102 comments on “Game Is Losing Effectiveness?

  1. I laugh when people talk about “game.” You see, there is no “game” and when people like Roissy and the HBD crowd talk about “game,” you immediately know they’re swimming in a sea of shit. There is no scientific evidence that game works; there has never been a study validating the supposedly core concepts of “game” and my guess is there never will be one, notwithstanding the usual “evo psych” just so stories used to justify this cynical and even crypto-feminist approach to dating, stories which can be used to justify literally anything. “Game” is bullshit and anyone who preaches it is a charlatan with a vested interest in your pocket book. The truth of the matter is that she either likes you or she doesn’t and there’s nothing you can do or say otherwise to change her mind. It’s like some guys and fat bitches, where they wouldn’t touch a fat bitch with a ten foot pole, regardless of what she says or does (although this analogy may not be particularly apt, seeing as how a significant minority of men will fuck anything that moves. This is also why women don’t need “game”).

    Now, I guess it’s time for PUAs to come at me with the usual female shaming language (it’s amazing the many similarities between PUA, gender feminism and even traditional Christianity): “You’re just bitter because you can’t get pussy…” Blah, blah, blah, blah.

    To PUAs: Buddy, I don’t need pussy. Except for maybe once this year, I spent the previous decade without pussy. I can do another 10 years without pussy as well. And seeing as how most men these days are settling down with women who can barely fit their asses through the front door or who have stomachs so big they haven’t seen their feet in years, being able to “get pussy” isn’t exactly something to be proud of either.

    • I agree with everything you say, and what I’m about say might sound like nit-picking, but I still wanna say it, just for the sake of clarity.

      The truth of the matter is that she either likes you or she doesn’t and there’s nothing you can do or say otherwise to change her mind.

      Only in one direction though. If you’re in her “not interested” classification, than sure, there’s nothing you can do. But if you’re in her “yes” category, there’s plenty of things you can do to change her mind so she moves you to the “no” category lol 😀

      I know you already know/say that, and its assumed, but still. I think it is useful to learn social skills, for the sake of not alienating people. It is possible to learn how to avoid being moved from “yes” to no”… and that is a learnable skill.

      Game is the lie that you can move from the “no” to the “yes.

    • I disagree Born Again Atheist. Traditional Christians are a separate group and Atheists, feminists, PUA’s and the crowd HBD have more similarities than differences when compared to traditional conservatives.

      • Actually, there is very little difference between Christians and feminists (at least in terms of social and ethical policy), as both groups are opposed to prostitution, pornography, the commodification of sex and the objectification of the female form, generally condemning male sexuality as a whole and advocating a traditional Protestant bourgeois morality as its antidote. Both see women as helpless figures who need to be protected by the government. PUA, Christianity and feminism are very similar to each other in that they all place women on a pedestal and believe them to be goddesses without fault, regardless of the woman’s behavior or what she looks like.

    • The difference between Christian marriages and secular ones is that secular ones seem to break down 50% of the time, and Christian ones “only” 38% of the time.
      Such an improvement, NOT!

  2. Perfect the more that say game does not exist and either demean it or say they won’t use it the better.

    Bravo Bravo. Keep the Hamster’s working

  3. It’s easy to notice that women go for guys who “supposedly” have game when they are young.

    But even this isn’t accurate as not all guys with game succeed.

    It’s more of a function of the woman’s ability to be expedient. She thinks there is no need for her to worry about the long-term while she has her fun.

    Notice that guys with game aren’t the target of most women after the women have nothing to fall back on. Maybe it’s because girls know that in the competition with the so-called “sisterhood” they’ll surely lose on the basis of their now reduced attractiveness. Not to mention their now-developed mental conditions.

    But you’ll hear more in the news about how most men are suddenly cads and useless, because the women that want to be attached despite being strong, equal and independent… always want someone else to pick up the tab for their actions, refuse to be held accountable in any way and demand that you treat them as if they are innocent newborn babes.

    As more men wake up to the idea that they were never really wanted, due to increased questions about paternity, disease and fidelity, more draconian laws will be passed to “keep the family together”

    We already have Lord Mansfield’s Rule of English Common Law. I see no reason why men should fully trust women when such an assumption (that in a marriage, the children are automatically assumed to be the husbands) is routinely made, enforced and promoted.

  4. When people say “game doesn’t exist”, what does that exactly mean?

    I mean, the concepts of kino, social value etc are not valid to you guys?

    There are hundred of variations on what game really is… I mean, many gamers even admit it’s all about displaying value, and you can actually “show more value than you really got”, by for examplo walking in a club with a hottie friend of yours.

    Game is cool for guys pretty much clueless about women, and sure thing helped a lot of people. It’s not only because some gamers claims like “YOU CAN GET ANY WOMAN ANYWHERE ANYTIME” are stupid as hell that the whole idea is trash. Makes sense?

    seriously, i’m not trolling. answers will be appreciated.

    • When people say “game doesn’t exist”, what does that exactly mean?

      vs

      There are hundred of variations on what game really is…

      You answered your own question. What we mean when we say that game doesn’t exist, is that it can’t be defined and nobody can agree what it is. Even the exact same person will redefine it based on how it fits the argument. At one point “game is doing x”, at another point “game is never doing x”.

      We’ve challenged thousands of people to define it. They can’t. And before you try, I’m not gonna waste my time. I’ve had this conversation so many times, and it always ends the same. The gamer just changes the definition once more, and does that like over and over and over again.

      Individual components exist, but “game” as a whole is a catch-all concept invented to mislead men, sell products and be able to conveniently shame men. Its kind of like “creep” and “creep”-you invent it on the spot (based on feeling) to term whatever you like – so you can shame people with it.

      Game is cool for guys pretty much clueless about women, and sure thing helped a lot of people. It’s not only because some gamers claims like “YOU CAN GET ANY WOMAN ANYWHERE ANYTIME” are stupid as hell that the whole idea is trash. Makes sense?

      Sure, placebo does help people in some cases, but we still dislike the selling of miracle water- even if it does help some people, because it hurts more people than it accidentally helps. And even the ones it helped, they don’t know why it helped them. If you get “success” on a false-premise, you can’t replicate it later on, and then you’ll spend years trying to recreate it “because it worked earlier”.

      • No.

        There are hundred of variations of game, but not necessarily hundreds of DEFINITIONS. That’s where your reasoning fails.

        It’s like saying sports do not exist because there are hundreds of variations of them. -.-

        Game is any planned system to aid men in interacting and ultimately seduce a woman. That means anything from “Inner game” (how to look at yourself) and “outer game” (how to express yourself, be it throught words, body language, etc).

        Obviously gaming is relatively recent in History, so many different people see different ways of attracting and interacting (systems) better than others.

        There ARE guys who actually get very good with girls with all this knowledge. They undertand what kind of stuff they should convey and demonstrate while on a conversation, plus what kind of body language is attractive and what isn’t and ultimately get better with “picking up” girls.

        Thing is, value is demonstrated through many ways, and women have many “offset” values for “measuring” attraction. Some women expect men to be buff, others like long haired men, others get turned on by musicians, others like nerdy guys. Ok, so if you already fit her “type”, you’ll have already higher value, and plus she’ll be more attracted to you naturally because of how SHE sees the world.

        But being able to handle the social situations correctly can either boost or diminish this initial value of yours. I’m a lot in the dating scene, and I’m young, so I got out a lot and see this every single weekend. I’d know what I’m talking about.

        The thing is, some guys really have low value naturally, and for the huge majority of women they will be seen as low value, thus won’t feel attracted to them. Being able to handle yourself in social situations is awesome, and seeing yourself in a positive way is great, but if you value offset is way too low it’s very unlikely you’ll be able to change the tide in your favour. So you’ll prolly have to work on yourself (better career, better body) to generate a more positive initial offset.

        It’s all about the big picture. You guys got carried away from the MAGIC PILL ADDS GET ANY WOMAN ANYTIME ANYWHERE and forget that it’s not about it.

        That being said, anyone saying that “game” doesn’t give you and edge in seducing women (be it by giving more knowledge, or giving more confidence) knows jack about seduction.

        • Dude stop rambling and gamesplainning. I’ve been around game circles before you could read the alphabet. I was around back when it was few hundred people on usenet. I even got a reality show produced on it – one of the first in Europe and before Strauss book.

          Please produce a definition Of “game” in one paragraph that

          1) is not vague, only contains quantifiable and measurable things
          2) makes it different than “confidence” or “social skills”

          I’ve given this challenge to hundreds of gamers for ten years, not one had succeeded, they just keep rambling on and on and refuse to give this definition.

      • Heh, you are going all way ad hominem now, Alek. So what if you’ve been around for 100 years? Doesn’t make you right or wrong, so w/e. Stick to the point.

        You are being evasive, and that’s funny. Why don’t you respond my post point by point instead of claiming that I’m simply wrong? Prolly because you can’t.

        Anyways, I’ll still do the “bodybuilding” approach:

        Definition of game: Game is any planned system to aid men in interacting and ultimately seduce a woman.

        Definition of bodybuilding: Bodybuilding is any planned system to aid men/women to build muscles aestheticaly.

        Too bad English is not my native language, or else I could give a more precise definition. Anyways, to prove me wrong you’ll have to:

        Prove the definition of game is wrong.

        If you fail, game exists. Over.

        • Definition of game: Game is any planned system to aid men in interacting and ultimately seduce a woman.

          vs.

          The combined knowledge from Evolutionary Psychology, Female Psychology and Body Language (amongst others) form what is called GAME.

          YOU IDIOT, YOU MANAGED TO GIVE TWO different definitions IN THE SAME DAY YOU FUCKING IDIOT. I told you this was going to happen before you even answered didn’t I?

          We’ve been through this on this blog a billion times. I told you that gamers always keep inventing and giving new definitions when I ask them questions, they just keep popping up new definitions when old ones fail ad-infinitum. YOU GAVE TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS JUST TODAY – in one fucking day.

          See how you’re fucking getting tripped over trying to define it – that’s because it doesn’t fucking exist. Here’s several tidbits for you…

          1) Knowledge =| system – so in one case you say its knowledge, in another that its a system. But you can have a system without having knowledge (following a ready-made diet-plan), and you can have general knowledge without having a system

          SO WHICH IS IT? Is it having a PLANNED system, or is it having knowledge… or is it always both?

