More Thoughts on Game and Social Conservatives

Just wanted to add a few more things to what I had written on yesterday.  If you find that you disagree with me in this piece, I would appreciate if you take a look at part one as well.  After you read all of my thoughts, you might find you disagree with me a bit less than you thought.  Once again I use SOCON to mean social conservatives that object to Game.  I know that SOCONS have differing opinions on this topic just like all sorts of other ones.

 

Novaseeker added some additional insight here, into my last entry on this topic.  It got me thinking about how SOCONS view marriage, and the importance they place upon it.  They view marriage as a contract with God that is supposed to be eternal.  They celebrate the virtues of a couple staying loyal through good times and bad, only to separate in physical form when one of them dies.  They understand the importance of stable marriages for producing healthy children and being the rock that civilization rests on.

My grandparents have been married for 65+ years.  It’s a wonderful thing.  Its also a dying trend.  Notice how stable these geriatric marriages are.  Don’t see many divorces after a couple has been married for 50 years .  The image in F. Roger Devlin’s story of a woman caring for her WWII vet husband in a nursing home is a powerful one.  Fortunately for the couple, the woman’s behavior was constrained to a much larger degree when they got married than it would be now.  Did  females’ core nature change in 60 years?  Of course not.   Incentives, and societal norms did.   

Women have always had the power of her beauty and fertility.  Now she is armed with economic parity and legal favoritism in significant and trivial ways alike.  A woman is free to use her sexual power any way she sees fit. Thanks to anonymous urban living, she is free from societal disapproval.  She has absolute power over reproduction as well. 

Wow.  That’s alot of power for a girl of such limited life experience.  A man of similar power would take years to acquire it.  Imagine, for example, if 18 year old boys ran industry, politics and had personal fortunes.  Think of the destructive and irresponsible decisions that would come from such a situation.

With young women, we are beginning to see the consequences of this unconstrained power in unwise and fickle minds.  Read what Novaseeker added to my point about marriage.  How can we get women in their 20s to reach their 80s, married and content, sitting by their elderly “beta” providers side? How can an individual man have the best shot at realizing this scenario. 

I guess an easy answer would be: Return to constraining that nature.  My easy reply would be: Fat chance.  I’m not going to run down the list of female privileges, and why social and legal restraints are a pipe dream, but if you disagree feel free to give me an example.  To me, only an American collapse would bring significant cultural change in this regard.  I don’t see that kind of collapse happening in the near future.  A tweaking at the margins may be feasible, but that is the extent of it in my view.

I think the best chance a man has in getting out of the “divorce danger zone” is Game.   The danger zone of course, is her 20’s and 30’s.  Society sure isn’t going to help out in that goal.  Your on your own. You won’t need to Game your wife nearly as much, if at all, when you are sitting in the retirement village.  A woman in her 20s can be overwhelmed by her power and choices. A lack of  stability and common sense doesn’t help either.  Women, especially at that age, are short sighted and unaware how their choices will be greatly diminished in a short amount of time. 

I want as many men as possible to benefit from a faithful wife wiping drool from their chin at age 90 as possible.  The road to that goal goes through a woman’s 20 and 30s though.  This is like March Madness, only backward.  You play the tough “teams” 1st.  Once you get to the Final Four, you are playing Belmont and Colgate.

Some random observations…

It occurs to me that another aspect of  female Game is shaming language.  Men who have any experience at all with women know what I am talking about. It is used to exploit weaknesses in a males natural desire to be viewed as a good provider, good in bed, honorable, and what not.  It is used to control men and  give a woman a leg up in gender relations. Whether done subconsciously or in a calculated manner makes no difference.  Men that are naturally good with women don’t often consciously use their version of Game either.

White Knights run Game themselves.  I wrote a little bit about that here.  Just because their Game is less successful doesn’t  mean it is more noble.  The White Knights aren’t selfless paragons of virtue.

One problem I see, that some SOCONS have, is their inability to appreciate the growing number of men that can go YEARS without a sniff of female attention.  It is assumed that the man must have something wrong with him if he can’t find a suitable mate in a certain amount of time.

I’m not talking about street bums, or the mentally handicapped either.  I can picture in my minds eye plenty of average looking, reasonably intelligent, and socially awkward men in their 30s, who are locked out completely.  We don’t live in a “one man one woman” culture anymore.  Some men, even ones with decent incomes and values are womanless.  Without a change in their behavior and outlook, this situation will go on indefinitely.

Perhaps SOCONS think it is perfectly fair that this decent, ordinary guy has to find females with severe defects in looks, age, baggage ,values, etc. to settle on; because women, in years past, who would have been his logical mate, are waiting for a higher status male to come along.  This ain’t a level playing field.

I’m sure alot of the disconnect with SOCONS has to do with age differences.  I am pretty hopeless on the ability to convince the older guys.  They can’t relate at all.  The rising percentage of sexless and dateless men simply don’t register with them.  It’s funny,  I don’t generally find them out of touch on other issues.  I might disagree with them, but I don’t feel as if I am in a time machine, talking to someone from 1948 either.

