The Beauty Inversion Makes Most Social Skills Books Outdated and Redundant

It should go without saying, that most social skills books are outdated, along with those about psychology, make money mindset, workplace politics, or anything else for that matter. Anyone who’s a millennial like me, would of been around in the penultimate transition phase, where we saw the move to online dating, facebook and smartphones.

I should write a better introduction based on conversations I’ve heard from people younger than me, later on.

Why most social skills books are outdated and redundant nowadays

This also includes pick up artist books and office politics books.

The Robert Hare sociopathy checklist inspired criteria for determining abusers, is now outdated and redundant

Well for my first point, that all the other points stem from, is that nowadays which is completely different from 15 years ago

Doing something that is….

  1. net plus or net gain (beyond just mutually beneficial, that could still be exploitative like capitalisn)….
  2. Prosocial (beyond just what society deems ethical)…..

…..nowadays doing such things can be counter-productive and cause NEW reservations of trust, in a way that wouldn’t of happened, around 15 years ago.

I’ll expand on those 2 points later on, to later explain them. That was just to set the scene.

We’ve gone from looking from low level abusive traits that are inspired by Robert Hare’s psychopathy checklist, to then determining who to trust and not trust, based on how CONGRUNENT someone is

Some people inevitably will disagree with me that such a thing had changed to be different from 15 years ago, to then have you say that it hadn’t even changed in the first place and that my “beauty inversion” type concept, that it doesn’t exist in society today.

Ask yourself whether behaviour like this back then, would ever happen nowadays

Given that nowadays, we have, unlike 15 years ago

  1. CCTV in HD colour with virtually unlimited online storage
  2. Data breaches where companies get hacked then the database ends up for sale or free download on the darknet
  3. Data over-reaches where you have rogue employees mis-use the internal databases they have access to, by selling it off, using it for ideological sabotage or leasing it to organised crime gangs
  4. The taxman be streamlining and standardising the income reporting and transactions, so it’s harder to hide undeclared income or make off-the-grid purchases
  5. Timestamped information from our online activity, all triangulated together under a specific criteria, that can be used to build inferences about a person, to increase the likelihood of something being true (like the okcupid questions), even if it cannot be reliably proven, from a Confidence Score Percentage
  6. Everyone walking around with smartphones so they can do discreet video and audio recordings with the recorded subjects nonethewiser

Whereas before you’d have people BRAZENLY commit crimes and domestic abuse within broad daylight or under the full blown knowledge of their peers, where you’d get people who would REVEL and RELISH in the Tony Montana persona as someone who is not to be messed with, nowadays they aren’t so brazen and are more discreet and covert about things, more into putting on a facade and keeping up appearances, showing face and being two-faced.

Could you imagine a scenario like this happening in 2023?

A new person joins a school or youth club, while someone approaches them to say

“You should be careful of X person. Don’t get them angry and don’t mess around with them. He’s proper haywire! Also welcome here you newbie

………….. No I can’t.

Also for those crime videos, I chose CLOSED BOX environments, where people CANNOT freely enter or leave the building or transport. It’s not like the open air environment like the street or a shopping centre.

Would aspiring criminals even dare to commit crimes on the closed box environment like buses nowadays instead of the open air environment of city centre streets? No.

Also domestic abusers are using self help books as a domestic abuse manual, to help them identify vulnerable victims with low self esteem

  • Pick Up Artist books
  • Make money mindset (think and grow rich, the subtle art of not giving a fuck)
  • Art of War
  • 42 Laws of Power
  • The Subtle Art of Not Giving A Fuck
  • How to make friends and influence people

PUA: From seduction to destruction

Pick Up Artists went through four phases, to then fizzle out into oblivion.

  1. Mystery Method where you could cold approach women and use preset scripts he made where you could fill in the blanks
  2. Neil Strauss The Game
  3. Tucker Max douchebaggery
  4. Red Pill, the three R’s, Roosh, Rollo Tomassi and Roissy (now called Cheateau Heartiste)

What I think is that domestic abusers were using pick up artist (PUA) books as a domestic abuse manual, so they could test the waters and push the boundaries. So something good for seduction got used for bad for destruction, reducing women’s self esteem instead of building it. In case you don’t know, red pill words like frame, dread game and flippant answers to simple questions.

The british government and women’s charities (for female domestic abuse shelters), they even consider “giving excessive gifts” and “love bombing” as a red flag.