          2) If game is “any planned system” than how come you dorks say that “naturals” have game. ISNT THAT A CONTRADICTORY STATEMENT? If they’re doing it NATURALLY and UNCONCIOUSLY, then its NOT a “planned system”. Then doesn’t that defy your definition of game. Either your definition isn’t correct, or naturals don’t have “game”.

          3) Do you discount game-teachers that only impart general knowledge and give no planned system?

          The DORK SAID:
          Game is any planned system to aid men in interacting and ultimately seduce a woman.

          4) HOW IS IT THEN FUCKING DIFFERENT THAN FUCKING SOCIAL SKILLS? See, any time anyone admits being a gamer, they’re carrying a big flag saying “I’m a dork with no social skills”.

          The DORK SAID:
          Game is any planned system to aid men in interacting and ultimately seduce a woman.

          OH SO DRINKING 3 BEER A NIGHT IS FUCKING GAME – see, that fits your fucking definition. Because if I make a plan to drink 3 beers per night, that AIDS my interacting with and ultimately seducing women – and this system is actually scientifically validated – there’s actual scientific proof that people getting drunk hook up more often -unlike pua theories.

          BUT STILL – do you see how fucking idiotic your definition is? You just defined drinking beer as fucking being “game”.

        • Further expansion on naturals-they also don’t fit the definition of “game” as being knowledge, because obviously naturals dont have the conscious knowledge either.

          So naturals fail both of your definitions of game you dork. Are you saying that naturals “have no game”? Are you saying the guys out there raking in hundreds of partners naturally “have no game”? That’s what your TWO definitions say you dork.

        • *****
          “YOU IDIOT, YOU MANAGED TO GIVE TWO different definitions IN THE SAME DAY YOU FUCKING IDIOT. I told you this was going to happen before you even answered didn’t I?

          We’ve been through this on this blog a billion times. I told you that gamers always keep inventing and giving new definitions when I ask them questions, they just keep popping up new definitions when old ones fail ad-infinitum. YOU GAVE TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS JUST TODAY – in one fucking day.”
          *****

          Oh my… you are just so… I don’t know

          Dense.

          You are wrong in so many points and you use so many fallacies… anyways I’ll take the time to prove you wrong, even though you are bad bad bad bad at this. If this was a face to face discussion you would be done by now because you are sustaining your points on logical weak links.

          ================
          Definition of game: Game is any planned system to aid men in interacting and ultimately seduce a woman.

          THIS is the DEFINITION.
          ================

          ================
          The combined knowledge from Evolutionary Psychology, Female Psychology and Body Language (amongst others) form what is called GAME.

          THIS is where game got the knowledge for it’s foundations.
          ================

          PLEASE, stop being stupid. Serioulsly. You aren’t being honest and you are just acting defensively in the face of the obvious.

          Again…

          =================
          Definition of bodybuilding: Bodybuilding is any planned system to aid men/women to build muscles aestheticaly.

          This is the DEFINITION.
          =================

          =================
          The combined knowledge from Medicine, Anatomy, Nutrition and Weightlifting (amongst others) form what is called BODYBUILDING.

          THIS is where bodybuilding got the knowledge for it’s foudations.
          =================

          sigh

          I didn’t give two definitions, and even if I did, it would only disqualify one another if they were contradicting (simple logic for you there), but no, they COMPLEMENT each other. Because one is actually the definition and other is a description on where the knowledge came from.

          Ok, so I don’t wanna go back to this point again, because it’s pretty obvious my definition is good, is solid and I’ve won your 10 year challenge. Wow I’m so proud. Not really, but w/e.

          *****
          1) Knowledge =| system – so in one case you say its knowledge, in another that its a system. But you can have a system without having knowledge (following a ready-made diet-plan), and you can have general knowledge without having a system

          SO WHICH IS IT? Is it having a PLANNED system, or is it having knowledge… or is it always both?
          *****

          That’s the part that made pretty sure you are just really really dense. Knowledge ISN’T a system, but ANY SYSTEM is made basically from INFORMATION (your ready made diet-plan), and this by DEFINITION IS KNOWLEDGE (“the state of knowing INFORMATION).

          *****
          2) If game is “any planned system” than how come you dorks say that “naturals” have game. ISNT THAT A CONTRADICTORY STATEMENT? If they’re doing it NATURALLY and UNCONCIOUSLY, then its NOT a “planned system”. Then doesn’t that defy your definition of game. Either your definition isn’t correct, or naturals don’t have “game”.
          *****

          Hmm, I’ve never said that. And yes, I believe naturals don’t have “game”, but they have the ability to seduce naturaly (hence natural). They don’t use game.

          Your biggest problem is that you like to dwelve in semantycs to avoid the real questions, but whatever.

          *****
          3) Do you discount game-teachers that only impart general knowledge and give no planned system?

          The DORK SAID:
          Game is any planned system to aid men in interacting and ultimately seduce a woman.
          *****

          Haha stop being so aggressive, it’s kinda embarassing you are getting so upset over this.

          Every game system has it’s inner and outer game parts. Some over emphasize inner game (prolly the example you gave), while others over emphasize outer (canned openers junkies). But probably with very few exceptions (never saw an exception tbh), every system has those two parts, mainly.

          ****
          4) HOW IS IT THEN FUCKING DIFFERENT THAN FUCKING SOCIAL SKILLS? See, any time anyone admits being a gamer, they’re carrying a big flag saying “I’m a dork with no social skills”.
          ****

          Obviously it envolves social skills, as much as bodybuilding involves strenght, for example. But you don’t realize that you have a very stiff standart for social skills. Lemme explain:

          For you, a guy with great social skills is talkative, always touches women he wants to seduce the right way, always has good body language in matters of seducing woman. While this is a possibility, it’s not always true. For example, a guy that went to church his whole life and was told that sex is wrong and that you must remain a virgin till marriage may be GREAT with his social skills (talking to people, even going very well on job interviews) but may lack confidence in approaching women (if he’s willing to do so) simply because he’s not used to it, noone ever discussed this with him nor he watched any family/older brother/good friend approach chicks (to see how it’s usually done).

          Having AWESOME social skills doesn’t necessarily mean you are good with women.

          Imagine that guy that picks up all the chicks but can’t really go well on a job interview even having the knowledge or a graduation under his belt. Those are different skills that OBVIOUSLY use SOCIAL SKILLS, but INVOLVE OTHER KINDS OF KNOWLEDGE/INFORMATION.

          Simple enough, huh?

          So, yes, it’s different than just having social skills.

          ****
          OH SO DRINKING 3 BEER A NIGHT IS FUCKING GAME – see, that fits your fucking definition. Because if I make a plan to drink 3 beers per night, that AIDS my interacting with and ultimately seducing women – and this system is actually scientifically validated – there’s actual scientific proof that people getting drunk hook up more often -unlike pua theories.

          BUT STILL – do you see how fucking idiotic your definition is? You just defined drinking beer as fucking being “game”.
          *****

          If you consider drinking 3 beers a night a system… ahaha there are good systems, and there are bad ones. This is probably a bad one. The data you provided (drunk people hook up more often) doesn’t necessarily come from the fact that you get more attractive or relaxed if you do (which I believe probably is the case), but you forget that the ocasions when people get drunk are often ones that highly favour sexual contact (parties, clubs, etc) compared to others that don’t favour it that much (getting drunk at home alone is probably rarer). Amongst other factors. Show me the scientific proof for it so we can look at it further.

          Now, a little advice: Stop forcing semantycs here, and go all out on the point you should be trying to make. And also stop acting like a fucking brat cursing everytime and calling me names to try to compensate your obliteration in this argument.

          Anyone who’s reading this can see you failed hard and that I’ve proved my point rock solid.

          Yep. Obliterated. Oh yeah I did it.

        • ****
          So naturals fail both of your definitions of game you dork. Are you saying that naturals “have no game”? Are you saying the guys out there raking in hundreds of partners naturally “have no game”? That’s what your TWO definitions say you dork.
          ****

          When people in general tell that this or that guy has game, they just mean he’s good with women. Stop trying to mix concepts.

          It’s like the word “tongue” for both the organ and language (as in mother tongue).

          You got devastated ahahah

  5. I have some thoughts also on why society is going the way it’s going, with those feminist rules and such, but I’ll leave that for later. First things first. Gotta know exactly what people here think so we can reach a common point then go from there.

  6. Yeah.
    And next guys are going to catch on to the girlish scam of showing us nice,
    firm tits and having advanced bj skills.
    They are like, so busted. We can see right thru their tawdry attempt to make themselves desirable to men.
    We should ignore these fakers and hold out for the real thing.

    • This is true. I think the ‘game doesn’t exist’ dudes haven’t quite got the right idea.

      It isn’t just the goofy openers and all that nonsense. It’s all about self-improvement. Getting down to the gym is game. Taking up a new sport is game. Learning a new skill is game. Learning a musical instrument is game. Getting a decent education is game. Starting your own business is game. Following your passion in life is game. Not taking any bullshit of anyone (male or female) is game. Seeing a chick you like and ‘having a go for it’ is game. If you get bombed out by the same chick and just say ‘Whatever, next!’. That’s game as well.

      That said, I respect the dudes who decide to opt out of the ‘game’. Fair dues and respect.

      • It isn’t just the goofy openers and all that nonsense. It’s all about self-improvement. Getting down to the gym is game. Taking up a new sport is game. Learning a new skill is game. Learning a musical instrument is game. Getting a decent education is game. Starting your own business is game. Following your passion in life is game. Not taking any bullshit of anyone (male or female) is game. Seeing a chick you like and ‘having a go for it’ is game. If you get bombed out by the same chick and just say ‘Whatever, next!’. That’s game as well.

        Breathing is game. Believing in jesus is game. Believing in mohammad is game. Being a republican is game. Being a democrat is game.

        You’re so gonna look back on these comments 2-3 years from now and you’re SOOO gonna cringe. You know, like when scientologists view videos of themselves from back when they were in the cult, and they cringe.

      • So everything under the sun is game? That is physically impossible. This is an example of why game doesn’t exist. It’s impossible to get a concise and non-circular definition of game from a gamer. Such things are one of the hallmarks of a scam.

        • I’ll use that term from now “non-circular definition” lol. Never seen one 😀

        • MGTOW are also keenly aware how many women view them as “rogue” or “dangerous” because they’re unplugged from the matrix.
          It also makes them vulnerable to false rape accusations. Going MGTOW means you have more time to understand the world, but you are also going to be up against a lot of people who want you to believe foundational myths so that you “buy-in” to the nonsense that they’re selling.

        • Of course don’t announce to the world you are a MGTOW. If women ask you out, politely decline and say you aren’t emotionally available or you are too busy to date or some other excuse. Women can’t handle the truth and will only view this as misogyny and unleash the shaming language.

        • The guys going MGTOW, will for the most part have their reputations pre-made for them – since they’re not what women through their groupthink, consider alpha.

          The thing to watch out for though, is the very true reality that by the time a woman has chosen to ask out a guy, especially one going MGTOW, she has either broken out of her programming or will become enraged at refusal.

          Succeeding at that stage, they are willing to accept a demotion for their status in the relationship … for a while.
          I believe they’ll reel you in with sex, cut you off from friends, restrict sex… and then start to show their true colours.

          For me, I just keep work as work. But I can assure you some women and men will even take offense to that… because when you are not playing their game, is an implicit judgement that you know 1. it’s not a game worth playing, and 2. the prize is possibly not worth it.

          You will be surprised how many people get angry when you don’t buy into the myth that a man needs a woman — especially the kind of woman that would never have given him the time of day previously until she landed in a heap of trouble — to be happy.

  7. If we are starting to see the game bubble burst, does this mean the misandry bubble is also bursting? Are men finally deciding that masturbating to porn will have to do till better women substitutes come online in the next several years?

  8. “Getting down to the gym is game. Taking up a new sport is game. Learning a new skill is game. Learning a musical instrument is game. Getting a decent education is game. Starting your own business is game. Following your passion in life is game.”

    But these are all things worth doing anyway, regardless of whether or not one is interested in dating, sex, and romantic relationships. So why put these things under a category – “game” – that explicitly has to do with dating, sexy and romantic relationships? When gamers do this, they imply that everything else in life must be subordinate to seeking approval from women. (I’m not saying you are doing this per se, as I don’t know you and we all each have only our comments on this blog to go by – rather I am just observing one implication of phrasing things this way.)

    • My “game” in life does not involve ever partnering up with human women as I have gone my way. The secret is that most men are actually happier without women in their lives, especially those with low drives. Most women have far lower drives than men and those women seek men for their money and status and want to sell their pussy to men who will pay for sex one way or another, such as marrying her. Come VR girls, most human women will be unable to sell sex, thus the misandry bubble will have burst.

      • In my opinion the sentence might need a bit of changing… because girls in their infinite quest of solipsism and plausible deniability, as an example will _say to you_ that they have a low sex drive…

        when the reality is:

        they have a low sex drive when it comes to you.
        As I said earlier: the benchmark of how much a woman respects you is how much she is willing to give up with little or no return.
        The more you have to compensate her for being with you, the less she actually values you.

        After all, so many women have the story about the alpha guy who treated her badly.

        But they leave out the bit where the nice guy was willing to treat her right. Because that would make her look both stupid (for being with the alpha guy who treated her badly), cruel (for treating the nice guy badly) and predatory (for using the nice guy as a stepping stone while she kept going with the alpha guy) and narcissistic (she liked the attention from the nice guy and strung him along since she had no real feelings for him).

        Women are only better communicators when men can’t figure them out.

        Once men can figure them out, a lot of deceitfulness and deliberately-vague-so-there-is-no-accountability language comes out.

        • Ray: Yes, women’s drives tend to respond much more to alphas than the rest of the men. However, women not being interested in us betas makes it easier for us to go our way. I have taken my red pills and understand that women are just a big liability

          Guns: I want to be with women romantically, but I am being honest by saying that as a MGTOW, I am far happier than most men who are stuck with women. VR girls won’t yet pass the turing test in 2020, but around 2030, machine will. What VR girls can offer in 2020 is going to out-compete all human women rated “7” and below. Even TFH on his “misandry bubble” blog wrote a few paragraphs about this horseman.

        • Hey, if a woman chooses to be with a jackass of a man rather than a decent one…
          The decent one will always be second (AT LEAST) to the jackass.
          No man should be so devalued that that happens.
          It’s now time for women to live up to being “strong” and “independent” and “owning their own sexuality”.
          Looking forward to clones myself.
          And I certainly enjoy the moments when a woman thinks she’s going to get a favour for free… and I charge her for it.
          I prefer cash to any sort of “my presence is my gift to you” BS.

      • if you are a voluntary celibate, that’s fine. but being an involuntary celibate and then saying “hell w/e, its better without women anyway” sounds just resentfull and not honest.

        And sincerely, the VR girls hopes of many guys here makes me a bit sad. I can bet with anyone here that come 2020 there WON’T be anything even closely resembling a human-like machine or algorythm. There’s simply no evidence for this in academic papers, I can guarantee.

        People in 2020 will be having sex the way they always had: with real meat women. And I bet you is way more satisfying than a robot or the likes.

  9. “The truth of the matter is that she either likes you or she doesn’t and there’s nothing you can do or say otherwise to change her mind.”

    That’s often true Game commentators like Roissy are, in my opinion, rather accurate at predicting behavior of many younger, attractive American women. Roissy is also right about how the obesity epidemic raises hugely the “dating market value” of most women. Yet Roissy – like most pop evolutionary psychology fans – is quite selective with the scientific research he choose to cite. He elevates evolutionary psychology explanation to gosel, but ignores any countervailing evidence – even basic problems with his whole approach. For example if we *really are* all just being reacting to our evolutionary “hind-brain” drives, then why is he (or any of us) even conscious enough of that fact itself to the extent that we can act differently and manipulate our social environments as he claims he is the master of so doing? Some of the evolutionary psychology he cites has merit, but ultimately his approach doesn’t account for the substantial complexity of human behavior. Roissy may think he knows evolutionary psychology but he missed out on social epistemology. [One common gamer response to what I put forward here: “typical beta academic. Can’t get laid.” Well, I do OK. 🙂 …. ] And as a result of that complexity, sometimes a girl likes you because she….just, well, does.

    Note also another flawed assumption behind most “game”. Attractive girls only *react* to alpha males. They have “hind-brain” drives, but apparently those drives only include seeking out and finding high status males, but rarely do gamers acknowledge that, yes, women DO have sex drives and – to be blunt – get horny. Again, sometimes a girl likes a guy just because, well, (in her words) “he’s hot.” Beauty is not quite in the eye of the beholder in the sense of the “pretty lies” Roissy seeks to discredit. He is right that most people in our society agree generally on what’s physically attractive. But there is more variation in the realm of *actual female sexual desire* – even among attractive females – than Roissy seems to admit.

    • Ya, they do the evo-psych trick often. Like, evo-psych ussually will have something like TWELVE competing hypothesis on a given problem…

      And the someone like roosh/roissy will PICK ONE that fits his frame and worldview, and then say “SEEEEEEEE even evo-psych proves what I say” -> and its like, dude, no, that’s just OFFERED IDEA inside of evo-psych, along with 11 completely different ones that go against what you say, lol.

      And even the 1 that is close to what he says, if it doesn’t fit, he’ll massage it to make it fit 😀

    • Yes, a determinist like Roissy will ALWAYS exclude himself from his deterministic theories.

  10. Kino: touching the woman in the sense that you are letting her know that you are there, you are a male presence to be reckoned with, and that if she allows further touching that indicates attraction.

    Conveying value: mostly social value, but reproductive value (great body) as well. Being the guy that doesnt flinch when talking to the girl and to the group, dressing sharp, being a happy person that people enjoy being with, knowing smart/funny things to say in the right moment: all of which CAN be learned (might be more difficult to some then to others, but still), and obviously INCREASES the attraction women feel for you.

    Canned oppeners: Not truly good, but when a guy is really nervous about talking to a chick, can relieve a TON off his back (specially if he is new to the dating scene). Most gamers nowadays advocate use of more “natural” and direct openings, such as “hey, i found you cute and thought I’d say hi”, but either way, working on the posture and the WAY you say those things is an integral part of almost any system.

    Now, what do the three terms have in common? They are mostly applied in “game” situations, and in fact ARE game.

    I absolutely understand there ARE flawed systems in PUA nowadays (many of them) and MANY MANY scammers that wanna rack a quick buck from desperate single men, and also many “Gurus” that don’t even do a single approach, but cmon, anyone with the slightest experience in dating can say any of the stuff I said above is wrong?

    If you think game is a magic pill you take and then instantly suck face with all the hotties (like some gurus claim it is for marketing reasons), then you are in for a treat. No, it doesnt work like that at all. You cannot attract ANY WOMAN, ANYTIME, ANYWHERE, that’s a lie, but most gamers don’t believe it.

    Don’t get me wrong, guys, I just wanna understand what is the “Game doesnt exist” concept. For that you can start explaining one by one (kino, conveying value and canned openers) how this stuff doesnt exist or work.

    • The word, hello, is used in what you call game situations but hello was not invented by gamers. Gamers have tried to claim they invented various ideas but that doesn’t make it true. It’s not like gamers have actually used these ideas either because if they did they wouldn’t be able to spend so much time bragging and arguing on the internet.

      • I’ve been around the sidelines for 10 years and have been viewing gamers come along and take credit for everything. About 99.9% of crap in game is not original.

        Most of it comes from sales/social-psychology etc. But the problem isn’t just that they steal – they steal rather poorly lol. They usually fuck up the thing they’re stealing, and break it in the process.

        • Gamers are like the Soviet Union. They can’t really invent anything so the steal from everyone else, but they can’t produce and use properly what they steal.

    • Obviously any of these concepts weren’t invented by game. They are from evolutionary psychology and such.

      It’s like saying Bodybuilding doesn’t exist because all their concepts came from Medicine, Anatomy, etc -.-

      Some bodybuilder trainers took the time to study those other things and concluded “Hey, the body works this way, so if we make this and that, probably we will get as results more muscles. Let’s test it out.” And they tested it, and there you go: Bodybuilding.

      With game was much like it: some guys that were reeeealy bad with chicks said “Cmon, there’s gotta be some kind of solution to it…” Studied Psychology, Body Language and such and put all togheter and said “Ok, most likely this is how attraction works… lets test it out” And they did.

      There are guys doing this kind of stuff everyday for very different things in life. Science and Engineering in one way or another work this way also: its VERY HARD to come up with something with no foundations on previous knowledge, and many things are really compilations of knowledge directed at a specific matter (I’m an Engineer, by the way, I should know).

      So I guess we have a common point here that all Kino, Conveying Value and Canned Openers all have their place in attracting a woman, plus all of them were put togheter by people looking for ways of attracting woman (Gamers). Saying game doesnt exist is like saying the science of bodybuilding doesn’t exist.

      Conclusion: Game exists and game works (its NOT the magical pill most “gurus” wanna sell, but OBVIOUSLY there are some kind of “mechanisms” in attraction that are common place and can be used to your favour).

      • It’s like saying Bodybuilding doesn’t exist because all their concepts came from Medicine, Anatomy, etc -.-

        No you illiterate straw-manning fuck…

        We didn’t say that gamers don’t exist. We said that GAME doesn’t exist. And then we went onto a different tangent where we said how often gamers also steal shit.

        FOR EXAMPLE pay attention you illiterate fuck Scientologists believe in thetans and past lives and all kinds of Crap. We say that thetans don’t exist. We also say that the few useful shit that scientologists share with their members – they stole from self help.

        Saying that scientologists steal shit from self-help, DOES NOT deny the earlier-claim that thetans and past-lives don’t exist.

        IN FACT, SCAMS OFTEN INTERMINGLE USEFUL SHIT TOGETHER WITH THE SNAKE OIL – so as to give an ilussion that the snakeoil works. Fitness supplement companies will sell a substance that does nothing, mix it with creatine, and tell you that the main substance (that does nothing) is amazing, when its the creatine doing all the work (for example).

        • Don’t know if you are trolling… or if you are just really really stupid.

          Alek, wtf. When did I say GAMERS didn’t exist?

          You are really really dense.

          The combined knowledge from Evolutionary Psychology, Female Psychology and Body Language (amongst others) form what is called GAME. I’ve proven that before and you just avoided the point.

          It doesn’t mean it will make you suck face with the hottest woman in the world instantly. It means this knowledge help you acknowledge whats happening in the environemnt you are in, and helps you read reactions from other people (specially women), and aids you in reacting the right way to build attraction and ultimately score the chick.

          It’s not the magic pill they promised you, you idiot. Get over that.

          I mean, what is SO absurd about this? It’s funny how you are being defensive and trying to argue in your own terms when it’s right in your face.

          Btw, for a man that was banging girls before I could even read, you are really fucking stupid.

          Grow up, respect others opinions and adress my points SPECIFICALLY as I’m doing with yours, or GTFO.

        • Alek, wtf. When did I say GAMERS didn’t exist?

          You took our conversation on what GAMERS DO, and said “AHA, your argument on game not existing is false since blabla”. Except that’s an argument we made on GAMERS – not on “game not existing”

          The combined knowledge from Evolutionary Psychology, Female Psychology and Body Language (amongst others) form what is called GAME. I’ve proven that before and you just avoided the point.

          Oh, so GAME is being a scholar… Makes sense. EXCEPT

          A)

          1) NOT ONE FUCKING GAMER has a PHD IN ANYTHING – let alone all of these fields. I am more qualified in these fields than fucking 99.99999% of gamers. I am actually academically qualified.

          2) NOT ONE OF THESE FIELDS is settled. There is not one grand unifying theory of body-language, and not even one little thing is settled in these fields about even the smallest shit – yet those teaching game teach it as if we know shit.

          3) I FUCKING ASKED YOU FOR A DEFINITION THAT MAKES THIS DIFFERENT THAN FUCKING GENERAL “SOCIAL SKILLS”

          B)

          The word “game” by you idiotic bunch is used as a “verb” – i.e. “You gotta game her”. So, how the fuck do you “game her” if gaming is KNOWLEDGE of fucking more stuff than 30 PHDs know and NOBODY HAS SETTLED?

          1) SO ALL THE SMARTEST SCIENTISTS IN THE WORLD can’t tell you what the “right” body-language is, but you know it, because tyler-dyrden says he knows it, and he skimmed some books some time or “got it through osmosis” from sargin a lot, except, every fucking gamer has completely different findings? The only things they agree on are GENERAL FUCKING TRENDS THAT ARE ALREADY PART OF EVERY DAY SOCIAL SKILLS.

          2) EVERY WOMAN IS FUCKING DIFFERENT – there is no THE ONE body-language to apply, and there is no THE ONE female-psychology you dork (leave the house more often) – if there were “a female psychology” then there wouldn’t be fucking hundreds of competing and completely contradictory versions of it. THE ONLY THINGS THEY AGREE ON – are already part of general fucking advanced social skills.

          3) So all you have left are GENERALITIES – in which case, HOW THE FUCK IS THIS DIFFERENT THAN FUCKING SOCIAL SKILLS YOU DUMB IDIOT?

        • It doesn’t mean it will make you suck face with the hottest woman in the world instantly. It means this knowledge help you acknowledge whats happening in the environemnt you are in, and helps you read reactions from other people (specially women), and aids you in reacting the right way to build attraction and ultimately score the chick.

          HOW THE FUCK IS THIS ANY DIFFERENT THAN SOCIAL SKILLS? I asked you for a fucking definition of game that’s not already “social skills”.

          The only things that make “game” different than “social skills” are things that are PROVABLY false, i.e. false marketing and magic-bullet thinking. The only things about game that aren’t false ARE ALREADY part of SOCIAL SKILLS.

        • ****
          You took our conversation on what GAMERS DO, and said “AHA, your argument on game not existing is false since blabla”. Except that’s an argument we made on GAMERS – not on “game not existing”
          ****

          When did I even mention what gamers do? Are you retarded?

          *****
          Oh, so GAME is being a scholar… Makes sense. EXCEPT:

          1) NOT ONE FUCKING GAMER has a PHD IN ANYTHING – let alone all of these fields. I am more qualified in these fields than fucking 99.99999% of gamers. I am actually academically qualified.
          *****

          Not sure you are so confident about that. But anyways, what’s the point? The depht of the knowledged involved isn’t PhD level.

          ******
          2) NOT ONE OF THESE FIELDS is settled. There is not one grand unifying theory of body-language, and not even one little thing is settled in these fields about even the smallest shit – yet those teaching game teach it as if we know shit.
          ******

          So fucking what? It’s still knowledge. Just shows that even if something isn’t settled (most things aren’t anyways), doesn’t stop it from being a form of knowledge that can be applied to many situations (body language). Thanks for proving my point.

          *******
          3) I FUCKING ASKED YOU FOR A DEFINITION THAT MAKES THIS DIFFERENT THAN FUCKING GENERAL “SOCIAL SKILLS”
          *******

          It’s on the post above, I’ll repeat it here so it can really sink in:

          Obviously it envolves social skills, as much as bodybuilding involves strenght, for example. But you don’t realize that you have a very stiff standart for social skills. Lemme explain:

          For you, a guy with great social skills is talkative, always touches women he wants to seduce the right way, always has good body language in matters of seducing woman. While this is a possibility, it’s not always true. For example, a guy that went to church his whole life and was told that sex is wrong and that you must remain a virgin till marriage may be GREAT with his social skills (talking to people, even going very well on job interviews) but may lack confidence in approaching women (if he’s willing to do so) simply because he’s not used to it, noone ever discussed this with him nor he watched any family/older brother/good friend approach chicks (to see how it’s usually done).

          Having AWESOME social skills doesn’t necessarily mean you are good with women.

          Imagine that guy that picks up all the chicks but can’t really go well on a job interview even having the knowledge or a graduation under his belt. Those are different skills that OBVIOUSLY use SOCIAL SKILLS, but INVOLVE OTHER KINDS OF KNOWLEDGE/INFORMATION.

          Simple enough, huh?

          So, yes, it’s different than just having social skills.

          *********
          B)

          The word “game” by you idiotic bunch is used as a “verb” – i.e. “You gotta game her”. So, how the fuck do you “game her” if gaming is KNOWLEDGE of fucking more stuff than 30 PHDs know and NOBODY HAS SETTLED?
          *********

          As much as many verbs and nouns have the same words but different meanings, obviously. You wouldn’t expect that “She knows love” and “She loves him” has the exact same meaning, I would guess.

          “To game” in this situation is to “seduce” simply, or probably (depending the context), “seduce her by applying you game system”.

          ********
          1) SO ALL THE SMARTEST SCIENTISTS IN THE WORLD can’t tell you what the “right” body-language is, but you know it, because tyler-dyrden says he knows it, and he skimmed some books some time or “got it through osmosis” from sargin a lot, except, every fucking gamer has completely different findings? The only things they agree on are GENERAL FUCKING TRENDS THAT ARE ALREADY PART OF EVERY DAY SOCIAL SKILLS.
          *********

          Never read a discussion about “right” body language (probably doesn’t exist, if it does post here the link), even defining what “right body language” is may be tough (right for what? better for what?).

          Anyways, many of the knowledge in game is empirical. Tyler probably just tested what worked better for him (not saying I’m a fan of his system, just saying what most likely happened) and wrote it down. So what’s the big deal? Many of the knowledge we have nowadays (specially in Chemistry, an area I’m more into because of my graduation) is mainly empirical. So what? People disagree about stuff. Doesn’t make it less right or wrong.

          ****
          2) EVERY WOMAN IS FUCKING DIFFERENT – there is no THE ONE body-language to apply, and there is no THE ONE female-psychology you dork (leave the house more often) – if there were “a female psychology” then there wouldn’t be fucking hundreds of competing and completely contradictory versions of it. THE ONLY THINGS THEY AGREE ON – are already part of general fucking advanced social skills.
          ****

          It’s the guys that sold game to you that told that you would suck face with every hottie you saw the minute you locked eyes with her, not me. Sorry if you are that naive.

          Game is about aiding you in getting the chicks. It effectively ELEVATES your chances with chicks, but obviously it’s not fucking math. There are patterns though, that repeat in a large number of girls. Vin DiCarlo’s Pandora’s Box addresses this specifically.

          ****
          3) So all you have left are GENERALITIES – in which case, HOW THE FUCK IS THIS DIFFERENT THAN FUCKING SOCIAL SKILLS YOU DUMB IDIOT?
          ****

          Not gonna repeat myself again, look up. Actually, I will:

          Obviously it envolves social skills, as much as bodybuilding involves strenght, for example. But you don’t realize that you have a very stiff standart for social skills. Lemme explain:

          For you, a guy with great social skills is talkative, always touches women he wants to seduce the right way, always has good body language in matters of seducing woman. While this is a possibility, it’s not always true. For example, a guy that went to church his whole life and was told that sex is wrong and that you must remain a virgin till marriage may be GREAT with his social skills (talking to people, even going very well on job interviews) but may lack confidence in approaching women (if he’s willing to do so) simply because he’s not used to it, noone ever discussed this with him nor he watched any family/older brother/good friend approach chicks (to see how it’s usually done).

          Having AWESOME social skills doesn’t necessarily mean you are good with women.

          Imagine that guy that picks up all the chicks but can’t really go well on a job interview even having the knowledge or a graduation under his belt. Those are different skills that OBVIOUSLY use SOCIAL SKILLS, but INVOLVE OTHER KINDS OF KNOWLEDGE/INFORMATION.

          Simple enough, huh?

          So, yes, it’s different than just having social skills.

          Just got blasted, huh, son? hahaha

          Anyways, I’m glad I did these posts, anyone sane will see that you are full of bullshit and is spreading your bullshit around.

          Cmon, give me your best shot.

      • Conclusion: Game exists and game works.

        No, game neither exists, nor does it work.

        Let me explain.

        The problem with “game” is that it is based on simplistic, one-dimensional theories (usually in the form of empirically unverifiable evolutionary “just so” stories) which analyze human social interaction through the prism of a rigid biological determinism, operating along the implicit assumption that our reproductive behavior is somehow based entirely on instinct or motivated by the blind self-perpetuation of the so-called selfish gene. This can be seen in the PUA bollocks that all women possess “hidden buttons” which regulate their capacity for the expression of physical attraction towards members of the opposite sex; the ability to press these buttons, using certain “tricks”, such as NLP or DHV, is what turns these buttons on and off like a light switch. Of course, this idea (and all others like it) is logically fallacious, based on a gross oversimplification of physical reality, as we are not animals guided by instinct (at least not completely). Human behavior is mediated by a number of complex social and psychological mechanisms which render invalid any rigorously deterministic approach. This means that there are no “hidden buttons” and that female physical attraction is likely to be more dependent on social context (it is a well-established fact that women internalize much more readily and are more easily manipulated by cultural expectations and societal norms) and her individual psychological makeup, rather than her reproductive biological urges (which stands in sharp contrast to men, where the physical often trumps the social).

        • The fact that no gamer has ever demonstrated better-than-cool-guy results proves those buttons don’t exist (among many other things). If those buttons existed, than gamers would get better results than your average cool, charming, confident and social guy – but they don’t. Most get worst results.

        • Born Again, I’m happy to discuss with someone that is not willing to curse over and over.

          ****
          The problem with “game” is that it is based on simplistic, one-dimensional theories (usually in the form of empirically unverifiable evolutionary “just so” stories) which analyze human social interaction through the prism of a rigid biological determinism, operating along the implicit assumption that our reproductive behavior is somehow based entirely on instinct or motivated by the blind self-perpetuation of the so-called selfish gene.
          ****

          I totally agree with a lot that you said. Many gaming systems are flawed when it comes to abusing those simplifications (one-dimentional psychologycal and evolutionary theories), even though I disagree they are unverifiable.

          And for game to work our reproductive behavior doesn’t have to work entirely based on instinct, but only suffer a great deal of influence of it. I think that’s a fair assumption.

          ****
          This can be seen in the PUA bollocks that all women possess “hidden buttons” which regulate their capacity for the expression of physical attraction towards members of the opposite sex; the ability to press these buttons, using certain “tricks”, such as NLP or DHV, is what turns these buttons on and off like a light switch. Of course, this idea (and all others like it) is logically fallacious, based on a gross oversimplification of physical reality, as we are not animals guided by instinct (at least not completely).
          ****

          Good point, and the problem with the “hidden buttons” aren’t that they aren’t there, but that people treat it very one-dimensionally (great term you used there btw). I’ll guide this with an example:

          When a really hot smoking girl gets naked in front of you, she didn’t even touch you, but she activated one “hidden button” in you, and you will most likely react to it (erection, probably, and desire to fuck her). But well, you might not get turned on, right? Like, you might be nervous. Hell, you might be even gay! Of course, we are not all the same. But there’s a great deal of men that the main pattern (arousal) will follow. She pressed the button.

          When you are seducing a girl and touch the palm of her hand and grab it, it presses “buttons” also. I’m not very fond of this “button” thing, but, you get the idea. Mainly, it’s LIKELY reaction to your stimulus on her, got it? Like, it’s not guaranteed.

          Just like economics, you can give a stimulus to a market if you are the government, but it may or may not react the way you were expecting (because there are other variables involved). Economy is still a Science right? Not trying to elevate “game” to “science”, because it’s too early for this (Most sciences take time to develop), but it has it’s empirical uses for sure.

          ****
          Human behavior is mediated by a number of complex social and psychological mechanisms which render invalid any rigorously deterministic approach
          ****

          Couldn’t agree more, I basically just said that.

          ****
          This means that there are no “hidden buttons” and that female physical attraction is likely to be more dependent on social context (it is a well-established fact that women internalize much more readily and are more easily manipulated by cultural expectations and societal norms) and her individual psychological makeup, rather than her reproductive biological urges (which stands in sharp contrast to men, where the physical often trumps the social).
          ****

          Her biological urges and her psychological makeup and needs are really intrinsicly connected, as are men’s.

          If physical often trumped over the social for men, me and you would be rapeing women every single day, and no single guy would be an “omega virgin”, right?

          Social and psychological mindsets for women and men differ, but many times if a girl feels the urge to fuck you, she will, specially with so much feminism spread in society. The thing is that the things that physically attract her (good looking body, power, dominance, masculinity in general) can be conveyed to her through your actions, body language and how you dress (for example), while the woman is generally more limited to her own looks while trying to seduce a man.

          Plus, even if there aren’t “hidden buttons” the main point is that the knowledge from game systems help men all over the world to approach girls (one way or the other), and ultimately help them getting laid. Most of it based on psychology, but many guys take different approaches, enphasizing less on psychology and more on empirism.

          A good example is 60 years. He never uses words regarding triggering, such as buttons, or anything related to it if I remember correctly. His work is basically on inner game, with some canned stuff (like how to approach, how to escalate by touching).

          You are the first poster on this site that actually addressed the matters that actually counted for something, Born Again, even though we disagree. Not ridiculous word games. We’ll prolly reach a middle point where we can both rest.

        • Thanks for the lengthy response Sr. BigGuns. I’m going to address some of the main points you raised:

          And for game to work our reproductive behavior doesn’t have to work entirely based on instinct, but only suffer a great deal of influence of it. I think that’s a fair assumption.

          I think the problem here is that “game” operates based on the assumption that human behavior is relatively inflexible and invariant across time and space, being the direct product of millions of years of evolution. This, of course, is only somewhat true; only a small part of human behavior is purely biological in origin, with the rest being influenced by the surrounding culture, parental nurturing and even “maternal womb effects” such as prenatal nutrition. Even if much human behavior was genetically inherited, “genetic” does not necessarily mean fixed and unchangeable, as these can be gradually altered by such factors as natural selection, gradual adaptation to the local ecology, genetic drift etc. Again, by positing a static view of human nature, “game” fails as an accurate means of predicting future human behavior.

          When a really hot smoking girl gets naked in front of you, she didn’t even touch you, but she activated one “hidden button” in you, and you will most likely react to it (erection, probably, and desire to fuck her). But well, you might not get turned on, right? Like, you might be nervous. Hell, you might be even gay! Of course, we are not all the same. But there’s a great deal of men that the main pattern (arousal) will follow. She pressed the button.

          When you are seducing a girl and touch the palm of her hand and grab it, it presses “buttons” also. I’m not very fond of this “button” thing, but, you get the idea. Mainly, it’s LIKELY reaction to your stimulus on her, got it? Like, it’s not guaranteed.

          The thing you’re forgetting here is that, whereas men tend to be fairly uniform in terms of their sexuality, women are not.

          Let me explain. Most men masturbate; most men have fairly high sex drives; most men tend to be fairly promiscuous and less discriminating in partner selection than women; most men express arousal by means of an erection etc. This is not the case with women, as women display much greater variability in terms of sexual behavior than males. For instance, some women masturbate, some don’t; some have high sex drives, some don’t and quite a few are sexually frigid; some women are capable of achieving orgasm, others aren’t; some women can express arousal physiologically, by means of a clitoral erection, whereas others cannot except by means of the complex interplay of both social and emotional stimuli etc. Because “game” assumes that most women are fundamentally the same, when science clearly demonstrates that they are not, it follows that “game” is a grossly inaccurate means of deciphering the female psyche.

          Just like economics, you can give a stimulus to a market if you are the government, but it may or may not react the way you were expecting (because there are other variables involved). Economy is still a Science right? Not trying to elevate “game” to “science”, because it’s too early for this (Most sciences take time to develop), but it has it’s empirical uses for sure.

          Economics is a social, not a hard science. However, unfortunately for “game,” there is virtually no scientific proof substantiating its core tenets.

          Her biological urges and her psychological makeup and needs are really intrinsicly connected, as are men’s.

          If physical often trumped over the social for men, me and you would be rapeing women every single day, and no single guy would be an “omega virgin”, right?

          Social and psychological mindsets for women and men differ, but many times if a girl feels the urge to fuck you, she will, specially with so much feminism spread in society. The thing is that the things that physically attract her (good looking body, power, dominance, masculinity in general) can be conveyed to her through your actions, body language and how you dress (for example), while the woman is generally more limited to her own looks while trying to seduce a man.

          Plus, even if there aren’t “hidden buttons” the main point is that the knowledge from game systems help men all over the world to approach girls (one way or the other), and ultimately help them getting laid. Most of it based on psychology, but many guys take different approaches, enphasizing less on psychology and more on empirism.

          Dude, I think you missed my point. My point here was that women display far greater variability in terms of their sexual behavior than men, known by social psychologists as the “plasticity of female sexuality,” meaning that the female sex drive is more easily influenced by socio-cultural factors; on the other hand, the male sex drive is largely physiological (for example, male sexuality must be regulated by means of state-sanctioned physical coercion, whereas female sexuality can be regulated by gossiping and/or shaming tactics, including social ostracism). Because “game,” assumes (falsely) that female sexuality is just as biological as its male counterpart, it fails as a means of accurately predicting female sexual behavior. Therefore, “game” is bullshit.

        • Interesting, Born Again.

          So let’s put it this way for a matter of clarification:

          I say “game” aid men to seduce women because there are certain patterns that can be “exploited” (I’m using the term losely here). While you say that the “plasticity of female sexuality” wouldn’t permit it, because the response of diverse women to the stimuli would be too “random” to actually predict and use in your favor.

          So that’s the main point now.

          If the patterns were just too hard to predict in any way, then yes, game would be total bullshit. But I think you are being far too extreme here.

          While I agree that men’s behaviour in some circumstances are more uniform than women’s, I guess it would be a little too much to say that we can’t find enough patterns to predict how some situations would go in the majority of times.

          And while we are at hard vs soft sciences, even psychology isn’t a hard science, and has many variations to explaining the same phenomenom.

          I don’t like talking about personal experience, because it’s not a valid scientific argument, but the way I see it is that while there are wider ranges of response for women regarding the same stimuli, there are still patterns (be it biological, cultural, social) that can be applied to generate attraction and seduce the girl.

          The tendencies in PU nowadays is to regard exactly how women are different from each other: having the same approach to all women will probably fail, but will grant you some success. That’s why people got “phone game”, “text game”, “night game”, because in different situations you are most likely to meet different kind of women that will respond differently.

          Plus, other gamers regard this in a different manner: by trying to scan “women types”. Of course you can’t say that you can put ALL women in very well defined categories (even with men you wouldn’t be able to do that), but obviously you will find some useful and helpful patterns in many situation, and it’s up to you to use that in your favor while seducing the chick.

          Obviosly game isnt any hard science (and is also very recent and empyrical), but saying that it won’t help with women is much of an extreme spot as saying that you can get any women in the world using game. Let’s be cautious and measure what’s useful and what is not in the different systems.

          Saying that “game is bullshit” when there is a lot of evidence on behavioral patterns in the sexuality of both men and women appears to be a bit too much for me.

  11. Yeah dude, gamers have way too huge an ego to just overnight bow-out and admit having been duped all these years.

    I know, because I’ve seen all of this play out before… HAHA. This whole thing, with the MRM being taken over by gaming and game is something I’ve seen before – mind you, I’ve been annoyed by game for like 10 years now. I’ve seen the cycle repeat a few times.

    What will happen over the next year is a bunch of quarrels (like the obsidian one), a lot of finger pointing-in, a lot of people making EXCUSES and elaborate stories on why “game stopped working”.

    Some of them will have realizations on how they discovered how this one new thing is better than game and “don’t get me wrong, game still has its uses but, bla bla, and it was useful i went through it and bla bla”.

    None of them will have the balls to come right out and admit they were duped and promoting a lie so strongly.

    • This one new thing will be VR girls which will be a reality by 2020. Then game and human women will be abandoned like yesteryear’s news. This will very quickly deflate the rest of the air in the misandry bubble. It is all those men chasing and spending money on women that made the bubble possible.

  12. AlexNovy

    So, if fat chicks start losing weight and making themselves more attractive to men – after a while, this will cease to work because guys will see through the manipulative behavior of fat chicks?

    • Rather, it will be women substitutes that devalue human women. If we see human women rushing out to get their “beauty makeovers”, this will ironically devalue women even further as beauty will become a dime a dozen. The more women become devalued, the faster the misandry bubble will burst and the better men will have it.

    • A fat chick will actually have a more deluded attitude due to their years of being pumped and dumped by players. I’m not sure there is actually an incentive for them to lose weight because in their mind, rejecting a nice guy means living up to the standards of an attractive girl… while a pump and dump with a player is a relationship.

      While I keep hearing how fat chicks have good character, I have repeatedly seen how that is not true. They know they are kept around so that the pretty chicks have someone worse to compare to,
      but the fat chicks enjoy their status as gatekeepers towards the pretty chicks plus the idea that “fat chicks have good character” to do relational aggression against guys.

      If you’re going to strike out, you’d better strike out with someone on the top of the attractiveness heap.
      This is the idea of “I may have failed, but I reached for the stars”, not “I may have failed, but I reached for the town bike”.
      Because if you do succeed, since the person you are with is someone who you want to be with… as the years go by you’re less likely to be disappointed by the ravages of time.

      But if you compromise… with the ravages of time along with lowering your standards… you’ll really be unhappy.

      • It’s often been said that women in general are ugly on the inside; the only difference between a fat bitch and a skinny one is that – whereas a skinny woman will carefully conceal her inner ugliness with a spotless and well-polished exterior – a fat bitch will wear her ugliness on both the inside and out.

        That said, it makes sense for the typical male to ask out the hottest girls he can find, as there is nothing more insulting and humiliating then to be rejected by some fat or otherwise repulsive bitch with a checkered sexual past and/or a history of multiple pregnancies. As a number of social psychologists have repeatedly pointed out, modern Western culture is a culture of entitlement, and with women leading sheltered lives and given privileged status by default, for purely anatomical reasons, it should come as no surprise that the average woman is a narcissist with an inflated ego and a delusional opinion of her own self-worth. This widespread female narcissism is further bolstered by the fact that any woman, regardless of how ugly or repulsive she is, is daily hit on by some large number of men (the number of men obviously increasing with the woman’s level of actual hotness). For the typical male, his self-esteem and personal dignity is put at risk when he pursues fat bitches, because each one is in pursuit of some rich Adonis in accordance with her own culturally instilled, unrealistic expectations of herself.

    • Acutally, yes. If more women become slim, becoming slim will be a less effective means for a woman to attract a man. It will become a new minimal requirement, without necessarily enabling the woman to differentiate herself from other women. A similar effect is going on with men and game, which is why it’s not working like it used to. Market saturation, if you will. Of course now women are pickier as a result because they’ve come to expect this behavior in men as a minimum requirement and everyone is worse off.

      • Ray, as a MGTOW I am free of all this drama. The person I will be with won’t be human, but machine and can be programmed to perfection in the looks, personality and brains department. I will wait however long it takes(I say 2020 for VR girls, 2030 for robogirls) for technology to give men those substitutes, since MGTOW is the best thing at the moment anyway. I won’t compromise nor lower my standards, you got that one right.

        Int, VR girls of 2020 will saturate the market with highly attractive women substitutes. The real women will be fighting a losing battle and whatever they do will only buy them a few years then VR girls will become more and more realistic. It will get to the point where no human woman can compete so they will become obsolete. Remember that it’s men who invented and built almost everything, this misandry bubble is an anomaly that will be corrected swiftly by 2020 thanks to VR girls causing women’s market value to rapidly plummet.

        • Absolutely right. It sickens me when I can see and hear other guys being told “BE GLAD SOME WOMAN WANTS YOU”. When the kind that wants decent men is usually merely the type that can no longer compete for alpha attention.

          Hell with that.
          I’ve managed to enrage women my mother knows when I’ve told them bluntly “I don’t have a girlfriend because the women around don’t meet my standards.”

          It seems men are ENCOURAGED to become pussy-beggars, then are told they are animals.

          But if they have standards, they are completely horrible and not worth the time of day?

          That system of tapped-out skanks looking for somebody to finance their Sex and The City lifestyle, can look elsewhere.

          I definitely say that gynoids are something to watch out for, they’re getting prettier by the day. A thing of beauty is a joy forever, as is said.

          The real women will fight their losing battle the way they always have. By crying to Big Daddy Gubmint to outlaw choice for men. So much for strong and independent.

    • So, if fat chicks start losing weight and making themselves more attractive to men – after a while, this will cease to work because guys will see through the manipulative behavior of fat chicks?

      What’s with all the strawmannning fucks? Is strawmanning a requirement when you join the game cult?

      What the fuck is this in response to? What have I said, that you’re responding to with this strawmanning idiocy?

  13. Fellas, let’s not forget that women only have a limited window of opportunity that lasts from between 18-24, when her mere physical appearance alone is enough to stimulate frenzied sexual competition among dominant Alpha males. If a woman isn’t able to select and be impregnated by an Alpha within that brief window of opportunity, she can kiss her prime reproductive and child-rearing years good bye.

    Furthermore, women age much faster than men (a scientifically demonstrated fact) and they know this on a primal, instinctive level, hence their blind obsession with screening out males for traits of Alpha dominance before their 25th b-days. Between the ages of 25-30, most women become so repulsive that no sane man would touch these creatures with a ten foot pole, save for a small group of losers who will sleep with anything that moves anywhere and anyplace.

    By the age of 30, a woman is only a shadow of her former self.

    • True, which is why many of these 30+ish women cultivate hobbies which put them in touch with the younger set of women. It seems Twilight/Harry Potter is something even 60 year old women watch.
      Whereas men watching Star Wars at 60 are laughed at. What a double standard.
      Feminism has had only 2 goals:
      1. To make women sleeping around be acceptable.
      2. To make men unable to marry younger women so that the older women get their fannies capped regulary in a respectable way (whether with money or stud service), by men their age who would normally have moved on from such repulsiveness.
      You will be surprised how many of the older women want to “mentor” young women so they can pollute their minds.
      Especially the unmarried hags who have a lot of time on their hands.
      Think Miss Havisham in “Great Expectations”.

    • not trying to pull your leg, but it’s funny that for attraction you said “(women) stands in sharp contrast to men, where the physical often trumps the social”

      Now you are saying that on a primal level they just “know it”.

      Also, ” Between the ages of 25-30, most women become so repulsive that no sane man would touch these creatures with a ten foot pole, save for a small group of losers who will sleep with anything that moves anywhere and anyplace.”

      Not true, I was with a girl (26 yo) for like 2 months and she’s one of the best, most lighthearted and happy persons I’ve ever met, besides being a cutie. We ended because I didn’t want a serious relationship at the time, and well, as you said, her biological clock is ticking, but we are still great friends and she’s never been a cunt to me nor anyone i know of.

      I’m not being a “mangina”, but many things people post here about women simply isn’t true or is unfair. I have many virgin male friends and while many of them are cool to be friends with and to hang around, a few are really really bitter about life and hate girls they will never get to fuck.

      I’m NOT saying this is your case, Born Again, and even if it is (if you are a virgin, that is), that’s nothing to be ashamed of. Anyways, just saying.

      • not trying to pull your leg, but it’s funny that for attraction you said “(women) stands in sharp contrast to men, where the physical often trumps the social”

        Now you are saying that on a primal level they just “know it”.

