Tribes Yareally

11/24/2019 Tribes
MENU
Search
M AY 1 5 , 2 0 1 6  BY ROLLO TOMASSI SEARCH

Search …
Tribes
The Rational Male
The Rational Male -

Positive Masculinity
by Rollo Tomassi
The Rational Male –

Preventive Medicine
by Rollo Tomassi
The Rational Male

by Rollo Tomassi
I received this email some time ago, but I felt it needed

Recent Posts
some serious consideration to give the concept the justice
it deserved. Unconscious Contempt
Rollo — You’ve been a major help to my An Essay for Women

understanding the underlying dynamics between men The Truth About Standards
and women. I’ve observed them in bits and pieces
over the years but never really understood the whys Are Men Adapting to the New
behind them or how to turn them in our favor. Sexual Marketplace?
It seems like one mid-term focus you have is on
Unmarriageable
male-male dynamics, specifically fathers and sons.
But I also wonder whether you’d consider writing
more about bonding and support between men and
The Rational Male
how those relationships can anchor men’s lives at a
Podcast
time when male relationships are regarded with
skepticism by larger society. Lately it’s struck me that
men tend to innately trust the men they know and
distrust those they don’t (and that it’s often the
reverse for women). This inclines us to believe
women when they decry the “assholes” who have
mistreated them in the past while women are
empathetic and credulous toward women whose
https://therationalmale.com/2016/05/15/tribes/comment-page-5/#comments 1/67
11/24/2019 Tribes
character they don’t know and whom they’ve never

met.
Many of us out here are lacking strong male
relationships, and our small social circles translate
to fewer men we innately trust and more men we
innately don’t. Women seem to regard male
friendships as a luxury at best–we should be focusing
on career, family, and her needs–while women’s
friendships are seen as a lifeline in their crazy, have-
it-all world. Indeed, a man discouraging his SO’s
friendships is widely seen as a sign of emotional
abuse, whereas the reverse is “working on the
relationship.”
This strikes me as a deep but largely untapped Red
Pill well and could provide essential guidance for
men looking to live a proud, constructive Red Pill life
however women and children might fit into it. I’d
definitely welcome your insights in future entries.
Look forward to every post!
Back in February Roosh proposed (and attempted to

initiate) a worldwide event that would be a sort of
‘gathering of the tribes’ with the intent of having men get
together in small local gatherings to “just have a beer and
talk amongst like-minded men.” My impression of the real
intent of in putting this together notwithstanding, I didn’t
think it was a bad idea. However, the problem this kind of
‘tribes meeting’ suffers from is that it’s entirely contrived
to put unfamiliar men together for no other purpose than to
“have a beer and talk.” The problem with unfamiliar men
coming together simply to meet and relate is a noble goal,
however, the fundamental ways men communicate
naturally makes the function of this gathering seem strange
to men.
Women talk, men Do.
The best male friends I have share one or more

common interests with me – a sport, a hobby, music,
art, fishing, lifting, golf, etc. – and the best
conversations I can remember with these friends
occurred while we were engaged in some particular
activity or event. Even just moving a friend into his
new house; it’s about accomplishing something
together and in that time relating about shit. When I
lived in Florida some of the best conversations I had
with my studio guys were during some project we
had to collaborate on for a week or two.
Women, make time with the express purpose of
talking between friends. Over coffee perhaps, but the
act of communication is more important than the
event or activity. Even a ‘stitch-and-bitch’ is simply Categories
an organized excuse to get together and relate. For
women, communication is about context. They are Alpha
rewarded by how that communication makes them
Biomechanics
feel. For Men communication is about content and
they are rewarded by the interchange of information Case Studies
and ideas.
Communication
11/24/2019 Tribes
[…]From an evolutionary perspective, it’s likely that Events

our hunter-gatherer tribal roles had a hand in men
and women’s communication differences. Men went Foundations
to hunt together and practiced the coordinated
Game
actions for a cooperative goal. Bringing down a prey
animal would have been a very information-crucial Hypergamy
effort; in fact the earliest cave paintings were
essentially records of a successful hunt and Idealizations
instructions on how to do it. Early men’s
Inter-gender Communication
communication would necessarily have been a
content driven discourse or the tribe didn’t eat. Interviews
Similarly women’s communications would’ve been
during gathering efforts and childcare. It would Iron Rules
stand to reason that due to women’s more collectivist
Live Appearances
roles they would evolve to be more intuitive, and
context oriented, rather than objective oriented. A Love
common recognition in the manosphere is women’s
predisposition toward collectivism and/or a more Operative Social Conventions
socialist bent to thinking about resource distribution.
Parenting
Whereas men tend to distribute rewards and
resources primarily on merit, women have a Plate Theory
tendency to spread resources collectively irrespective
of merit. Again this predisposition is likely due to Positive Masculinity
how women’s ‘hard-wiring’ evolved as part of the Psychology
circumstances of their tribal roles.
Relationship Game
From this perspective it’s a fairly easy follow to see how
Romance
the tendency of men to distrust unfamiliar (out-group) men
might be a response to a survival threat whereas women’s Series
implicit trust of any member of the ‘sisterhood’ would be a
Sexual Market Value
species-survival benefit to the sex that requires the most
parental investment and mutual support. Social Conventions
The 21 Conventions
Divide & Conquer
The Best of The Rational
In our post-masculine, feminine-primary social order it Male
doesn’t take a Red Pill Lens to observe the many examples
The Feminine Imperative
of how the Feminine Imperative goes to great lengths to
destroy the intrasexual ‘tribalism’ of men. Since the time The Matrix
of the Sexual Revolution the social press of equalism has
The Red Pill
attempted to force a commonly accepted unisex
expectation upon men to socialize and interact among Uncategorized
themselves as women do.
Unplugging
The duplicity in this striving towards “equality” is, of

course, the same we find in all of the socialization efforts
Blogroll
of egalitarian equalism; demasculinizing men in the name
of equality. A recent, rather glaring, example of this social Aaron Clarey
push can be found (where else?) at Harvard University
where more than 200 female students demonstrated Alan Roger Currie
against a new policy to discourage participation in single-
Alpha Game Plan
gender clubs at the school. You see, women were very
supportive of the breaking of gender barriers when it Appearance of Power
meant that men could no longer discriminate in male-
Black Label Logic
exclusive (typically male-space) organizations, but when
that same equalist metric was applied to women’s Chateau Heartiste
exclusive organizations, then the cries were accusations of
Dalrock
11/24/2019 Tribes
insensitivity and the banners read “Women’s Groups Keep Dean Abbott
Women Safe.”
Divorced After 50
That’s a pretty fresh incident that outlines the dynamic, but Donalgraeme
it’s important to understand the underlying intent of the
“fine for me, but not for thee” duplicity here. That intent is Ed Latimore
to divide and control men’s communication by expecting
Goldmund Unleashed
them to communicate as women do, and ideally to do so
on their own accord by conditioning them to accept Hypergamy Doesn't Care
women’s communication means as the normatively correct
Krauser
way to communicate. As I’ve mentioned before, the most
effective social conventions are the ones in which the Ladder Theory
participants willingly take part in and willingly encourage
others to believe is correct. Manosphere Appendix of
Acronyms
Tribes vs. The Sisterhood Masculine Style
Novaseeker's Veritas Lounge

Because men have such varied interests, passions and
endeavors based on them it’s easy to see how men On the Rock
compartmentalize themselves into various sub-tribes.
Playing the Devil's Advocate
Whether it’s team sports (almost always a male-oriented
endeavor), cooperative enterprises, cooperative forms of Psychology of Attraction
art (rock bands have almost always been male space) or PodCast
just hobbies men share, it is a natural progression for men
to form sub-tribes within the larger whole of conventional Research of Martie Haselton
masculinity. Richard Cooper's Video
Channel
Because of men’s’ outward reaching approach to
SoSuave Forum
interacting with the world around him, there’s really no
unitary male tribe in the same fashion that the collective StonePT
‘Sisterhood’ of women represents. One of the primary
strengths of the Feminine Imperative has been its unitary The DJ Bible
tribalism among women. We can see this evidenced in The Real Christian McQueen
how saturated the Feminine Imperative has become into
mainstream society and how it’s embedded itself into what Yohami
would otherwise be diametrically opposed factions among
women. Political, socioeconomic and religious affiliations
of women (various sub-tribes) all become secondary to the The Books
interests of ‘womankind’ when embracing the collective
The Rational Male
benefits of being women and leveraging both their victim
and protected statuses.
Thus, we see no cognitive dissonance when women

simultaneously embrace a hostile opposition to one faction
while still retaining the benefits that faction might offer to
the larger whole of the Sisterhood. The Sisterhood is
unitary first and then it is broken down into sub-tribes.
Family, work, interests, political / religious
compartmentalizations become sublimated to fostering the
collective benefits of womankind.
While I can speculatively understand the socio-

evolutionary underpinnings of how this psychological
Archives
dynamic came to be, I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out just
how effective this unitary collectiveness has been in Select Month
shaping society towards a social ideal that supports an
unfettered drive towards women’s gender-coded need to
11/24/2019 Tribes
optimize Hypergamy. This unitary, gender-primary Recent Comments

tribalism has been (and is) the key to women’s unilateral
social power – and even in social environments where
Bob on
women still suffer oppression, the Sisterhood will exercise Unmarriageable
this gender-tribalism.
Yollo Comanche on
Unconscious Contempt
Threat Assessments
weminuche45 on
Asserting any semblance of a unitary male tribalism is a
Sentient on
direct threat to the Feminine Imperative. In The Threat I Unconscious Contempt
began the essay with this summation:
foxguy on
Nothing is more threatening yet simultaneously
attractive to a woman than a man who is aware of
his own value to women. Follow me on Twitter
When I wrote this essay I did so from the perspective of Tweets by @RationalMale
women feeling vulnerable about interacting intimately
Rollo Tomassi
with men who understood their own value to women and Retweeted
also understood how to leverage it. One of the reasons Rational Male Quotes
Game is so vilified, ridiculed and disqualified by the @Rational_Quotes
"The lean-in is a
Sisterhood is because it puts this understanding into physical display that
practice with women and, in theory, removes women from illustrates how a man’s
subconscious has
the optimization of Hypergamy. Red Pill awareness and decided that his
Game lessens women’s control in that equation, which is woman’s Frame is the
dominant one in the
sexy from the standpoint of dealing with a self-aware high
relationship. He feels
SMV man, but also threatening from the perspective that the compulsion to put
her security depends on him acquiescing to her Frame and himself into her space
as his natural impulse."
control. - Rational Male
Up to this point, Game has represented an individualized 53m
threat to women’s Hypergamous control, but there has

Rollo Tomassi
always been a larger majority of men (Betas) who’ve been Retweeted
easily kept ignorant of their true potential for control. Rational Male Quotes
@Rational_Quotes
However, on a larger social landscape, the Feminine
"A l i i f l k
Imperative understands the risks involved in men forming
a unitary tribe – a Brotherhood – based solely on
benefitting and empowering men. The manosphere, while Subscribe to Rational
Male
still effectively a collection of sub-tribes, represents a
threat to the imperative because its base purpose is making Enter your email address to
men aware of their true state in a feminine-centric social subscribe
order. Email Address
SUBSCRIBE
As such, any attempt to create male-specific, male-
empowering organizations is made socially synonymous
with either misogyny (hate) or homosexuality (shame).
Follow The Rational
Ironically, the shame associated with homosexuality that a Male
fem-centric society would otherwise rail against becomes
an effective form of intra-gender shame when it’s applied
to heterosexual collectives of men. Even suggestions of
male-centered tribalism are attached with homosexual
suspicions, and these come from within the collectives of
men themselves.
11/24/2019 Tribes
The above picture is from an “academic” conference

(class?) Mediated Feminisms: Activism and Resistance to
Gender and Sexual Violence in the Digital Age held at
UCL in London. There’s quite a bit more to this than just
collecting and codifying the sub-tribes of the manosphere,
more can be found here.
Now, granted, this conference is replete with all of the

uninformed (not to mention willful ignorance) concern to
be expected of contemporary feminists, but this does serve
as a current example of how men organizing for the
exclusive benefit of men is not just equated with
misogyny, but potential violence. As a unitary collective of
men, the manosphere terrifies the Feminine Imperative.
That fear, however, doesn’t stem from any real prospective
violence, but the potential for a larger ‘awareness’ in men
of their own conditions and the roles they are expected to
play to perpetuate a feminine-centric social order. They
fear to lose the control that the ‘socially responsible’
ignorance of men provides them with.
Men’s predisposition to form sub-tribes and intrasexual

competition (“lets you and him fight”) has always been a
means of covert control by women, but even still the
Feminine Imperative must insert its influence and
oversight into those male spaces to make use of
them. Thus, by assuring that feminine primacy is equated
with the idea of inclusive equalism, all Male Space is
effectively required to be “unisex space” while all-female
sub-tribes must remain exclusively female. For an easy
example of this, compare and contrast the reactions to
Harvard’s unisex institution of campus club equalism to
the worldwide reactions to, and preemption of, the “Tribe”
meetings only attempted to be organized by Return of
Kings in February.
Making Men
By controlling men’s intrasex communications with each

other the Feminine Imperative can limit men’s unified,
collective, understanding of masculinity and male
experiences. Feminine-primary society hates and is
terrified of men defining and asserting masculinity for
themselves (to the point of typifying it as potentially
11/24/2019 Tribes
violent), but as connectivity progresses we will see a more

concentrated effort to lock down the narrative and the
means of men communicating male experiences.
I’ve detailed in many prior posts how the imperative has

deliberately misdirected and confused men about a unified
definition of masculinity. That confusion is designed to
keep men guessing and doubting about their “security in
their manhood” while asserting that the feminine-correct
definition is the only legitimate definition of healthy, ‘non-
toxic’, masculinity. This deliberate obfuscation and
ambiguity about what amounts to ‘authentic masculinity’
is another means of controlling men’s awareness of their
true masculine potential and value – a potential that they
rightly fear will mean acquiescing to men’s power over
their Hypergamous social and personal control. Anything
less than a definition of masculinity that fosters female
primacy and fempowerment is labeled “toxic masculinity”
– literally and figuratively poisonous.
This is the real, operative reason behind the obsessive,

often self-contradicting, need for control of male space by
the Feminine Imperative. Oversight and infiltration of
male sub-tribes and instituting a culture of self-policing of
the narrative within those sub-tribes maintains a feminine-
primary social order.
Building Better Betas
Since the time in which western(izing) societies shifted to

unfettering Hypergamy on a social scale there has been
various efforts to demasculinize – if not outright feminize
– the larger majority of men. Today we’re seeing the
results of, and still persistent efforts of this in much starker
contrast as transgenderism and the social embrace of
foisting gender-loathing on boys becomes
institutionalized. A deliberate promotion of a social
constructivist narrative about gender identity and the very
early age at which children can “choose” a gender for
themselves is beginning to be more and more reinforced
in our present feminine-primary social order.
As a result of this, and likely into our near future, today’s

men are conditioned to feel uncomfortable being “men”.
That discomfort is a direct result of the ambiguity and
misguidance about conventional masculinity the
imperative has fostered in men when they were boys. This
feminization creates a gender loathing, but that loathing
comes as the result of an internal conflict between the
feminine-correct “non-toxic” understanding of what
masculinity ought to be and the conventional aspects of
masculinity that men need to express as a result of their
biology and birthright.
Effectively, this confusion has the purpose of creating

discomfort in men among all-male sub-tribes. These
masculine-confused men have difficulty with intersocial
11/24/2019 Tribes
communication within the sub-tribes they’re supposed to

have some sort of kin or in-group affiliation with. Even
the concept of “male bonding” has become a point of
ridicule (something typical of male buffoons) or
suspiciously homosexual , so, combined with the feminine
identification most of these men default to, today’s
“mangina” typically has more female friends and feels
more comfortable communicating as women
communicate. These men have been effectively
conditioned to believe or feel that male interaction or
organization is inherently wrong, uncomfortable or
contrived, possibly even threatening if the organizing
requires physical effort. Consequently, interacting as a
male becomes ridiculous or superficial.
Pushing Back
What then is to be done about this conditioning? For all

the efforts to destroy or regulate male tribalism, the
Feminine Imperative still runs up against men’s evolved
predispositions to interact with the outside world instead
of fixating on the inside world of women. Below I’ve
pieced together some actionable ideas that might help men
come to a better, unitary way of fostering the male
tribalism the Feminine Imperative would see destroyed or
used as a tool of soci0-sexual control:
While it is vitally important to maintain a male-

specific mental point of origin, together men need a
center point of action. Women talk, men do. Men
need a common purpose in which the tribe can
focus its efforts on. Men need to build, coordinate,
win, compete and problem solve amongst
themselves. The ‘purpose’ of a tribe can’t simply be
one of getting together as like-minded men; in fact,
groups with such a declared purpose are often
designed to be the most conciliatory and
accommodating of the Feminine Imperative. Men
require a common, passionate purpose to unite for.
Understand and accept that men will naturally form

male hierarchies in virtually every context if that
tribe is truly male-exclusive. There will be a
reflexive resistance to this, but understand that the
discomfort in acknowledging male hierarchies
stems from the Feminine Imperative’s want to make
any male authority a toxic form of masculinity.
Contrary to feminine conditioning male hierarchies
are not necessarily based on Dark Triad
manipulations. That is the ‘fem-think’ – any male
created hierarchy of authority is by definition evil
Patriarchy.
11/24/2019 Tribes
Recognize existing male sub-tribes for what they

are, but do so without labeling them as such. Don’t
talk about Fight Club, do Fight Club. As with most
other aspects of Red Pill aware Game, it is always
better to demonstrate rather than explicate. There
will always be an observer effect in place when you
call a male group a “male group”. That tribe must
exist for a passionate reason other than the express
idea that it exists to be about men meeting up.
Every sub-tribe I belong to, every collective interest
I share with other men, even the instantly forming
ones that arise from an immediate common need or
function, all exist apart from “being” about men
coming together.Worldwide “tribe” day failed much
for the same reasons an organization like the Good
Men Project fails – they are publicized as a
gathering of men just “being” men.
Push back on the invasion of male space by being

uncompromising in what you do and organize with
passion. Make no concessions for women in any all-
male space you create or join. There will always be
a want to accommodate women and/or the fears of
not being accommodating of feminine-primary
mindsets within that all-male purview. Often this
will come in subtle forms of anonymous White
Knighting or reservations about a particular passion
due to other men’s Blue Pill conditioning to always
consider the feminine before considerations of
themselves or the tribe. It is vitally important to the
tribe to quash those sympathies and compromising
attitudes as these are exactly the designs of the
Feminine Imperative to destroy a tribe from
within.Make no concessions for competency of
women within the tribe if you find yourself in a
unisex tribal situation. Even the U.S. military is
guilty of reducing combat service requirements for
women as recently as this month. If you are a father
or you find yourself in a role of mentoring boys or
young men it is imperative that you instill this no-
compromise attitude in them and the organizations
that they create themselves.
The primary Red Pill / Game tenets that you’ve

learned with respect to women are entirely
applicable in a larger scope when it comes to
resisting the influences of the Feminine Imperative.
Frame and a return to a collectively male-exclusive
Mental Point of Origin are two of the primary tenets
to apply to non-intimate applications of resistance
in terms of aspects of society. Observations and the
Red Pill Lens should inform your interactions with
women and men on a social scale.
11/24/2019 Tribes
Finally, I want to close by restating that my approach to

resisting the influences of the Feminine Imperative on a
meta-social scale is the same bottom-up approach I used
with unplugging men from their Blue Pill doldrums. Once
men have taken the first steps in Red Pill awareness this
new perspective has a tendency to expound into greater
social understandings and a want for applications beyond
hooking up with desirable women. That Red Pill
awareness becomes a way of life, but moreover, it should
inform us as men, as tribes, about how best to maintain
ourselves as masculine-primary individuals and
organizations.
Share this:
 Share
Like this:
Like
15 bloggers like this.
Related
Balancing Act The Rational Male – Estrus

June 25, 2014 Preventive Medicine December 17, 2014
In "Biomechanics" March 9, 2015 In "Alpha"
In "Foundations"
 Posted in Foundations, Hypergamy, Positive Masculinity, The

