"The Rawness" blog

[Zarky]

I just stumbled across this blog about sexual politics, the mating market, the seduction community, etc. It's called "the Rawness." Is this a hidden gem or am I just the last to hear about it (as usual)?

I've been reading this post and it's quite good:

http://therawness.com/the-myth-of-the-middle-class-alpha-male-part-2-2/

with quotes like:

"The successful middle-class alpha male is a mythical figure that can’t exist for any significant amount of time. Our society is specifically built to put most alpha behavior in check. The only types of men who can pull off any semblance of true alpha behavior in the West are men at the extreme lower end of the socioeconomic scale because they feel they have nothing to lose and men at the extremely high end of the socioeconomic scale because despite having something to lose they have more resources with which to get away with alpha behavior. This is a society that keeps the peace and maintains the status quo by keeping alpha behavior in check through various disincentives and punishments."

 

[Wilko]

Nice find, albiet a long, loooong, looooooong article.

Stuff like that always makes me think about "who" is "this Game" for, and particularly, who is the SoSuave Game for? I've personally found it useful but I think there are lols to be had when you consider that if everyone who came here really acted on SoSuave's dominant self-improvement themes...we'd have thousands of buff, confident, smooth-talking, salsa-dancing, MMA-fighting, internet entrepreneurs (TIC!).

There's more in that, but I gotta run, breakfast with a mate.

 

[Vice]

Cool blog. Bookmarked.

Geeking out right now, with popcorn.

 

[zekko]

A lot of intersting stuff there. But I like when he talks about women:

“sport ****ing” or “fun ****ing” whoever she wants, be it bad boy alphas, metrosexual artfag hipsters, starving artists, ad account executives, Starbucks employees, and all types of middle class and working class guys who would have normally died without reproducing in the old dog-eat-dog primal eras of the past.

FINALLY some pickup guy describes the real world, the reality you can see if you get up off your computer and go outdoors. Usually I come on this forum and it seems like everybody says there is one guy who gets all the girls while there are nine other losers on the sideline crying in their soup.

That's not the world I live in every day, that's some sort of pickup fantasyland. It may as well be Middle Earth or some weird science fiction landscape, it's so foreign to me. In the real world I see everyday, there are all sorts of guys hooking up with all sorts of gals. There are some "losers" sitting on the sidelines or getting left out, but nothing like 90%. And sometimes the losers can change themselves and become winners.

This author points out that modern society has made it a lot safer for women, so they don't need the brutish Columbian drug lord guy to protect them. They can indulge their tastes in other sorts. Put that gangbanger here in the US and he probably goes to jail, he's out of the picture. The author makes a good point that true alphas in the middle class are probably nonexistent.

I haven't read his Renaissance Man material yet, but the "DJ" is often described here as a renaissance man. I wonder if this is where he got the idea.

 

[Vice]

zekko, totally agree on the skewed view some members on the forum have. Maybe it's because that's THEIR reality, and we're taking it for more than it's worth just because it's written somewhere?

This blog you found is PURE GOLD. Mine this sh*t, it's valuable.

 

[zekko]

This blog you found is PURE GOLD. Mine this sh*t, it's valuable

If you read part three he talks about some history of polygamy.

It's interesting to note that for the most part, women have been simply pawns in the men's power games in these cultures. Either they were forced into the ruler's harem under threat of death, or they were forced into the wealthy men's harem to avoid starving in poverty with the poor men. For the women, it was simply a matter of survival. It didn't appear "attraction" entered into the equation at all.

The author goes on to talk about how democracy and industrialization allowed weaker men to use their numbers to impose monogamy on the "uberalphas", thus giving themselves a shot at reproducing.
At the same time, this apparently gives the woman a choice of a wider range of men. It makes me wonder if being "alpha" is as much of a turn on for women (in the middle class) as we've been led to believe.

By the way, a lot of people on this forum describe "alpha" as a sort of attitude you take toward women, but I think this is wrong.
"Alpha" really refers to your ability to impose your will on other men.
Either through physical might or political strength.

 

[bigneil]

Great article, thanks Zarky.

 

[Zarky]

Still reading it, unfortunately the guy berates "feminism" like a lot of other folks in the "seduction community," here:

http://therawness.com/the-myth-of-the-middle-class-alpha-part-5-2/

But again fails to state why feminism is so awful. Nobody's been able to tell me why feminism is so awful. If women are free to make it on their own, they're also free to "sport fvck" with few ill-consequences, which makes it easier for guys like me to get laid.

Back in 1961, I would have had a very difficult time getting laid by multiple women unless I were quite rich. In 2011, I could get laid while being homeless, living in my car (as I did in 2002), because women don't care as much about finding a "provider."

I don't see the problem with feminism, yet this guy b!tches about it like almost every other dude. Makes no sense to me. For me to think of feminism as "bad," someone would have to do a total breakdown for me, like:

"Zarky, without feminism you would be getting laid by hotter women, more frequently, and with less cash outlay, because XYZ."

Nobody has ever done that, and I'm not sure they can.

 

[zekko]

For me to think of feminism as "bad," someone would have to do a total breakdown, like:

"Without feminism you would be getting laid by hotter women, more frequently, and with less cash outlay, because XYZ."

Interesting point, Zarky.

I think feminism is bashed more because it has contributed to things like the divorce rate skyrocketing. A guy can no longer get married to a girl he cares about and have a good chance of following through with his intentions with her, because at some point she is now more likely to stab him in the back.

The game used to be more even, or actually tilted in the guy's favor. Women gave sex in exchange for man's ability to provide. Now women can provide for themselves so women's sexuality has become overvalued, artificially inflated. The balance has been disturbed.

But most guys here would probably say marriage is an AFC's dream anyway, so I don't know why they would care. Maybe they realize that once they reach a certain age, they really would like to settle down.

But you're right, if you come from a perspective of just wanting acheap lays from multiple women, it's hard to find fault with feminism.