Lately, discussion of game and Christianity has been occurring in the Orthosphere, led by GBFM, Donal, Zippy, and Cane. I don’t disagree with many of the conclusions of the anti-gamers. There is probably a lot of the placebo effect to “game”. Although, there is also evidence that dark triad traits, which game attempts to mimic, are attractive, while being a nice guy isn’t.
I do find though, that a lot of the Christian, “is game acceptable?”, debate really boils down to defining “game”. Nobody comes to terms before discussion, so the conversation almost always turns into a bunch of people talking past each other.
I myself have gone back and forth on game.
Either way, chasing flags and notches is an empty, joyless, if sometimes pleasurable, way to live. Roosh’s personal reflections over the last year or so provide ample example of that. No Christian should participate in it, and, even according to game advocates, even most non-Christians are simply not suited for it and would be better of finding an average girl and marrying. “Game” in the gimmicky, manipulative, player sense is something to avoid; at best it is a stop-gap.
But, men should instead focus on building themselves up. Instead of focusing on gimmicks, men should focus on improving themselves and being the kind of man who would have the kind of life they desire. Focus on the core, what some call inner game, and you will be attractive to the type of woman you want in your life.
****
This being said, I don’t think all game is a placebo. While I avoid the immoral and gimmicky parts of game, some of the more straightforward and practical social skills and body language advice is useful. One of the earlier posts which made me take Roissy seriously, was this post on contraposta. Simply standing differently, and having a way I could purposefully stand, did wonders for my confidence. Just off the top of my head, other such tactical posts that helped me immensely include Simon Grey’s eye contact post and Roissy’s statement-statement-question.
Little practical things like these can work wonders and give socially awkward men like me something firm to hold onto.
****
All this being said though, whether you are pro-game, or anti-game, there is something you can agree on. So, what if, as Zippy says:
Game (understood as the pickup artist’s toolkit specifically) is actually pretty lousy in terms of effectiveness, right on par with placebo. Doing something (and learning from the experience, and being persistent, and building confidence) is far better than doing nothing; but once you extract taking action at all, persistence, confidence, and learning through experience from the equation, the part of Game that is left over (that is, Game itself) – at least according to the “best of the best” PUA themselves – doesn’t do much for your percentages.
Let’s say game is mostly a placebo. Let’s say that its only real effect is to give awkward guys something to latch onto so they have a place to start developing confidence and acting. Let’s say, game is simply doing something.
This leads directly to the question, what else is there? As I’ve said before:
There is nothing else.
If you are an awkward, nerdy male, the only people willing and able to teach you practical advice for attracting women are the PUAs. I’ve checked. There is simply no one outside the manosphere teaching men how to meet a pleasant, moderately pretty girl for a stable long-term relationship.
I’ve read a number of Christian books and articles on dating, but they all assume a woman is attracted to you. They are either discussions of what kind of dating is appropriate and exhortations against sin or man up articles on how to avoid sex in relationships, how to avoid leading women on, and how to be firm in your intentions. There is almost no practical advice on how to actually attract a girl in first place so that the other advice has any relevance.
(For any Christian manospherians reading this, here’s a great book idea: write a guide to help awkward Christian guys attract a Christian wife. Market it in the Christian culture industry and you’d make a killing. I’d write it, but I’m not qualified at this point.)
Going outside the Christian stuff, everywhere else you look the socially awkward male is given the same advice: be yourself and be a nice guy, she’ll come… eventually.
Guess what?
We already do that: it doesn’t work. If it did work, we wouldn’t be looking for advice.
For women (and church leaders and others who may care): if you do not want awkward guys going to PUA’s for advice on attracting women, offer a viable alternative.
The only reason I started taking guys like Roissy or Roosh even remotely seriously was because they were the first people I found anywhere who gave enough of a shit to give some practical, useful advice. I haven’t adopted either game or playerhood, but I have tried some of their more morally neutral advice and it has been useful. (I’m now more influenced by the Athol/Dalrock approach).
How royally screwed up is it that self-proclaimed assholes like Roissy and Mentu are the only ones honest and selfless enough to give practical advice to the awkward guy looking for companionship (even if they mock us while they do it)?
Zippy, GBFM, Cane, and the rest can criticize game all they want, they might even be, probably are, right. But it doesn’t matter.
There is no alternative.
If I, as an awkward, nerdy Christian man, want practical, actionable advice on finding and attracting a nice Christian wife, game is the only place to go.
Without the game advice of these “low value dirt bags and sexual garbage collectors”, I never would have been able to approach this girl. I never would have gotten this date. I’ve had more dates in the last year than in my whole life prior, and a lot of it comes down to the advice and help I got from these “dirt bags.”
