It is OK for a woman to dread game a BP with low social proof/aesthetics. CMV

Xemnas81 · 2014-10-02T21:57:55+00:00

Eh, manipulating people knowing that they will get hurt in the end is shitty. End of story.

Xemnas81 · 2014-10-02T23:58:46+00:00

So a quick google told me they the dread game is making your SO think that there is a looming breakup that they now feel they have to act extra good to avert, correct?

Assuming that is the correct definition, that is a horrible thing to do to someone that cares about you. Making someone think that their relationship is ending might make some act more loving, but for most the stress of being in an unfufilling relationship will make them look for an exit. The only ones who would fall for the dread game are those who already want to be with you, in which case there is no need for a cruel game to make them stay.

Bakerofpie · 2014-10-03T05:19:35+00:00

Warning: generalizations ahead

I don't think it would work well. Someone thinks their partner has a lot of other options and they need to step up their game, what do they do? Be more eager to please, more doting, more clingy. That's exactly what makes men less sexually attractive in relationships. You're taking a man with a low SMV and making it even lower. I'm not sure where I stand on the morality of it, but it's certainly unfortunate for all parties involved to find someone who isn't that attractive, hook them in, and then willfully making them even less attractive so that they feel they have to fight to be in your life since no one else will have them.

Xemnas81 · 2014-10-02T23:52:52+00:00

Of course it's "ok". Nothing in TRP is about "what's ok". Just being the higher value partner is "dread game", why would you even have to dread game a lower value male?

Reginleifer · 2014-10-02T23:24:37+00:00

It's more than OK, but you run the risk of losing your SO.....same as with a man, so that's why TRP usually considers it last resort and not to be used as a fix all.

Tombstone31 · 2014-10-02T22:19:13+00:00

Can someone explain to me why dread game is considered manipulative? Isn't it basically saying "change or I'm leaving you"?

powerkick · 2014-10-02T23:00:23+00:00

This is a long-winded, angry response I used in argument against someone trying to sell the benefits of dread game to me, so bear with the personal-sounding and raging essay:

"I have a related anecdote. When I was 13, I was too lazy to take out my own trash. You know, typical 13 year-old BS. Now, my stepdad had a rather unique method of reminding me to take the trash out: He would simply leave the bag by the front door.

There were four of us total who lived in the house, yet this singular "matter of choice and consequence" was supposed to solely reach me. That trash bag was my problem and I had to deal with it. The problem with passive aggression is, what other ways could "allowing your actions speak for you" be interpreted?

Well, maybe someone else was going to take it out later. Maybe we were going to do something special with that particular bag of trash--maybe it's a donation? I don't know, it's a fucking trash bag with shit in it by the front door. If I decided to take it out, as I should have, I ran the risk of making the mistake of, "oh powerkick, where did this bag of gold bullion go? You threw it out? Why the fuck did you throw it out?"

Being anxious about accidentally making mistakes, I played it safe, which is obviously also making a mistake because that trash bag did not, in fact contain gold bullion, but instead hundreds of used, balled-up tissues.

I had difficulty translating "dread game" regarding a fucking TRASH BAG. How on God's green, dangerous earth is your SO supposed to translate your passive aggression? "Is he hungry?" "Is he horny?" "Maybe he had a bad day at work."

I want to finish here, but I can't. I MUST throw a hypothetical situation at you in order to demonstrate how ineffective dread game (rebranded passive aggression in case you still haven't gotten the message) is.

Let's say you are on one side of the river and there is somebody else on the other side. Let's say there's a puma behind him that's going to eat him unless you clue him in and he somehow manages to escape with his life. The catch is, you can only "allow your actions speak for you."

See where this is going? No you don't. I'll continue

What possible combination of charades could possibly signal, "THERE'S A GIANT CARNIVOROUS CAT BEHIND YOU!" in any effective manner? Maybe you jump up and down? Wave your hands in the air? Motion him to circle around? Run away yourself in order to convey that there is danger nearby? There's a chance the bystander won't even SEE you, let alone translate your mess of signals in time to avoid being eaten.

And you think dread game is an ART?!"

TL;DR: No, there better ways to communicate that don't involve dehumanizing your SO.