Feminine Imperative, The Red Pill, Unplugging
 Tags Alpha Fucks, Beta Bucks, beta guy, blue pill, dread game,
equalism, feminine imperative, feminized men, gender relations,
hypergamy, intergender relations, male perspective, male space, male
tribes, manosphere, physical attractiveness, rational male, rational
male year one, rationalmale, red pill, Rollo Tomassi, rollo tomassi the
rational male blog, sexual market value, SMV, social conventions, the
rational male, therationalmale, tribalism, white knights, women
 Previous Post - Good Girls, Bad Girls

 Next Post - Two Guitars
Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational
Male, Preventive Medicine
View all posts by Rollo Tomassi
Connect with
Leave a Reply
Enter your comment here...
11/24/2019 Tribes
 Subscribe 
redlight  OF F LI N E  
Being fat is tingle alpha
Guest you are drawing the wrong conclusions from the research
papers (or if you have chosen to ignore them, from social
media)
 Loading...
 0   3 years ago
kfg  OFF LI NE  
Redlight:
Guest If I need somebody to fight for my life, I’m going with this
guy:
http://jasonferruggia.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/US-
Olympic-gymnastics-trials_2_1.jpg
Not this guy:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-
quWjjxngHSM/Txyoj6tSZKI/AAAAAAAABWA/sW3y5Q
uVhv8/s1600/Ronnie%2BColeman%2B43.jpg
There is downward selection pressure on size as well.
 Loading...
http://fathersmanifesto.net/gaussianheightmenwomen.png
Guest Standard deviation is 2.9.
 Loading...
scray  OF F LI N E  
@rollo
Guest “And I posted you over 20 scientifically peer reviewed

studies and experiments, one a direct rebuttal to the
hamfisted attempt to discredit that research, by only one of
the dozens of top researchers doing them for over 20 years.
Your response: we can’t KNOW anything.”
the meta-analysis covered 45 PUBLISHED studies so……

your ’20’ peer reviewed studies is w/e and likely come from
the same data set.
and for whatever reason you left out the rebuttal to the
rebuttal….
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276528210_Reply
_to_Gangestad%27s_2015_Comment_on_Wood_Kressel_J
oshi_and_Louie_2014
and one of the papers you linked to tacitly acknowledges

one of the underlying reasons pointed out by Wood for
inconsistent SLOPPY results — the methods of measuring
a woman’s place in her cycle.
my response wasn’t that we can’t know anything

my response was that as a matter of scientific truth, when
there’s a lot of debate in a field, it’s safe to say that the
matter being debated is not yet known.
‘So we must know something right? Is there any

evolutionary theory you credit or believe is valid?
‘
ya.
i’ve used basic 101 evolutionary principles to actually
11/24/2019 Tribes
discredit a lot of what you say we ‘know’ wrt to looks, for

example…high genetic variance in looks counting strongly
against any particular ‘look’ being strongly selected for.
that’s BASIC evolutionary theory.
seems like there’s less variance wrt to test levels rising after
successful competition in men.
seems like there’s less variance wrt to T levels remaining

higher after a successful competition and staying that way
relative to those who lost a competition up until the next
competition.
these seem like responses and reactions that are pretty much
common to all men….
you win = higher t = higher social status behavior
doesn’t seem like there’s a ton of variance wrt that general

process, which means that those behaviors and that
feedback loop was probably selected for. but hey maybe
not! i’m not super attached to what is at this point
speculative.
i don’t think you grok how damaging this stuff can be to

people just getting in the game, esp when it’s unproven. this
is the kind of shit that chews people up and sends them to
sluthate or turns them into an eliot roger, man….
@blax
“scray is pro life experience to the point where it will

disprove some of the science.
”
nope.
i’m about real science and what real science is….
if your shit is rock solid and a matter of scientific fact, then

the studies will all support it. they don’t AINEC with this
shit.
if you want to just talk about shit you think may be true,
fine, but it has about as much weight as my personal life
experience.
the only stuff that has higher weight would be REAL

science.
” . . . doesn’t seem like there’s a ton of variance wrt that

general process, which means that those behaviors and that
Guest
feedback loop was probably selected for.”
Winning and phenotype are not independent variables.
 Loading...
@kfg
Guest “Winning and phenotype are not independent variables.”
cool, never said that….
different environments produce winning phenotypes which

would make the feedback loop very useful and allow the
species to occupy many different niches…
and i get that you have your schtick but
https://zippy.gfycat.com/RespectfulHorribleCicada.mp4
 Loading...
11/24/2019 Tribes
“different environments
produce winning phenotypes
which would make the feedback loop very useful and allow
the species to occupy many different niches…”
Guest
We have come to own the macro world.
 Loading...
@kfg
Guest “We have come to own the macro world.”
yes….
….in many different ways in many different places
 Loading...
keyser Soze  OFF LI NE  
@Scary,
You will never know how it feels to be 6’2 and get checked
Guest
out when you enter any space.
You will never experience what is it like to get approached
by women.
You will never understand why men with good genetic (and
game) don’t bother to approach.
A Hb9s can never understood being in the shoes of a HB 5.
Sorry body, we weren’t created equal.

That’s why not every man can become
Einstein.
 Loading...
Rollo Tomassi  OF FL I N E  
Oh look, some new infield videos to add to the evolutionary

debate:
Author
https://sirtyrionlannister.wordpress.com/2014/10/24/women
-appraise-male-attractiveness-in-a-glance/
 Loading...
By the way Rollo, how many women you had biting on

your chin (or grabbing your jaws).
Guest
 Loading...
Mr. C  OF F LI NE  
Some patients ‘will never be happy’….
Guest http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-17/labiaplasty-
patients-prompted-by-negative-comments-study/7418188
 Loading...
11/24/2019 Tribes
@kfg
YaReally  OF FL I N E  
“I have not seen
anyone here claim that game doesn’t work.”
No one is saying that anyone here is saying game “doesn’t

Guest
work”. This hasn’t been about “does game work” in 10+
pages. This is about “muscles = attractive”
@Blaximus
“is there a significant difference in picking up girls/women
at a bar, club or function, and just picking them up
wherever they happen to be?”
In terms of what you trigger, no. The same SUBCOM

triggers (confidence, assuming attraction, preselection,
social proof, leading, good eye-contact, etc) are all the
same.
But there are differences mainly in the external situation

and for the guy himself, these are the objective good/bad
points:
– there’s a lot of stuff that makes it easier like no loud

music, no competition, she’s not really EXPECTING to get
hit on so she generally won’t have a bitch shield up, it’s a
bit of a “romantic movie moment” to her to meet a guy
during the day, she doesn’t have friends around to worry
about judging her and trigger ASD, you can get away with
being a lot less sexual, etc All of that stuff helps make it
easier
– the problems are on the guy’s end mainly…who’s often

going to feel a lot more anxiety when he doesn’t have liquid
courage to rely on, he’s in an environment that ISN’T
“social by default” (people go to a bar EXPECTING to
interact with other people, VS approaching a girl who’s on a
walk with her mom or some shit) so he feels less like he has
permission to be loud/expressive and less entitled to hit on
her, he feels that because it’s daytime he can’t say or do
sexual things so he’ll often put himself into an asexual
friend zone category, he thinks it’s “impossible” to fuck a
girl off a daygame approach so he ejects from girls that
would’ve fucked him and just gets their phone number or
whatever instead, there’s less hot girls walking around
during the day in most cities that aren’t New York or Vegas
etc so he has more trouble keeping social momentum going
since he can spend 5-20 minutes looking for a new girl to
talk to and get inside his head during that time, because the
girl isn’t dressed as sexual he treats her as more of a “good
girl” when she’s not ACTUALLY a “good girl”, etc
– Girls at the bar generally have bitch shields up because

they KNOW they’re going to get approached by
unattractive men (they’ll often reject guys without even
looking at them because they get into a “NOPE JUST NO
ONE TALK TO US WE’RE TRYING TO GET TO THE
BATHROOM” zone if they get hit on by enough lame guys
and are drunk etc) and they’re done up hotter so they FEEL
higher on the SMV chart and act as such. Booze can fuck
the girl’s ability to comprehend what you’re saying up
(which is annoying to me because I spit a lot of verbals
Russell Brand style, I stick to the generally sober girls
personally). There’s way more environmental competition
for her attention, like the DJ playing her and her GFs’
favorite song and they drag her off to the dance floor, guys
get more ballsy when they get liquid courage in them so
you have more AMOG competition to deal with, the
volume of the music can be hard to communicate over
which makes it tougher for guys who haven’t gotten to the
point where they can rely on their nonverbal subcomms,
girls get barraged with texts/matches from their orbiters,
exes, new guys on dating sites, other guys from last
weekend or earlier in the night etc etc because everyone is
out and looking for booty calls, drama gets way
overexaggerated in bar environments (the thing that
annoyed that girl wouldn’t really bother her during the day
but drunk in a club she’s literally in tears crying about it
lol), if you’re leaving the bar at last call with the girl you’re
going to have a bunch of orbiters/AMOGs to deal with,
she’s rarely out by just herself so you’re probably going to
have to engage a group of girls or a mixed set (possibly
with orbiters) and all the drama etc that comes with that
11/24/2019 Tribes
(there are also lots of GOOD sides to doing nightgame, like

the reward is girls done up hotter on your dick, it’s easier to
build preselection/social proof in an enclosed environment
with tons of people around, you can gain a ton of reference
experiences in a short time VS walking around all day
looking for decent girls to open, etc)
So the actual attraction triggers pickup stuff is exactly the

same. But the circumstances/environment can play havoc
with triggering those switches in a nightclub.
But on top of that it the GUY’S internals are different too:

If you BELIEVE that girls at the bar are all sluts that are
easy to fuck, what do you think that does to your
subcomms? You’re going to be much less hesitant to
approach them, you’re going to assume attraction, you’re
going to assume success, you’re going to be more sexual
and more sexually aggressive/dominant/leading, you’re
going to be more likely to try to pull the trigger and make
out or pull them from the bar, you’re EXPECTING other
guys to get out of your way and not be competition, etc etc
Whereas a guy who believes that girls at the bar are going
to be hard to get because he’s intimidated or whatever, is
going to be more hesitant to approach, he’s going to assume
he won’t have attraction, he’s going to be less sexual, he’s
going to be less likely to pull the trigger, he’s going to
EXPECT more competition and put more value on other
guys (because someone told him looks matter) etc
That’s why I send guys to Chaturbate, where normal

average everyday girls like the girls you see all around you,
are shoving giant dildos up their ass and riding crazy
vibrator machines and shit. To help guys understand that
girls LOVE sex/masturbation/orgasms and WANT to fuck,
to help them improve their subcomms and pull the trigger
when they’re infield, whether it’s daygame or nightgame.
You, Blaximus, would probably do just fine in either

environment because you have solid internals/subcomms
and views of women and sexuality.
“So when you guys ” go out “, is it exclusively bars and

clubs?”
No we sarge everywhere. What scray means when he says

you need to be anonymous to sarge is that it helps for
legitimate cold approach sarging for the purpose of
increasing your skill level…if you walk into a bar where
everyone already knows you and you know all the girls,
you’re doing Warm Approaches not Cold Approaches
because your value is already starting at some high level to
the girl and you already have social proof and comfort etc
so while you still end up flipping the same triggers to get
her sexually attracted and get the lay, a lot more of the work
is already done for you so you don’t get as much practice at
the actual “this girl has no idea who I am and I have no
social proof or anything to rely on to make this easier”
hardcore Cold Approach skills.
Most Naturals run their game at venues they go to regularly

and they use a ton of social proof (knowing the staff,
knowing other male and female customers, etc) to raise
their value and then open a girl who’s seen all that and is
radiating green light IOI’s at them and call that “gaming
her” when really they’re doing a very Warm Approach, not
an actual Cold Approach, and a lot of those exact same
Naturals will freeze up completely if you put them in an
environment where they don’t know anyone and they’ve
never been there before and don’t feel comfortable etc,
because you’ve taken away all their crutches.
ESPECIALLY if you also take away booze and they’re used
to drinking too.
But no you can do pickup literally anywhere at any time.

We have guys going up to families in restaurants in the
daytime to try to pick up the daughter and shit lol
Personally I prefer to stick to the nightlife because I
ENJOY the nightlife scene in general, it’s fun to me and I
like girls in dresses strutting around more than girls in
hoodies with no makeup during the day and I LIKE the
competition etc But if I become sick of the bar scene down
the road, I’ll switch to doing daygame, and when I get sick
11/24/2019 Tribes
of that and am an old fucker, I’ll just do social circle game

because it’s the easiest.
“Even that shit is risky… ask Siegfried and Roy.”
That’s kind of the point of the discussion. What’s the

difference between when those guys get mauled and when
this chick doesn’t? If this chick gets mauled, what will be
the differences in her behavior that caused that? Why will
those cheetahs eat you and me but aren’t eating her? Is it
just magically random? No. Do we just ignore what she’s
doing (and what countless other “animal whisperers” do)?
No, that’s not really science.
So we have to drill deeper and look at “why does THIS

person trigger the hardwired biological response in the
animal to kill them while this other person (or the same
person moments ago) doesn’t?” and that’s where we get
into subcomms and the whole “if you run from the animal
it’s going to tackle your ass just because you’re ACTING
like prey (subcomms), whereas if you step toward it it
doesn’t know what to do because everything is scared of it
and it assumes from your subcomms of not being scared
that there’s a reason you’re not scared and it leaves you
alone or even runs away”.
And then we learn how to teach people to have those better

subcomms, which is all that girl and these guys are doing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeeBG_iz2-A
It’s very very simple why these things happen when you
understand subcomms. That’s why we can’t just ignore
subcomms and how they trigger those biologically
hardwired responses.
@Rollo
“Run down a list of bad sub coms and good sub coms and I
will show you how each of those behaviors and/or their
accompanying mindsets are intimately linked to evolved
survival traits.”
YES, we all AGREE on this. SUBCOMMS indicate

survival/replication traits. That’s WHY they’re, themselves,
causing hardwired “I want to fuck this” responses in girls.
“You’ve already confirmed that looks, facial symmetry,

body habitus, etc. convey the potential for good sub coms
which in turn denote the potential for survival benefits –
ergo good sub coms are attractive.”
Yes, okay, good, stay on this path now, we’re on the same
page here.
Now just follow this to its natural conclusion without going

on crazy tangents: “Good subcomms are attractive”. What
does that MEAN?
That MEANS that muscles THEMSELVES are not

“attractive”, it means that, according to social conditioning
which has pushed the image of “muscles = potential for
having those subcomms that indicate good survival benefit”
(based on our history where yes a lot of times having
physcial strength DID matter), muscles indicate that a guy
is likely to HAVE (in the absence of demonstrating
otherwise, like in a photograph (and even then it depends on
his body language etc in the photograph or a guy standing
100% motionless not interacting with anyone)), good
subcomms, which are attractive, and that high probability of
having those good subcomms is what triggers the
biologically hardwired nipple hardening and panty soaking.
Is there ANY part of this ^^^^ statement that you disagree

with?
“We also know that women practice a Hypergamous

dualistic sexual strategy to secure the best genetic potential
with the best provisioning / security potential in a mate. (Or
have we come to throwing that entirely out of Red Pill
awareness since it’s all socially preconditioned and women
will fuck ligers and dogs?)”
I’m not throwing it out, it’s just completely irrelevant to the

discussion of “is it the muscles themselves or the subcomms
that are attractive”. You’re trying to say “well okay
MAYBE you’re right, but only if it’s for Beta Bucks not
11/24/2019 Tribes
Alpha Fucks see AF relies on looks so there you go we’re

still right” which is still inaccurate. We’re talking about
sexual attraction. So yes, we are talking about triggering
sexual responses for Alpha Fucks, aka the nipple hardening
soaking wet shit you saw the male strippers (who have
AMAZING subcomms) trigger because we’re explaining
why those guys trigger that response but the buff gay dude
singing britney spears DOESN’T trigger those reponses
even though he’s built too.
“It’s no fucking coincidence that cultures across history all

have similar masculine ideals”
Yes because in HISTORY, having muscles really DID

increase your/her survival/replication chances. That’s our
point. That that shit stopped being relevant BUT
media/hollywood/etc just kept perpetuating that even
though a Steve Jobs is probably a lot better for
survival/replication now than some jacked dude in a ghetto
these days. But we have lifetimes of social conditioning
pushing the narrative that Steve Jobs isn’t sexy and a jacked
dude is sexy, because that narrative is based on history
where that was generally the case.
“Samson, Odysseus, Gilgamesh, and many other mythos

from culturally independent societies, all existing long
before Hollywood, all have similar archetypes for an
idealized masculinity, why is that?”
Because in those societies, at that time, those physical traits

really DID indicate better survival/replication because shit
was more violent/physical back then.
@sentient @scray
“Because your examples either are contradictory or fail to
refute the premise that there is a biological basis for
attraction.”
“NO ONE SAID THERE WASN’T ONE.”
This lol I’ve said this a thousand times to Sentient but he

and Rollo seem determined to keep arguing that we’re
saying there’s no biological basis for attraction and no
hardwired triggers. Which is not what we’re saying at ALL.
@Rollo
“Oh bullshit. GTFOH you’re gonna just dismiss the
findings of over 20 years of research”
Yes, we will dismiss BAD RESEARCH. Just like every

time you post these Harvard self-survey “look at this
picture, are you wet?” studies that show absolutely nothing
and then try to cram them into your biases. Those aren’t
actually demonstrating anything except giving guys who
don’t go out ways to confirm their socially conditioned
biases.
We HAVE to call out bad research and ignore it, especially

if newer better research (like what we’re gathering infield in
all this infield video) indicates different. That’s the point of
science.
Apparently 1 in 1 women is being raped on college

campuses every 25 seconds and the wage gap is oppressing
women, because a shitload of people are using BAD
STUDIES to base their conclusions on. Are you going to go
against 50 years of feminist theory and studies Rollo?????
But THESE studies fit your social conditioned view so
THESE ones are all legitimate to you even though we can
pick them apart and demonstrate why self-surveys about
photographs is a flawed experiment.
WE aren’t going by studies, we’re going by OBSERVABLE

INFIELD HIDDEN CAMERA EVIDENCE that all of us
can look at an analyze recording instinctive human
reactions. That’s worth a THOUSAND shittily designed
experiments by guys who don’t understand attraction in the
first place.
Like scray says “you want to do science, do it right and stop

