trying to understand the manosphere

I’ve been trying to understand the manosphere and the dating, mating, marrying, reproducing, and family problems. And the pattern is pretty simple:

(a) a man interprets a woman by her costs because of female intrinsic value(fertility), and women by her gains because of male demonstrated value (productivity). Men make a cost-benefit decision just like women do. We are looking for the highest return on investment by the only value women have that we find interesting: femininity, nesting, care, and sex. After we make that cost calculation, we determine whether we have the potential to be allies, co-workers, and friends in a family. The reason good men ‘ghost’ or ditch women is because it takes a long time to get past the ‘attraction’ of sex and femininity before we understand the cost and friendship capacity of a woman. This is made worse because women both try to conform for the man that they want, and lie to themselves about themselves until they run out of energy to hide their nature from men. So again, this takes time. It can take weeks or months.

(b) women think BEING vs doing is an asset – it isn’t. It means you’re a cost. Just like men ‘being’ rather than doing is a cost. Men know what you look like when you come out of the shower. That is how we see you. Our ideal woman almost always looks like a woman’s ideal man: an athlete. Not a mannequin. We are not fooled by the makeup and the salon. All these tell us is that you try to take care of yourself, but you take it to costly and selfish and ‘unregulated’ extremes. This means you will take other things to unregulated extremes.

(c) Women manifest dysfunctional anti-social behavior by gossiping, drama creation, undermining, sexuality and promiscuity the way men do it by dominance expression, risk-taking, criminality, and violence. In science, this is called impulsivity and sensation seeking, and women seek it by manipulation and seduction the way men seek it by threats and force. There is no difference. We know this. We men like ‘crazy-chicks’ so to speak, like women like ‘bad-boys’. It’s the same thing. Just like women like Chads and Tyrones, like men like girls who advertise sexuality and availability. It’s the same thing.

So, you would expect to see men and women sort into groups that are mutually self-destructive. And that’s what we see. They do.

You would also expect to see women punch above their weight and fail. And you’d expect men to take advantage of women punching above their weight.

And the only people that are left out of this game are men who cannot find dates mates and wives amidst the noise created by these men and women while young, and women who cannot find men when they hit the wall.

Meanwhile the ‘silent majority’ of normal men and women pair off consistently and quietly, and build families, and wealth, while singles pay the high economic costs of single households, dating, and not investing.

There is so much more to cover. But what’s really going on in intersexual relations is the same thing that has happened in all of the rest of life: excess wealth, excess debt, produces search for signal value (status, emotion, entertainment) over investment and returns, because of the false promise of the end of scarcity (in our case, time.).

So the internet and internet dating have created an industry that maximizes the potential for false hope and false advertising in the short term – like massive credit card debt – at the expense of long-term investment.

This leads to no children, unhappy women who suffer but tolerate it because of female magical thinking, and male suicide because they don’t engage in magical thinking. Feels vs Reals in everything to do with the sexes. Simple version: you get what you pay for. 😉