Gendernomics: The Elevator Pitch

Recently I had a quick twitter exchange that had to do with how to be interesting, to which I replied:

Trouble is, a lot of men have no idea which things that happened to them were interesting, and which are not. @Blacklabellogic

This is one of those things that are quite obvious on the surface, so obvious in fact that I never really thought about it until I saw the tweet that prompted the response. It is no surprise really as women are the sex that has an inherent grasp of marketing, framing and rhetoric, where most male conversations tend to go down one of two paths.

The first path of male conversation is simply an information exchange following the problem – analysis – solution model, and I suspect this is the default male form of communication. This draws on deductive problem solving, requires clear, minimalist language in order to ensure maximum mutual understanding, and an honest presentation of the situation at hand.

The second path of male conversation takes the form of banter, of which locker room talk is a sub-category. This path tends to follow a tit-for-tat model where one-upping one another with better roasts, jokes, or stories is central, and functions somewhat to determine the status of each male, but also to hone an ability to be witty, humorous, and think on one’s feet. It also serves to keep a man grounded, and to bond the group together, through having fun at each other’s expense. An ability to be productive, honorable, funny, and so on contributes to either a rise or a fall within the male dominance hierarchy.

A man that seeks to improve his position in the sexual market place must do some initial analysis. Having an idea of how he needs to position himself in the market, the competitive pressures within the market and other market factors will be central in determining how to apply his efforts during product engineering. Luckily, much of this information is available in the manosphere on a general level.

Once he has this information, combined with his experience within the market, he is likely to have an understanding of the major factors that impact his value, the next step is then to establish where he deviates from those factors and with this understanding he can engage in targeted product engineering to adapt the product he is offering to the market to which he wants to appeal. Once these factors are engineered into the product (himself), he can start to consider the marketing aspect of the product.

The marketing aspect deals with the correct communication in regards to the product offering. In short, how does he present the value he represents in the best possible light. This is where game plays a major role. For instance, the opener represents a way to open an avenue of communication with a potential customer, and could be likened to everything from cold calling to banner ads. Once the customer has been “opened”, the next step is to get the customer invested in the communication. Once the customer is invested in the communication, one can move on to techniques that serve to best highlight the product, engage in influence techniques and various other means that seek to position the product in the mind of the customer. Finally the close represents the time when the customer has to make the first choice with tangible consequences.

There are two key areas in such a scenario, what information to present and how to present that information. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: The Walls of Jericho

A barrier in Porter’s model represents either hindrance from engaging in willful and informed action towards an objective or a defense from encroachment on your objective once the wheels are in motion. A barrier to entry for instance represents both a defense for existing market participants, but also a hindrance for potential new market entrants.

During my last appearance on the Mark Baxter Podcast, along with  Rollo Tomassi [1], Mark referenced an article of Rollo’s entitled “Buffers”[2] that deals with the many buffers that men utilize in order to reduce the risk of rejection. Thus they are inherently rationalizations of behavior used to avoid taking risks.

Barriers serve a similar function within the male psyche, and most sentences involving them tend to be related to “enough yet“. When I first started reading the manosphere back in the early 2000s, it was quite obvious that there was a deeper set of behaviors below the surface. The scripts themselves were fine, but as game went on, the idea that “it’s not what you say, it’s how you say it” started to take hold. This coincided with the idea of “natural game”, which sought to take game from following scripts in a flow-chart to being the default state of behavior.

I’ve covered various aspects of the blue pill and red pill perspectives, various alpha behaviors and so on previously, however I’ve scarcely addressed the barriers to the underlying state required in order to manifest such behaviors. This is a simple case of cause and effect, when one engages in “fake it until you make it” one is acting out the effect without the prerequisite cause.

To exemplify the concept, if one never feels fear, one can never be brave, because bravery means acting in spite of fear. Thus, a prerequisite state to bravery is fear. The “Enough Yet” problem comes when a man procrastinates or fails to do something because of his own inner game hangups. This is not purely a red pill/game related problem, it could be the guy who wants to start his own business but doesn’t think he’s competent “enough yet”, the guy who wants to gain some muscle but doesn’t think he’s ready “enough yet” to get into the gym.