Without the advice and encouragement of them, without the practice from my previous dates, I probably would have awkwardly blown out the first date with the girl I’m currently courting.
None of these dates or approaches involved gimmicks, sleaze, or even anything resembling the popular perception of game. They were all simple, straightforward, well-intentioned interactions that nobody would or could think ill of.
But game advice gave me something to latch onto. It gave me practical steps I could take to improve myself. Was it a placebo? Possibly. But some of it was real. (The simple advice to not follow around a girl you like like a love-sick puppy alone was worth its weight in gold).
It was something practical I could do to improve myself and become better at social interactions with.
Roissy, Roosh, et al. may be self-professed degenerate scum but what is Zippy* providing?
This is the problem. What are the Christian man’s alternatives?
My Omega’s Guide was a start. I tried to make a practical guide to self-improvement anyone could use while avoiding “game”. Donal puts out a lot good theory, Chad’s stories are excellent sources of some Christian attraction principles put in practice, Vox throws out a fair amount of Christian game, and Athol puts out good, but non-Christian, advice for married men. A few other Christian blogs from my roll put out the occasional advice post.
Of these, Vox and Athol are the only names even remotely well-known and the only ones who have successfully found a wife and there sites is the gamiest and least Christian, respectively, of them all.
The awkward Christian man’s sources of information for attracting a wife without game are few unknowns who have plucked the pearls from the vast library of information the degenerates put out and have tried to apply it, but haven’t even found a wife for themselves.
So, give us something. Where is the church? Where is the help from the pro-marriage, anti-game moralizers to help us?
I don’t need another exhortation to man up, I’ve had enough of those. I don’t need another post telling me the greatness of marriage. I don’t need another lecture on servant-leadership; I’m drowning in those. I don’t need another sermon on avoiding fornication; I’ve been listening to those since before I knew what sex was. I don’t need more don’t do this, don’t do that; I need more do this.
Where is the practical Christian advice that will help me find a wife? Where can I find advice so the good Christian girl’s description of me to her friends isn’t “ew”?
Without that, all the rest of this debate over game is just noise and thunder signifying nothing. Awkward Christian men will go the degenerate dirt bags, because our choices are either try to pick the occasional nugget of truth from the hedonists and hope we don’t become corrupted by them or live the rest of our lives in grinding loneliness and sexual frustration.
If you don’t like game, give us an alternative.
****
Being opposed to complaining without providing a solution, I will point any Christian men reading this and looking for answers to my Omega’s Guide. It should provide some good advice I’ve painfully learned through the last 7 or 8 years. At some point, I’m going to arrange it into a self-published ebook for easier distribution.
Once I’m married and can speak with real authority on the subject, I plan to write a book on finding and attracting a Christian wife (probably cribbing heavily from the Omega’s Guide). I might even try hocking this to the various Christian publishers.
****
* I realize this is unfair to Zippy, and mean no offence, he’s not making a relationship blog and he isn’t professing to, but neither is anyone else.
Funny you should post this just now. I am finishing up another post on Game as well. Although I will be proposing an alternative in it.
If you can dig through it and draw the right conclusions (I have a bad habit of going on theory walks and petering out before I hit applicability), my latest post may be helpful.
I’m onto something, I just suck at explaining it.
Also, Cane’s theory stuff is well, well, well worth reading. It’s hard to get your head around because he starts from foundations and doesn’t cater to modern sensibilities, but if you stick with it you’ll acquire a worldview from which you just do the right things.
I should add that my proposal is skeletal at this point. More theory than anything.
As long as Christians continue to not restrain their daughters sexuality and fail to find brides for their sons then game is a Christian man’s best bet.
Kind of sad though. Christianity conquered the roman empire by producing daughters that were so modest, chaste, faithful and submissive that roman aristocrats married them up in large numbers.
I don’t understand why Christian men have to be chaste, when Christian women will have their legs in the air within a half hour of meeting a hot guy. Or what about all those re-virginated sluts coming back to the church to find their beta provider after a decade of carousel riding?
Christian men need to understand that Game is a tool. Nothing more, nothing less. Whether you drive your car safely or like a maniac, it is up to you. In either case your car (and Game) will bring to a destination. How you use the tool for good or ill is strictly up to you.
The thing that these Christan bloggers get caught up in focusing on Jesus instead of Paul. Paul was the guy who built the Christan church and he was the one that reduced the status of women within the church. Game raises a mans status above a womans to make her more attracted to you, less troublesome, and in generally happier in a relationship with you. Paul told women to shut up in church, vial yourself, submit to your husband and you can’t divorce your husband for any reason. This lowed the status of women and had the same effect on men and women as a group that game has on a men. It raised men status in general above the women which made Christan women very happy, fruitful, and faithful.
The church has abandoned the teachings of Paul almost entirely and it’s killing the church family formation. Bloggers arguing that game is bad don’t understand why it works and how they themselves can produce the same effect simply by following Paul’s teachings.
“I don’t understand why Christian men have to be chaste, when Christian women will have their legs in the air within a half hour of meeting a hot guy. Or what about all those re-virginated sluts coming back to the church to find their beta provider after a decade of carousel riding?”
Christian men don’t have to be chaste. Chasity is commandment for women but only a recommendation for men. Almost all new testament bible verses dealing with men sleeping around are actually about sleeping with temporal prostitutes. It was accepted by almost all church fathers that men were going to sleep around a bit. Your religion lives or dies on how chaste your women are, not your men.
@Red
What you say is true but it is a lesson the modern church does not teach. Women over 30, ex-Carousel riders, re-virginated sluts and single mothers are presented as heroic women and we must “man-up” and marry those ho’s. And yet men are constantly exhorted to refrain from fornication lest they go to hell.
This does not mean that you have to follow the PUA lifestyle, rather use Game to find and marry that woman who is worthy of you (that is if she still exists).
Learning the body language and social cues alone was worth its weight in gold.
Roissy was also the one that mentioned your mission is more important than a woman. Most pastors tell you the opposite.
The problem is that there are degenerates on the Christian side too.
Someone posted the following statement at Dalrock’s back in December:
“A Christian man with game will change western history.”
Here’s my response, which might help the readers here:
He did. His name is Jesus. Sophronia is His game.
For the imperfect men who follow Him, introducing sexualized Game in church will cause them to fall prey to Jezebel, Delilah, Potiphar’s wife and that conniving bitch hypergamy. The traps and snares these duplicitous creatures will surely lay in their paths will make a man’s church life a weekly dance with the devil. Christian men will be tempted so often and in so many beguiling ways that they in their fallen state and imperfect faith will not be able to handle. A few mis-steps and they’ll be on the shortbus to Hell.
Game works, but why teach church men how to dance with the devil? Satan’s agents are mobilised when obtaining sex from Christian women becomes easy for men. When the music stops and the serpent strikes, the man with Game and the women terminally sick with Alpha love for them will find themselves with fangs in their necks. At that point, their Heavenly future will look grim indeed.
Protect your sex for Godly work, men. A Heavenly future is the prize – not women. Christian men who struggle to attract women are as safe as God wants them to be. If you must use Game, attract the one and only woman God prepares for you to marry and waste your skill on no other.
There are always women worth marrying. Don’t be discouraged if it takes time to find a good woman in church. Church is not always a good place to find one since it’s essentially a hospital for the spiritually sick, but if a young man is serious about marrying a church girl, I recommend a six-step process:
1. Be completely honest with God about your own spiritual ailments (an essential first step)
2. Ask God what you need to do to get better (then start doing it)
3. Find a humble church where there are a few quiet girls in the potential wife zone who pray (no divorcees or baby mamas)
4. Meet them all, looking intentionally for their good points (ask God if you can live with the bad)
5. Ask yourself honestly if you can husband the one you like most (women can be trained, but you must be willing to lead her)
6. Pursue her boldly and unashamedly (this is a lot easier than the feeling that precedes it suggests).
I realise this is the sort of vanilla advice given to every young man in church for the last gazillion years, and grist for the mill in the Manosphere, but red pill men do sometimes look at Woman’s collective failings and say “they’re all the same – why should I bother with this one?”.
My advice is to bother with this one and do better for each other together. Just do it wisely, carefully and with God’s help.
Good post FN.
The Christian objection is game seems twofold:
First, female pedestalization/NAWALT. “Sure the sluts you go for would fall for that. Not my nice Christian women”.
Second, a misdefinition of game. If all you know of game is Mystery Method and dark triad of course it will leave you with a bad taste. But there’s finding your mission, storytelling, vulnerability, qualification, leading.
Game states the man must lead the woman which I see as an inherently Christian concept.
If game deniers could get past thinking game is all scripted lines and “negging”, they might understand. The game community has been past that stuff for about 7 years.
“I don’t need another exhortation to man up, I’ve had enough of those. I don’t need another post telling me the greatness of marriage. I don’t need another lecture on servant-leadership; I’m drowning in those. I don’t need another sermon on avoiding fornication; I’ve been listening to those since before I knew what sex was. I don’t need more don’t do this, don’t do that; I need more do this.”
Exactly, what is worse is most pastors, and perhaps yourself, see the social/sexual landscape as being merely there to provide “a Good Christian Wife”.
