November 20th, 2018
The "anglobitch" as a culturally specific phenomenon
Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)
Bookmark and Share


Respected Member

Join Date: 11/17/2010 | Posts: 412

Came across this article. Definitely coheres with one of the things I've observed after being in France for a while. Basically argues that the U.S. and Britain instill a separation of the sexes in childhood which is unique to their cultures. Thus, the sexes tend to socialize separately. In France, men and women are actually friends with each other and tend to go out in mixed groups.

I have definitely noticed that among university-aged people in France, "couples" as Americans and British people understand them are much more rare. There is no division between hanging out with your "guy friends" and hanging out with your girlfriend--everyone goes out together in a group of friends. University-aged people form monogamous relationships in France, but they tend not to be the codependent college marriages that you see in the U.S. (the negative results of which pushed a lot of us into the community). 

This notion that the division between sexual and social relationships might be specific to the Anglophone world may explain something else I've noticed. A lot of pickup humor bases itself on satirizing the princess myths of Hollywood social conditioning with over-the-top compliments. When I've used this with Europeans, they don't get the joke--they think I'm just being very American and think it's cute (they don't get creeped out because it's so foreign to them, and because they tend to be less misandrist than American women--they don't see every man as a potential rapist).

Another difference: women here do not assume that they have the sexual power. I think a lot of women in the U.S. think they can just assume higher value. Women in France, if anything, assume the opposite.
Login or register to post.


Respected Member

Join Date: 11/17/2010 | Posts: 412

I read another article by this guy and the argument behind the anglobitch thesis is actually more subtle than I initially thought. The guy's rhetoric is pretty wacky, but essentially the argument is that sexual repression causes female status to rise (among those people who passively accept social conditioning) as the "givers" of sex to men, while men are denigrated as sexualized bodies.

Even if women want sex, those women who are caught up in social conditioning would rather hold onto that status by repressing their desire for sex than risk losing it by becoming bodies that are as sexualized as those of men ("sluts").  (As an aside, the notion of the "slut" is much less prevalent in France than in the United States. When girls are down to fuck in France, they will do highly sexual shit in public and think it's weird that American or English men are uncomfortable with PDAs).

Note that the division between the pure lady and the dirty, sexualized man is a relatively recent historical development which dates from the Victorian period. In medieval Anglophone culture, the female body was sexualized and held in contempt--a distraction on the male's path to salvation. 

However, this is not just a rehash of "the repressive hypothesis." For those of you not up on your continental philosophy, Foucault demonstrated in The History of Sexuality that the Victorian period did not repress sexuality, but largely created it. That is to say that the modern societies sought to control sexual behavior by creating an unprecedented amount of discourse (basically, experts talking--think sex education) about sex, which assumed that one's sexual preferences were the core of one's being. "Repression" in the context of Kshatriya could just mean a uniquely Anglo-American way of thinking about sex that puts women on pedestals which is in fact a consequence of the explosion of discourse about sex which began in the 19th century with the rise of industrial capitalism.

Note also that this division is as much if not more men's fault than that of women. It is consistent with an argument that society is patriarchal, even though the author often calls Anglo-American society "matriarchal," because in Lacan (the central figure of 3rd wave feminism) the patriarchal figure is the source of the castration phenomenon that sets up all these social rules. The castration threat is not a fear that your penis is going to literally get cut off (at least in Lacan), but can be thought of as social exclusion or loss of social power. Women experience it too--you don't have to have a penis to be afraid of castration.
Login or register to post.


Trusted Member

Join Date: 09/19/2006 | Posts: 1755

 Cool article.

btw I've met some fuckheaded french girls...

I think fuckheadedness is fuckheadedness whatever, and it just gets expressed through different cultural channels - e.g. maybe UK/US it's "anglobitch", in catholic countries its the catholic guilt,  in germany the girls are neurotic and text you 20 times a day...

It is really interesting how sexuality and culture intertwine though, Im fascinated by it.
Login or register to post.


Respected Member

Join Date: 10/19/2008 | Posts: 566

 Amazing post. I've actually surmised a similar theory in my own head over the last few months. I'm at a large American university and it really stands out to me how girls and guys do not hang out all that much. I've been around the social circles of the hottest girls and the most "high value" males yet there is still so much separation. In other words - guys will go out with their guys friends and girls will go out with their guy friends. Obviously that's not a rule and there are exceptions I'm talking about the majority of situations. At parties and bars guys/girls will converge but I mean before and after the party or bar they would rather keep to the same sex. 

I think there is plenty of weight to theory that Western culture has purposely insinuated some sort of division between the sexes. It really hasn't made sense to me but this article is a very solid theory.

