Tuesday, August 11, 2015

Bad Boys, Alphas, Assholes, Nice Guys and Players

“The cheaper the crook, the gaudier the patter” - Sam Spade, The Maltese Falcon

I've decided to run a one from The Masculine Principle, and while I do not agree with everything in it (I never do) he is quite correct that the Manosphere's concept of an "alpha" is in reality a pussy. They're narcissists/psychopaths, and have that fragile "grandiose" self covering up that devalued, humiliated self. In other word, a pussy. I've had a lot of experience with these frauds - which is why I have that quote at the top (originally written by Dashiell Hammett): "The cheaper the crook, the gaudier the patter.".

Again, what the Manosphere calls an "alpha" is in reality an "omega."

And again, all the guys I know who got laid a lot with a lot of women were liars and cowards - "Omegas."

All the self-proclaimed "alphas" and "PUAs" are insecure frauds. That's why "Roosh" fell apart on TV when interviewed by Dr. Oz. It was pathetic but expected. He couldn't handle not being in control and so was humiliated. Easily humiliated (why do you think "Roissy" hides everything about himself? There is a reason for that, and not a good one - he's hiding from being humiliated and exposed as a fraud). He can't handle any criticism and throws a hissy fit when people prove him wrong - which he will never admit.

Here begins the article.

Bad Boys

"Badboys" are pussies, not alpha males. The easiest way to tell if a man is alpha is to observe if he has the respect and cooperation of other men, especially other men in general (i.e. he has power and respect in society, not just socially). You very rarely see a "badboy" meet these criteria. When you do, it's usually an alpha fooling around to get laid.

Alpha males don't usually get the chicks. They get the best chick and she tends to stick around and beat the shit out of any other girls who come around.


The multiple sex partner thing is the omega male's gig. You usually see all sorts of deviant behavior going on in addition to this. Although he is getting laid, he is powerless in relationships as well as every other aspect of his life. No one respects him, not even the psycho chicks who screw him.


Alpha's get snapped up quickly. Beta males screw a lot early in life while women are competing over them, and then settle down. Omegas can't form stable relationships. And Zeta males rarely get laid. Most people are betas.

Humans aren't apes. We have a different mating strategy than them. Women compete for the best man they can get (at a very young age) and then stick with him for life. He sometimes cheats, but not to reproduce. She never cheats. Everyone pairs up. Whenever you see people straying from this paradigm, fucked-upness starts to happen. This is what is happening with women. They are becoming more and more omega. Their clustering around these men is not a normal thing, which is why it is so fucked up in all other ways.

On "Asshole Game"

Being an asshole doesn't even work in the short term. Sure, alternating hot and cold will sometimes get a woman obsessed (the same way random interval reinforcement gets people hooked on gambling). But, just being a total jackass gets you nowhere. Some "game" guys say different. Based on what they say, they obviously have no real experience with women. What does work, and what these and a lot of inexperienced guys get mixed up with this, is being evil. If you are the type of guy who gets drunk and acts like a jackass in public, expect a lot of dateless nights. But if you are the type of guy who sells drugs, or gets drunk and beats a woman so badly she ends up in the hospital, or you've been arrested numerous times, or you are in a gang, these are the things that get you laid. That's not even close to being a normal thing and there is a very high price for aligning yourself with that intensely negative vibe.

If any guy thinks he is going to be successful with women by being a jackass, think again. Being a jackass is just the other side of the coin of being a wuss. The defining element here is lack of control... lack of power. Yeah, that'll get you laid... not. This is why it appeals to wusses so much. They think they can get their way by being an obnoxious wuss instead of a snivelling wuss. But they still haven't expended the effort or cultivated the power to not be a wuss (i.e. to affect the world rather than being blown around by it). Bad habits are the hallmark of that brand of nonsense.

Note that this is a hell of a lot different than being assertive or even aggressive in the face of a woman's bullshit. Women will call that behavior (i.e. not giving her her way) asshole behavior, but it's not. Most people who do this are very nice about it and treat people with love, dignity and respect, when they deserve it. They just don't take any baloney and they insist on things being on their terms. The typical asshole does none of these things. Instead, they treat women like shit, and allow women to treat them like shit in return. Their behaviour opens the door to the woman's behaviours. The assertive man does the exact opposite. He neither gives nor allows poor treatment. He never explains and never negotiates either. It's either his way or the highway. Women say they don't like that as a way to try and get away with something. But every normal woman loves that about a man.

