The general contention around this ‘sphere is that the biggest reason certain women hate and fear game is because it allows men to turn the traditional alpha-beta-omega hierarchy of sexual attractiveness on its head. When men can aspire to be alphas, or just raise themselves out of their station in life period, a fundamental pillar of female power is toppled. Now, Snark has written a great post on this subject:
There is a certain type of woman who likes to ascribe men and women to ‘leagues’, and believes that men should not try to rise out of their ‘league’ and associate with women in higher ‘leagues’. Much like white supremacists, who believe that different races of people shouldn’t associate with each other.
This is what her worldview is based around: the stratification of people into different levels of social and sexual hierarchy.
Game shits all over that, and allows men to climb up, down and all over the social and sexual hierarchy, with the consent and blessings of the women whom they attract, who would otherwise have been out of their ‘league’.
Women like this will try to defend this ‘league’ hierarchy – in which 90% of women are eligible for 10% of men, and the rest can simply starve – at all costs. Because it shatters her worldview to think otherwise.
The connection of Game with rape is just a convenience. The term ‘rape’ is emotionally-charged. Who doesn’t oppose rape? So she conflates Game with rape, to preserve a hierarchy system which benefits her and excludes the majority of men.
You MUST read the whole thing.
When I read over a year ago at Whiskey’s that women tend to prefer rigid, hierarchal societies, I had no clue how right he was:
Which points to the big difference in preferred social structures between men and at least as indicated by the vampire novels, young women. Men like “flat” social hierarchies, where hard work, leadership, and talent combined can give them opportunities to be part of a “winning team” that expands their own social network. Just as Grant and Sherman both protected each other politically, when each was at a low ebb, so too do the preferred social hierarchies of men protect against losing (since to move ahead takes risk). Achievement is measured in concrete goals accomplished — enemy cities taken, armies destroyed, supplies destroyed or rendered useless. In peacetime, games won, or items sold, or buildings constructed. All of which require cooperation, trust, and delegation of duties, indeed specialization, to accomplish anything big and worthwhile.
Now, there is a huge mis-match in the relationship market, and nothing speaks more to it than the Vampire novels. Young women want the hunkiest of hunks, natural of course, but also a very hierarchical society where losers and winners have already been picked, and no one changes out of their status, ever. It is a society frozen in Amber, fixed with as the Wall Street Journal describes, “atavism” of a backward, feudal nature. Not just in the original, Bram Stoker version of Dracula, but all the updated versions, from the Sookie Stackhouse series to the Laurel K. Hamilton novels, feature very feudalistic societies made up of “Kings” and “Queens” who “run things” like a combination of the Borgias mixed with the Sopranos mixed with South American Drug lords, with a supernatural twist. Societies made for pretty young women, but not for ambitious young men.
The reality of the anti-game, misandrist movement is that they want us men to be enslaved, to be trapped in whatever societal position we occupy, to “know our place” and to not aspire to be successful or great. If you’re one of the sexual haves, cool – if you’re a have-not, tough shit. It’s like I said before – men who can’t get laid, or have difficulty doing so, are little more than vermin to these scum. As Snark said, game is the nuclear bomb that is vaporizing the old order of supplicating courtship. The cat’s out of the bag, and the revolution is marching on in spite of the old order’s protestations. The times are a-changin’ all right.
{ 85 comments… read them below or add one }
Sexual Calvinism.
The saved are already chosen, and there is nothing that the have-nots may do to change things.
This is the orthodox system. Game allows men to run circles around it; to get into ‘heaven’ so to speak, without having been chosen by those who believe they can ‘play God’ …
On the quoted section from Whiskey – yes, Kings and Queens, feudal societies, everyone shall know their place.
And every woman believes that she is a Queen.
We must recognise this: ‘leagues’ only really apply to men. For women, no man is ‘above’ her, for they are all Queens. There are only leagues BELOW her, which the large peasant class occupies. The underclass, expected to run and maintain society but never bother the female members of the aristocracy (all women). Women are ENTITLED to expect everything from men – given that men are of lower status – without men having any entitlements to anything from women. Men from lower leagues shouldn’t even LOOK at women, no matter how much flesh they show – that is for ALPHA EYES ONLY.
Kudos for the ‘trackback’.
“Sexual Calvinism”…I like that.
Reminds me of that “secret society” piece I’ve seen floating around the Mansphere (which I can’t find now) which illustrates the world most women inhabit and which far fewer men do.
I’m positive Game is misused and misinterpreted the world over, and I shy away from even calling it “Game” any more. Game, viewed correctly, is “enlightenment” and the sham that is the wool womankind has been allowed to pull over male dupedom in recent times is lifted through this enlightenment.
I think what women generally resent is that Game allows men to see.
Good piece. Knowledge often progresses in leaps, when some resistance is encountered, pushed against for a while, and suddenly overcome like a dam breaking.
I’m tempted to thank the recent alignment of Lady Raine, Denise Romano and Twilight 2 as they have beautifully focused our minds on women’s sexual dystopia and the attempts to protect it from unworthy men.
Denise, you insane crazy femtard, I salute you for services rendered to the advance of the MRA intellectual canon!
FB,
I think one of the things that people need to wake up to is that there is an inherent issue of justice here. The idea that alpha males can go around fucking with impunity, including the women of beta men, is a very serious issue of justice as it is an infringement on the reciprocal duty to betas that society owes them in exchange for their productivity and participation in civilization.
The easiest rectification is the restoration of provocation and justifiable homicide as legal defenses. If a beta male catches an alpha screwing his fiance or wife, the system should recognize no “right of self-defense” in the alpha male and consider his actions a legitimate provocation to homicide by the aggrieved beta.
I suppose I should qualify that. It should not be a license to commit 1st degree murder, but I would argue that if the homicide happens within 24 hours, without the beta male sleeping on it, that it should be regarded as a form of “in the heat of passion” thinking or temporary, but human, insanity.
The problem with the society that the Feminazis want is that is completely unfit for civilization and that Wester civilization is superior BECAUSE IT DID EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.
the greatest lie put forth by the feminists was that women are the prize, that must be pursued. the in demand are the prize…and watch how women will fight and backstab over them.
Murdering only the alpha and leaving the cheating skank breathing is definitely absolving the woman of repsonsibility for her actions and taking a “blame the man” stance. Not that I advocate murder, generally speaking.
Interesting.
Chuck Ross has a post up today over at The Spearhead about Roy Baumeister’s views, which are that men actually prefer more hierarchy than women do because men tend to also prefer larger, shallower groups, while women prefer smaller, deeper groups.
Interesting stuff.
Thanks for the link, Ferdinand!
You can see female preference for “already a winner” guys in places other than Vampire stuff. Its in almost every Lifetime movie, or in say, “Gilmore Girls,” which is quite fascinating if you look at the female dynamics. Sex and the City applies, but also the popularity of “Gossip Girl” and all the rich-girl-rich-boy stuff.
There’s a couple of scenes out of Gilmore Girls (women watch this stuff like crazy, so it pays to analyze it despite the estrogen poisoning) that bear mentioning:
1. The daughter, at Yale, has a sort-of-friends-maybe-not relationship with a tall, hunky, but scholarship guy whose family owns a restaurant, and is sort of Italian. She’s pursued by a snotty, often drunk, spoiled, rich kid who is heir to a newspaper fortune, raised at boarding schools, with obnoxious rich friends who humiliate the first guy over his lack of money/wealth. The girl promptly screws the rich guy afterwards.
BECAUSE SHE GOT OFF ON THE HUMILIATION. An episode, btw, written by the female series creator. Women LOVED that episode, and found it very romantic. They found the scholarship guy lacking because he was born to the wrong family.
2. Same dynamic, with the single mother (who had her kid at 16), who cheats on her blue-collar fiancee with rich guy who abandoned her and her daughter, now that he suddenly inherited millions. Again written by a woman, the series creator, and LOVED by the female fans.
In both cases it was the POWER that the money gave, not the money itself.
This is btw why Obama positions himself as “King” and it makes him more popular with women and less popular with men (who hate arrogance in leaders and rigid hierarchies).
You think Team Obama know enough about this stuff to position him as “king”? He’s so repellantly beta that it’s hard to believe they wouldn’t have addressed that first – if they knew these things. I think Obama’s posturing is far more like the “dwarf on a mountain” effect.
The power of his position, and the shameless rockstar branding of him, will help is popularity with the women but I’d assumed he was popular more as a Renfield than an Alpha.
What I advocate is something akin to normalizing the way that Daniel Sickles got off for taking the life of the man cuckolding him. I fully support legal sanctions for adultery as well, but I think one of the keys to controlling men, especially alphas, in this type of case is to make them clearly the legal inferior to the man they are injuring.
If a man improves his standing in life, he can move up the heirarchy. “Game” is not the way to do this. “Game” was created in order to penetrate the bar and club scene of the United States and pick up as many women as possible within that scene. When men swashbuckle or swagger into a club dressed like – whatever, exuding (false) confidence and approaching women, getting them to laugh or whatever, this may and often does result in women sleeping with those men. However, once the women get to know those men, what types of jobs they have, what sort of income they earn, what sort of ‘hood they live in, what sort of hobbies they have, and their overly lifestyle and real place in the heirarchy, the women lose interest.
Now IF on the otherhand, some of those men go on to write books, make money, become famous – they have genuinely moved up the heirarchy and they will find that not only will the same women be willing to sleep with them for one night, some of them may even be willing to mate with them for years, even a lifetime (but our culture doesn’t do lifetime anymore, so highly doubtful).
There is a BIG difference between these two scenarios and much has been written about how PUA gurus want to KEEP IT THAT WAY.
If one truly wants to rise up the heirarchy there can be no better way than to, well, ACTUALLY MOVE UP IN THE HEIRARCHY.
Otherwise it’s ridiculous for dude to think just because he pulls off one type of persona in the club, that those women are going to desire him for more than a week.
What are you doing with your life and what are you bringing to the table besides a d*ck, which women can get anywhere at anytime?
Ah, but the point is that there are tons and tons of men who have great jobs, are in good shape, and so on and so are fine in terms of the “economic hierarchy”, but still do very poorly with women. They can benefit from Game. You’re also assuming that Game is only useful for PUAs in bars and clubs, which is also false. A man can learn a lot from Game to improve his interactions with women in any setting, keeping in mind that the kind of Game you run in Starbucks or at the bookstore is very different from the kind of Game you run at a club. Yes, the PUA gurus are focused on clubs and bars, but Game is bigger than that.
Yeah sure, if a man is already higher beta in terms of education, career, looks and position in life, learn some “game” to give you that edge in meeting women.
Othewise it’s wiser to get your act together first, make something of yourself, AND THEN learn “game”.
No amount of one night stands is going to make any of those women want to spend a few years of her time with you if you have nothing else to offer.
Excellent post as usual, but I gotta delurk to complain about the new black-on-brown text scheme. It’s impossible to read — can you at least lighten the background up a few notches?
Second. This new color scheme fills me with rage.
What you have to offer a woman worth keeping around is your whole person. If you have to be upper class to keep a woman, it’s not you that is keeping her with you, but your money.
Material status differences are relative. If you pick up a girl who is a waitress making <$20k a year and you make $50k a year, you're automatically higher status than her monetarily if you have your finances together.
Mike T:
Agree 100%. Thing is, that’s not the issue here. The misandrist faction WANTS alphas to continue to be able to do this while denying betas the ability to do the same. It amounts to robbing the poor to give to the rich.
But isn’t “game” supposed to give you an “edge” and put you “in league” with Alphas, allowing you to compete with them on an even keel?
If so, what is the problem?
Othewise it’s just a case of “competition anxiety”.
Regarding the $20K waitress. Who says she’s obliged to stay with the $50K man if a $100K man shows interest in her?
Great post! I never really considered the way women and men have completely differing conceptions of social hierarchy. In many ways women would completely support a form of rigid caste system, like the one in India, which is horribly oppressive.
@Krauser, Mike T: Legalizing killing in the cases of pilfered wives would be a step in the right direction. The Jews, one of the greatest patriarchal societies in history had this law. I think they were on to something.
Leviticus 20:10
The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death.
“The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death.”
Where does Tiger fit in to all of this?
What is funny is that feminism has greatly widened the gap between :
a) Women who are 28 vs. women who are 36 (just an 8-year difference).
b) Women with an attractive BMI vs. a woman just 20 pounds overweight (a seemingly small difference in percentage terms).
Marriage masked these differences and made them seem small (just like marriage masked the difference between alpha and beta males). Feminism has exposed these gaps for being the large chasms they really are.
I soon expect a civil war among women. Young and hot vs. cougars. Attractive vs. overweight. High income single female taxpayer vs. single moms drawing from the state.
There are feminists on record proudly saying that the male population should be reduced to 10% of what it currently is. Note how genocide can be rationalized when the climate to say it exists.
If I could find the cite, I would post it.
“If I could find the cite, I would post it.”
FemX says that type of thing all the time.
“What is funny is that feminism has greatly widened the gap between…”
Gotta disagree. All the women in this list get or have gotten alpha cock. Most of the women who are tortured by knowing that they’re a disposable pleasure for these guys wouldn’t even have tasted alpha in the past. They really want it all; commitment and sex from an alpha but if they aren’t getting sex or a commitment, they’ll still long for the sex. Once they get it they feel even worse because they don’t have the commitment, but hey, life’s funny like that.
TFH,
For every genocide in history, the climate to say that sort of thing had to be created before enough INDIFFERENCE existed among the majority of the population, for a SMALL number of people to carry out the killing and for nobody to stop them.
For instance, the Rwandan genocide of 1994 had the greatest participation, in terms of who did the killing, out of any 20th century genocide – only 8% of the population ever killed anyone.
The rest, simply didn’t care enough to try to stop it.
The percentage of Germans who actually engaged in slaughtering Jews is very low – something like 2%-4%.
THAT IS ALL THAT IS NEEDED. The point being, that the other 96%-98%, had been made so indifferent towards the plight of the Jews, through a ceaseless bombardment of anti-Semitic propaganda, that they were (apart from the odd individual here and there) not willing to lift a finger to prevent the genocide.
Compare this to our present situation. Men could conceivably be dehumanised to the extent that genocide becomes possible, perpetrated by a relatively small number of radical feminists.
However, I am not so pessimistic, on this particular issue, because men are an enormous minority – in fact, at 49% of the population, it’s difficult to be larger a minority than we are!
This doesn’t rule out other, smaller-scale atrocities from happening, though.
It’s simply pragmatism that they are seeking other strategies. Men would put up quite the fight, as things currently stand – and almost certainly emerge victorious. To attempt to destroy all men currently, would be more like Hitler’s march into the Soviet Union than the Holocaust.