        Is it not a fact that male sexuality is more physiologically based than female sexuality, which is more influenced by socio-cultural factors? This doesn’t change the fact that female sexuality has its physiological underpinnings as well, but to a lesser extent.

        Also, ” Between the ages of 25-30, most women become so repulsive that no sane man would touch these creatures with a ten foot pole, save for a small group of losers who will sleep with anything that moves anywhere and anyplace.”

        Not true, I was with a girl (26 yo) for like 2 months and she’s one of the best, most lighthearted and happy persons I’ve ever met, besides being a cutie. We ended because I didn’t want a serious relationship at the time, and well, as you said, her biological clock is ticking, but we are still great friends and she’s never been a cunt to me nor anyone i know of.

        Exceptions do not prove the rule. Most women over 24 are repulsive bitches.

        I’m not being a “mangina”, but many things people post here about women simply isn’t true or is unfair. I have many virgin male friends and while many of them are cool to be friends with and to hang around, a few are really really bitter about life and hate girls they will never get to fuck.

        It’s more than not being able to fuck. It’s funny how everything always boils down to a woman’s hairy, smelly cunt, because (presumably) that’s the only thing of value any woman has to offer. Many guys legitimately hate women because of the free ride society gives them, the ravages of feminism and the fact that many of them were fucked (hard) over by women. Your Captain Save-A-Ho routine isn’t working.

        • Ok, I always try to base my claims in some kind of research or logic. The thing is, why should anyone believe “Exceptions do not prove the rule. Most women over 24 are repulsive bitches.”? I mean, I know some women like that, is I know men who are even worse. But most women I know aren’t like that. I wonder why you chose to believe they are repulsive bitches.

          And while not everything boils down to vagina, some men are REALLY bitter about not having sex. I think that we are hardwired to have sex, and that it makes us happy and is actually necessary for a fulfilling life. I respect if you think otherwise, though I don’t see any reason to think differently.

  14. Hmm…I’m not so sure about the whole robogirls thing. You might want to push those dates back a bit. Don’t get me wrong, I’d LOVE for a realistic sex substitute to get on the market ASAP. It’d probably help with some of the psychological problems I (and doubtless many other dateless men) suffer from. It’s just…these types of predictions have occurred time and time again, and the their arrival dates keep getting pushed back.

    There are also other issues. Say robogirls come out, are successful, and seriously impact female market value. Will they substitute adequately for long-term companionship? Will the newly available women be more willing to be in a relationship, or…will they be embittered and psychologically damaged to the point of being basketcases? Men can handle datelessness better than women can. I’m assuming no one is deluded to the point where they think a robot can substitute for the real thing indefinitely.

    Ultimately, I want a sane, reasonable girl. A girl who is real, and who I can reproduce with. I believe that womanhood as a whole has brought many problems upon itself, and will suffer the consequences. That doesn’t mean it’ll be any better for guys like us, though.

    • More likekly they will get robotgirls banned. It’s easy in any social climate and even easier in a society, whose legal system is dominated by feminism.

    • If anything, escorting, and the legalization of prostitution is likely to come sooner, as are price-drops in prostitution.

  15. I find it amusing that so many women have swallowed the PC establishment lie that a woman of high status is a woman with a career and loads of money.

    This is absolute stinking bullshit. If such were the case, Margaret Thatcher or Queen Elizabeth II would be objects of widespread male sexual desire.

    A woman of high status, or an Alpha female if you will, is a girl of around 20 years of age, who happens to be skinny and pretty. There are no exceptions to this rule.

    • Many women swallow that lie because there’s no way they can live up to being hot AND young. Good if people like a plastic look, even better if you like gynoids (as those don’t age or come with an attitude problem of years of being pumped and dumped).

      Women tell you what to want since that’s the only way they can stay relevant, attain social power and get favours(while not having to reciprocate — or even better: “You better help me, or I’ll tell all the other girls you are a creep”. It’s funny how they don’t do that against stores or handbag outlets.).

      Forgetting of course, that the “sisterhood” is pretty tyrannical, and not the place that is going to help them if they want a lasting, loving relationship based on honesty and respect.

  16. Born Again Atheist said “Human behavior is mediated by a number of complex social and psychological mechanisms which render invalid any rigorously deterministic approach.”

    This is one of the most useful, valid, and prescient comments made so far. AlekNovy has also made some valid and useful comments along these lines (i.e., that the conclusions of evolutionary psychology researchers are far from settled and are all contestable and the importance of individual variation i.e., every woman is different.)

    These are some of the best challenges to the claims of “gamers.”

    As for Sr. Big Guns, I have a comment and a question about one thing he said:

    “That being said, anyone saying that “game” doesn’t give you and edge in seducing women (be it by giving more knowledge, or giving more confidence) knows jack about seduction.”

    Even if that is true, you are not being precise enough. I wonder if you meant “…knows jack about men’s seduction of women.” Why is it that I, as a man, should expect to have to do the seducing. Girls get crushes on guys and have sex drives too – and when a girl’s romantic and sexual attentions are directed at me, shouldn’t she seduce me? Why is there always an implicit assumption that we as men have nothing to offer sexually that attractive women would *themselves* want to pursue. Gamers always talk about women being receptive to male advances. Is there no accounting ever that a hot girl *herself* has sexual romantic desires, selects a target, and she pursues him? Yes, some hot girls really are passive and like to be seduced and want to take no initiative. Again, it’s the matter of individual variation at play. Yet anyone who has been with lots of attractive women knows that at least *some* of them *like* being seductress as much, if not more, than they like being in the role of “target” of male seduction.

    My question for Sr. Big Guns is why, if he is correct and we are wrong, does he find it worth his time to continue this debate on this blog? Would not his time be better spent going out and using the game he finds so effective? I admit, though “to each their own” so, Sr. Big Guns, if you find this blog entertaining, I don’t question you more than I would anyone else – though I am curious about why you find it so crucial to convince us rather than just be happy we deluded unbelievers aren’t out there causing you competition (!).

    • Someone that’s a great response. Unfortunately it’s a bit above the intellectual capacity of a gamer, so it won’t be read by any of them.

      The aside. It’s an excellent, well put summary.

      • That’s not surprising, if one considers the fact that gamers themselves have a hard time explaining what game really is. More proof that there is no such thing as “game.”

        As an aside, I wonder what sort of women gamers actually manage to pick up. The fact that PUA doesn’t seem to work on female models or celebrities should set off alarm bells. From what I’ve seen, it’s either low quality women (fat bitches, drunken whores, mental defectives, fuglies, women over the age of 30 etc.) or the proverbial dreaded Palm sisters that always seem to fall for PUA bullshit.

        • It’s not that the ugly/fattie “falls for” pua bullshit, it’s more that she settles for the dork DESPITE the pua bullshit. Basically, most of these dorks are happy to even be talking to a woman without shitting their pants which really is all you need to get the fattie/uglies that PUAs get.

          As for dorks like mr.sir.guns – this is the more common type of gamer. This type hasn’t yet even overcome basic approach anxiety and spends all his time promoting game to others in some sick hope that if he gets enough people converted to game-he will finally be able to leave the house, one of them will drag him out.

          The ones who are out there talking to women are not online defending game.

    • “Gamers always talk about women being receptive to male advances.”
      Because it is implied that the men who game women, are not the men that the women want if they have a choice. Hence why you “build rapport” or “disqualify her by negging”.

      Again, it is a kind of “emotional/drama compensation” for being with the woman. Meaning that you are not her first choice.
      The best part of it is game makes out as if your time has no value, such that you can go around spending it building rapport with (essentially) skanks and opportunistic women who require orbiters.

      The more hoops you have to jump through with a woman, the less she honestly wants you.
      Gamers that teach are the ones that benefit most, since they’re compensated in real cash, for a system based around social pressure, behaviour switches and attention-getting.
      The more men can let go, the more options they have.
      Because the more hoops with a woman you jump through, the more you are feeding her ego, and _THE MORE INVESTED YOU ARE IN THE OUTCOME_.
      Kind of like spending your time around land whales or warpigs, eventually your brain gets wrongly acclimatised to see it as normal. And as I said earlier, the land whales and warpigs are gatekeepers and relational aggressors.

    • Sorry, Someone, just saw you post now.

      It is indeed an interesting point you put there. Why should MEN do the seducing?

      It is a fact that MANY women like seducing men, and actually going for the guy and, well, fuck his brains out. But as Born Again said earlier, there are some variables to consider such as the plasticity of female sexuality which basically means that the sex drive of women and how they would act/react in social situations regarding her sexuality ie. being seduced, for example, is greatly influenced by cultural and social factors that even though you may not control, you can UNDERSTAND.

      That being said, here are my beliefs in this matter:

      1) She got the womb, so she prolly will choose the best man possible to mate because the baby will be INSIDE HER. A girl that fools around a lot might not get a man to commit to take care of her and her child. Just a few years ago this was exactly how it happened, and that’s where we come from culturally. Now with condoms and pills getting a baby when you don’t want to can be easily avoided even though society at large still view it this way.

      2) Well, number 1 was basically explaining that this is the way it happens since people were able to marry whoever they wanted, so that’s a good point.

      3) Women seduce men, but currently (and probably always) the social norm is that the men ask the girl for marriage, the men go out and approach the girl, etc. If you don’t like that’s the way it works, by all means you are entitled to not approach women, but the chances are that you will have far less relationships that if you just started approaching.

      Also, one VERY interesting thing is that you don’t see people saying “WOMAN UP!”, but you see them saying “MEN UP!”

      Society thinks: Feminility is taken for granted, but for a man masculinity must be proven. That’s how humanity works for thousands of years. It is interesting that only about 33% of our human ancestors were men. You WOULD expect it to be 50/50, but it’s not. We are result of a lot of fighting and struggle and fucking blood sweat and tears.

      We are the product of many many years in evolution. Fucking ACT LIKE IT.

    • “My question for Sr. Big Guns is why, if he is correct and we are wrong, does he find it worth his time to continue this debate on this blog? Would not his time be better spent going out and using the game he finds so effective? I admit, though “to each their own” so, Sr. Big Guns, if you find this blog entertaining, I don’t question you more than I would anyone else – though I am curious about why you find it so crucial to convince us rather than just be happy we deluded unbelievers aren’t out there causing you competition (!).”

      I actually love arguments and such, it makes people grow and understand other view points. I consider myself a thinker and love to engage in arguments to learn new things.

      Just because you have the possibility to bang chicks doenst mean you should be doing it 24/7… There’s time to meet new girls as there is time to play some bball, to read, to study etc.

      And yeah, I find the blog entertaining. The views here are so extreme that sometimes is interesting to read. And you prolly wouldn’t be competition, I’m pretty sure we don’t live in the same continent ehehe

      Thing is, you guys are so convinced that game doesnt exist and that it doesn’t work that many people that might read this wouldn’t maybe even try it if they stumbled on this site and they had problems with attracting women. So it’s a good thing to give potential readers more points of view and let people decide what they really want.

      I’m positive that many people benefit from dating sites and blogs and get better at seduction. I know many who did, and it was a great thing for their lives. I know other people also who had such low low low social skills that they couldnt even apply what they read in a convincing manner… I think saying that game is utter and absolute bullshit because of these guys is too extreme and no sincere.

  17. Probably the most crippling problem with game is its tunnel vision: it’s not that women are “all different”, but circumstances definitely are, and unless you spend your waking life in clubs you’re going to run into problems fast whenever you try to apply any of the hard, supposedly infallible rules of Game™ you’ve read about on the Internet.

    For example, Roissy is a big proponent of making the girl “come to you”, as is Mystery (think of his bit about not moving your place to get closer to a girl on a sofa); he thinks you should speak as little as possible, barely emitting grunts to communicate your approval or disapproval of a girl’s behavior. But Roosh often stresses how the first “thirty minutes” spent with a girl have to consist of you talking non-stop: with some girls, or in some circumstances, sitting around like a silent weirdo is going to get you nothing but a night spent with the ol’ right hand when you get home. Well, who’s right then? They’re completely opposite ideas, you can’t reconcile one with the other unless you admit that there are no hard rules and that the strictures of social living are so complex and multiform that trying to obsessively plan them out will only lead to failure.

    I’m convinced that this is part of the reason the biggest game blogs have been moving away from phrases, techniques and tricks, instead meandering into this increasingly vague territory of “inner game”, which basically comes down to shit like “be a narcissist” or “be yourself”. Well, duh.

    • Notice that game blogs have no advice for the bad situation that many “not-alpha” men can find themselves in, namely:
      1. relational aggression
      2. false rape accusations
      3. character assassination

      Game excuses many women from their bad behaviour, making real relationships impossible.
      Because a real relationship involves accountability for your actions.
      And most women are unwilling to accept that responsibility, despite being “strong” and “independent”.

    • The idea of a lot of game involves getting a woman tangled inside your whirlwind of adventures in self-improvement, life-experiences and sensations.
      There’s just one problem there.
      Real achievements, the kind that takes years, are usually boring.
      You see the action movies with soldiers going guns blazing in a warzone. What you don’t see is the dreariness of KP, the horror of burning crap in latrines and the interminable boredom of duty.
      Game is trying to live your life as a hamster on a treadmill 24/7.
      One could almost argue that following game makes you pathologically unable to concentrate on any long-term goal. You develop a kind of attention-deficit-disorder.
      Since you are analysing so many approaches, dealing with negs, AMOGging and doing dance-offs along with kino and “our world” scenarios.
      You might as well have a 2nd job.
      At least there you’d have positive results (an increased cashflow) and fewer emotional problems (famously, game does not seem to work well at sustaining marriages, given that _very few_ people said to practice it have stable marriages)
      Then again, most gamers long ago gave up on education and being productive members of society.

      • Just an observation:
        On the other hand you have the very real truth that almost any woman past the age of “entering and leaving university/college” is quite damaged beyond the point of sustaining an honest relationship(since she has almost certainly, in her progressive world view, had plenty of sex with the man she considered “Mr. Right Now”), making it a necessity that men screen for good character.

        Because the costs of false rape accusations, relational aggression, sexual harassment, paternity lawsuits and broken marriages are so high.

        The thing about “game” that makes it so indefensible is the reality that any society requiring it to create relationships between both genders(especially when it is seen as normal for one gender to behave in an entitled manner, and the other told to “be grateful for any attention you get, dance monkey dance”), is a sick society.

        So it’s not a question of “is “game” good or bad”. It is more a question of “is a society that requires “game”(or the kind of ritualised mating dance that consistently puts men at risk of female aggression/attitude) for relationships, one worth living in?”

        • I totally agree with this. To be fair though I don’t think it’s a common trope that game is supposed to be some kind of social cure-all (except for the Roissyite faggots who thnk they’re “bringing more love into the world”/”giving women what they want”). I think it likely started as a genuine response to the growing masses of men who’re finding it impossible to mate in the First World, and about five seconds later a bunch of enterprising L. Ron. Hubbard clones latched onto it to make a quick buck/feel big.

      • Yes, real achievement is boring. This is one reason why all this talk from gamers about inner game and self improvement is bullshit.

        All of you know I run my own business. Getting to this point involved a lot of boring and mundane crap that women would never be attracted to. The results were worth it and my life has objectively improved. Has my self improvement attracted women? HELL NO. And this is despite the fact that I’m now swimming in money.

        Real self improvement doesn’t attract women. PERIOD

  18. I also think book peddlers and camp salesmen are basically making bank off of that phenomenon which Houellebecq calls the “energy of despair”; it’s that point where everything suddenly “clicks” for you, you feel an immense sense of bravado, of confidence, like you could whip down mountains with your wang. But game doesn’t prepare you for the inevitable crash (when you strike out, or when your mood just takes a swing into the can) because it’s so unrealistic, it’s like “life coaching” (the sheer arrogance!): you can’t prepare for every eventuality in life, and disappointment, bad luck and things out of your control are a part of that life.

    If “inner game” peddlers were earnest in their desire to help men improve themselves, they’d tell them that lasting confidence only comes from experience, from grounding yourself in reality and your desires and in truly loving yourself above any woman, in seducing a girl because *you* want to, and not because you’re her court jester. But a happy camper doesn’t buy books.

    • Anon, many gamers say exactly that, look up for 60 years of challenge. It’s basically what you are talking about.

      • Game is by its very nature kowtowing to women and begging them for sex. The instances where it isn’t (i.e. “demonstrating higher value” by making her come to you) are bogus because they only work when you’re actually attractive to begin with.

        You’re also raising a problem that people have touched on here: when exactly are men not in for “60 years of challenge”? Isn’t that just a man’s state by default?

        • No, not really. 60YOC is a system developed by, well, 60YOC I’m not a native English speaker so I prolly didn’t understand your question, but I’m refering to the game system that you can easily download on the internet. Read it a bit (or maybe the 60 years of challenge MANIFESTO, its really easy to find) and you’ll see what it is about.

  19. Let’s be honest here alpha males do posses attributes (physical and psychological) that put them ahead of other males. Game is just a set of social skills and learning how to be a better man. This would be the type of stuff a guy learns from his father but thanks to the divorce epidemic we have single mothers teaching their sons how to piss sitting down. Throw in the emasculating culture plus Jim Crow style misandry and you have the rise of “game”.

    • If somebody hires a wingwoman, or pays for sex… both give you the “alpha” vibe.
      But at the same time, why should such a narrow definition count for what it is to be alpha, unless women are the ones who reinforce it?
      As for the idea “Game is just a set of social skills and learning how to be a better man” – do junkies, deadbeats abusers, convicts and ne’er-do-wells fit in there?
      Because they seem to be the ones most succeeding in the current environment.
      And most of them either come from broken families or “single mother environments”, which removes the idea of “type of stuff a guy learns from his father”.
      It’s not correct to say the culture is emasculating. What is correct to say is that “some men and women are privileged to get away with misdeeds in this culture”.
      The misandry is aimed at the “men that are not wanted”.

  20. “do junkies, deadbeats abusers, convicts and ne’er-do-wells fit in there?
    Because they seem to be the ones most succeeding in the current environment.”

    Anybody can be an alpha. These guys prove it. That should be inspirational.

    “And most of them either come from broken families or “single mother environments”, which removes the idea of type of stuff a guy learns from his father”.

    Perhaps but these guys grow up in very masculine environments like prole neighborhoods or the ghetto. What they don’t pick up from male figures like their fathers they get from other influences.

    • It’s in no way inspirational that those with the most horrific character flaws are those that succeed so well with most women,
      unless most women really want trash (or, correctly, the trash that they think is a treasure only they/their friends can understand).
      If women were really the great judges of character that they say they are, the divorce rate of over 50% would not be initiated over 70% of the time by them.
      I have heard the standard canard “Women don’t go into relationships to be abused”.
      When it should actually be “Women don’t go into relationships to be abused by men they are not attracted to”.
      For that reason alone, the kind of women most wanting for decent men, are those unworthy of relationships since they do not value character and seek a walking wallet — they deserve nothing that would grant them any measure of advantage.
      Remember too, when being with a woman of low character, you are probably being exposed to STDs AND damaging yourself for relationships with a good woman, reducing your own ability to value a good relationship. Not to mention the present danger of “an angry degenerate who thinks you are stealing his woman”, and the woman who thinks the angry degenerate accessory is something to be proud of.
      I find it weird to hear that the masculine environment happens to be the “prole neighbourhoods or ghetto”. Because these are precisely the environments where short-sightedness, short-tempers and irresponsibility gather. Along with the single mother influence. So the idea that this is somehow “masculine” when the overarching contact growing up is with single mothers… seems a difficult conclusion to reach.

    • Oh, and if women had so much character themselves, they would not be leaving their marriages without good cause or false accusations.

  21. Women have no character they merely have tits and pussy. All any man wants access to in the first place.

    “I find it weird to hear that the masculine environment happens to be the “prole neighbourhoods or ghetto”. Because these are precisely the environments where short-sightedness, short-tempers and irresponsibility gather.”

    In other words high testosterone men. The kind of men women love.

    • No, the kind of men women love until they can’t hold on to them anymore.
      Then they go hunting decent men to overpay for their broken lives.
      More men are waking up to the idea that unless the woman has youth and beauty to offer them, the offer is probably tainted with bad faith or some “surprises”.
      Since a woman their age has had considerably more “relationship experience” and certainly little to no genuine feeling left. Making it easy for those women to be cruel and ruthless.
      Meaning most men should stay away and allow those women to self-destruct.
      Women can make their own choices, men can make their own choices. Equality, baby.

  22. Here’s my definition of “game”:

    Shrewd businessmen taking money from stupid people.

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