Stop Chasing

Below are two comments from a reader and my responses. The picture above is included primarily because it very clearly expresses what I have been saying over multiple posts now : stop chasing.

The second comment set has more to do with chasing than the first comment set, but both should prove insightful.

From Random Indian (source)

Hey Anthony. I’ve commented here before under a few different user names (that I’ve since forgot). I’d like to address a few points.

You state that woman looking up to man is the natural state of womanhood but offer no scientific evidence to back up this claim.

Your point about chasing. If we observe much of the animal kingdom its the males who display (peacocking) and the females who choose amongst the males displaying. The Mystery Method is based on this premise. In modern human society this has been reversed. The females are doing the displaying, replacing the colorful feathers of the male peacock with colorful makeup and clothing, in order to attract the human males, who then choose which females to approach, who then themselves are subject to a reverse selection process when the females then accept or reject their advances.

I guess I’m lucky because my culture does away with chasing on both sides because our families arrange our marriages for us, but we do have ultimate veto power. In other words, we are not forced, if after getting to know the person we do not like him/her, we are free to reject the proposal and then our families will line someone else up for us to meet.

I’m not saying its a perfect system, but it does away with much of the anxiety, heartbreak and general mess I see in the modern western dating scene.

Interesting you bring up Ayn Rand. What disturbed me greatly about The Fountainhead was the rape scenario, following which the vicim fell in love with the criminal who committed the crime against her. I felt this gave a particular insight into Ayn’s inner psychology, which presumably would have been quite dark. That such a criminal would be portrayed as a “hero” of any sort is also disturbing. People may say, “its just a novel” but what authors choose to write about often reflects their values. Ayn positioned herself as a champion for individual rights and freedoms and that she would portray someone who so blatantly trespassed on the freedom and rights of another sovereign individual as some sort of “hero” of any sort flies in the face of her “philosophy” in this readers opinion.

Interesting point here is that I’ve known many immigrants from India (my own family members included) to jump on the Objectivist bandwagon after reading Ayn’s books. This makes sense when you understand how very structured the life of the average India is. We are a very family oriented people and our culture is very vocal in what it expects from us, despite our government being so chaotic and inept. The cultural download is very strong in us. The arranged marriage system reflects that as the marriages are not just randomly arranged but very carefully planned according to the similar socio-economic backgrounds of the two familes coming together, and make no mistake about it – it is two entire families being wed, not just two individuals.
So it makes sense that Objectivism and the emphasis on the individual would look very attractive to someone whom their entire life has done most things that their family expects of them such as pursuing a certain career to marrying a certain type of person, etc. But even with all the Objectivist and individualist talk emanating from their mouths, they ALWAYS fall back on our Indian family system and culture which is evidence in their career choices, marriage choices and general lifestyle. It is this which has made us the “model minority” and most successful SES group in the United States today.

Here’s a qoute from Ayn which I disagree with, “if man is to progress, he must reject the morality of altruism”.

I’ve progressed greatly from acts of altruism. Some of my own and some expected of me culturally and familialy. I’ve helped friends in need (my own choice) who later blossomed on their own and in turn helped me in my pursuits. The return help was not at all expected. I helped them because I genuinely wanted to and it makes me happy to be of service to people I value.

On the other hand it is expected that members of Indian families will help each other, and like a good Indian, I have helped family members, some purely out of personal choice and others purely out of a sense of duty. In both cases I also progressed. Again, this is one of the reasons Indians do so well economically in the United States, we help each other climb the ladder.

My response.

Hey Random Indian

Thanks for commenting. In the interest of producing the best comment and maintaining a blog I love, I am going to answer your question very bluntly. In tandem, I believe being this honest is also how you show someone respect.

In responding to your comment I am going to run though it chronologically. I won’t quote, but it should be obvious to what specifically I am responding to.

###

I stated no such thing. You took something I said and restated it in a way that fit your interpretation, which was an incorrect one. I stated that looking up to man, in concept and in flesh, is the essence of femininity. This is not an automatic, natural process, which is what your comment implies. It is absolutely not the default state of “womanhood”, a word I did not and do not use. The essence of femininity is something women have to actively work towards and for. It is earned, not arbitrarily gifted.

When you say “scientific evidence” you display a clear misunderstanding of the word because this post was philosophical in nature. Philosophy is not just “a science”, it is the fundamental science of reality and of man’s relationship to it. It is the science that precedes all others. In this sense, I absolutely discussed and provided basic evidence. You didn’t recognize an ounce of it because you are ignorant of philosophy being a science in the first place. Science to you has been reduced strictly to statistics, biology, and so on.