When the “sexual socialism” argument broke on blogs in this circle a few months ago–i.e., the idea that leftists are hypocritical for supporting economic leveling while vehemently opposing sexual leveling, instead supporting the current sexual marketplace which resembles the worst form of unbridled capitalism–I was browsing a message board populated mainly by leftists and saw someone attempt to make this argument.
Of course, the leftists bristled at the suggestion. “Don’t be ridiculous; it’s totally different, you can’t have sexual redistributionism,” they said. “Everyone has a right to basic human needs like health care, education, a living wage, but no one has a right to someone else’s body. The notion that they might is positively evil, a throwback to the days when women were treated like chattel,” etc. Now, obviously, leftists, who support economic redistribution, believe that people DO have rights to the fruits of other people’s labor, which isn’t that much better than having rights to another’s body IMO. But leftists will never see it that way.
I wasn’t able to find it, but I remember Roissy writing about how if every woman on the planet became a 10, that would raise the standards of men for at least 50 years because men are biologically programmed to like what they like. So a planet of 10s would be heaven to men. According to him, the same principles would apply to women and men with game. Women are programmed to like what they like, so if every guy on the planet had solid game, that wouldn’t raise women’s standards for at least 50 years. So really, men knowing game is good for men AND women.
The feudal system where 90% of women compete for 10% of men doesn’t really work for women because many are either going to be turned away by alphas or be an alpha’s #3 or #4 (or even lower) girl. If every man is an alpha, every woman goes away satisfied.
I wonder if a “hierarchical” model reflects the views of women–as More Liberal BS noted, a hierarchy implies the ability of men to move up and down in status; this runs contrary to snark’s observation that women are greatly opposed to men “moving outside their league” (moving outside the boundaries of their status level). I think a more accurate description might be a caste model, with men restricted to a particular caste (Alpha, Beta, Omega, etc.) from the viewpoint of women. From a caste model, Game represents a repudiation of established boundaries–much as when dalits of Hinduism convert to Buddhism. It would explain the virulent reaction to Game from feminists.
It’s not a perfect model, but I think it’s a helpful image to contemplate.
India is already a model for sex-selective abortions. The same could be accomplished in the West, but reversed. For women that want to have boys, and lets face it, society does need some, they would have to mate specifically with Alpha males. Only the male offspring of Alpha men would be born. Girl children could be born of either sex, but again, the preference there would be Alpha. We would be looking at a gradual weeding out of the beta gene pool altogether.
More Liberal –
I can say I have personally seen MANY men who lack money, power, and so on. The stereotypical bicycle messenger, part time guitarist, drug addict, pulling EXTREMELY HOT WOMEN who are accountants, lawyers, doctors, nurses, psychologists, and the like.
Game is like a rise in money to millionaire plus status. I know guys who pull in close to 200K a year, and don’t get a look from a woman, and they are in decent shape too. Game allows even a guy in a drudgery cubicle job to pull amazingly hot women. Its true you can’t be “Jim from the Office” but you can be a total idiot forklift driver (as in “Extract”) and part-time guitarist and pull in all sorts of very hot, higher status (on the surface) professional women.
What these guys did was play the “bad boy rake” whose “real identity” was the guitarist, a bet on rockstar status just around the corner, not the true reality of cubicle drone work, etc. I know personally two guys who pulled part-time musician status coupled with low-pay/status blue collar jobs into marriage with gals who were at least 9.8 and professionals (lawyer, accountant).
And I’ve know MANY women who are married or in LTR relationships with much younger men, and I know MANY women who are the sole breadwinners in their relationships and the men do ZERO housework. The point is?
I’ve nothing against “game”. The side of me that is fascinated by new-age philosophy and pseudo or soft-sciences like psychology, NLP and EFT can devote a few hours a week in research of the same.
What I thought he was going to say:
Game is like rape because rape is the way that a man of the lowest status, even the most worthless omega, can gain sexual access to any woman, even a woman of the highest status. Game can do the same thing by a different method. Rape is the physical method, and game is the social / psychological method, for a man to “cheat” and climb to the “top rung of the ladder” where women consider that he doesn’t belong.
This is basically the Raine/Romano view — men are using Game to bat “above their league”, which makes it akin to rape — i.e., they are “cheating” the hierarchy-detection-system of women, which R&R consider to be fraud, and therefore the consent given is invalid = rape.
It takes only a small percentage of men (10-20%) to learn just a Moderate level of Game (defined by me elsewhere) to totally disrupt the sexual marketplace.
We will be there in a few years. Less than 10 years.
Novaseeker is right, and I will add that I have never seen a woman who has higher than a 6 in looks be stridently opposed to Game. The UG faction knows that a man with Game can aim higher than THEM, leaving them with shrunken prospects.
The thing is, a woman has no ability to tell which man learned Game, vs. which man was naturally charming. Hence, any attempt to use the legal system to halt Game will actually not ensnare Game practitioners, but will only ensnare hapless Betas. This will create hundreds of Sodinis, while men with Game will go about their lives unscathed.
Whiskey is correct. I have mentioned many times that Moderate Game Competence is worth $2 Million. for all intents and purposes. Plus, no one can tax your Game, steal your Game, sue you for it, or swindle you out of it.
“It takes only a small percentage of men (10-20%) to learn just a Moderate level of Game (defined by me elsewhere) to totally disrupt the sexual marketplace.”
But if Indian style sex selective abortions are put in place (in the reverse manner), and only male babies born of Alpha seed are allowed to see the light of day………..
But if Indian style sex selective abortions are put in place (in the reverse manner), and only male babies born of Alpha seed are allowed to see the light of day………..
That is quite a misguided statement :
1) China does a lot more sex-selective aboritons than India, due to their one-child rule.
2) You seem to think that sex-selective abortion is imminent in the US
3) You further seem to think that babies go from birth to adulthood immediately.
So your statement has nothing to do with anything for the forseeable future.
Regarding the imminency of such a scenario, there are feminists on record proudly saying that the male population should be reduced to 10% of what it currently is.
Othewise it’s wiser to get your act together first, make something of yourself, AND THEN learn “gameâ€.
The two best guys with women I have ever met were basically barely employable bums. You need almost nothing of substance to do extremely well with women.
The two best guys with women I have ever met were basically barely employable bums. You need almost nothing of substance to do extremely well with women.
Indeed. It is so contrarian that many *men* get visibly angry when this fact is presented to them.
Which says a lot about the wrongheadedness of those who place women on pedestals.
“The two best guys with women I have ever met were basically barely employable bums.”
Yeah but were they hot?
Natural alphas in the looks or sex appeal departments get a pass.
They may also have been incredible in bed.
P Ray said…
I think the reason why females prefer stratified society is because in a stratified society you don’t make the mistake of shunning or putting down somebody who can rise up. You are always keeping your option open to work upwards, to the correct people.
Add that to the fact that women see themselves as always right, plus the idea that they can do no wrong.
Have you tried to get a woman to apologise _sincerely_?
They become the ultimate losers, when they think that every guy not up to their standards is a “loser”, for the very fact that the guys they see as “winners” are not going to be the guys that could give a rat’s ass about them in the future when the girl has outlived her utility of social proof and sex.
Then again, given the way they’ve treated guys who would have behaved properly with them, maybe they deserve the players.
Hermes,
Yesterday was one of my greatest days of the few past months:
A socialist that I am constantly discussing with, complained about the high taxes.
BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA…
Another socialist to whom I opened up the idea:
Look, if the working class is getting its wealth distributed to the society then, the women also need their wealth distributed.
