I wasn’t planning to post more than once a week on Sigma Game, but given the high level of interest demonstrated combined with my Cernovichian philosophy which dictates reinforcing success and starving failure, I’ve had to rethink my plans. So, today Sigma Game reviews an old Alpha Game post from 2011 in light of two recently published scientific studies about female competition. It’s fascinating to note the way in which both logic and science line up perfectly with observed female experience.
Due to an inept stylist over-processing part of my hair, it was breaking on one side and not the other, I had to continually cut it to even it out. It was shorter than I’ve ever been comfortable with. Now that it’s growing again I hear from women “oh, I just loved your hair shorter.” I don’t believe it. They also try to convince me to go back to my natural color (dark “dirty dishwater” blonde) instead of the color my husband prefers (platinum). Again, a suggestion I think is insincere and catty. Of course not all men prefer blondes but mine does, and women should not be taken seriously when suggesting hair styles to each other, unless they are trying to prevent the Good Idea Fairy from convincing them to “chop” their hair.
The conclusions of the two studies are highly amusing in light of the vociferous protests that greeted the historical post in defense of a woman’s right to chop her hair off, for any reason, without being forced to endure the painful knowledge that most men will find her less attractive. But I suppose that we have already been reliably informed that science is intrinsically misogynistic due to its inherent failure to prioritize feelings over empirical data.
