The Warren Farrell protest stuff is interesting, but a couple of the key things I really like about this post are:


“I do not, as a rule, ask women out on dates. They ask me. My process is simply in theory, demanding in technique, but effective as a strategy.”


And from the comments:


“It takes some field practice to perfect and ultimately, you’ll adjust the technique to suit your own preferences and skills. The only tried and true rule is to never ask questions…any questions.”


~ by aneroidocean on 12/06/2012.

25 Responses to “”

  1. Wouldn’t that just contribute to turning gender roles around? I don’t think I’m understanding this completely.

  2. Sounds like most people understand that the one doing the asking is the one at risk. Gender norms or not, I bet that any feminist attempts to end this go as well as getting women into hard science fields

    • I guess I’ve read too many of the types of blogs that think women having power is a bad thing that will lead to the end of times. Of course, I would think the traditional man has the power in asking me out, or to get married, because I’d be a lump of melting jello if he doesn’t. Either side is at risk, of hearing a decline of offer or of not even getting an offer.

      • ” Either side is at risk, of hearing a decline of offer or of not even getting an offer.”

        That’s a rationalization hamster on the loose. Today’s society has shown that women can find someone if they put forth even a minimum effort on their looks; where as men have to have physical looks, personality, charisma, fashion sense, and a job AND then still go do the asking.

        What the author, and most women, are really sad about is the few men they’re attracted to and having sex with won’t commit. In which case I advise them to do two things:

        Up their attractiveness
        Lower their standards.

        Done. Problem solved.

        • I’m glad you came up with such an original solution but, it wouldn’t be in the best interests of Darwinism :P
          I’m not clear on hamster life, though I’m sure I’m a huge one, maybe you can point me in some direction that would help clear things up? I’m trying hard not to be defensive but at the same time, I want to get to know you. Crazy.

          • “it wouldn’t be in the best interests of Darwinism”

            Darwinism – to find the best mate one can get to pass on the most amount of genes you can

            1. Up attractiveness: Increases your own value to attract more/better mates

            2. Lower your standards: American women have unrealistic standards. Lowering them means you’ll actually find a mate you can keep rather than trying unsuccessfully to find a Brad Pitt clone.

            Rationalization Hamster: That animal in your brain that works so hard spinning its wheel to rationalize illogical or stupid behavior, or harsh truths about yourself and reality that you’d rather avoid.

      • You say that women are at risk of not getting an offer. I think this is complete crap because if they both have risk, that makes it even STRANGER that women wouldn’t do any of the asking (effectively they don’t). It would make sense that if they have no risk when men do the asking that they would never ask, and effectively this is what happens.

        Explain. Keep in mind that women tend to attempt to debate with emotion. You can’t debate with emotion, you can only argue. When you debate with emotion instead of logic, you succumb to the rationalization hamster, whether you’re female or male.

        • I’m trying, it’s just hard. It’s like if someone says Mexicans are all lazy drunkards who are good at agriculture. There’s no way I’m not getting emotional about it.

          I’ll offer my own view and not that of all women because I won’t pretend to know how everyone’s mind works. I won’t ask a guy out because when I have, I don’t know if he’s saying yes because my asking him out means he’s bound to get laid, or if it’s because he is interested in seeing me. I know that a guy is not going to ask me out if he isn’t somehow interested. He knows that if I say yes I want to screw him and I am likely interested in learning more about him. As time goes on, I start to question it, I ask myself if I’m the man of the relationship, friends have pointed out whether or not I’m the man of the relationship, and it’s disconcerting because I don’t know where to take things.

          As I do tend to be a little more traditional, I assume that a man knows where he stands in a relationship and when/if he’s ready to move forward, he’ll let me know, but I don’t know how to do that without doubting myself so much that I end up breaking up because I can’t deal with the pressure. That’s the beautiful difference I see between men and women, or at least between me and the men I’ve known. They can choose something and stay resolute where I will analyze new information as it comes in and be constantly changing my mind.

  3. That was in jest, but since you’d rather respond to that than the part where someone wants to get to know you:

    1. Up attractiveness – if what you say is true, that women don’t have to do much, then what is there to up? You up your kid’s attractiveness by finding a cuter mate, not by increasing your own value. You can’t do anything to change your genes, or what’s getting passed on on your side but you can try to make sure the other set is good stuff.

    2. Lower your standards – No one cares about getting married anymore. This is what’s going to happen if game flourishes: Men will only want to get laid because they’re convinced women don’t love them and never will and eventually they will spread some crazy conspiracy that women as a whole are out to get them and break their hearts. Men will get married if they think it’s worth it to buy the cow, but they will still always see women as a cow. You might have lower standards but maybe that’s why women have such high standards. You might want to consider getting in a woman’s head before explaining things from the man’s point of view. It’s not as easy as it seems. And if you aren’t wanting to do that, I don’t even like it, I would recommend to you that you don’t try to explain things you aren’t equipped to explain. I can walk around saying iPhones are stupid and anyone who buys them is an idiot but I’ve never used an iPhone, I just think they are overrated, and maybe I can’t afford one anyway. I should be happy with my phone and not care about the people who buy them.

