Frequent readers of The Obsidian Files know well that I tend to log one post a day, and almost always early in the AM hours, as I tend to be an early riser myself. However, a quick trip over to Lady Raine’s blogsite has given me the occasion to make an exception to my usual posting rule; with this post, I officially invite Lady Raine to come and actually reason together on the merits, or the lack thereof, of Game.

Her newest post up on her blog is one which not only mentions my name, but is also one of the finest expositions of Strawman Shadow Boxing I’ve ever seen. Aside from repeating for the umpteenth time why she refuses to educate herself on the most basic of facts surrounding some of the seminal writers on the topic, to say nothing of actually reading the book(s) herself, she also goes into full-on Ad Hominem mode, attacking the authors (and by extension anyone who adheres to Game principles) as something less than reputable. I’ll layout more definitive evidence over the course of this post and subsequent threads, but for now, let me address her primary “teaching” tool, *an episode from network tv (CBS, I believe) called “Criminal Minds”(!!!)-uh, yea, really academic, LOL!

Of course, primetime tv being what it is, the episode, according to Lady Raine herself latches on the most sensational aspects of the PUA/Game community and weaves it into a murder-mystery where the chief suspect is a Mystery-like character, complete with outlandish “peacocking” outfits and the like. And of course, we’re treated to a Tom Cruise/Magnolia-like sleaze of the Seduction Guru, which Lady Raine is very careful to latch onto-nevermind the FACT that to date, NO ONE HAS SUGGESTED THAT NEIL “STYLE” STRAUSS, is a sleazeball, douchebag, sexist, misogynist, or in any other way creepy (if so, I’d need to see the direct quote and source, Lady Raine.)-to say nothing about the fact that, to date, in the realworld, there hasn’t been ONE report of rape, much less murder, implicating ANYONE in the Seduction/PUA/Game community. And that’s been in more than a decade-not a bad track record, by anyone’s estimation, I would think.

Lady Raine claims not to have any beefs with Game, and instead only with sleazeball guys who basically use Game to “get back” at Women, but I’ve personally known many Men who aren’t sleazeballs nor hate Women; my own blog clearly lays out my position on both fronts. Moreover, her hiding behind these and ancillary strawman only does a very poor job of her inability to actually discuss Game intelligently, no matter how much handwriting she’s claimed to have studied.

I have pointed out to her several times, that she is incapable of even discussing what Game is, because of her basic ignorance on the topic, and have proven this with someone she “endorses” in a PUA who calls himself Assanova; recently, on his blog and in the comments section of a thread about yet another photo she claims is Roissy, I said the following:

“(Post #70): And now Lady Raine, I’d like to take you up on your challenge, before I follow my good friend Ferdinand Bardamu’s advice and do some other more productive things with my time-with all due respect.

Several times over the course of our exchange, you have spoken favorably of Assanova, a PUA and Game blogger of some repute. I’ve decided to look him up on the web and peruse his site. At random, I chose three posts of his: on Peacocking, his 7 Rules for Natural Game, and his post that talks about how all Women are the same.

You’ve left comments on each of those posts. I can tell you, that not only don’t you know what you’re talking about, but that Assanova’s used the MYSTERY METHOD in every single one of the aforementioned posts.

Let’s count the ways:

On his Peacocking post, Assanova elaborates on its importance and gives his views on what it’s true purpose is. While both he and you take issue with Mystery’s personal style of peacocking (NOT a requirement, nor does Mystery or Style ever say as much-but you wouldn’t know that, as you’ve never read either book, right?), Mystery’s point, which is rooted in EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY remains-that in Nature, Males display, and Females choose. Since you’re so adept and knowledgeable about Psychology, you really can’t argue with that-right?

The issue isn’t to wear silly hats and paint your nails black; the issue is to make yourself, as a Male, standout from all the other Males, in the Mating Grounds-which, in our time, are bars, lounges, clubs and the like. Being very well dressed is one of many ways, and definitely one of the more important, for a Man to standout from his peers to a Woman.

But of course, you already knew that!

Next, Assanova speaks about how all Women are basically the same psychologically. Again, being so knowledgeable about the subject, this basic point would elicit no argument from you, right?

Well, not quite. Instead of actually taking up what Assanova said, you instead log a highly defensive comment about how so and so would NEVER work on you (how many times have we in Game heard this line from sooo many Women before? Sheesh!), that you simply say “NO!” umpteen times until the guy gets the message, and about how you would “punch a guy out” if he groped you-something that Assanova NEVER said, and in his response, said as much. He then specifically mentioned KINO-a theory not coined by Mystery, but is definitely part of his school of thought-and briefly explained how it works. To date, you’ve yet to respond.