IGNORING things that flatly contradict what you ‘know.’”
We are collecting data that flies in the face of that shit, so
yes, shit has to be thrown out or updated and new studies
have to be done to explain what we have ENDLESS hours
of infield footage demonstrating.
11/24/2019 Tribes
“Why are you even posting here? For all it matters if

women will fuck dogs it also disproves every tenet of RSD
too.”
It does no such thing. It backs up what we’re saying: that

girls instinctively respond to subcomms like dominance,
sexual assertiveness, physical manhandling, not being able
to control them, assuming success/having entitlement to
their bodies, etc:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTs1Za-9kgs
Those girls are having biologically hardwired responses to

what the dogs are doing (subcomms like dominance, sexual
assertiveness, physical manhandling, not being able to
control them, assuming success/having entitlement to their
bodies) and it’s VERY likely that a bunch of them get
wet/excited in the moment from it which is why they’re
laughing so hard as their triggers all spike through the roof.
@kfg
“Check out the sub-coms on this hot hunk:”
And what do they picture in their head when they’re using

that cucumber? Do they picture the buff gay guy singing
britney spears? He has muscles and muscles themselves are
attractive so they must picture him singing to them as they
fuck themselves lol
@scray
“your kneejerk reaction that this HAS TO BE THE TRUTH
that there must be some objective ‘look’ isn’t anything in
defiance of the FI you allegedly hate — it’s part and
parcel.”
This is the surreal part of this whole thing. You’re literally

perpetuating the FI and sending men on wild goose chases
with this Rollo lol
But just like we’ve been doing since the start, we’ll fix
these guys who come to us all frustrated that they aren’t
getting laid by the girls they want after they get built,
because they didn’t fix their subcomms, and we’ll train
them to go hit the bars at 30+yo to collect the reference
experiences and build the internals they SHOULD have
been building in their 20s before they read “muscles =
attraction” and wasted all that time chasing the external rat
race not realizing that it’s the internals that matter.
But it sure would be nice to save those guys some time and
frustration and depression by just putting them on the right
track from day one.
@keyser
“They make it look like they get ALL the women , all
success and no failure.”
This has been disproven SO MANY times. Someone else

even TOLD you about me posting Julien rejection videos in
the thread. You are 100% just making shit up.
“90% of the women they show in their videos, are all

average looking women.”
lol ok, tell us more about pointy elbows.
@hank holiday
“I wasn’t really pushing boundaries. I’ve done all the stuff
in the FR before, including drinking a girl’s beverage
without asking. I’ve also stolen their other items before, lol.
One girl was wearing at hat so I grabbed it on put it on my
hat. Then I went around to people talking about how cool I
was now that I made this new hat fashion.”
lol awesome. Now the question is: can you do the same
thing with the same level of “I can get away with this, and
this is funny to me so who cares if she gets mad”
entitlement to your personal 8s, 9s, 10s? THAT’S when
you’ll be pushing your comfort zone/boundaries if this
behavior is already something you’ve done before with
lesser girls.
“You CAN open them and get into a convo, but it takes a lot
of energy to reach that hook point where they want to
continue talking to you.”
11/24/2019 Tribes
Gotta learn Group Theory and how to hook them. Mystery

has stuff on Group Theory and Julien has a lot of stuff on
reaching the hook point. In that scenario, where they’re all
friends and are there to hang with eachother, you’re going
to have to do a lot of getting group approval and bringing
value to the whole group (disarming orbiters with crushes
and overly protective guys (this is where you have to do
Julien/Todd’s stuff of making her choose YOU instead of
you choosing her, cause they can’t interfere as easily if
SHE’S the one choosing to keep talking to YOU vs YOU
trying to hold her attention), including the girls friends in
your conversation with her so she doesn’t feel like she has
to talk to you OR them or has to neglect her friends (being
rude) to talk to you etc). So it’s a bit tougher, no lie lol but
the tools are laid out for you and it’s just collecting
reference experiences infield from there.
The problem with most guys is they approach a group

looking to TAKE value, they want one of the girls in the
group so they don’t engage the whole group just the girl, the
girl is forced to choose between them and the group (and
will usually pick the group because it comes with a lot of
social pressure/judgement if she doesn’t etc), the guy
approaches with the mindset of trying to get the girl away
as fast as possible instead of the mindset of joining their
group for the evening and not worrying about getting the
girl till later, etc
“I tend to only really do one thing when I go out.”
The more you go out the more you’ll internalize a lot of

these things and then when the moment calls for a little
jerkboy game you’ll just naturally pull it out and then get
back on track toward the pull. That’s why it’s important to
go out at this stage in your development, even to just have a
20 min convo with a 5. View this as a years-long process.
“I don’t judge, so I pick up things from everyone. Just like I

learned a lot about islam from the muslim girl.”
This is one of the things I like about sarging. Meeting

people from different walks of life and learning things from
them…little trivia bits of info, looking at their mindsets and
how they came to be that way, etc etc It’s rare that someone
doesn’t have ANYTHING to offer when you have the
rapport skills to help bring it out of them and don’t show
judgement.
“Next time I will take yareally’s advice and pivot on a

dying interaction to get into new sets with girls. Its just with
the 5, the only people at the bar at that time were myself,
the 5, and the bartender. Soooo, no one to pivot TOO.”
Right, my pivot advice is for when there’s someone around

to pivot TOO lol If you really wanted to get hardcore you
could go for a walk with her TO an environment that has
girls and then use her as a pivot to engage those better girls
and ditch her, but that’s kind of cruel to her (wasting her
time and making her think she has a chance then ditching
her for hotter lol) Julien would do that kind of thing though.
“Yeah, seen that before. Its just clicks more now that I have
personally experienced.”
Which is why we harp on hitting the field. Gotta

EXPERIENCE it. Your brain wants proof about what will
happen, not promises about what would happen.
“Focusing on game over girls tends to help me a lot.”
Tyler’s frame back in the oldschool days was that you’re

walking into a pickup experiment lab. It’s not about getting
the girl it’s about experimenting in your pickup lab and
seeing what reactions you get and what happens etc. A
mindset like that can help take away the pressure and
outcome dependence and turn it more into a fun “let’s see if
I can do THIS” game where you might lose the girl, you
might not, but your real reward is the knoweldge you gain.
“Very true. I always learn a shitton from all my interactions

with girls that last over a minute or so.”
I never regret a night out, but I always regret nights I stay

in.
11/24/2019 Tribes
@hank holiday
“Everyone seems to agree on 98% of things, but we’re
bitching over the 2% that there is disagreement.”
That 2% is important. It’s literally the basis for half of

pickup concepts and the difference between guys wasting
their time chasing externals that don’t matter and ending up
missing out on developing the subcomms that DO matter.
It’s a big deal.
@viavitae
“If women are allowed to breed with whomever they want
free of concerns over provisioning, its reasonable to think
the distribution of phenotypes will change”
That’s basically the situation we’re in now. And girls are

fucking anyone who triggers their hardwired attraction
triggers with subcomms. That’s why they aren’t fucking the
buff gay dude singing britney spears and that’s why they’re
happily fucking Tyler and Julien and scray and myself etc
“That there is no hard definition of looks or physicality, it’s

all socially programmed?”
Basically this. What’s attractive looks-wise is socially

conditioned. Thus the flat-head shit in other cultures, the
lack of caring about bad teeth in some cultures (like Japan
where people get surgery to purposely fuck their teeth up
https://www.tofugu.com/japan/yaeba-crooked-teeth-in-
japan/ because over THERE the social conditioning is that
it’s cute) while in other cultures like LA we’re getting white
veneers and shit because OUR culture conditions us to think
perfect teeth are more attractive.
“Does that count for men too?”
Men are wired differently. But even then, social

conditioning can play a role…the guys in those african
tribes probably think their women are hotter than an LA
blonde. Black dudes seem to love big booty chicks which is
probably a cultural conditioning thing, I have buddies who
love skinny shapeless girls and buddies who love a super
curvy hourglass etc so in my mind the effects of hardcore
social conditioning on men’s preferences are open for
debate/analysis (though there seems to be a lot more pull
toward specific ratios etc). But I don’t really care what men
want to fuck so it’s not something I’ve gone into in-depth
because it doesn’t really have any relevance since we know
men are visual and women read erotica about guys with
amazing subcomms and guys who fit society’s socially
conditioned stereotype of what’s likely to have subcomms
(so the 50 Shades guy is a rich jacked billionaire because
right now in society that’s what the women reading it have
been socially conditioned to assume will have good
subcomms).
“Like they don’t youth and hotness over accomplishments

and experience for social reasons only?”
I’d say with women it’s more what constitutes “hotness”

that’s up for debate. Guys don’t seem to really care about
accomplishments or social value with women lol but my
buddies all have different preferences for looks/personality,
though they all fit within the same range of “ya I’d probably
tap that”. To me the 1-10 scale guys will pretty much all
agree up to around 7 or 8 and then from there it becomes
each guy’s personal preferences of what consitutes a
legitimate 9 or 10.
“Is there no AF/BB dualistic mating strategy?”
I’ve never said AF/BB doesn’t exist. We are talking about

triggering hardwired sexual attraction aka alpha fucks in
this discussion.
“If so, is it just a modern reaction to the rule changes and

not some ancient thing?”
Not sure what you’re asking.
@Bromeo @Rollo
“The only evidence they have is “but look at all the hours of
infield footage” LOL”
If your assertion is that “things always work X way (aka

muscles = attractive and triggering hardwired hardening
11/24/2019 Tribes
nipples and wet pussies)” and we have ENDLESS hours of

infield footage showing that things DON’T always work
that way (buff gay guy singing britney spears, death row
full of jacked dudes every weekend who don’t get
attraction/laid, etc), and ENDLESS hours of infield footage
showing that things work the OPPOSITE way (skinny little
PUAs triggering hardwired sexual attraction), then your
theory is wrong and has to be re-evaluated and our evidence
trumps your armchair theories and badly designed studies
over the last 20 years.
This is common sense.
@Blaximus
“Rollo and scray are seeing the same things from different
perspectives.”
Because scray, myself, Tyler, etc put our dicks in <25yo

girls in 2016 and Rollo doesn't anymore and hasn't in years.
That's the difference. Rollo is using data from guys who
also aren't out there putting their dicks in <25yo girls in
2016 to form theories that our infield
experiences/data/video footage/etc ACTIVELY
disprove/counter.
"Rollo, is pro scientific data to confirm those things we all

see."
The experiments are flawed. Just like asking female

commenters "Well what would YOU do?" is flawed. These
experiments aren't actually studying what they SHOULD be
studying because the guys designing them don't even
understand the basics of attraction/sexual dynamics, the
knowledge/understanding of which has skyrocketed since
the PUA community formed. None of these guys is
watching Tyler's infield. None of these guys are looking at
the subcomms on jacked guys getting shot down on Keys to
the VIP. None of these guys is going out and experimenting
with having good and shitty subcomms and sticking their
dicks in <25yo pussy in 2016.
That's not a sleight on Rollo, that's just LOGICAL

OBSERVATION. Unless he IS fucking the promo girl he
posted a pic of, in which case hey let's hear the Lay Report
up to where your dick was inside her. But he's not fucking
her, he's just extrapolating the flirting she'll do with him
into what he thinks would happen and viewing it
solipsistically through his personal experience lens, while
we're looking at data across the board from the entire PUA
community and any other infield of any guy seducing
women in general.
I'm going to trust the observations and infield footage of the

guys who are FUCKING that promo model and who fuck a
BUNCH of promo models LIKE her, in 2016, over the guy
who used to fuck girls a lot back in the day before he
understood anything about subcomms/attraction and could
ojectively observe what he was doing and he hasn't fucked
them in 10+ years despite enjoying the IOIs/flirting or the
guy who makes theoretical observations about how that girl
PROBABLY would respond to hypotheticals in badly
designed experiments.
"scray is pro life experience to the point where it will

disprove some of the science."
Pro-LITERALLY OBSERVABLE RECORDED INFIELD

FOOTAGE, HUNDREDS OF HOURS OF IT THAT
ANYONE CAN LOOK AT AND OBSERVE THE
SUBCOMMS IN THEM.
"Sometimes neither perspective can absolutely nail down

the source of an action with absolute 100% certainty"
What we are saying is that the current theory of "muscles =

attractive" is ACTIVELY and DEMONSTRATABLY
wrong. You can come up with other theories, that's cool, say
aliens are causing everything, it doesn't matter to me as
long as what your theory says doesn't contradict what we
have TONS of infield footage/experience demonstrating.
@scray @Rollo
"i don’t think you grok how damaging this stuff can be to
people just getting in the game, esp when it’s unproven. this
11/24/2019 Tribes
is the kind of shit that chews people up and sends them to

sluthate or turns them into an eliot roger, man…."
Yup. Because Rollo doesn't teach pickup, he teaches

prevention of getting fucked up, and damage
control/recovery after guys are fucked up. So "muscles =
attractive" doesn't really fuck with anything he
teaches/explains.
But guys like Tyler and myself are the ones that these guys
who chase that complete side-tangent path and end up
frustrated that they're good-looking but still not able to get
laid, IF they don't go the Elliot/sluthate route, come to us
desperate and fucked up and confused and depressed and
we have to get them to understand WHY their muscles
aren't getting them laid like guys pushing your "muscles =
attractive" narrative said they would, and THEN finally put
them on a path to fixing their subcomms the same way I'm
having to do with scribblerg as he struggles to believe he
has value without his former looks.
Except we could've SAVED them YEARS of frustration if

we just looked at the VERY BLATANT INFIELD
FOOTAGE EVIDENCE of how muscles DON'T matter and
how SUBCOMMS are the thing those guys should be
focusing on. The more you focus on "muscles =
biologically hardwired to trigger nipple hardening pussy
soaking responses" the more guys you're going to have
coming to you as fucked up damage cases down the road
when their wife they bought a Tesla for or stayed jacked for,
cheats on them, because they didn't know about subcomms
or that subcomms are what are attractive.
@Rollo
"Oh look, some new infield videos to add to the
evolutionary debate:"
perrrrrfect choice. Let's ACTUALLY look at

these instead of relying on your snarky completely shallow
surface-level observation (you know, that drilling deeper
thing I always mention), shall we? Pay attention now, you're
about to learn about subcomms:
Skip to 56 seconds in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmLqzwz6Oug&t=56s
This guy is with this girl and she’s into him right? But this
OTHER guy comes up, and I’m not into dudes but
objectively this other guy is more outgoing/social, more
energetic, and like an inch taller, and also well dressed,
good looking face, apparently charming etc.
Why doesn’t she switch to him? Or more importantly why

if they replayed those exact same actions over and over
again, would the girl NEVER switch to him?
Turn off the volume and watch their body language. The
second guy is facing the first guy while the first guy faces
away. The second guy leans in and the first guy puts his
hand up and stops him. Who’s more reactive? Who’s
reacting to who? The energy guy is yapping like a squirrel
while the other guy spends half the interaction just staring
off into space giving him minor amounts of attention and
never faces him with his body. Half his responses are just
one word or a shrug until he makes an important point.
THAT'S subcomms. That’s that 0.00001% in action and

girls NOTICE that. That’s why that girl doesn’t switch to
the other guy, because he’s 0.00001% more reactive to this
first guy than this first guy is to him. In any interaction
someone is always reacting to the other person, that’s just
how human interaction plays out.
Most guys would look at this clip and go “that girl would
take either one of those guys” but that’s because they aren’t
looking at these subtle subcommunications that are telling
the girl “stay with this guy”.
At 1:50 the second guy comes back and physically

manhandles the first guy a bit and runs off and normally it
would be like “oh he AMOG’ed him”, but the AMOG’ing
isn’t based on what that second guy does it’s based on how
the first guy REACTS to what that second guy does and as
11/24/2019 Tribes
you can see the first guy gives no fucks and is unreactive to
it. DEMONSTRATING SOLID SUBCOMMS.
Whoever reacts to the other person is lower value. Girls

need to be able to spot this so they know they have the
highest-value guy. That’s also why I stress a guy with
GOOD GAME. The second guy broke the rules about being
reactive and leaning in and shit (BAD SUBCOMMS) while
the other guy held to the rules instinctively (GOOD
SUBCOMMS). The girl doesn’t NOT switch to the second
guy because he’s “ugly” or not dressed as well, she doesn’t
switch because his game is weak and she can tell that the
first guy is higher value and has better subcomms.
That second guy WILL get girls, if the first guy doesn’t
interfere, but if you put a girl in the room and said “who do
you put your money on getting the girl if these two guys go
after her” my money will be on the first guy if they’re in the
interaction with this same energy. If the first guy has too
many redbulls so he’s too reactive or just got dumped so he
feels insecure and not as confident/entitled (so he has bad
SUBCOMMS) and you put him in a suit and the other guy
is wearing a t-shirt and tired from fucking a model all night
so he’s less unreactive and is putting out more high-value
subcomms, and the video is shit like the first guy facing the
second guy and leaning in while the second guy barely
acknowledges him, then my money goes on the second guy,
even though objectively speaking they’re both good looking
dudes and the other guy has a suit. Because I know the girl
will be reading their subcomms and that’s the shit that
actually matters in-field.
The rest of those videos is just guys macking girls with no

interference, nothing special and nothing that contradicts
what I’m saying but lets all the guys who don’t go out
blame those jerk good looking guys for why they can’t get
laid.
But I’ll bet the guy running that site could never describe to
you what’s happening in that little value-battle those two
guys may not even realize they had in front of that girl and
I'll bet Rollo didn't notice any of what I just wrote when he
watched it or he wouldn't have linked it because it just
provese what we're saying about subcomms being
attractive.
And the reason the guy running that site will never look at
those dynamics is because 1) he doesn’t go out, 2) he
doesn’t go out and try to take girls off these guys, 3) he
doesn’t befriend these guys and watch them fail and look
for patterns and weaknesses in their game, and 4) it doesn’t
fit his narrative that the sky is blue so he’ll dismiss the
photos of an orange sky.
Your rebuttal? Or would you like to post MORE infield of

guys with good subcomms getting good results that
supports what we're saying?
Oh look, at 0:34 in the 3rd video on that site there's a much

bigger guy behind the main guy and the girl is choosing the
main guy OVER him. WOT'S GOING ON??? Ohhhhh the
main guy has good subcomms and is expressing himself
and confident sexual etc while the other guy is hunched
over quietly stifled in the background getting a beer.
You can LITERALLY SEE IN THE THUMBNAIL for the

first video, a taller good-looking guy in a yellow blazer with
a drink up at his face looking around nervously (aka BAD
SUBCOMMS) and then WATCH the video and see that guy
be COMPLETELY INVISIBLE to the girl who's flirting
with the guy with GOOD SUBCOMMS.
Did you even go look at that? Right now when you read
what I just wrote? Did you go open that page again and
watch the yellow blazer guy and watch the tall guy in the
3rd video?
Or did you not bother going to look because it doesn't fit

your paradigm that looks matter and you don't want to see
blatant counter-evidence.
If muscles/height/etc = attractive these girls SHOULD be

ignoring this littler guy for the bigger ones. But they don't.
The bigger ones are invisible to her when this guy is
11/24/2019 Tribes
around, because the littler guy is actively demonstrating

better subcomms, so they're getting turned on by him and
the way he assumes attraction (trying to make out with the
girl on the bus and not taking no for an answer, while a
taller/bigger guy behind him chodes around in the
background), entitlement, has confidence, good body-
language, unreactiveness, etc
But please post more videos supporting that your theory is

wrong, they're very useful and I can break down subcomms
alllllllll day because this stuff is blatantly obvious when you
know what to look for…and if you post enough of them we
might actually get you looking at subcomms in them so we
can have an ACTUAL discussion about how attraction
ACTUALLY works.
Plz post the hulk bod VS dad bod self-survey interview

next, where the dad-bod guy has bad subcomms and the
hulk-bod guy who's PAINTED GREEN peacocking in
public and fits society's socially conditioned stereotype of a
guy who should have good subcomms (which is exactly
what we're saying). Because I know you love these self-
surveys and bad science lol
SFC Ton
Guest SFC Ton  O F FL I NE  
Looks matters
Game matters
but you need a look and game that matches your look.
 Loading...
Sentient  OF FL I N E  
Yareally – i love your stuff but the video titled “Very

Handsome Guy Picks Up 2 Girls” is a poor one to use for
Guest
your argument. i.e. the initial guy being “very handsome”
and all.
So you have a handsome, fit, muscular guy (with some

Caliente level game) in set, and another guy (who may be
slightly taller) who is thinner (and maybe gay) and has bad
game comes in set and can’t pull. and this is proving
something?
You missed on this one as an example.
 Loading...
SFC Ton
is it easier to pick up girls at night vs the day?
reckon the important question is not works best in general

but what works best for a specif man
 Loading...
@Sentient
“So you have a handsome, fit, muscular guy (with some
Guest
Caliente level game) in set”
So he has good subcomms.
“and another guy (who may be slightly taller)”
Height = attractive, right? Since looks matter? So the girl

should be switching to him. He’s clearly outgoing and
extroverted compared to the other guy, he’s not standing in
a corner or anything. So why doesn’t she switch?
11/24/2019 Tribes
“who is thinner”
So exactly what bodyfat % is the best? And what do you

say about the bigger guys I pointed out (yellow jacket in
video 1 and big white shirt guy ordering a beer behind him
in video 3)? Or do we just ignore them because they don’t
fit the narrative?
“(and maybe gay)”
And what makes you think he may be gay? His bad

subcomms. Why doesn’t the girl switch? His bad
subcomms that he’s demonstrating.
“and has bad game”
aka he’s demonstrating bad/unattractive subcomms

compared to the shorter guy.
“comes in set and can’t pull. and this is proving

something?”
It proves that this was a terrible example to show of “looks

matter” when you actually understand subcomms and look
for them.
“Week 7 Advanced Principles” of Tyler’s Hot Seat @

