Fellow travelers in this area of the blogosphere might be familiar with a guy named Justin, who runs the blog The Truth Shall Set You Free and occasionally comments at Elusive Wapiti’s, Anakin Niceguy’s, Φ’s, and The Spearhead. Justin is opposed to game, denouncing it as “evil and stupid” and claiming it fosters a “destructive” worldview. Thursday described him as a “hyper-moralist” on the spectrum of game detractors:
Hyper-Moralists – Don’t like the fact that the main discoverers and theorists of game are almost all libertines and/or nihlists. They also don’t like that game contains techniques for getting women to have premarital/extramarital sex, and that it seems too consciously manipulative.
In any case, I’m not interested in debating Justin or dissecting his arguments, as trying to have a debate with individuals like him is like trying to convince an Orthodox Jew to accept Jesus Christ as his personal savior. You might as well ram your head into the wall. However, I recently caught Justin in a little lie that has all but destroyed his credibility on this topic, so I’m calling him out on his flagrant dishonesty.
Justin wrote this over at Biblical Manhood:
E.W. [Elusive Wapiti] just did a post responding to a question from a Gamer about if he were unfortunate enough to have a daughter. That is the fruit if Game, to poison your outlook on women to the point where you would regret your own daughter’s birth.
There is just a teeny tiny problem with the statement above: it is completely wrong. Not subjectively wrong, but objectively “the sun rises in the east and sets in the west” wrong. The post that he’s talking about is “Mailbag: Gusto Hat Eine Frage,” published at The Spearhead last week. Elusive Wapiti was responding to reader Gusto who wrote this:
If I’m unfortunate enough to father a girl, what should I do to make sure she grows up with the right attitude?
Those are the only words from Gusto that Wapiti had in his post. Take a look at this sentence, folks. Is there any way to divine that Gusto practiced game from that one line, or that he even knows what game is? If your answer is “yes,” get me the name of your dealer so I can know what brain-damaging drugs you’ve been abusing in your free time. There is no evidence, none, that game had anything at all to do with Gusto’s question. Gusto himself left two comments on the post, one in which he defends himself against Justin’s assertion that he shouldn’t have kids and mentions he is a high-functioning autistic, and another in which he thanks Wapiti for answering his question. In neither comment is game mentioned or even hinted at, and since Gusto says he is autistic and implied he has difficulty understanding people in his first comment, I am confident in saying that he most likely does not practice game.
Additionally, while game is a frequent topic of conversation at the virtual Algonquin Round Table that is The Spearhead, Elusive Wapiti did not discuss, make reference to, or mention it in his post once. Not once. Not only that, game did not come up as a topic in the comments at all. Discounting the unrelated sidebar, searching for “game” in the post using Google Chrome’s word-finder feature turns up a grand total of three usages, listed below.
One comment from Jabherwochie:
The two Demaines continue to work closely together and have many joint works of both mathematics and art,[13] including three pieces of mathematical origami in the permanent collection of the Museum of Modern Art, New York;[14] their joint mathematical works focus primarily on the mathematics of folding and unfolding objects out of flat materials such as paper and on the computational complexity of games and puzzles.
One from Thursday:
As me and my teacher friends say, the kids just want to fuck and play videogames.
And one from Eumaios, quoting the above Thursday comment verbatim.
Unless you’re like Russell Crowe in A Beautiful Mind and able to divine secret messages from completely innocuous passages of text, there is no way to claim that ANY of the above statements have ANYTHING to do with game, consergame, seduction, or whatever you want to call the science of winning a woman’s sexual and romantic interest.
So what can we ascertain about our friend Justin from his tiny little fib here? There are two possible conclusions:
- Justin is a liar who has no qualms with twisting the words of others in order to libel his opponents.
- Justin is a moron who can’t read.
If you case his blog for a bit, you’ll find that Justin clearly isn’t stupid – in fact, he’s well informed and correct on a number of topics. Therefore, we’ll have to go with option number one.
Now, pardon me if I get this wrong, but isn’t there a Biblical commandment that forbids lying? “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor?” A God-fearing man such as Justin ought to know this. I wouldn’t make a huge deal out of this, but Justin is one of those hypocrites who wraps his arguments against game in a film of moral superiority. He even had the balls to call me a “moral degenerate.” And here he is, violating the very codes he is supposed to live his life by. I have no quarrel with the religious, but people who break the moral laws they use to attack me and my compadres just piss me off.