These emotions forms the barrier to entry for his venture, and there are only two possible solutions to this problem:

A) Do it now, do your best and accept the consequences, the chips will fall as they may.

B) Do not do it and spend more time in preparation until he feels ready.

The people who select option A generally tend to come out better than those who select option B, because those who only want that little extra piece of preparation never quite get that final piece. I’ve helped many a person with their thesis, their research proposals, business cases and such over the years, and those who fall into category B, never get truly good results. The depressing aspect of that is that they are often the most competent people.  This could be viewed as the Dunning-Kruger effect in practice, as people who are highly competent will often be the most competent at finding flaws in their own work and as they become more competent as they prepare, they find new perspectives and information, which causes them to postpone action. However, when you combine this with a tendency towards perfectionism, wanting to be in control of every eventuality and every variable, it creates an unwinnable scenario.

There are only two possible outcomes, number one is that they fail and use this as evidence to prove that they should have spent more time preparing, number two is that they succeed and obsess over what they could have done better. Continue reading

Gendernomics: Options and Obiters

Options within the financial industry are in essence securities that give you certain rights related to other securities. The most common being Call options that give you the right to buy a set amount of an underlying security at a set price known as the strike price, and Put options that give you the right to sell a set amount of an underlying security at a set price. These financial instruments can be used in a variety of ways the most common being hedging risk exposure and taking leveraged positions in the underlying security. The former is quite common among hedge funds, the latter among traders. The underlying basis for options is that the underwriter and the buyer have differing views on how the asset will develop going forward. In the case of a Call option, the option writer thinks the stock will fall and the buyer thinks the stock will rise, in the case of a Put option, the underwriter thinks the stock will rise, and the buyer thinks the stock will fall.

I’ve previously written on risk in the sexual market place and while men often neglect risks completely when it comes to sexual relationships, women are consummate risk managers who seek to guard in for most eventualities within the market place. It is not uncommon to see wealthy men go “all in” on a marriage working on, not just once but twice and thrice before realizing that they are really buying expensive hookers paid after the fact.

The inherent ability of women to risk manage within the sexual market place is a function of hypergamy and solipsism, in that hypergamy represents the drive to maximize the gain from her SMV over a relatively short lifetime, much in the same manner that a professional athlete needs to maximize the value of his ability over a short period of time, while solipsism permits her to do whatever is necessary in order to achieve this goal. Via solipsism a woman can justify any action she perceives as required in order to maximize her outcomes. Continue reading

Gendernomics: Finding Your Mission

The Sixteen Commandments of Poon is a great list from an Heartiste that has been a manosphere staple for many years now. Perhaps the most frequently cited commandment is number 3.

III. You shall make your mission, not your woman, your priority [1]

The fundamental challenge with this commandment however, is that it presumes that all men have a clear and defined mission in their head that they can make the primary target to aim for in their life. The reality is that many men are like objects in a vacuum, they remain inert until acted upon by an external force. They simply have no idea what their mission is, and some do not even know what having a mission entails. How can one put one’s mission before a woman if one lacks a mission and has a woman? Alternatively, how can one avoid making a woman one’s mission if one lacks a mission?

Some men are born with an innate sense of purpose and know what they desire from an early age, but many do not pay much attention to having a mission, and instead opt to be adrift for years and sometimes decades. In some sense, this can be partly blamed on a social order where men are no longer raised by men, and thus are no longer trained by men to develop that sense of purpose. I’ve known many men who despite great talents and abilities do not live up to their potential.