“but that is wrong”…
Wrong my ass.
If society does not provide me with what I want, why should I provide society with what it wants. No, free healthcare, free childcare are not needs, they are “wants”.
Liberal BS,
However, once the women get to know those men, what types of jobs they have, what sort of income they earn, what sort of ‘hood they live in, what sort of hobbies they have, and their overly lifestyle and real place in the heirarchy, the women lose interest.
And the point is?
The man already got what he wanted.
Shit would I care if she lost interest. She would be interested anyway in a few years, when I would have no more interest.
Moving up? Tell that to all the project managers I know who have been slapping their salami for years no end. Tell that to the lawyer who works way overtime just to get shot down in the bar by a chub who rather wanted the attention of that drunk Justin Timberlake wannabe.
Moving up in order to get women is the best way to ensure women get fucked and chucked throughout their best years and then demand some dude with the means take care of her used up being. Because women still will not consider these moved up men for casual fun, unless it is accompanied by bad (etc) attitude.
Move up for yourself, and let women (the cats who did not play with you as kitties) not even get a smell of it.
Spend it on your hobbies, spend it on honest prostitutes, build a mansion, give to charity whatever.
But the cat, which rejected you as a kitty, shall starve.
Now IF on the otherhand, some of those men go on to write books,
When have women respected intelligence?
I heard women call Einstein a loser.
Case closed.
they will find that not only will the same women be willing to sleep with them for one night, some of them may even be willing to mate with them for years, even a lifetime
You forget to question if that woman is worthy of anything except a one or two shag timeframe, even if that.
Another post that might interest some of you..
Altruism, Adversarialism and Women: 01
http://dissention.wordpress.com/2010/01/22/altruism-adversarialism-and-women-01/
Novaseeker is right, and I will add that I have never seen a woman who has higher than a 6 in looks be stridently opposed to Game. The UG faction knows that a man with Game can aim higher than THEM, leaving them with shrunken prospects.
Yeah, but if all the male 6′s with game are now looking higher, the female 6 can console herself with the fact that male 3′s and 4′s are now gaming her. =)
Yeah but were they hot?
Natural alphas in the looks or sex appeal departments get a pass.
They may also have been incredible in bed.
Both of which are a part of Game, too. Strauss in particular points out the importance, in terms of appearance, of making the most of what you’ve got — grooming, clothing, gym etc.
But the larger point is that even if you are a guy who is physically “hot”, if you learn Game, you can shoot even higher and more consistently than if you do not. It is *additive*, and it is virtually always a value-add in terms of female attraction. And, a guy who is fantastic in bed probably has Game, either naturally or otherwise — the two go together.
God I wish it had another name. What did they call it a hundred years ago? I have always referred to the web of dating, sex, love and relationships as “seduction”. Several years ago I even used to call it…wait for it….”romance”. Ha, ha, ha,…romance. It is not a lost art, it is a dead art. I think it’s the associations with the word “game” that leaves a bad taste in a lot of womenfolk’s mouths. “Game” has been assembled and sold through a seeder underground world, that reveals with deeper digging, an alarmingly high number of the guys come from broken homes and damaged upbringings. Now, whether they join the Hell’s Angles, or a cult, or become radically religious, the still have a higher chance of taking whatever said “belief system” and abusing it. They are more likely to take it to the extreme level and the actions of those peoples leave a much larger wake than those that are using it for good. I am paying the price of all the raging feminists and those of you who use “game” in a way to better enlightenment and substance are paying the price of all the guys who are the counterpart to feminists. Feminists hate men and players/snakes/abusers of “game” hate women. I keep saying they deserve each other.
If a guy were to tell me that while traveling all throughout Asia he found Buddhism (true story) and it led to him improving his own lot and core self, I would call this an example of obtaining “game”. Women can change their “class” as well. I should know, I have. Ferdinand knows of the bleak landscapes of upstate NY…beautiful in the summer, dreadful in the endless winters.
I most likely was “gamed” by my two long term boyfriends in the beginning of our courtships, but I didn’t know it. And that is exactly how it should be done. What you all are facing as part of the backlash against “game” is that its darker examples seem to get more attention that the good ones. You all are absolutely correct in your saying that “game” is good and women should embrace it, but the problem with that is men tend to leave at that. The being right bit. It still doesn’t bring success, being right. Some positive examples of the use of “game” will bring them over to your side.
And one more thing…sustaining sexual attraction in a long term relationship requires “game”. Long terms are a prime host for “game”. It just becomes a just a deeper, even more psychological and more emotional form. If you’re good. Ask anyone who is or has been a in good, healthy long term or marriage and they will attest to this.
It appears that testosterone makes people bargain more fairly and become less abusive, who knew? Note that the ones who got the placebo testosterone patch became more mean and nasty.
Prejudice and truth about the effect of testosterone on human bargaining behaviour
link
“Here we show that the sublingual administration of a single dose of testosterone in women causes a substantial increase in fair bargaining behaviour, thereby reducing bargaining conflicts and increasing the efficiency of social interactions. However, subjects who believed that they received testosterone—regardless of whether they actually received it or not—behaved much more unfairly than those who believed that they were treated with placebo. Thus, the folk hypothesis seems to generate a strong negative association between subjects’ beliefs and the fairness of their offers, even though testosterone administration actually causes a substantial increase in the frequency of fair bargaining offers in our experiment.”
Their goal is to continue the injustice which I mentioned, hence that is precisely the issue of justice I am talking about.
Another Classic..
_____________
Barbra Walters interviews Sean Connery
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FgMLROTqJ0
I think what women generally resent is that Game allows men to see.
I think that is far closer to the truth than the “massive conspiracy theory”.
Z.G.: “Look, if the working class is getting its wealth distributed to the society then, the women also need their wealth distributed.
>>>> What? Women don’t pay taxes?
Z.G. “The man already got what he wanted. Shit would I care if she lost interest.”
>>>>> Then you’re a rare gem! Most men in the blogosphere are complaining about women not showing sufficient interest in them “as human beings” and not staying with them long enough.
NOVASEEKER: “even if you are a guy who is physically “hotâ€, if you learn Game, you can shoot even higher and more consistently than if you do not. It is *additive*, and it is virtually always a value-add in terms of female attraction.”
>>>>>> Yep! I just LUUUUURVE hot alphas who learn game. No complaint there! In fact, they should be the ONLY ones allowed to learn game.
ANOUKANGE: “Game†has been assembled and sold through a seeder underground world, that reveals with deeper digging, an alarmingly high number of the guys come from broken homes and damaged upbring”
>>>>>> This is the United States. Who here under the age of 45 or 50 DIDN’T come from a “broken home” or “damaged upbringing?”
In some cultures, if there has ever been even ONE divorce in your family, you will not be able to find anyone willing to marry you! But here??? Single moms and dads spend as much time on the net trying to “hook up” as their teens do!!!
Can someone PLEASE explain this to me?
Where the hell do single parents find the TIME for dating? And what is the point? And where do they get the chutzpa to think that anyone wants to deal with their baggage? Just last week some single dad acquaintance phoned me up and asked me out. I was like “wh, wha, what did you say???”. The gall of him! I was insulted.
Can you imagine growing up as a kid watching your single mom or dad trying to score?
(probably some of you CAN imagine if you lived through it, but I can’t)
So low class.
I just hope some smart and moral immigrants take over this country real soon.
Liberal BS:
“>>>>>> This is the United States. Who here under the age of 45 or 50 DIDN’T come from a “broken home†or “damaged upbringing?â€
me. you dumb bitch, now go away.
