Thus the first field of study was biology. Cultures, societies and large parts of psychology can be influenced in very short periods of time, just look at the gargantuan changes we have seen in our societies, cultures and in our mindset since the early 1900s. In the time-span of evolution by natural selection however, we are merely a second on a history that is millions of years long. Biologists differ a bit on how old our specific branch on the tree of great apes is, but they estimate between 100.000 and 200.000 years. Our ancestors prior to this developed bipedal locomotion, larger brains, reduced sexual dimorphism, they got opposing thumbs and lost most of their body hair. Thus, the premise is that while our cultures, our societies, our families and out environment has changed substantially in the past 5000 – 10000 years, will not have changed much in that period.

The major barrier that I’ve found in people for understanding the concepts that I’m going to cover in this essay is time-perspective, to most humans 5 – 10 years is a long time, while for natural selection it’s a second. This is the same reason that people have issues with understanding compound interest and time or the same reason that they expect to put on 10 lbs of lean muscle mass after 2 workouts.

Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Beyond Red and Blue Pills

Lately it seems that there is some discussion regarding when to move on from the red pill. As someone who found the manosphere quite early, was a part of it for a while, left and then came back I found myself thinking about this idea. There is no doubt that everything we encounter in life is either a permanent fixture or a transitory element, meaning that some things stick with us for life, other things are part of our life for a while and are then left behind. To use weight training as an example, if you build your body over time, then you can maintain it with much less effort than it took to build. Yet if you completely neglect it, it will slowly crumble over time. This is similar with most skills, if they are not used, then they atrophy over time until we find ourselves not having the skills at all. Depending on the skill and the length of the atrophy period, one may be able to re-learn the skill rather quickly, or it may take just as long as the initial learning period.

This lead to the question, if a man internalizes red pill teachings will they remain with him in sufficient strength to avoid the very pitfalls that lead him to the manosphere in the first place? One must keep in mind that most men arrive at this corner of the internet because they have problems they need to solve, the problems are many and diverse, what they have in common is intersexual dynamics. Whether a man is attempting to figure out why his wife of 10 or more years left him for a guy she met a few weeks ago, why he is in a 5 year dry-spell, or why he is living in a dead-bedroom situation the manosphere can offer probable diagnosis and potential cures. Continue reading

Gendernomics: Curves and Complications

SMV Curve from Therationalmale.com

The SMV graph by Rollo Tomassi has become one of the cornerstones of Red Pill theory. The chart demonstrates the development of the sexual market value for men and women across time. The graph is quite information dense, and the major difference between the sexes is that as male sexual market value is built, not given. Men need time to build their value. Women on the other hand are given much of their value at birth, discounted due to risk until the value manifest. It is for this reason that I’ve often described female sexual market value as being similar to a financial instrument called an option, while male sexual market value is more similar to a corporate share value.

The graph is probabilistic in that it does not outright state that every man will reach an SMV of 10 at around age 35, and every woman will reach an SMV of 10 in her early twenties, it states that this is the time, ceteris paribus that each sex has the highest probability of reaching the highest SMV they will have in their life. A man who does many of the wrong things between the ages of 15 and 35 cannot expect that his sexual market value will be higher at 35 than at 20. A woman, may not experience her peak until her late 20s, or perhaps experience it in her late teens depending on circumstance.

As I spoke about in my series “On Value“, it is important that we know the distinction between a deterministic view (It will be so) and a probabilistic one (It is likely to be so). For this reason I’ve tended to view the SMV graph in terms of being the time in life where a given sex has both the highest possible value multiplier and the highest amount of beneficial effects applied to them. For instance a man in his mid-thirties has the beneficial effect of being attractive to the broadest possible demographic of women, he has had a decade or two to mature, improve and build himself up. Yet, time has not yet done much damage to his appearance and he has hopefully regained some of his faculties after being dominated by the little head since puberty.

In order to exemplify possible sexual market developments for men, I created 3 theoretical men from broad categories that are often observed in the wild. There is the classical “Early Peak”, “The Norm” and “Late bloomer”. These all have different curves as a result of a mixture of choice and natural proclivities. For instance many of the men who develop a high sexual market value in their teens and twenties do so in part due to good genetics, related to build, height, psychological factors and interests in things that offer social proof such as artistic or athletic endeavors. Continue reading