Mykaelous

Thinking about this more and after reading some of the comments I want to put a thought out there. Given the choice, would you rather do the hard work of figuring this issue out or leave it up to your daughter to "wonder if there is something "wrong" with me because I'm just not good at relating to women." Your child will inherit that disconcerting feeling if you are unable to find an answer. I know in my experience of having a father who wasn't very social that it was no coincidence that both my brother and I were loners throughout school. We lacked an effective model of how to interact with other men and how to pick good friends. In my brothers case he attempted suicide, in my case I fumed and considered committing violence and possible suicide at times due to feeling lonely. Ultimately this drove me toward a search for self-knowledge and has defined a great part of my life. Fortunately that search has landed me here and I now have quality relationships with quality people and my children will model that. Keep in mind that having low quality friends is likely as destructive as having no friends, because it will lead your children to select low quality friends for themselves. It's amazing how much of ourselves we model after our parents.

How do you get anyone interested in anything? You have to demonstrate it's value in a meaningful way. My goal is to become such a happy and successful person that people will come and ask me "how did your life come to be so good?" and it is only then that they will be receptive to my answers. When I lost 100 lb's people, even people that were skinnier than me, began asking me for what I was doing to loose weight, I didn't have to sell them on it, the proof is in the pudding. But even then it takes work and effort and even if you see the holy land in the distance, some just don't have the will to make the journey to it.

Dude here with mostly female friends. So this is definitely an outside perspective, but as you yourself feel alien to deep female companionship perhaps I can offer some theories. I will take a leap and generalize females companions into two categories. The cognitively biased and the emotionally biased. You seem to be in the first camp(I would assume most female FDR listeners to be in this camp, while most women in the general populace are in the 2nd camp). The criteria you have for what is a meaningful relationship is different than most women. Think about the qualities that attracted you to your best friend(husband), how many of those qualities do your female friends share and value? I would suspect that the qualities that bond you and your husband may in fact be a cause of conflict when relating to emotionally biased friends. You may value truth while they may value loyalty. An example of this is the infamous "does this dress make me look fat?" question. Guessing by your statement "I'm not the kind of person you'd call if you were in need of emotional support " I would hazard a guess that you would opt for the truthful answer while most women would opt for the answer they believe their friend wants to hear. Answering honestly would make the emotionally biased woman feel alienated, while it would build trust with the cognitively biased women(although a cognitively biased woman is far less likely to ask such a question to begin with). If say you were to placate to their desires, while this may serve their feeling of trust and rapport towards you, it betrays who you are and thus damages your feelings of closeness with them. This is certainly a unique struggle for the cognitively biased woman. You look around and see women seemingly enjoying themselves laughing, smiling and lauding eachother's appearances and life events. It's easy to mistake such social posturing for real meaningful friendship. But ask yourself if you think that these women talk to each other about the same topics you and your husband discuss, or even the thoughts you think of when you are awake at night? Do they seriously wonder and consider things like "Is there a God? What is Truth? Is there life after death?" I am not saying they never consider such questions, but in my experience they don't dwell upon them for any considerable amount of time, nor are they compelled to. Just because your behavior/preferences are abnormal, that doesn't make them unhealthy, and if they work to reinforce your family unit they may be beneficial. The difficulty for cognitively biased women to make friends among themselves is due to the effort required to maintain a friendship. Men have the incentive of potential access to female reproductive value by being friends and so will make a greater effort to meet and interact with cognitively biased woman. So it's easier for cognitively biased women to be friends with men, than for them to be friends with other cognitively biased women. What you are describing is an Omega Female/Male. You are the independent outsider who stands her ground. To be an Alpha, you must have a clique of Beta's that attempt to gain your good will by imitating and following you.

Luckily such manipulation has resulted in the conservative blowback in generation Z. Since Generation Z never had that association between the imagery and the word, they see people emotional reactive programming for what it is, ridiculous.

The first book I read voluntarily was the Enders Game Saga in High School. From there I moved to autobiographies of famous people and then non-fiction books on psycology, science, picking up girls, and philosophy. I am not a fan of imaginary tales. I think the books that were the most compelling to me were books that I could identify with at the time. I suppose books like Harry Potter with magic was a type of escapism that just made me angry because they weren't real, the characters didn't have to suffer like I was at the time.

Actually haven't looked at 5. I just know 4 was a shit show.

Not saying that the following applies to you, but something I would keep in mind. Sometimes for those of us who didn't quite get relationships at a young age we fall into a pattern of yearning for women who find us unattractive. I know for myself I have noticed sometimes that when I like a girl and suddenly gain her interest some part of me looses interest in her, or finds something small like "ohh her nose is bigger than I thought" to get all worked up about in my mind and dismiss her. I try to recognize that unloved child in my brain and tell him not to fear being loved.

