No one supports any ideology because of hte ideology's claim to rightness in of itself. There is always a personal, primal reason for doing it, not morality.
Hippie culture was created just so peopel could defy traditional culture, and let themselves be in isolatio nwith primal urgings where girls can be hypergamic with hot guys, and resistant to ugly guys.
Freedom is not always good for humanity. Even if it is morally sound.
Peer pressure, or in this case where it was counter culture, it was the proclamation that chads, or androgynous chads would say "look at me I am a chill guy, I don't need to be in regimental order to be secure, only the insecure people wanna live by rules because they're not attractive enough to be secure in isolation."
Every time ""hippies"" would attack "the man" it was because he was a beta cuck afraid of losing his control by a hyper scrutiny that laidback chad advocated against.
And women buy it, bc in the state of america's incoming globalization, women knew they were more secure on a physical level, so they needed less a masculine guy's strength (where the girl and her desire to acquire good comparative value (looks money status) could be confused by lesser tier genes that were covering up their inferiority by changeable value/ traits, that any low class schmoe could achieve (gymcelling, or forcing everything to be secure through rules.).
There may not have been gymcelling back then, not prominently, but it was true that women felt that insecure men loved systems of order, the "man" back then was filed and coupled with the beta college dean type people, insecure men.
The rebellious chads who feared nothing typically were the ones pushing for open cultural values, and lack of things being overly uptight. All blaming it on guys being beta.
More than Chads, but lazyfucks who weren't insecure wanted this, but women would often file through the periphery and go for the chads who just wanted polyamory. That's why women wanted to advocate for it. To get away from traditionalism.
The most essential thing a woman wants is someone who had a LIFE POSITION of superiority throughout. And working hard for it shows low status. Nonchangeable traits make you more of a staple winner, and women love to have stereotypes of the qualities they want on their side.
Women want concepts, ideas, things like power, dominance, mysteriousness, etc. On their side now. And wanting things with real practical value as opposed to gimmicks of being a winner, a bully, a sophisticated poet (all achieved by physiological implications of being a tall chad, or a sleek, dainty goth with sharp features) is for people who are at the low status level of footwork.
Real value men (who have muscles, have moral accountability) is footworkish and passe. Being with guys from fantasy is what is in now, and if you have to worry about having whats real then you're probably poor or stupid to not have the ability to have luxuriance in life.
Women want unquestionable value in their life. Nothing that shows that someone was hiding something. Muscles hide. But showing bone, and hair density (being a rock star for example) shows genetic value. It shows a girl that a guy can simply be natural and get beauty, instead of trying to hide subhumanity, or cover it up with something superficial.
It has a more regal, hierarchal/ dominarchal value resonance. Lifetime dominarchy.
Gymcels' muscles hide subhumanity.
Physicality farmhand value would be wanted less, and being sophisticated, intelligent is more important.
If you look at andrognyous hippie/ goth/ emo guys, then only their features that are not changeable (like hair, and bones) are bare to show they are hot in isolation.
Women love men who have high regality by exquisitarchy (exquisiteness where they compile how dainty, sophisticated, ethereal (not footwork/ earthy), and it all being NATURAL makes it all the more magical, and the hierarchy of regality beats adornment. (what was changeable). Exquisitarchy over Adornarchy.
Showing that a man relied on things that were unchangeable means that he had a higher starting place than a man. Women hate compensators, and love to always be the people who have higher personal profile value implicitly from the start.
That's what women focus on, impressions, rather than value.
REAL value depends on the moment, but impressions are based on people's range of inference when it comes to impressions.
Women know this. They love to scam people and win through real value PLUS machivellianism.
They'll pick machiavellianism in a high position that covers up inferiority than low status but real value. Influence matters more than real value.
The reticular activation system, an old PUA term used to refer to what is meant to bring on attention from the girl, or what is meant to attract a girls attention. Girls think if someone is not naturally valuable or good looking all things are jus RAS manipulation to get a girl away from detecting a subhuman guys' genes.
The hippie movement felt like the only thing honest to her value cynical pragmatic value system. Only Chads would feel secure with it. And there were a ton of white tall men a part of that movement who were not ugly. The ugly guys could move aside.