Human beings are infinitely different from all other animals known to man. We are the only animals who posses a volitional consciousness and the capacity to think in multiple levels of abstraction. Studying or citing the behavioral psychology of animals is less than meaningless in the context of this discussion and post, it is detrimental to further and genuine intellectual discussion. The psychology of instinct driven animals has no place in the psychology of human beings. The two have nothing to do with each other.

I find it abhorrent and bizarre that you find yourself fortunate to be arbitrarily arranged into an intimate relationship with another human being. It’s insulting to the concepts and the potentials for human joy they represent, especially in regards to romantic love. The veto power you mention is insignificant. The problem is the performance of the practice in the first place, and anyone giving remote credit to it’s validity.

There was no criminal act of rape in The Fountainhead. Your comment reveals a profound ignorance both of the concept rape, its criminal implications, as well as of the novel The Fountainhead. Dominique Francon wanted to be ‘raped’ in The Fountainhead, was perfectly aware of it, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Rape in The Fountainhead was, in a context you would understand, more akin to being “ravaged”. Rape on the other hand is an often misused word that in a criminal context means physically and violently assaulting someone in a sexual manner.

The physical assault is the (primary), the sexual aspect is (secondary). The importance of this order cannot be stressed enough, nor can it’s implications into rape law today (disastrous when ignored, which is often).

Re Indian culture, I believe you are very confused on what Objectivism and individualism truly mean. Being a strongly “family oriented” culture is no more individualistic than being a “society oriented” culture because they both replace the basic unit of society — individual human beings — with *groups* of individuals, and therefore remove the individual from the equation entirely. The number of people in a particular group is irrelevant. Collectivism is collectivism whether you make the base unit of society 5 people or 500 million.

The individual is 1 and he is supreme in both spirit and politics.

Collectivism with a family slant is no less dangerous and harmful than State inspired collectivism, race inspired collectivism, etc. And all lead to total collapse because they fundamentally and diametrically oppose the reality of human beings on this earth *as the individuals that they are, always have been, and always will be*.

I would challenge you to define success, because I really doubt you understand the meaning of the term on a grand scale if you’re talking about how successful one minority is compared to another.

You cannot just “disagree” with that quote. Absolutely rejecting altruism is one of the cruxes of everything she *ever* wrote. She rightly despised the morality of altruism. By what you’ve written here you are an altruist, although at the same time you are clearly confused.

Benevolence is not altruism. Genuine benevolence is in fact (often) a sign of high self-esteem.

Altruism is sacrificing higher values for lower values. It is the covering of moral depravity in the guise of helping others, becuase you haven’t a clue what to do with your life. It is the attempt to live through others and have your very existence validated by their needs. It is the moral enslavement of man to his brothers.

It is any sense of duty to any one but yourself and to things you’ve chosen [edit: *by free will, and voluntary ***guilt free*** consent].

It is the attempt to make service to others a virtue.

Altruism makes benevolence impossible, and turns free men into slaves.

Another comment from Random Indian (source)

“Best thing you could do to de-attract an unattractive woman from you is to chase her.”

Next time an unattractive woman hits on you, reciprocate it by flirting, ask for her number then follow up with a phone call asking for a date. I guarantee you she will NOT be “de-attracted”.

My response.

If you behave towards her in a way that is authentically similar to how you would act towards a woman you are strongly attracted to, not only will it de-attract her, it will do so shockingly fast, regardless of all other factors. You don’t understand this because you lack the ability to envision how this would play out in real life in addition to lacking the conceptual map of why this happens in the first place.

After approaching more women by the age of 22 than most men will in a lifetime, and having the faculty to connect these ideas into something philosophically coherent, I can tell you definitively that this is in fact how things work, whether your like it and agree with it, or not.

Women cannot and do not fundamentally admire men who sacrifice their masculinity, to the lowest bidder, for the potential of sex. It’s both antithetical and insulting to women at the same time.

About Anthony Dream Johnson

CEO, founder, and architect of The 21 Convention, Anthony Dream Johnson is the leading force behind the world's first and only "panorama event for life on earth". He has been featured on WGN Chicago, and in the NY Times #1 best seller The Four Hour Work Week.    His stated purpose for the work he does is "the actualization of the ideal man", a purpose that has led him to found and host The 21 Convention across 3 continents and for 6 years in a row. Anthony blogs vigorously at TheDreamLounge.net and Declarationism.com.

, , , , , ,

19 Responses to Stop Chasing

  1. Random Indian May 22, 2012 at 10:19 pm #

    I appreciate that you took the time to respond. Thankyou.

    I’ll address the last point first.