I remember being at some event and some feminist workshop was INSERTED into the event. We had some flashcards and we had to put them to either side of the table, depending on whether the behaviour was abusive within a relationship or not. One of the cards said buying a person gifts I asked why that would be seen as abusive. The woman said that a man would buy a woman lots of gifts because he would then guilt trip her into doing something in return. She later said that the man would also do this, in order to gauge how supseptible she is to being extensively receptive she would be, to receiving domestic abuse. They call this testing the waters.

Sources about giving women being gifts being manipulation

Stop chasing after ghosts in this decade

What young people want nowadays is come instructions complete with all-encompassing, beyond comprehensive, categorical descriptors and methods, which are like

Treasure Hunt - An AR Scavenger Hunt Game
Pantone Color Match Card: How to match to a Pantone Color in 25 seconds
Pen Tool a Heart in Adobe Illustrator
#10MinSkills - How to vectorize hand lettering with Illustrator’s Pen tool

About And Its Author |

  1. A flowchart
  2. A Pantone colour matching card
  3. A radar like some AR treasure hunt smartphone app
  4. Eisenhower Matrix or Contour Map
  5. Adobe Illustrator Pen tool

Which is an oxymoron and unfeasible nowadays, due to a net plus no longer being a pair bonding plus, nowadays like it was 15 years ago.

Maybe 15 years ago, what they’re asking for would be practical and suitable but now it’s just ridiculous.

My analogy

Imagine that the nightmare neighbour next door has

  • No name
  • No face
  • No forewarning
  • No police to help you
  • No distinguishing visible features
  • No probabilistic categorical descriptors
  • No diversity monitoring
  • No hate crime monitoring

Consider that the ethical imperative is often not in-line and in conflict with the prosocial imperative.

For example Is it ethical for someone to ghost someone else after pm’ing them, in the grand scheme of things? Are they entitled to do so, if they so please.

Actually yes. But is it prosocial? No.

Consider my second example Is a university student obligated to help another student commit plagarism by helping them out with their coursework, by doing MOST of it for them? Is it ethical if they were to REFUSE to do it.

Actually yes. But is it prosocial? No.

So as you can see, the prosocial imperative is often at conflict and in direct opposition to the ethical imperative.

Nowadays we’ve reached a beauty INVERSION where

Doing the net gain thing or the prosocial thing, can counter-intuitively be counterproductive, as it can cause a red flag, as a reservation of trust

Historical Example Proves Then Isn’t Now

Example 1

So that example

Telling someone a fake secret to see if they’ll gossip and blab it round, to let you know whether you can trust them on it, which ALSO doubles as a way of making them trust you, as they think you consider them a potential close-tie of a friend (rather than a weak tie)

15 years ago that would work, nowadays it doesn’t. 15 years ago, it would be useful around 75-90% of the time Nowadays it’s only useful 20-33% of the time, so it’ll nowadays cause junk data.

It wouldn’t quite cause such a pair bonding or expression of one-way affinity, nowadays, like it would back then.

Example 2

So that’s why I think that MOST self help books on Amazon are outdated by 10-15 years.

Here’s a good example of an outdated self help book, where the blog has enough content for you not to spend any money, in order to see my point

I’m Chris MacLeod. I created in 2006 and am the sole writer behind it.

I studied psychology in university and got a B.A. Honours degree in it in 2003.

So he must have been 21 or older when he got his bachelors degree.

2003 – 21 is 1982

When I remember living in 2003, I was 11 in primary school. I was having speech therapy and couldn’t even tie my laces properly at 11.

I think that his website and book and website is outdated but for me to explain why, I’d have to dissect EVERY chapter and blog article, …

The ENTIRE underlying premise behind the book and its complimentary blog, which is now outdated and redundant, is that a net plus behaviour and a prosocial behaviour is BOTH a pair bonding plus behaviour, for it is both socially acceptable and a grade above mutually beneficial.

Something I see nowadays as false. If you spend a few minutes reading the website, you’ll see what I mean. Would I read that website? …………….. No

ALL that will happen NOWADAYS if you follow the advice given at is that you will be inducing reservations of trust, for newly being perceived to be lacking congruence, being incongruent.

But here’s the thing. You don’t know what each person classifies as prosocial or in-congruent That’s down to each individual person and it varies with each person. You can have a general or feint idea but you can never truly know.

What would of happened if a person committed an off-colour transgression, 15 years ago

  • Do you know what you just did? (as if somehow, you didn’t get the gravitation or sensitivities of the situation)
  • Get their friend to speak to you about it, on their behalf, to give you the 411, in the same week, to talk it out. They’ll pass your message onto them (as implied) after you’ve explained yourself.
  • Ask you to apologise (often straight away)

Such stuff would never happen again today.


Some person who’s younger than me said that my blog explains things in a patchy way.

Related Posts