TRP.RED: Home | Blogs - Forums.RED: ALL | TheRedPill | RedPillWomen | AskTRP | thankTRP | OffTopic
Hot New Old TopControversial
Login or Register
6 | 3 Comments | submitted 7 years ago by squarehouse [Post Locked]
[-] squarehouse 1 Point 7 years ago

My main criticism is that that Chateau seems to confound attractiveness with game. Maybe, in the study, when they say "attractiveness" they mean really attractiveness...physical attractiveness. Some effeminate-looking man with all the alpha game in the world would probably be in the same place as the other unattractive guys.

Sometimes I'm what Chateau calls an anti-gamer...I don't really think game helps as much as people claim. For attractive/masculine looking guys, game is about not screwing up; for unattractive/effeminate looking guys, game is about tricking women into bed and playing the numbers game. IMHO.

[-] [deleted] 1 Point 7 years ago


[-] iggybdawg 1 Point 7 years ago

Perhaps what the real problem is is that what women say they want with their words, and what they say they want with their actions is totally different. Outside of the concept of game and the rare psychological studies like this one, most people don't grasp this.

I can't find the post right now, but Athol Kay in Married Man Sex Life advocates tracking your mate's cycle. And then implementing your own cyclical game, presuming you want the LTR. Where you turn up the alpha when she ovulates and bring out the beta when she PMS's/bleeds. That way, you play both roles in the dual mating hypothesis.