    “If you behave towards her in a way that is authentically similar to how you would act towards a woman you are strongly attracted to, not only will it de-attract her, it will do so shockingly fast, regardless of all other factors. You don’t understand this because you lack the ability to envision how this would play out in real life in addition to lacking the conceptual map of why this happens in the first place.

    After approaching more women by the age of 22 than most men will in a lifetime, and having the faculty to connect these ideas into something philosophically coherent, I can tell you definitively that this is in fact how things work, whether your like it and agree with it, or not.

    Women cannot and do not fundamentally admire men who sacrifice their masculinity, to the lowest bidder, for the potential of sex. It’s both antithetical and insulting to women at the same time.”

    Anthony, put it to a field test. Approach an unattractive woman in the same manner you would approach an attractive one and see for yourself if she is flattered or insulted. Women who do not get approached by men due to lack of good looks will lap up any sort of positive attention like a puppy, especially if its from a reasonably good looking guy, which going by your photos you are.

    Now on to more pressing concerns.

    I’m glad you make a distinction between humans and animals. So much pseudo scientific and pop culture “evolutionary psychology/biology” is bantied about the pick up industry, oh excuse me “lifestyle and relationship” industry, that puts forth the idea that we are little more than primitive sub-humans or animals running purely on biological instincts, which is obviously completely false for the reasons you mention and more.

    “I find it abhorrent and bizarre that you find yourself fortunate to be arbitrarily arranged into an intimate relationship with another human being. It’s insulting to the concepts and the potentials for human joy they represent, especially in regards to romantic love. The veto power you mention is insignificant. The problem is the performance of the practice in the first place, and anyone giving remote credit to it’s validity.”

    In India I didn’t give it much credibility. Outside of a few major cities we don’t have a dating culture there so our parents arranging for us to formally meet girls in the company of their own parents is the common way we meet romantic prospects. I

    However I REALLY started to give credit to it’s validity after moving to the US where I see a divorce rate hovering around 50%, children being raised by single parents and the resultant psychological problems that accompany that, those same single parents re-entering the dating scene and hurting their children even further by exposing them to a merry-go-around of potential future mommies and/or daddies, people going in and out of “relationships” with nary a care what that does to others or their own ability to form a lifelong pair bond, etc, etc, etc. ITS A MESS and I envy neither you nor your culture for it.

    On the contrary arranged marriage does not preclude love and joy in the slightest. My own parents had an arranged marriage and they are still demonstratably in love after several decades.
    My parents know me better than anyone else and so I trust that they would only choose potential mates for me amongst women they have screened for compatibility. The ultimate decision lies with me and the woman I’m meeting, not with them. It is my opinion that American children would grow up healthier and happier if their parents were to become even a fraction as family oriented as the average Indian couple.

    “Collectivism with a family slant is no less dangerous and harmful than State inspired collectivism, race inspired collectivism,”

    Says who?

    I allow my parents to screen potential mates for me because I love them, I trust them and I value their opinions highly. You may call this “dangerous” but I call it respect. If I had no respect for them or if they had proved to be untrustworthy there is no way I would allow it.

    I know its common for young Americans to devalue and disrespect their parents, sometimes even going so far as to outright hate them, but that is not at all common in most cultures around the world. In most cultures the wisdom of age is deferred to. Not always followed, but at least given an ear. Now, I understand that many, if not most American youth are growing up in single parent households and are witness to their parents doing things that do not command respect, such as bringing home a carousel of strange men or women in the name of “relationships”, and hence they grow up disrespecting their parents, and it could be argued rightly so, but this is not something that your average Indian grows up being exposed to, hence we still respect our parents and value their opinions on important decisions like marriage. And since the majority of Indian parents do not get divorced, their opinions on marriage carry weight.

    If I had American parents on the other hand, there is no way in hell I would defer to their opinions on the matter or allow them to screen potential spouses for me because they more than likely would be divorced, if ever married at all, and trolling profiles on some cheap dating site as if they were a young person like me.

    And that my friend, is the one of the major reasons why there is an ethical and moral vacuum in your country. It is obvious to the rest of the world, and now becoming obvious to Americans on the inside as well if the voice of the broken man-child in the manosphere is to be believed.

  2. Theo May 23, 2012 at 3:08 am #

    Wow, Anthony usually writes convoluted paragraphs that have circular arguments from hell, but his responses above were pretty well articulated. I am actually surprised at how well you delivered your point.