The younger SOCONS are reachable though.  Look at Thursday.  He is great on religious topics and understands the benefits of Game.  He is the type of example to sell to other SOCONS.  I hope he writes more on topics like this.  I think he has more credibility than alot of guys writing on these issues.  Novaseeker is of a religious persuasion as well.  Those are the type of guys that can make more headway with younger SOCONS of similar back ground and values.

Some of the reservations and hostility I see to Game seem to come from the idea that Game is set in stone.  Like Mystery or Roissy came up from the fires of hell, holding a tablet with the “rules” and “regulations” that make up the amoral art written on it.  That the minions of these evil doers (like me i suppose) are spreading a new kind of blasphemy to influence young minds and displace Christianity with a new secular religion.

Of course I disagree with this notion.  The most important aspect of game requires a more realistic view of female nature. Knocking the female off of her pedestal and placing her down here with all of us mere mortal and sinful men. The techniques of game will seem less threatening and make more sense once this happens.  The analogy to a gun will  resonate more.

Not every technique needs to be advocated either.  It’s not an all or nothing proposition.  Heck, you can even change the name of some of the terms if you like.  If “neg” is problematic, use something else.  How bout “playful teasing”? 

Certainly religious leaders of yesteryear understood the need to constrain female nature and sexuality.  I think Game teaches a man how to personally constrain that nature in his own right.  Micro constraining if you will.

If SOCONS feel that Game is still compromising their believes, fine.  Let me raise another point.  Would you rather compromise on “negging” or on fatherhood  and marriage?   I’m thinking a society with more game, more marriage success and more legitimate children is better than a society with men sticking to absolute principle, less marriage and less legitimate children. 

To conclude…

Game allows an honest assessment of the dark parts of female nature and the disastrous consequences of it when unconstrained.  This to me is the most beneficial part of Game on the “macro” level.  Only when a realistic assessment of a woman’s nature is understood will their be any progress in the broad array of men’s issues.

Lets see, what do I fear more….

A. Large numbers of men will learn Game and go around pumping and dumping with impunity, sending Western Civilization into a death spiral from which it will never recover.

or

B. The larger culture never confronting the dark aspects of female nature, and continuing the “pedestal from the right, goddess from the left” paradigm we currently live in, and all of the social consequences that entails.

I hope that was viewed as rhetorical, but for the more thickheaded, I fear B much more than A.

I would align myself with men “worse” than Roissy or Mystery to try to move the understanding of destructive female nature in the right direction.  I feel it’s that important.  It’s not mens’ fault that only PUAs, with few exceptions, are the ones pointing out the elephant in the room.   I’m certainly not waiting on feminists, the mass media, or other useful idiot groups to begin an honest dialogue about male/female differences.

For this reason, Game is important to skeptics and non practitioners as well.  I am for almost anything that will allow this taboo subject to gain some traction in the larger culture.

Social Conservatives had their chance.  They still have a chance if they want to jump on board or offer tangible and workable alternatives.  Bio Conservatism has began to move in to fill in the void. 

Game denying SOCONS can talk about horrible men that won’t grow up and gay marriage til their hearts content.  I’ve heard it all.  I know, men are dirty dogs.  Thank you. I got that memo.  The rest of society has as well.  I have, and will continue to give it do diligence.

If you don’t mind though, I’ll be busy trying to avert a full blown matriarchy and all of the terrible consequences that come with  it.  I’m not hopeful, but at least I won’t be fiddling while America burns.

Advertisements

11 Comments

Filed under american decline, american women, beta male, female nature, Mens Issues, pop culture

11 responses to “More Thoughts on Game and Social Conservatives

  1. Posec

    Here (from another post of mine) is why option ‘A’ is discomfiting: “Once it permeates politics, the ‘bio’ part of biocon will not be in dispute, but the ‘con’ certainly will be. There are implications in HBD that dovetail with the leftist agenda (e.g welfare). It will then become necessary for those whose object it is to preserve the West to distinguish themselves from these hypothetical ‘Bio-radicals’

  2. Niko

    Left to its own device, game would encentivise woman to pull their heads in overnight. Problem is big daddy government will catch any fallout:

    STDs, no problems we’ll teach boys in schools to use rubbers.
    Rotten cunts from promiscuous sex, no problems here is your cervical cancer vaccine.
    Illegitimate children, no problems here’s a welfare check.
    Stud won’t commit, lets call it common law marriage.
    Got a gina tingle, here’s your divorce papers.
    Can’t get a job, we’ll give ol’ whitey the flick.
    Spending too much, well your under payed and deserve more money anyway.
    Your expectations too high, here’s premium grade A sperm and we’ll foot the bill.

    Game is the antidote but the question is how will the beast respond?

  3. Posec, thanks for the comments
    do you have a blog?
    I only see “bio” conservatism having a limited role. I wouldn’t want a whole reductionist movement of bios taking over.
    I don’t see any scenario in which option A could happen. I would also like to see non hedonists/puas talk seriously about male/female differences. I don’t think it has to be “bio” cons exclusively. If social conservatives talked about it, “bio” cons wouldn’t be so compelling.

