***Lawrence Auster, Among the Gamers
These kids feel that they have their hands on the truth, the truth that no humans before them have ever seen--the truth of female sexuality. They lay great stress on the idea that social conservatives are on the wrong side, because the "SoCons," as they call them, see men as beasts and women as refined beings whose job it is to civilize the men. Now it's true that such a view is fairly common among today's social conservatives and Christians, and I agree with the Gamers that it is a sentimental and destructive delusion. But what the Gamers don't see is that the Christianity they are accusing of naivete on this score is the contemporary, emotion-based brand of evangelical Christianity… They don't seem to be aware that historical Christianity and conservatism put human sinfulness first and foremost in its picture of human nature--including an understanding of female sexuality in its evil aspects [...]
But a more fundamental flaw than their cultural and historical ignorance and their ideological arrogance is their biological reductionism and determinism. Thus they treat the female attraction to dangerous and irresponsible men…as a fundamental and unchangeable truth of existence on which society must be built, not realizing that this "truth" is itself the result of contingent cultural factors. In Christian terms, it would be like translating the idea that "man is inclined to evil but capable of good," into "man is biologically determined to be evil." Of course, some things are biologically determined; but the Gamers seem to think that everything is biologically determined.
I'll quote some comments from In Mala Fide to give a flavor of the discussion.
A commenter named Rum wrote:
Saving Western Civilization is still the ultimate Right Thing to Do, it is just that this will have to be done without putting women on much of a pedestal, and with the awareness that most womens' deepest sexual instincts are no different than a chimp's--they only want to mate with elite males and will hook up with ordinary nice guys if they have no choice. The hind-brain-vagina connection always lights up brightest in response to the type of man that is unlikely to be an ideal, stable provider.
To which I replied:
If you think that this is true, and if you think that speaking about human beings in this way can be the basis of any politics at all, let alone of some alliance between bio-cons and social conservatives, let alone of saving Western civilization, you're living in a fantasy.
Look at what you're saying. You're saying that the way to save Western civilization is to regard women as the equivalents of chimpanzees.
***One STVD, Why The Beta Revolution Will Fail
The Beta Revolution errs in assuming these betas will act in the manner which supports societal reform and not in the manner that motivated them to pursue Game in the first place. With the success of Game, their sexual desire and confidence will only increase, making them increasingly unlikely to settle down with a rapidly aging baby-maker. Thus, the Beta Revolution ultimately fails because it converts a class of productive men potentially satisfied with a traditional family existence into a cohort of productive men who shirk the duties of stability and reproduction. The Beta Revolution will depress the reproduction of betas by inviting them into a world of sexual gratification and excess. Thus, the beta foundation of society will reproduce even less and the proposed solution fails.
***One of the comments to Fedinand Bardamu's post, Dialog with a Skeptic...
“The Mystery-Neil Strauss conception of game, the view that is by far the most popular, bases its precepts on a quack pseudoscience called “neuro-linguistic programming."
This is not entirely true. In his book “The Mystery Method,” Mystery says that the philosophical basis of game is biology. He states that women are attracted to men who the women’s instincts indicate have high “S+R value,” survival and replication value. I don’t know whether he mentions Darwin by name, but his statement that women are attracted to men based on their biologically programmed antennae for replication value is clearly Darwinian in ethic.
You are giving NLP more credit than it deserves as the historical basis for game. NLP proved that women had certain attraction switches that could be turned on through words and behaviors. This truth caused Mystery to do a trial and error study of female attraction, using himself as the test subject. What he came up with was largely the Evo-Psych based theory we see today.
***Alpha Dog Ryan Jenkins committed suicide yesterday.
***Thought of the Day: Where is Roissy in all this??
***Lawrence Auster, Are "Bad Boy" and "Alpha" Just the Loser's Excuse?
There is an element of truth in Roissy's advice...But it's mixed up with something false and negative. To say that men need to be strong, that they need to be the leader in the relationship, and that that is what women want, is not the same thing as the deliberate manipulation that Roissy counsels. What he says is not good. The badness of Roissy simply radiates from everything he writes. And frankly, not intending disrespect to anyone, I feel that people who do not see this about Roissy have gone astray.
Evil always comes mixed with good, otherwise it would have no power to attract. So Roissy offers some things that seem helpful. But (1) Roissy is evil; and (2) whatever truly valid element there is in Roissy's advice could be found and practiced without Roissy and his baggage.
The men asserting that they can't find wives because the women "don't want nice guys" are engaging in self-justification and/or self-delusion. What is actually happening is that the women whom they consider sufficiently attractive to pursue don't find them sufficiently attractive and/or interesting in return. Women who fail to measure up to their standards of beauty won't get the time of day from these "nice guys."
Roissy's purpose is not to exalt readers with truth, but rather--like a successful pornographer--to foment anger and misogyny in men who want to luxuriate in their sexual frustration. Like all propaganda, his message is based on partial truth, but he also slanders and denigrates all women for effect. In fact, there are plenty of good women out there...For any refined man, hedonism is nihilistic despair, and as such, has nothing to do with saving Western civilization. In fact, it is just another exponent of its decline.
M. Mason at VFR:
Even apart from the sophomoric, ludicrous notion that the Game could ever be the driving force to produce a higher civilization, it doesn't take profound insight to see that it will eventually prove to be destructive on the personal level for everyone involved in it. And it is the women in such relationships who will first come to realize just how distasteful and unacceptable a counterfeit it really is. For a woman's strongest desires--to feel specially loved and cherished and to have the deepest possible emotional connection to her mate--are exactly what Roissy's desperate, addicted, game-playing "lost boys" will be constitutionally incapable of fulfilling.
John Dempsey at VFR:
Game is an excuse for sinful behavior under the pretense of altering or undermining the current sexual license that prevails in our society. As we know, it is in our nature to use any justification we might devise in order to fulfill our own desires as well as to justify why we should not be adhering to moral principles. Game is nothing less than arrant evil in disguise.
[END]
1 comment:
I posted today concerning SoCons misconceptions about Game and Ferdinand's POV.
http://chuckross.blogspot.com/2009/08/games-incongruent-terms-of-discourse.html
Post a Comment