  3. Dude May 23, 2012 at 3:29 am #

    Yeah. I agree with random Indian guy. Bride burning, acid throwing husbands in the States is just brutal. Oh no wait;

    The Thomas Reuters Foundation survey says that India is the fourth most dangerous place in the world for women to live in as women belonging to any class, caste or creed and religion can be victims of this cruel form of violence and disfigurement, a premeditated crime intended to kill or maim her permanently and act as a lesson to put her in her place. In India, acid attacks on women who dared to refuse a man’s proposal of marriage or asked for a divorce are a common form of revenge. Acid is cheap and easily available and is the quickest way to destroy a woman’s life. The number of acid attacks have been rising in India and there have been 68 reported acid attacks in the state of Karnataka since 1999. Most of the female victims suffer more because of police apathy in dealing with cases of harassment as that of a safety issue as they refused to register a police case despite the victim being attacked thrice before meriting police aid after an acid attack.

    Most dowry deaths occur when the young woman, unable to bear the harassment and torture, commits suicide. Most of these suicides are by hanging, poisoning or by fire. Sometimes the woman is killed by setting her on fire; this is known as “bride burning”, and sometimes disguised as suicide or accident.

    According to Indian National Crime Record Bureau, there were 1,948 convictions and 3,876 acquittals in dowry death cases in the year 2008. According to Indian police, every year it receives over 2,500 reports of bride-burning.The Indian National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) reports that there were about 8172 dowry death cases registered in India in 2008. Incidents of dowry deaths during the year 2008 (8172) have increased by 14.4 per cent over 1998 level (7146).The accuracy of these figures have received a great deal of scrutiny from critics who believe dowry deaths are consistently under-reported. UNDER-REPORTED.

    Source; Wikipedia

  4. Random Indian May 23, 2012 at 6:06 am #

    “You cannot just “disagree” with that quote. Absolutely rejecting altruism is one of the cruxes of everything she *ever* wrote. She rightly despised the morality of altruism. By what you’ve written here you are an altruist, although at the same time you are clearly confused.”

    On the contrary, I’m not confused in the slightest. I am NOT a Randian and I pretty much disagree with almost everything I’ve read of her’s and I MOST CERTAINLY AND EMPHATICALLY disagree with her personal conduct and lifestyle. I totally and thoroughly reject her dim view of altruism as well.

    “Re Indian culture, I believe you are very confused on what Objectivism and individualism truly mean. Being a strongly “family oriented” culture is no more individualistic than being a “society oriented” culture”

    It is not me who is confused but rather you who are confused about what I wrote. I wrote,

    “Interesting point here is that I’ve known many immigrants from India (my own family members included) to jump on the Objectivist bandwagon after reading Ayn’s books. This makes sense when you understand how very structured the life of the average India is. We are a very family oriented people and our culture is very vocal in what it expects from us, despite our government being so chaotic and inept. The cultural download is very strong in us.
    …….So it makes sense that Objectivism and the emphasis on the individual would look very attractive to someone whom their entire life has done most things that their family expects of them such as pursuing a certain career to marrying a certain type of person, etc. But even with all the Objectivist and individualist talk emanating from their mouths, they ALWAYS fall back on our Indian family system and culture which is evidence in their career choices, marriage choices and general lifestyle.”

    Where you became confused is that you assumed, for whatever reason, that I was equating our culture with Randian “objectivism”. Hell no! My point was that it is not odd that Indians leaving a culture of discipline, duty, responsibility and obligation and coming to obnoxiously-individualist-to-hell-with-everyone-else-even-my-own-kids-America would become artificially inspired by Rand’s shallow and poorly written Hollywood screenplays because the message is “freedom” and “self interest” at the expense of discipline, duty, responsibility and obligation. However, these very same Indians eventually come back to our responsible culture because the other model simply does not work (see my comment above for specific examples on exactly which ways it doesn’t work, and the entire manosphere corroborates that). That kind of faux “self interest” is self interest in name only. Firstly, these people don’t even know who the hell their own damn selves are, and secondly, ultimately it does not deliver as promised.

    Which leads me to answer your question as to what I consider “successs”.

    Success is a contented and satisfying home/family life, health, happiness, honesty, love, deep feeling inter-connectedness with people I value, and peace of mind.

    My culture has produced several brilliant philosphers from the ancient period til now. Those philosophers also led a lifestyle that was noble and honorable. As you know Ms. Rand cheated on her husband with a married man more than half her age and when caught then attempted to convince both her own husband and the wife of her lover that it was in their “rational self interest” to allow the affair to continue. With both of them financially dependent upon her, they acquised, which proves the golden rule: Gold rules.

    Nature taking its course (or karma biting her in the ass), Ayn’s young lover eventually began cheating on Rand with a much younger and certainly more beautiful woman and when caught Ayn cursed him thus, “If you have one ounce of morality left in you, an ounce of psychological health—you’ll be impotent for the next twenty years! And if you achieve potency sooner, you’ll know it’s a sign of still worse moral degradation!” Afterwhich she proceeded to kick his sorry ass out of her cult.