Nice Guys

One of the things I don't like about the "niceguy" label is the assumption that niceguys are nice because they are afraid to be otherwise or it is part of approval seeking behavior or that the world revolves around ruthless, brutal behavior of which niceguys are ignorant and victims of.

This just isn't true.

What is true is that almost anything of any worth has been created by the good people of the world, despite negative influences. Bad people create jack shit. And that goodness flows from strength. It's the assholes of the world who aren't doing what they are supposed to be doing that are making life shitty for everyone. I'm not a niceguy because I was born that way. Nor am I a niceguy because of socialization. I'm a niceguy because I specifically choose to be so. It's part of my method of living a good, decent and satisfying life, because I have noticed that people who are not "nice" simply aren't able to get that for themselves.

Being an asshole is a weakness that makes a person's life sad and pathetic... all the while desperately trying to fool themselves and others that it isn't so.

On Players

Briefly talking with a woman (or better yet, figuring it out before ever approaching them) to discover if she is attracted to you is hardly being a player. Neither is causally breaking off contact with the 90% of women who don’t fall into that category. Women are not entitled to anything from you, least of all your interest in them if they have none in you. A player is trying to get away with something. He is without confidence and lacks an understanding that he has the right to determine the nature and direction of any relationships he is in, and with whom. So, he lies, cheats and goes to incredible lengths to try and fool women. I think the basic problem here is he is trying to convince the 90% (impossible). Don’t do that. Instead, be assertive and honest. Build confidence by gaining experience. Understand that if you do what you are supposed to be doing and someone (especially a woman) accuses you of doing something wrong, it is a manipulation, with no basis in fact. She is trying to get away with something and claims that it is universal to all women. THAT IS A LIE!

If a woman sees you as a player when you are, instead, being rational and assertive, it means something is wrong with HER. She is trying to scam you. No one else will think you are a player, least of all the women who are interested in you.

For example, let’s say you are interested in a short duration, non-monogamous fling. Be upfront and honest about it. When you are starting to become intimate with a woman, she will sometimes ask you where this is going. Tell her you are only looking for a fling and give her the option to say, "No, that’s not what I want from you" (very few women will do that, BTW). Her shrewish friends might call you a player, simply because you aren’t willing to get on all fours and beg for sex and swear your undying love, all your present and future earnings and put up with limitless abuse, just to get some pussy. But as long as you don’t lie, she definitely won’t think that way (for the limited time her feelings for you last, that is). And neither will anyone else who matters.

Being honest and direct like this INCREASES your chances with women, not decreases. A small minority of incredibly insane women (as in, everything else about them is insane too), have a problem with that. But all your behavior should revolve around making sure they aren’t even allowed to talk to you, let alone influence your life.

Also, although I don’t allow relationships to get too deep anymore, I am hardly engaging in a “fuck and dump” strategy. I simply understand that her interest in me has an expiration date (once it expires, her interest in me turns dark and sinister), so I better not get any ideas about the long term. Since there is no long term, I have no reason to exclude myself to any one girl. Unfortunately, they don’t understand that (if they did, maybe they would fix it, lol) and constantly try to deepen the relationship, forcing me to set limits. The most effective way to set limits isn’t through what I say, but rather through what I do. And, what I do is limit the time I spend with a woman and refuse certain activities (like meeting her family). That’s OK with most women (as long as you don’t lie or use or abuse them) for varying amounts of time. Then they wander off. You need to be OK with that. And you won’t be OK with that unless you have another to take her place. And you won’t have another to take her place if you stop looking for interested women every time you meet one.

To All the Girls I've Loved Before

I think of all the women I’ve been with as people I care about and love, not objects to be used for awhile and then discard when I find a better one. Unfortunately, I know full well that they view me and the relationship (and whatever marriage they may undertake in the future, lol) this way, which forces me to adjust my behavior. It’s not natural for me to spread myself over several women, none of whom I allow to get any ideas about where our relationship is headed. But bitter experience has taught me that I really don’t have a choice in the matter. Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of women who will say they are different. They say they love me and they say they are loyal and want a life with me. But their actions just don’t match their words. After awhile I realized it was a deliberate deception. The way women REALLY see me is as a toy to vent their lusts on while they shop around for Mr. Right. Mr Right happens to be some weak willed schmoe with a fat wallet that they plan to suck dry during a divorce before they have even met.