Think about that for a moment, how many divorces spring from that ill formed approach. If game teaches a Christian male anything it is women are emotionally driven, starting with a view of “will this lead to a marriage I’m told I want”.
Game will inform Christian men what a female with kids and a divorce in her past is likely looking for, basically a “nice” Beta to provide for her past indiscretion/mistake. Knowing this means if there is a relationship one then knows what it is about from her pov. No matter what she says.
Far better to find a purpose and follow it then to beta puppy behind her, dropping everything that matters to the Christian Male in order to follow that Disney script. At the very least, such an approach will speak loudly to the fmr Mrs Whomever that one will brook no bullshit as you have options.
Most Beta/Omega Christian males, especially younger ones, will literally pee on their stomachs if a woman even looks in their direction.
I´m with Red here. Maybe you need to accept that man is a fallen creature, and accept that living in this world entails a lot of sinning just to stay alive.
In other words, convert to Catholicism or Orthodoxy, all other brands of Chrisitianity are either: a) too lefty and put women (and mankind in general) on a pedestal (Protestant Churchianity), b) too demanding on mankind. Paul didn´t say: don´t sin!. he said: avoid sin and repent when you sin.
The main fault with protestantism and sola scriptura, etc is that most men aren´t worthy enough to properly understand God´s teachings. Everytime you browse your Bible you´re comitting the deadly sin of pride (hubris). Not because of your reading in itself, but because you believe you can interpret the Bible by yourself and without being designed by God to do so.
The Fathers of the Church, the Saints and ordained priests have direct acces to God and its teachings. You don´t. Unless one day God hmself singles you out and you ultimately become a Saint.
Until then, use game with wisdom and enjoy life.
As for nice mariageable Christian women, I think part of the Red pill viewpoint is that they´re either: a) nonexistent b) extremely rare.
Good luck anyway!
As one or two commenters here know, I ‘found’ “game” and the manosphere because I am working on a book on dating, courtship, and engagement. I agree that many of the traditional methods of teaching men, for social interaction, etc. are no longer very visible I am a bit surprised at the recent repetition of
“It is game or nothing”
Really? It is a big world and pointing out that neither all women nor all men match the conceptualization of “game” is not ‘NAWALT’ (as if using an acronym was a refutation) – it is simply factual. The core problem with “game” as proposed originally by PUAs and largely by others is not just the original immoral aim but a core category error in the entire ‘alpha/beta/gamma/omega’ divisions. Or do you really think that routine exercise and different foot placement changes personality? Or that men without the ‘dark triad’ are always socially inept?
I hope not.
I will agree that the tools and such needed to get men to act in a virtuous manner are often tucked away into sub-cultures that mainstream men do not participate in, sure. But I do not accept the argument that ‘since all I am aware of is this flawed, immoral system then I must follow it’.
No, that isn’t how moral choice works.
Perhaps there are two books here – a second on how to develop strong, moral men.
Ah Aquinas’, foot placement and regular physical exertion will change personality via building innate confidence. Game itself is amoral, in some ways no different from a Dale Carnegie book.
The difference is intent.
Further, one appears to be relying on the “I’m a special snowflake and that won’t happen to ME” approach, which is the lament of many a jilted male, the foolishness is only revealed after the phrase “BUT I did everything RIGHT” is oft repeated to a largely uncaring world.
I think of Game in the Psalm sense, “Blessed is my God who trained my hand for war”, only in this case the battlefield is relationships in the love is a battlefield sense of “war”.
“Roissy, Roosh, et al. may be self-professed degenerate scum but what is Zippy* providing?”
In the post you linked to, Zippy tells men to engage in the futile and worthless exercise of shaming cads. Here’s in effect what he says:
“Roissy is a scumbag. You guys should be ashamed of yourselves, “high-fiving” cads like him! And we need to tell sluts that Roissy is a scumbag!”
Roissy and players/cads like him give not the slightest of damns what anyone thinks of them. Players and cads have special disdain and disregard for what “square Christians” think of them. And sluts sleep with players and cads because players and cads are the only men who are attractive to them.
If we don’t want Christian men looking to cads and players on how to be masculine, then there needs to be something better than Dennis Rainey, James Dobson, Boundless, Focus on the Family, and wimpy, spineless pastors bleating “man up” all over the place.
Roissy is a self-professed scumbag. But he doesn’t put up with shit from women. He knows how to walk away from a bad situation and how to project confidence. He knows how to pursue something he wants, and he knows how to risk. That’s a lot more than I can say for people like Rainey and Dobson, who tell men to do dishes to fire up their wives’ slow cookers and who tell men essentially that their wives are always right and that husbands are always wrong.