A few years in my early twenties were spent in such drift, aimless, and without much purpose. However, various life experiences served to radically upend this view of the world. It appears that a man who finds himself adrift may only be awoken from his slumber by significant adversity and challenge. Frequently, the longer he has been in such a slumber, the greater the challenge he must face in order to prove himself worthy of progression. Continue reading

Gendernomics: The Vagina Valuations

In my recently released Gendernomics book, I go through a subject that I themed relationship cost accounting, that utilizes some common methods to establish the opportunity and sunk costs of a man entering a relationship. A correlate to this is what I theme “vagina valuation” that draw on some classic finance and accounting methodologies to define a value for a woman. This was inspired by the classic quote:

“No matter how hot she is, someone out there is sick of dealing with her shit”

Which can be viewed as a woman writing checks her vagina cannot cash, either immediately or over time. Most men who have experience from a relationship or two, can testify that women are somewhat like a new car, at first just getting inside it is existing and exhilarating but over time as the sense of new fades, so does the emotions experienced. As with other drugs, one must seek out steadily increasing levels of experience in order to gain the same emotional impact. However, in many cases, performance declines as the relationship matures, as excitement is replaced by maneuvering from the woman to take control.  The move for control is in many ways a typical move women makes when a relationship reaches a certain stage, this stage is very relative and depends among other things on her age, her own sexual market value, the man’s sexual market value and cultural/social context, however it always happens unless the relationship self-destructs very early on.

To some extent this is driven by what appears to be an inherent female tendency to fall for a man who embodies certain qualities and traits, only to proceed to eradicate those traits in him, if he permits her to, should he fight back, it predictably causes the woman to increase her less than ideal behaviors. This represents a situation wherein the value the man places on the woman is tested by the woman’s behavior over time. However, this also functions to display to the man the woman’s true self.

Both women and men misrepresent themselves somewhat during initial courtship, however, women to a larger extent engage in bait and switch behavior, thus this situation represents a true test of her idealized self and her true self. The inherent tendency for misrepresentation and machiavellianism in women, lead to valuation metrics being somewhat questionable. In the process referred to as “Due Diligence” during a merger, acquisition or joint venture, the goal is to work through massive amounts of data, rearranging and reviewing it in order to identify discrepancies. This is done in order to establish a “true and fair” view that one can then analyze. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Of AWALT and Snowflakes

snowflakeNot 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.

Continue reading

Gendernomics: The Female Bubble

tulip-maniaOpportunity costs and sunk costs have been one of the topics that I have returned to quite a few times in various essays, as I consider them central to male issues within the sexual market place. Both of these metrics exist to judge whether an allocation of resources is sound or unsound. Opportunity costs are the costs of the best opportunity foregone, exemplified by getting married, where the opportunity costs are alternative mating with one or multiple other women. The sunk costs represent the time and other resources a man has invested into a relationship with a woman, and the resources that would be loss should the man decide not to pursue a relationship with that women any longer.

I credit my twitter feed with inspiring many of my essays, and this week is no different. Last week Illimitableman tweeted the following nugget of reasoning:

If a man earns $500 an hour and you want 5 hours alpha attention to be fucked, you’re saying your pussy is worth $2500. Overpriced!” @Illimitableman

This got me thinking along the lines of my “Hookers vs Dating” calculations in an earlier post on marginal utility. It is without a doubt that in the world of constant social media validation and where women are raised to view themselves as Princesses that women develop somewhat of a tendency to value themselves very highly. This is a natural consequence of being told that your product is the best in the world and worthy of royalty. Furthermore, having this over valuation validated by a range of thirsty men from the age of 15 does not in any way encourage a sober valuation. One must keep in mind that hype and marketing can drive a low quality or even useless product to immense heights for a time, examples of this includes such fad products as the pet rock and the Dutch tulip craze.  This is one of the value theory observations that the price of a product frequently does not reflect the underlying costs of building this product.

As an example one could argue that the price of an iPhone should be:

A) The price someone is willing to pay for it in an open market.

B) Reflect the cost of building it.

These will obviously be two entirely different prices. In the Gendernomics sense, the former reflects how the sexual market operates, whereas the latter is quite inconsequential. It does not matter if a man invests massively in himself if he does so in a manner that is not market oriented. Thus, the price the woman sets for her sexual companionship reflects that of the market in which she operates, how high a price will the market accept? Continue reading