Shopping around for the right partner is a euphemism for looking for a rich guy to victimize. The payoff for the time invested is his money. Women talk about this jokingly or in metaphor, but the behavior is direct and unambiguous. It’s a reliable pattern I’ve come to expect and have gotten good at avoiding.

"Never screw anyone crazier than you are" - a friend of mine from a long time ago


Unknown said...

'I think the basic problem here is he is trying to convince the 90% (impossible).'

Probably true...he's only looking out for his own pleasure so something as important as her being interested in him is probably thrown to the wayside.

DeNihilist said...

Bob, seems this guy has read and re-read the Book of Bonecrckr. Some of the stuff he writes is ALMOST word for word, but not quite as well smithed. Funny, I was reading some more Bone last night, (thanks for posting his stuff, I had meant to read more of it) and a lot of what I read last night was in this OP.

. said...

Thanks for linking my sites, Bob.

@ DeNihilist,

Yes, you're right... Principles of Seduction (On the Masculine Principle Site) is a direct take-off of the No-Maam Site, which is the most known avenue for Bonecrker... and that would be because, the Masculine Principle site is run by the same guy who made the No Ma'am site, lol!

The old site at No Ma'am is on Blogger Classic (which will one day soon be defunct), and it has been targeted by so many "hate" groups that it's time to move it to another venue. Owning that site is like walking through life with a ton of bricks tied to your ass. BUT, the only thing that has changed, is that Bonecrker is now "grouped" into topics rather than wandering all over the place, and a few of the No Ma'am articles are updated, with a few new ones added in. There's nothing missing, and only a few new articles added.

Cheers guys!

DeNihilist said...

Well I'll be damned! Good to know, and bad to know about the No Ma'am site. Bonecrker must be preserved! The font of knowledge that he laid out is and will be invaluable! If it is lost it will be akin to the destruction of the Bhudha's in Afghanistan!

Mindstorm said...

"Women compete for the best man they can get (at a very young age) and then stick with him for life." - a woman sticking with anything, especially a man, for life? That's news to me. :) If this happens, it's hardly natural. It requires hard work on her part (and probably a certain 'image' projected by said man).

. said...

@ DeNihilist,

Heh, I see you linking to my stuff once in a while - that's cool!

As per the Bonecrker and his history, he wrote this stuff back in 2003/04 on the NiceGuy's Forum. When I hooked up with Zed circa 2005/06, he recommended to me to read his stuff at NiceGuy's. Back then it was just a jumbled mess of posts that hardly made sense. Since then, as far as I know, I am the sole "editor" of Bonecrker.

I am the one who numbered his posts and separated them, originally on a word.doc. Then I started publishing them online as separate posts, and then, I eventually published it as a "book." The only alterations I've ever made has been for spelling and punctuation... and throughout the years, I've linked related posts.

You are right, that I've read and re-read him often - lol, usually around every six months. Back in the early days of the Manosphere - ie, 2007/08, he just blew my mind, how much he conveyed about what I had experienced in life.

The only things in "Principles of Seduction" that are added are the very first three posts (I don't know the author - but they are very good) and the very last article was a comment I made online that sparked a huge discussion. For the rest, the entire Book of Bonecrker can be found in "Principles of Seduction" but in a more direct and less haphazard form... it's taken me NINE YEARS, lol! So, if Bonecrker ever shows up again - which he never has - he owes me one, and me him!

DeNihilist said...

Thanks Said. In my estimation you have done more for the sphere then most of the "leaders" of today's version.

I predict that the work you have done to gather and index the words of Bonecrker will one day be seen as one of the highest points of the sphere.

The Obvious said...

No likes for Philalethes? His stuff is excellent, the way he inverts women's common attacks making them over extend and fall flat on their face?

You're missing out bigtime.

Jamie NZ said...

I think you're being too critical on them bloke's Uncle Bob. You seem so ready to forget them bloke's pretty much figured the wimminz out and wrote the book on em[not even the bible did that]. They may not have it all figured out [who does???] but you seem to forget far too easily they were a generation thrown to the wolves and forged in indifference.

