My clarification of game and it’s sceptics

In flirting you can use many “tools”: a smile, confident body language, bragging about your wealth or status, whatever. The effectiveness of these tools differ from one situation to another. Some almost never work, some almost always do. If you’re goal-oriented you probably choose your tools according to the circumstances, based on your previous experiences on what worked well.

The problem is that nobody teaches you how all this works, what tools you need or can have, what tools suit your personal style the best and so on. Even worse is the fact that nobody tells you that there is something to be learned at all. On the contrary, men are fooled by those around them – mostly by parents, female peers and hollywood – into believing that “romance has to come naturally”. An extension of this is the mantra of feminists and other haters of game which practically boils down to “you must not learn how to handle women”. Why? Well, just because.

So most men wonder around not even paying attention to their own experiences and keep on failing to achieve their goals. Their set of tools are very limited and often they don’t know how to use them properly. They never really open their eyes or use their brains to figure out what is the reason behind other’s success.

It’s because they have more tools and use them better.

Game is a box of tools, with manuals on when and how to use them. Actually it can not “not work”. It can be misused in a number of ways but that’s the user’s fault. If you’re an apprentice in – let’s say – blacksmithing, and you know only how to operate the bellows, your success as a blacksmith will be very limited. If someone gives you a hammer and tells you how to use it then it’s up to you how you manage, but simply saying that the hammer “does not work” is foolish.

The neg, the false time constraint and all these are tools. You don’t necessarily have to use them to get laid, but you can, and sometimes they are the perfect tools for a situation. You can manage without them but why should you?

Now, let’s see about those sceptics. They come in many shapes and forms.

1. The ones who are repulsed by the idea of it or say it’s “immoral”. They are deeply indoctrinated by the cultural zeitgeist that “seduction” and “learning” are words not to be used in the same sentence. They live in pink dreams where every men have their own fixed destinies from birth and it’s sacrilege to try to alter them if one’s not satisfied. The core of their beliefs – which they rarely distill into plain words – is that if you fail, you must not improve, you have to keep trying and failing ’till you drop dead or give up on women altogether. They often spread lies that for every man there is a mystical woman waiting out there somewhere, a soulmate they only have to find and then everything will be alright. This is a delusion poisoning the lives of lots of men. Using the analogy above, these are people who insist there are no “tools” and shouldn’t be either, and if you come across a problem to be solved, you will succeed or fail according to what is destined for you.

2. The ones who read a few sentences and decide it’s BS. They only skim the surface but think they know everything. They probably found some pictures or videos of Mystery on the net and think game is about black nail polish and stupid hats. They find the toolbox, but when they open it up the first thing they see is a wire stripper and they immediately close the box saying they don’t know what it is or how to use it but it looked silly. Anyone with a decent knowledge of game can spot these from a mile away because of their arrogant assertions about game which are total BS.

3. Those who say there’s no need for game. Some of these are just nitwits who feel they must tell everyone they’re smarter. Some of these are “naturals”, that is to say men who are blessed with a wide range of tools and instinctual knowledge on how to use them from the get-go. Naturals very often don’t understand what is the problem with “those losers” because for them womenizing comes naturally and so they think it’s easy. A typical example of projection. It is easy for them but not so for others. Using the analogy: these are handymen with their own toolboxes, not recognizing that they do have tools indeed and just keep on talkin’ that problems can be solved with bare hands.

4. Those who say game can’t be learned. If you’re a natural, you win, if not, forget it. They say a beta will remain a beta forever. Which makes approximately as much sense as saying that if you don’t already know how to use a rock-drill you should not try to learn it because it is unlearnable.

5. Those who say it’s “manipulation”. This is based on an entire set of false premises. First of all, the word manipulation evokes a sense of evilness. This is misandrist white noise implying that men approaching women with sex in mind have evil intents. Sex is not evil. Wanting to have sex is not evil. Trying to talk someone into having sex with you is not evil. Accusations of manipulation are just plain old shaming language. Also, the idea that women have to be manipulated into sex is indirectly saying that women don’t want to have sex. Let me tell you, those women who are willing, are willing. If a woman does not want to have sex there’s no way a PUA can manipulate her to do it against her will. Somehow I fail to feel pity for those “poor women” who “fell victim” to the “evil men” and went to bed with them the night they first met. We live in an age where women are supposed to be independent and empowered, remember? Let’s cut them some slack and instead of picturing them as stupid dolls with no willpower at all, let’s just say when they have sex they know what they’re doing.

