The internet is fun! Or at least, it used to be until people figured out that you can make money screwing around on the internet and not have to get a real job. Then, the internet became this crazy place filled with edgy extremists spouting opinions they only sort of believe in, hoping this game of virtual slots pays off, Hawk Tuah style, where some random bit of content goes viral, giving a normal person Z-tier internet celebrity status for about 15 minutes.
The more realistic content creators who recognize this game of virtual slots is a losing bet have taken the more tedious route of, through hard work over time, cultivating an online brand by creating on-brand content people find entertaining or useful. In an effort to avoid getting a real job, these people accidentally found one. At least, the people that do good enough work to actually generate some income have.
If you think about it, social media is a lot like an online roleplaying game. You create a character then venture out into the online world to interact with others, in character, earning points if your in-game interactions are successful and cause people to like what you do and engage with you. As you gain more points, your character levels up, becoming more powerful with greater reach and ability, and if you do really well, you can unlock the play-to-earn mechanic.
At least that’s my take when I type some bullshit on the internet. The internet is my video game time because I suck at real video games.
But content creation is worthless without the rest of us. The peasants who follow the tales of the royalty and who patronize the merchant’s stalls are absolutely necessary for the kings and merchants to maketh yon coins and expandeth yonder empires. In fact, in social media RPG, the peasants themselves are the currency being pursued by the nobles and merchants. Just not in a slave-trading way. Usually.
The true skill in navigating the dangerous wilderness known as social media requires an understanding of communication. The messages within messages.
Hands down, the most engaging content on the internet, at least in our dark corner where we imagine there’s a war between the sexes, is edgy content that provokes argument. Typing something benign that most people like and agree with is boring. But type something edgy, and people who like you and agree with you will rush to chime in with their agreement, smiling about how you’re really showing the other side what’s what by typing that edgy thing you typed. Meanwhile, people who dislike you and disagree with you will rush to argue with you and with the people who like you. (This is why artificially edgy content its creators only sort of believe is so common.)
But internet culture aside, behind everything is a deep understanding of communication. Messaging.
Let’s take an example defamatory internet stat someone might post on social media: “95% of murders are committed by men”
This stat is true, actually, so it technically doesn’t legally count as defamation. Even though the intent of this statement is defamatory.
What is the message behind this statement? Is it to communicate this unknown and random fact about how murderers, a tiny subset of the population, are primarily male? Of course not.
The intent of this statement is to use the terms “95%” “men” and “murder” in the same sentence, then let the human brain unconsciously form some associations. The intent of this statement is to imply that men are dangerous and should not be trusted. (I often joke about “girl math” - the idea that under the rules of girl math the statement “95% of murderers are men” means the same thing as “95% of men are murderers”.)
You spotted the real message right away, didn’t you? You weren’t tricked into thinking the statement was a benign statistical fact. You saw the subtext. You’re probably feeling like a very smart communications expert right about now. In fact, if you saw this statement being made by some anti-Red Pill internet user, you’d probably rush to engage that content creator and argue about what a disingenuous statement he or she has made by implying men are dangerous. (I’m typing using the generic “you”, not necessarily you, the reader, specifically.)
You might point out some other stats, like the murder rate being extremely low — something like 1.4 per 100,000 people in the United States. This means that 99.9986 percent of men are not murderers. That percentage is even higher if you’re in a neighborhood that’s middle class or better. The overwhelming majority of men are good guys, not murderers, and the majority of men who are not good guys fall into the categories you would expect.
So let’s take your responsive internet stat: “Only 0.0014 percent of men are murderers”
What is the message you are communicating with this statement? Are you demonstrating your great skill at internet research? At argumentation? Have you proven the other person wrong and yourself correct?
Nope. The message you are sending is “I’m an insecure man-child with no frame, probably somewhere on the autism spectrum, who is fragile and easily triggered. I rushed to respond to this enraging internet content I saw, probably because I’m a prone-to-violence loser who can’t get laid, so I felt like this statement was about me and warranted a response to defend myself. The fact that I brought my time, attention, logic, and research to bear against this issue proves that the issue is significant. I’m also very, very dumb for trying to use arguments as a tool to get strangers on the internet to like and understand me”.
It’s not that engaging with entertaining internet content is wrong. If you see content that entertains you, of course it’s fine to engage with it in your spare video game time. You weren’t tricked into engaging - you willingly engage with content that entertains you, which properly rewards a competent content creator who has created content that you found entertaining.
The problem is that you forgot that the internet is fun.
When you meet women in the real world (or non-women for that matter), you want them to think that you are a fun person. You want them to enjoy interacting with you. Nobody enjoys interacting with someone who’s really serious about his arguments, really serious about being right, and very overly serious about himself or whatever team he perceives that he’s on. This isn’t to say that these things can’t be important. Just that they’re only important to you. And nobody else thinks they’re fun.
Your present and future women want to be with a guy that’s fun (we even call the act of meeting and seducing women “the game”). Your present and future friends want to be with a guy that’s fun. Even your present and future employers want you to be at least a little fun.
So oblige them. Happy gaming out there, internet men!