The alpha-beta-omega hierachy of sexual attractiveness is constantly promoted and enforced by PUAs. In fact, I think the whole hierachy was really invented by them. Certainly there have always been men who are broadly successful with women, and men who are not, but it’s PUAs who have grouped men into different classes, with each class having its own rigidly defined characteristics. Some PUAs (who are all self-declared alphas, naturally) treat betas and omegas with pity (even in cases where the supposed betas and omegas are actually far superior to the PUAs in every possible way except in terms of notch count), others with hostility and contempt.
It’s PUAs who keep telling me that if I want to be successful and a “real man,” I have to become a PUA as well, and dedicate my life to sleeping with as many women as possible. My position in society is either a PUA or a worthless loser, and that’s it. Well, there’s always the third option: a feminist. Because if you’re not with us (that is, if you reject our hierarchy), you’re against us.
Oh, what an abundance of choices I am given in this brave new world.
And PUAs are different how, exactly? They, too, treat betas and omegas as scum.
“me. you dumb bitch, now go away.”
Classy.
“Lady†Cumstain thinks claims to have nothing but contempt for PUA’s and average Joe’s learning ‘game’ to meet women, saying they should have the book thrown at them legally and be charged with rape (RMLMFAO ).
However, this evil witch seems to have nothing but the highest respect for serial killers!?!
***
“However, yes of course. I have always loved/studied Crime, Psychology, the Human Mind, and Law. All those things sort of invoke an interest in the other. I absolutely LOVE studying the Human Mind and especially the mind of a brilliant Psychopath or Sociopathic Killer. They ARE brilliant (most of the ones who get away with it for awhile at least) and if they weren’t already killers they’d be geniuses would could have changed the world.” — LR, “Consent: What’s the Confusion?â€
***
It is garbage like LR that rewards these satanic monsters.
This sub-human is proving everything Roissy said about her (and her type of female) is 1000% TRUE.
Commentators like Whiskey are sooo right – “women” like this are against ‘game’ cause they are concerned that they wouldn’t be getting the ‘real deal’ – a full bore psychopath like themselves.
The whore should be spending more time raising her son rather than spending 24/7 online and leaving comments like this. A COMPLETELY UNFIT MOTHER!
Guaranteed we are going to see this ‘bad seed’ on the show ‘Snapped’ one of these days very soon.
Poo, what you say about the elite heirarchy in the PUA cult is true, and if this site is to be believed, is only going to get even MORE stratefied;
“The community talks about a “secret society,†like a sexual “Fight Club.†The members recognize each other, but outsiders are never shown the way in.”
From:
http://blog.theessentialsofattraction.com/111/the-secret-sexual-society-or-the-case-for-kink/
“Oh, what an abundance of choices I am given in this brave new world.”
Oh, the amount of care we could dredge from Giveacrap Bay.
to elaborate a bit on boys from broken homes:
http://anoukange.wordpress.com/2010/01/23/broken/
it’s a cousin to the topic at hand…and the PUA world (can’t believe I’m actually typing the acronym) is FULL of broken boys who were never taught to be a “man” from the ground up.
[“me. you dumb bitch, now go away.â€
Classy.]
-yeah, most of the time I am, but I’m out of patience with you. Sorry to be so blunt but you really do help give women a bad name.
Ferdinand, if you ever read this comment…may I ask how you, as a man in his early twenties have become so burnt on women that you feel the way you do towards them? Or is it just the feminists you hate?
I don’t even understand why you guys are talking about an imaginary world where women, Feminists, or anyone else cares about your “plight” with women.
No human is entitled to sex. Especially not with women/men out of your league. Normal men and women go ON DATES, respect the other person, get to know them, and guess what? Have a happy relationship and have lots of sex.
Just because you are a group of panty-sniffers and low-lifes who are TOO LAZY to date the “normal” and honest way, does not make you progressive, intelligent, or “manly”.
It makes you cowards and low-lifes who have simply PROVEN that you CANNOT compete with other men, cannot impress a “quality” woman, and cannot land a woman out of your league without deceiving, tricking, and STEALING sex from her like the Criminals that you are.
You shriek about this imaginary “Feminist Agenda” against men like you. Men like WHAT? I didn’t even realize you EXISTED on earth until reading these ridiculous blogs. I have never had a date with a man who DID NOT open the doors, carry all the heavy stuff, pay for everything like they should, and take me on 3-4 dates before even TRYING to kiss me, let alone have SEX WITH ME.
You say that “women are scared they’ll get gamed”. Um, no. Gamers always happily tell their “3 Date Rule” where if they don’t get laid by date number three they give up. Good, because 90% of normal women would never allow you to touch them before at least 3 dates which means we are STILL out of your league and you’ll continue having to sleep with war-pigs and drunken bar sluts.
No woman wants a man who has a dirty dick, sleeps around, and pretends to be “manly” and masculine and isn’t. No woman goes on more than a date or two with those men. That’s why you have to pretend that you only WANT one night stands.
Game has taught you to lower your standards and expect to only get the LEFT OVERS from the real Alpha Male Providers, Fathers, and Leaders that women like and want to spend time with. You will NEVER be an Alpha Male by sleeping around, having no kids, and having to “steal” off other men’s work.
Those are the “jackals” and scavengers of society. Those are not “Alpha” Males. A man with no children and no prospects at 35-40 years old is already a Darwinian Failure and also proves himself to be “Beta for Life”.
You make tons of adorable excuses for why women don’t “like Game”. We don’t care one way or another about WHY you use Game. No one cares if you get laid all day every day by different women every hour.
Women can get laid any time and anywhere they want to and it’s not like you have to be gorgeous to land a wealthy, attractive, and successful man. The fact is that women and men have the SAME BRAIN. Women are often looking for one night stands as well.
I don’t understand why PUA’s act like it takes “skill” to sleep with the many women who ARE just looking for some dick. They are willing to use you and discard you and you can still go home pretending that it was YOU who discarded HER. No one mind if you do that.
However, normal quality women SHOULD expect a man to “court” her. To WORK at dating her. To EARN her adoration, respect, and of course “sex”. No woman who has an education and half decent looks should expect any LESS then proper dates, proper courtship, and a clear respect for her sexual boundaries.
Game has not changed that rule. Women now simply have to weed out the PUA’s as the “one night stand only when your plastered drunk” group, too.
I don’t know what world some of you live in, but of COURSE PUA’s are Criminals. They using coercion and trickery to get sex with women who would OTHERWISE NOT GIVE IT TO THEM IF THEY KNEW THE TRUTH (which is Rape and Non-Consent as any educated person knows).
PUA’s and especially their Gurus SHOULD be prosecuted for Sexual Assault and now that more women know about this subculture of perverts we can make sure MORE WOMEN come forward and realize that these men have Sexually Assaulted them using “mental conditioning” which is NOT considered “legal consent”. LMR is in itself Sexual Assault. The same abusers use to “isolate their victims” and make them feel as if there’s no one else they can trust.
Then PUA’s use antiquated anti-Science shaming messages like “Well if women ALLOW themselves to be brainwashed, they’re weak.”
Nice try, but any human male or female can be brainwashed without their knowledge whether they are a genius or a retard. Your argument is Scientifically FALSE, Medically FALSE, and Psychologically FALSE just like everything else the Guru’s say.
The truth is that you HAVE to use light mind control and deception to get laid because you are not good enough to get a “quality woman” any other way. You lie to yourselves and keep spending your $$$ on the men who tell you that it’s “normal” and there’s nothing wrong with being obsessed with sex and women.
