Society is not a unit

It is not uncommon for any 'movement' or even 'observer' to lift themselves up as angels to look over everyone else with a God's eye. Two groups form, one being the observer and the rest being the pitiful mass of humanity. From this vantage, it does look like Mankind is a single group, a single culture, a single civilization.

This event of observer turning into a 'God' and the observer's equals turning into a 'unit' is common in classical literature. This is why all the 'great' kings and emperors only viewed themselves as 'above' and everyone else as 'the mass' which, like a biological mass, can be cut, sliced, and molded. Just as the gardener has his hooks, shears, and knives, so too does the politician has his laws, regulations, and taxes to remake civilization to 'uplift' it. This is why all politicians, all of them, fall into this view. This is why tyranny is the norm of history.

A common problem with the 'Men's Movement' is, like other movements, they turn themselves into observers that take the status of angels while everyone else becomes a 'culture' or 'society'. What hogwash!

People say there is a recession. But what they don't say is that the definition of 'recession' is based purely on an average. Do you live your life as an average? Do you invest as an average? Date like an average? Dream like an average? The solution to everything is stop being average.

The economy, of course, is not a unit. There are people making more money than ever before. In the Great Depression, Rockefeller and others made great wealth.

Society is not a unit. It never will collapse, only *change*. And it is inevitable it will *change* because people do not live forever. Freedom begins by seeing everyone, even ourselves, as individuals. People make wrong choices all the time. But that will not affect you.

"But what about government taxation, Pook?" you might say. "Their bad choices affect me."

That is nothing compared to city states going to war and nations dueling it out on the world stage. Society is not a unit; it is the trade of all. In fact, the cause of many of the problems that Men's Movement is set to fight against is because husband and wife became seen as a *unit* and that the family became seen as a *unit*. Since they are *units*, that means it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to pay child support and keep the wife a lifestyle she has become accustomed. If they cease to be *units*, then you can see the moral support for child support and wifely lifestyles dropping.

If one person murders another, the neighborhood is not *destroyed* for the neighborhood is not a singular entity.

All the talk about 'destruction of civilization' is funny because Western Civilization is not a static immovable unit. It moves with the people. At one point, Western Civilization was in the Islamo-sphere with the Saracens after the fall of the Roman Empire (a political entity). And when the Saracens fell, it went to Europe. When Europe or other nations falls, it will go somewhere else. AND IT WILL BECOME STRONGER THAN BEFORE.

Movements tend to be built up and spread by emotion (which is energy in motion). Should it be positive energy or negative energy? One leads to an endless cycle down the infinite dream where one keeps imagining civilization being 'destroyed'. Do you want to live your life in that mindset? The other leads to a cycle up. One leads to waking up with anger and rage. The other leads to waking with laughing. Which do you want?

Away, doom-shovelers! While you waste your time investing your emotions in the supposed 'civilizational collapse', I will invest my emotions in building myself up and aiming at a brighter future. This is, of course, uncommon Most politicians cannot do it and you can tell the evil by when they need to rely on harnessing negative emotions from the masses to win. Those few, those blessed few, politicians who harness positive emotions to win, are unanimously popular as everyone gets in line behind the person with the vision. The negative people call it 'delusional'. Everyone else calls it leadership.

Time to move beyond MGTOW

There is something very wrong with MGTOW. Instead of talking about 'men going their own way', we see...

-Anti-Americanism (or other rants against one's mother country)
-Declarations of Chicken Little economic/social/cultural collapse.
-Religious screeds against a particular religion or against all religions.
-Conspiracy theories.
-Evangelizing the 'Deck-Stacked-Against-Us-Have-No-Hope' view of society (which is unproductive)
-Evangelizing that one ought to live like a Mexican...
-...or another country...
-Forums become a 'Yes!' echo chamber. There is no discussion, just rants filled with yes-men.

These 'elements' are well known but ignored because of the 'good things' that do come out. We should just shrug off these things and compromise with them. Well, there is one problem.

When food and poison compromise, which is the victor? It is the poison. Eating it may be sustaining... for the short term... but your body fills up with these poison toxins. You begin to lose your ambition, your passion, and generally become filled with bitterness.

I have wondered how this is occurring. It is not uncommon. Many 'movements' somehow get filled with negative filled people with anger issues and other wackos. But not all movements. So how did MGTOW become a container for this garbage?

The answer is that MGTOW is founded on a negative itself: avoidance of woman. This has caused blanket rants against women. "But many of these rants are accurate, Pook!" So what? A farmer can rant all day about the unfairness of frost, but that will not get him anywhere. There is no cosmic justice out there. The world is what it is and its better to live in it that in a hyper-reality.

Perhaps this will hit more to the point. How many years has MGTOW existed? And what has changed since then? Really, nothing has changed at all.

But I have to wonder why no one in MGTOW can keep to the subject. Pick any random thread and you will find someone start going off the reservation of a speech against a religion or another unasked for soapbox sermon on some oddball subject. Often, many will randomly insert his "brilliant" assertion that civilization will collapse in ten years.

MGTOW is based on the belief that men have made mistakes (which should be spared making mistakes). These mistakes can include marriage, being nice guy, being worshipful to women, and so on. All these mistakes have a common theme: egotism. When the man got married, he was so sure he was doing the right thing and the naysayers were all jealous villains.

Since so many join MGTOW based on being wrong in the past, why does everyone act like they are right all the time? It is amazing! The egotism never died. It just shifted into new forms. This would explain why someone can't keep to the subject of MGTOW and instead must start bashing a religion, bashing a country, or bashing something else. One can be right on something and be wrong on other things. But MGTOW do not see that. They act like they have suddenly become right on everything (so they become vocal on it).

If we were wrong in the past, and it damaged our lives (such as getting married to a fiend), why do we strut around as if we have such 'wisdom'? If we were so wrong once, we could be wrong again. Yet, this reservation is nowhere to be found in MGTOW. Every man has his own pet theories. The dogs slip their leash and begin to ravage the good content.

To be honest, I don't see many happy MGTOW. There are no celebrations about being 'free' but complaining about... something. Trust me; celebrations and good cheer are far more effective and contagious than "being right all the time".

In normal society, people do not like being around someone 'right all the time'. Even if they are right, they are downright annoying. People prefer light-hearted, good cheered fun. When I think of MGTOW, 'good cheer' is the last to come to mind. MGTOW isn't about being alive as it is about escaping pain.

For as much as we mock feminists for being negative, for getting with women to talk bad about men, it is becoming more and more clear that MGTOW is becoming more like the mirror image. Behavior by behavior, a MGTOW male acts very similar to a feminist in lifestyle and habit. You begin to live alone, have meetings with guys to 'talk bad about women' (to ease existential pains), and write bad essays.

I think it is becoming clear that marriage and children is a natural longing in not just women but men as well. Nature did not intend gender avoidance. I believe generally everyone is repelled by the negative pessimistic tone found on MGTOW. However, people return consistently for a dose of the poison to ease the existential pain (caused by the natural longing of wife and children which is found in every culture and time). Once convinced by the rantings that women are more painful than pleasurable, the male goes off semi-satisfied. But, alas, the natural longing creeps up again causing the male to return.


why, it must be requited. I hear how I am censured:
they say I will bear myself proudly, if I perceive
the love come from her; they say too that she will
rather die than give any sign of affection. I did
never think to marry: I must not seem proud: happy
are they that hear their detractions and can put
them to mending. They say the lady is fair; 'tis a
truth, I can bear them witness; and virtuous; 'tis
so, I cannot reprove it; and wise, but for loving
me; by my troth, it is no addition to her wit, nor
no great argument of her folly, for I will be
horribly in love with her. I may chance have some
odd quirks and remnants of wit broken on me,
because I have railed so long against marriage: but
doth not the appetite alter? a man loves the meat
in his youth that he cannot endure in his age.
Shall quips and sentences and these paper bullets of
the brain awe a man from the career of his humour?
No, the world must be peopled. When I said I would
die a bachelor, I did not think I should live till I
were married.

-"Much Ado About Nothing", Shakespeare

MGTOW is equally damned.

Purpose of life is to win, not to survive

Attention all you mediocre males (for I will not call you MEN). You like to spew all sorts of speeches, essays, and words over anyone that will hear you. You smoke your words in a pretty pipe to null yourself to girlish comfort and gooishness. You, who say, life is to be survived not to be won. You who cower in the corners saving and scavenging for the pennies who are afraid to risk. In fact, you view risk as an enemy to your comfort. "Survive Pook! We are meant to survive!" You passion-less slugs! Not even a child would be as guilty as you are. Even a CHILD knows there are WINNERS and LOSERS in life.

