Whilst this film is probably most useful as entertainment, rather than some type of pickup guide, Roger Dodger does contain some excellent dialogue.

The first scene in particular amply demonstrates a man that is confident, charismatic and able to subtly move conversation in any direction he wants; but a man who is also exceptionally devious and unable to form intimate relationships with anyone.

Several times we’ve seen people hoodwinked by over-hyped and poorly tested theories; most notably Baker and Bellis’ Kamikaze Sperm Hypothesis, or just plain pseudo-scientific fabrication, such as virtually any theory which starts “50,000 years ago…” that you may perchance have read on other seduction related websites.

Instead of taking these theories literally, simply because they might sound like they could be true; try considering what is the outcome that the communicator is trying to induce amongst the members of his audience?

With this in mind, have another look at the first scene from Roger Dodger:

Roger Dodger – Opening scene: Five Co-workers in a Restaurant

Roger: What’s happening right now, is important only in the context of our continuing evolution as a species.
Donovan: Roger, Roger, all I’m saying is that I wish my sister would learn to read a subway map.
Roger: And, by saying that, you disregard the primary importance of utility … in human relationships.
Roger: Our ability; Man’s, Men’s ability to read maps, to navigate, makes us useful. You should discourage your sister from even looking at a map.
Joyce: Are you saying: that we women have an inferior sense of direction?
Roger: Which way is North, Joyce, without looking around?
Joyce: What?
Roger: You heard me. Point North quick. North North. Quick! North, North… Nooorrth (Point’s north).
Donovan: You’re right.
Joyce: Is he right?
Donovan: He’s right.
Elaine: [Clapping] Very impressive.
Roger: As she has throughout history; the female responds to the male who displays the most utility. By honing those skills which make me useful, I stave off my inevitable obsolescence.
Donovan: So, what? You stay home honing your ability to program a VCR?
Christopher: My VCR’s been flashing twelve o’clock for three years.
Elaine: What else, Roger?
Joyce: Oh, driving a standard shift. Lifting heavy things.
Elaine: Air guitar.
Group: [Laughter]
Roger: Yes, yes. Go ahead and chuckle, okay? But until women evolve the ability to move objects telepathically – And they will – Physical strength remains a primary utility.
Donovan: Here’s to brute strength then! (Offers a toast).
Group: [Laughter]
Joyce: You know Roger, you’re forgetting a very important male utility.
Roger: What’s that? Barbecuing?
Joyce: (Shakes head) … Sex.
Elaine: Yeah. I want a guy to do more than just program my VCR.
Donovan: Oh, Elaine, I’ll program your VCR, Baby, like you never had it.
Elaine: It’s a top-loader. You think you can handle that?
Roger: Interestingly, a group of scientists in England, just announced their intention to fertilize an egg without the use of sperm cells.
Joyce: No…? I don’t understand that.
Roger: Every cell in the human body contains a copy of the genome pattern. The only reason sperm cells have all the fun is that up until now… they were the only ones with access. Within Christopher’s lifetime, artificial insemination will render sperm as useless as an assembly line worker in Detroit.
Donovan: Luckily, my accountant set up a golden parachute for my sperm years ago… In case they were downsized.
Group: [Laughter]
Joyce: Just so you know, Roger, you know that we women… make love because we like it… Not just to procreate.
Elaine: Yeah.
Roger: But are men absolutely necessary?
Joyce: I don’t know about that.
Roger: Think of the structure of the female genitalia.
Donovan: Wait, wait… Okay, got it.
Group: [Laughter]
Roger: What is the most sensitive part of the vagina?
Elaine: I can’t believe we’ve gotten into this.
Joyce: I think you know this, Donovan.
Roger: It’s the clitoris, first discovered by Renaldus Columbus in 1559.
Donovan: First he thought it was India.
Group: [Laughter] Oh, no! No!
Roger: The crown of the clitoris contains 8,000 nerve fibres. It’s a far greater concentration than in any part of the male body… even our fingertips. It is the most efficient pleasure-delivery system ever devised by nature.
Roger: Now, ask yourself… Why didn’t the clitoris end up inside the vagina? So that intercourse would be naturally… compellingly… constantly pleasurable for a woman?
Joyce: (Raises hand) I know the answer.
Roger: Yes, Ms. Maynard.
Joyce: Because: in primitive time, women died of childbirth. So for intercourse to be too pleasurable – wouldn’t make sense from a Darwinian standpoint.
Donovan: I’m impressed.
Roger: Absolutely right… So, What does that tell us?
Elaine: That Evolution is looking out for us girls?
Joyce: Exactly.
Roger: That for women… intercourse and sexual fulfilment were never intended to intersect. New technology just makes it official.
Roger: Future generations of women will evolve clitorises – clitori, clitorati -
Joyce: Clitorissimo.
Group: [Laughter]
Roger: That are larger, longer, even more sensitive. And a woman’s ability, as well as her desire to self-stimulate will increase exponentially; as intercourse is robbed of its procreative utility.
Christopher: I’m confused; and frightened.
Roger: You should be… The species is not static, okay… We’re in a constant state of flux.
Roger: Two genders has been the default setting for one reason only: So far, it’s been the only way to propagate the race.
Elaine: Is there any species that just has one gender… that doesn’t have male or female?
Roger: Starfish, for one.
Donovan: Next time I see a starfish, I’m gonna tell him to go fuck himself.
Group: [Silence]
Donovan: Come on. You love it.
Elaine: No, we don’t.
Roger: So where are we headed… Equality? Equality; what is that?
Roger: Is that a principle of nature? We all sit around reading Subway maps together…
Roger: No, of course not. Natural selection. Now that is a principle of nature. Selection. Something has to lose, something has to be defeated, in order for something else to be selected. So, what does this mean?
Donovan: Means we all have to take orders from Joyce for the rest of lives.
Joyce: That’s right. I like that.
Roger: It means that ten or fifteen generations from now… men will be reduced to servitude. Technology and evolution will have combined, to exclude sperm from procreation. And our final destiny will be to lift couches, and wait for that day when telepathy overcomes gravity, and our gender’s last remaining utility is lost forever.
Joyce: Forever… [Laughter]
Elaine: Oh, my God, Roger.
Roger: [Looks to Donovan]
Donovan: What? I’m done.
Roger: Then I rest my case.
Group: [Applause]
Roger: Thank you.
Roger: Love you people.

Posted by Jonathan as Art & Literature, Psychology at 12:32 AM BST

No Comments »

One of the big seduction milestones that a number of guys would seem to need to pass is that they are shy around women.

I’m tempted to say pull yourself together; Faint heart never won fair lady! But I realise that some people are genuinely shy, and overcoming this problem would be a major hurdle for them.

I suspect that adopting the belief that “Any individual standing or sitting alone would welcome the opportunity to interact with someone else.”

You could start by smiling and saying something simple like ‘Hello’ to as many people as you can make eye contact with, and who will smile at you. Asking for simple directions, giving an unexpected compliment, or offering assistance (e.g., holding a door open) would be three very simple ways to practice talking with others. The point here is to get used to talking with people.

Here are ten more tips for dealing with shyness :

1. Practise breathing exercises, and reducing muscle tension (such as repeatedly clenching and releasing your fist).

2. Don’t use drink or drugs to loosen you up. The effects soon wear off (and you might only get a hangover).

3. Practise small talk with people whom you meet briefly in non-threatening situations, for example, while out shopping, at a museum or a sporting event.

4. To carry on a conversation, you must have something to say. Read widely, and watch or listen to information-based programmes. Try to ask open-ended questions, such as “What do you think of…?”

5. Rehearse topics that might come up. Practise at home in front of a mirror.

6. Kind acts, e.g., offering to get a party guest a drink, invite reciprocation; maximising the chances of successful socialising.

7. Accept that the world isn’t looking at you: other people tend to focus on themselves.

8. If someone ends the conversation, don’t assume that they find you boring. There are many more logical explanations (e.g., the person had someone else to meet).

9. Learn to take rejection. Nobody gets on with absolutely everyone.

10. Find your comfort zone: you may feel happier in an art class or doing volunteer work than going to a bar or nightclub.

Source: Shyness Research Institute

Posted by Jonathan as Psychology at 9:13 PM BST

No Comments »

First, understand that the best biological strategy for men has historically been ‘relatively promiscuous’ sexual behaviour, and for women ‘relatively selective’ sexual behaviour. Furthermore, for men sex is frequently an end in and of itself; more so than for women. I once heard it put quite well as:

Men use intimacy to achieve sex, and Women use sex to achieve intimacy.

This is not universally, true, of course, but there is enough truth to provide insight and be useful.

If you accept these notions as being relatively useful descriptions of real life, you might also predict, other things being equal, that men would have a lower ‘threshold’ for sexual interactions than women (and by the way, a higher threshold for interactions involving significant intimacy). Ask yourself; are these assertions not both true?

In other words, in most relatively symmetric situations, there are more women that the average man ‘would have sex with’ than there are men that the average woman ‘would have sex with’. Therefore, other things being equal, the typical male/female sexually-related interaction is that of him making a pass at her, and her declining. Based on the most logical and most prevalent male/female strategies for maximizing their own genetic success into subsequent generations, a typical male/female sexual interaction, is that of a man attempting to initiate sex and a woman rejecting it.

This type of interaction is not an isolated incident, an emotional trauma, or an excuse for being shy. It is the most natural, and by the way, the most frequent, type of interaction. Probably 90-95% of all sexually-related (heterosexual) interactions look pretty much like this.

Much words to assert what is for most of us an obvious reality. The question is, so what?

The insight for men is; understanding that long run equilibrium is defined by an equation that looks something like this:

10 passes = 9 rejections + 1 acceptance

The insight is that in order to get the 1 acceptance a man should expect to have to go through 9 rejections. The number may actually be 1, 2, 9, 90, or any other number, but the point is the same. Men should expect a certain amount of ‘rejection’ as a natural part of their long-term seduction strategy, and should learn to deal with it, with understanding and confidence. After all dealing with acceptance is easy. It’s dealing with the rejections that are ‘in-between’ now and the next acceptance that is difficult.

Posted by Scott as Philosophy, Psychology at 9:13 PM BST

1 Comment »

Having browsed some of the dating and seduction related message boards, and then listened to some of the gobbledygook taught to students of the Seduction panjandrums, one idea we find absolutely hilarious is that of being the ‘Alpha Male’.

Being the alpha male seems to be the universal excuse of immature guys that are frustrated by their lack of success in attempting to find a girlfriend; and so they decide to take their frustrations out on the rest of the world; starting arguments on internet discussion boards and generally making a nuisance of themselves. However, more enlightened folk would call this being a Cockblock or a Bully etc.

Most of the population will no doubt have seen big and aggressive animals, outfitted with dangerous weapons (fangs, tusks, antlers, horns) such as Gorillas, Elk, Wolves or even Sea lions battling with one another for control of a harem of females on some nature programme or other. And this is most likely where these poor deluded individuals have obtained the idea from. This much was pointed out to one gentleman recently, and he was surprised that it wasn’t an idea developed by his chosen Seduction guru, and had merely been taken out of context from popular science.

Origins

The phrase alpha male originates from back in the 1950’s when Primatologists were first studying animal dominance hierarchies; the animals would be labelled Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta etc., as the perceived order of the level of dominance.

Now, in species such as Gorillas, harems are established, in which the dominant ‘silverback’ male mates with perhaps three to six females. (Male gorillas are two to three times larger than their mates, apparently because competition among males to be successful harem-keepers has conveyed an evolutionary advantage to those that are larger, stronger, and generally more effective in keeping rivals at bay.) No wonder the guys claiming to be the Alpha male have so much pent up anger and aggression, or at least they pretend to be that way.

If we contrast the Gorilla with the Gibbon: gibbons live in male-female pairs, so most healthy gibbons get to reproduce, and usually most males do. As a result, there are very few big winners or big losers and, accordingly, almost no size difference between the sexes.

This is much more like human society, where a far more complex and multi-layered dominance hierarchy will be found. Consider the Military, the Caste system in India, or the company where you work. All of these are multi-level hierarchies. Even if we expand this idea to more violent organisations, The Mafia, the Yakuza and Triads are all multi-layered dominance hierarchies, and it would be facile to claim that the Godfather, Oyabun or Mountain Master gets all the females, whilst the rest of the organisation remains celibate.

Just for fun

So, if we attempt to identify any alpha male in human society, we are forced to confront the fact that there are a number of very powerful people at the top of different divisions of society, and that in turn automatically rules out there being any alpha male in human society.

As a simple test, we have split all of the United Kingdom society into four branches, and identified four possible alpha males. See how much sense this makes to you, and whether any of these people are renowned as harem-keepers:

All of these candidate alpha males appear to be devoted (to the best of my knowledge) to the women they married, and aside from Roman Abramovich getting divorced for a younger woman, none of these people have been know for their sexual exploits. But even then, that doesn’t come close to the sexual proclivities of the gorilla.

Testicle size

So, getting back to more serious science; scientists have observed that species in which mate-guarding predominates generally have small testes. Whereas when frequent copulation is the preferred strategy, then, unsurprisingly, the resulting male gonads are much larger.

For some notable cases of frequent copulation, look as those species that are polyandrous, in which one female regularly mates with more than one male (such as the Jacanas). These animals typically have a high copulation frequency, probably initiated by males, each attempting to swamp the sperm of his rivals and thereby increase the chances that the eggs to be deposited in his nest (and which he will then incubate and care for) are genetically his. The males of such species have oversized testes, producing more sperm than monogamous males whose responsibility is just to inseminate their mate but not to compete with the sperm of other males. This pattern is not limited to birds, it has been found in mammals generally, confirmed by comparing, for example, rodent species that do and do not have many extra-pair copulations, as well as members of the Horse family (including Zebras), Baleen whales and Primates.