Until the Christian community starts giving something better to men, I will not be in the least against men studying a cad or three so that Christian men can get on their masculine feet.
Padre,
“one appears to be relying on the “I’m a special snowflake and that won’t happen to ME” approach”
Who is this, exactly? And besides,even ‘top PUAs’ only succeed about 10% of the time, or less, according to themselves. THEY do ‘everything right’ and still miss their target 90% of the time….
Exactly, and consider that for a moment Aquinas, specialists at Game, and still a 10% success rate, which illustrates how difficult male/female socio/sexual relationships are in the real world.
And do keep in mind, they use a shotgun marketing approach, playing the “if I ask 100, 10 will respond positively”, and they will point blank tell anyone who asks “this is not for everyone” as such high levels of rejection would be difficult for “joe average” to accept.
With that in mind, what chance does a Christian man have if they do not use elements of game. At the very least such a Alpha/Beta dynamic would be helpful in keeping marriages between Christians together along with helping the unmarried Christian male at least understand what they are seeing when talking with women. AND the frame of mind ‘is this my next wife” is disposed of for the misleading thing it is in fact.
That very line of thinking is rather chilling, how about starting with “what do I find appealing in a woman” not “is this is my future wife”, men not automatons Aquinas, is where things need to begin
If the degenerates taught the Christians that stumbled in…is how they unmasked the dark side of female nature. Name one Christian denomination that does that. They either just skip it altogether, say that women are pure beacons of virtue, or blame all that nature on the men. Man up and marry the slut! Many Christian men are in the dark about this and it behooves them to know which women to go after and which to avoid. I was one of these…and who knows what type of slut I would have committed to if I was still in the dark.
I would often use the advice they said to notice the women I should avoid. Why use my best material on a slut that advertizes it? 20 or so signs she is a slut has yet to be proven otherwise to me. Short hair, cats, tattoos, her speech, even the dead look in her eyes that is the thousand cock stare is enough for me to see.
So I wouldn’t use it to go out and get my fornicating on…I’m using it as a filter while self-improving myself.
Padre,
My point is threefold;
#1 – your jibe about a good Christian male complaining “BUT I did everything RIGHT” is nonsensical in comparison to “game”.
#2 – These numbers demonstrate that “game” is a mirage – heck, it might *get in the way* of success with women! Heck, considering the sheer amount of time, energy, and effort PUAs put into their ‘craft’ having such low success rates in a targeted group is frankly laughable. If “game” REALLY WERE some sort of advantage in male/female interactions the conversion rates indicate that no one else would *ever* have sex, and certainly nothing else!
#3 – I am aware that Christian men in general, Catholics in particular have higher a incidence of marriage and a much lower incidence of divorce. “…what chance does a Christian man have if they do not use elements of game” you ask? Better, it seems
“Roissy is a self-professed scumbag. But he doesn’t put up with shit from women. He knows how to walk away from a bad situation and how to project confidence. He knows how to pursue something he wants, and he knows how to risk. That’s a lot more than I can say for people like Rainey and Dobson, who tell men to do dishes to fire up their wives’ slow cookers and who tell men essentially that their wives are always right and that husbands are always wrong”
And here is the fact of the matter, couples who share housework tend to be less happy and tend to break up more frequently.
It is very much like talking to a 5 yr old who sticks their fingers into their ears w/a “I’m not listening, I’m not listening”, viewed from a provable pov, their advice is relationship suicide.
Small wonder Free Northerner brings this up, and really, it is the tip of the iceberg, view say Joyce Meyers teachings through a rationalization hamstering pov and it’s macabre listening.
1, Suspect you have not spent much quality time over a beer w/a recently divorced Christian male. Or failing that, chatted w/a young Christian male who is completely frozen out of the dating market altogether and cannot understand why.
2. Apparently you know very little about marketing and sales, 10% return is actually rather high, avg would be around 3 percent conversion rates or so
3. Not so, in fact, Christian divorce rates mirror societies’, as do bankruptcies. Oddly enough, the less conservative the Christian, the more likely the marriage is to last.
“Catholics in particular have higher a incidence of marriage and a much lower incidence of divorce. “…what chance does a Christian man have if they do not use elements of game” you ask? Better, it seems”
A few things about that:
Catholics are told to not use birth control as it is a serious sin (whether they do or not is another story)
Women that aren’t on birth control respond to more masculine males…and it is my belief Catholic men that follow the faith would be more masculine than other denominations. Let’s not forget that birth control itself is a divorce. The procreation side of sex.
I remember the sex ed class..both sexes were told to wait until marraige because it is a serious sin outside (whether they do or not is another matter). At least the females have been told or made aware of that fact…while the rest of society tells them to do what they want. If they actually listen to this advice…then all the stuff about N and the likelihood of divorce would make sense.