Here is a few of my blogs - [I only include them to show the (low)calibre of bloke I am]



I can't seem to find any photos of you putting your head up over the parapet

Now eaze up aye bro

Unknown said...

The more I swim through all this 'alpha beta' non-sense, the more the repulsion I feel for these guys.

The problem with the so-called Manosphere is that deprives men from Agency, placing them in a position where we men are victims. And there seems to be no exception to that. Bonecracker is childish, immatoure, and in several aspects wrong.

Men can be classified into two categories:
1) useful to society
2) useless

A man who only strives to get laid is useless. While the rest of his peers develop talents, skills and a good understanding of life; he wastes his time pursuing ephemeral pleasure. Nothing good comes out of that.

Classifying men in terms of the quantity-quality of women they find is emasculated and feminist.

Jamie NZ said...

A man who figured out the wimminz games they play then passed that knowledge on to the world - In this Kiwi's book I would say that's some pretty dam useful information

Ya'll should quit being such ball-busters. Try it sometime

Unknown said...

Sure women play games...but basic knowledge of them should come down to this.

She's either interested in you or not. And if she is she tends to help you out or overlook your faults. If she's messing with your head playing games...she not interested in keeping you around.

And I do like the thought of classifying men as either useful or useless.

Rusty Shackleford said...

What is the PUA term for encounters with women that happen in everyday life? They call it "day game." They're so focused on the ridiculous club scene that they had to come with a stupid term to describe the 99.999999..% of life that is lived outside of the night club. And they treat "day game" like it is some sort of bizarre offshoot of club life and barely worth talking about. The bars and clubs are an artificial environment and the relationships that result from them rarely result in anything but flings. Observations drawn from drugged up fun boys and party girls at the club are bound to result in conclusions that don't really apply to the wider world. The manosphere tries to twist the real world to fit game and ends up with a distorted, grotesque reality.

"Men can be classified into two categories:
1) useful to society
2) useless"

I'd be a little more sympathetic to that definition if society were a little more sympathetic to the average man in general. As it is, I can't see why a man should put himself out too much for a social structure that's in many ways specifically rigged against men who actually try to be useful to society.

Personally, I favor a system of limitless but strictly defined categories that allows every doofus on the planet to call himself "alpha" at something. In my system Roissy may be an alpha at SMV/PUA/game/etc. or whatever he wants to call it. And that is fine and may even be useful to some people, as long as there is no scope creep between categories. When for example Roosh begins to think that picking up drunk sluts has made him some sort of uber wise alpha he man in every other aspect of life, that is where we encounter a domain error, like what happened on the Dr. Oz show.

Unknown said...

Basically the Dr. Oz show revealed how socially inept Roosh is. You can get away a bit with social ineptness if your target is under mind altering drugs in dark scenes with loud music. When the bright lights are on you and your adversary is sober...that's a different story.

Rusty Shackleford said...

"Bad Boys "Badboys" are pussies, not alpha males. The easiest way to tell if a man is alpha is to observe if he has the respect and cooperation of other men, especially other men in general (i.e. he has power and respect in society, not just socially). "

Exactly. Now compare this to Vox Day's hierarchy list. The VD version reads like the work of a little dork who never got over being a high school loser. In voluntary organizations, the guy who's socially at top isn't some jackass who alternates between bragging about himself and insulting everybody around him. In my experience, he's usually cool and understated and doesn't need to brag. He's competent at whatever he does, and he inspires trust and confidence in the people around him. That last part is the most important. The guy at the top might not be the smartest, the toughest, the best athlete, etc. but he's the guy that everybody knows they can rely on.

" Alpha males don't usually get the chicks. They get the best chick and she tends to stick around and beat the shit out of any other girls who come around."

Years and years ago I remember David Beckham's pop star wife describing their relationship pretty much exactly this way.

Unknown said...

"I can't seem to find any photos of you putting your head up over the parapet"

Why would I post a picture of myself? It means nothing. That's for attention whores like Roosh and Vox Day

But I have told the truth about myself - my name is Bob, I did own a taxi for five years, I did have some pathetic Omega I let live in my back room kill himself because of a 30-year drug addiction, I did pull a pistol on a bunch of punks harassing me in the street. These are true things, unlike the lies and exaggerations posted by "Rooth" and "Roissy."

Unknown said...

@ said

All of this needs to be in a eBook.

It's far above the usual Manosphere stuff.