I would love to hear what Tyler or other instructors who have traveled the world say about this. 
Login or register to post.
Paris Boum Boum

Paris Boum Boum

Trusted Member

Join Date: 04/02/2009 | Posts: 3550

Interesting post.

I didn't know that socialization was gender determined in the US-UK. Now I understand why the image of the typical chode and 30 yo virgin geek make sense. In France, guys socialize with girls because all the time spent in schools is a time spent around girls. It doesn't mean everybody has female friends (although it is very likely), it means that hanging around girls is normal and considered normal. Going out with a group of guys & girls is very common. 

I understand know why UK-US girl (this is a blanket statement, I know) seem to respond so well to button pushing game. The power is given to them by society, and they don't have any grip on it, so whenever they feel that a social interaction can take it away they lose their confidence and seek validation. 

Most of modern PU theory comes from the US, but the people writing it are not aware of their cultural peculiarities, hence the discrepancies you may find sometimes between field and theory.
I understand now such a line as "you & I wouldn't get along together blah blah" doesn't work so much in France if she is not already attracted. Society doesn't consider a girl a Hollywood princess right from the get go. In the US, this line works because it reverses roles.

Still, maybe the differences are more contextual than cultural.
You may find that "Hollywood type" game doesn't work in some cultural areas as long as it is not put in the right context. When it is, it works.  
For example, 95% of the male population in Paris think that girls are heartless ice cold bitches. It's just because of the context you meet them in (chill house party vs super club). 
The few people that cold approach old school (ie without any PU background) get angry very easily, insulting the girl when she blows them off, which in return teaches the girl she shouldn't respond to a random guy cold approaching her. As a result of that catch22, there is a lot of loneliness in that big city. 
That's not the only reason of course, but my point is that "high-value US type game" as you were describing it can work when the context calls for it, and many times in Paris that can help, depending on the type of venue, the context of the events, and the level of jadedness of the girl etc.

So when you say "Another difference: women here do not assume that they have the sexual power", it really depends on the situation you're in.

Also, there's a bias when you meet someone of a different culture. It's not that foreigner are easier, it's just that you don't have the same thought patterns, and you're more likely to display more attractive behaviors. That's why everybody think girls from other countries are easier. 

BTW for those interested, OP talks about the first chapter of a History of sexuality, vol1. 
Do you have any precise reference for Lacan ?

Thanks again for the post. 


-Interesting point about "homosociality"
-If you're living outside the US-UK, PU material can fuck up your game because of cultural differences
-I think that at the end the key differences boil down to context and not to culture so much.
Login or register to post.


Respected Member

Join Date: 05/06/2009 | Posts: 748

Actually that separation is even stronger in scandinavia, east europe, and russia.  That makes actually pick-up a lot easier in these countries (england, scandinavia, east europe)  than in France, spain, italy, south america, where in clubs people always hang out in huge mixed groups (less natural to approach than the typical group of two girls that you see all the time in east europe and scandinavia)
For me it is not an anglo-phenomon. It is more a north/south difference. In latin countries, people hang out in mixed groups just to have fun together(not meeting other ppl), while in northern countries, guys go out with guys, and girl go out with girls (with the purpose of meeting guys)
PS: IMO  the reason for that is that people from the south are more social/less shy etc, so it is more natural to them to hang out guys and girls, and to have girls-guys friendships. (im not sayign there is no guys-girls friendships in the north, but it is just well different, and i know many east europe and russian girls, who have shit loads of female friends, and not even one male friend, this doesnt happen in france or spain..... . (well these russian and east europe girls  have male friends, but they are fuckbuddies, hard to have friendship with a guy witout fucking him for northern girls IME.. I have tried but they always end up fucking me lol)

PS2 : it is also why IMO some people seem to disagree in the way to do pick-up in forums, some say day game is the best, some say night game is the best, some say social circle is the best. In northern countries, night game in clubs(cause such a huge abundance of two-sets out to get laid)  is just too easy to bother doing anything else(day game or social circle). But for example, in france, it is  a whole other story, clubs are not full of two sets wanting to get banged, cause girls spend their nights out  with friends mostly.. so it is why then social circle is more important(or day game..)
Login or register to post.


Respected Member

Join Date: 11/17/2010 | Posts: 412

Thanks a lot Paris Boum Boum for taking what was useful and applying it to practical game.

I had been wondering why button-pushing doesn’t get the same instant response in all contexts that it does in the U.S. (where, even if it’s done in a reaction-seeking way, it generally gets some sort of response, even if it’s not the optimal one), and your application of the theory makes sense.

As you indicate, I think a phrase like “you and me could never get along xxx” could work in some contexts here, basically as a push-pull technique with someone who is already attracted to you. But it doesn’t cause the same sort of mindfuck that it does in the Anglosphere because it does not jam up social conditioning in the same way.

Thanks for the precision on Foucault. As for Lacan, I was thinking of the section of Écrits where he describes the mirror stage, the infant’s process of individuation which marks the beginning of self-consciousness—the infant’s construction of a subject/ego, which he defines roughly as a participant in “the symbolic order.” In Tyler-speak, one can think of it as a theory of the beginning of social conditioning.

It’s worth noting that in the later Lacan the mirror stage is less a developmental stage then a permanent feature of subjectivity. There is a move from conceiving of the subject as a stable atom to a constantly shifting “subject-in-process.” This makes stuff like conscious self-actualization possible.

You can find an interesting application of the mirror stage/castration complex in the context of third-wave feminism in Julia Kristeva’s article “Women’s Time.”

I actually think the concepts of the mirror stage and the subject-in-process may have influenced, perhaps indirectly, portions of The Blueprint. Tyler, if you ever read this: do you plan on providing a bibliography in the book? I would love to see the conceptual edifice underlying the system you lay out there.

A lot of this is very egghead, but the “game” phenomenon has social implications which transcend any individual’s progress with women, and I think it’s important that we become more transparent with our sources so as to better organize our body of knowledge. (That self-improvement is a private industry has many advantages, but the lack of a system for organizing the knowledge it produces is a disadvantage).

@JohnG I wouldn’t say that the French are less shy than people in northern countries, but I have also noticed the dirth of two-sets when going out here. It seems like the percentage of people who go out hoping to have sex with strangers is much, much lower than in the US/UK (I really can’t comment on Scandinavia, Germany, or Eastern Europe because I haven’t lived there). But the percentage of people who seem to have casual sex within their social circle seems much higher in France (this is just an impression, although confirmed by several reference experiences).

I would be interested to see what Paris Boum Boum has to say about this, but I think you can get around this problem if you are good at working mixed groups. In general guys are less likely to try to amog you in Paris than in London or New York, and are more likely to want to chat. But this experience may result from my situational value as a foreigner, as well as the fact that PUA cold approach is less common in French clubs.
Login or register to post.


Respected Member

Join Date: 05/06/2009 | Posts: 748

About what you guys talk about button-pushing etc, it is a whole other topic.(interesting too, but not related with the mixed group thing) Basically, the whole bantering thing is mostly an american (and english) thing. It is the way you guys communicate with each others there... it is kind of weird in a way, how some american ppl I meet sometimes  seem to be able to communicate only by banter... In east europe or russia for example, it is the opposite, they dont get any kind of  humour so often, girls get offended so easily there it is so funny..
Login or register to post.


Respected Member

Join Date: 06/24/2010 | Posts: 360

Paris Boum Boum wrote:

Also, there's a bias when you meet someone of a different culture. It's not that foreigner are easier, it's just that you don't have the same thought patterns, and you're more likely to display more attractive behaviors. That's why everybody think girls from other countries are easier. 

Some nice shit right here, the whole post was pretty good Boum Boum; but i think you are on to something i have been theorizing in my head about over the past few months. I love to study different ethnicities and genetics and cultures, and i have been mentally masturbating about the appropriate ratio between the genetic vs the cultural aspect regarding sexual behavior........

What are your thoughts on this Paris? What do you feel the predispositions and success would be of say a 100% SubSaharan African descendant male that grew up in say the French culture? What about a 100% Arab descendant male in the French culture? I feel that the genetic has about 50%, the in-home culture 40%, and the national culture only 10% of the conditioning power regarding beliefs and success. How do you feel about my theoretical estimates? and what are your opinions of the primary drivers of reproductive success?
The Carthaginian


"I will either find a way, or make one."

- Carthaginian Gen. Hannibal Barca  (to his officers regarding their incredulity about crossing the Alps with a 100,000+ member army including many War Elephants) outset of the 2nd Punic War 218 BC

Login or register to post.
Paris Boum Boum

Paris Boum Boum

Trusted Member

Join Date: 04/02/2009 | Posts: 3550


-I can't really say anything because I haven't made cold approaches in the US-UK.

-As for amogging, you were a foreigner so you enjoyed the foreigner effect, which is basically that you have "high value" (I hate that lingo but that's the only way to put it) right off the bat, especially if you are American / English / Australian. You are interesting by the very fact that you are from another country. I don't know if it works with guys from Irak lol, but it works well with people from the Anglosphere. 