Lekking

Some bird species, including Prairie chickens and Sage grouse in North America, breed on what is called a ‘lek,’ a communal displaying ground. Males gather here and show their wares, calling and posturing and typically arranging themselves in a dominance pattern, with the alpha males in the middle. Females mate almost exclusively with these favoured individuals, who may copulate with numerous females in one day; these females, in turn, generally give the subordinate males a cold shoulder. Systems of this sort provide the opportunity to answer this question: When males have especially large testes, is it because of sperm competition? (i.e. because other males are likely to be copulating with the same females) or simply because of the demands of producing enough sperm to fertilize the eggs of so many different females?

The answer is pretty clear-cut: Whereas polyandrous species have large testes, the males of lekking species have testes that, corrected for overall body size, are if anything exceptionally small. Evidently, it is rather easy to make enough sperm to fertilize one female or even many, as dominant lekking males do. What really makes for big balls is when males must compete with the sperm produced by other males.

The most impressive case comes from observations of the great apes. Remember the impressive silverback male gorillas, large in body and relatively aggressive in temperament, who succeed in dominating other males and gaining reproductive rights to a small harem of females? Although their bodies are large, their testicles are remarkably small, indeed downright tiny once corrected for body weight. By contrast, chimpanzee males (which do not achieve anything like the reproductive despotism enjoyed by their gorilla counterparts) have immense testicles. This is entirely reasonable, since a female chimp in heat will copulate with many different males; in one case, Jane Goodall observed a female chimpanzee copulate 84 times in eight days, with seven different males. As a result, a male chimp cannot simply assume that sexual access to an oestrous female will result in paternity. He must produce enough sperm to give them (and thus himself) a fighting chance.

Amongst people, when it comes to testicle size, human males fall somewhere between the polygynous gorilla and the promiscuous chimp, suggesting that we are mildly polygynous.

Infanticide

A more ethically troubling discovery (originally from the work of Sarah Hrdy) has been that many alpha males practise infanticide. The pattern is as follows: When the harem-keeping male is eventually deposed, the newly ascendant alpha male not uncommonly embarks on a gristly policy of slaughtering the nursing infants. Although contemptible by human standards, such behaviour makes ‘good’ evolutionary sense, because after their youngsters are killed, nursing mothers quickly resume ovulating, whereupon they are likely to mate with the new harem-keeper (despite the fact that he murdered her offspring.) Insofar as the unfortunate infants were sired by the preceding male, their fate is of no biological concern to the newly ascendant infanticidal alpha male. He is interested only in his own progeny, not someone else’s.

Interestingly, female Langur monkeys have even evolved an interesting counterstrategy. If a female Langur is in the late stages of pregnancy when the male takeover occurs (roughly every 27 months), she may undergo a ‘pseudo-oestrus,’ developing swollen genitals and a sexual appetite for the new harem-keeper. Then, when her offspring is born, the adult male is more likely to act paternal than infanticidal.

Polyandry

Sometimes, however, males may have little choice: Females mate with more than one male and cannot be prevented from doing so. In one particular species of zebra (known as Grevy’s zebra, after its discoverer) individuals live in groups whose membership is constantly shifting. Females associated with a given male are likely to mate with a different male not long afterwards (polyandrous.) In fact, during a single day they may mate with an average of four different males. On the other hand, there are some Grevy’s females (generally, those that have just given birth) who remain with one male for a prolonged period, during which they are essentially monogamous. They do this, because they need reliable sources of water, which are found only on a male’s territory. So Grevy’s stallions have two different kinds of females to deal with; those that are sexually faithful and those that aren’t (bear in mind that the same female will occupy different roles at different times in her life).

Grevy stallions adjust their tactics accordingly, depending on whether their female companion is polyandrous or monogamous. When mating with polyandrous females, males invest more time and energy in mating itself; Stallions call to and copulate seven times more frequently than when involved (temporarily) with monogamous females. They even ejaculate larger quantities of semen. It is also worth noting that in another zebra species, the Plains zebra, females live in traditional harems, each lead by a single male, and as far as is known, they only mate with the harem-keeper. Plains zebra stallions copulate less, produce less semen, and also have smaller testes than their Grevy’s counterparts, which have to be prepared to deal with females having a penchant for a high-frequency of extra-pair copulations.

Summary

So, the closest human parallel we have to anything like an alpha male would be the charismatic men who establish cults or other forms of communal living arrangements and then proceed to monopolise the sexual attentions of women, including those associated with other, more junior cult members. Indeed, one of the main reasons for the failure of various utopian communes has been eventual resistance to the sexual privileges typically demanded (and received) by the founding fathers.

Posted by Jonathan as Anthropology, Sociobiology at 9:13 PM BST

No Comments »