Interesting thoughts. Adam Kokesh was the one that pushed me towards an Agorist perspective where you do everything you can to work around the state to diminish it's effect.

That also rings true for me, especially as I have observe my niece growing up. She is a empirical learning machine constantly repeating experiments of gravity tossing blocks to see how they fall over and over again. Then she was told that about the Easter bunny, st. nick, and the belief in God because my sister has a vain appreciation of her daughter praying at the dinner table to something that doesn't exist. The reason my niece believes is an emotional one, because mommy says so and that is a strong belief because her survival is dependent upon her mother. Such a emotional bond requires another equally powerful emotional bond to break. Formal logic has only existed for about four thousand years not nearly enough time to influence the human species evolutionary. It is rare for someone to override/comprehend their emotions with brunt logic, it is what many of use who pursue self-knowledge hope to do in that pursuit. For me my commitment to truth is an emotional one, because for me the concept of an external universal truth is key to the validation that other minds exist, although I cannot prove that they do within my own mind.

Are you sure they were erected by poor men and not women? It seems that the prohibition of prostitution was imposed by the preferences of women who wanted to have a monopoly on sex within a relationship to guarantee continued resources and obedience from men. The greatest modern day critics of prostitution are feminists and the fervently religious. Under this theory as sex becomes easy the pressure for men to participate in marriage and long term relationships is diminished. In our post sexual revolution society, this is certainly the case. A lot of good insights there my friend. I think there are many misconceptions about the pickup community especially how it was presented in the game, because the book was never meant to be a how to book and it emerged before the community had the opportunity to really understand the social dynamics underlying techniques(it was a book more about the journey(his personal growth) than the destination(getting with women)). The reason those funny mustaches and card tricks worked was because it was a source self-amusement. Women are at least 10 times more perceptive and influenced by a mans attitude and congruence with his actions than they are to his words. I could tell a woman I wanted to do a plethora of uncouth things to her within minutes of meeting her(that would send any SJW into a convulsive rage) and if my body language and vocal tonality were congruence with my actions she would absolutely love it. We only evolved the capability for speech a few hundred thousand years ago(we invented fire and tools before that) and therefore it's impact on sexual dynamics and communication would be minimal at best. Scott Adam's blog from time to time touches on the subject in relation to persuasion. I would really like Stefan to have Neil Strauss on the show to talk about relationships, because I think Neil could re-frame the negative image Stefan has of it. I think that especially with Neil's new book "The Truth" that there is a message that they both share when it comes to love, peaceful parenting(in relation to the childhood traumas that shaped Neils life), and the benefits of self knowledge and therapy.

Ask yourself "Why is prostitution illegal?" Who does it benefit? The same group of people benefit from the use of the word "slut."

Just anecdotal evidence(dubious as it might be) of having been apart of several atheistic communities. I have found that the majority of Atheists 80-90% become atheists due to an emotional response to the edicts of religion. Personal examples of people have met are as follows. 1. A girl believes that she should have the right to have an abortion. The Christian churches opposition to the practice thus places her in opposition to God, so it is easier for her to reject God than to argue the logic. 2. A Homosexual man finds his natural urges and lifestyle to be incompatible with the edicts of Christianity so he abandons it. This is easy to see in the language used by atheists in opposition to theism(especially on college campus's). I myself while young had my doubts about God, but through punitive means took Gods existence as axiomatic and became very devoted. It wasn't until I was convinced emotionally that God did not exist(the lack of chastity within the christian community enraged me bitterly, and I no longer was dependent upon my parents for survival) that I came to accept the fundamental arguments I devised when I was 8 that the belief in God was paradoxical. For me I always knew that a belief in God did not make sense, but I couldn't accept those rational arguments it until I was in an emotional state to do so.

Idea's are cheap, execution is everything. Stefan said as much on a recent call in. Everyone has an idea, but being able to execute on that idea is what matters because that's where things fall apart. Stefan has often said that he is always looking for help on the podcast and that if you want to, the best thing to do is start doing it, build a prototype and demonstrate potential, then you have leverage to ask for the resources to make your idea finalized. Look at kickstarters or shark tank. The ones that work are the ones that have a functional prototype.

From experience I can tell you that it is easier to bed a married or "committed" woman for a one night stand than it is to bed a single woman. The reason being that single women want to extract resources from you so they will try to hold out on sex. "Committed" women already have a flow of resources and simply desire better genetics. My current plan is to find a woman 8-10 years younger than myself who has a history of strong pair bonds(her parents are in a long committed relationship) and form a community which reinforces the ideals of monogamy.