-I don't quite agree with "PUA cold approach is less common in French clubs". In fact my impression (and it's only an impression because I haven't seen how things work out in the English speaking world), is that the average guy from France (especially Paris) has more game than the average guy from say the US. 
Guys cold approach especially in clubs because they are wasted and the environment is hectic. 
My point is that guys approach girls in France. 

-Nonetheless I agree that PU US style is not very common though. 
From the little things I know from the community in France, most of the guys found routines not natural and many "schools" have a more natural take on those things. 
I spotted MM guys only once, they were running "80s Dogs" on the girls I was with, lol. It was interesting. It happened once.

Interesting points from a well-travelled guys. 

I think when all is said and done, it all boils down to your skills and experience. 

Also, keep in mind that it's common for girls in Paris to be approached by guys. They do it very badly ("hey miss can I get your #?"), but they do it. So you don't get bonus points because you talk to girls there. 
Login or register to post.
Paris Boum Boum

Paris Boum Boum

Trusted Member

Join Date: 04/02/2009 | Posts: 3550

I don't know. 
The more I think about it, the more stuff I read from Tyler a while ago makes sense. 

Basically, when you don't know shit, you think height, money, looks get the girls. So you see a well built black guy, and you think he fucks new girls 24-7.

You get experience in field, and little by little all your beliefs get destroyed. You see that a skinny guy gets the girls. You see handsome guys getting nothing. I pulled when I was about 100kg (I didn't look fat though). 
Then you see strange things happening. You fuck girls who have boyfriends. You talk to 2 regular looking girls and you make out with both at the same time. You discover that girls can be 100x more sex focused than men. Girls grabbing your dick becomes common. 

Now I think that it all boils down to your thought patterns. That's it. They determine your success. Not your looks. Not your money. 
Sometimes it's so obvious. You spend nights and nights in field, it seems so clear. And sometimes you forget it, especially when you approach a 10. 
Why ?
Your thought patterns determine your behavior and your emotions. Your emotions influence your behavior. Your behavior is what gets you attraction, and what gets you the right logistics. Attraction and taking care of the logistics mean success. 

But thought patterns are learnt, not innate. That's why I don't believe in genetical predispositions. You learn thought patterns crucial to seduction in your culture and through socialization with guys and girls. Now the ratio may change depending on the awareness of the guy, but at least I don't believe in genetical predispositions. 

I can't repeat it enough: it's so BLATANTLY OBVIOUS the thought patterns determine your success.

-You don't approach your 10. Why ? Thought patterns: "I can't handle it, I'll fail, blah blah". 
-You approach and you say weird shit. Why ? Thought patterns: "I must not fuck it up, I mustn't fail, fuck I am getting anxious, fffffffuuuuuuuuuu...."
-She isn't very responsive, you eject. Why ? Thought patterns: "I fucked it up, fuck, ok what can I do, I look like a moron now"
Same thing for kissing, pulling, whiping your dick out. 

Man, I grew up being told I was ugly, now when I say to a girl I am handsome, she answers "it's true, you're hot".
Now I EXPECT girls to think I am handsome. I expect to hear it a few times during my night out. I expect to be proposed sex. 
The big sticking point for me is to get the kind of reactions I am getting from regular girls with 9-10s consistently. Those are the only girls I want to pull. Just tonight, a girl I knew wanted to bring me at her place, with a possibility for a 3/4some. But they were 7s and didn't have the boobz. I am dying to get those kind of reactions from girls I think aer 9s-10s. 

When you travel, your mind is overwhelmed with new informations. So you forget your usual thought patterns to acquire new ones. During that time, self defeating thought patterns are silenced, and - surprise - you report that girls from X-country are so easy. RSD instructors themselves reported that their game became lethal when they were abroad. 
In reality, it's just that you're outside your head automatically because your mind is learning from an environment which is completely new. Girls see that, they understand you don't need to worry about anything, thus they assume you are very "high value" and get attracted.

Basically, the criterion is this: if you think you had a bad night, it means that your thought patterns are not 100% geared toward success. 
When you need something that you don't get, and when that thing is scarce, you end up frustrated. When you have a bad night, you are frustrated and you didn't get a girl, or had bad reactions, or didn't even approach, etc. 
It means that you were needy, that you live in scarcity and that you don't feel entitled. 
Those are the very thought patterns that prevent you from getting the girls in the first place. 

It's a bit long and I forgot what I wanted to add, so in a nutshell:
-genetics determine 0% of success
-thought patterns determine 100% of success
Login or register to post.