    I hope anyone who throws that word around so casually understands that the hamster, as you describe it, might just be a part of the self-conscious. The part of a woman that a man can’t understand, especially if he sulks around the world assuming that all women have it made. We sit back thinking of all the ways we’re terrible and you could never want us and maybe you do want us, all those stupid turns trying to analyze situations to tell us whether or not you’re interested and whether or not we’re validly angry but we can’t be because then we’re naggy and we don’t want to be anything you don’t want, even if we pretend you don’t matter, which is the only reason negs work.

    Anything I say would be from my hamster, then, if that’s how you define it because what you’re saying is that if I don’t accept something that a man would disagree with, if I rationalize why it’s okay for me to be who I am, that I am wrong and that it’s just a stupid hamster. It’s not my individual way of processing information, it’s a woman thing and women do stupid things and this is how men should explain it. Not that she has an internal struggle going on, only handling it in the way a woman would instead of the way a man would, she is just an idiot because she is a woman.

    I am not a feminist. Just saying.

    • I meant for that to be a reply…*smf at wordpress.

    • Your sarcasm didn’t come off via text, so it got a serious response.

      “Not that she has an internal struggle going on, only handling it in the way a woman would instead of the way a man would”

      No internal struggle – its just the way women see the world.

      • Why would you say that?

        • Because they’ve shown it to be true.

          • Can you link me to those studies? Or a book? Or some researcher I can email? I’m not being sarcastic, I am always up to proving theories on women being no deeper than a fish tank. Then I could just walk around being free of care because it’s natural.

            • Since the original post included a mention to Dr. Warren Farrell, this would be an appropriately themed reading suggestion:


              Keep in mind that it’s aim isn’t to show how women or men are different, but it does a decent job explaining many of the differences from the statistical point of view. I’m sure Leap of a Beta can direct you to more. If you have a strong stomache and open mind, the below site regularly posts research that supports other theories in the red pill community/manospher/pua community whatever you want to call it:


              • I can’t do heartiste or roosh or whatever. You, Yohami, and the like are great, maybe for what you don’t say, but I don’t want to be convinced that I’m a sub human hamster. I decide to give up lest I should have heart attack or kill myself for not being worthy of getting played.

                • That’s fine. Go pick up a Dr. Warren Farrell book. He’s got a great way of explaining himself that should be plenty palatable to you. He is the only man ever elected (3 times) to the board of the National Organization for Women. That is, until their inequal nature came to the forefront for him:

                  “In a 1997 interview, Farrell stated:
                  Everything went well until the mid-seventies when NOW came out against the presumption of joint custody [of children following divorces]. I couldn’t believe the people I thought were pioneers in equality were saying that women should have the first option to have children or not to have children–that children should not have equal rights to their dad.”

                • Thanks for the suggestion, luckily my school’s library has an e-copy of the book. It’s proving insightful :)

                • And you missed something key. Leap of a Beta was explaining that your arguments were illogical. When you argue with emotion or illogically, you are using your rationalization hamster. That doesn’t mean YOU are subhuman or that he’s calling you only as bright as a hamster. You’re projecting a lot of stuff onto Leap.

                • There is no win here and that is why this isn’t a debate or an argument. This is what I mean, it’s just an exchange of perspective and that’s all it can be. There are no cold facts when dealing with societal issues. A man is always going to be able to call out the hamster thing because it is something he doesn’t understand, which is neither bad nor good but just is. I don’t pretend to understand, and maybe this is why it’s good to stay out of a woman’s frame, because you get bitter and cold and make women some enemy, something you don’t even recognize you put as lower than yourself. When you aim to manipulate a person, that’s what you’re thinking, that they’re lower than you, or at least that’s how it feels once you recognize you’re being manipulated.

                • It’s absolutely a debate. If you can’t back up your position with some logic, some research, etc… (just like you asked for earlier when asking about his statement) then your comment will seen as merely verbal diarrhea. You obviously understand logic because you asked him to back up his statement with research. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. If I reacted to you and called you a bitch and told you that nobody needed research, I’d be responding emotionally. It has nothing to do with perspective, it has to do with being illogical or logical. You can’t rationalize something away just because you don’t like it or it doesn’t make you feel good. That’s the problem many women face. They want to have their cake and eat it too. This puts men in a lower position as they’ve never been able to do this.

                • Then, I don’t understand what we’re debating. I know that’s ridiculous but, I think I’m chasing my own tail now.

                • And, I didn’t mean to be bitchy, I really am just interested in reading about this stuff. Sorry.

                • No worries. Understand that if I’m direct, I’m not trying to hurt you, but I am trying to be clear.

                • Lol, I feel like I should formally concede, even though this is one point and not the discussion. Is this the red pill thing? Walking around thinking everything is the game matrix?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: