42 comments on “What More Proof Do You Need That Game Doesn’t Exist?

  1. Would you describe yourself as anti-feminist or anti-female?

    That’s not a loaded question with an intent to attack or anything; I’m just curious.

  2. Wow, what a surprise. A pick-up artist is a so-called “feminist”.
    It’s like Hugo Schwyzer is a feminist… but he also had sex with his students while working as a lecturer, and used drugs during that time.

    And he has the nerve to tell men how to act, much like Strauss, who wants men to step up and “game” for his leftovers.
    Take that hunk of steaming crap and eat it, Mr. Strauss and Mr. Schwyzer.
    Never take the leftovers, THAT’S being the real loser.

    • Like previously mentioned, Neil Strauss has defended feminism and castigated men who feel “threatened” by it. Neil and Hugo are shades of the same thing, both vying to be king of the hill and getting female attention while condemning other men in one fashion or another.

    • Typical case of the Alpha man “daring” other men to take the women he has decided to leave. “Are you man enough to build a life with her, knowing that she will only be _settling_ for you while thinking about me, and that at anytime she can divorce you and take all your assets?”
      Yeah, I’m not worthy.

  3. What a MORON. Attacks also come from outrage from injustices, being attacked yourself – many other things…

    Egads, I am going to read that article. This guy sounds like a complete dimwit.

  4. The Game movement has always had an undercurrent of Manginaism 2.0. Hence all those alleged PUAs who come on here and tell our host how he just needs to get some ‘game’ and he’ll be safe from false accusations.

    Think that one over: women persecute a man who doesn’t generate enough gina tingles, so that proves he has to shape up, or face more persecution. Should fat chicks need to go on a diet to be free to live their lives in peace?

    • Could you expand on what manginaism 2.0 is as opposed to manginaism 1.0?

      The comparison with fat chicks is apt to a point. Being fat won’t get them a lot of men but they have the right to live their lives free of harassment and abuse. The difference between me and fat chicks is that they will still get guys as long as they don’t weigh 800 pounds and they can lose weight. There is nothing I can change to make me attractive to women.

      • Good point Coastal. I have thought that for some time. undesireable geeky guys = obese women, in terms of attractiveness. Only difference is society has some sympathy towards obese women, nothing but contempt for undesireable men.

      • I see Manginaiam 1.0 as the whole ‘traditional manhood’ thing. Whatever its particular merits might or might not be, its one overwhelming problem was that it was utterly useless in the face of feminism. In fact, in so far as it demanded men honour a social contract women had long abandoned, it arguably enabled feminism with its constant demands that, no matter how badly treated they were, men should still ‘man up’, ‘take it like a man’ etc

        Game was supposed to be the answer to that. A new breed of men using new tactics were going to take it to Team Women. The beta chump was history and the PUA was king, ready to take hypergamous sluts on at their own game…. except you can’t help but notice a certain undercurrent in a lot of PUA material. A lot of it seems to devolve down to what I think of as Freddie Game.


        Yes, indeed. When these guys are working a prospect, they really will give them piece de resistance and a tour de force, they’re only here to entertain them…..

        Magic tricks, rehearsed routines and the like are only the extreme end of it. Even the guys doing ‘natural game’ are still following the girl’s lead: if she talks about a dancing bear she saw on TV, he’ll talk about dancing bears he’s seen.

        Sure, some will say they’re only saying it to get a result, but look how many of these people suggest that guys mistreated by women obviously deserve it for not having enough game, or think that any guy who doesn’t spend every waking moment trying to ‘getsome’ is clearly, like, some total loser…Bottom line: these guys accept the basic premise of manginatude: that a man’s worth is defined by the female opinion of him.

    • That just proves that a lot of society is built on misandry.
      Women have choices (which are never bad or they got tricked into it by an evil man or somebody made them angry or they have a condition or they couldn’t take the pressure) while men have responsibilities AND HOW DARE THEY DON’T PERFORM TO EXPECTATION.
      While as usual, the alpha man gets the betas and the omegas to foot his bill of broken women (who chose to be with him, but could never live up to him – yet take that as a sign of his “discerning” tastes), by claiming the eternal red herring “Man Up!”