Home product (had to do some sneaky shit to find it,
hopefully it gets pirated enough to be easier for everyone to
find down the road) has him going through silent videos
(holy shit he shows them WITHOUT audio??? but what do
we focus on if we don’t hear audio…all that pesky
subcomm stuff??) of him interacting with girls breaking
down the subcomms going on. It’s all completely blatant
and obvious what’s happening especially when he points it
out.
He repeatedly asks the audience as he goes through the

videos “how does this look like it’s going? Do I look
needy? Do I look like I care about the outcome? How does
she look? Who’s leaning in? What happens when she does
this, how much do I react? Compare that to the last video
where it didn’t go anywhere, what did my subcomms look
like then? Was I showing sexual intent? Compare my eye-
contact here with the last video.” etc etc and you see direct
correlations in the girls’ attraction between when his
subcomms are on point and when they aren’t. And yes, he
shows bad sets and weak sets too, and the consistent thing
every time is bad subcomms = bad result, good subcomms
= good result.
Your guys’ lack of checking out the

resources/content/teaching that breaks this stuff all down in-
depth and explains it with massive infield footage analysis
and literally teaches you how to spot subcomms and what
effect they have etc is what will keep you clinging to your
social conditioning and make discussions like this
impossible.
I’ll link the vid when I can find it easier to get (right now
it’s on some shitty foreign pirate site you have to sign up
to), but it’ll probably just not be watched, just like all the
other shit that explains what I’m saying, because god forbid
we question 20 years of bad experiments testing off-base
theories with actual hidden-cam infield video showing this
shit in-depth lol
Roused  OFF L I NE  
No disrespect, but damn, I guess some guys have a lot of

time on their hands for mental masturbation. I’ve been too
Guest
busy learning new stuff at work to offer anything remotely
useful for you. Rollo, KFG and Ya reinforce a lot of
foundational stuff. The debate is healthy and always
interesting here, but it’s to damn nice outside to jerk off on
the keyboard anymore than this short comment.
At the very least it’s still great we have this space to

hammer out these types of discussions. Blax nails it again
with his Morgan Freeman meme image. I’m going to spend
the rest of my week ignoring my whiny girlfriend, enjoying
my daughter turning 18 and working outside. Working at
11/24/2019 Tribes
being a good strong father helping to teach lessons to my

daughter who fucked up big time recently has been more
important than getting laid. Hopefully stuff sinks into her
knucklehead noggin…. We’ve all got our own mental point
of origins and shit to take care of.
Have a good day gentlemen.
Andy  OF FL I N E  
fwiw, I’ve actually learned a little bit from this whole

discussion. One thing I don’t get is how subcomms relate to
Guest
cold reading, dhv stories, routines, adding value. Are social
dynamics and subcomms interdependent?
I should probably just figure it out myself.
 Loading...
Bromeo  OFF LI NE  
@Yareally
Guest “If your assertion is that “things always work X way (aka
muscles = attractive and triggering hardwired hardening
nipples and wet pussies)” and we have ENDLESS hours of
infield footage showing that things DON’T always work
that way (buff gay guy singing britney spears, death row
full of jacked dudes every weekend who don’t get
attraction/laid, etc), and ENDLESS hours of infield footage
showing that things work the OPPOSITE way (skinny little
PUAs triggering hardwired sexual attraction), then your
theory is wrong and has to be re-evaluated and our evidence
trumps your armchair theories and badly designed studies
over the last 20”
Your comparisons are very biased to your argument, ie.

skinny little pua’s vs buff gay and jacked death row
inmates… more accurate comparisons will be skinny guy
with game vs jacked guy with game
The reason all the infield footage is of skinny dudes picking

up is because that is the outlier. This is why you don’t see
videos of jacked guys recording themselves for hours
infield, any dude that sees that will automatically dismiss it
and say “that guy is jacked, obv hes going to pull”, if it
were down to sub comms alone, we would see both skinny
and jacked pua’s dropping infield footage and we would be
dissecting the interactions based on sub comms alone.
Yareally
Guest “So you have a handsome, fit, muscular guy (with some
Caliente level game) in set”
So he has good subcomms.”
You are veering into a full on cognitive dissonance

meltdown now. Refer to the first 6 words above, which you
ignore completely in your effort to post a litany of
strawmen, or refer to the very title of your exemplar “Very
Handsome Guy”…
There is no argument that subcomms and game (game

encompassing a broader set of actions than subcomms) will
overcome any initial looks based attraction.
Strawman and ad hominem all you want.
We can disagree about the origin of looks based attraction

(whether hard wired or socially conditioned) because the
net effect is the same, initial attraction (note words are
important, and the order of them – initial attraction).
11/24/2019 Tribes
You yourself keep acknowledging that looks based IOI’s are

real, then trying like the devil to deny you believe this.
Here are some:
“IOIs happen because she’s been socially conditioned

to believe that the cake (muscles) is more likely to
contain sugar (high-value traits). If the guy hasn’t
done anything to indicate otherwise (like demonstrate
bad subcomms), then yes, her RAS will drift back to
the better looking guy because at that point she
assumes, based on her social conditioning, that he is
the cake with sugar in it.”
“This is why I say get back to cold approach. All those

guys on Tinder are putting up their best pics that half
the time don’t even represent their actual life/value,
and their subcomms can’t kill them off until a few
messages in or even the first meetup etc
If you’re a jacked tall white dude, go ahead and clean

up on Tinder. But if you fall outside of that external
checklist then fuck it, grab yourself some Mystery
Method, PIMP, SHIFT, Krauser, whatever, and get the
fuck out there. Separate yourself from the herd…”
“Looks/money will get you free gimme ioi’s here and

there because those externals represent a higher
possibility that you are more likely to have the
ACTUAL diamond core attractive traits (dominance,
preselection, confidence, etc aka your subcomms aka
things that are 100% of the time additive to
attraction), but… ”
“That doesn’t mean NO girls will approach…lots of

aggressive average girls will, because that’s how
those girls get LAID ”
“If the guy is just standing there like James Bond,

girls will go by their social conditioning that says
“he’s probably likely to have high-value subcomm
traits” and may give him free gimme IOIs the same
way you may see a bear and your social conditioning
says “that thing will probably rip your face off” and
avoid it. ”
[scray] “even i’ve said that things like being fit and
whatever make a difference — i ought to know.”
” I don’t accept that looks don’t factor in arousal”

lol but no one is SAYING THEY DON’T”
“if the point you’re making is that looks can make a

difference THEN ELL-O-FREAKING-ELL
“ya I agree. we all agree. PUAs agree.”
So you keep hitting on looks do “matter” at least to the

extent that they are a factor in initial attraction, then spend
5k words trying to disagree with yourself…?
It’s still very simple and not inconstant with any add on
discussions you are compelled to continue add on:
Women will respond/be attracted to good looks, but that

does not mean that looks will prevail over better game.
Better game does not preclude women being initially
attracted to looks.
“So you keep hitting on looks do “matter” at least to the

extent that they are a factor in initial attraction, then spend
Guest
5k words trying to disagree with yourself…”
@Sentient
Serious question. Why do you care so much? Looks =

social conditioning + subcomms. He keeps saying it over
and over again, and you’re obsessed with the fact that it
generates IOI’s? I just don’t get what the problem is.
 Loading...
11/24/2019 Tribes
Andy – a) I disagree with your equation. b) I disagree with

your assertion c) the “problem” is saying one thing, then
Guest
saying 10,000 other things to try and negate the one thing.
 Loading...
Harrison Bergeron  O F FL I NE  
@bromeo
Guest “The reason all the infield footage is of skinny dudes

picking up is because that is the outlier.”
It’s also proof that game can overcome looks.
“This is why you don’t see videos of jacked guys recording

themselves for hours infield, any dude that sees that will
automatically dismiss it and say “that guy is jacked, obv hes
going to pull””
Just like yareally’s excuse for not getting his ass in shape
😉 All his buddies would then attribute his success to his
looks and completely ignore the rest, even if they KNEW
him when he was chubby, poor etc. They would forget all
that because he now fits their FI view of attraction.
“if it were down to sub comms alone, we would see both

skinny and jacked pua’s dropping infield footage and we
would be dissecting the interactions based on sub comms
alone.””
You mean Keys to the VIP? or the dissection of Good

Looking Loser a few months ago? or the videos just last
week of Julien failing and dissecting his own failure? did
you watch it with the sound off like numerous people said
was eye opening?
Jafyk  OFF LI NE  
@ SJF and Rollo,
Guest I do have an idea on how the guys in this Forum or other

red pill site can join up offline while the activity itself
would remain anonymous from those anti-red pill. Here’s
what I propose.
(1) I will design an app that only members here can

download. So, the question remains how can we ensure it’s
only legit that will have access? Well, Rollo can send out an
invitation to those on his subscription list and attached to
that invitation will be a quiz of basic red pill principles.
Members will have to respond and pass using their handle
and email on here.
(2) After passing the quizz members will either select or be

given a password that goes along with their TRM
subscription email.
(3) Members will then download the app which will require
them to login to get access. This will ensure that only
members have access.
(4) Functionality of the app: The app will allow members to

PM each other, receive notification on their phones for
TRM or manosphere members only event etc.
(5) In the worst case scenario that an anti-redpill infiltrates

the app everyone’s info would still be anonymous since
they used anonymous handles to sign up.
(6) The only limitation now is that I can’t afford on my own

to pay the monthly fee the app’s platform would require to
keep it active. It’s not a perfect system but let me know
what your thoughts are on this.
11/24/2019 Tribes
fleezer  OF FL I NE  
“how is 17 better?”
Guest the best way to understand a product is to experience it

through it’s entire development.
under 20 does not mean 15, 16 or 17, so web puas cannot

offer insight into something they have never experienced.
web puas are absolutely correct about subcomms/game

being the driver – for girls that have aged OUT OF PRIME.
girls in their prime are the prize. as they age out, men
become the prize. every guy here realizes he’s the prize
because it’s true. when guys are older.
girls in their prime do you not fuck guys based on

subcomms. it is not situational subcomms, social
conditioning, or any other thing. and it most definitely is
not frame.
girls in their prime fuck certain guys because they want to.
usually the guys are taller, athletic (not jacked) and
conventionally good looking. they are not always popular.
they are not always funny. they are not always smart/quick.
it is not social dominance. it is something physical.
something that the girls sense. it’s fucking magic unicorn
stuff.
it’s a joke to think that a 16 year old guy has frame,

situational, comparative or otherwise. Every guy here could
stare a hole through these kids with no problem. and their
subcomms are HORRIBLE. I made basically nothing but
mistakes. Every kid I see makes nothing but mistakes. But
guess what? They pull the hottest PRIME girls. These girls
fucking glow. They are sweet. They are submissive. They
are the definition of femininity. They are in bloom. hispanic
culture puts the bloom at 15 as do many others. it is for
good reason.
why is 17 better? look at the free market forces.
Prime girls are guarded by layers of protection. authority

figures both secular and religious, older brothers and
especially fathers. all of these groups have the ability and
social backing to cause physical harm to a man that
attempts to access the prize.
15 year old kids not only have to pass shit tests from the girl
(prime girls have their own metrics because I failed
constantly as does every other kid but somehow still pull),
but from all those layers of protection as well. getting to a
23 year old simply means showing up at the club/bar.
getting to a prime girl means sitting across the dinner table
from her parents, eating their food and getting grilled
nonstop about everything. only if you pass their high
pressure tests do you get to fuck their daughter in their
house. no one gives a shit about the 23 year old.
but parents and older brothers guard the prime girls like the
treasure/prize they truly are.
a kid with no frame, horrible subcomms and no drivers

license gets access to the prize. now imagine some 30 year
old fat balding pua showing up at the door to her family
home. he doesn’t get invited in for dinner. he gets a shotgun
shoved in his face.
why is 17 better? Two days ago I was standing in a room

with 100 prime girls. then a hot and fit 22-24 year old
entered. the kind of girl anybody would sarge. guess what?
she looked like a fucking crone in comparison to all the
others.
there is something magical about the bloom phase. cell

division/renewal, hormones, something. I have seen hot
girls peak at 16 and then go downhill. some dude is going to
meet those girls when they’re 24 and think they’re hot. and
he’ll be right. but he’ll never know what they looked like at
prime. he’ll never feel that energy they give off. that’s the
11/24/2019 Tribes
fucking problem. a knowledge gap about the development

of the product
everything rollo, roissy, ya say about game is true. when

men are the prize. it is absolutely irrelevant when girls are
the prize in that short window that sometimes lasts less than
a year.
as a treasure/prize hunter, I prefer having a prize to win.
Forge the Sky  OFF LI NE  
Morning project: reinforce bedframe
Guest
 Loading...
“why is 17 better? look at the free market forces.”
Guest There is no such thing as Sweet 22.
 Loading...
” a) I disagree with your equation. b) I disagree with your

assertion c) the “problem” is saying one thing, then saying
Guest
10,000 other things to try and negate the one thing.”
Okay, so I would agree that there might some sort of

general aesthetic to a physically attractive man. So, Looks =
Social Conditioning + subcomms + general aesthetic. The
MAX you’re going to get out of it is a DHV. Do you
disagree with that?
 Loading...
Forge wins the thread.
Guest
 Loading...
@Harrison Bergeron
Guest “You mean Keys to the VIP?”
Really? lol, you do realize that is a staged show produced

on the comedy network? I have seen all the episodes and
while there are observable game tactics being used it does
not negate that it contains actors and scripting.
 Loading...
@bromeo
“it contains actors and scripting”
Guest
Not to mention they’re all drunk bar sluts anyway right?
Like they’re all 5/10 totally gross. You guys have an excuse
for everything lol. What about GLL? Why wasn’t he 5 for 5
11/24/2019 Tribes
in that video? He should have banged them all on looks

alone
@fleezer
” it’s fucking magic unicorn stuff”
You heard it here first guys, it’s all magic, let’s pack up and
stop trying to figure it out
“Two days ago I was standing in a room with 100 prime

girls”
Are you a 10th grade teacher? I’m worried for your students
 Loading...
Frito Pendejo  OF F LI N E  
As I’m days away from my 50th, I’ve really come to

believe that men are always at their very core absolutely
Guest
alone in the world and bear burdens that no woman can
even begin to comprehend… It’s the essence of Rollo’s
“don’t wish it was easier, wish you were better.”
The challenge for men is that we can either complain about

it or we can wear it as a badge of honor – the stoic “stiff
upper lip”, the Jeremiah Johnson, the renegades, the lone
wolves – these are the men who make shit happen in the
world. Yes, women will never understand or sympathize
with the crosses we bear, nor should we expect them to…
But there’s no question that they are drawn to (and envious)
of that power.
I sometimes wonder whether women invading male spaces

is not so much a conscious effort to divide and conquer, but
rather their attempt to be in close proximity to male power.
I don’t question that the female subconscious is threatened
by that power, and maybe that’s where the female
subconscious works to subvert male spaces by dividing and
conquering, but I really believe their first instinct is to be
absolutely enthralled by the power and substance of male
relationships because they don’t have anything
approximating that. In that respect, invading male spaces is
yet another form of shit-testing… Are we up to the task of
maintaining our collective frame in the presence of women?
Here’s an example… I’m getting together in a few weeks

with high school buddies, some of whom I haven’t seen in
decades. It’s already apparent from our emails back and
forth that even after 30 years, nothing in our ritual has
changed… It’s the same ribbing, the same hazing, the same
put downs we used in high school. Filthy, totally
inappropriate jokes. Calling each other “fat pieces of
shit”… Joking about fucking each others’ moms. It was this
way more than 30 years ago, and it’s like we’ve picked up
exactly where we left off 30 years later. I don’t think the
group of us has ever had a serious conversation, yet we’ve
remained the best of friends for decades.
We’re also all absolutely alone, but alone in the sense that
each of us carved out our own niche in the world without
help, without guidance… Just true grit.
Some are divorced; some are entrepreneurs who started

their own businesses; one is a wilderness guide who spends
weeks by himself in the outdoors; another is one of the most
highly-skilled and self-taught craftsmen in the world;
another a highly accomplished professor; but without
exception… all of them are passionate about what they do
and highly accomplished in their own fields.
My wife is begging me to allow her to join us for just one

night… It’s clear that she is fascinated and enthralled by
how we interact. It’s like she desperately wants to be close
to that power and soak up how we interact. She knows the
score: It will be raw, filthy, totally inappropriate and
absolutely hysterical. I haven’t agreed yet, but she knows
what she’s in for… This crowd will not pull punches just
because a woman is present.
Now think of the opposite scenario: How many *real* men

would ever want to be included in a gaggle of hens prattling
11/24/2019 Tribes
on about this and that? Unless it turned into a topless pillow

fight, I would hope that none of us would. My wife used to
ask me if I wanted to join her and her friends when they
were getting together, and I always replied that unless they
were “doing lesbian stuff” and I could join in, I had
absolutely no interest.
The upshot of all of this is that I believe that women invade

male spaces and conquer them because we let them. If we
stuck to our guns and treated male spaces with the
reverence they deserve, women would fall in line. We need
to stop equivocating and apologizing and jealously defend
our turf. Stand up to their shit tests. If a woman is thrilled
by proximity to collective male power, I’ve got no
problem… If she attempts to divide and conquer, she needs
to GTFO.
@Sentient
“Refer to the first 6 words above”
Guest
“Caliente level game” = good subcomms. The other words
don’t matter except that they mean he fits into the girls’
socially conditioned view of what a guy who’s likely to
have good subcomms looks like. And he’s had a lifetime of
that same social conditioning that’s told him to feel entitled
etc to hot girls which is part of what’s contributed to his
good subcomms. This is common sense.
“There is no argument that subcomms and game (game

encompassing a broader set of actions than subcomms) will
overcome any initial looks based attraction.”
There’s no initial looks-based attraction. There’s initial

“likely to have attractive subcomms” attraction.
“We can disagree about the origin of looks based attraction

(whether hard wired or socially conditioned)”
There’s nothing to disagree with. You’re wrong. This origin

is important. This is the 2% disagreement that determines
whether a guy wastes his time chasing externals that don’t
matter or develops the subcomms that DO matter and
actually ends up UNDERSTANDING attraction.
“because the net effect is the same, initial attraction”
The net effect is not the same. The guy with bad subcomms
doesn’t get laid and ends up frustrated/depressed and
coming to us for help years down the road (hopefully, or he
ends up much worse-off).
“You yourself keep acknowledging that looks based IOI’s

are real, then trying like the devil to deny you believe this.”
What part of the thing I’ve been saying over and over: “on
Tinder, where guys can’t display bad subcomms (unless
they have brutally awful photos of them being low-value),
girls assume the better looking guy will have good
subcomms because her social conditioning has told her to
assume that” do you not understand?
“the “problem” is saying one thing, then saying 10,000

other things to try and negate the one thing.”
If you don’t actually understand the nuances of what I’m

saying then I can see how it would look like I’m negating it,
but I’m not, you just aren’t following closely.
@Andy
“Why do you care so much? Looks = social conditioning +
subcomms. He keeps saying it over and over again, and
you’re obsessed with the fact that it generates IOI’s? I just
don’t get what the problem is.”
It’s surreal to me. Like talking to a brick wall. I’ve repeated

the same thing a million times and we have all the infield
evidence to show it.
@Harrison @Bromeo
““if it were down to sub comms alone, we would see both
skinny and jacked pua’s dropping infield footage and we
11/24/2019 Tribes
would be dissecting the interactions based on sub comms

alone.””
You mean Keys to the VIP? or the dissection of Good

Looking Loser a few months ago? or the videos just last
week of Julien failing and dissecting his own failure? did
you watch it with the sound off like numerous people said
was eye opening?”
Exactly. Go watch every episode. Do your homework and

then come back to the discussion. Otherwise you’re just
arguing rocket science with NASA engineers based on
having skimmed a book or two.
“Really? lol, you do realize that is a staged show produced

on the comedy network?”
That’s cute. The “THEY’RE ALL PAID

ACTRESSES!!!111 NONE OF IT IS REAL AHHHH!!”
defense. Never seen that before. Any footage we show you
that goes against your belief system will be thrown out as
“OBVIOUSLY FAKE GUISE!!!!11” Next tell us they’re all
drunk bar sluts and anyone could get them and they’re ugly
and–wait let me dig out the giant list of excuses guys make
when they don’t want to believe infield footage because it
goes against their belief system…….
@fleezer
“under 20 does not mean 15, 16 or 17, so web puas cannot
offer insight into something they have never experienced.”
Under 20 means under 20 and above the legal age limit.
“web puas are absolutely correct about subcomms/game

being the driver – for girls that have aged OUT OF
PRIME.”
Except that you think 12 is prime so…lol
“girls in their prime do you not fuck guys based on

subcomms. it is not situational subcomms, social
conditioning, or any other thing. and it most definitely is
not frame.”
Girls is girls, sorry man. AWALT, attraction triggers flipped

by subcomms are hardwired:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0Z0WaTl9Sw
“it’s a joke to think that a 16 year old guy has frame”
Compared to their peers, some of them do have stronger

frames, subcomms, etc. And if the girl is only really
exposed TO that peer group, there you go. She doesn’t
compare that guy to Blaximus, she compares him to his
peers around her.
“why is 17 better? Two days ago I was standing in a room

with 100 prime girls. then a hot and fit 22-24 year old
entered. the kind of girl anybody would sarge. guess what?
she looked like a fucking crone in comparison to all the
others.”
Tell us more about her pointy-elbows.
“there is something magical about the bloom phase. cell

division/renewal, hormones, something.”
Seems like legit science to me! I’ve met guys who would
say the same thing about old cougar BBWs.
“everything rollo, roissy, ya say about game is true. when

men are the prize. it is absolutely irrelevant when girls are
the prize in that short window that sometimes lasts less than
a year.”
It definitely doesn’t sound like you’re putting them on a

pedestal, that’s for sure.
(I legitimately don’t care, I just like to bug you on your

weird dirty ol’ Uncle Fleezer teahing a room full of 12yo’s
magical bloom love shit…it’s creeper city to me, partly
because I’ve been socially conditioned to feel that way and
partly because I’ve been with a few “under 20s” and found
most of the experience to just be annoying because they are
still retarded at those ages and I personally like to be able to
have conversations with the girls I hang out with. But you
do your thing…you’ll come off a lot less creepy and be a lot
less easy to make fun of if you drop the “their magical tight
11/24/2019 Tribes
young pussies bloom and glow in the morning dew of their

innocence” pedo-talk though)
@Forge
“Morning project: reinforce bedframe”
Bravo lol Well done man.
I made a thing because work is slow as fuck this week and

this Hotseat footage is so good (I haven’t seen the whole
Guest
program yet so I don’t recommend it yet) and it’s relevant
to this looks/subcomms discussion.
Inspiration for the weekend, Tyler takes 3 girls off a better

looking guy, step by step:
http://i.imgur.com/iwrP2kj.png
http://i.imgur.com/QhD0TEJ.png
http://i.imgur.com/vLpAsin.png
http://i.imgur.com/bOSMPc1.png
Full album of the full pickup with my breakdowns of the

good/bad subcomms going on…give it a read Sentient and
Rollo, maybe you’ll finally get what I, scray, Andy, HABD,
Tyler, etc have been trying to tell you:
http://imgur.com/a/WidPg
Drill deeper till you find consistent diamond core

principles. Looks/muscles/money = attraction is not
consistent. Subcomms = attraction is. Like I say, what if
you didn’t have to “justify” feeling entitled to the hot girls?
What if you weren’t bought into the socially conditioned
value system and gay Harvard studies etc that told you
“looks = attraction”. What if you understood that what
Tyler’s doing and the subcomms he’s giving off ARE
what’s attractive about him, and you could do this stuff
consciously, competently, and understand why you get
blown out and why you succeed and be able to spot other
guy’s subcomms infield and know which ones were actual
competition and which were harmless instead of assuming
guys with looks will get attraction (meanwhile the Death
Row good-looking guys go home to jack off alone)?
All it takes is a mindset shift to break out of social

conditioning. And ideally red pill communities drilling
deeper than the surface level and not perpetuating these
myths about “muscles = hard nipples and soaking panties”
and start promoting ACCURATE data that “good
subcomms, like the good subcomms a male stripper has =
hard nipples and soaking panties”.
I recommend everyone try going out this weekend without

doing their hair or dressing in a plain t-shirt etc. Take away
one of the externals you think is attractive and approach
girls all weekend.
Ahhhh….
Guest “There’s no initial looks-based attraction. There’s initial

“likely to have attractive subcomms” attraction.”
“Likely to have subcomms attraction” is based on look.

What else could it be based on but an impression formed by
visible observation of appearance? and it works on
Tinder…
And so the transmogrifying continues…
 Loading...
11/24/2019 Tribes
@Sentient
““Likely to have subcomms attraction” is based on look.
Guest What else could it be based on but an impression formed by
visible observation of appearance? and it works on
Tinder…”
It could be based on reputation, it could be based on

observing how other people react to you, it could be based
on interacting with you via texts, it could be based on
interacting with you via a phone call, it could be based on
seeing a huddle of girls around someone without being able
to see who they are because they’re in the middle of it, it
could be based on seeing a lineup lined up for autographs
for a celebrity she’s never seen before, it could be based on
seeing your body-language from behind, it could be based
on hearing your vocal tonality from around a corner…
Want me to keep going?
Tinder removes most guys’ ability to demonstrate BAD

subcommunication, and since there’s no such thing as NO
subcommunication, girls will assume, because of social
conditioning that says a good-looking guy is likely to have
good subcomms, that the better looking guys will be more
likely to have good subcomms and swipe them.
Very simple.
having a bad day  O FF LI N E  
F*K!…like a moth to a flame…lol…

___________________
Guest
@Sentient
re that jump out of closet thing…
that startle response is wired in, nobody is saying that it’s

NOT (just like we are NOT saying that arousal triggers are
NOT wired in – i think everybody AGREES that they
ARE…)… buuut, if dad started jumping out of the closet
every day, the kid would soon learn (be socially
conditioned) that dad jumping out wasn’t a threat… AND
also likely to learn that it’s kind of fun (if DAD imparts that
meaning to the interaction by saying laughing and tickling
the kid every time…)…
now, apply that idea/concept to ‘society’ imparting meaning

(teaching/social conditioning) to girls that the current ‘good
looks’ standard WILL lead her to a guy with ‘alpha’
subcomms/desirable genetic traits…
HABD – re visual cliff.. the fact that an innate response can

be honed by learning isn’t negating the initial response.
nobody said that there was no ‘initial response’…there’s a

bunch of stuff that’s wired in, the problem (as kfg has
pointed out) is that finding that ‘dividing line’ is the
problem… bc learning (aka social conditioning) starts at
such a early time…
Basically I view any woman “out” at night is DTF to some

degree, or else she wouldn’t be out. The rest is coming down
to your ability. and any women, sitting alone in a hotel
lobby drinking a glass of wine… that girl is totally DTF.
Hindbrain in action. “it just happened”…
at least we still agree on SOMETHING…lol…

_________________
@kfg
Historically black Keds, but I go with Chucks now because

they come in mono black, even the tongue tag which is
easily removed anyway.
props on the style…lol… i used to love my keds…

__________________
@YaReally
I have legitimately never encountered this kind of logic

resistance before.
11/24/2019 Tribes
seriously?…lol… i get it ALL the time… from BPers… and

especially WKs…
but you’re right… I have NEVER seen this kind of push-

back resistance from RP guys…
what the pattern ‘matches’ (aspy sperg alert!…lol) is FI in

play… and i think THAT’s what’s so frustrating… bc it’s
ROLLO…lol…
like this…
Rollo at scray
Why are you even posting here? For all it matters if women
will fuck dogs it also disproves every tenet of RSD too.
that’s just an attempt to resolve cognitive dissonance… i get

this stuff from ‘leftys’ all the time…lol… but it doesn’t
make any sense coming from Rollo…
___________________
@ Blax
lol… you crack me up…lol… always great to have the

‘proper perspective’ on this shit… lol
___________________
@Rollo
i’m the LAST guy that’s going to be a ‘blank slater’…lol…

but everything in Pinker’s ted talk just reinforces what we
are saying… = hard-wired responses exist and are baked-in
(and are ‘passable’ genetically)…
we are saying that ‘social conditioning’ informs when those

hard-wired responses are triggered.
and those ‘attractive guy’ videos just reinforce what WE are

saying is going on… just look at the subcomms those guys
have, regardless of their looks… = open relaxed posture,
relaxed and happy facial expression, non-needy (not leaning
in), never ‘chasing’ the girl (not facing her directly), etc…
here are some concepts that i think are in play here, that we
haven’t specifically talked about bc we tend to look past
them…
halo effect – do you agree that this is an accurate psych

theory?… bc that’s all that’s going on wrt the ‘good looks
through social conditioning’ = ‘expectation of valuable
genetic traits’…
occams razor – do you agree that this should apply to

science theory?… bc if true, this idea requires you to
include all those ‘outlier’ cultures’ ‘looks’ into any arousal
theory you advocate…
confirmation bias – are you willing to admit that you MAY

have even the slight possibility of this… on at least a small
level?…
bc i am ALWAYS willing to admit that I’M wrong about

anything. I acknowledge that i MIGHT be mistaken…about
whatever… buuut, in order for me to agree with your
different knowledge/theory/whatever, you’ll need to explain
to me WHY i’m wrong… AND account for all the real-
world observations that are inconsistent with YOUR theory,
when those observations ARE readily explained by my
current theory… but IF you CAN do that, i’ll just absorb
your knowledge into my schema… and move on… like the
borg… lol…
and if you are not willing to even admit the possibility that
you might be wrong… that in itself is an indicator… of
something… and wrt RP concepts, it’s usually the FI in
play…
__________________
@YaReally at 1:23am
+1…that was easy…lol…
i just want to point out that this:
Whoever reacts to the other person is lower value. Girls

need to be able to spot this so they know they have the
highest-value guy.
is WHY asking the question about “well, what if they have

EQUAL subcomms, won’t the girl go for the ‘better
11/24/2019 Tribes
looking’ guy?” is to misunderstand the dynamic of

arousal… bc the guys in the interaction will NEVER have
‘equal’ subcomms…
But we have lifetimes of social conditioning pushing the

narrative that Steve Jobs isn’t sexy and a jacked dude is
sexy, because that narrative is based on history where that
was generally the case.
not to throw another distraction into the ‘debate’ (not sure

what else to call it…lol), but the ‘good looking = valuable’
value is ALSO a great way for the FI to keep most men
down (and sell those men shit they don’t need… as they
chase that ideal…) and it keeps them in their ‘place’ and
distracted…and producing… bc the narrative is that they
will NEVER be able to be successful with girls unless they
have/are [insert socially conditioned narrative value]…
it does seem like the inmates have taken over the asylum…
lol…keep fighting the good fight…
_____________
@Harrison Bergeron
props on trying to keep the focus on where it really

SHOULD be… = helping men to better their lives through
encouragement and PRACTICAL application of the
knowledge-base… (and good on you for cutting through the
‘crap’…lol
but that knowledge-base needs to be accurate… bc like

YaReally has pointed out, guys will use WHATEVER small
excuse they can find to avoid the pain of change. and just
that slightest hint of the remotest potential possibility that
‘looks/money/etc’ MIGHT matter WILL stop some of them
from making the effort…and THAT is the disservice to
those men that we are trying to avoid…
but it really is heartening to know that the basic message is

out there in good hands…lol
_____________
@Roused at 5:34am
ya, it really IS getting in the way of my work…lol…but like

a moth to the flame…lol…
____________
@Andy
fwiw, I’ve actually learned a little bit from this whole

discussion. One thing I don’t get is how subcomms relate to
cold reading, dhv stories, routines, adding value.
those are all opportunities to display your subcomms

(genetically high-value behavior cues)… good or bad…
Are social dynamics and subcomms interdependent?
yes, just like flour and sugar in a cake…lol…
______________
good luck, all!
@sentient you’ve been intentionally obtuse for over a week

now, constantly taking the argument into semantics.
Guest
Test it yourself, man. Go out and approach women with
good subcomms (please tell me you’ve at least picked up
what THOSE are by this point) and with bad. Report back
what you find. If you’re not tall dark and handsome, find
your best looking buddy, no homo, and have him do the
same. Report back what you find.
Because you’re so invested in this, you’re never going to be

convinced until you see it first hand.
 Loading...
11/24/2019 Tribes
@Yareally
mersonia  O F FL I NE  
The push back is
expected when you (in their view) attempt to take back the
greatest excuse (or ego boost) and something that during
Guest most of their youth they based their worth on…looks that is.
 Loading...
@YaReally
Author
Looks/muscles/money = attraction is not consistent.
Subcomms = attraction is.
What constitute good sub coms? Wait, don’t answer, it

doesn’t matter, because women will fuck dogs and no one
really knows, so just stay chipper and put out positive vibes
into the universe and anything you want will be yours.
Good sub coms are based on scientific evidence? Well

you’d better get your story straight with Scray then, because
according to him there is no such thing as Hypergamy or
AF/BB and the Red Pill is all just Hollywood trying to
convince you you suck because you’ve learned all the
wrong things – which again, don’t matter because no one
really knows and the science jury is still out on all that.
So what are good sub coms? Apparently they are anything

that confirms why you got the lay, but even then, women
will fuck dogs and no one ‘really’ knows.
YES, we all AGREE on this. SUBCOMMS indicate

survival/replication traits. That’s WHY they’re,
themselves, causing hardwired “I want to fuck this”
responses in girls.
No, apparently they really don’t:
except we don’t because once AGAIN a HUGE meta-

review of all the ovulation research turned up a)
almost zero statistically significant differences in mate
preference and b) pretty much no differences of even
small effect….
….idk how many counter-examples it takes to

disconfirm theories around these parts tho
the mating strategy could just be the same ALL THE

TIME: pursue the highest status dude.
So the good sub coms upon which RSD is based are entirely
speculative and only confirm a positive result because we
don’t really know what really turns women on ALL the
time.
Like I said, you and Scray really need to compare notes

because how he’s subjectively coming to what define good
sub coms (which still haven’t been concretely defined since
this debate got started) aren’t based on the same hardwired
cues that indicate survival/replication traits that you insist
they are.
So either we accept the personalized ‘science’ of Scray and

ignore 20+ years of research on intersexual dynamics, or we
rely on the ‘no one really knows’ theory and accept that
your sub coms communicate you’re positive and believe in
yourself (instead of what Hollywood has convinced you)
and HB9s will regularly want to fuck you.
But even then, women will fuck dogs, as long as those dogs
conform to what a sexy dog is as defined by Hollywood.
11/24/2019 Tribes
Harrison – Because
I’ve seen it first hand
is why I am convinced, you are a late comer to this
discussion. There is no semantic subterfuge. I’ve been very
Guest clear in language. “Looks” requires visual observation. You
don’t form impression on looks via text… those are the
endless strawmen that keep growing back in the field. That
also does not mean you can’t conjure an impression of A
look based on a text. But those things are not the same.
Please tell me you understand the difference here.
HABD – I’m glad we agree that biological responses are

hard wired and can also be modified [to differing degrees]
via conditioning. Saves me from posting the naked Lena
Dunham pic…
Yareally
Guest Please save your time (I enjoy all the RSD stuff for the
record btw) you are just planting more strawmen at this
point.
“Inspiration for the weekend, Tyler takes 3 girls off a better

looking guy”
There has never been any argument that good game will
defeat good looks in field. Read the sentence you wrote
“takes 3 girls OFF a better looking guy”. The entire
discussion is premised on the later part, the three girls are
with the better looking guy to START with. That is the
issue, initial attraction, how those 3 girls got with that
chodey poor subcomming loser in the FIRST place, not that
he would never lose them.
http://legendsrevealed.com/entertainment/wp-
content/uploads/2009/08/scarecrow.jpg
@HABD,
Author
we are saying that ‘social conditioning’ informs when
those hard-wired responses are triggered.
and those ‘attractive guy’ videos just reinforce what

WE are saying is going on… just look at the
subcomms those guys have, regardless of their looks…
= open relaxed posture, relaxed and happy facial
expression, non-needy (not leaning in), never
‘chasing’ the girl (not facing her directly), etc…
here are some concepts that i think are in play here,

that we haven’t specifically talked about bc we tend to
look past them…
halo effect – do you agree that this is an accurate

psych theory?… bc that’s all that’s going on wrt the
‘good looks through social conditioning’ =
‘expectation of valuable genetic traits’…
I totally agree it’s an accurate psych theory, but again, you

better get your story straight with Scray, because according
to him there is no hard scientific proof for anything that
corroborates what a woman’s ‘expectation of valuable
genetic traits’ really are.
Your argument is irrelevant, women will fuck dogs.
@viv
11/24/2019 Tribes
Guest ““If women are allowed to breed with whomever they want
free of concerns over provisioning, its reasonable to think
the distribution of phenotypes will change””
the distribution of phenotypes has been changing

throughout humanity’s history, that’s the point.
@sentient
“Women will respond/be attracted to good looks, but that

does not mean that looks will prevail over better game.
Better game does not preclude women being initially
attracted to looks.”
as i said like at the outset of the entire discussion….
looks don’t matter in the sense that there’s anything

UNIVERSAL or OBJECTIVE about them — i.e. constant
across evo time, i.e. -A- look that is -THE- look…
they matter in the sense that they prime a woman to treat

you and react to you a certain way because of social
conditioning
the first sense is the one that matters and fucks most guys
up because they end up believing that there is something
fundamentally wrong with them on a deep level.
like, go out….
you’ll meet jacked dudes, rich dudes, successful dudes who

are all broken as fuck inside by this external rat race.
@ya
“Because scray, myself, Tyler, etc put our dicks in <25yo

girls in 2016 and Rollo doesn't anymore and hasn't in years.
"
so much this.
hot women are desensitized to good looks.
a lot of manosphere guys really are focused in the 5-7 range

with women, which is probably why they hang on to the
ideas.
it's not until you snag a girl who is more physically

attractive than you are and you do it by being cooler that
you really start to understand the kind of underlying forces
at play.
@rollo
Guest ” because according to him there is no hard scientific proof

for anything that corroborates what a woman’s ‘expectation
of valuable genetic traits’ really are.”
1) ya, that’s right there isn’t. please show me HARD

scientific proof. if there’s a lot of debate and confusion
surrounding x or y, then you don’t have ‘hard scientific
proof’ yet.
the fact that this riles you is lol and just silly scientism that
is part and parcel of the FI.
that doesn’t mean there isn’t some stuff here that’s useful as
a matter of heuristics or very general guidelines….
2) ‘Your argument is irrelevant, women will fuck dogs.”‘
first, your comeback to this is that they’re the ‘abberration.’

that isn’t true. as we have seen from the studies where
women were ACTUALLY HOOKED UP TO
ELECTRODES, the women got wet from pretty much
anything.
you see, that is a FACT that takes a SHIT over the theory
you’re in love with.
now, i love summing it up as ‘women fuck dogs’ because it

ultimately boils down to that. seems like they can be primed
to fuck anyone or any thing, which MEANS that your
continued reliance on ‘but there’s a physiological response!’
doesn’t really shed light on anything.
11/24/2019 Tribes
Author you’ll meet jacked dudes, rich dudes, successful dudes

who are all broken as fuck inside by this external rat
race.
Not unlike Mystery (still suicidal), Owen (with his two

illegitimate children), Neil Strauss (who’s hawking this
shit) or Tucker Max?
 Loading...
Guest
21st century television made me do it, because the 50s.
 Loading...
quixotic  OF FL I N E  
@Frito
Guest Great post man. Reminds me of my buddies and how we

interact. If you have such reverence for your time with your
buddies though tell your wife NO.
I think you will regret taking her. Your buddies certainly

will. I fucking hate it when one of my boys thinks its cool
to bring his gf/wife to a guys only event. It does change it.
Even if your friends are still saying filthy vile shit in front
of her, it will not be the exact same interaction you would
have had without her there. For one you wont be able to
honestly and with complete freedom talk about women
(such as your wife), because she will be there.
I have a friend who thinks his wife is “one of the guys”

ugggggh I try to minimize hanging out with him now. Guy
time is sacred. And every year i get older it gets harder to
take guy trips, we are spaced out more, schedules busier
and harder to align, they have new baby or kids getting
older, life pulls us in different directions.
I quote your own post:
“The upshot of all of this is that I believe that women

invade male spaces and conquer them because we let them.
If we stuck to our guns and treated male spaces with the
reverence they deserve, women would fall in line.”
“My wife is begging me to allow her to join us for just one

night….. I haven’t agreed yet, but she knows what she’s in
for… This crowd will not pull punches just because a
woman is present.”
Of course she wants to be included. Of course she wants be

where the boys are. Don’t let her invade your most personal
sacred space you have been protecting for 30 years. Stick to
your guns. Treat male spaces with reference. She will fall in
line.
11/24/2019 Tribes
Relevant Patrice O’Neal quote:

You have never heard 4 guys out a party and one of them
goes, “You know what would make this party even better?
IF MY GIRL WAS HERE. She’s funny as a motherfucker.”
So fucking true lmao
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPUZyTXERtw
@YaReally, well, there you have it. You’re gonna have to

get on board the Scray train or disagree.
Author
@Scray, guess what? It also takes a shit on your theory
about what constitutes good sub coms and turns RSD into a
repackaging of The Secret for men.
 Loading...
@rollo
Guest “so just stay chipper and put out positive vibes into the
universe and anything you want will be yours.”
lol this is more accurate than you think, and the fact that
you believe it’s just RIDICULOUS says a lot
‘ because according to him there is no such thing as

Hypergamy or AF/BB and the Red Pill is all just
Hollywood trying to convince you you suck because you’ve
learned all the wrong things’
i didn’t say that.
i said you DON’T KNOW about the whole dual mating

strategy shit and that at this point it could just be a single
mating strategy. jury’s still out.
hypergamy definitely exists, but we don’t KNOW whether

it’s just a post-civilization development or something that’s
more innate.
the desire for social status, even if it’s innate, may either be
hijacked by something like hypergamy, or it may just
function like hypergamy.
once again, we don’t KNOW….
– which again, don’t matter because no one really knows

and the science jury is still out on all that.’
“So either we accept the personalized ‘science’ of Scray

and ignore 20+ years of research on intersexual dynamics’
it’s not personalized
lol read Karl Popper
he would shit all over what you’re trying to pass of as

science too
even evolutionary biologists, like Jerry Coyne, take regular

dumps on evo psych
‘‘no one really knows’ theory and accept that your sub coms
communicate you’re positive and believe in yourself
(instead of what Hollywood has convinced you) and HB9s
will regularly want to fuck you.’
ya pretty much.
it’s not ‘no one knows.’ it’s ‘chicks seem to dig high social
status’ so….
if your sub comms communicate that you are high social

status, hot chicks will be attracted….with attention paid to
how your circumstances interact with those subcomms.
‘ he’s subjectively coming to what define good sub coms

(which still haven’t been concretely defined since this
debate got started) aren’t based on the same hardwired cues
11/24/2019 Tribes
that indicate survival/replication traits that you insist they

are.’
the sub comms are universal and indicate high social

standing, so that’s not subjective
the more subtle point is that humans adopt different

strategies in different environments to survive.
so rather than some core set of ‘traits’ indicating good

survival — just think height or something static —- what if
an animal could just a) change its phenotype to match its
environment, and b) learn which phenotypes were thriving
in a particular environment.
holy shit, that’d be a huge advantage….and the subcomms

are shorthand for ‘THIS DUDE HAS THE TRAITS IN
THIS ENVIRONMENT that = WINNING = SURVIVAL’
‘But even then, women will fuck dogs, as long as those

dogs conform to what a sexy dog is as defined by
Hollywood.’
lol ya, which is why this whole discussion seems like the
other side refusing to completely swallow the REAL red
pill.
yes women will fuck dogs which is why i immediately

laugh when ppl start talking about how innately picky they
are, sorry. those two facts don’t go together.
@rollo
Guest “Not unlike Mystery (still suicidal), Owen (with his two
shit) or Tucker Max?”
ya
the level of frame and inner game you’d have to have to not
react to social pressure when you’re that level of celebrity is
several SDs to the right and probably some kind of
psychopathy —- like cult leaders
it’s not surprising that these hotshot nerds who opened

pandora’s box are running into tough spots.
altho i’m not sure what you’re beef is with Owen. so he had
some kids out of wedlock?
‘ It also takes a shit on your theory about what constitutes

good sub coms and turns RSD into a repackaging of The
Secret for men.’
it actually DOES NOT which is what I keep trying to

explain
the subcomms etc. are about social norms
this is why i qualify hypergamy to post-ag times b/c it may

not have been this way in hunter-gatherer tribes. seems like
the sex was given out freely way back when.
we agree that women and men simply don’t seek out sex in
the same way
from everything i’ve seen, they pretty much are passively
ready/up for it
so it could be that the good subcomms —> winning —>

activate conditioning “you can fuck this person” —> sex
b/c like i’ve said….you can put one girl and 4 nerds in a
room and close the door and she will fuck all of them at
once if she doesn’t think anyone will find out and she’ll
never suffer any bad social consequences from it.
so this would explain why in post-ag societies you have

these universal subcomms that seem to get pussy and it
would also explain why it is that women will fuck dogs.
it also would predict things like women getting off even if

they’re raped — which happens — and the trauma they
suffer is mostly about social norms and boundaries. if we
11/24/2019 Tribes
were in a society where sex was just freely given, it’d just
be another fuck.
So your entire premise of what constitute good sub coms is

entirely subjective to what your perceptions of women’s
Author
social conditioning is, thus RSD is selling sweet sunshine to
loser Betas. I don’t personally believe that, but that is your
premise.
And women will fuck dogs, but maybe we should wait for
some infield video of a great dane pulling 3 girls off of
Owen on the street before we confirm that?
 Loading...
IAS  O FF LI N E  
@Rollo: Mystery and the others do seem like they have bad
internals, but Tyler seems like he has very good internals.
Guest
I’m biased because I really like his videos though.
Can you clarify why you think Tyler has bad internals? Is it
just because he has kids without being in an LTR /
marriage? Given the legal system that seems pretty wise of
him to do so.
Didn’t Tucker Max precisely get betaized due to marrying

(or LTR’d) and having a kid? Seems like Tyler wanted kids
and got them without that, presumably because he doesn’t
want that.
 Loading...
@rollo
Guest “So your entire premise of what constitute good sub coms is
loser Betas. I don’t personally believe that, but that is your
premise.”
no…..
the subcomms that signal high social status, i.e. confidence,

slow-speaking, whatever…..are not subjective.
the ‘winning’/traits that —> those subcomms vary by

environment and society.
for example….
one guy wins at tennis –> high t —> core subcomms
one guy watches his fav basketball team win the

championship —> high t —> core subcomms
the subcomms are ALL the same……
and they ALL signal the SAME thing
‘ maybe we should wait for some infield video of a great

dane pulling 3 girls off of Owen on the street before we
confirm that?’
we should just review the studies that hooked electrodes up

to women’s vaginas lol
11/24/2019 Tribes
Guest @HABD Yea that’s why I was hesitant to pull back into the
practical, overview because you guys were doing such a
good job fighting the good fight in the trenches of language.
@sentient “I’ve been very clear in language. You don’t
form impression on looks via text… that also does not mean
you can’t conjure an impression of A look based on a text.
But those things are not the same. ” Very clear lol “The
entire discussion is premised on the later part, the three girls
are with the better looking guy to START with. That is the
issue,… Read more »
quixotic  OF FL I N E  
@Yareally
Guest Damn man thank you for posting that epic fucking
breakdown of Tyler’s pickup on Yellow girl. Haha poor
Blazer. I have been that blazer dude many times and i have
been the scumbag tyler while blazer dude stands and
watches (albeit with less hot girls lol – that chick in yellow
as smoking jeezus but I will get there if i keep putting in the
work). I remember the first time i saw a guy who dressed
worse than me, shorter, fatter do this “magical” game shit.
Now i know its not magic, its observable and its repeatable.
I’m sure my face was a lot like blazers: dumbstruck, angry,
jealous.
I have learned (and please correct me if i am wrong) that

Blazer would have been much better served if he had
“stayed in his lane” as Julien says. Meaning blazer should
have focused on making tyler compete against blazer in
blazers’s world instead of blazer competing against tyler in
tyler’s world.
Problem is tyler is a wrecking ball of social value, tyler

forces you to react to him. he is like a fire; you would look
weird and try hard if you “pretended” you didn’t’ notice a
fire. That is why Blazer becomes invisible, he doesnt want
to give tyler value and in blazer’s mind he is trying to figure
out a strategy in the moment to compete against tyler.
and your first instinct as blazer guy is to “compete” but the

second you do, you are playing tylers game and tyler is a
master of his own game. So what would you recommend
blazer do (if he could get over his ego and admit tyler just
AMOGed him)
1. Join tyler’s frame and try to befriend tyler. Like you said
tyler can’t fuck all 3 and tyler is a friendly social guy so
would joining tyler’s frame and adding value (not just
mocking tyler or being passive agressive) and being
genuine “disarm” tyler?
2. Trying to keep Red’s attention on Blazer by Blazer being
interesting, high value in his own way and making Red
come into Blazer’s world
3. Trying to get tyler to join Blazer’s frame
Like you can’t beat Ahh-nuld at the bench press so make

ahh-nuld compete against you at ______ (your best skill)
I guess what I’m asking is how would you deal with tyler in
this exact situation?
My answer is I would acknowledge reality: I would try to

engage tyler and tell him damn man you are a social
wrecking ball you have these girls eating out of your hand –
teach me lol”
I would not do it in an ass-kissing needy way, but its the

truth. If you see someone do something amazing/skillful,
you are impressed with it and want to know more. A person
with confidence would want to learn more and would not
feel ego pain. Like meeting ahhh-nuld would not make me
stare and my arms and feel bad, it would motivate me and
make me admire him and allow me to learn from him.
Also I agree on your analysis of the vids of the handsome

unreactive guy. The part where he is on the bus is amazing
it happens so fast like microseconds where he does kissy
ducklips to slight eyebrow raise and then goes for the kiss
11/24/2019 Tribes
and keeps on plowing til he gets it. My favorite part of these

is there are in spanish. Watching with the volume off is a
big help, you are forced to watch the teeny tiny reactions or
non-reactions and see how people ping off of each other.
Harrison
Guest “Very clear lol” – so you understand the difference or not?
“Since we didn’t see their initial interaction, it’s impossible

to tell how he got them interested in the first place. ”
We have to play the strawmen as we find them

unfortunately. Much is unknown.
“You can’t have one without the other, except maybe like
you see a headshot on Tinder. ”
So you can’t have one until you can. I agree.
 Loading...
“you’ll meet jacked dudes, rich dudes, successful dudes

who are all broken as fuck inside by this external rat race.
Guest
Not unlike Mystery (still suicidal), Owen (with his two
smh… What are you defending blue pill ideals now? Or are
money and muscles a red pill ideal? Marriage? Sigh…
“Illegitimate” children… Come on.
 Loading...
Scray
Guest “the first sense is the one” that is bounded by biology…
“the first sense is the one that matters and fucks most guys
like, go out….
are all broken as fuck inside by this external rat race.”
And this is the underlying cognitive bias, the pain and fear.
 Loading...
Author the ‘winning’/traits that —> those subcomms vary by

environment and society.
Ergo, sub coms are NOT universal, but subjective to

environment and society. So what pass for good sub coms
and good internals (again, still undefined) in one social
environment are subjectively bad in another.
But,…
one guy wins at tennis –> high t —> core subcomms
Wow, sounds almost like the stimulus of winning prompting

a testosterone rush was an evolved trait that in turn
11/24/2019 Tribes
prompted social sub coms that women evolved to be

attuned to as sexy?
But,…
the subcomms are ALL the same……
and they ALL signal the SAME thing
Hmmm, well that would imply that there actually ARE

some universally evolved cues (sub coms) that, on a root
level, indicate a better breeding potential. Now, what
extrinsic cues might imply an individual would be
exemplary of those sexy sub coms, since now those sub
coms DON’T vary by environment and society?
In fact, what sub coms might imply a man’s potential

sexiness while a woman is in the proliferative phase of her
ovulatory cycle?
Wait, don’t answer that, women will fuck dogs. I’m actually
surprised we haven’t encountered a dog-human hybrid yet.
@sentient
Guest No I don’t understand your differentiation between looks

and A look.
You’re leaving no choice but to invent straw men and guess

at what you’re argument is. You have no counterpoints.
“Can’t until you can…”

Again, you’re not responding to the content of any
comments. My example was as close as you can get to
“looks in a vacuum” or looks with no context, which
doesn’t exist in the real world.
 Loading...
“I’m actually surprised we haven’t encountered a dog-

human hybrid yet.”
Guest
I wonder what difference there might be that would allow
women to fuck dogs, and yet still be picky about men.
Is a puzzlement.
 Loading...
fleezer  OF FL I NE  
“There is no such thing as Sweet 22.”
Guest ^ THIS!!
the social conditioning here is amazing. guys what to talk

about real human nature/firmware/evo psych and then back
off the second it gets socially uncomfortable.
“why is 17 better?”
took a look at what the girls do.
girls in their prime: wear whatever they want (usually going

for comfort). eat whatever they want. wear little to no
makeup. never “work out”
why would a 23 year old dress uncomfotably according to

some hazy “fashion” rules, obesses over her diet, cake her
face in makeup and spend hours per week “working out”?
those are all perfect examples of attempts to mitigate

declining SMV.
11/24/2019 Tribes
@rollo
Guest “Ergo, sub coms are NOT universal”

‘So what pass for good sub coms and good internals (again,
still undefined) in one social environment are subjectively
bad in another.’
nope. not sure what’s getting lost in translation
X LEADS TO HIGHER T WHICH LEADS TO

SUBCOMMS
the subcomms are ALL THE SAME
the variable is X or what constitutes ‘winning.’
‘Wow, sounds almost like the stimulus of winning

prompting a testosterone rush was an evolved trait that in
turn prompted social sub coms that women evolved to be
attuned to as sexy?’
lol welcome to the party ace, here’s what i already said —>
‘.seems like there’s less variance wrt to test levels rising

after successful competition in men.
competition.
speculative.’
‘Hmmm, well that would imply that there actually ARE

level, indicate a better breeding potentia’
lol no one has taken the position that there aren’t……
‘Now, what extrinsic cues might imply an individual would

be exemplary of those sexy sub coms, since now those sub
coms DON’T vary by environment and society?’
well actually, it would be more advantageous if the cues

were behavioral because it would grant the most
flexibility….
@sentient
Let me take a step back. All I’ve seen you do is respond to
Guest
others comments, explanations, reasoning, etc. Which is
great, its the only way to really flesh out ideas.
Maybe you already have and I missed it but, could you

explain your position on how and why looks matter?
Quantify the advantage.
 Loading...
@fleezer
Guest “girls in their prime: wear whatever they want (usually

going for comfort). eat whatever they want. wear little to no
makeup. never “work out””
k well as a matter of bio girls are at their best sometime

between 20-30, probably between 20-25. White women esp
11/24/2019 Tribes
top out at 23-26. that’s when they’re the most fertile….
 Loading...
Men go out to sarge because they want to make as many

babies as possible.
Guest
 Loading...
Author lol no one has taken the position that there aren’t……
Except that you have, because the tangible biologically

advantage cues that account for good sub coms are based on
evolved aspects of a Hypergamy you claim doesn’t exist (or
hasn’t been concretely proven to your subjective
satisfaction).
Either that or they are subjective to whatever environment

conditions women to interpret them as beneficial, whether
they are or not.
 Loading...
Tin Man  O FF LI N E  
Women Talk, Men Do … That piece of wisdom is priceless.
Guest And for the past few decades, men have become more
concerned with what women are saying, than about what
we are doing. I have a thought, let’s quit caring what they
way, and start caring about what we do.
 Loading...
Tin Man  O FF LI N E  
…what they say**
Guest
 Loading...
@rollo
Guest “Except that you have, because the tangible biologically

advantage cues that account for good sub coms are based on
evolved aspects of a Hypergamy you claim doesn’t exist”
lol
first of all, they don’t need to be based off of hypergamy to

exist so there’s a completely unnecessary assumption in
your argument.
the feedback loop could simply exist to enable tribes to

work as a more cohesive unit, the tribe defers to Bob for
hunting fish because Bob is good at hunting fish and ACTS
like it, so he is the ‘fish’ guy, but when it comes to hunting
birds, Tim is the guy and ACTS like it, so Tim is the bird
guy, and so on and so on…..
second of all….
so i claimed hypergamy doesn’t exist?
11/24/2019 Tribes
that’s funny:
‘hypergamy definitely exists, but we don’t KNOW whether

it’s just a post-civilization development or something that’s
more innate.’
it’s as if I said exactly the OPPOSITE of what you said I

said.
I went on to further say —>
‘the desire for social status, even if it’s innate, may either be
hijacked by something like hypergamy, or it may just
function like hypergamy.’
hypergamy could be a post-civ development that taps into

the natural desire to pay attention to those subcomms, or it
could be THE natural desire.
hard to say. we don’t know at this point — it doesn’t seem

like it works that way in hunter gatherer societies and that
sex is more freely given (for me not to acknowledge this
would be to IGNORE facts that are inconvenient for a
particular worldview) and maybe sexual selection operates
more at the genital/sperm level, but none of what i said =
hypergamy doesn’t exist or that there aren’t any evolved
cues that play into attraction.
‘Either that or they are subjective to whatever environment

conditions women to interpret them as beneficial, whether
they are or not.’
no dude omg
the VARIABLE is WHAT traits = winning
so in a forest, you’d have a suite of traits that would =

winning
in a desert, the same, etc. etc.
they won’t be the same but they will confer the advantage
in that environment. and the SIGNAL that X or Y has those
traits is the subcomms….
pretty simple point that you keep twisting and turning away
from
Rollo, nobody has ever said that it isn’t possible to be so

delusionally sure of your false, socially conditioned, FI
Guest
value system that you can have good subcomms. I believe
that YaReally even pointed out Trump as an example. The
point is that the external attributes are NOT the common
denominator…
 Loading...
“Women Talk, Men Do . . .”
Guest I think that what sets me apart from the average

MGTOWish guy is that I am not butt hurt over that. I don’t
even understand being butt hurt over that.
I note that we have a word to describe people who do

nothing: vegetable.
I am not a vegetable. I am an animal, which is to say:

animate. I do shit.
“I have a thought, let’s quit caring what they way, and start
caring about what we do.”
That would have saved Sweden and Germany.
 Loading...
11/24/2019 Tribes
@Andy, that isn’t it though. I have no quibble with the sub

coms indicating various ‘sexy’ aspects of a man’s breeding
Author potential. As I said before all of this I entirely subscribe to
why Game is effective and learning and internalizing it is
effective.
What I disagree with is the underpinnings as to why those

sub coms are positive or negative in the first place. What I
disagree with is dismissing wholesale the evolutionary
psych research that essentially confirms everything Game
elicits in men and women.
There is a social component to Hypergamy, I’ve made this

connection countless times on this blog, but the reason it’s
extrapolated into a social/political arena is because it exists
on the personal and evolved biological level.
@rollo
Guest “What I disagree with is the underpinnings as to why those

sub coms are positive or negative in the first place.”
except not really!
here is what you just said: —>
‘, sounds almost like the stimulus of winning prompting a

testosterone rush was an evolved trait that in turn prompted
social sub coms that women evolved to be attuned to as
sexy?’’
which is essentially restating what I said AWHILE AGO —

