Women hate the demystification of romance: commodities, artisans, and the game
Women hate game but simultaneously women hate guys with no game. Players look at this and initially think those two views make no sense together, because on the surface they doesn't... women should want guys to learn game and learn how to please women, instead of repulsing women with awkward banter, technical talk, sports talk, politics, terrible fashion, video games, etc. Yet we have all seen game demonized by some women and feminists, who also complain that there are no "good" men (and there's some truth to their complaint, since men don't learn how to be effective with women). I would probably never tell a woman in real life about consciously practicing "the game," although I have encouraged a few to read Neil Strauss (they hate THE GAME the book, despite the fact that THE GAME makes men better boyfriends and women more likely to have good dates).
What gives? The seduction and sex process is probably shrouded in more mystification than any other common human activity... the whole culture is collectively blowing so much smoke around seduction and sex that women don't understand it either, and thus many women encourage men to do things that the woman herself doesn't like, like "Just be nice to her," fine advice if you are +2 or +3 relative to her in SMV and bad advice if you are not. Men don't understand the seduction process or women.
What happens when you remove the mystification and understand the process? Men get more power (a few of us do, anyhow) and often, as a result, become less interested in commitment. Women hate game because it demystifies romance and pushes sex with a woman just a little bit closer to commodity status. A little economic theory for you, no one wants to be a commodity because a commodity can be made by many producers, pushing profit to zero or near zero. Everyone wants to be differentiated because a differentiated product can earn profits above the market rate. Apple makes more money than a thousand white-box computer makers because Apple is differentiated from white box makers; if consumers wanted to maximize income we would all be buying white box computers running Linux and a web browser. Most computer users prefer the branded experience though and producers want to create brand mystique so they can charge higher prices. Mystification can help everyone win. I'm writing this on a Macbook not a whitebox Linux laptop, so I'm as guilty as anyone, and I know enough to know better.
Many guys think, "What do women want?" "I don't understand women." "I got lucky." If they learn evolutionary psychology and game, they figure out what women want and how to deliver it, with much greater consistency and reliability than if we don't learn evolutionary psychology and the game. Many women have nothing of value in their lives apart from their p***y, so, if you reduce the value of that by learning game, they end up being commodities. Hot guys with good game take them for a ride then decline commitment, leaving her feeling used and unhappy. So women demonize game and think romance should "Just happen" like it does in the romance novels they masturbate to. At the end of all romance novels a hot guy wifes up a woman... usually a woman who is lower SMV than him.
Many women are frustrated because they find it easy to get a guy +2 SMV for sex but can't get him for a relationship. The guy who is even SMV or -1 to her might be willing to do a relationship but he doesn't have the value she seeks. To quote David Buss's advice to a female colleague, "She is an 8 chasing after 10s but being pursued by 6s. It dawned on her that pursuing men just outside of her mate-value range was the source of her misery. Why would it take my intelligent friend so long to come to this realization? Her belief was encouraged by high-mate-value men who gave her cues to long-term mating interest—acting helpful, taking her to nice restaurants, displaying interest in her personal life, finding common interests that they shared. Men interested in casual sex commonly provide misleading long-term cues because they work." (Source, Buss's book, When Men Behave Badly.) Many women thrash in this trap for a long time... the ones who thrash in it too long end up being spinsters and writing those stories about why hot rich men won't "man up" and marry 38-year-old women past their prime. Sex and the City is the fantasy version of women who play the field and somehow everything magically works out for them. Cultural narratives can deliver on fantasy that differs from reality.
Game improves male SMV but also makes the guy choosier and less likely to commit. A guy with many options won't be as interested in committing as a running-to-fat guy whose chief hobby is video games, with pr0n and TV secondary.
Economic history has parallels to this: starting with the Industrial Revolution, people began figuring out how to produce artisanal goods at mass scale. Artisans fought like hell against mass manufacturing because they argued mass-produced goods can never be as pure and honest (or whatever) as hand-crafted goods. Everyday consumers were like, "LOL whatever bro" and bought cheap + functional. Entrepreneurs used factories to demystify the production process and make high-skill artisans redundant. The children of artisans ended up working in factories because that's where the efficiency was, and thus where the wages were. Today some artisanal commodity goods have high status again among some people, but the vast majority of us buy cups and plates and clothes that have been inexpensively made by machine. Ikea, Target, and Amazon rule.