There is. If you’d spend those thousands on the Professional Psychological help with Sex Addiction and Psychosis that you CLEARLY need, you’d be a lot happier and healthier.
In the meantime, though….women should be aware that there is yet another group in the Rapists/Perverts/Creepy Category to wipe off the earth and it’s PUA’s and their Gurus.
I’d like to see them all sit in prison if even ONE woman was abused because of their “Entertainment Advice”. They are uneducated men with no credentials and barely even an above average academic understanding….no medical or psychological training….and no education in Science of any kind.
Yet they teach immediately how to “isolate her” (intimidation), use LMR (coercion, intimidation, and deception), and “get sex’ from her (rape her because she wouldn’t have otherwise fucked you).
I am the first to hate on Revenge Feminists who “hate men” and wish to destroy and control them, but I have to say that the PUA movement needs a Female Counterpart to see how much you think the methods are “acceptable” when its a HUGE subculture of man-hating Feminazis teaching classes, boot camps, seminars, and writing books on “How to use Mind Control and Intimidation to Steal His Money Even Faster.”
I suppose that would be totally acceptable to you since it’s the exact same kind of CRIME and FRAUD, right? Women should be able to lie, trick, and even use hypnosis to get men’s money faster and disappear, shouldn’t they? It’s fair since the men should “just avoid and overcome” it, right?
I sincerely hope that a group springs up publicly and proudly doing this to men and stealing their money and resources and then saying they are simply “evening the scales”. I’ll be the first to tell you that you DESERVE IT and even though I hate the Revenge Feminists….I’m starting to see some of their points.
Certain men really SHOULD just be wiped away, discarded, castrated, imprisoned. There IS such a thing as “being better” than someone else and those men need to realize it and just accept that they are the “lessers” in this world.
[Jesus Christ woman, where do you get the TIME to post these long-ass rants? Don't you have a kid to feed? - ed.]
Acksiom, then don’t pretend like game is all about giving men freedom.
Of course, anoukange, but remember that there are assholes like Bill Pollack at Harvard running around and writing books about how boys should not separate from their mothers, and instead should learn to be more like their mothers and express a more feminine masculinity — and that fathers are really peripheral and have nothing at all to do with the problems facing young men today.
The enemy is out there, persistently scrivening away and making slpashes in the press and so-on, perpetuating the old 60s drivel that masculinity is problematic and if males were more like women we’d all be fine.
Except, of course, that none of the women would want to *fuck* any of these androgenized omega girlie-boys at the end of the day, and the sex would be even more concentrated on the few bad boys who resist the Pollack reconditioning program.
“yeah, most of the time I am, but I’m out of patience with you. Sorry to be so blunt but you really do help give women a bad name.”
Um, for what? Pointing out that MOST Americans under the age of 45 come from divorced or otherwise broken homes?
Are you that desperate for (anonymous internet) male attention that you call someone who AGREES with you a “bitch”?
My god.
Put on your glasses and re-read the comment.
It’s usually people who are given to anger and foul language on the internet who come from dysfunctional backgrounds, by the way. And like I said above….that’s more than half the population of the United States.
America: take your happy pills!
“No human is entitled to sex. Especially not with women/men out of your league.”
___
And just what, er, “league” do you (eugenic guardian-mistress of the holy gene pool) consider yourself in, Vaine??
“Acksiom, then don’t pretend like game is all about giving men freedom.”
No; don’t you pretend that you have no responsibility to create your own alternatives, or that new choices of conceptual framing beyond your existing resources, given to you freely, are some kind of restrictive oppression.
“No human is entitled to sex. Especially not with women/men out of your league.â€
___
And just what, er, “league†do you (eugenic guardian-mistress of the holy gene pool) consider yourself in, Vaine??
>>>>>>>>>
You are quite a rather average ‘plain jane’ there yourself, Ms. Schwartz, to be dispensing relationship ‘advice’ to others.
Here is a nice dose of some very real social truths for you, Wendy -
[...]
Men ascertain a woman’s sexual desirability through her looks. If she makes your penis hard, she’s a worthy conquest. This ensures that women who aren’t wildebeests and/or hippopotamuses will have an endless stream of dudes looking to bring their battering rams crashing through her iron gates of life, but it has a downside; a woman’s options for improving her sexual market value are limited. The reason a 20-year old co-ed can play the coy coquette and a 35-year old cougar has to force herself onto guys is because the former has qualities men desire (youth and beauty) that the latter doesn’t and can never get back. An unattractive woman who prances about like she’s a 10, like The Rules says that ladies should do, isn’t going to suddenly make men think that she is a 10 – they’ll just avoid her in favor of girls who are still on the same plane of reality. Men instinctively know the difference between fool’s gold and the real deal, and no games played by girls can convince them otherwise.
[...]
http://www.inmalafide.com/2009/08/21/how-mainstream-dating-advice-harms-women/
Since you are escaping ‘youth’ and are well, well short on real, genuine beauty (you are a natural 4.5 — with that big schnoz and semitic-looking eyes… a 5.5-6 AT BEST with all the warpaint, um, ‘makeup’ on) it would be very wise for you to come to terms with reality and structure your life accordingly.
Please do not further lecture anyone else on their ‘attractiveness’, what ‘leagues’ they supposedly belong in, and what kind of ‘morals’ and ‘good dating behaviors’ they should have.
It just has such a hollow, hypocritical ring coming from a ‘former’ stripper. Sorry.
“I don’t even understand why you guys are talking about an imaginary world where women, Feminists, or anyone else cares about your “plight†with women.”
You obviously do.
Lib BS-
“Are you that desperate for (anonymous internet) male attention that you call someone who AGREES with you a “bitchâ€?”
We do not agree Liberal BS, we would not sit at the same table. Bitch may have been a bit harsh, caught me on a bad day, but dumb certainly wasn’t. Attention? Really? That tired argument is the first one fellow gals throw at each other. Since about 15 or so I have been noticed for whatever “looks” I may have. I’ve actually improved with age, which goes against all that the Roissy-sphere claim. I’m sure it’s only a matter of time before I show my age but attention has never been in short supply for me. Big deal, it ever gave me a big head, there’s always room for improvement. But it is something I have cruised for a while now and I am no longer flattered by nor seeking attention. Officially, sorry for the bitch sling at you but it’s statements like this:
“Now IF on the otherhand, some of those men go on to write books, make money, become famous – they have genuinely moved up the heirarchy”
“Regarding the $20K waitress. Who says she’s obliged to stay with the $50K man if a $100K man shows interest in her?”
“Yeah but were they hot?
Natural alphas in the looks or sex appeal departments get a pass.”
…that puts you and I at odds my dear.
I would never value a dude who made a name for himself writing about “game” any higher than a janitor. In fact, a custodian has more respect from me. Now the reason that I in particular feel this way is because I have access to any number of guys, successful, rich, handsome and I don’t run off and fuck every last one. If I can fuck almost any guy I want and don’t do it, then I have a hard time respecting a guy who can fuck women in large quantities and does. Never did I dream as a girl growing up that I could meet and date a guy who made money off of his stories of how he manipulated women into bed. Could I be friends with him? sure. I have several guy friends who are players. Would I consider him a catch or higher up in hierarchy in some way? Hell no.
