Aug 222009
 

On various blogs there has been an explosion of discussion about “game”.  Some have said game is anti-Christian.  Other’s have said that it can be used to get and maintain a marriage.  And that is just one of the many topics of game that are being discussed.

Those of you who have read my comments know that while I have nothing against game (and think that it can be used by Christian men as long as they use it in a moral manner), I don’t see a whole lot of value in using game.  My issues with game aren’t moral, but practical.  Game will not protect you against STDs.  (No one claims that it does, but do you really want to be having sex with some STD infested skank.  Looking for women in church does not protect you against this either regardless of whether you are using game or not.)  Game will not protect you against divorce, false rape charges, sexual harassment charges, etc.  The proponents of game will claim that these aren’t problems, and that game itself will mean that a woman won’t do any of this to you, but let’s face it.  It’s bunk.  Vigorous assertion will not protect you.


Game also has the problem of carrying the assumption that getting laid (or getting married for those with that moral position) is the most important thing in the world.  The practitioner of game is desperate for female approval just like the apocryphal “nice guy”.  A practitioner of game can still be ruled by a woman easily and be manipulated by women through the use of shaming language.  This is related to the fact that use many proponents of game use shaming language against men who do not use game.  Shaming language is used to paper over the fact that game has its own problems.  This is why MGTOW is superior to game.  By going his own way, a man is in control of his own life.


Beyond all that, I have noticed that game carries an implicit wrong assumption, namely that biology is immutable and some sort of magic.  The fact is women are NOT fertility goddesses.  On various blogs proponents of game have claimed that since this is the way women are, men just have to deal with it, and men’s only option is game based on concepts of evolutionary psychology.  (It’s important to remember here that a reasonable man adapts himself to the world, but the unreasonable man tries to adapt the world to himself so all progress depends on the unreasonable man.)  Clearly, female behavior must have a basis in some combination of biology and psychology or otherwise having no fault divorce laws, sexual harassment laws, etc. wouldn’t matter since women wouldn’t used them.  The fact of the matter is all of this is changeable. We need not be victims to evolutionary psychology.  Evolutionary psychology and biology are not magic.  If biology is causing a problem as it is with the way female behavior currently is, then let’s fix the biology.  In the long term we can use technologies such as genetic engineering and gene therapy to do this.  Granted, both of these technologies are in their infancy, and it will be a long time before we can do this.  In the future genetic engineering will be used for everything else, so its perfectly reasonable as a solution to this problem too.

  8 Responses to “Biology is neither magic nor immutable”

  1. Great point about trying to change the biology. It's always kind of disappointed me that game is just another way to serve women so they give us what we want.

    About changing chicks long term: Civilization used to do that so it's very possible it could happen again. From there the issue always becomes one of how do we revert back? The consensus seems to be much hand ringing and whining or "it's not possible till it collapses".

    Nether genetic eng or waiting for the collapse helps guys right now. And right now is what we need a fix for.

  2. 'Game' has little to do with Evolutionary Psychology – because the latter stresses the value of reproductive success, while Game views sex as 'recreational'. In fact, recreational sex is fairly Gamma, in that it serves as a substitute for reproductive success. A male might have sex with a thousand women, but if he has no children out of it he is a monk, in socio-biological terms.

  3. Or you could go somewhere with more coooperative women…

    http://www.happierabroad.com

  4. "This is why MGTOW is superior to game. By going his own way, a man is in control of his own life."

    I'm curious, PM/AFT – why do you regard MGTOW and game as being mutually exclusive? There's no requirement in the MGTOW manifesto, so far as I recall, that precludes men from seeking sexual relationships with women. If you can live without sex with women, that's fine, but what about men who can't? For men who would rather not be celibate, game is an effective tool. I personally don't see why using game prevents a man from going his own way – in fact, one could argue that using game IS a form of MGTOW (so long as you avoid getting married or entangled in the feminist government complex).

  5. @Grim

    Unfortunately, I don't have a good answer that men can use right now. As everyone here knows I believe GYOW is the best option available.

    At least genetic engineer will solve this problem one and for all regardless of how long it takes and without a complete loss of civilization. (The guys who want civilization to collapse are playing with fire since there is a good chance we may never get civilization back at all after such a collapse.)

    @FB

    In theory, MGTOW and game aren't mutually exclusive. GYOW can mean anything if its want you want to do after all. The problem is the men as you put it who "can't live without sex". A man with that mindset can't truly GHOW. If he is that desperate for sex, then he will be ruled and manipulated by women. A MGHOW wouldn't think like that. A MGHOW might have sex, have a girlfriend, etc., but can and will dump her ass if needed when she tries the usual female crap on him. A man who "can't live without sex" will become a woman's lapdog.

    I was talking about this on another board and someone said in response to similar comments I made, "Something is better than nothing". This is not the attitude of a MGHOW. Implicit in that concept is the willing to take (the equivalent of) dog shit because its "something". Clearly, there are plenty of cases where "nothing" is the superior choice. A MGHOW has to be willing to choose "nothing" when needed.

    No one needs game to not get married. There are plenty of other ways than getting married a woman can drag you into the feminist government complex right now. In the future, there will be more as government will eventually start getting involved in cohabitation and then after that just regular old relationships. Many of the proponents of game just want to pretend these aren't problems which means they will be snared by it eventually.

    On the more "Christian" side of things (I put Christian in quotes since not all Christian men think this way) there are men who think its a good idea to use game to get and maintain a wife. They are playing Russian roulette with the feminist government complex. They will get snared by the feminist government complex eventually.

  6. PM/AFT:

    "The problem is the men as you put it who "can't live without sex". A man with that mindset can't truly GHOW. If he is that desperate for sex, then he will be ruled and manipulated by women."

    Neediness and desperation is a stumbling block to getting laid, which will lead to a guy getting played by women. This is why a number of game proponents advocate "not caring." Roosh explains it best:

    "I remember when the act of getting laid used to be a big deal. I’d bang a girl and pat myself on the back like I just accomplished something special. My friends did the same thing. But then we got older and the more sex we got the less of a big deal it became. While I’m sure there are a lot of reasons why getting laid isn’t a problem for us now, it’s not a coincidence the more I put pussy on a pedestal, the less I got. Problem is it’s hard to fake not caring about pussy. You still have to want it (you won’t get something you don’t want), but you must barely care if you don’t get it."

    "I was talking about this on another board and someone said in response to similar comments I made, "Something is better than nothing". This is not the attitude of a MGHOW. Implicit in that concept is the willing to take (the equivalent of) dog shit because its "something". Clearly, there are plenty of cases where "nothing" is the superior choice. A MGHOW has to be willing to choose "nothing" when needed."

    No argument here. There are times where your hand is a better bet then what's out there. This is a matter of personal dignity, not game.

    "No one needs game to not get married. There are plenty of other ways than getting married a woman can drag you into the feminist government complex right now. In the future, there will be more as government will eventually start getting involved in cohabitation and then after that just regular old relationships. Many of the proponents of game just want to pretend these aren't problems which means they will be snared by it eventually."

    I agree that this will become a problem in the future. My solution: leave the country. If it weren't for my current obligations, I'd have fled to South America already.

    "On the more "Christian" side of things (I put Christian in quotes since not all Christian men think this way) there are men who think its a good idea to use game to get and maintain a wife. They are playing Russian roulette with the feminist government complex. They will get snared by the feminist government complex eventually."

    Again, no argument here. I don't advocate that men get married, game or no game, but the option is still there.

  7. Neediness and desperation is a stumbling block to getting laid, which will lead to a guy getting played by women. This is why a number of game proponents advocate "not caring." Roosh explains it best:
    (snipped Roosh paragraph)

    Yes, that's true, but this still has the same problem I'm talking about, namely that this guy's behavior is completely oriented towards pleasing women. By his own admission he still cares (appearances aside) so he still can be manipulated and controlled by women regardless of how much he appears to care. A MGHOW has to be willing to dump the sorry ass of a woman and go celibate if need be. The story you quoted does not say that to me at all.

    No argument here. There are times where your hand is a better bet then what's out there. This is a matter of personal dignity, not game.

    Tell that to the proponents of game. They refuse to realize that this is a real problem in themselves.

    I agree that this will become a problem in the future. My solution: leave the country. If it weren't for my current obligations, I'd have fled to South America already.

    That's fine, but most of the proponents of game believe that game will somehow magically protect them against these problems. As you know it won't.

  8. PM/AFT,

    Once you get those sex bots perfected, we won't NEED game anymore-ha! Sorry, I couldn't resist…

    MarkyMark

Leave a Comment. (Remember the comment policy is in force.)

Cheap Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Cheap Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Cheap Jerseys Cheap NFL Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Wholesale Football Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Wholesale NFL Jerseys Cheap NFL Jerseys Wholesale NFL Jerseys Cheap NHL Jerseys Wholesale NHL Jerseys Cheap NBA Jerseys Wholesale NBA Jerseys Cheap MLB Jerseys Wholesale MLB Jerseys Cheap College Jerseys Cheap NCAA Jerseys Wholesale College Jerseys Wholesale NCAA Jerseys Cheap Soccer Jerseys Wholesale Soccer Jerseys Cheap Soccer Jerseys Wholesale Soccer Jerseys
Translate »
%d bloggers like this: