Ah Conor, you’re like a little chihuahua. All bark and no bite. Your posts on game amuse me. I”m bored, so I thought I comment on your latest. As I’m sure you’re aware with all your posts on game, hits is hits, wherever they come from.
Do you know what should bother feminists (and everyone else too)? The Web site Roissy in DC, written by a member of the “pickup artist community” that I upset in my prior posts on “the neg.”
Did you upset Roissy? Well, I don’t know the mind of Roissy but he seems to see your attempts to shame him as amusing. Feel free to drive more traffic his way. Feminists and everyone else are bothered by the truths that Roissy exposes. You (and they) would rather keep your (their) illusions. I held those illusions once, but life forced me to accept that they were illusions and not reality.
Why is “everyone else” an after thought? If what Roissy espouses is so bad, why separate it into two groups? The underlying implied message of your words is:
- Feminists get upset.
- You know what upsets them (you are either a feminist yourself, or a collaborator)
- Everyone else should be going along with the feminists and what they believe.
- If you’re not a feminist, you’re a prole.
- You are attempting to ingratiate yourself with your feminist owners.
A basic version of Roissy’s worldview can be gleaned from a quiz he has devised. “If you are a woman, this test will measure your dating market value,” he writes. “The higher the number, the better quality man you can catch. The lower the number, the more likely you will find yourself surrounded by cats.”
Women are very good at lying to themselves. I’ve had 2’s, 3’s, and 4’s tell me that they and their friends are all 10’s. Before you say that beauty is subjective and not objective, I’ll refer you here, here, and here.
The majority of Roissy’s questions on the market value test for women are based on looks for a reason. Some facets of personality do make a woman more attractive. If you want to deny that men are visual creatures, go right ahead. If men did not find women sexually attractive, the human race would have died out. Why such a simple fact seems difficult to understand by so many people seems inconceivable, but that’s the culture we live in. This immutable fact cannot be changed, no matter how much it is denied, or how much shame is heaped on men. The human race will become extinct long before this succeeds.
As a sometime DC resident, I would be fascinated to know which bars he frequents. I’ll bet they’ve got bottle service, which is basically an ingenious douche-bag tax designed by some unknown genius club owner years ago.
Ah, you throw up a nice straw man here. Not that Roissy would get bottle service you say, but obviously any dude (PUA or not) who goes to a club with bottle service is a douche-bag. Is the corollary also true, Conor? Are the women that go to these clubs douches? If they aren’t, why not?
In a culture and society that is completely and utterly shameless, the only purpose of these attempts to shame another person is to win points from his superiors, the women on the pedestal above him.
The tragic thing about Roissy in DC is the emptiness of its approach to women. Hookups, dating and marriage are cast as games that are won by the men who are best able to perpetrate an extended con on a conquest who is misled about his personality, aspirations, level of their affection, etc. Every last detail is contrived strategy, and the inevitable effect of the sundry deceptions is a relationship with someone who doesn’t actually like you even if you wind up having sex with or even marrying her.
Still couching game in terms of deceit and the long con I see. You can’t fake personality, aspirations, and depth of character. As far as the level of affection a man should show his women, if any faking is involved it’s showing less emotion than what you actually feel.
If learning how to “get what you want” from another person is so morally abhorrent to you, then why aren’t you condemning Cosmo and a myriad of other magazines, books, talk shows and everything else that women turn to for relationship advice and to learn how to “get what they want out of their relationship?” You don’t do that, do you?
Conor quotes some Roissy:
Give your woman 2/3 of everything she gives you. For every three calls or texts, give her two back. Three declarations of love earn two in return. Three gifts; two nights out. Give her two displays of affection and stop until she has answered with three more. When she speaks, you reply with fewer words. When she emotes, you emote less. The idea behind the golden ratio is twofold — it establishes your greater value by making her chase you, and it demonstrates that you have the self-restraint to avoid getting swept up in her personal dramas. Refraining from reciprocating everything she does for you in equal measure instills in her the proper attitude of belief in your higher status.
These days, men tend to be needy in their relationships with women. I want you to find any woman that enjoys being with a needy clingy man. You won’t. This kind of advice is absolutely necessary for most men to break out of the foolish idea that if he smothers a woman, she will love him. That never works.