As is my habit, I will give an excellent analogy. Through my periodic workouts (of which the ladies time their workouts at the same time to be in the presence of my Pookness), I tend to swim afterward. It is nice to cool down in the pool. But I noticed something particular. Why was swimming in the pool draining my battery more than lifting hundreds of weights? Why could little women, who were I admit were very muscular with their strong legs and tight rear, able to easy outswim me? Maybe swimming wasn't in my genetics? But that, I knew, was poppycock.

"Poppycock!?" cries a reader. Yes, poppycock. I swam harder but that just drained my energy further. What was I doing wrong?

I realized in swimming (just as with everything in life), we are taught to survive, not how to win. In swimming, you are taught how to stay above the water, how to use your arms to propel yourself from one side to another, and let us not forget to follow the black line. We end up flat on our face slapping the water endlessly as we struggle to go back and forth, back and forth.

No other creature on Earth swims that way. Fish do not swim flat, and they do not use their fins to propel them. "But fish were made to be in the water, Pook," you might say. "Man was made to be on the ground. Of course we cannot swim like a fish."

We were told we could not fly like a bird until Man's MIND came up with an answer. Instead trying to swim to survive, let us try swimming to win. "And how might you win, Pook?" Why, by imitating the master swimmer: the fish. Instead of swimming flat, swim at an angle like the fishes do (water has 1000 times more resistance than air. Think of all the air resistance that cyclers and joggers attempt to combat and wonder why swimmers don't do it for water.) The way how we swim is that we go against the water most of the time. 'Chop!' 'Chop!' ' goes our arms in the water. The engine to the fish is not its fins but its thrust with its body. The fins only guide. After all, golfers and baseball players don't swing with their arms, they swing with their thighs. With olympic swimmers, the faster swimmers are those who use their arms the least.

Nevertheless, I began swimming like a fish. Took a while to learn and required me to untrain my old habits to really use my brain to learn to swim again. I must certainly look funny being underwater, on my side. But what is funny is that I only have to rotate my arms a few times to go from one side of the pool to another. Those who swim to survive become annoyed as I keep up with them. "You are barely working at it!" they growl. "I know," I reply. "That is the point."

With Don Juan, you realized it was better to win than to survive. Nice Guys live to survive; Don Juans live to win. You understand the natural process so you do not 'work'. Nice Guys think of getting girls as working uphill- hard, frustrating, and taxing. Don Juans think of getting girls as sliding downhill- exhilarating, fun, a roller coaster. This same difference animates all of life: love, finance, sports, sex, learning, playing, and everything else.

"Live for what you NEED!" says the voice of security. "Live for what you WANT!" says the voice of freedom.

"That is selfishness!" damns a reader.

No. Selfishness is not doing what you want. Selfishness is demanding others do what you want as a form of entitlement.

So sit softly, you mediocre men who sit in the soft glow of your computer monitors. Live your life to survive. I intend to win.

"But you might lose, Pook!" Yes, but at least I can say my life was an adventure. Can you say the same for yours?

Huxley and Orwell foretold the Matriarchy

There are two political books the 'masses' keep gravitating toward of the last century. The books are Brave New World by Aldous Huxley and 1984 by George Orwell. Both books are cited by all political groups from across the spectrum. Each points to the other as 1984 while one group finds Brave New World a horror while another group sees it as a utopia. Something with these books have tapped into the Human mind in such a way that made them universal.

I am familiar with all the political books, and they are mostly dry, pompous nonsense on stilts. Why do those two books, beyond any other, keep coming up in people's dreams of horror?

The answer became so obvious that I could not stop laughing at my previous foolishness. The secret to appeal and horror of the two books could not be even more plain.

They have nothing to do with politics.

"But Pook! But Pook!" you say. "They speak of empires, of manipulation, of social reconstruction! How could they not be political books?"

We know the current course of Matriarchy did not start in the present. It has been gradually building well over a century if not more. Do not forget the De Beers manipulation of 'engagement rings' and diamonds started in the 1940s. Feminism began even in the 19th century. Progressive reconstruction of society was universally embraced by the West. You only have to see the Constitutional amendment on prohibition and eugenics (in America nonetheless!) to see the sociological events occurring today, as unimaginable thought they may be, they are the tree whose sapling was swaying happily in the twentieth century.

