In my post on avoiding the pitfalls of a fragile ego, "Don't Do What Donny Does," I made mention of an "Introduction to The Red Pill" presentation that I put together for Donny, and a few people on the board had mentioned wanting to get a look at what I put together... I did find it, and in bullet point form it kind of looks like madness, but what I'm thinking is that I'll take pieces of it and flesh them out as individual Red Pill posts. This will create less of an idea jumble, and hopefully spark some interesting discussion on the particular points rather than the whole piece.

I'm going to label this series of posts [Red Pill 101] as some of the material may seem basic for some of the longtime members of the board, as this will primarily be foundations in understanding sexual strategy, with helpful tips along the way meshed with stories from my own experiences; I encourage you all to do the same in the comments.

Donny initially asked me for advice on speaking to women as a man. I know that seems like an odd request, but a lot of men don't know the difference.

See, Donny was messaging girls he was attracted to on OKCupid after reading their profiles and finding that they had common interests; usually music and movies. He would message them long, very thoughtful paragraphs where he explained that he too liked the same music and movies...

I've never seen Donny's profile, but I'm willing to guess that there is a tremendous amount of value proofing going on- value proofing is where men who are insecure attempt to impress by broadcasting their ability to be providers (also see: blue pill, beta-male)...

Now, a bit about Donny... Donny has a cool job and a fairly wide social circle; stuff the kind of girl Donny would like is into. However, Donny is close to a zero in both looks and game. Understand that the latter negates any gains you may have made from the former.

Donny is making the mistake of following the archaic social narrative that women are attracted successful men... the crucial update to that, perhaps Donny's first Red Pill, is that success makes attractive men even more attractive.

An unsuccessful attractive man can still fuck a hot girl; an unattractive successful man is still a thirty begger.

Can you talk with your girl about some bullshit movie you both like? Can you play Mario Kart and smoke a bong? You can do whatever as long as it *follows attraction* (and doesn't compromise it <-- why 80% of men end up on The Red Pill, imho).

Donny doesn't get any messages back from women on OKCupid... okay, for a few reasons, but primarily because he isn't framing the interaction in terms of attraction, he's framing the interaction in terms of being friendly.

This is why short one-liners will get you way more pussy than doing things the way the OkCupid subreddit suggests; even if half the girls disqualify you for not being photogenic enough to use the particular line (make no mistake- it's never the line being too dumb), you'll still get a much higher response percentage than sending a personalized and thoughtful message.

In fact, not to go off on a tangent about "online game," but those one-liner framing devices set you up for having a much more flirtatious interaction from the jump rather that the typical, "hello," "what are you up to?"

Really, using silly lines (and handling the flirtation that follows), I've met up with girls within a few hours.

So, Red Pill Lesson #1: Attraction Means Everything

The other problem with Donny's approach is that he's setting himself up for being categorized in a provider role.

Most men only know how to be the provider, or the beta-male, or the Blue Piller. Successful men, handsome men, athletic men, rugged men... the ugly truth is, if you put yourself in the position to become the beta-provider to a woman, even if she's attracted to you, even if she still wants to fuck you, you will primarily be the beta-provider.

How many stud athletes get divorced raped per year?

A few weeks after I hooked up with a girl that I met with a bullshit line off of OKCupid within a few hours (21 YO, HB6), I had a date with a different girl (HB4)... a different girl that I had failed to set a proper frame with.... when she called me out for making dickish sexual comments, I didn't reframe (or next), I caved... I liked how she was a piano teacher, IDK, w/e.

I entered her frame and we had an awful uncomfortable date, at the end of a summer where I hooked up with a few girls much more attractive due to setting the proper frame from the first message.

Had I set the proper frame with that girl, and trust me it's not a big deal or anything, I likely would have fucked her... because I didn't, she saw me as a dopey beta-male who takes things slowly and is very respectful of women, and she treated me accordingly.

The Culture of Categorization

(Excerpt from: “The (Almost) Perfect Guide to Imperfect Boys” and Indoctrination to the Culture of Categorization for Middle School Girls)

From a biological perspective, it is necessary for a woman to be able to efficiently categorize potential mates and suitors. For the sake of simplicity in mate selection, women are able to sort all men into one of three categories (although, they can admittedly be somewhat nuanced: 1) The Alpha Male, 2) The Beta Male, and 3) The Omega male.

Women adore the hyper-Masculine Alpha male; Masculinity is power and since “women feel entitled to the possession of power their response to male power is typically an attempt to annihilate it, and if annihilation fails, to cast ownership over it; if all else fails, to get fucked by it.”

So, if a woman encounters what she believes to be an Alpha male, she will test his Alpha fitness by challenging his ease of authority to some degree- men who have a traditional, attractive Alpha aesthetic will receive less testing- and if he is able to prove his worth as an Alpha male, she will attempt to manipulate him into a relationship, and failing that, most likely settle for sex.

Women tolerate the beta-male in a utilitarian manner; the extent of their tolerance relates directly to the usefulness of the particular beta-male. This usefulness comes with a rigid set of unspoken rules; the beta-male is expected exist in the primary interest of the woman. If the beta-male is desired for his wealth and financial status, this status must stay constant. If the beta-male’s purpose is to emotionally supplicate, he must do so in-order to remain useful and relevant.

If the beta-male is under the foolish assumption that he has an egalitarian friendship with a female and proceeds to spout an unauthorized opinion, he may just end up with a drunk girl in his face shouting “ALL VAGINAS ARE THE SAME SIZE” to his shock and confusion…

Trust me.

Women are disgusted by the Omega male. These men are seen as worthless; there is no ego-reward to had for a woman with a fat geek drooling over her, and even if the Omega male has a good income and reliable resources, he is too icky to be considered a beta-male. The Omega male is considered dog food; not for human consumption.

The sorting mechanics and categories are somewhat innate for women; a woman can sense through attraction who is an Alpha male, and distinguishing a beta-male from an Omega male is something of a checklist combined with referencing if she’s able to tolerate the man sexually or if he’s just too icky.

Human Nature isn't going to change; the attraction to Alpha male traits is something hardwired into every woman.

Alpha male traits are what caused the attraction, beta-male traits are what diminishes attraction; aesthetics matter in-so-much as they point toward Alpha male traits, which aren't necessarily binary; they can come in different forms and be nuanced- but that is for another blog.

Like my post? Check out my BLOG: www.killtoparty.com