OTOH yes, there are some tools in game which can be considered manipulative (most of them aren’t). The question comes to mind: what is wrong with that? We’re not talking about outright lies or deceit here. It’s only choosing your words carefully or framing things in a way that is best suited to your aims. If you have a goal in mind you try to do what it takes to achieve it (within the borders of social norms and laws of course). But all you do is talk, for God’s sake. If you talk your way into the pants of a woman that’s not a crime. These “manipulative” tools are way overrated by the sceptics. As I’ve said before elsewhere, the classic neg “nice nails, are they real?” is not the devilishly evil mindfuck the haters claim it to be. If this is manipulation we should be ashamed of I’ll eat my funny hat. And at last but not least, women always use manipulative tools to increase their chances and options regarding men – and have been doing so from the beginning of time – so their whining seems rather fake in this case. Using the analogy, this accusation of manipulation is like saying that in case you face a leaking tap you should under no circumstances use a spanner because it’s “immoral”.

6. Those who tried game and say it does not work. Their problem most probably is that they grabbed some tools but did not read the manuals and/or didn’t do enough practice. They find the toolbox, take a wrench and a chainsaw, run up to a rusty ford mustang and then they come back disappointed.

7. Those who say that game is abuse, coercion, rape. Those are retards and/or evil. Most of them are radical menhating feminists who sleep under a poster of Andrea Dworkin with a text bubble saying all sex is rape, and the rest are business competitors trying to blacken PUAs in hopes of stealing their customers (see loveandworkcoach.com).

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Game and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to My clarification of game and it’s sceptics

  1. David C says:

    “Game” is good in a marriage too. I have been married a long time, and I am still honing my “game” and getting better and better results.

  2. globalman says:

    “you must not learn how to handle women”
    Yes. I once did a class that came to the conclusion ‘women are a mystery wrapped in an enigma’ and basically if you could live with that you could have a good relationship with a woman. What a f***ing lie THAT was!! LOL!!! After 32 years of listening to women and believing what they said because they all said the same thing so it sounded like ‘the truth’ I actually took a MUCH closer look. What did I find? Western women are cowards, liars and hypocrites in the main. So I only date eastern european women. They are much nicer.

  3. fedrz says:

    Wow! You’ve already made my blog roll!

    How the hell did that happen?

  4. Pingback: Weekend Link Fest – Sleeping in edition « Seasons of Tumult and Discord

  5. Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: For a Good Time Click Edition (NSFW)

  6. Stumbled upon your webblog via msn the other day and absolutely think its great. Carry on the excellent work.

  7. Jennifer says:

    There IS dark game and it is evil. But basic game is learning to use masculinity traits that women find attractive; some guys find it natural, others learn it the same way women learn such traits. No, game won’t make a lasting marriage if said marriage is built on nothing but techniques (though it is good for sex), but many of its basics are good.

    Thanks for explaining, Deansdale. Many mistrust game because of the name, the way they’ve seen SOME parts used, and the way some uplift it as the end to all problems or speak of it as though it’s a new secret weapon for women; the name can be misleading.

  8. Jennifer says:

    I’m also very much against treating women as as*holes, but that tends to work only for women who just want sex and animal attraction (without the positive male traits needed for a LTR) anyway. And if they like as*holes, it’s a problem they need to deal with themselves; we can’t forget that a lot of what the gaming PUA’s learned was taught from women themselves, who treated “beta” men like trash. Those women are hard as nails and know what they’re doing.

  9. Jennifer says:

    The Roissy-type is what can give Game a very, very bad name. Glad I found blogs like this.

  10. Deansdale says:

    I’m also very much against treating women as as*holes
    Look, if being an asshole wouldn’t work, PUAs wouldn’t do it. Of course it’s not “nice”, but women will always get more of what they reward with sex. If there are more assholes out there than ever before, it’s your own doing :)

  11. Jennifer says:

    *sighs* No, not MY doing. I’ve never respected assholes and never will; teasing her is one thing, but I’m talking real assholery, like using her as an object. I’m a Christian and believe in respecting others; certain tricks may result in easy sex, from foolish men and women. But after all this time, God was right: those who carefully choose their mates, respect themselves and treat sex as something important are the ones who reap the most benefits.

  12. Deansdale says:

    I did not mean it’s your fault personally. It’s women’s doing. Do I really have to explain?

  13. Jennifer says:

    No, I meant women like me.

  14. Jennifer says:

    You’re right though, women in general have soured the ground in many ways. I’ve heard it said many times: women will have to be the main changers to better things in society.

  15. Ivan Drago says:

    May I add another category? Those who fear the positive results of game.

    What if game can warp oneself instead of just being a set of tools? Of course, allowing something to change what you’re about isn’t very alpha, but let’s face it – sometimes it’s a duel of the two heads. Game appears to have many uses, but the all too natural proclivity for hedonism and gluttony makes “evil game” very tempting. I wonder the origin of the term ‘tool’?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s