A most fundamental political book, Locke's Two Treatises of Government, based much of the idea of liberty and freedom based on the relationships of man and woman. Locke constantly cites Adam and Eve and even cites how the husband and wife treat one another in marriages. What a reversal we have had! Locke looked toward marriage, of coupling, to see "natural society" and base the government in regards to those observations. Now the government observes and "natural society" must be refit, remolded, chopped, spliced, and smashed to fit the 'Way'. Like a gardener having tools to reshape a bush, so too does legislators use tools of taxation, courts, and other laws to exact the same painful mold.

Let us look at these two books not as political fairytales but as a sense of something changing with the relations of man and woman.

Brave New World was written as a farce to the utopias of the time. But even Huxley was stunned at how many of the things in the book became true. Every writer knows that good writing is done on its own, that it never fits the beginning outline or vision. When the writer is done writing, he is often stunned at what was put down and often astonished at what his characters are saying. While the author may have intended this, and afterward may have suspected he wrote that because of this, really, he isn't as sure.

What is the conflict that Brave New World revolves around? It is not the genetics or Bernard's ambition. It is not the telling of the society itself. The Savage is the axis of the story. The conflict is the Savage (whom the reader identifies as himself) thrown into such a society where everyone is happy... yet are not. His reaction to the woman he falls for is most telling. His despair and constant quoting of Shakespeare, "Oh Brave New World that has such creatures in it!" is contrasting the pathetic flat world of the book to the glorious spiraling realm that Shakepeare, and indeed the West, once personified. The book illustrates the destruction of family, marriage, and the old ways.

1984 also has nothing to do with politics. The use of language, of manipulation, of 'Big Brother', are all just blocks which could easily be replaced with something else. The conflict of the story is expressed by Winston by, first, his past and his attempts of coupling with a woman he chooses. Winston says how he wanted to murder his wife, how child rearing was told to him as a 'duty'. 1984 was not about an omnipotent, omniscient government as it was about the destruction of a natural union between a man and a woman. It was not about Winston loving Big Brother as it was that they forced him to destroy his love for her. "Do it to her! Do it to her!" screams Winston at the climax.

Both Huxley and Orwell both appear to be candidates, in how their lives went, to have detected this slouching towards Matriarchy (or whatever you want to call it today) way back then. They wouldn't even have consciously knew it. It is like a Middle Ages work being filled with praises of God, even revolving around it, but not realizing it because he was so immersed in the times. This would explain who the two books hold so much gravity with the masses and why they are so often cited.

Sexuality was once intertwined with faith, with liberty, and with society. If it is true that sexuality's wheel has been fraying, that more and more people are turning into sex-less automatons and only resort to man/woman during intercourse (and even then only seen in the context of animals), imagine a third book to follow up what Brave New World and 1984 started. Imagine a book that could perfectly mirror society today. Not the society of images we see on TV or magazines, but how it really is. The difference between a good writer and a mediocre one is that the good writer never sees himself as writing, only as holding a mirror up to Human Nature.

What if the mirror was held up to society now? Is it possible to translate the pain and suffering that men undergo, as they commit suicide, after divorce and being ripped from their children onto the page? What about the sadness that enters men's hearts when they see daughters and other young women use sex to obtain material things? Or what about the abyss that men realize they have been manipulated their entire lives? And how about the heights (or should I say depths) of the modern woman's life with her cats? Can the farce of the family court be put into a book? Can the spiritual castration of men be properly illustrated? What an impact it would be to have the West look itself in the mirror! This is the appeal I believe MRA sites have. People are looking for a mirror of society and MRA sites are giving explanations.

Such a book would truly rise fast as one of the first 'great works' of the twenty first century. But in order for such a book to be written, the writer would have to march down the steps of the abyss far lower than Brave New World and 1984 ever did. He would have to write about such hellish subjects, and know it and dream it, consistently to get the work written. If most men commit suicide once knowing the truth, it would be extremely hard for one to make such a tome. It would take a very rare man to create such a work... without killing himself... and then having the balls to publish it.

And by writer, I am not meaning some newsletter or other author. I am meaning something more: a poet. Not in the sense that he writes in rhymes, but in the sense of how much Human Nature he would have to connect him.

I have heard several talented writers attempt such a work. They either abandoned the work in haste of going mad, did indeed go mad, or completed a work that shows some sparkles of insight but is mostly flat (for the author refused to fully enter the abyss). The sphinx will continue feasting until someone realizes how to answer with "Man!"

Radicalism of Vilar #8: Even in Sex, Man is Enslaved

"Women live an animal existence. They like eating, drinking, sleeping - even sex, providing there is nothing to do and no real effort is required of them. Unlike a man, a woman will rarely make an effort to get her partner into bed. If, however, he is already there and she hasn't planned to set her hair or undertake some other form of large-scale beauty repair and there is no TV programme she wants to see, she will not be averse to making love, provided he is prepared to be the active partner.

"But even the euphemisms 'active' for the male partner and 'passive' for the female do not conceal the fact that woman allows man to serve her in bed just as he does in every sphere of her life. Even through intercourse may give a man pleasure in the long run, it is nothiing more than a service to a woman, in which the man is the better lover, arousing desire more skillfully, quickly, and making it last longer.

"Men suspect that women tend to exploit them during intercourse and have developed a certain fear of female sexual appetite. "Signs of this appear in the rites of ancient cultures, in philosophical works of men such as Schopenhauer and Nietzche, in the novels of Baudelaire, Balzac an dMontherlant, in plays by Strindberg, O'Neill and Tennessee Williams. Since the discovery of contraceptives, this fear has reached almost hysterical proportions."

I have spoken much about sexual transmutation of men in the past. Men can utilize their sexual desire to make it bloom into their art, their music, their work, their actions, to make their life progress swifter and increase their resonance among people (i.e. "charisma"). As a salesman myself, I know that the highly sexualized people make the better salesmen while the lower sexualized people (of both men and women) become stuck with low sales.

One gender's transmutation is another gender's manipulation. At least, this is what the feminists say when they point to the great works of Humanity.

We know that most men do not understand transmutation. They can often just live an animal existence and try to hump the nearest female in sight. These men generally end up mediocre in life. Keep in mind, I am referring not to the highly sexualized male but the male who submits to his sexuality, rather than forging the sexuality into what he desires. Think of the trunk in high school who ended up getting a girl pregnant and is doomed to a life of paying for it.

Most women, also, do not understand transmutation. The "slut feminism" is merely that of an animal existence.

However, women do undergo transmutation. They sexualize themselves as much as possible meaning through exercise, tight clothes, long hair, make-up, and so on to and undergo training in dance and other things. The woman will become trapped in her own game (as Radical Vilar #2 will reveal) but she is certainly trying to get the wealthiest and socially desired male.

Some women (mostly feminists) will resort to writing bad books about female goddesses and the occult as well as being mesmerized by Egyptian mythology. These women are confusing their sexuality with their faith and have the shoes on backward. Nevertheless, they are trying to project that sexuality in some means. This would explain why such women are often extremely ugly.

It is quite common for women to declare men are all pigs who want nothing but sex. But if you have ever tried to eliminate sex from a budding relationship, the woman goes bonkers. She has no mind of herself, just her animal existence, and she projects that onto the men. "All men want is sex!" Well, ma'am, when was the last time a woman said something even remotely

abstract? Even with feminist theory, all they do is regurgitate verbatim what is heard. There are still no new ideas. The original nut of feminist theory is just a cliche with zombie girls echoing the cliche.

But let us listen some more.

"In truth, reliable contraceptives (invented by a man, naturally) have robbed man of the only triumph left to him in his state of sexual subjugation. Previously, woman was always to a certain extend at his mercy. Now she is suddenly in control. She can have as many children as she wishes. She can even select the father (rich, if possible). If she has no intention of having children, she can indulge in intercourse as often as it appears advantageous to her. Men cannot do that." Pg. 80-81

This is a good question. Have contraceptives increased man's power or woman's? Obviously, it is woman's whose fortune has doubled. She can now be the slut and be free from most of the consequences. This was much more difficult in the past.

I suspect contraceptives have been historically banned because of men insisting it so. This would explain why the ancient religions all banned contraceptives. Christianity banned all contraceptives unanimously until around 1928. It also finally explains why Onanism was frowned at (a man emptying his seed outside the woman). It kept giving the woman power.

Sex has two main long term consequences (not counting short term pleasure). One, it creates children. Two, it enslaves a man.

With contraceptives, the children element is removed but the enslavement of men are not.

"But Pook! But Pook!" you cry. "Would this not free the men too? All these women and little consequences?"

The changing definitions of man by the moderns have help emasculate men. A false definition is worse than a slander. But the definition of "man" as supported by the moderns is a man who has sex with as many females as possible. There is no historical basis for this. What was the definition of a "man" was the man WHO HAD THE MOST CHILDREN. This is why centuries ago, familes would range from eight to fourteen children. Men who were impotent and could not have children strived to display their manliness in some other way (such as America's George Washington).

The more children, the more new people were under the man's name. He became the leader of the household. He became the Patriarch in this way.

By pinning the definition of sex on 'as banging as many females as possible', one can pinpoint the further enslavements to men:

1) the married man keeps demanding sex from his wife who she can easily manipulate the man further based on such desire.

2) the bachelor throws his time away (which is more valuable than money) on playing the 'game' to get as many girls as possible. Women will manipulate the guy for entertainment, social access, and even money.

3) the guy throws his money away (less valuable than time) at prositutes, both offical and unofficial, just so he can 'feel like a man'.

We know that for men, sex is very much a mental thing. Alter the brainwashing and free yourself.

It is hilarious when someone tries to defend this definition of man using evolutionary behavior. Evolution only works if you have children you idiots. When I see demographic reports of less and less children born in each generation, I assure you that is not evolution in work: it is extinction.

Vilar goes on speaking how much women research sex and how it involves men (to 'rock his world to enslave them' essentially).

"Contrary to man's fear, women do not, however, weigh one man against another and choose the most virile- far from it, as she herself is not all that keen on sex. In view of that, and provided all other conditions are equal, she is likely to prefer the less potent man because she can always blackmail him with her intimate knowledge of his weakness. "In the realm of sex, more than any other, man is a victim of the principles of efficiency according to which he is manipulated."

You never hear about any pressure for the woman to 'perform'. The only thing you hear about that is if the woman cannot keep the man (i.e. manipulate him). This would explain why when a wife cheats, the husband "fails" and the wife is a "victim". And if the husband cheats, the husband "fails" and the wife is again the "victim".

"That sexual competence in a man is a matter of indifference to the majority of females is shown by the number of highly paid men who marry and stay married, despite the fact that they are impotent (it is unimaginable that a woman without a vagina would have an prospects whatsoever of getting married to a normally sexed man)." Pg. 84

A young man is often amazed that dating is really nothing more than sex. Women don't want to know you. They do not care about your dreams. The bait on the hook is sex and the purpose is to reel you in. Women's greatest fear is the celibate man as he cannot be hooked in any way.

I got Rudolph!

Now I'm ready for Christmas dinner...

What I want for Christmas...

...the gift that keeps on giving... and giving.. and giving...

Pook Grows Wings ; Co-Workers Stunned

I have been an advocate of Anthony Ellis's program for quite some time. Until I started a new job, I actually was out of the loop for going to the gym in all (as a door to door salesman, it is too difficult to keep up). However, at the new job I could get back into the program. I declared to the co-workers that I, the caterpillar, will be growing wings. They said I was too skinny. "But it is good to be skinny!" said one fat hag. Having been through the program several times, my muscle fibers were dormant but waiting. Muscle memory was all still in place even after a couple of years.

In three months, I gained 35 pounds of muscle mass. Yes, it is possible.

Now, you might ask, "Why gain muscle, Pook?" For the testosterone, silly! I noticed that I began sleeping better, I was generally happier, and I was eating better. The downside is that my sex drive goes up which often concludes with a woman (unfortunately).

Women are persuaded by male's bodies as much as men are by female bodies. I know the girls don't care about me. They don't want to know who I am. They don't care about my dreams. All they care about is that think my body is *hot* and I get flooded with the "You need a girlfriend immediately!" line (with the girl saying that often volunteering). I respond back with how worthless American women are and the reactions are priceless. Some women become hostile, others become reflective. Either way, it is much better than simply saying, "Oh shucks, I am just waiting for the right lady!" or something as retarded. It amazes me how these women assume I will go for them. They are that arrogant. What I mean is that if a guy sees a girl they think is *hot*, they do not assume she is automatically his. He tends to think she already has a boyfriend or husband. Or he also thinks he has to work to get her. Even players know they have to do something in order to get the girl. But with women, no, they feel entitled to the guy.

