Who is your favorite RSD instructor?

[Thought Art]

@Recursoinominado Maybe, 

[The Caretaker]

Todd for mental models and Owen for overall "motivation". I don't even watch them anymore, but I could recommend them for somebody who wants a more balanced perspective on pick-up culture.

[Thought Art]

I am finding Owen's paid program to actually be way better than his free stuff. I am learning a lot and already seeing changes.

[AION]

Actually there is no RSD instructor left.

Julien is solely focused on helping desperate house wives.

Max got into swindling and selling bogus business courses.

Todd shat his pants as the autistic guy he is.

Owen is the only one who is left and there is Jeffy of course. Owen talks too much smack lately. There are some golden nuggets in his videos but the juice is not worth the squeeze. 

His last video was worth it though:

 

 

 

 

The speaker addresses the narrative circulating on social media which suggests that 80% of women desire only the top 20% of men, perceived as "high-value men". Instead of complaining about this dynamic in online forums, the speaker suggests a more productive use of time and attention would be to understand why there are so few "high-value" men. The speaker argues that women are currently outperforming men in various life facets, including college degrees, home ownership, and income, and men should focus on how to level this playing field. Complaining online indicates that one is likely a "low-quality man" and not in the pool of "high-value men". Therefore, a better use of time is to figure out how to become a "high-quality man".

 

The speaker acknowledges the perspective of a woman from the start of the video, who finds that being in a relationship with a man makes her "look like shit" and "like the life has left [her] eyes," regardless of whether the relationship is bad. This leads her not to be a "big relationship person" because it takes up time that could be spent "getting money and getting to the bag," closes her off from others, and makes her "look like shit". The woman also uses the example of "Bonnie Blue," who reportedly had intimate relations with a thousand different men willingly, to argue that it is not hard to get a man to be attracted, spend time, or want a woman, implying "men are not the prize".

 

The speaker, however, suggests the woman lacks context. The speaker points out that the college admissions and job markets now favor women in some ways, and online content aimed at helping men is at risk of removal, preventing men from seeing the larger picture. While it may appear women have randomly shot ahead, the speaker, having studied this for two decades, aims to explain the dynamics at play and what it would take for men and women to reach a better place. He stresses the importance of empathy for men to understand women's current position.

The speaker contrasts the current social landscape with the past, specifically the era of patriarchy prior to World War II. In the past, women had limited rights; they couldn't vote, get credit cards, have bank accounts, or easily get jobs. Furthermore, the high risk of pregnancy made women cautious about who they had sex with and reliant on men to "stick around". In this older society, men were needed as "protector and provider". However, the speaker argues that in the present day, women generally don't need a man for protection due to modern police forces, and they don't need to be provided for as they now have more access to jobs and education than men. The speaker states that about 60% of new jobs go to women, and around 65% of college admissions are for women. Additionally, modern birth control and the availability of abortion (until recently) reduced the fear of unplanned pregnancy. The speaker notes that this shift in social landscape means that women no longer need men for protection or provision in the way they once did.

Drawing on evolutionary biology and human history, the speaker explains that in nature, a small percentage of top males impregnate most females to move genetics forward. Sex's function is to "weed out low-level men". The speaker suggests that the traditional patriarchal pressure for women to marry and have sex with potentially less attractive "beta male men" was an "enslavement" from a biological perspective. The change in social circumstances has freed women from this pressure.

A significant social trend discussed is the use of club promoters by rich guys to attract women. Promoters are paid (sometimes up to $100k/month) to find attractive women and invite them to exclusive events like private dinners, planes, yachts, and trips. The speaker claims this is why many women are able to attend events like Coachella without paying, being brought there by promoters connected to rich men. The promoter often has more "swagger" and is more genuinely liked by the women than the rich guy paying for everything, although the rich guy still benefits from the favorable ratio of women. The speaker mentions a client worth $30 million whose wife is divorcing him for $15 million, suggesting that despite being a "good man" (faithful, provider), he became boring to her. The speaker advised this client to allocate a budget to hire promoters and attend exclusive events to meet women, as this environment offers a better situation than focusing solely on providing.

 

The speaker introduces the concept of the "winner effect," drawing on research by Robert Sapolsky on baboons. The winner effect posits that perceiving oneself as having higher status changes brain chemistry. High status is associated with effortless public speaking, confidence, health, and positive social interactions. Conversely, perceiving oneself as low status leads to being trapped in one's head, feeling not good enough, difficulty flowing in conversation, constant compensation, and hypervigilance in social interactions. The reticular activation system (RA), responsible for selective focus, goes "haywire" when one feels low status, focusing on perceived threats or value, leading to overthinking. Low-status individuals are described as stumbling, not funny, not confident, often sick, and sometimes subservient to high-status men, which destroys their attractiveness to women. They lack "lateral thinking" and are prone to being naive and gullible, as exemplified by the public reaction to the events of 2020.