  5. Gold comment here about game by “Yong” that you should check out OmegaVirgin — http://men-factor.blogspot.com/2011/04/look-out-alpha-male-on-loose.html

    “Neil and Hugo are shades of the same thing, both vying to be king of the hill and getting female attention while condemning other men in one fashion or another.”

    You got that right. At least traditional conservatives are vying for the attention of God or some deity (Hindu, Buddha, etc). “Gamers” only care about what women think lol (not to mention their emphasis on rights and autonomy).

    “Real anti-feminists want nothing to do with game because game is nothing more than a feminist lie.”

    Kind of reminds me of the distinction between real conservative and “pseudo-conservatives” — http://bonald.wordpress.com/2010/12/31/a-taxonomy-of-the-right/

  6. Pingback: Game Has Delayed Progress In Mens’ Rights « Omega Virgin Revolt

  7. What a lot of so-called “gamers” seem to miss is that men who are truly socially successful, i.e., what gamers call alpha males, generally *do not* tend to put down other men. Any man who has ever had a leadership position on a sports team, in a military unit, or other traditional male leadership role knows that positive motivation and encouragement, not putting down, of others is what accomplishes goals. When guys come on here and criticize so vocally W&N or others, one has to wonder *why* they’re doing that if they’re so great. Likewise, socially successful guys don’t shun or treat unattractive women badly…you don’t have to want to date them to be nice to them. Gamers also insist that a woman’s only “dating market value” is in her looks. To accept that is to say that a physically beautiful, nice, open-hearted, genuine woman is equal in “dating market value” to a physically beautiful, mean-spirited, emotionally insecure, rude woman. I’ve dated the former and been happy doing so and I pass up the latter just as often as I pass up women to whom I’m not physically attracted. I may not agree with everything W&N says but he has a point that the gamers who are most prolific online behave in ways inconsistent with people who have the social lives and psychological make-up of alpha males. W&N, again, I know you’ve had a hard time out there – at least you have this blog to state your opinion. Words are power.

    • but he has a point that the gamers who are most prolific online behave in ways inconsistent with people who have the social lives and psychological make-up of alpha males.

      True dat… And how do these most-prolific “gamers” post 15 long rants about game on a friday evening? Sometimes you wonder if they even do any work, let alone leave the house to meet women.

  8. Bam! Another one smacked out of the park. Great work, W&N.

    It is a basic axiom that men’s movements never get anywhere, and never will get anywhere, because men are always eager to throw each other under the bus, if it looks like it would get them ahead, especially if a woman is involved. I see Game as just another manifestation of that.

  9. I read the article you posted with Neil Strauss and I never heard any mention saying he supports feminism. Can you please quote the part where he says that? He just says that he isn’t against feminism and questions the definition of feminism. I don’t interpret that as being pro-feminist, if anything I interpret it as being neutral or indifferent to feminism.

    • Random… You’re in mega denial… By the very FACT he uses feminist languaging and ACCEPTS basic feminist concepts, he’s automatically saying he supports feminism.

      Do you want him to spell it out ?

      • Maybe I am in denial, but this doesn’t look like supporting feminism to me:

        “CT: So how do you feel about feminism?

        NS: I’m definitely not an expert, but it’s splintered into so many things that I can barely define feminism. There can be people who are feminist, and people who hold the completely opposite view but are still feminists. It seems to me from the outside that there’s a lot of people busy fighting each other rather than working toward their goals. It’s a shame. Maybe you can tell me what feminism is.”

        Plus, do you really think he is going to say he’s anti feminist to a feminist interviewer? Of course not, it looks to me like he just dodged answering the question to avoid looking anti-female.

        • LOL, at least try to give a proper rebuttle rather than just claim I’m in denial.

          Anyways, the interviewer clearly states that she is a sex positive feminist. If Neil Strauss had said this, I’d be able to say without a doubt, yes Neil Strauss is a feminist. The problem he doesn’t mention that he is a feminist once and all he does is mention that he is not anti-feminist. Not being anti-feminist does not make you a feminist.

        • “It seems to me from the outside that there’s a lot of people busy fighting each other rather than working toward their goals. [b]It’s a shame.[/b]”

          So, it being a shame that the feminists can’t get their ducks in a row to “work towards their goals” isn’t an affirmation of feminist ideals?