Reginleifer · 2014-10-02T21:48:39+00:00

http://imgur.com/gallery/g90IU

My answer.

exit_sandman · 2014-10-03T07:27:16+00:00

Just something in general: I think dread game is far too often conflated with nuclear dread, aka the direct threat of a breakup to force a partner into compliance, which is a far too simplicistic view. I've already written a longer post about its nuances, though it's actually mostly quotes, special thanks to Rollo Tomassi (1, 2, 3).

The problem here is also one of semantics - "dread" sounds more catchy, but that way it's prone to be equated with terror, threats and blackmail, especially in here (though admittedly inside the redpill community it's also predominantly used as such).

To illustrate the fundamental function of dread, let's simply put it on its head: The absence of "dread" is "taking your SO for granted". And this is to be taken literally - it doesn't just mean "relying on your SO" or "trusting your SO" (which are positive things and in an ideal relationship should both be a given and justified). Someone who takes his partner for granted, who can't imagine him/her actually leaving or just asserting him/herself, who stops appreciating the efforts the partner makes (because they're perceived to be a given), who doesn't appreciate the fact that his or her efforts are enabling one to live life as it is (and can concentrate on the instances where the partner is inconveniencing him instead) - that is a person who doesn't feel dread. It may work out, but usually it only fosters complacency and, in the long run, resentment because the lack of appreciation prevents one from seeing the positive things (and believe me, I've seen it turn out exactly like that all too often to think it's just a coincidence or just extraordinarily shitty people who treat their partners like that).

Dread in that regard is simply the realization that your partner not being present is a real possibility and that your life would be worse without him or her (whether that feeling is justified or not); but it can also work in a different function; and it certainly doesn't necessarily entail the nuclear option of the "do that or else"-approach, but can also work at levels that are lower - a lot lower. Here are some of the more refined nuances of dread one of the patron saints of the manosphere wrote about (emphasis mine):

Although I’ve suggested casually returning flirtations with other women as a means to amplifying desire and illustrating social proof, this is hardly the only, or best, means of fostering competition anxiety. Overt flirtations are a blunt means of stoking this anxiety, but often all it takes is a nuanced shift in a predictable routine to trigger that imagination. The idea isn’t to instill terror from fear of loss, but rather to demonstrate higher value; particularly when a woman’s attention is straying into comfortable, routine familiarity and she begins seeking indignation from other sources.

Sometimes all that’s necessary to provoke that imagination is to get to the gym, dress better, get a raise, travel for work, change your routine, adopt a Game mentality, hang out with a new (or old) friend, be cocky & funny with her – risk to offend her sensibilities. [...]

In light of this ambient fear of loss women seek to avoid, one might be tempted to use a more sympathetic approach in order to allay a woman’s fears. This is hardly worth mentioning here since this is generally the tact that most men intuitively use in their LTRs anyway – a constant reassurance of love and devotion. Guy’s like my friend Jim will follow a perpetual strategy of appeasement in spite of themselves.

Lets be clear, the vast majority of women are secure enough not to allow this condition to get the better of them, and it’s in the extreme cases I’ve used above that real neuroticism flourishes. Contrary to popular belief I’m not an advocate of the Dark Triad methodologies of Game. Not because I think they’re ineffective, but rather because, with the right art of Game they’re not even needed. Only in extreme cases are the dark arts to be employed, and if a situation necessitates their use it’s important for a guy to understand that a line has been crossed with a woman who necessitated their use.

So yes, you should be seeking to reassure an LTR of your love and devotion, but know that due to women’s intrinsic fear of security loss, you will never achieve an ideal state of contentment of it, and certainly not by relying solely on comfort and familiarity. She want’s you to rock the boat, it’s what makes her feel alive.

And:

[...] returning casual flirtations is actually a compliment to the woman a Man is with. It satisfies that internal, hypergamous doubt as to whether the guy a woman committed herself to years ago is still the Man other men want to be and other women want to fuck.

[...]

