A Gamer apostate

The pro-Game blogger who calls himself “One STDV” writes today that Game contradicts itself and fails as a strategy. His argument is simple and elegant. Given that the claimed civilizational purpose of Game is to restore sexually deprived betas to their natural roles as providers and pillars of society, and given that the means of working this transformation is to teach betas how to behave like alphas and get chicks, why should these betas, once they have been alpha-ized, want to return to hum-drum beta existence?

The Beta Revolution errs in assuming these betas will act in the manner which supports societal reform and not in the manner that motivated them to pursue Game in the first place. With the success of Game, their sexual desire and confidence will only increase, making them increasingly unlikely to settle down with a rapidly aging baby-maker. Thus, the Beta Revolution ultimately fails because it converts a class of productive men potentially satisfied with a traditional family existence into a cohort of productive men who shirk the duties of stability and reproduction. The Beta Revolution will depress the reproduction of betas by inviting them into a world of sexual gratification and excess. Thus, the beta foundation of society will reproduce even less and the proposed solution fails.

Clearly OneSTDV has been influenced by the critique of Game by traditionalists and conservatives who have relentlessly pointed to the fact that notwithstanding the Gamers’ pretensions that Game can save society—that it is the ONLY way to save society—from the crisis brought on by female sexual promiscuity and the marginalization of beta men, the main and immediate purpose of Game is simply to help the beta guys partake of those same promiscuous females themselves.

Thus, in the last 14 hours, the debate on Game has moved dramatically toward closure. The VFR discussion last night, Are “bad boy” and “Alpha” just the losers’ excuses?, followed by my critique of the In Mala Fide commenters, Among the Gamers, followed by Todd White’s e-mail to Ferdinand Bardamu this morning, followed by OneSTDV’s concise refutation, have left the Porn-Philosopher Roissy’s brainchild exposed as the hyped up silliness it is. One more world-saving materialist ideology ends up in the junkyard of history.

- end of initial entry -

Gintas to LA:

What’s surprising to me is the large number of Gamers who have come out of the woodwork, seemingly out of nowhere. The Enlightenment is the story of Western Civ staggering from one disaster to another, and this will end badly, too.

What we need is a “Civilized Western Man Boot Camp,” where we turn these Gamers into men.

LA replies:

Check out VFR today! Since last night, Game has been refuted.

“What’s surprising to me is the large number of Gamers that have come out of the woodwork, seemingly out of nowhere.”

I agree, and they’re all going to feel a bit abashed. People are so eager to believe in some plausible-sounding materialist theory that will solve our problems.

Todd White writs:

You wrote: “In the last 14 hours, the debate on Game has moved dramatically toward closure.”

I agree. We are reaching closure. I keep waiting and waiting for the Gamers to say something—anything—that would make me think, “You know, maybe they’re onto something; maybe I need to rethink my premises.” Instead, with every new word, they keep flushing themselves further and further down their ideological drainhole. However, I am eager for Roissy to wake up from his slumber and write something. I know it’ll be filth, but it might be useful for entertainment purposes.

M. Mason writes:

LA wrote:

“Given that the claimed civilizational purpose of Game is to restore sexually deprived betas to their natural roles as providers and pillars of society, and given that the means of working this transformation is to teach betas how to behave like alphas and get chicks, why should these betas, once they have been alpha-ized, want to return to hum-drum beta existence?”

Why indeed? I would simply add here that even apart from the sophomoric, ludicrous notion that the Game could ever be the driving force to produce a higher civilization, it doesn’t take profound insight to see that it will eventually prove to be destructive on the personal level for everyone involved in it. And it is the women in such relationships who will first come to realize just how distasteful and unacceptable a counterfeit it really is. For a woman’s strongest desires—to feel specially loved and cherished and to have the deepest possible emotional connection to her mate—are exactly what Roissy’s desperate, addicted, game-playing “lost boys” will be constitutionally incapable of fulfilling.

John Dempsey writes:

I must take exception to your description of Game as “hyped up silliness.” Game is an excuse for sinful behavior under the pretense of altering or undermining the current sexual license that prevails in our society. As we know, it is in our nature to use any justification we might devise in order to fulfill our own desires as well as to justify why we should not be adhering to moral principles. Game is nothing less than arrant evil in disguise.

LA replies:

I agree with you.

However, when I spoke of hyped up silliness, I wasn’t speaking of the pick-up techniques aspect of Game. I was speaking of the Gamers’ claim that it is the cure for the ills of Western civilization.

John Dempsey replies:

Yes, I understood that. Which is why I spoke of it as a “justification”. And that is, to a great extent, what makes Game inherently evil.

LA replies:

Yes.

PA writes:

OneSTDV’s comment rests on a false premise that so-called provider betas will become womanizers. It is a widely acknowledged fact among Roissy’s commenters that only a tiny percentage of men is cut out to be a womanizer. Most haven’t the talent or temperament for it.

Game, as has been pointed out to you many times, is a tool that most men will use to reassert their masculine dominance within the context of marriage or casual male-female relationships.

LA replies:

While Roissyites may have said what you say they have said, the opposite has also been said by them many times, which you appear not to have noticed, namely that the overwhelming preponderance of the actual use to which Game will be put is to get a woman in bed.

From the Todd White e-mail to Gamer Ferdinand Bardamu today, here is information on what the Gamers themselves say is the purpose of Game:

Todd White writes:

Read the Amazon.com review of the famous Neil Strauss book, The Game.

“After two years, Strauss ends up becoming almost as successful as Mystery, but he comes to an important realization. His techniques were actually off-putting to the woman he ended up falling in love with. And they never prepared him for actually having a relationship. After a while, he ran out of one-liners and had to have a real conversation.”

So if Game can’t help build a loving relationship with a woman, what is its purpose? It’s purpose is to help Gamers get laid. You basically admit this when you write, “Men need a way to sate their lusts. Game is the best way in my opinion to help them do this.”

PA replies:

Of course. What do you expect? the Roissy demographic tends toward the younger guys, and that’s what’s on their minds.

I certainly wish that I had access to something like Roissy’s site in my teens/early 20s some two decades ago. I was always good with initial attraction, but lost girlfriends due to my lack of “Long Term Relationship Game.” I tended to overrule my healthy male instincts with feminist misteachings.

LA replies:

What do you mean, “Of course”? That’s the exact opposite of what you just said. Golly Moses…

PA replies:

There are both young guys with “wilder” motivations on Roissy’s site, as well as more serious older guys. That’s all I menat by “of course.”

LA replies

It remains the case that you’ve contradicted your opening point, which was that Roissyites are not using the techniques mainly for pickup. First you said: “It is a widely acknowledged fact among Roissy’s commenters that only a tiny percentage of men is cut out to be a womanizer.” Then after I disagreed wtih you and defended my position (which you had told me was wrong) that Game is mainly about getting sex, you turned around and said, “What do you expect? the Roissy demographic tends toward the younger guys, and that [womanizing] is what’s on their minds.” So you were jerking me around.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 24, 2009 12:43 PM | Send