Aquinas Dad:
You’re wrong about Christian and Catholic divorce rates.
Overall US divorce rate: 40% to 50%
US divorce rate, professing Christians: 38%
US divorce rate: Roman Catholics: 25%
With due respect to my brothers both Protestant and Catholic, those are miserably poor examples. We American Christians are doing a piss-poor job at keeping our marriages together; probably because we’re doing a piss poor job of selecting mates and an even worse job of keeping the commitment once made.
Deti,
I said Christian men are less likely to divorce than the general populace.
The numbers you post confirm that.
I said Catholics in particular are less likely to divorce than Christians in general
The numbers you post confirm that
While I agree that those numbers are still too high it doesn’t mean that my statement was wrong.
And if you look at cholarly articles on divorce rates among Catholics that consistently use NFP (i.e., are confirmed for not using artificial birth control) the numbers are amazingly low.
@ deti
Actually he said they have a lower rate of divorce. He never said it was a big drop.
But given the current climate…a 1/4 or 1/3 chance of being destroyed is better than a 1/2. So there must be something there keeping the numbers lower.
In fact at least what the Catholic church teaches is divorce prevention.
Pre marital sex…a grave sin. (lower n means less chance of divorce)
Cohabitation…a grave sin. (occasion of sin for the first thing…usually given into)
Birth control…a grave sin.
Basically anything that is against the sixth commandment…grave sin.
All acts of sex must be open to life (the woman’s natural cycle does give her off periods of fertility so birth control is just for selfish people).
People will still get divorced due to fallen nature and the corrupt system in place. But I would say take out the fornicating and birth control and your odds of not getting divorce are much better.
AD:
If you think that a 25% overall divorce rate for US Roman Catholics should be a point of pride, or means things are going better for Catholics than for others, perhaps you should reexamine things.
A one in four chance of divorce in a denomination that forbids divorce is unacceptably high, don’t you think?
None of which answers free notherners’ question:
If not game, then what?
(and the Deti’s numbers are not quite accurate:
Looking at national surveys, “Catholics stand out with only 28 percent of the ever-married having divorced at some point,” the blog post stated, compared to more than 40 percent of those with no religious affiliation, 39 percent of Protestants and 35 percent of those of another religious faith.)
Interestingly, his 10% success rate for game comes back up, 40 percent for the general population, 28 percent for Catholics, 2% deviation)
Further, why is the assumption that a marriage is at all times a desirable outcome to a relationship, marriage as an institution benefits the female far more then the male. And yet the instant thought is “is this my future wife”.
Nobody said that was a source of pride….1 out of 4 is still high. And I don’t know if that takes into account annulments.
Given the current system where women are rewarded for their base instincts it shows some of them know better to keep those things under control.
Plus check the numbers with those Catholics practicing NFP…I’ve read the divorce rate is in the 2-5% range. Perhaps the higher numbers are due to those using birth control.
It is also my understanding that many Protestant denominations allow birth control. I know it started with the Anglicans and then many others followed suit.
That would explain the higher occurrence for divorce overall among professing Christians in general.
Earl:
I agree. As a general rule, the US Catholics are doing it better than the Prots.
Earl:
And yes, you’re correct about most protestant denominations. The more liberal of them allow not only birth control, but also abortion (in certain circumstances), divorce, and remarriage after divorce. Many also allow female ordination. Homosexuality is not only tolerated, but embraced and celebrated (even if active homosexuals might not be permitted ordination or deaconates or lay leadership positions).
Is this is a game…or good advice?
http://www.returnofkings.com/26763/girls-with-short-hair-are-damaged
Backed by none other than Paul.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Cor.11.15
Paul was straight and to the point. These blogs prove the reasons why Paul is right.
Well there you go.
And not to accuse anybody…but a thinking exercise…how many problems in a marriage stem from using birth control? My guess would be most if not all.
How much game in its present form would a man need if women weren’t constantly on those pills…my guess would be very little.
@FN
1) Who confuses the definitions, and what does that tell us?
2) Let’s grant that they know Game. What do those men actually know about Christianity?
LaidNYC said:
1) What can a man who goes by the translated name New York City Fornicator actually know about Christianity? Yet here he is spouting off what he thinks are Christian concepts. The name signals the knowledge that an enemy of Christ has; not a servant.
2) A proficient Game is Game in which scripted lines, negging, and Dark Triad do no go away–they are not “got past”–but rather ingrained and they become natural.