  10. You could get anything you want from that quote. What I get from reading that is that men and women won’t be able to reach their goals if they keep fighting each other. You obviously get something else, it’s obvious people see what they want when they read what Neil Strauss says, maybe it’s better not to draw any baseless conclusions?

    • Baseless!? He upfront states that unjustified fear and ignorance are the only reasons any man could oppose feminism. That’s a key feminist talking point right there (also: assine). If he’s saying that only the stupid and bigoted could possible oppose feminism, then yes, that’s an endorsement of feminism. It’s like a guy saying he’s not anti-Semitic, but ‘here’s the deal’: the Jews are running the world.

      • Like I told W&N, how anyone interprets his points is completely arbitrary. Is the point you are making possibly true? Yes it definitely is, but so is mine, so I respect your opinion, but I’m not drawing any conclusions.

        • Ok random, you’ve officially lost any respect I had for you. That’s just sad…

          Neil Strauss: Anyone who dislikes obama hates black people
          Neil Strauss: The reason people aren’t progressives is because they don’t GET progressivism
          Random: Nah, that doesn’t mean NS is progressive, can’t drawn conclusions

          Neil Strauss: People who won’t accepted god into their lives just don’t get it
          Random: Nah, that doesn’t mean Neil Strauss is Religious… That’s just an intepretation

          Random… Pathetic

  11. LOL, AlekNovy you can continue to insult people who disagree with you. You did it with yohami and you did it with me. Luckily we aren’t as weak and stupid as most people you try to intiimidate to believe your extremely poor arguments.

    At least W&N states his opinion and says take it or leave it. You are the only who is pathetic sadly.

  12. AlekNovy: Anyone who disagrees with me loses my respect and is pathetic
    AlekNovy: The reason people don’t believe what I say is because they don’t get what I say
    Random: Nah, that doesn’t mean what you are saying is true, can’t drawn conclusions

    AlekNovy: People who won’t accept everything W&N says unquestioningly, just don’t get it

    Random: Nah, that doesn’t mean W&N is right all the time… That’s just an interpretation

    LOL, you’re just as bad as gamers when it comes to convincing people to believe your bullshit. You just admitted you used to write for marketers, so convincing people of whatever you believe whatever you say is your obvious strong suit. It’s a shame it won’t work on people me and yohami who look at logic and not emotional manipulation to believe something.

    AlekNovy and Gamers = One in the same, different side of the same coin. The sad thing is I actually respected you as someone who knew what they were talking about until you had to reduce yourself to insults and intimidation to yohami because he didn’t agree with you on a few points.

    • Its simple really. You’re defending Neil Strauss with this routine called “nah I don’t wanna draw fast conclusions”

      • My point is that I think Neil Strauss is just playing nice to feminists because he received a lot of backlash and was called a misogynist for his book and he’s simply trying to deflect negative attention from feminists by taking their side. Whether he is actually a feminist in reality I have no clue, I don’t know the guy in real life.

        • “Whether he is actually a feminist in reality I have no clue, I don’t know the guy in real life.”

          This is pathetic, Random.

          That’s like saying a man who spends his entire career denouncing black people as “the inferior mud race” isn’t a hate-monger if he loves black people in secret.

          The only way that argument can actually work is if he is working undercover, but that usually entails the act of sabotage while the spy works.

          Now unless Neil Strauss is secretly moving to undermine and destroy feminism in some MEANINGFUL capacity (which I highly doubt), I don’t give a SHIT who he cheers for when he’s home alone.

          And neither do the rest of us.

        • If Strauss is secretly working to attack feminism then more power to him. However most people most of the time don’t operate in such a fashion. Without evidence there is no reason to ascribe such motives to Strauss so I have no choice to conclude Strauss is a feminist or a feminist sympathizer.

      • Wow all of you guys are totally blowing this out of proportion. I wouldn’t say I’m a feminist, but I have nothing against their cause. Thanks for the laugh guys, it made my day.

  13. Pingback: Hookers Provide Something Tangible Unlike Gamers « Omega Virgin Revolt

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.