Before the main event, we talk about the Star Wars sequels for 13 minutes, so skip to 13 minutes if you don't want to hear that. Sorry. 

There are also detours into sex research gone too far, "fun" professors, and other stories.

At the center of it all is a conversation about dating risk: how much weirdness is charming, how much is a red flag, and when a story stops being funny and starts becoming a genuine threat. Cody's date becomes a case study in why bad dating experiences poison trust for everyone else, and why one truly unhinged encounter can make modern dating feel like a minefield.

In this episode:
- Cody's date from hell and the Uber showdown that followed
- What happens when "no chemistry" turns into a full public meltdown
- Police, receipts, and why recording saved the night
- The difference between eccentric, unstable, and actively malicious
- Why boring might be safer but chaos makes better stories
- Star Wars prequels vs. sequels and the death of cinematic sincerity
- What happens when your Big 10 professor brings a Sybian to class

Click here to view the episode transcript.

First, Wes, Cody, and Stony break down a scene from Materialists and the kind of dater who treats romance like a prestige shopping list: height, hairline, age, salary, "boxes," and the offense of being rejected by someone you considered beneath you. It turns into a sharp conversation about ego, entitlement, what people think they "deserve," and why dating can become a brutal mirror for your real market value.

Then, one of the guys tells the story of dating a woman who served time in prison for murder — with a whole side discussion about self-defense, prosecutors, prison, and why exposing yourself to unusual people and experiences can teach you more than a safe dinner date.

The back half is a live workshop on Bumble profiles: what women write, what men respond to, why so many profiles are painfully generic, and why leading with your role on the liver and kidney transplant team may be less sexy than you think. The guys debate humor, originality, filtering, visual imagination, and the difference between saying something harmless and saying something memorable.

Finally, the fellow wrap up with a serious argument about Darth Vader, Qui-Gon Jinn, the Star Wars prequels, and whether having a good take on Episode I makes you more attractive to women.

In this episode:
- Why people are furious to be rejected by someone "below" them
- The difference between standards, delusion, and status panic
- What "deserve" does to your dating life
- What it's like to date a murderer
- Why most dating app bios are boring, anodyne, and useless
- How to make your profile more distinctive without being cringe
- Why "kidney" and "liver" might be bad branding
- Did Obi Wan have an arc?

Click here to view the episode transcript.

They kick things off with a viral clip about a woman holding a baby for the first time and suddenly wanting a huge family, which opens up a bigger conversation about why young adults are so disconnected from kids, family life, and motherhood. From there, they move into the rise of dog culture, whether people are displacing parental instincts onto pets, and why modern life seems designed to keep children out of sight.

Then it turns to dating in New York: Wes talks about the fatigue of constant first dates, why dating apps can make romance feel like cold outreach, and how exhausting it is to keep filtering for red flags without becoming cynical.

Later, they explore a deeper question: how do you evaluate someone early on without turning dating into an interview? That leads to ideas like jigsaw-puzzle dates, escape-room compatibility tests, reading character through stress, and why the best partners probably aren't the ones constantly "creating problems" to see how you react.

Finally, they wrap up with a deep discussion about art vs. engineering brains, poetry skepticism, self-sabotage in relationships, horrifying animal stories, and a serious inquiry into whether pre-date masturbation affects outcomes.

In this episode:

•  Why seeing a baby can suddenly rewire your brain toward family 
•  Dogs, childlessness, and the weird emotional economy of modern cities 
•  Why dating apps feel transactional even when they “work” 
•  Jigsaw slow dating, escape-room dating, and other better ways to test compatibility 
•  Why some people keep choosing the exact kind of person who hurts them 
•  Art, sensitivity, and the costs of feeling everything too deeply 
•  The extremely unscientific pre-date masturbation debate

Click here to view the episode transcript.

The spark is a viral clip of a woman listing her “ideal man" checklist: 7-figure salary, full head of hair, tailored suits, Christian but not too Christian, no tattoos (unless it’s an Ivy League secret-society tattoo), no allergies, and preferably a cat person. The guys break down what’s actually wrong with standards like these. Is it the specificity? The sheer number of filters? The kind of traits being optimized for? Or the deeper issue: mistaking fantasy for strategy?

From there, the conversation widens into mate value, leagues, “deserve,” and the brutal economics of the dating market. How do you tell whether your standards are healthy, ambitious, or just totally disconnected from the evidence of your real life? And what happens when founder-style optimism—great for startups—turns into romantic self-destruction?

Then the episode flips to the other side of delusion: staying too long in the wrong relationship. Wes talks through the “fog of war” problem—when things are good 90% of the time, but the 10% that’s broken is something foundational: religion, kids, long-term vision, or basic compatibility. It’s a conversation about two equal and opposite mistakes: holding out forever for the impossible person, or clinging to something that was never built to last.

Click here to view the episode transcript.

They kick things off with a dispatch from the Love Symposium — a real conference where matchmakers, founders, researchers, and rationalists are trying to solve relationship formation from first principles. 

From there, the conversation turns personal: single life vs. partnered life, how age changes friendships and purpose, and why being alone hits differently once everyone starts building families.

Then they dive into the big one: the "hoe phase." Is sleeping around liberating, damaging, necessary, overrated, or some messy combination of all four? The guys unpack a brutal relationship post — "I've had my fun; now I'm ready to settle down" — and explain why that kind of honesty can still be relationship-ending. Along the way, they debate whether sexual history matters, how much culture lies to young people about consequence-free choices, and why "freedom" almost always comes with a bill later.

It's a wide-ranging episode about trade-offs, maturity, intimacy, and the difference between what feels good now and what builds a good life later — with a few very handsome detours along the way.

Click here to view the episode transcript.

Is your job "noble," or are you just keeping the machine running? The fellas break down honor in work, the difference between creating value vs. capturing value, and why even invisible jobs can make the world meaningfully better.

Then it gets personal" beauty, environment, and why modern life makes people feel trapped in politics, status games, and performative identities  — when the real move is building a life you can control.

From there: dating discourse whiplash. A viral "shooting my shot" post (5'5", 147 lbs.) sparks debate and Cody's take that "makeup is immoral."

Finally, they tackle a classic modern dilemma: approaching someone in public. Is following women around in public creepy, romantic, or just socially uncalibrated? You'll hear a full-on argument about truth vs. framing, "plausible deniability," and whether you should ever admit the awkward parts up front  — or save the meet-cute backstory for date six.

They close with a hot take post defending dating apps, and a colder reality check: apps aren't neutral tools  — misaligned incentives change everything.

Click here to view the episode transcript.

Sh*t tests: Are they harmless vetting? Manipulative gotchas? Or just the unavoidable reality of dating rituals? Cody argues for authenticity and "good faith," Wes shrugs, and Stony introduces his "fart test" strategy.

Later, the conversation moves to a very modern first-date trap: politics. Why some people bring it up like an unwinnable test, how "vetting" can turn into fighting, and why the guys think the best move is often to opt out of the whole performative game.

Finally, they dig into the nightmare fuel that is the Tea App and "Are We Dating the Same Guy?"-style communities  — crowdsourced dating reviews where you might have a profile you've never seen, written by someone who didn't like you. Wes tells a story about discovering himself in one of these groups and what happens when you try to "set the record straight."

Prepare to get handsome.

Click here to view the episode transcript.

The fellas break down "radio silence" before a first date, why modern dating feel scriptless, why high-bandwidth communication beats endless texting, and the simple confirmation move that keeps you from getting ghosted.

When a guy asks a woman her weight and calls her "hefty," where's the line between honesty, tact, and being an idiot? Plus: why first impressions can be wildly misleading, the case for giving things a little more runway, and Stony's coin-flip experiment.

Finally, the conversation widens out to the big stuff: money, housing, status, height, and why dating feels harder than it used to. The guys argue for playing Moneyball(s) with your love life  — stop competing where you can't win, lean in to your unique "market alpha," and go where real connection actually happens.

Prepare to get handsome.

Click here to view the episode transcript.

Click here to view the episode transcript.