Early artisans were angry but ineffective, because machine-made goods were and are better, and the superior product wins over time. We now have the term "luddite" from nineteenth century anti-technology groups who failed to stop technological development. Women also don't want game entrepreneurs to apply evolutionary psychology to the dating and sex process because they want to be artisanal producers, not commodity products. No woman, except a few unusual women like evolutionary biologist Diana Fleischman, will characterize the situation this way, but the instinctive anger reaction is there. Women like a guy who "just gets it" and shows his intelligence, charisma, etc. by "just getting it." Women hate the idea that average guys can counterfeit (or, more realistically, learn) these traits, then avoid committing financial and attention resources to women. Personally I think these fears are overblown because the vast majority of men are too lazy with insufficient IQs to make any of this happen... but a few will learn game and in the process they might remove themselves from the marriage market. That's frustrating for women. Smart men are learning from each other and using that learning to reduce female market power.
I'm writing the Red Quest because it is visible to search engines and every day a bunch of new guys find it... I'm sure the majority won't understand what they are reading, but a few get it, start down the path, and figure things out. There's a movement out there and it's open to anyone with a brain and a will. A blog helps, too. Most guys lack both brain and will, so they are safe from knowledge, but not all guys. I was talking to a player and found myself saying, "I am sex club Jesus." Despite what you hear about non-monogamy and female hypergamy, for top guys this is closer to a step towards commodification... on average guys are more eager for more sex partners than women.
Guys frequently commodify themselves, too. Let's say you're a guy on a dating app, couple pounds overweight with a normal job... you present yourself as a possible provider guy... for even slightly cute women, there is a huge interchangeable sea of "basic provider guy 6" available. You're a commodity and if she doesn't choose you she'll choose the next you. Red Pill, seduction communities, etc. are attempting to differentiate you and remove you from commodity markets (commoditize your complements). Even guys who make above-average incomes as programmers or engineers still bore women sexually and come across as commodities, since women prefer feelings to income, primarily. I have been friends with these guys... in another world I might have become one... almost no one woman cares about your programming feats, sorry. You can be a king among programmers and a peon among hot women.
Women don't like being commoditized, and men don't like being commoditized, and men like learning what women want, and women like the idea of "natural" emotions/connections ("natural" is a pretty bullshit idea here, but it's important to women). I had very crude versions of this conversation as early as middle or high school... now we have citations from books and experiences... but the overall thrust is the same. Game is also just weaponized evolutionary biology... that's it. Women are living with the fruits of freedom, feminism, and the sexual revolution. So they're finding that a lot of guys are super happy to embrace sexual freedom.... which leaves a lot of women just like......... commodities. I doubt early feminists realized that sexual freedom would end up turning women into commodities for top men but that's happened and it's left a lot of women sitting on the shelf, unhappy. A lot of hot women can have wild sexual experiences in their 20s but they don't lead to anything lasting or important in their 30s and beyond, when they're forced to cruelly compete with younger women for top guys.
The average woman still wants a man and a family, and yet feminism and sexual freedom have made that harder for her. Feminism is great for asexual women, women who hate men, women who want super careers (Sheryl Sandbergs of the world, they are out there), and women who want to be sex-positive mega-sluts and get a lot of dick. These are all pretty small groups... the average woman is worse off, more likely to be divorced, etc. The average man is worse off too, cause he's more likely to be divorced, disrespected by the culture, etc. The top man is having a ball.
Online dating used to be a great way for high-sex-drive women (sluts if you will) to indulge. Maybe those kinds of women are still online but they have moved to other domains. Being able to f**k, without f**king up your social reputation, is super important to a lot of chicks. This is the sort of thing NO ONE talks about in mainstream culture, either, because mainstream culture is in total denial about female libido and female reality.
Nude pics of women are already commodities, and that's why asking for nudes from a woman has become a DLV. If you want them, shoot them yourself, seriously (or). Video is headed this direction, if it's not there already. If a player wants to, he can make his own crazy library of pr0n. That further demystifies romance... it also proves to other women that it is demystified.
Player men are trying to commodify women. Women are trying to discern who among men is not a commodity... but many women don't realize, or care, when they have turned themselves into an undifferentiated commodity.
Many players will encourage guys to drop women quickly for bad behaviors. That's commodity thinking at work. If this one behaves poorly, move to the next one. Guys without game are much less likely to think this way and much more likely to put up with bad behaviors because they feel they have no choice in the matter. Game creates male choice.
Sex clubs and non-monogamy are the greatest steps forward a skilled player can take to create abundance, yet few players seem to have fully integrated these into their practice.
A classic Redquest article. I reference this in my texts to friends and acquaintances often, and find myself directed to it frequently. But my experience just seems to confirm it, for what little my life experience amounts to (as of yet).
Still don’t know how or why Substack sends out these older articles via email, but it doesn’t hurt to have the reminders