I never claimed to be a saint or even that good of a man, but I strive to be as honest as I can be. I despise liars and hypocrites, and if I had ever believed in God, my conception of hell would be something akin to Dante’s, with the aforementioned groups occupying prime real estate just above Satan’s chambers. If people oppose game, that’s their business, but I’ll not tolerate them lying to my face in a transparent, intelligence-insulting fashion. In his statement above, Justin has revealed himself to be a man lacking in both integrity and intellectual gravitas. Keep this post in mind the next time you catch him spewing his empty moral platitudes and sterotypical shaming language insults around the blogosphere.
You tangled with the wrong blogger, holmes. Now feel the pain.
{ 22 comments… read them below or add one }
A man who has any respect for a woman deserves to be screwed over by her.
Seriously,
Why should a man play nice? What is in it for him?
A lifetime of servitude, threats, manipulation, overwork and lack of respect.. for a rapidly aging pussy that won’t put out and will destroy your happiness.
Since you linked to one of EW’s conversations to skewer Justin, I’ll reiterate one of my recent cynical thoughts about game: it’s a cultural hack that cannot really be maintained. Eventually, most practitioners of game will reveal their true nature to a woman. It’s inevitable and unavoidable unless the man wears himself paranoid and thin maintaining the charade.
And that’s all it is, a charade.
God help these suckers who think that they can live with a woman for 20 years without her getting wise to them. When she does, I think it stands to reason that unless they happened to marry a good woman the wrath she’ll unleash on them will be a lot worse than if she knew what she was really getting.
“God help these suckers who think that they can live with a woman for 20 years.”
Edited that last line for excessive word usage. Much clearer now.
Mike, you are assuming that a man would want to spend 20 years with a woman. The reality is that western women are not worth that investment of time.
As for the charade, to quote Shakespeare: “Life is a stage.”
Finally, Ferd, you are a moral degenerate, but then I have yet to meet an honest man that wasn’t.
Sorry, it’s option Two. Justin is in fact a moron who isn’t reading clearly. Perhaps not organically moronic, but functionally. Someone so wrapped up in their own agenda that they seize on any pretext to expound it. Who can’t listen to what anyone else is actually saying because they’re so busy planning out what to say next. Happens all the time.
It’s a complete waste of time trying to carry on an intelligent conversation with such people, because communication is always a one-way street for them. Don’t judge, don’t argue; just dismiss and discard.
I’m not so certain of this. The type of women who respond to LTR Game are not going to want to be with weak men, period. I think that in many cases what happens is that men start out strong and then get comfortable and turn out to be pussies. And many women despise that. There was a very interesting comment on the rape fantasy thread at the Spearhead earlier today by a quite candid woman who basically, in a longish comment, confirmed that LTR game works 100%.
That’s a red herring. Whether or not a western woman is worth that time is immaterial to the point that no woman, of any nationality, will be happy when she finds out that she’s been committed to a charlatan.
No, its not Mike. The reality is that the more men wake up, and the ones that women find attractive are the ones that are the most aware, the less they are likely to commit to a 20 year relationship with a woman. Period.
Although I agree that when a man stops gaming his wife, he’s in for deep shit, the reality is most men go that route anyway in marriage and end up in a living hell. At least a guy that understands game understands what he needs to do to stay married.
If what you are saying is accurate, than people are unable to change their behavior, which means all of therapy and psychology is an utter waste, so too are any religious couple retreats that encourage people to change their attitudes to each other.
You see game as a ruse, when it is about the man changing his behavior and understanding how to change and maintain attraction.
One more thing, Mike.
If what you posit is true, than no man can be happy married to any woman because they are in fact charlatans too. They use make up to deceive, they act one way single and another married. The stop dressing to appeal to their husband.
The man quickly realizes he bought something that is only going to ge tworse with time, not better.
Who is the deceiver? By your logic, every man should be enraged after 20 years of marriage.
The type of men who are sufficiently strong to actually make LTR Game work with any degree of elegance are also already strong, and thus need only a few pointers, not a makeover.
Calvin was correct in many respects when he said that the will is slave to one’s nature, after all, even if he wasn’t quite so right about that in relation to God.
People are able to change their behavior, but not what they are by their own will. In fact, the religious retreats, at least the Christian ones, assume that sort of transformation. They assume that they can appeal to two saved individuals to change their behavior to align more with the new nature they’ve been given by God. The most they can do is rebuke that behavior, not change it, and they’d be the first to tell you that.
I never claimed that most men are happy with those things in the long run either. I merely scoff at the idea that a relationship built on game, wherein the man is not using it merely to refine his already fairly strong nature in a way pleasing to women, will last rather than likely end explosively.
http://religionnewsblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/who-is-allowed-to-have-nukes-in-mid.html
The Justin you mention has serious “Jew issues”. He also refers to Iran as the Middle East’s largest democracy, presumably in a laudatory context.