Hippie culture was created just so peopel could defy traditional culture, and let themselves be in isolatio nwith primal urgings where girls can be hypergamic with hot guys, and resistant to ugly guys.
Freedom is not always good for humanity. Even if it is morally sound.
Peer pressure, or in this case where it was counter culture, it was the proclamation that chads, or androgynous chads would say "look at me I am a chill guy, I don't need to be in regimental order to be secure, only the insecure people wanna live by rules because they're not attractive enough to be secure in isolation."
Every time ""hippies"" would attack "the man" it was because he was a beta cuck afraid of losing his control by a hyper scrutiny that laidback chad advocated against.
And women buy it, bc in the state of america's incoming globalization, women knew they were more secure on a physical level, so they needed less a masculine guy's strength (where the girl and her desire to acquire good comparative value (looks money status) could be confused by lesser tier genes that were covering up their inferiority by changeable value/ traits, that any low class schmoe could achieve (gymcelling, or forcing everything to be secure through rules.).
There may not have been gymcelling back then, not prominently, but it was true that women felt that insecure men loved systems of order, the "man" back then was filed and coupled with the beta college dean type people, insecure men.
The rebellious chads who feared nothing typically were the ones pushing for open cultural values, and lack of things being overly uptight. All blaming it on guys being beta.
More than Chads, but lazyfucks who weren't insecure wanted this, but women would often file through the periphery and go for the chads who just wanted polyamory. That's why women wanted to advocate for it. To get away from traditionalism.
The most essential thing a woman wants is someone who had a LIFE POSITION of superiority throughout. And working hard for it shows low status. Nonchangeable traits make you more of a staple winner, and women love to have stereotypes of the qualities they want on their side.
Women want concepts, ideas, things like power, dominance, mysteriousness, etc. On their side now. And wanting things with real practical value as opposed to gimmicks of being a winner, a bully, a sophisticated poet (all achieved by physiological implications of being a tall chad, or a sleek, dainty goth with sharp features) is for people who are at the low status level of footwork.
Real value men (who have muscles, have moral accountability) is footworkish and passe. Being with guys from fantasy is what is in now, and if you have to worry about having whats real then you're probably poor or stupid to not have the ability to have luxuriance in life.
Women want unquestionable value in their life. Nothing that shows that someone was hiding something. Muscles hide. But showing bone, and hair density (being a rock star for example) shows genetic value. It shows a girl that a guy can simply be natural and get beauty, instead of trying to hide subhumanity, or cover it up with something superficial.
It has a more regal, hierarchal/ dominarchal value resonance. Lifetime dominarchy.
Gymcels' muscles hide subhumanity.
Physicality farmhand value would be wanted less, and being sophisticated, intelligent is more important.
If you look at andrognyous hippie/ goth/ emo guys, then only their features that are not changeable (like hair, and bones) are bare to show they are hot in isolation.
Women love men who have high regality by exquisitarchy (exquisiteness where they compile how dainty, sophisticated, ethereal (not footwork/ earthy), and it all being NATURAL makes it all the more magical, and the hierarchy of regality beats adornment. (what was changeable). Exquisitarchy over Adornarchy.
Showing that a man relied on things that were unchangeable means that he had a higher starting place than a man. Women hate compensators, and love to always be the people who have higher personal profile value implicitly from the start.
That's what women focus on, impressions, rather than value.
REAL value depends on the moment, but impressions are based on people's range of inference when it comes to impressions.
Women know this. They love to scam people and win through real value PLUS machivellianism.
They'll pick machiavellianism in a high position that covers up inferiority than low status but real value. Influence matters more than real value.
The reticular activation system, an old PUA term used to refer to what is meant to bring on attention from the girl, or what is meant to attract a girls attention. Girls think if someone is not naturally valuable or good looking all things are jus RAS manipulation to get a girl away from detecting a subhuman guys' genes.
The hippie movement felt like the only thing honest to her value cynical pragmatic value system. Only Chads would feel secure with it. And there were a ton of white tall men a part of that movement who were not ugly. The ugly guys could move aside.
Last edited:
