Virtue-signalling

I keep hearing the term in regards to left-wing politics and find it hilarious/fascinating/scary how stupid and out-of-touch with the real world they look after claiming some hypocritical moral high-ground.

Personally, I think it seems natural to "virtue-signal" to some extent when trying to pick up women (even if it is not a huge part of the game). Not specifically signalling politics (bad idea), but maybe to show that there would be no consequences to hooking up that night?

So how many ways are there to do this without coming off too forwardly (i.e. maybe not just saying exactly "hook up with me tonight and I won't ever call you again") and also is there a way to work this part in without being obvious "shit-tested."

Starting to see more shit-tests for what they are but I seem to get bogged down over-thinking is it a test right now or not? Is this kind of virtue-signalling (anti-virtue-signalling?) a good template for any shit test?

Thinking I'm close but it's still not quite clicking so I thought to asktrp

[–]failingtheturingtest0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]professor_mcamateur0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]iLLprincipLeS 1 points1 points1 points 8 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]professor_mcamateur0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

How has that book changed you or anybody you know?

I know a guy who read that and suggested reading it and I was surprised at how easy it was to tell he was constantly trying to power-grab. And frankly, not doing it well, though that could have changed since. Even one of his closer friends mentioned how his obsession with the book's content probably led to the observable degrading of his "character."

Maybe the guy I know is just an a-hole (not writing off the book for any reason but it didn't look that interesting when I paged through it) but hey - is the book about women or friends or business or politics because it probably can't cover all 3 succinctly; "power" only gets you so far. Granted, the guy also wrote on the "Art of Seduction" so maybe he's got the bases covered...

I have a basic understanding of the Machiavellian mindset regarding business/politics yet struggle finding any reasonable means to use it to get with women. Basically - if you use some crummy pickup line and whatever other sly "techniques" to manipulate a woman into sleeping with you or begin a relationship - what would stop her (within her own moral guidelines) from moving on to the next guy with better tricks up his sleeve?

(not to imply that taking the moral high-road guaruntees *anything other than some blue-pill like mindset - I don't see how letting a girl fuck around without you is very "red pill" other than just not caring about it or if it's having multiple women and then not caring??? really racking my brains on this one because it seems like most girls where I'm at have a boyfriend or else don't ever want to see me again after we bang and I don't know what that means)*

The book is kind of autism tier and already by todays standards outdated in it's simplicity. I'd go as far as say Robert Greene is overrated as fuck since all he did was just adapt The Art Of War to the 90s self help format. BUT, we live in such a shit era that there is not yet anything better, the only hope would be a poster from TRP named illimitableman to write something better and he is currently MIA.

Even one of his closer friends mentioned how his obsession with the book's content probably led to the observable degrading of his "character."

It happens. A lot more with women. Dumb whore reads some book and for 1 month she is the character in the book.

I have a basic understanding of the Machiavellian mindset regarding business/politics yet struggle finding any reasonable means to use it to get with women.

Granted, the guy also wrote on the "Art of Seduction" so maybe he's got the bases covered...

Never read it. But if something works to gain power over a male then it works to seduce a woman too.

Basically - if you use some crummy pickup line and whatever other sly "techniques" to manipulate a woman into sleeping with you or begin a relationship - what would stop her (within her own moral guidelines) from moving on to the next guy with better tricks up his sleeve?

Nothing stops her if you only got the basics. That's part of TRP knowledge. You need more advanced tactics to keep her from whoring around.

I don't see how letting a girl fuck around without you is very "red pill" other than just not caring about it or if it's having multiple women and then not caring???

Plates. And what value a female has? This is a whole other separate mindset. Generally, if you are not comfortable doing something, don't do it, don't accept it as long as you don't think it limits your life.

really racking my brains on this one because it seems like most girls where I'm at have a boyfriend or else don't ever want to see me again after we bang and I don't know what that means

It seems you overthink a lot of things. Same way you managed to fucking attribute virtue-signalling to shit tests. This is not a bad thing, you are one of the few innovators but it will take a lot of work until you will manage to make something useful out of your overthinking. You need to experience with whatever theory you try to develop.

Title	Virtue-signalling
Author	professor_mcamateur
Upvotes	0
Comments	6
Date	November 20, 2017 10:07 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/askTRP
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/asktrp/comments/7ecmy4/virtuesignalling/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/askTRP/virtue-signalling.118673 https://theredarchive.com/post/118673

Comments