His cleverness is used primarily in the pursuit of deceit.
Mike T:
Hey man, he started it. I’m only pointing out the massive disconnect between his claims and the truth.
The thing with game is that if you keep up the attitudes and actions of it, they eventually fuse into your personality. Our identities are in flux, and always changing as a result of our life experiences – you’re a different person now then you were ten, five years ago, and so am I. A man who successfully implements game in his personal life eventually alters his identity to the point where it is second nature, like any other learned talent or habit. To reuse that Nietzschean cliche, if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes into you.
I agree that making long-term relationships work is more complicated then “neg her thrice daily, pass four out of every five shit tests, and bask in the free blowjobs,” but the underlying principles are the same.
This is an interesting topic I may address on the blog later.
If I were a hyper-moralist, and I’m not, I would take the Kantian line and claim that Gaming girls treats them as a mere means.
By attempting to “override” their reason with smooth talk and carefully planned nonsense, Game intends on using the person simply for their sex with no regard for their inherent moral value.
I like Kant, I really do . . .
But since I don’t really buy the metaphysical in-itself nonsense, and I like getting my dick wet, I’m going to side with this argument instead:
She has free will. If she’s in the bar, she knows the deal. She’s not there for the economically priced drinks, or the music only an audiophile would love. Unless you’re depriving her of free will (which I kind-of do every time I play $20 worth of Fear Factory on the juke box) then she’s complicit in the Game by not telling you to choke on a cock the moment you try to approach/open her.
I’ll reiterate one of my recent cynical thoughts about game: it’s a cultural hack that cannot really be maintained.
Once again, demonstrating that it takes men to restrain women. If males still held political dominance “game” would be highly circumscribed, as game only works to the detriment of other men. A world of unrestrained game is one where every single aspect of existence creates a loser for every winner.
Oh, that was the on that thread? Man I forgot about that, I thought that the point was left clear enough.
@Asher
Game is just a real analysis of what atracts women and what are the true traits of manhood, with or without morality. What makes a man be a man? The fact is that women and men have different answer for that, but since women LIE about it we just need to learn it of somewhere. Hint: We want to be men that have hot sex with women.
There’s a post about in on this blog, and Ferdinand, really: You take the bother of define what is game in your blog and don’t bother to stick it on the front of it? The amount of times when that can be linked is huge.
http://fbardamu.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/the-fundamentals-of-game/
Seriously man, just put in on the front. At least corroboration of the stupidity would be faster.
@Gx1080
Um, your last comment was quite vague, but I’m assuming you think i deny the factual validity of game. I do not. I’m simply pointing out that a world of unrestrained game is a world of complete social chaos. In the past, there were rules that men, to the extent possible, held other men to follow, namely, that everyone only games one woman.
Given that the ability to game is far vaster than targets with which to run game on, a world of unconstrained game is a world were every single aspect of experience is a loser for every winner. In the animal world, and we are animals, biological reproduction is largely a zero-sum game. And game is part of that biological world.
I’m a hyper-moralist in the sense that I believe that people need morality to survive. But my concept of morality is far different than the game critics that you have described. We shouldn’t be moral for God’s sake or for the sake of society, we should be moral because our own lives will benefit from it.
I’m not against pre-marital sex. I’m against sex where one is indifferent to the values and merits of one’s partner; and some (but certainly not all) figures in the Community are indifferent to the attributes of a woman so long as she meets the threshold of sexual attractiveness.
Ayn Rand puts it better than I could: “Morality, to you, is a phantom scarecrow made of duty, of boredom, of punishment, of pain, a cross-breed between the first schoolteacher of your past and the tax collector of your present, a scarecrow standing in a barren field, waving a stick to chase away your pleasures—and pleasure, to you, is a liquor-soggy brain, a mindless slut, the stupor of a moron who stakes his cash on some animal’s race, since pleasure cannot be moral.”
thats very sad…
Wait, aren’t you the guy who said if you had a daughter, you would marry her to a good Mormon boy? What a hypocrite you are.
You admit that men like you are scumbags and you wouldn’t want your own daughter to have anything to do with you. Yet, you persist in your self appointed role as Prophet of the Cult of Game in spreading its poisonous ideas as far and wide as you can.
Dude, until you can answer the question seriously of what you will do with a daughter, you have earned the title of moral degenerate, which you apply by your own admission.
Oh, and to address your primary claim, that I lied. That is not true. I may have been mistaken in characterizing the questioner as a Gamer, but no lie was involved. As the title of my blog indicates, I hold truth in high regard. Your character attack on me is unwarranted, unbalanced, and unjust.
{ 3 trackbacks }