Also, Love has nothing to do with money and looks have nothing to do with love. You seem to care what a guy makes for money, I do not. Now, they must have a character that could make money and I will help him as his woman, but the goods and the brains have got to be there. Hot guys get old fast if that’s all they have going for themselves. I almost hold good looks against a guy. He has to work harder for me because I don’t trust that he has built character. Same with big dicks…they are the guys most likely to suck in bed. Lazy bastards.
“You shriek about this imaginary “Feminist Agenda†against men like you. Men like WHAT? I didn’t even realize you EXISTED on earth until reading these ridiculous blogs. I have never had a date with a man who DID NOT open the doors, carry all the heavy stuff, pay for everything like they should, and take me on 3-4 dates before even TRYING to kiss me, let alone have SEX WITH ME.”
…
“However, normal quality women SHOULD expect a man to “court†her. To WORK at dating her. To EARN her adoration, respect, and of course “sexâ€. No woman who has an education and half decent looks should expect any LESS then proper dates, proper courtship, and a clear respect for her sexual boundaries.”
__
Raine,
Do you even attempt to keep track of your pathological lies?? -
…
“It seems like many foreign men somehow get the impression that if you sleep with them, it means you LIKE them and want to be with them!!!
“They don’t seem to understand “I’ll call you when I need some dick again.†thing”
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/what-foreign-men-think-of-american-women/#comment-105974
…
“Do you know why (men) adore me and do things for me? Because I give them everything they’ve wanted: lots of sex, no questions, no commitment, and a woman who genuinely could care less what he does or who he’s with.”
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/what-foreign-men-think-of-american-women/#comment-106233
…
Ah, such words of “wisdom” from an “ex” stripper, who apparently herself has the morals of an unspayed alley cat —
“And ruining their credibility to future potential husbands by racking up a long sexual rap sheet.â€
“Again, Nova as I said before. Any woman who answers that is an idiot. I have a rule to never date a man I work with, who lives near me (less than 20 min), or a man I went to school with. That negates the possibility of men knowing anything at all about me except what I choose to tell them. A smart woman NEVER answers that and firmly chastises the man who dares to ask something so rude.”
(*Gee Raine, according to your buddy Denise Romano, if a man was unforthcoming about his sexual past, that is also grounds for assault — since, you know, he would be endangering the woman*)
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/what-foreign-men-think-of-american-women/#comment-106243
…
And here, she just straight up admits to being a full-blown slut (too graphic and sickening to quote on this thread) -
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/what-foreign-men-think-of-american-women/#comment-106243
…
Oh, and lastly Raine, stop talking (and bragging) about sex and relationships like a guy, since, coming from a woman, IT MEANS **ABSOLUTELY NOTHING** -
*****
“A woman being proud of getting laid is like an alcoholic proud of getting drunk.”
*****
http://www.inmalafide.com/2009/11/05/what-girl-game-isnt/
…
Someone please get this “woman” some desperately needed help.
And here, she just straight up admits to being a full-blown slut (too graphic and sickening to quote on this thread) -
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/what-foreign-men-think-of-american-women/#comment-106243
…
Sorry again all for mentioning this vileness, however this is the correct link to the above quote -
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/what-foreign-men-think-of-american-women/#comment-106493
___
Lest anyone forget, these comments by Raine were made A FULL MONTH on ROISSY’S SITE after she was supposedly sooooooo ‘outraged’ that he posted pictures of her son.
How does the words to that song from Fleetwood Mac go again — “Tell me lies… tell me lies… tell me sweet little lies …. Oh, no, no you can’t disguise
(You can’t disguise, no you can’t disguise…)”
Acksiom
What a cop-out response. If game presents itself as giving men freedom and options, then I expect it to do just that. But instead, game presents a rigid, arbitrary hierarchy consisting of those at the top and those at the bottom, and enforces specific attitudes and modes of behavior.
Anoukange, my point was that guys who write about getting laid are “alpha” – rather my point was that just being able to “game” women into bed is not an alpha quality, but rather being able to PRODUCE something does. Production requires discipline and self-control. Anyway, the point was lost on you, no biggie. I don’t consider PUAs to be alpha at all – just a bunch of aging horny guys who have managed to extend their adolecence into their pre and peri andropausal years, like “Mehow” who frequently uses advanced terminology like “like”, “totally” and “wow” in his conversations with women. (Videos online available, including one where he interviews a woman about Middle School, because, and I qoute: “middle school is very important”) LOL!!!!!
Speaking of peri-andropause, where are all the PUAs in their 50s and 60s who are having regular success gaming women into SNL (same night lays) and the rest?
You’d think if “game” were that great that it would be able to empower the oldies as well.
Mehow (meow).
To anyone wasting their time with “More Liberal BS”:
“More Liberal BS” is the perpetually dishonest, mentally ill Lady Raine groupie otherwise known as “Bag Lady,” “Desi FPUA,” “DADT,” and a bunch of other names I can’t be bothered to remember. I checked the IP numbers and they both originate from the same ISP in the same city. Since Obsidian has exiled her for good from his place, she’s apparently back to bothering me. Their habits are identical:
Constant downplaying of game’s effectiveness (see her posts in this thread)
Off-topic misandrist rambling (see her completely irrelevant comments about penis size here)
Bizarre obsession with single parents “trying to score” (see this comment here – interesting because she advocates that white American women marry Arab or Indian men, considering that her first husband was Indian and she harbors a pathological hatred of Indians and their culture, as evidenced by her posts at Lady Raine’s and Obsidian’s)
Nonsensical anti-Americanism (see her remarks about “smart and moral immigrants” upthread)
Constant kvetching about male aging (see her crap about “andropause”, a made-up concept that isn’t recognized by any medical organization, just above this comment)
Debating with her is useless because she is both ignorant and because whenever you corner her on something, she always changes the subject. I’m not going to ban her just yet, but I’ve gone and changed all her comments to show her real name. Y’all should disengage. Don’t feed the troll.
“Debating with her is useless because she is both ignorant and because whenever you corner her on something, she always changes the subject. I’m not going to ban her just yet, but I’ve gone and changed all her comments to show her real name. Y’all should disengage. Don’t feed the troll.”
Thank you so much, Ferdi!
Women are terrified of Game truths getting out to all men because then Matriarchy will come tumbling down upon them, when betas rise up to be slaves no more. It only takes a critical mass of angry betas with Sodini/Cho like mentality to topple the system. Women make the mistake of thinking men are simply going to go along with their pretty little rules – this won’t work once men know the rage-inducing truth about women – and I think this is what women fear most about Game.
Men typically favor merit based, dynamic hierarchies which give most men access to at least some power and women/reproduction – whereas women typically favor static hierarchies based upon alpha domination/humiliation of the masses of powerless/sexless beta males. IOW, women favor a polygnous and oligarchal Matriarchy, where the alpha oligarchy rules unchallenged, where women have rotating sexual/reproductive access to alpha males and bear their children as single “independent, strong” mothers, where the masses of beta males are sexless drones/slaves/cuckolds whose labor output is confiscated and shared amongst the women. Some examples of matriarchy: high school/college where a small clique (oligarchy) of popular/violent alpha males fuck all of the women with masses of sexless nice guy betas bullied into the ground; aristocracy/monarchy where a few elite men (oligarchy) rule mostly unchallenged and fuck all of the women with masses of peasant males getting nothing; politburo (oligarchy) in socialistic societies where those men in the Party have all of the power/women and the rest of the men are simply faceless/nameless worker drones; ghettos where a few violent gangs/thugs (oligarchy) control and intimidate the masses of weaker men and fuck all of the women, etc.