The key takeaway regarding attraction is that in the current environment, genuine attraction is the only "equity" in a relationship. The old "protect and provide" model is no longer an attract tactic because women don't need it. Simply having money or providing doesn't guarantee attraction; in fact, the speaker's past experience suggests mentioning owning a house or car could be a turnoff.

 

Instead of focusing on being a provider, men need to develop "swagger," which the speaker equates with a high "winner effect," high brain chemistry, and the ability to express oneself freely without overthinking. Swagger involves owning one's identity, even quirky or nerdy traits, and amplifying them rather than trying to dumb oneself down. It requires finding one's "tribe" – people who appreciate who you are – and not having a codependent relationship to approval. Developing swagger is an "art form" that takes practice, learning from others, and developing unique traits, jokes, and sayings. The speaker practices this by doing free associative public speaking events without scripts. He argues that cultivating swagger is more effective for attraction than focusing on traditional male roles. He gives the example of his friend "Drunk Justin," who is 5'4" but is "swarmed" by women because he optimized for swagger, throwing parties, and creating social proof, rather than traditional achievements like becoming a doctor or lawyer.

The speaker is critical of modern relationships and institutions like marriage, stating the environment is "currently not suited for marriage" or traditional relationships. He believes there is "almost no equity at anything anymore" due to the lack of community accountability. Marriage is often viewed as "cuffing season" or a "flex" on social media rather than a sacred, permanent commitment. Spending money on a partner is seen as an "experience" by the recipient, not an "investment" into the relationship's equity. Friendship also offers no equity, as people may leave when attraction is lost.

 

A core concept explaining this lack of continuity and accountability is the idea of a "private deity" in the mind. This "private deity" represents the individual's emotional state, which supersedes integrity and agreements. If the emotional state dictates a change, agreements or past investments hold little weight. This is exacerbated by "hyperindividuality" and the absence of traditional social structures like church and community that once provided external pressure and accountability. The speaker suggests the absence of God is also a factor, as God traditionally represented a higher level of ethics and integrity beyond the state or individual whim.

Social media is presented as a major factor in brainwashing people against traditional relationships, promoting unrealistic expectations, focusing on boundaries and what one isn't getting, and encouraging cutting people off. The speaker uses the example of seeing his ex-partner liking anti-man content after their breakup, despite his significant efforts in the relationship. Furthermore, friends and family can contribute to dissolving relationships through gossiping ("triangulation") and encouraging breakups, especially if they are not "ingratiated" by the partner. The speaker highlights the prevalence of drug use, even among wealthy individuals, as contributing to a state where people operate more from lower-level circuitry and emotions ("reptile brain") rather than integrity or higher values.

Given this environment, the speaker believes that many attractive men are becoming "oompa loompas" (low-status, trapped in their heads, unattractive) due to negative social conditioning and groupthink. He argues that it is possible to transform an "oompa loompa" into a "gigachad" (confident, attractive).

The speaker suggests that men need to "learn real self value, real social skills, what it means to be actually attractive". He believes this can be taught relatively quickly, potentially in schools. He has made millions teaching these concepts but also feels a sense of guilt that this crucial knowledge is not more widely accessible, leading him to offer free events and content.

While acknowledging the difficult landscape, the speaker still finds value in fatherhood and providing for one's children. He emphasizes that providing for children is done for one's own self-esteem and for the children's well-being, not as an attract tactic for the partner, who may not care. He highlights the lasting impact a father can have on his children, offering a more reliable source of validation and connection than a romantic partner in the current environment. Being a good provider for children is a result of becoming an "executor" – someone who makes plans and follows through – which is a trait women respect.

Ultimately, the speaker views the current social dynamic as one where men must focus entirely on becoming genuinely attractive as women do not need them for traditional reasons. This requires escaping the "oompa loompa" state, developing confidence and "swagger," finding self-value, and committing to self-improvement and execution in life. While the traditional model of protection and provision is outdated as an attractant, it remains important for personal integrity and providing for children. The speaker offers hope that change is possible through dedicated effort and learning.

[Thought Art]

@AION AI? Please disclose 

I just got an Email from Julian. He is coaching men still. 

Edited May 7 by Thought Art