There is no better rebuke to women than to be hot and say no to them. They cannot take it!

Anyway, I will tell you how I gained mass so fast. Outside of Anthony's program, I throw in swimming during Chest day (Anthony disapproves but I do it anyway. I have an urge to swim for some reason. Swimming is good for the chest and shoulder muscles anyway. Besides, swimmers end up with hot bodies anyway).

I use NO supplements except for Twin Lab Ultra Fuel that is used immediately after the workout. No creatine. No stupid shakes. I use REAL FOOD for every meal with FRESH MEAT. I do not eat Whey bars or processed meat. All my meals are cooked (a week in advance). I have 8 hours of sleep as well. I do not divide my meals in cute little tupperware. I have the food and I eat as much as it as I can for every meal.

In the gym, I look funny because I struggle with weights (because I use HEAVY weights to me). I have had idiots come up to me to give me "tips". I ignore them and keep doing what I'm doing which stuns the meathead. But now I am bigger than the meathead.

There is a good way to identify whether or not women *like* you. If women are trying to set you up with one of their friends, they think you are below them but they are trying to help out a friend. Imagine a kid being given a cookie he doesn't like. But a cookie is a cookie so she gives it to someone who might like that type. However, when women really *like* a guy, she will volunteer herself. She will not try to set the guy up with a friend because she wants him for herself!

What always amazed me was not women's changing reactions to my body, but men. For someone reason, the big muscular guy gets respect. Behind my back, they make jokes. But I suspect that is only because they notice the reactions of the women.

Anyway, every guy should try to gain muscle mass at least once in life. You will probably like it so much that you want to continue it for life. You don't gain mass for women or for anyone else. You do it for yourself and in how you feel. Seriously, all I do is go to the gym for an hour and half three times a week, eat six times a day, and get 8 hours rest. It is not hard to do. The challenge is to be consistent. If you are consistent, you will see how it is like a machine where the iron is reforging your body. You will look into the mirror and see an underwear ad staring back at you.

The Adventurer and the Vortex

One day, the magnificent Pook decided to share his manliness (for it would be selfish to contain so much manliness!) with the world. The people rejoiced in this and children ran to greet the Pook when he appeared.

However, Pook encountered a band of disgruntled people huddled in a circle. They hissed their frustrations of life to one another and that was their ritual. Then, they would all disperse to their jobs and lives which they despised. Next day, they would gather, share in their complaints about the world, and then leave again to do it the next day. Seeing the cycle, Pook approached the group.

"What do you want!?" seethed a young man in his twenties who was beginning to look like he was entering his forties. "Why do you disrupt us?" came an old woman's screech from a woman just turning twenty five.

"Tortured souls," the Pookius Maximus said, "Every day, you gather and complain. Yet, then you go back to what you complain about."

Then came the protests.

"X isn't fair!"
"Y is corrupt and has been turned conspiracy against us!"
"Z will eventually collapse due to this injustice!"

Such are the common replies! And how frequent they come! Now, reader, you may inquire about the beings of this group. Rest assured, the beings are both liberal and conservative, pious and hedonistic, rich and poor, men and women, as well as your ancestors and your descendants. They are the 95% of the people. They are the masses.

"Let me be mirror to your thoughts," said the Pook. "I want you to see your mind reflected as it really is. Permit me to ask some questions."

"Very well," allowed one member. "Ask and you shall have your answers."

"Do you believe that you have suffered unfairness?"

For the first time, animation electrified their answers of "Yes!". Each and every one of them believed their fate was unfair.

As Pook kept talking to them, a pattern emerged. Each and every one believed in a spiritual law of fairness. Bitterness swelled in them as they recited how "unfair" this or that was. All of them dreamed of the collapse of the "system" where their spiritual law of fairness would "return" the natural order of things.

Adults believe in Fairness like children believe in Santa Clause. Santa Clause is very much a figment of that Fairness. He knows who has been naughty or nice, bestows gifts on the good and coal on the bad. But just as there is no Santa Clause, there is no Fairness Spiritual Law either.