Rememeber the key statistic in the Baumeister paper: about 40% of the men who ever lived reproduced whereas about 80% of all women who ever lived reproduced. IOW, aside from the few non-consentual matings (which are not many otherwise most humans – both men and women – would prefer rape as a mating strategy) women throughout human history have been all too happy to lavish pussy on alphas while starving betas and purging them from the gene pool – this is female sexual selection in action. So we should never expect women to care now when they’ve never cared – after all the are ENTITLED to sex and reproduction so they can only empathize with the men who are also entitled to sex/reproduction (alpha males). Women view betas as defective and strange because they can’t manage to do something women and alphas seemingly do so easily.
Another thing, if women/feminist demand to be entitled to male evolutionary resources (production – ie the output of beta male production systems such as protection, food, shelter, jobs and civilization itself) through feminism, socialism and cultural chivarly – then I see nothing wrong in men demanding to be entitled to female evolutionary resources (reproduction – sex, babies, childcare, homemaking, etc) via prostitution, porn, foreign women, surrogates and other “affordable” sexual/reproductive access for the masses of beta males. Sex is not “entitlement to another’s body” or whatever some dumbass mangina or feminist would say – it’s a SERVICE that one performs WITH their body – just like work/labor – just like the fruits of men’s work/labor which women routinely confiscate via feminism, socialism, cultural chivalry and social conservatism. And if we’re supposed to live in an egalitarian society, and women and alpha males are ENTITLED to easy sex/reproduction – then beta males must be as well.
“poo”,
“game presents a rigid, arbitrary hierarchy consisting of those at the top and those at the bottom, and enforces specific attitudes and modes of behavior.”
Game enforces nothing.
No PUA is kicking down your door, holding a gun to your head, and forcing you to act in accordance.
What PUAs and other students of Game are saying, is that these are the behaviours and attitudes you may want to adhere to if you want to get results. Whether you do this or not is up to you.
Game is not creating the hierarchy at all; it is diagnosing it. The hierarchy exists without the input of Game. More to the point, Game allows for increased mobility within the hierarchy, but no one should expect to just receive the ‘goods’ without putting in any work.
It is hardly ‘enforcing’ anything.
Game shows the way things are, and what you can do to secure a better deal for yourself.
PUAs aren’t going to follow you around and wipe your nose. A lot of what Game diagnoses are regrettable facts of human nature; facts that we are powerless to change, and simply have to work with.
“Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea.” Robert A Heinlein
Snark, game contains a clear hieararchy, and if you want to be at the top you must act in certain ways and do certain things. Otherwise you’re a beta or an omega, AKA subhuman scum.
Right… and the patriarchal conspiracy really exists too, and feminism is just diagnosing it.
The alpha-beta-omega hierarchy is strictly an invention of pickup artists. It is no more real than scientology.
“Snark, game contains a clear hieararchy, and if you want to be at the top you must act in certain ways and do certain things.”
Yes, game DESCRIBES a clear hierarchy, but do you really think that Game is such a powerful force that it has created the hierarchy? That it has influenced women to pursue X instead of Y?
Conceptualising the hierarchy as alpha-beta-omega is, indeed, an invention of PUAs.
BUT, are you seriously denying that a sexual hierarchy existed before the advent of Game?
If so, I have nothing more that I can say to you, for apparently you believe that all the world before Game celebrated free love, and nobody went without sex; and that all this was destroyed by the evils of Game, which by itself, divided the world of men up into three castes.
Anyone can create any hierarchy they want to (Scientology being a good example).
Just because game is a work of fiction doesn’t mean nothing like a sexual hierarchy does not exist (except it’s not really a hierarchy in the sense that game thinks it is, or wishes it were).
Get real–
I don’t understand what the point of your comments/quotes are.
What do you find dishonest about any of that? Do you NOT understand that women ALSO have mental “categories” where they file certain kinds of men away into “one night stands”, “maybe casual dating”, “could be long term”, etc.
What is SO offensive to you about the fact that at 29 I have had long term relationships, one night stands, and also “dating” (as in going on dates casually) that may or may not lead to something??
You act as if women somehow have to choose to ALWAYS be looking for “Mr. Right” or ALWAYS be looking for a one night stand.
You do realize that sometimes I’m not looking for a LTR and sometimes I am?
Sometimes a man strikes me on an intellectual level (thus, maybe I’ll consider dating him long term) or maybe he DOESN’T and only strikes me on a physical level?
This is what I mean.
You are SO shocked and offended and horrified by a 29 year old woman who is single and has lived a normal “single life”?
So, basically it’s totally fine for men to get laid all they want but I’m supposed to be ashamed by only choosing to “date seriously” certain men?
No, shit. Me and every other woman on earth. I hate to tell you, but most women expect to be taken on traditional dates for AWHILE if a man expects to be taken as “long term potential”. If he DOESN’T want to take a woman out or “court” her, then he gets filed into “one night stand” or “casual dating only”.
I’m sorry if that’s shocking to your fragile male egos, but women DO discern the difference and much like women….if a man acts like he only wants to be a “manwhore” then guess what? He’ll be treated as exactly that by the women he’s sleeping with.
So? Isn’t that what you mean wanted? More chances at feeding your weird sex obsessions?
God, seriously…..we’re all either “evil sluts” or “cocktease gold diggers” to men like you so why should we care either way what you want? You’re never happy no matter HOW much freedom Feminism has given you to go have sex with no strings.
Just because you STILL cannot get laid and are angry that OTHER men are getting laid isn’t really a very valid qualm. Last I checked, sex isn’t necessary to live…..and if you cannot live without it, you have a mental problem.
Go see a therapist if you think sex is meaningful or “telling” of whether or not you’re attractive to women/men or worthy of love. Sex is about as meaningful as going to the bathroom or eating a meal…..except those things are needed to live and thus are more important.
Lady Raine -
Nooo ma’am, I did not post those comments to shame or disparage your ‘sex life’ in any way. I posted those quotes to highlight your unrelenting hypocrisy, nothing more, ’tis all.
I was getting a little exasperated with you always coming here and other male-oriented blogs and leaving these moralistic, rambling cut-n-paste screeds, and attempting to give us guys a ‘morality lesson’ on ‘dating and relating’ to a woman.
You know, attempting to tell us what is ‘proper’ date etiquette — and saying it is the standards that you follow and expect of others yourself, implying that men that don’t take or follow this advice are misogynistic ‘gamers’ who want to ‘trick’ women to get what they don’t ‘deserve’ or wish to ‘work for’.
Additionally, why do you childishly ASSume that it is my ‘sex life’, or lack thereof, that is the reason I posted your contradictions.
As to my attitudes regarding sex, I agree with you totally that the physical act of sex is NOT …’meaningful or “telling†of whether or not you’re attractive to women/men or worthy of love.’ (Indeed if you are sincere here.) I desire monagamous, lifetime partnerships for my values and perspectives — nor do I necessarily look down on others for doing otherwise (except if they are inconsistent or hypocritical about it).
I vaguely remember you saying on your blog that PUA’s who disrespect (which many do) and/or ‘hate on’ women paradoxically become the mental and emotional slaves to those very women these jack-asses objectify!
Oh, how ‘Right-as-Raine’ you are with that statement.
I was too harsh with you, and for that I was wrong. I think what was the most frustrating with reading your many comments is that you often say many intelligent and insightful things, yet absolutely go and say something polar opposite without any sense of contradiction. So this is probably why I overreacted the way I did.
Again, ’tis all.
{ 2 trackbacks }