An LTR based on dread, a threat, or an implied ultimatum isn’t one based on genuine desire, and you know enough about my philosophy to understand how important real desire is to me. I think of it more as an ambient understanding that a Man is still desired by other women and this manifests in flirtatious behavior. Obviously if a guy is overtly seeking out opportunities to flaunt his flirtations with his LTR, that’d be indicative of him having other issues to resolve for himself. Guy’s thoroughly underestimate women’s sensitivity to nuance and subcommunication; it doesn’t take much to trigger her imaginings, but most guys think they need to beat her over the head with what he wants her to get; and that of course defeats his purpose – he’s too obvious.

And an example:

Mrs. Tomassi and I were recently talking with a woman of about 49. She’s the ever-present front desk host at our gym and a casual acquaintance and friend. She’s not particularly unattractive for her age, reasonably good shape from a body perspective – I can tell she used to enjoy a lot of male attention in her 20s and maybe 30′s – but now just this side of 50 she’s moved not so much into a regret stage, but rather a hopeful sense of well post-Wall self-remorse. That might sound odd, but she’s at least optimistic about her ‘chances’ of getting with a “good man” in the near future.

She’s quite upfront and honest about the Alpha Bad Boy Jerks she’s dated, married one and then divorced from her past. In fact she’s one of the more lucid women I’ve encountered about her present state and how she came to it. Although she’s the typical result of a hypergamous life prolonged past the “eating her cake too” phase, she owns her mistakes.

Although we generally hit Gold’s at different times, occasionally the wife and I go together in the mornings. It was on one of these mornings, and our friend at the counter stopped us to say,

“I love you guys, I really do. I see a lot of people pass through here but when I see you both together it gives me hope that I can have a good relationship like you two. You’re such a team, I really hope I can meet a guy I can connect with like that.”

We were on our way out, and she always has something else to say about her personal life so, while I guess I was somewhat flattered, I didn’t pay it much mind. That is until our ride back home when Mrs. Tomassi looked me square in the face and said, “I am so glad I didn’t end up like that!” I was actually kind of surprised at the tone of her voice. “Thank God that’s not me, how horrible to be in that position at her age.” I nodded my head because I knew she was expecting my usually analyzations of post-Wall women and the beds they make. Then, with a hint of a tear in her eye, she gave me one of the best compliments I’ve ever heard from her, “I hope Bebé finds and marries a Man just like you.”

That made me feel really good, and what I’m about to type here sound really shitty. After not a small swell of pride, I thought, while it’s nice to be appreciated in this respect, would this realization have come without the influence of our friend and her state of life?

You see, what I experienced that morning was a sort of de fact association of social proof. Granted, I’m not taking anything away from the love and solidity upon which my marriage and our relationship is founded on, but was I just the right guy in the right place for this realization to come to awareness? What I had just participated in was a form of soft dread. A dread that needs no emphasis or prompting from a Man, simply the occasion for it to come to the surface to be actualized.

Gregjlaver · 2014-10-02T21:54:32+00:00

if you think in the mind set of right and wrong you have already lost to somebody who has a lesser moral compass then you.

Doing any kind of manipulation will put you ahead, so it is about a personal gain.

Is it wrong, yes the second you start abusing somebody else's emotions you are in the wrong.

Can you do it? of course you can

Should you do it? Meh prob not but hey I ain't going to judge you for taking every advantage you can get.

[deleted] · 2014-10-03T18:48:55+00:00

BP? Consciously or unconsciously? Because if you're a consciously BP male, you're consciously submissive, and that's what you damn well signed up for. Who am I to say you're not allowed to like what you like?

But if a dude doesn't know any better and the woman does know better, then no, that ain't cool. But the chips will fall where they may. What can you do about it? Nothing.

an_absolute_rose · 2014-10-02T22:55:57+00:00

CMV

Why? I'm not BP. IDGAF what you do. You do you.

Honestly, if done right, this seems like the most accurate parallel to a man dread gaming a girl. I have no problems with this, just as I have no problems if a man dread games his SO right.

Title	It is OK for a woman to dread game a BP with low social proof/aesthetics. CMV
Author	Xemnas81
Upvotes	3
Comments	88
Date	October 2, 2014 9:46 PM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2i4q92/it_is_ok_for_a_woman_to_dread_game_a_bp_with_low/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/it-is-ok-for-a-woman-to-dread-game-a-bp-with-low.284699 https://theredarchive.com/post/284699

Comments