    A cougar scorned! And fancy that! – The woman who said the following, waxing eloquent about “morality”. Here’s the extent of Ayn Rand’s so called “morality”….

    “[The Native Americans] didn’t have any rights to the land and there was no reason for anyone to grant them rights which they had not conceived and were not using…. What was it they were fighting for, if they opposed white men on this continent? For their wish to continue a primitive existence, their “right” to keep part of the earth untouched, unused and not even as property, just keep everybody out so that you will live practically like an animal, or maybe a few caves above it. Any white person who brought the element of civilization had the right to take over this continent.”

    No siree, make no mistake about it. I am not a Randian by any stretch of the imagination.

    I have read her 2 Hollywood screenplays The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, as well as several articles and listened to audio and video. My conclusion is that this is a woman without a single moral or ethical bone in her body.

    🙂

  5. Bijal May 24, 2012 at 2:18 am #

    Random Indian:

    1. The reason India has a very low divorce rate is because it is looked down upon by Indian society to get a divorce. You will either be ostracized or lose a lot of social value. You think all those Indian couples are happier? Completely wrong. They appear happy on the surface and show a smiling face when in public, but behind closed doors, many are pretty miserable. And it sucks for them, because in spite of being miserable, they’re stuck with their partner.

    2. How can parents screen for you? Only you know what you want and what you like. Are you saying your parents know you THAT well? Besides, they select girls from a subset of girls. What if you like non-Indian girls? What if you like a girl who likes to party? And how do you know what you like if you haven’t dated / gone out with enough girls?

    3. American society is far from perfect, but remember, it was your parents who immigrated to America, not the other way around. If American society is so fucked up for you, why did your parents immigrate there? If your parents gave up the incredible Indian lifestyle with its values and culture just to chase the almighty dollar, that means money is more important than your values and your culture.

    4. It is possible to value somebody’s opinion and respect somebody without agreeing with them. I have parents – and I respect them and listen to their opinions, but ultimately it is me who has to live with the decisions I make.

    5. Indians are the model minority because they are the richest ethnicity per person, have nobody in jail, and are hard working. It has nothing to do with culture and values and how you marry. Indians do help one another, but notice that it is not forced. You do it out of your own free will. Ayn Rand isn’t against helping one another … she is against being FORCED to help one another AGAINST your will.

    6. Regarding dating sites, India has some of their own. And yes, married Indian people do use them. And the city of Mumbai is becoming more Americanized every day, so any criticism you have of America is pretty accurate of Mumbai as well – and Mumbai accounts for 40% of India’s GDP.

    7. The problem with Indian culture is that it forces you to be nice to somebody even if you don’t want to. Ayn Rand philosophy suggests that you always act out of your free will as long as you’re not infringing on anybody’s basic rights. Indian society dumps a lot of obligations on to you, and none of them are out of your free will.

    8. To get back to the point of Indian couples and families being really well off – are you serious? Do you not know about the tensions that exist between the mother-in-law and daughter-in-law in almost every household … and the son/husband is too much of a wuss to state his opinion?

    Curious to hear your response.

  6. Random Indian May 24, 2012 at 2:18 pm #

    Bijal,

    Yeah I know all the problems associated with our society. Every culture has its issues. I still say that arranged marriage (not forced against will obviously) is a good system that has stood the test of time. We have managed to avoid most of the problems of the modern western dating scene and promiscuous lifestyle that the manosphere was created to complain against. Ironic isn’t it that many men in the western online manosphere envy us, our culture, our intact families and our women? Yet here you are, saying what – the lack of family values and utter sexual depravity of the west is a *good* thing? Take the red pill, my friend.

    1. Your first point: you think all Indian couples are unhappy? Every society will have its share of miserable marriages. I’m sorry if your parents and all your aunts, uncles and every Indian person you know is in a miserable marriage and thus have given you a dim view of it. I would ask you – what sort of family were you born to? I don’t envy you, dude.

    2. You ask how can my parents screen for me? Because I trust them to. They know me enough and so far the screening process has worked out just fine.

    Remember, in India we do not have a dating culture, much less a depraved hook up culture like the Americans.
    What other method would you suggest for us other than introductions through family network?
    Would you suggest dating in our villages? Where will couples go to date exactly? I’m curious what you see as an alternative for the “real India” – you know the rest of the country who does not live in Mumbai but in rural villages, towns and 2nd tier cities where values are socially conservative? What method of meeting prospective spouses would you suggest for them?

