@polishknight

[adopted daughter turning out better than biological daughter]

A lot of people who want to debate nature vs nurture when it comes to raising kids lose sight of the fact that kids have free will. They're their own people, and they'll make their own decisions with their own consequences, especially once they've grown into adulthood.

I have two younger brothers. When we were children, I was an absolute brat who wouldn't sit still or pay attention in school, and would consistently disrupt everyone else. My parents and my teachers were at their wits end until I suddenly snapped out of it at around 14. On the other hand, my two younger brothers were absolute delights who behaved, paid attention and participated, and made straight As. The difference was so stark that of the three of us didn't look so much alike, people would have thought I was adopted. But nope! Same house, same parents, same rules, different results.

As discussed previously, "hypergamy" is the notion of a one side must win more than the other one

Dude, not even close. You still struggle with this, I think because you talk to too many feminists and bloopies on X who are stuck on the dictionary definition of hypergamy.

Get back to the source material: Rollo.

I'll summarize and simplify: women want a man who is better than themselves in every way, both on the alpha fucks side and the beta bucks side. They usually can't find everything in one man, so they'll settle or compromise in some ways. Sometimes it's with the man's potential for future growth in mind. Which aspect (alpha fucks or beta bucks) is given more weight depends on what stage a woman is at in her life, as well as where she is in her monthly cycle, and even a bit on conscious choice.

They might lose out entirely by waiting too long.

They might "win" along with a husband who gets what he wants too.

"Winning" has nothing to do with the definition.

If my many attempts at explaining how it works aren't getting through, maybe you should read Rollo's writings on this.

@thegap same answers you received in this thread a couple of years ago.

As far as applying useful stuff to your life, that's mostly determined by you, what jives with your experience, and what your goals are (and you're allowed to change your mind).

In other words: just start trying and applying stuff. Mindful application. Observe, orient, decide, act. Then back to observe again, and continue the OODA loop.

As for some of the links not working, can you tell us the specific titles? Some of us who remember what to look for might be able to dig it back up. Caveat: we all have lives, careers, etc and don't do this shit for a living, so don't expect instantaneous results (or even a response every time).

What really sucks is the internet as it used to be is kind of dying, and a lot of good shit is getting lost. The entire internet is turning into about a half-dozen social media sites posting screenshots of shit from the other sites, and AI-generated garbage.

@thegap @Typo-MAGAshiv

Re: funny OODA loop story.

Many, MANY years ago when I was still wearing a blue uniform, we were taught about the OODA loop and its originator, a fighter pilot named John Boyd. He was describing the process of getting “inside” an adversary’s decision cycle to get kills in aerial combat.

Like many general axioms (such as the Pareto Principle), there are countless other applications. I was giving a class to the staff of an Army battalion, and I talked to them about using Information Collection and OPSEC to get inside the enemy OODA loop. After I finished my class, the members of my team (three retired Army O-5s, and retired Army E-9, and a retired Army E-7) asked me what the hell an OODA loop is. Not one of them has ever heard the term. A similar thing happened when I had different teammates, including a retired Army BG and a couple of retired Army O-6s. Subsequently, any time I used the term from the podium I explained what it means.

@polishknight again, all human relationships are transactional.

Do we charge our friends to be friends with us?

Transactions aren't limited to monetary exchange.

Do we expect them to engage in some quid-pro-quo transaction?

Yes, at least subconsciously. Most people aren't going to allow themselves just to be used.

quid-pro-quo

And just to be clear: it won't always be an even exchange, and sometimes the benefit one receives is just feeling better about themselves through the relationship.

Let's try this if you could be so kind: Is my relationship with my daughter transactional?

For the record, and this won't surprise you, whatever it takes for her welfare I'll jump under a bus in a second.

Yes. What you're getting out of it is ensuring that your genes live on, and the pride you see in her growing up.

"Transactional" doesn't necessarily mean a cynical exploitation. In fact, most people GTFO if they realize they're being exploited.