The Private Man posted about women’s dating coach Evan Marc Katz, who appears to be making money telling women what their mothers and grandmothers should have told them all along: be feminine and take the time to see if there’s substance behind a man’s charm. As the feminist pendulum perhaps slows to a stop at its extreme, with much of its radical and untested philosophy implemented both in cultural conditioning and in legislation, we find that the ability to create your own reality ends where the brick wall begins.

In this case the brick wall into which the feminist ideal of interchangeability of the sexes runs is the biological fact that males and females, generally, are attracted biologically to different things. A man wants a woman who is young, attractive, and treats him with respect, affection, and obedience. A woman wants a man who is strong in character, capable, successful, and gives her security and resources. It’s not that men don’t care if a woman is successful in her career — it’s that it doesn’t make her attractive to him.

That, by the way, opens a whole ‘nother can of feminist worms: men have a biological incentive to succeed in the workplace, sports, or politics. When a man works hard and rises to the top, he is rewarded by a much better choice of women who want to be with him. No one has to mention that rock stars, pro athletes, and to a more modest extent CEOs and politicians get showered with the attentions of willing young women even if they don’t send pictures of their wieners via cell phone.

But what happens to women who try the same thing? Does Nancy Pelosi get hit on more than a hot 18-year-old college freshman? Do the WNBA stars have more hot guys slipping them numbers than they would have if they were cocktail waitresses in Vegas? No — in fact, the feminine occupation of waitress (along with flattering costume) adds to their attractiveness to men.

This is why the recent push by the ACLU to support the Paycheck Fairness Act disappoints me. The bill proposes that even if no sex discrimination is found to have occurred, an employer is still liable if women are paid less on average than men for the same job. The pendulum is trying to keep moving in the direction of legislating more and more for women, but the biological incentives for men to succeed in the workplace explain the differential in outcome better than some theory of invisible cultural bias.

So Private Man and my other Red Pill friends: what narrative can we construct that will counter the current ideology? The masses will always be on the Blue Pill. How do we regain control of the conversation?


Being in my tomcat phase I have the frequent opportunity to exercise my verbal martial arts in response to the endless stream of shit tests coming my way. As the betasattva, time freezes for me and all at once I see, in slow motion, the natural beta response which would cause disappointment and loss of attraction in the girl, and an array of possible alpha responses, of which I usually choose the funniest one — to me, anyway. This happened the other day:

Aspiring starlet: “I’m trying to lose about 30 lbs.” (she is 19, 5’6″, and weighs 130).

Beta response: “Oh no, you look great.”
Result: wrinkled nose, inching me toward the friend zone, escalated shit tests

Alpha response: “Yeah, you are a bit hippy.”
Alpha response: “I was going to say…”
Alpha response: (pause…reach over and pat her belly…sad, sober, slow nod.)
Result: “You’re such an asshole!” She looks up and grins, wide-eyed, as she says it and you can smell a wave of musky pheromones being released as she starts tingling for you.

Aspiring starlet: “What do you think about tattoos? I was thinking of getting one.”

Beta response: “Oh yeah, a lot of girls are getting them. What were you thinking of getting?”
Beta response: “Oh no, why would you want to mark up that perfect body?”

Alpha response: (pause, look her up and down) “I suppose if you really want to you could get my name tattooed, but it might be embarrassing after I break up with you.”
Alpha response: “They’re ugly and get uglier as you get older.”
Result “You’re such an asshole!” Grin, eyes, wet.

When I was younger I would sometimes observe men saying and doing things I thought were outrageous and rude. I distanced myself from them and made a mental note never to behave that way myself.

It took far, far too long for me to realize I should have been learning from these assholes.


I’m well over 40 and currently dating three girls ranging in age from 19 to 26. All three are attractive, reasonably intelligent, and sexual. While I am a successful man with a nice house and car and plenty of spending money, I owe this lifestyle to studying what Roissy calls the “crimson arts.” I was a virgin throughout my teens and painfully shy. When I did break through that barrier I gained confidence and my natural alphaness came out to a degree. But the feminist indoctrination I was raised with left me clueless about how to keep a girl once I had won her (see Athol Kay‘s new book The Married Man Sex Life Primer 2011 for more on that).

I’ve been studying seduction for about 15 years now and I keep having the thought that many of the PUA gurus seem to focus way too much on scoring as many hot girls as possible. Having gone through periods of doing that myself, and quite successfully when I am running on all cylinders, I inevitably meet someone I connect with so well that all the other girls fade into black and white and I simply don’t want to be intimate with anyone else for awhile.

I like both lifestyles. But the one seems to segue into the other for me. Are other men more like me or more like the gurus? To me, sex with a girl I connect with on many levels is way better than a new hot girl every week or two. So although I’m currently in my tomcat phase, I’m thinking deeply as only a betasattva can about how I will be should I once again fall into monogamy.