>
‘seems like there’s less variance wrt to test levels rising

after successful competition in men.
competition.
speculative.’’
‘ the reason it’s extrapolated into a social/political arena is

because it exists on the personal and evolved biological
level.’
okay but here’s your problem…
you’re falling into adaptationism and refusing to consider

other REAL aspects of evolution like spandrels, accident,
random drift, etc.
this is why I qualified my statements on hypergamy,

because yes it is exists BUT what we don’t know is whether
it’s a hack into something else that is innate or it itself is the
innate thing.
this uncertainty bothers you for whatever reason
“What I disagree with is dismissing wholesale the

evolutionary psych research that essentially confirms
Guest
everything Game elicits in men and women.
There is a social component to Hypergamy, I’ve made this

connection countless times on this blog, but the reason it’s
11/24/2019 Tribes
extrapolated into a social/political arena is because it exists

on the personal and evolved biological level.”
Agreed.
Saying, “hypergamy could be a post-civ development that

taps into the natural desire to pay attention to those
subcomms, or it could be THE natural desire.” is an easy
cop out, if you don’t accept any evo psych researched data
as base facts then the whole RP foundational pillars will
crumble.
@Rollo
“What constitute good sub coms? Wait, don’t answer, it
Guest
doesn’t matter, because women will fuck dogs and no one
really knows, so just stay chipper and put out positive vibes
into the universe and anything you want will be yours.”
Are you kidding? Good subcomms are shit like:
– confidence
– assuming attraction
– leading the interaction
– leader of men
– entitlement to engage her
– entitlement to be physical with her
– confident eye-contact
– laser/bedroom/sexual eye-contact
– confident body-language
– comfort touching her body
– comfort talking about or demonstrating sex/sexuality
– decisiveness
– comfort invading her space
– expecting good reactions
– being unreactive
– having a strong frame
– holding that frame when its tested
– passing shit-tests
– good neutral/breaking rapport tonality
– authoritative demeanor
– outcome independence
– not seeking reactions
– not seeking validation
– preselection
– social proof
– being expressive/emotive
– immunity to social pressure
– etc etc etc etc etc
Like, how do you not know this stuff? This is pickup 101.
All of these traits are traits that 1) ALWAYS increase your
attractiveness (whereas as the buff gay guy singing britney
spears shows that muscles don’t always increase your
attractiveness), 2) demonstrate that you have probably
fucked girls like her or better which is why you have all
those subcomms when you interact with her (whereas a guy
who hasn’t fucked girls like her before will project bad
subcomms because he won’t feel entitled, will seek her
validation, will have worse eye-contact, etc etc), and 3)
demonstrate you have high survival/replication value,
probably have high T, etc etc, all good things that trigger
hardwired attraction in women.
If you give a girl laser eye-contact, pass a shit-test and then

cut the space on her (get your faces close together as you
hold laser eye-contact), she WILL get nipples hardening
and panties soaking. Because your subcomms are triggering
her hardwired involuntary biological responses.
This is BASIC game, man. Like, day one of seduction

school here. How am I having to explain this??
Social conditioning has taught her that a jacked/rich guy is

likely to have a bunch of those subcomms, moreso than a
Tyler, so when she has to choose based purely on looks,
she’ll play the odds and go with the jacked/rich guy. But it’s
not his muscles/money that cause that biological response,
11/24/2019 Tribes
it’s his potential to have, or having, those subcomms that

she’s hardwired to be attracted to.
“So what are good sub coms? Apparently they are anything
that confirms why you got the lay, but even then, women
will fuck dogs and no one ‘really’ knows.”
No, you and Sentient keep doing that Feminist style arguing
where you go “oh what?? You disagree?? Well how do you
KNOW??? I’m going to ignore every time you list it out
FOR me and just exaggerate your position and then claim
NO ONE CAN UNDERSTAND IT IT’S ALL MAGIC”
and flip the Monopoly board over.
All of the things I listed above are things that are VERY
OBSERVABLE IN ANY VIDEO OF ANY HUMAN
BEING, ESPECIALLY INTERACTING WITH
ANOTHER HUMAN BEING.
This isn’t some woo-woo magic. Watch some infield/Keys

to the VIP and watch for these things. There RIGHT
THERE in front of you.
“So the good sub coms upon which RSD is based are
entirely speculative”
They absolutely would SEEM speculative if you 1) don’t do

your homework and I have to actually list them out FOR
you (wtf), 2) don’t watch the infield and infield breakdowns
I link regularly, and 3) don’t go out and look for this stuff in
real life because you refuse to believe it exists or it existing
would endanger your inaccurate world view.
“because we don’t really know what really turns women on

ALL the time”
We DO know, that’s what we’re trying to tell you. But you

don’t want to hear it because you’re fully invested in the
looks/money paradigm the FI has set up.
“you and Scray really need to compare notes because how

he’s subjectively coming to what define good sub coms”
Because he’s going out, he’ll come across them. I doubt he

would disagree with any of the giant list I just made above
and could probably add some more himself.
“(which still haven’t been concretely defined since this

debate got started)”
That’s because we kind of assume guys on a red pill

message board that talks about attraction regularly actually
understand the bare minimum basics of seduction/pickup.
But apparently we were wrong lol That’s why we’re all
mystified that we have to even explain this stuff. How do
you not know this??
“But even then, women will fuck dogs, as long as those

dogs conform to what a sexy dog is as defined by
Hollywood.”
Dogs naturally have a good handful of those subcomms I

listed.
“because according to him there is no hard scientific proof

for anything that corroborates what a woman’s ‘expectation
of valuable genetic traits’ really are.”
What we have is a HUGE load of infield evidence from the

last 15 years of pickup being widespread, showing us that
VERY CONSISTENTLY the things I’ve listed above
trigger hardwired attraction in women, and TONS of
evidence showing that muscles/money do not. As soon as
Harvard figures out how to run an experiment to test why
women fuck Tyler, we’ll be happy to look at their
experiment and pick apart whether its flawed or well
designed. Maybe you should E-Mail them some Tyler
infield to review?
@Sentient
“You don’t form impression on looks via text…”
No you form an impression of the guy’s SUBCOMMS via

text. Because that’s what they’re looking for, to figure out if
you have the subcomms of a high-value guy or not.
“I’m glad we agree that biological responses are hard wired

and can also be modified [to differing degrees] via
11/24/2019 Tribes
conditioning.”
I’ve never disagreed with that, you’ve misinterpreted what

I’m saying if you think I have.
“Please save your time (I enjoy all the RSD stuff for the
record btw) you are just planting more strawmen at this
point.”
You can’t just call anything that shows you’re wrong “a

strawman”.
“Read the sentence you wrote “takes 3 girls OFF a better

looking guy””
I know you get a boner for semantics but he’s just a guy
who happened to approach those girls. “OFF” doesn’t mean
they were all fawning over him and sucking his dick. It
means that he was engaging the group.
“That is the issue, initial attraction, how those 3 girls got

with that chodey poor subcomming loser in the FIRST
place, not that he would never lose them”
They were not attracted to him, despite his looks, they were
engaging with him because he approached them.
“Please save your time”
I probably SHOULD save my time because you’re clearly

ignoring everything I’m posting that you don’t agree with
and aren’t actually looking at anything I’m putting up to
explain how attraction actually works.
@scray
“they matter in the sense that they prime a woman to treat
you and react to you a certain way because of social
conditioning
the first sense is the one that matters and fucks most guys
like, go out….

are all broken as fuck inside by this external rat race.”
This. And a handful of them will be created by the red pill

guys pushing “looks matter” when they don’t even know
what a list of good subcomms looks like.
“hot women are desensitized to good looks.
a lot of manosphere guys really are focused in the 5-7 range

with women, which is probably why they hang on to the
ideas.
it’s not until you snag a girl who is more physically

attractive than you are and you do it by being cooler that
you really start to understand the kind of underlying forces
at play.”
Maybe that’s it, who knows. Maybe these guys have pulled
girls that are within their “looks range” (by social
conditioning’s standards) and can’t relate to pulling girls
that are WAY “out of their league” (by social conditioning’s
standards, wouldn’t want Sentient to jump on semantics
again by forgetting to mention that obvious bit). I can’t
wrap my head around how guys studying/teaching
attraction don’t understand this stuff.
@scray @Rollo
“first, your comeback to this is that they’re the
‘abberration.’ that isn’t true. as we have seen from the
studies where women were ACTUALLY HOOKED UP TO
ELECTRODES, the women got wet from pretty much
anything.”
See that’s a decently designed study, because it’s not a self-

survey and it’s not testing at a different time than “in the
moment”, it’s testing actual responses in the moment. I’d
love to see more studies designed like this.
@Rollo
“you’ll meet jacked dudes, rich dudes, successful dudes
who are all broken as fuck inside by this external rat race.”
11/24/2019 Tribes
“Not unlike Mystery (still suicidal), Owen (with his two

1) scray is pointing out that guys internals/subcomms don’t

get fixed by getting muscles/looks, which fucks them up
2) Owen seems pretty happy, dude runs a multi-million

dollar company, has passed on his genes (“illegitimate
children”? Really? Should he get married Rollo? Do you
look down on guys who have children outside of marriage
now? Have you been replaced with a Feminazi? Why are
you shaming men for living outside of the Feminist
Imperitive now?), lives in a mansion, has a shitload of well-
connected high-value friends/networks, doesn’t drink
smoke or do drugs, eats healthier than most of us, and walks
around with a smile on his face helping thousands of guys
change their lives. But ya, let’s go the character
assassination route, just like Feminists…”I don’t like your
message because it goes against what I believe, so let’s
insult and judge the person giving the message” What
happened to the whole “truth, regardless of where it comes
from” thing?
3) the other guys were in the early PUA community which

didn’t focus as much on internals/subcomms because we
were still figuring out the external side of things. Now that
we have more data/experience to work from, we understand
the internal/subcomm side of things better and push guys to
develop that inner/subcomm stuff so they don’t end up like
those guys
It’s amazing to me how hostile and lashing out you are

about having your beliefs about looks/money challenged by
guys who are regularly stunting over your theories infield
and can consistently explain how they’re doing it and why
it works and link videos and in-depth breakdown
explanations of it.
“this is why I qualified my statements on hypergamy,

because yes it is exists BUT what we don’t know is whether
Guest
it’s a hack into something else that is innate or it itself is the
innate thing.”
lol? hypergamy is biological built in firmware for the

female species, there are numerous resources and data on
this subject not only written by rollo but others in the
manoshpere.
 Loading...
@bromeo
Guest ” is an easy cop out, if you don’t accept any evo psych
researched data as base facts then the whole RP
foundational pillars will crumble.”
yeah it’s called accounting for all the facts.
“if you don’t accept any evo psych researched data as base
facts then the whole RP foundational pillars will crumble.”
lol i accept ALL of it, and there’s A LOT of it that

contradicts your worldview. sorry
 Loading...
@bromeo
11/24/2019 Tribes
Guest “lol? hypergamy is biological built in firmware for the

female species, there are numerous resources and data on
this subject not only written by rollo but others in the
manoshpere.”
please show me studies on the heritability of ‘hypergamy’

or the genes for it and the mechanism or just stfu talking out
your ass
 Loading...
“What I disagree with is dismissing wholesale the

evolutionary psych research that essentially confirms
Guest
everything Game elicits in men and women.”
It’s obvious that practically speaking hypergamy exists… I

don’t really see how that ties into looks matter though…
Subcomms convey sexual value. A handsome guy that can

buy her a black Tahoe to cart the kids around in conveys
socially conditioned value. Nobody wants to be the second
guy. So… Looks don’t matter.
 Loading...
And I am saying it is foolish to arbitrarily throw out

decades of peer reviewed studies about the biological basis
Author
of Hypergamy because it doesn’t slot in nicely with a social
constructivist narrative.
When I make a post like this

https://therationalmale.com/2014/12/17/estrus/
I’m not suggesting that men are beholden to the dictates of

Hypergamy from a biological perspective, just that it exists
as a framework that can either hinder or benefit a man
employing Game. I’ve had women flush tampons for a SNL
so they could fuck me that night. Obviously my sub coms,
appearance, internals, social proof, etc. was such that I was
perceived as ‘high priority’ breeding potential and
ovulatory influence be damned. But there was still a battery
of triggers that cued these girl’s tingles in spite of
themselves. There is still an evolved biological architecture
that makes those sub coms valued or refused.
” . . . the reason it’s extrapolated into a social/political arena

is because it exists on the personal and evolved biological
Guest
level.”
No man has an instinct to power dive on a sparrow.

No falcon has an instinct to grab an ass.
No Galapagos Iguana worries , despite having a lizard

brain.
No man can avoid worrying, or being startled by a noise
behind him the dark.
Because for millions of years sudden death came to him and

his from above and behind.
The noise is not death, it only implies that there might be

death, but the reflexive response is to worry and start at
noises in the dark. This is not conditioned into him by
television. It is moderating it that requires conditioning.
And men do not go out sarging to make babies. They go out

to fuck, even though babies are the purpose of fucking and
fucking only implies babies.
11/24/2019 Tribes
Hard wiring for proxies not only works, but it often works
better than hard wiring for the primary would. If you stop to
investigate whether or not the noise is a leopard, it’s much,
much too late if it is.
Lol.
Here is the best infield for Yareally and scary and for all the
Guest
ugly short fat bald guy.
Do us all a favor and :
Go to a sperm bank and try to sell your sperm.

You will be for a rude awaking.
LAUGHING OUT LOUD.
Ps,
Those women in Tyler’s photos , I wouldn’t even look at
them.
 Loading...
@rollo
Guest “And I am saying it is foolish to arbitrarily throw out

decades of peer reviewed studies about the biological basis
of Hypergamy because it doesn’t slot in nicely with a social
constructivist narrative.”
it isn’t arbitrary when a meta-analysis of nearly 50

published studies comes up with data that FLATLY
DESTROYS the theory.
that is a RED FLAG, no matter what ‘data massaging’

rebuttals come out.
‘ about the biological basis of Hypergamy because it

doesn’t slot in nicely with a social constructivist narrative.’
this is just another unwarranted assumption that hypergamy

must be based on a dual mating strategy. it need not be…
‘just that it exists as a framework that can either hinder or

benefit a man employing Game.’
but ceteris paribus game is always a positive.
@keyser soze
Guest dude you’ve been hollering at me for days with no

response. take a hint, i don’t like you like that.
 Loading...
@scary,
Boy, my last comment gave you a rude awaking already.
Guest
Ps,
Do forgot, go to sperm bank and try to sell your sperm, that
will be enough for you to believe in looks are every thing.
 Loading...
11/24/2019 Tribes
– confidence
– assuming attraction
Author – leading the interaction
– leader of men
– entitlement to engage her
– entitlement to be physical with her
– confident eye-contact
– laser/bedroom/sexual eye-contact
– confident body-language
– comfort touching her body
– comfort talking about or demonstrating
sex/sexuality
– decisiveness
– comfort invading her space
– expecting good reactions
– being unreactive
– having a strong frame
– holding that frame when its tested
– passing shit-tests
– good neutral/breaking rapport tonality
– authoritative demeanor
– outcome independence
– not seeking reactions
– not seeking validation
– preselection
– social proof
– being expressive/emotive
– immunity to social pressure
– etc etc etc etc etc
Every article on this list can be directly linked to hardwired

sexual selection cues, but that’s only relevant if you accept
that Hypergamy is rooted in a biologically evolved context.
Would you agree that these sub coms were attractive male
traits in ancient Egypt? How about feudal Japan? Colonial
America?
Hypergamy didn’t start in the 1930’s when Hollywood

began producing movies. In fact, the vast majority of
leading male actors relied on all of these sub coms in their
acting well before Hollywood became what it is.
Yareally trying to sell his sperm at the sperm bank :
Guest ” but I have good subcomms ”

Lol.
 Loading...
Lets just throw out all the evo psyc research and studies and
what RP is founded on and just accept all the facets of game
Guest
as fact because they just somehow work infield… lol
ridiculous
 Loading...
@Rollo
” Would you agree that these sub coms were attractive male
Guest
America?”
Yes. That’s what we’ve been arguing…but that’s not what

you’ve been arguing…
11/24/2019 Tribes
Lol this is the layer below ‘looks’, these are the attributes
that ARE always attractive. To put it into Scray’s formula,
these are the behaviours of successful, high achieving
men…winners…regardless of society. What causes a man
to be a winner, to exhibit these traits my vary across time
and space (biggest herd of cows, killing blow on the
mastodon, etc.) but a man who wins will act as such.
 Loading...
SFC Ton
why not just punch him in the face?

one thing I dislike about game is its reliance on others
playing nice
 Loading...
“Every article on this list can be directly linked to

hardwired sexual selection cues, but that’s only relevant if
Guest
you accept that Hypergamy is rooted in a biologically
evolved context.”
Why? Is this the whole pareto distribution thing? What if in

the hunter/gatherer days 90% of the guys were Alpha? We
don’t know either way, but we’re born Alpha. It would
make sense.
 Loading...
” . . . just accept all the facets of game as fact because they

just somehow work infield…”
Guest
If they work infield it is a fact that they work infield. If it
works infield and there is a theory that says it doesn’t, it is
the theory that is wrong.
 Loading...
@scray @Rollo
“which is why this whole discussion seems like the other
Guest
side refusing to completely swallow the REAL red pill”
That’s basically what it looks like. It’s surreal to see the

hostility. Like trying to get Blue Pill guys to accept
AWALT.
“yes women will fuck dogs which is why i immediately

laugh when ppl start talking about how innately picky they
are, sorry. those two facts don’t go together.”
The consistent theme between fucking a dog and fucking a

Tyler and fucking a Chad Thundercock (who DOES have
all the subcomms he’s “supposed” to have) is the subcomms
triggering her hardwired attraction triggers.
Very simple and consistent.
“it also would predict things like women getting off even if
they’re raped — which happens — and the trauma they
suffer is mostly about social norms and boundaries.”
This. What’s happening in a rape? A whole shitload of

those subcomms I listed (like being entitled to physically
manhandle her, being immune to social
pressure/consequences, dominance, etc). Funny how many
11/24/2019 Tribes
girls don’t even realize they were raped until their friends
judge/shame/lead them into believing it.
“So your entire premise of what constitute good sub coms is

loser Betas.”
You really need to quit exaggerating your point, it makes

your argument sound ridiculous. Nothing we’ve said
contradicts what RSD teaches. You and Sentient just
apparently somehow don’t know what subcomms are
because you somehow slept through day one of seduction
school lol
“I don’t personally believe that, but that is your premise.”
You can believe anything you like. All that matters is what
the field evidence shows. And the field evidence shows that
“muscles = attractive” doesn’t hold up.
“And women will fuck dogs, but maybe we should wait for
some infield video of a great dane pulling 3 girls off of
Owen on the street before we confirm that?”
What would be the point, you’ll just say they’re hired actor
dogs and all have pointy elbows and they’re outliers.
@Harrison
“Yea that’s why I was hesitant to pull back into the
practical,”
For the record I do get what you were trying to say/do with
the practical aspect and do agree, it’s just that right now the
discussion is 100% about what’s ACCURATE more than
feel-good stuff because we’re surprised we’ve run into such
resistance to what’s blatantly obvious infield.
If what we saw infield contradicted what we’re saying and

we saw that looks DO matter, I’d be one of the first ones to
switch completely and say “nope, the field shows looks
matter, get to the gym guys” because I want guys to succeed
and handle this part of their life. I have no investment in a
theory or method, it’s just what we see infield contradicts
the current “theories” by guys who aren’t infield and don’t
have the depth of understanding of pickup/seduction/game
that we do (as evidenced by me having to list subcomms).
“Since we didn’t see their initial interaction, it’s impossible

to tell how he got them interested in the first place. Are you
saying it was 100% his good looks? Because even if he was
*just standing there* he is giving off subcomms through his
body language”
If you see the actual video and hear Tyler’s breakdown etc,
you can see all the body-language stuff that shows the guy
very clearly just approached them with his buddy and was
just going with whatever girl was the most engaging
because he has shitty unconfident subcomms, that’s how he
ended up focused on the Red dress girl and why Owen had
no problem opening the other two girls who were BORED
with the good-looking guy and his friend and their shitty
subcomms.
But it’s funny how Sentient goes RIGHT TO “SEE??? They

were talking to him BECAUSE OF HIS LOOKS!!!!” Like
there was no other possiblity in his mind of how that
situation could happen. Says exactly how socially
conditioned he is that he would assume that.
In my descriptions of what’s happening I almost FORGOT

to mention that Tyler’s girl was taller than him and had to
go back and add that in because it’s so irrelevant to me and
I had to remind myself “oh ya, that’s a thing that these guys
will think is important” lol
@quixotic
“Damn man thank you for posting that epic fucking
breakdown of Tyler’s pickup on Yellow girl”
The actual vid and Tyler’s breakdown are excellent. I’ll try
to link it when it goes up somewhere linkable.
“Haha poor Blazer. I have been that blazer dude many times
and i have been the scumbag tyler while blazer dude stands
and watches”
11/24/2019 Tribes
lol we all have been that guy. That’s why I lol’ed so hard
and had to screencap his face when he realizes he’s blown
out completely. That facial expression is SO PERFECT lol
You can just read the confusion and FML on his face. I love
it. I see that a lot when I’m doing my thing at the bar from
the guys around me when I’m on fire.
“(albeit with less hot girls lol – that chick in yellow as

smoking jeezus but I will get there if i keep putting in the
work)”
The biggest understanding that Tyler had from day one was
“I can do whatever these other guys are doing if I just learn
to do what they’re doing”. There’s absolutely no reason you
won’t get girls like that if you put in your infield hours and
do your Field Reports etc
“I remember the first time i saw a guy who dressed worse

than me, shorter, fatter do this “magical” game shit. Now i
know its not magic, its observable and its repeatable. I’m
sure my face was a lot like blazers: dumbstruck, angry,
jealous.”
lol sorry dude you must’ve imagined that ’cause looks =

attraction and those subcomms I listed are just magical
unobservable invisible things so it was all just an illusion
you made up in your mind. lol
“that Blazer would have been much better served if he had