Stefan's point is that if you are true to your virtues you will naturally weed out the unfit, you just have to be willing to say no to a lot of people. To find "the one" worth saying yes to, you have to be willing to say no to a lot of people. People get confused into thinking that others are rejecting them when they present themselves for who they are, but it is yourself that is rejecting the other by not conforming to their values. Debasing yourself so you can garner the attention or appreciation of others is a sure way to living a life of misery. Education /= intelligence, especially considering that standards are down across the board and the majority of women in college are getting soft majors which require little effort to achieve.

I am going to use my last post of the day for you, so I hope I can add to the conversation. First, from your post it is evident that you have a lot of self knowledge into your motivations and responses and have thought this out well. I believe that you already know the answer, but feel unsure because she has been a large emotional investment for you. Sometimes we Second, "no go" topics are not ideal in a relationship with someone you should trust. Ideally your significant other is someone who you can completely confide in, someone who can make good judgments for you when you are incapacitated or not in the right state of mind, in other words someone you can trust. But how can you trust someone who you can't be open and honest with? Third when you do talk about philosophy or matters of importance she has two reactions. The first is to get angry, and the second in to cry. The first is an emotional reaction that indicates a lack of self knowledge, if she is not able to work through the emotions to understand what in her past is causing her to have such a visceral reaction to a topic. The only way to salvage the relationship is if she is willing to work through her emotions(weather this is a worthy venture is your call). Her second reaction where she cry's is simply a way to manipulate you like she may have her father or mother into getting her way(again self-knowledge is key here). I would hazard a guess that there were a few arguments where she was unable to manipulate you by getting angry or crying to get you to agree with her and like many women she is now attempting to separate you from your support system so she can control you. This is an evolutionary tool that women have used since the dawn of man, as it is imperative that a woman has control over her mate as to maintain a monopoly on his resources. She fears that if she does not have your complete obedience that you may one day leave her like you did in the past which evolutionary would have been hugely detrimental to her and her children's continued existence. Ultimately I do not believe it is the content of the arguments you are having that matter, but rather the social dynamics that are at play. You could easily be arguing over the color you should paint the walls, the fundamental dysfunction in this relationship runs deeper and more subconscious than that.

I've always been a proponent of single stall unisex restrooms like they have in Vegas nightclubs. Seemed the most efficient use of resources. From what I gather women are generally the ones opposed to this as "men piss on seats" is what I normally hear when I make this appeal.

Because women(and by extention society) find the idea of men manipulating(don't think of this in the negative connotation) women into liking them as a threat to their natural hypergamous intentions. It's ok for women to manipulate men with makeup and breast augmentation, but for a man to augment who he is to attract women is deemed reprehensible. Neil Strauss in the book The Game has a good quote on this I can't find that basically talks about how it's silly how if people want to learn how to fix a car, or learn jujitsu society encourages people to learn, but if you want to learn how to be more attractive to women, society scorns you for it because being able to attract women is considered to be an innate part of being a man, and to admit you cannot attract women is to admit that you are not a man thus deserving of ridicule.

I could do DnD 3.5. I would play a True Neutral Druid or the like.

I wouldn't recommend christian sites as the 3 people I know who have used them all ended up getting someone/getting pregnant, because they were having extramarital sex without protection. I understand that the OP's purpose of searching online is to easily identify someone who has shared values. The problem with online dating in my experience is that it attracts 4 types of people. People who are interested in casual sex(people who aren't interested in a real deep virtue based relationship), people who have extreme or general anxiety(anti-social types which aren't good mates, or won't meet up), people who have little time for a full time commitment to a relationship(they will just waste your time as you date them week to week), or they are desperate(people who are unattractive, either physically or mentally, or they really need a sperm donor). So the fundamental question or purpose of this post remains. How do you find your libertarian soulmate? Well if I find out I will tell you. My last ex was a "libertarian atheist" which I was really enthralled with at first until I found out that it was based not in reason, but in emotion. So while we agreed on how things should be we really couldn't discuss philosophy or liberty because she was incapable of following the arguments. This ultimately resulted in a serious lack of self knowledge that culminated in a mental breakdown and the subsequent ending of our relationship. While I am young and still have hope of finding my dream girl(it only took about 150 dates and 4 years of serious dedication to find 1 that was pretty close to my ideal) I think I might slowly be getting convinced by Molyneux's presentations that it wouldn't be bad to join a religious cult to find a woman to raise a family with. I'm thinking Mormonism since all of those that I have met have been truly outstanding people in my experience.