Finally, on Assanova’s “7 Rules of Natural Game”, you chime in to inform him that his notions of “not chasing” females simply wouldn’t work on you (God, that is so tired). Of course, Assanova responds to further explain why a Man shouldn’t chase a Woman, something that my own personal experience definitely tallies with, and this, plus many other of his “rules” can be traced right back to the MM (for example, his “Keeping Poised”? Just another way of saying “Frame Control”. No disrespect to Assanova, but I’m just saying)-which, according to you, is based in “9th grade Psychology”. If so, it’s all so elementary Watson, then why all the defensiveness, Lady Raine? I mean, either Assanova’s basic points are correct in aggregate, or they’re not-which is it? And remember, this is YOUR guy, someone YOU suggested was a much better source of and for Game, than Style/Strauss or Mystery. Fair enough-so why is it that on the three posts I chose at random on Assanova’s site, the ONLY comments from you are those that appear to openly contradict what Assanova says? Even when he responds to you? What’s up with that?

Again: learn how to debate with Logic.

And how to play Chess.

Here then is the end of today’s lesson.

Merry Xmas.

The Obsidian

By theobsidianfiles on December 25, 2009 at 6:55 AM”

And, as if to add insult to injury, my good friend and brother in arms, blogger Ferdinand Bardamu, says the following, just a few comments up the thread apiece:

“(Post #67): Obsidian, I dropped in here after seeing referrals from LR’s blog to my old WordPress.com address. I honestly don’t understand why you’re wasting your time with these people.

It’s one thing to engage folks like OneSTDV, Todd White, or Susan Walsh, people who you may disagree with but have intellectual acumen and can argue in good faith. But Lady Raine isn’t even capable of getting the basic facts of the debate right. From one of her comments here alone:

(Lady Raine): A fictional and never proven to have even HAPPENED biography written by a REALITY TV STAR.

Basically, I would have to regress intellectually and abandon my understanding of the very ROOTS of “Game” and study the completely fictional, completely biased, completely opinion-based novel written by MYSTERY???

(Ferdinand Bardamu): What the hell is she talking about here? Mystery, the “REALITY TV STAR,” never wrote any biographies. If she’s referring to “The Game,” that was a memoir (which is by definition factual, with zero evidence out there to suggest otherwise) written by Neil Strauss, who has never been on any reality shows, much less been a star. Mystery wrote “The Mystery Method,” which is a handbook, not a biography.

Secondly, she keeps referring to Mystery as a “REALITY TV STAR,” when everyone with an IQ above room temperature knows that Mystery didn’t get a TV show until years after he had written “The Mystery Method” and established himself as a seduction guru. Referring to him as a “REALITY TV STAR” is like referring to Hugh Laurie as a novelist – factually accurate but untruthful in its incompleteness, and betraying the ignorance of the person saying it.

LR: Why would I want to “muddle” the actual science and fact with some random dude’s diary of “my midlife crisis” in the form of a “biography”??

FB: Strauss wrote “The Game” when he was in his mid-30’s, based on events that happened in his late 20’s/early 30’s. “Mid-life crisis”? Are you kidding me?

It’s one thing to argue with someone who hasn’t read a necessary book in order to understand what’s being debated. It’s another thing to argue with someone who doesn’t know information that can be found on fucking Wikipedia! If Lady Raine can’t get little, easy-to-verify things like this right, how the hell can you trust her to debate honestly on issues of actual fucking importance?

Listen man, you know I respect you, but I really think you’re casting your pearls before swine. This whole blog reeks of bad karma. The people here are chugging Haterade by the liter and doing nothi stewing in their bitterness and misery. Let them rot – all they can do is drag you down with them.

By Ferdinand Bardamu on December 25, 2009 at 5:22 AM”

Perhaps along with all the Cold Reading, Psychology and Graphology Lady Raine studies so much, perhaps it might do her some good to also study Logic and Critical Thinking, to say nothing of Debate? We’ve all seen how well she can tapdance. Now let’s see how well she can actually address actual issues, hmm?

Lady Raine, and I know you’re out there-the floor is yours. Please address my and Ferdinand Bardamu’s comments directly-and no Bullshittery from you, or you will be erased. Time to put up or shut up.

Your move…

Holla back
The Obsidian