Too many Soldiers have made ONE mistake and received a Hug,

instead of an All-Night Fuck.

HOW TO NEVER FALL INTO THE FRIENDZONE EVER AGAIN:

《《 THREAD 》》

The #1 reason guys get friendzoned?

They aren't physical enough.

They act like one of her girlfriends or g@y friends.
Being Physical-

It's an expression of yourself.

You're not trying to accomplish anything.

you're doing it because YOU want to.
When should you be physical?

As soon as possible.

You don't want be another "girlfriend"

You want to be MAN TO WOMAN.
If you're not Physical,

you're not a Sexual Threat.

Women will vibe with you, but in a very platonic way.

You want her girlfriends to go- "Who is this guy!?"
What you don't want to happen,

is for girls to interact with you for hours,

and then when you ask her number, she says

"I have a boyfriend"

BECAUSE YOU NEVER SHOWED THE SEXUAL INTENTION.
Every girl knows why you're approaching her.

Become Intentional.

Come from the Frame of Pure Abundance.

If you dont get laid, its not going to affect how you feel.

It's not going to change who you are.

you are purely indifferent to the outcome.

Strengthen your Personality.
Never Justify why you are being Physical.

You Lead her.

You create her New Reality.

One moment you're talking about squirrels,

the next- you're making out.

NEVER EXPLAIN YOURSELF & YOUR ACTIONS.
Being Physical just happens as the Interaction flows.

Don't take this as a step-by-step.

The close can happen ANYTIME.

It doesn't matter when as long as you are LEADING.

You can make out, then handshake, and then ask her name.
Dont be reactive.

If she turns away while you attempt the make-out,

Stay relaxed, as if nothing happened.

If you emotionally react, you're FUCKED.

Laugh it off.

Congrats, You've just DHVed yourself.
When you're ready to destroy the friendzone, and CHOOSE who you sleep with, check out my course-

It's the only guide you will EVER need;

to SLEEP with THE 9s and 10s.

https://t.co/QNScuNcTg4

More from Life

“We don’t negotiate salaries” is a negotiation tactic.

Always. No, your company is not an exception.

A tactic I don’t appreciate at all because of how unfairly it penalizes low-leverage, junior employees, and those loyal enough not to question it, but that’s negotiation for you after all. Weaponized information asymmetry.

Listen to Aditya


And by the way, you should never be worried that an offer would be withdrawn if you politely negotiate.

I have seen this happen *extremely* rarely, mostly to women, and anyway is a giant red flag. It suggests you probably didn’t want to work there.

You wish there was no negotiating so it would all be more fair? I feel you, but it’s not happening.

Instead, negotiate hard, use your privilege, and then go and share numbers with your underrepresented and underpaid colleagues. […]
THREAD: 12 Things Everyone Should Know About IQ

1. IQ is one of the most heritable psychological traits – that is, individual differences in IQ are strongly associated with individual differences in genes (at least in fairly typical modern environments). https://t.co/3XxzW9bxLE


2. The heritability of IQ *increases* from childhood to adulthood. Meanwhile, the effect of the shared environment largely fades away. In other words, when it comes to IQ, nature becomes more important as we get older, nurture less.
https://t.co/UqtS1lpw3n


3. IQ scores have been increasing for the last century or so, a phenomenon known as the Flynn effect. https://t.co/sCZvCst3hw (N ≈ 4 million)

(Note that the Flynn effect shows that IQ isn't 100% genetic; it doesn't show that it's 100% environmental.)


4. IQ predicts many important real world outcomes.

For example, though far from perfect, IQ is the single-best predictor of job performance we have – much better than Emotional Intelligence, the Big Five, Grit, etc. https://t.co/rKUgKDAAVx https://t.co/DWbVI8QSU3


5. Higher IQ is associated with a lower risk of death from most causes, including cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, most forms of cancer, homicide, suicide, and accident. https://t.co/PJjGNyeQRA (N = 728,160)

You May Also Like

I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x