“stayed in his lane” as Julien says. Meaning blazer should
have focused on making tyler compete against blazer in
blazers’s world instead of blazer competing against tyler in
tyler’s world.”
Right. This is big in the high-end scene when a guy like me

(who obviously doesn’t belong there) enters it (I love dolled
up girls so I love that scene). That environment and the
people in it will try to suck me into their value system
where I’m the bottom rung. So I have to go in with a strong
enough frame that I suck THEM into MY value system,
where suits are kind of stuffy, dolling up is kind of try-hard,
being dressed chill/casual is much cooler and high-value,
etc
“Problem is tyler is a wrecking ball of social value, tyler

forces you to react to him.”
Exactly. The reason I can suck those people into my frame

is because I’ve put in a ton of infield hours to develop a
strong frame and resist social pressure etc Tyler is that
x10000 and forces everyone around him to react to him.
That’s why Blazer becomes invisible, because Tyler
captures all the girls’ RAS and the Blazer guy doesn’t know
how to get it back. That’s part of why I say a lot of good-
looking guys rely on their looks and rely on no interference
and rely on the bare minimum good subcomms to get by, so
they’ll still get laid, as long as no one interferes. Blazer
probably wouldn’t have even made it past the Red
cockblock ’cause she was so intense and he looks like a
Nice Guy.
“he is like a fire; you would look weird and try hard if you
“pretended” you didn’t’ notice a fire”
lol exactly. It would be weirder NOT to fall into Tyler’s

frame or NOT to react to it. And Tyler knows that. The
thing is, in the actual video he’s VERY chill and laid back.
The ONLY crazy move he does is when he picks the girl up
physcially (which he just does ONCE to show that he’s
comfortable touching/manhandling her, the ENTIRE rest of
the set he’s laid back and barely even touching her and very
chill and low energy and unreactive to everything).
But he knows the perfect TIMING to pull out a big move

like that and blow the other guy out and spike
attraction/temperatures in the group.
“That is why Blazer becomes invisible, he doesnt want to

give tyler value and in blazer’s mind he is trying to figure
out a strategy in the moment to compete against tyler.”
Right. And Blazer doesn’t have anywhere near the infield

experience Tyler has, so while Blazer is trying to figure out
a plan of action, Tyler is already 10 steps ahead leading the
interaction toward his goal. That’s why a lot of my AMOG
11/24/2019 Tribes
stuff is just stuff that freezes the other guy up (like

saying/doing something weird/unexpected or asking a
strange question or making a super offensive/sexual
comment or putting the guy on the spot) and while he’s
trying to figure out how to react I’m already in the girl’s
face and taking up her RAS and anything he does would
look reactive or trying to get into “our” group.
Like if I drop “you should fuck my friend here tonight, he’s

got a huge dick, he fucked me with it last night”, the girl
thinks it’s hilarious because it’s so giving no fucks, but the
guy has NEVER heard any guy say anything like that in
front of a girl before and it’s technically a compliment but
it’s a fucking WEIRD compliment and while he’s trying to
process “What the fuck just happened?? How do I respond
to that??” I’m already capitalizing on the huge Buying
Temperature spike the girl’s having and the guy is done.
“and your first instinct as blazer guy is to “compete” but the

second you do, you are playing tylers game and tyler is a
master of his own game.”
Exactly. You got it. Great read on the dynamics, well

done. This is exactly what happens…Tyler has now set the
frame and determined the value system for everyone in the
interaction and forces Blazer into checkmate where
anything he does is now inside Tyler’s frame.
“So what would you recommend blazer do (if he could get

over his ego and admit tyler just AMOGed him)”
Buy some lube and tissues for later. lol But seriously tho:
“Join tyler’s frame and try to befriend tyler. Like you said
tyler can’t fuck all 3 and tyler is a friendly social guy so
would joining tyler’s frame and adding value (not just
mocking tyler or being passive agressive) and being
genuine “disarm” tyler?”
This would be optimal. “haha dude, you’re crazy, you’re

awesome man!!” and give Tyler props and because he’s
giving value, Tyler is VERY likely to literally HAND the
other girls to him, because Tyler knows he’s got his Yellow
dress on lockdown so he can give the other girls to Blazer
and they can all have a fun night together as a group and go
on an adventure and who knows maybe he becomes friends
with Blazer. That’s win/win/win for EVERYONE involved.
If I was Tyler and a guy reacted that way to what I was
doing I would wingman him and tell the other girls “ya this
is my buddy he’s awesome” and big him up to them.
“Trying to keep Red’s attention on Blazer by Blazer being

interesting, high value in his own way and making Red
come into Blazer’s world”
This COULD work if he was SUPER fucking fascinating

but probably not…like he could step to his right so that Red
dress is facing fully away from her friends, but she’ll still
HEAR their Buying Temps spike when they shriek and
giggle so she’s STILL going to end up engaging Tyler. If he
could get her AWAY from her friends so she doesn’t know
their Temps are spiking that could help but she’s the
aggressive mother hen of the group so she’s not likely to
leave her friends behind.
“3. Trying to get tyler to join Blazer’s frame”
This would be pretty much impossible lol With a dude who

isn’t Tyler, like with another Blazer guy, he could probably
do that and that would work (basically the higher-value guy
is the one who’s reacting LESS to the other guy, so just get
the other guy to react and/or qualify himself to you and
you’ll come off higher value to the girls, I talk about
making guys qualify themselves (in positive complimenting
ways, not hostile) in various places in my archives). But
ideally he should have the field experience to KNOW as
soon as Tyler gets one of those huge spikes, that he should
befriend him ASAP lol
Part of what Blazer was doing was following Rollo’s “looks

matter” idea…he kept thinking that Tyler would run out of
steam and the girls would come back to him, because he’s
better looking than Tyler. But that’s because he doesn’t
understand that Tyler’s subcomms are what the girls are
11/24/2019 Tribes
attracted to and revelling in and they’re why they’re seeking

his attention and basking in it and engaging him. So by the
time he realizes “oh they’re NOT coming back to me…”
he’s already inside his head and giving off brutal failure
subcomms.
If a guy like Blazer came into my set I would LET the girls
talk to him because I know from his subcomms that he’s not
an actual thread even though he’s better looking than me.
But if a guy like Tyler walked into my set I would befriend
him FAST lol
“My answer is I would acknowledge reality: I would try to

engage tyler and tell him damn man you are a social
wrecking ball you have these girls eating out of your hand –
teach me lol”
lol this is fairly solid, especially if you do it in a

legitimately complimentary giving-value way. You could do
this in a hostile way too, like a classic hostile AMOG
routine was “wow man, look at all these girls you have,
you’re such a pimp dude, what’s your secret?” but it’s kind
of negative/shitty. You can do it to a Nice Guy and fuck
with his frame but a cool guy will try to tool you for doing
that and then it’s all just negative energy and a waste when,
like I say, Tyler can’t fuck all 3 of them.
“I would not do it in an ass-kissing needy way, but its the

truth.”
Right, that’s the right frame. Just a genuine compliment,

without supplicating.
“A person with confidence would want to learn more and

would not feel ego pain”
Right and that’s the type of subcomms a Tyler would read

into and would reward you for being cool that way instead
of butthurt reactive. A lot of times when you end up in a set
with another cool/positive guy with game infield you’ll
both recognize the other guy has good internals and a good
postive frame etc and the girls don’t even matter anymore,
you’re both more happy to have found someone on the
same level/mindset and you end up becoming friends out of
mutual respect.
“Like meeting ahhh-nuld would not make me stare and my

arms and feel bad, it would motivate me and make me
admire him and allow me to learn from him”
Mindsets like this are why you’ll have girls like Yellow
dress on your arm one day.
“The part where he is on the bus is amazing it happens so

fast like microseconds where he does kissy ducklips to
slight eyebrow raise and then goes for the kiss and keeps on
plowing til he gets it”
Ya most guys will just see the title “Handsome guy gets
girls” and then fast-forward through it and see him makeout
and just instantly link it going “SEE YAREALLY LOOKS
MATTER” like I assume Rollo did. But when you
understand subcomms you can go through a video like that
literally almost frame by frame and see SO MUCH going
on that explains why exactly that shit happened for THAT
guy and not for other better looking guys. It’s balantly
obvious. And when you get good enough at reading those
subcomms that you can spot that stuff in realtime in real life
when you’re out and about, you get to where Tyler is, where
he knows the good-looking guy is irrelevant.
Blaximus  OFF LI NE  
LOOK AT MY TRIBE GO!!!!!!
Guest You guys absolutely rock like Gibraltar.
Best comments section in the Manosphere, imo.
Like
11/24/2019 Tribes
“why not just punch him in the face?”
Guest Society is to blame.
Like
@Andy
“smh… What are you defending blue pill ideals now? Or
Guest
are money and muscles a red pill ideal? Marriage? Sigh…
“Illegitimate” children… Come on.”
Mindblowing to read that here of all places. What’s going

on??
@kfg
“I wonder what difference there might be that would allow
women to fuck dogs, and yet still be picky about men.”
Dogs aren’t socially conditioned to not believe they deserve

the girl who’s leg they’re humping when they’re horny. But
a huge majority of men ARE. So while dogs don’t have all
the subcomms a human dude does (like a dog isn’t making
sexual bedroom eyes with the girl), the ones they DO have
are pretty rock solid. Whereas a guy may have all the
OPPOSITE versions of those subcomms because he’s been
socially conditioned to not feel entitled, to not touch girls,
to not make eye-contact, etc etc
“Is a puzzlement.”
No puzzle when you understand subcomms. It’s actually

consistent/logical.
@scray @Rollo
“Hmmm, well that would imply that there actually ARE
level, indicate a better breeding potentia’
lol no one has taken the position that there aren’t……”
I have no idea how many more times we can actively say

that NO ONE disagrees that there are hardwired attraction
triggers to universal cues (the subcomms) that indicate that
shit and cause the involuntary nipple hardening shit. It’s
surreal that these guys keep just skipping over it every time
we repeat saying it.
@Rollo
“Hypergamy you claim doesn’t exist (or hasn’t been
concretely proven to your subjective satisfaction).”
Come on man, what is this? So now an Agnostic who says

“we don’t know if God exists” is the same as an Atheist
who says “there’s definitely no God”? wtf logic leaps are
you making here to try to exaggerate our position.
All Scray is saying is there’s no real science showing

Hypergamy is a thing. Personally, I’ve seen enough infield
evidence collected by enough guys and enough of their
experiences to fully be on-board with Hypergamy and it
doesn’t contradict anything we’ve seen infield (and seems
to support what we’ve seen), so for ME, I say it’s legit. But
Scray is just saying there’s no definitive proof of it is all,
the same way you’re saying there’s no definitive proof of
what we’re saying.
@scray
“it’s as if I said exactly the OPPOSITE of what you said I
said.”
This seems to be happening a LOT. It’s like they’re arguing

with phantoms or something. I’ve lost count of the number
of times I’ve been told I’m saying something I’ve
repeatedly said the opposite of in this discussion.
“the VARIABLE is WHAT traits = winning”
It’s like there’s a flow chart for this and we are trying to get
them to understand they have to INSERT A NEW
11/24/2019 Tribes
BUBBLE in the flow chart between “muscles” and “nipples

hardening” and in that bubble is “subcomms” but they’re
determined to keep the flowchart from being expanded.
“so in a forest, you’d have a suite of traits that would =

winning”
This is literally the basis of the War Brides mechanic. In

that new environment the traits the new guys who’ve taken
over have are what increase survival/replication so women
adapt and those traits become attractive to them. How do
you write an article as brilliant as that about such a drilled
down subject and not understand what we’re saying?
@Andy
“Rollo, nobody has ever said that it isn’t possible to be so
delusionally sure of your false, socially conditioned, FI
value system that you can have good subcomms. I believe
that YaReally even pointed out Trump as an example. The
point is that the external attributes are NOT the common
denominator…”
Right. That’s why if you can achieve topping society’s

value system, you may GET good subcomms from it if
you’re fully invested in it. Just like when I wear my lucky
shirt I’ll walk into the bar with much better subcomms than
if I wear the shirt that I have a bunch of bad memories
assosciated with.
But it’s my good subcomms in the one shirt that are

attractive and make girls get wet or my bad subcomms in
the other shirt that make them repulsed, not my shirt itself.
For someone who has nothing attached to that shirt it won’t
do anything for him.
The problem with teaching guys to chase the rat race of

looks/money is that there will ALWAYS be someone bigger
and more jacked or in better shape than you, and there will
ALWAYS be someone with more money than you, so you
will end up comparing yourself to them and you can’t win
in that value system…and even if you DO you’re stuck in
someone ELSE’S value system instead of your own so
you’re just the best at living up to someone else’s values.
And if/when you lose those things (like scribblerg is going

through right now after a divorce and business troubles etc),
your confidence/self-worth goes along with them.
Whereas if you base your internals on YOUR value system

and the things you have ARE the highest value possible,
then you will be confident and entitled regardless of your
externals or what society says you should feel about
yourself.
“It’s obvious that practically speaking hypergamy exists… I

don’t really see how that ties into looks matter though…”
It’s another side tangent because they can’t seem to debate

what we’re actually saying so they keep veering off into
these things and saying we’re saying stuff that we’re
actively saying the opposite of.
@Rollo
“Obviously my sub coms, appearance, internals, social
proof, etc. was such that I was perceived as ‘high priority’
breeding potential and ovulatory influence be damned.”
That’s why I ignore the ovulation stuff you guys love lol
You just flip her attraction triggers with your
subcomms/game pro-actively and what day in her cycle it is
won’t matter.
“But there was still a battery of triggers that cued these

girl’s tingles in spite of themselves.”
Yes. Subcomms hit the hardwired attraction triggers. Which

is what we’ve been saying from day one.
“There is still an evolved biological architecture that makes

those sub coms valued or refused.”
No one disagrees with this.
“Every article on this list can be directly linked to

hardwired sexual selection cues, but that’s only relevant if
you accept that Hypergamy is rooted in a biologically
evolved context.”
11/24/2019 Tribes
Like I say, I’m cool with Hypergamy. I’ve seen enough

evidence and the concept doesn’t contradict anything I’m
aware of infield and even supports it. Scray may want more
proof, but I’m convinced enough to accept it and teach guys
to be aware of it.
“Would you agree that these sub coms were attractive male
America?”
Yup. All over. That’s what we’re saying. These are

universal. Looking like Don Draper is not.
“Hypergamy didn’t start in the 1930’s when Hollywood

began producing movies.”
Then it’s a good thing no one said that it did. What I said
was that Hollywood continued and mass-swamped our
social conditioning with the stereotype that muscles/money
indicate higher likelihood of having the subcomms that will
increase survival/replication.
“In fact, the vast majority of leading male actors relied on

all of these sub coms in their acting well before Hollywood
became what it is.”
Yup. And subcomms are the reason Russell Brand was

getting laid before he was a famous actor.
@Harrison
“Lol this is the layer below ‘looks’, these are the attributes
that ARE always attractive.”
This. That’s why I use the terminology “drill deeper”. Rollo

is stopping at the surface level which gets inconsistent
results (muscles/money often DON’T trigger those
hardwired attraction responses), instead of drilling deeper to
the consistent subcomms. This is what we’ve been saying
since the start.
@kfg
“…just accept all the facets of game as fact because they
just somehow work infield…”
“If they work infield it is a fact that they work infield. If it

works infield and there is a theory that says it doesn’t, it is
the theory that is wrong.”
This. What we’re saying is that your theory of looks

mattering and muscles = attraction don’t hold up infield. We
have TONS of evidence contradicting it. So your theory is
wrong because consistent infield results/data isn’t wrong lol
Reality trumps theory, even 20 years of theory, just like 1 in

1 women aren’t being raped on college campuses and
there’s no wage gap despite 50 years of feminist theory and
data saying otherwise.
“Dogs aren’t socially conditioned to not believe they

deserve the girl who’s leg they’re humping when they’re
Guest
horny.”
Dogs are safe.
“What we’re saying is that your theory of looks mattering

and muscles = attraction don’t hold up infield.”
Looks being called attractive because they attract did not

come out of theory.
 Loading...
11/24/2019 Tribes
« PREVIOUS 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 … 13
NEXT »
The Rational Male
RSS - Posts
RSS - Comments
Copyright © 2009-2019 The Rational Male is a registered trademark. All rights reserved. The
thoughts and expressions of post commenters are their own opinions and do not necessarily
represent those of The Rational Male or its author. All other copyrights remain the property of
their respective owners.
Copyright © 2019 Your Name Here. All rights reserved.

Tribes Yareally

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Tribes Yareally

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

11/24/2019 Tribes

M AY 1 5 , 2 0 1 6  BY ROLLO TOMASSI SEARCH

The Rational Male -

The Rational Male –

The Rational Male

I received this email some time ago, but I felt it needed

Rollo — You’ve been a major help to my An Essay for Women

character they don’t know and whom they’ve never

Back in February Roosh proposed (and attempted to

Women talk, men Do.

The best male friends I have share one or more

[…]From an evolutionary perspective, it’s likely that Events

The duplicity in this striving towards “equality” is, of

Tribes vs. The Sisterhood Masculine Style

Novaseeker's Veritas Lounge

Thus, we see no cognitive dissonance when women

While I can speculatively understand the socio-

optimize Hypergamy. This unitary, gender-primary Recent Comments

Up to this point, Game has represented an individualized 53m

threat to women’s Hypergamous control, but there has

The above picture is from an “academic” conference

Now, granted, this conference is replete with all of the

Men’s predisposition to form sub-tribes and intrasexual

By controlling men’s intrasex communications with each

violent), but as connectivity progresses we will see a more

I’ve detailed in many prior posts how the imperative has

This is the real, operative reason behind the obsessive,

Building Better Betas

Since the time in which western(izing) societies shifted to

As a result of this, and likely into our near future, today’s

Effectively, this confusion has the purpose of creating

communication within the sub-tribes they’re supposed to

What then is to be done about this conditioning? For all

While it is vitally important to maintain a male-

Understand and accept that men will naturally form

Recognize existing male sub-tribes for what they

Push back on the invasion of male space by being

The primary Red Pill / Game tenets that you’ve

Finally, I want to close by restating that my approach to

Balancing Act The Rational Male – Estrus

 Posted in Foundations, Hypergamy, Positive Masculinity, The

 Previous Post - Good Girls, Bad Girls

Published by Rollo Tomassi

View all posts by Rollo Tomassi

Being fat is tingle alpha

Not this guy:

There is downward selection pressure on size as well.

Guest Standard deviation is 2.9.

Guest “And I posted you over 20 scientifically peer reviewed

the meta-analysis covered 45 PUBLISHED studies so……

and one of the papers you linked to tacitly acknowledges

my response wasn’t that we can’t know anything

‘So we must know something right? Is there any

discredit a lot of what you say we ‘know’ wrt to looks, for

that’s BASIC evolutionary theory.

seems like there’s less variance wrt to T levels remaining

you win = higher t = higher social status behavior

doesn’t seem like there’s a ton of variance wrt that general

i don’t think you grok how damaging this stuff can be to

“scray is pro life experience to the point where it will

i’m about real science and what real science is….

if your shit is rock solid and a matter of scientific fact, then

the only stuff that has higher weight would be REAL

” . . . doesn’t seem like there’s a ton of variance wrt that