Life never runs smooth. It is a bumpy ride with set-backs as well as uphill struggles and downhill surges. If a person complained that a ride was not "fair" he would be considered mad. The purpose of the ride is the fun of taking different roads, seeing new scenery, and meeting the new people that come in your life. This is the Adventurer which every Human begins as (what we label the 'innocence' of a child) but can easily become corrupted into something else.

What is the opposite of the Adventurer? It is the Vortex. A Vortex is someone who is miserable in life and who complains as a swirl of angst. The nature of the complaint does not matter. It could be about the job, the women, the men, the world, SOMETHING. What happens when you combine many vortexes together? They create a giant Vortex that creates such a sucking sound that, standing near it, you literally begin to think the world is an Evil Place.

The Feminist is a Vortex. She thinks life has been unfair to HER and becomes a swirling cyclone of angst. Combine her with other swirling cyclones of angst and you have a giant vortex that begins to suck in normal women nearby. Men are not attracted to the Feminist Vortex (unless they have somehow been 'sucked in' so to say) because no one likes negativity and parasitism in their life.

The Nice Guy is also a Vortex. There are many definitions for 'Nice Guy', some be it the guy who is naive, the guy who believes in 'love', the guy with old morals, or simply a guy who is very polite. But the true definition of 'Nice Guy' is that like with all Vortexes, he believes in a Spiritual Law of Fairness. Beautiful women are not going for him. They are going for the "jerks"! What injustice! As the normal guy becomes a Nice Guy Vortex, he may become 'buddies' with similar thinking guys but women avoid him more. And the more women avoid him, the more the Vortex intensifies causing women to avoid him even more. "It's not fair!" whines Nice Guy.

Vortexes are everywhere. It is your job, as the Adventurer, to avoid them. Obstacles in your path are what makes the Adventure fun. The only REAL obstacle is the Vortex who, like Sirens, will suck you towards to the rocks where the masses of shattered lives lay on the beach.

How do you know if you are in a vortex? Here are some signs:

1) Are your conversations about NEGATIVE things that are occurring that is out of your control?

2) Do the people participate in hopes of vomiting their frustration?

3) Is the theme of the conversations revolving around the concept of UNFAIRNESS of some form?

4) When the people talk, do they smile? If not, they are more likely in a Vortex.

The Vortex eats up your valuable energy. Instead of using that energy to ADVENTURE, to discover new and wonderful things, you go in circles in the Vortex. Time passes. And one day, you will simply... stop. Since Fairness will never come, for that would mean Heaven on Earth, the only way out of the Vortex is to die.

Most people in their lives swirl around their vortexes, like the toilets, all their lives.

There are so many Vortexes it would be ridiculous to mention them all. But the most common are political. When we get frustrated in life (which is inevitable), many lose their senses and become drawn to a political 'cause'. When our talents and passions are frustrated, we tend to turn to new 'causes'. This is why children of wealthy people get caught up in political 'causes'. Same with actors and many of the population. Hitler was a frustrated artist first, dictator second.

In many ways, the Feminist and the Nice Guy are far more alike then different. When career women go off to dinner together, they are complaining about men (i.e. super vortex). Nice Guys can be the same. Other groups you are thinking in your head right now apply as well. Consider these Vortexes to be the Cult of the Fair. All their doubt and anger leads to PRE-MATURE AGING.

"But Pook," cried a woman. "If what you say is true, if that is the Cult of Fairness, then what is the alternative? Who follows the Adventurer?"

"My lady," I replied, "the opposite would be the Cult of the Fantastic. There is no spiritual belief of Fairness in this one. By adopting the mindset of what they WILL do, they live completely and enjoy the bumpy ride. The Fairness Cultists huddle from their rat holes to point, be envious, and hurl moralizations. They condemn the Adventurer for violating the Law of Fairness where they are really condemning themselves."

I then turned to the crowd and said, "You are all done with the Vortex. You will now stop thinking of what you are NOT achieving and, instead, think of what you ARE achieving. This puts you in a mindset looking for opportunities and challenges rather than barriers and obstructions. This simple change of your mindset will remove the detractors and doubters from your life and attract the movers-and-shakers."

And with that, the crowd dispersed for the last time. One person swore that he would find a new job within the next two months. Another swore he would buy that house in six months. Yet, another decided to devote his free time back to his passions and dreams. The Vortex imploded and, they all became adventurers again.