    I don’t see how going to a greasy bar and screening for sluts and same night lays one week, but doing “day game” and screening for “girlfriend material” the next is better. In fact its many times worse and depraved. Surely you are not suggesting this for India’s masses? Remember that PUA was created as a reaction to the current dysfunctional sexual market place in the west which is highly competitive and for which most men lose out because they are not hot, sexy top dogs. (And both you and I know the hottest American girls are not attracted to men like you. Desi men are considered miserably unsexy for the most part).

    You want the same sort of low self esteem scenario to be replicated for Indian men? Why?

    3. I never specifically said myself or my parents immigrated here. Don’t know why you assumed that.

    4. You say you respect your parents and listen to their opinions but the ultimate decisions for your life rest with you? Same goes for me. The key difference is that we actually respect our parents and listen to their opinions. Most Americans don’t. They can’t wait to move out and get as far away from their parents as they can by 18. Only an economic recession like the current one prevents them from doing so. And they are considered “losers” for living with their parents.

    5. “Indians are the model minority because they are the richest ethnicity per person, have nobody in jail, and are hard working. It has nothing to do with culture and values and how you marry. ”

    OH YES IT DOES.

    “Indians do help one another, but notice that it is not forced. You do it out of your own free will. ”

    This statement is interesting. Later you will say that “The problem with Indian culture is that it forces you to be nice to somebody even if you don’t want to.”

    So which is it? Force or free will? I say both and also a middle ground called “duty”, which being a Desi you will be more than familiar with. While never being “forced” (at gunpoint) I have been expected to help a few family members out of familial duty whom if never suggested would never have crossed my mind to help them. I helped them happily out of that sense of duty and later ended up benefitting from it myself. Win/Win.

    I find it odd that you argue that Indians are forced to stay married, forced to “be nice” to people, but somehow when it comes to helping family its all “free will”. Doesn’t add up, son. Doesn’t add up.

    6. Mumbai? That’s all you got? One metropolis out of a large country of over 1 billion people, most of whom live in rural villages, towns and 2nd tier cities? Sounds Desi shame is taking over here and you want to prove to your American buddies that India is “modern” (said with appropriate accent and head bob). Sure there is some dating in India’s large metropolises like Mumbai and New Delhi, but it remains confined there to certain sections of society and you know it. Have you ever read accounts on PUA forums of American men working in Mumbai and trying to “pick up” Desi girls? Impossible. For all the blantant materialism in Mumbai, at heart it remains almost as traditional as the rest of India, although divorce is on the rise there from 3% to 7%. Oooh how “modern yaar”.

    7. “The problem with Indian culture is that it forces you to be nice to somebody even if you don’t want to.” See above, you said we help each other out of “free will”. Now we are “forced” to be “nice”? Which is it? Quite frankly, after being exposed to how rude and graceless many Americans are (for no reason), I find the “niceness”, however external, of Indians to be a refreshing release. Take the red pill, son. The manosphere is always bitching about how bitchy American women are. A few lessons in cultural niceties would do this country well.

    What do you have against niceness as the default way to deal with people, strangers and friends alike? How is it in your “rational self interest” to be mean, rude and generally classless?

    8. Regarding joint family household and its ensuing drama. Some Indians love living in a joint family manner and others don’t. In India now its probably 80/20 with 80% living in joint family and 20% living in nuclear family. Both models have their pros and cons.

    In closing I will again reiterate the entire MO of the Manosphere. The current SMP (sexual market place) has created a reactionary movement (of which pick up/game is a part) because the traditional family values of America (which were not entirely unsimilar to the family values currently in India) have been eroded. This fact has American envying men from more traditional cultures like India who have what they want: a wife with a low count of previous sexual partners whom they didn’t have to compete or fight tooth and nail with some “alpha male” for in some nightclub, and a lifelong intact family free of divorce, alimony and child support payments.

    In short, they want what I have and I don’t blame them. Not one iota.

    Take the red pill.

  7. ben sima May 25, 2012 at 9:38 am #

    Recommendation: “The Woman in Love” by Simone de Beauvoir

    http://books.google.com/books?id=OgMbKqJMzxcC&lpg=PP1&dq=the%20woman%20in%20love%20simone%20de%20beauvoir&pg=PA683#v=onepage&q&f=false

    Anyone that doesn’t understand what Anthony is saying should read that essay. Some good quotes:

    > For woman, … to love is to relinquish everything for the benefit of a master.

    > There is no other way out for her than to lose herself, body and soul, in him who is represented to her as the absolute, as the essential.

    > …normally she is looking for a man who represents male superiority.

    > …what she always wants is for her lover to represent the essence of manhood.

    > …when woman gives herself completely to her idol, she hopes that he will give her at once possession of herself and of the universe he represents.

    > The woman in love feels endowed with a high and undeniable value; she is at last allowed to idolize herself through the love she inspires.