3) Notice how easily they sell out their brother Mystery for his funny hats, negging, scripts and the other bits of Game that actually worked. They not only worked, but still inform the topic because even when not practiced, the efficacy of those tips is referenced as evidence that Game is a scientific fact. This is the famous fraternity of Game? Sounds like sorority pettiness to me.
I’ve never had to do it…but imagine trying to game a pregnant chick into the sack. Sounds like a difficult if not impossible task to me.
That’s what women on birth control are like…minus having the actual kid inside. So you have a lie on top of craziness to get through.
Up to this point, most of what we’ve heard from the orthosphere roughly translates to
Just be your good, devout, observant, chaste Christian self.
Be good with women.
Be handsome.
Be attractive.
Don’t be unattractive.
I think those who criticize Roissy et al. will have to do a bit better than that.
I’d start it with one of the better things Roissy said…
“III. You shall make your mission, not your woman, your priority”
Because guess what…a lot of game tactics in your mission translate perfectly to women.
Don’t be like Driscoll and shout shaming tactics at men who don’t know what to do…given them tools to become men. Pray and ask God for your specific situation, lift weights, find your passion in life, learn body language, fast, discipline yourself and don’t push the eject button at the first sign of trouble. All these things are DOING something instead of complaining about those doing something else.
If Christian men would at least present the door to go through instead of pointing out which ones not to…then more Christains might decide to go through it.
The error is people assume modern masculinity is bifurcated.
You must choose between being alpha f*cks OR beta bucks.
You must choose between having masculine attributes that women find attractive (confidence, swagger–the alpha masculine attributes), and masculine attributes that other men respect (loyalty, responsibility–the virtuous masculine attributes).
The two sets of masculine attributes are not mutually exclusive.
There’s nothing wrong with teaching beta men (who, by most traditional male masculine standards are good men) how to be more attractive to women. There does though, seem to be such an emphasis on the “alpha” masculine attributes in some parts of the manosphere that they either forget about or paint in a negative light the “virtuous” masculine attributes. That is a problem.
FWIW, this was my defense of why Christians need to pay attention to Game concepts. Game is Not a Four Letter Word .
Right now, the alternatives to Game from our Christian brothers seem to be “well, just be a good, virtuous, Christian man, avoid those icky Roissyites, and you’ll be attractive”.
Or “You don’t need to learn anything! You don’t need to unlearn unattractive things! Just be like me. Be good and natural with women, but also be virtuous and devout, and repent of your sins; and the women will come.”
8to12,
Indeed. As a matter of fact, that is one of the main reasons I think the entire ‘alpha/beta’etc.’ division idea is too flawed to use at all. Men are far less ‘binary’ than that.
And the ‘alternative to “game”‘ has always been there – the virtues
I’ve pitched this before.
The four cardinal virtues are
1) Courage (not fearful, not foolhardy)
2) Temperance (control of the appetites without being puritanical)
3) Prudence (making good decisions without being impulsive or indecisive)
4) Justice (giving people what is owed them good or bad)
and the three theological virtues are
A) Faith (obvious, but also means being loyal and honorable)
B) Hope (not giving in to despair but also not being pollyanna)
C) Charity (in the theological sense, so giving people the benefit of the doubt)
Getting into decent shape? Prudent, requires temperance. Approaching/talking to women? Courage, temperance.
You get the idea.
Of course, putting women on a pedestal? Unjust, imprudent. Failing to lead women? Unjust, against the faith, shall we say ‘less than courageous’.
There is, of course, more, but this is and was the core of masculinity and, therefore, of looking for -and gaining- a spouse.
AD
I like the list…it’s a matter of explaining and giving examples to that list that makes it better. Otherwise they are just words on a page.
Christians give a list and that is basically it…the seculars give a hit or miss list but explain why they did what they did.
Earl,
wait for the book, please
Who teaches the four cardinal virtues?
apparently, the “grownups” expect that men will “just know this stuff”, or should go to a library and learn it of their own initiative.
Ah. I see, Aquinas Dad.
“Just be nice. Just be virtuous.”
OK.
@ FN
We’re working on it. Though, first we need to lay down the foundations before we give out any practical information. I’m no expert, but I do seem to have a gift for teaching.
That’s what these couple posts I’ve written yesterday and today focus on:
http://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2014/01/16/christian-masculinity-and-confidence/
http://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2014/01/17/the-foundations-of-christian-masculinity/
http://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2014/01/17/christian-masculinity-the-nice-guy-and-neediness/
http://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2014/01/17/god-doesnt-owe-you-anything/
After we lay what a spiritual foundation, we will be able to show logically how our actions serve God while yet attract godly women to us to find a godly wife.
Sto12: “You must choose between being alpha f*cks OR beta bucks.”