    • Posec

      I do have a blog that centers on the historical/philosophical approach to conservative thought. Of late I have been trying to ascertain where exactly the biocons fit in the overarching movement and perhaps begin to include it in my writings. But I need a further understanding before I do so. What sort of role do you see biocons playing?

      • A role in truth telling. They don’t offer a platform that a politician could openly run on, but they might be able to change the debate a little bit by affecting voters assumptions.
        It can be ugly and I wish I lived in a world where it wasn’t necessary, but I don’t. The left especially, wants to use all sorts of pretty lies to advance their agenda. I see “bio” cons challenging those lies.
        A little “bio” con gos a long way. I wouldn’t want that to be the dominant theme in a philosophical movement either.

  4. niko, nice to see you.
    I think we are seeing the trends you wrote about anyway.
    I don’t accept the premise that Game leads to more of those social problems. Game will have limited utility to a small number of men that take the time and effort to take advantage of it.
    I think if used properly, game can actually help to reverse some of those trends in a small tiny way at the margins.
    The fact that Dave in Hawaii is still married and might have children is evidence in itself.
    The beast will continue unabated for the most part, Game or no Game.

    I don’t think Game will do much of anything at the “Macro” level. I mostly support it for an individual mans sake. Most men won’t use it or won’t be very successful when they do. We won’t see any mass movement of gamers out there. To the extent that talking about male/female differences help move the ball in various mens issues all the better.

    If I misunderstood your point let me know.

  5. “Did females’ core nature change in 60 years? Of course not. Incentives, and societal norms did. “

    Their core nature did not. But their social conditioning sure as heck did. Incentives are only part of the picture, as are social norms. The phrase “they just don’t make them like they used to” doesn’t just apply to appliances and cars.

    “Imagine, for example, if 18 year old boys ran industry, politics and had personal fortunes.”

    And had the literal power of life and death. Then it would be the image of women these days.

    “Game denying SOCONS can talk about horrible men that won’t grow up and gay marriage til their hearts content. I’ve heard it all. I know, men are dirty dogs. “

    I don’t listening to social con commentators if they bang on the marriage dearth but utter nary a peep about divorce. Which means I pretty much don’t have time for the whole lot of them. I can’t think of a single mainstream social con commentator that attacks hetero divorce as the #1 affliction of modern marriage and families. Same with homogamy. Yes, I think homosexuality is disgusting and a perversion of God’s gift of sexuality. But the steady drumbeat of homos demanding permission from the State to marry is but a symptom. And men are dirty dogs if you let them. Same as women are domineering bitches if you let ’em.

  6. Hey EW
    Not much to add. Excellent points.

    Men are indeed dirty dogs. I sometimes get into conversations with my sister or others females about male/female nature. Good women. Not crazed feminists. When I make a point about the weaknesses in female nature their rebuttal always seems to be: well what about men?

    Generally I tell them that men have all sorts of things to battle within their own natures but I think the greater culture has that thoroughly covered. I view guys like us as the balance. A small overwhelmed, almost invisible balance, but a balance nonetheless.

    For me to dedicate my time talking about the weaknesses in male nature would be like me spending my time warning everybody about the dangers of smoking.

  7. SteveinTX

    Good posts!

    It seems that a lot of folks are taking an all or nothing approach to use of game – a response of “What would happen to society if ALL men used game.” Almost a flip side of the standard female response of “not all women are like that.”

    I see it rather as a set of channellocks within a toolbox – useful in some circumstances, not so useful in others; and I’m sure that I have some channellocks that I’ve never used.

    The reaction is “Oh no! Not channellocks, we’ve always used wrenches before!”
    Only now the heads are stripped and all the wrenches are going to do is spin. So we use the channellocks now, until we can replace the bolts.

    They are not the only tools in the toolbox, and we are not going to use them all the time but we should not throw them away just because wrenches are “better”.

    SteveinTX

  8. Thank you Steve,
    Yes, some girls require much more Game than others as well. Some of those rarely used “tools” at the bottom of the tool box can come in really handy with certain types of women especially.

  9. GG

    “One problem I see, that some SOCONS have, is their inability to appreciate the growing number of men that can go YEARS without a sniff of female attention. It is assumed that the man must have something wrong with him if he can’t find a suitable mate in a certain amount of time.

    I’m not talking about street bums, or the mentally handicapped either. I can picture in my minds eye plenty of average looking, reasonably intelligent, and ****socially awkward**** men in their 30s, who are locked out completely. We don’t live in a “one man one woman” culture anymore. Some men, even ones with decent incomes and values are womanless. Without a change in their behavior and outlook, this situation will go on indefinitely.”

    Being “socially awkward” is definitely a liability and the only solution is to make a concerted effort to improve social skills. Social skills are essential — there’s no other way around this. Without social skills you have no foundation for “game” or anthing else for that matter.

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