    * * *

    Also good is the work by the feminist Luce Irigaray. Basically they both say that the ideal relationship is one in which both parties embrace the differences between the sexes, namely, the fact that men tend to lead and women tend to follow.

    • Anthony Dream Johnson May 25, 2012 at 3:53 pm #

      For the record, these are Ben’s suggestions and I do not necessarily endorse or refute any of the works, being unfamiliar with both, as well as the authors.

      On the same note, I would highly recommend The Psychology of Romantic Love by Nathaniel Branden.

      • ben sima May 27, 2012 at 7:57 am #

        heh, didn’t mean to put words in your mouth, Anthony. I wrote a couple papers on love for philosophy classes, and used both Branden’s work as well as Beauvoir and Irigaray. The latter two write more philosophical/literary than Branden, but they say similar things.

        Also good is Nancy Tuana’s essay, “Coming to Understand: Orgasm and the Epistemology of Ignorance”

        • Anthony Dream Johnson May 27, 2012 at 6:55 pm #

          Hey Ben

          I know =), just reaffirming and clarifying for the dedicated few who read these comments consistently. If anything its a compliment, because you’re recommendations are consistently awesome.

  8. Random Indian May 26, 2012 at 5:23 pm #

    Ben, interesting, “when woman gives herself completely to her idol”…In Indian Hindu culture we have the concept of Pati-Parameshwar or husband as god to the wife. At the same time we also have the concept of Griha-Laxmi (house Laxmi) or wife as the man’s own personal Goddess of Prosperity.

    I don’t know how familiar with Hinduism you are, but Divinity is always depicted through both male and female archetypes. Almost every god has his goddess consort and every goddess has her god companion. There are also a few single male and female divine archetypes, but they are minor compared to the “married” ones.

    • ben sima May 27, 2012 at 8:04 am #

      woah man, careful with the divinity stuff. Men and women are human beings, not gods. The point is to live to the ideal of man as a man, and the ideal of woman as a woman, insomuch as we can live to that ideal as human beings.

      Also, Beauvoir’s writing is very literary and stylistic. Don’t confuse that with prophecy or theology or myth. I’m kinda familiar with Hinduism and other myths, but I prefer zen buddhism as it maintains a realistic outlook on life.

      • Random Indian May 27, 2012 at 3:08 pm #

        Whoa man, careful with the Judeo-Christian assumptions. As typical of the western mind, you assume Hinduism’s approach to is similar to the Abrahamic concept of “god” because your conditioning does not allow for any other way of thinking about metaphysics.

  9. Bijal May 26, 2012 at 7:11 pm #

    Random Indian:

    1. I didn’t say that all Indian couples are unhappy. But if there is a couple that is unhappy, there is no social viable option for one partner to get out of the marriage in Indian culture.

    2. Since India does not have a dating culture, the only option left to somebody is to have their parents screen for them. Why doesn’t India have a dating culture? Why is it looked down upon if a man and a woman want to go out on a date, and have sex? The problem lies with the restrictive and sexually repressive Indian culture.

    The seduction community was created to help men improve on their social/seduction skills. Nothing more.

    According to you, the hottest American girls are not attracted to Indian men. Why do you feel this way? I know a few Indian men who consistently date really beautiful American girls.

    3. I assumed you and your parents immigrated to the US because you mentioned that some of your family members immigrated. My apologies. But then, my question is how do you know so much about American culture? Have you lived or studied or worked in the United States? Or are you getting all your information from the media, internet, and what other people are telling you?

    4. Americans want their independence and that is why they want to move out of the house. To say that most Americans disrespect their parents and don’t listen to their parents is an incorrect generalization.

    5. You don’t need a gun to force somebody to do something. In the US, Indians help out of free will because you could disassociate from the Indian community and still have a nice life. In India, you don’t have that option, and hence I say that you are forced or obligated to be nice when you are in India.

    6. I don’t have to prove anything about India to anybody. All I was saying is that your criticisms of America apply to Mumbai as well.

    7. Read point number 5 above. I’m not against being nice. I’m against being forced to act a certain way against due to obligation.

  10. Random Indian May 27, 2012 at 3:31 pm #

    1. “I didn’t say that all Indian couples are unhappy. But if there is a couple that is unhappy, there is no social viable option for one partner to get out of the marriage in Indian culture.”

    Yes there is, its called DIVORCE which is legal in India. There is also the option of separation without divorce.

    2. “The seduction community was created to help men improve on their social/seduction skills. Nothing more.”

    I’m talking about the greater online Manosphere which you seem to be unaware of. They are very aware of the seduction community but it appears some in the seduction community are unware of them.

    3. “According to you, the hottest American girls are not attracted to Indian men. Why do you feel this way? I know a few Indian men who consistently date really beautiful American girls.”

    Yeah, you’re right … “a few”. You know as well as I do that Desi men are generally not considered hot for a variety of reasons. I can’t say they are wrong either.

    4. “Or are you getting all your information from the media, internet, and what other people are telling you?”

    No, from direct experience.

    5. “You don’t need a gun to force somebody to do something. In the US, Indians help out of free will because you could disassociate from the Indian community and still have a nice life. In India, you don’t have that option, and hence I say that you are forced or obligated to be nice when you are in India.”

    How silly. Do Americans have the option of disassociating from the wider “American community”? No. There are obligations for everyone throughout all walks of life because we are not solitary individuals on our own separate planets.

    6. “Since India does not have a dating culture, the only option left to somebody is to have their parents screen for them. Why doesn’t India have a dating culture? Why is it looked down upon if a man and a woman want to go out on a date, and have sex? The problem lies with the restrictive and sexually repressive Indian culture.”

    Since American parents do not screen for their kids, the only option left to them is an agressive, competitive dating culture that they even have to pay money to PUA “gurus” to learn how to navigate!!! Bwahahaha!

    For your information I am partial to both models. Dating and assisted marriage. In fact, for Indians who do date, especially abroad, they often fall back on the assisted or arranged model when it comes to marriage and they are done with dating. Indians who date in India however usually date with a view towards marriage. In other words, we desire to marry the person we date. We don’t spend an entire decade or longer going from one person to the next.

    Which leads me to the next issue. You may be familiar with the “gori blogosphere”? Its a part of the online blogosphere dedicated to the issues of non-Indian women dating and marrying Indian or other Desi men. Give it surf. There are a great number of inter-cultural issues these women face. One of them being the so-called “independent Indian man” who insists that his family will accept the girlfriend, she will not have to change or adjust in any manner that he is “not like other Indian men” etc, etc, etc.

    What happens is that while the Indian man is in the foreign country or living away from his parents at school or on the job, he is just like any other American dude. The girl then “falls in love” with this person, the person she THINKS he is because of the way he is acting and portraying himself away from his family.

    When things start to get serious then usually 1 of 2 things happen; he either dumps her OR he finally (after like 2 years of postponing it) introduces her to his family and that’s when all of the expectations for “adjustment” are thrust upon her.

    Where does all the talk of “independence” and “I’m not like other Indian guys” go to then?

    This is the hypocrisy of Desi men in dating non-Desi women. It is not fair to those non-Desi women and one of the reasons why I am generally against inter-cultural pairings, especially in the case of Desis with non-Desis. The cultures are just too different and it is always the non-Desi woman who is expected to bend towards and adjust to the expectations of the “independent” Desi guy’s family.

    • Random Indian May 29, 2012 at 11:29 pm #

      You kinda/sorta got this right, probably by accident, “In the US, Indians help out of free will because you could disassociate from the Indian community and still have a nice life. In India, you don’t have that option, and hence I say that you are forced or obligated to be nice when you are in India.”

      You are wrong about Indians helping other Indians in the US being entirely of independent free will. If that were the case they wouldn’t be singling out other Indians to help, which you damn well know they do. There is a feeling of ethno-cultural fidelity involved, and hence a sense of obligation. Times that by a zillion when dealing with family members, however distant and removed.

      But you did touch upon a very significant point regarding Indians in India, its a shame you failed to connect it to our arranged marriage process, but that just goes to show how out of touch you are.

      In India we do not have your American social safety nets like health and dental insurance, medicare, medicaid, etc. We don’t have Social Security, SSI for the disabled, etc. Hell, we don’t even have driveable roads much of the time.

      THE FAMILY UNIT IS OUR INSURANCE and OUR SOCIAL SECURITY!

      This is one reason why marriage is not seen as between two individuals only but between two families. This is why it is so important for the prospective bride and groom to be a good match in more ways than just sexual attraction, which is the primary thing you screen for in the US. For an Indian couple, and their two families, there is much more at stake than just the lust and happiness of the couple.

      The only way you can say that the individual is the primary and most important unit of society is because your society (the US) has the safety nets to allow for such thinking. It is not a swim or sink society like India. In India the individual very much needs his/her family in order to not completely drown and perish.

      If you’ve ever been to India then you know that.

  11. Mani June 3, 2012 at 7:00 am #

    Man stop with this India rubbish. If it was that great, so many people wouldn’t have moved out. I grew up around Delhi just so I know what Im talking about when I say Indian culture has massive problems.

    Ontopic – Im interested more in the practicality of it all. If you don’t chase how do you get them? Do you approach? Do you give your number?

Make your mark