See here is the problem with that assumption, and really with Aquinas’s list, it is NOT men who are making the choice b/t Alpha/Beta, females are making those choices.
A man can call himself Alpha, or Beta, or Captain Crunch, it does not matter, it is what women perceive about that man that is where decisions are made.
These conversations happen in a vacuum, males can discuss this stuff forever, it won’t matter, out in real life interactions is the place that it matters. This is why Game matters, and why “Roisseyites” scoff at “square Christians” and why the Pastors advice to “man up” is out of touch just a lil bit.
I’d go so far as to say that any interaction with a female in a intimate setting that begins with “is this my future wife” is doomed to the Alpha/Beta reference.
the other prong to my contention is Game is being misconstrued to mean “play the numbers game to have sex with as many women as possible”..not so, the core of game is simply to demystify women and level the playing field, what happens next is up to the individual man. Suspect Game purists who claim the only measure of Alpha is the number of notches on the bed post have it wrong. A string of failed relationships, or pump and dumps, possible STD’s or illegitmate children is not exactly an optimal outcome in any meaningful sense.
Game at it’s heart is building rapport with women whether one plans to have sex with them or not.
Deti,
,i/> “Who teaches the four cardinal virtues?”
This? Again?
“Just be nice.”
I never said that nor implied that. Justice is not nice, for example.
“Just be virtuous.”
Just? JUST? There is an old saying that ‘important things are simple. Simple things are hard’.
@Aquinas Dad,
You are advocating that men should model themselves after Fred Rogers of “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” fame.
He seems to have possessed ALL of the virtuous attributes (courage, temperance, prudence, justice, faith, and charity) that you maintain that modern men should use as alternatives to game–all of them.
No modern woman when approached by a Mr. Rogers type of man thinks “Wow, he’s so handsome.” The more likely reaction is “EWWWWWWW!” followed by a nuclear rejection.
I have to wonder if if the men that denounce Game are themselves such natural alphas (at least in the way that attract women) that they can’t comprehend the absolute inability of other men to attract women at all. Much like the guy that is a natural baseball player can’t relate to (or offer help to) to the batter that strikes out every time at bat. Saying “just hit the ball” is little help to the guy that keeps striking out, because he doesn’t have a clue about why he can’t “just hit the ball.”
BTW, I am not advocating that the virtures AD lists are bad or should be ignored–not at all. They are in fact part of being a complete man.
But, none of them are them are attributes that make men attractive to modern women.
Missed most of the comments, will try and respond to a few.
@8to12
I think the answer to your question is yes. Most are naturals. They have internalized a great deal, so much so that they cannot even recognize it. So when they give advice, it is always incomplete.
Disagree. Courage is attractive. The others, not by themselves no.
“But, none of them are them are attributes that make men attractive to modern women.”
Not so, in fact quite the opposite, the way attraction works is what is inside is unknowable to the outside observer..all they can know is what they can see and deduce from what they see.
Those internal factors can all make one a far more interesting person then “joe average”. And that leads to attraction, I’d toss out temperance of course, otherwise it all comes down to how one presents those qualities when matched to style/social freedom/swag (another name for innate courage).
It would be a fun discussion to have whether a Christian man who speaks two languages, works out, has a personal style and is charitable is somehow unattractive to the modern female.
Only caveat would be how introverted they are in interactions (under the flag of false humility) and a sense of humor.
Padre99; donalgraeme,
* Courage = being fearful, but going forward despite your fear.
* Confidence = being so self assured in your ability that you lack fear.
One thing I’m sure of is that confidence is the #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6th attribute that women most desire in men. When faced with a choice of a man that is confident to the point of being an arrogant jerk and a man that shows a lack of confidence, they’ll go for the arrogant jerk.
Courage is not confidence. Courage is an attribute men admire in other men, but I’m not sure it’s an attribute women admire in men. You can’t have courage without fear, and women do not admire fearful men–even men who have the courage to overcome their fear.
Difference being, Confidence is merely courage outwardly displayed, they are not divorced traits, Confidence is merely Courage turned outwardly.
One can be inwardly fearful, (approach anxiety in Game terms) yet have the courage to approach despite fear and appear outwardly confident while speaking to her/them/whomever
8to12,
One, what does your wife say about that?
Two, a courageous man feels fear because he is not insane; that doesn’t mean it plays out across his face.
Padre99,
Confidence is not courage turned outward.
If I was attending say a Rolling Stones concert, and 5 minutes before the show started the manager rushed out into the audience, grabbed me, and said “Charlie Watts is sick, we need you to come on stage and play the drums for tonight’s concert.” I would say yes and follow him to the stage without the slightest twinge of fear. I’ve played in front of large crowds, I know the Stones material, and to be blunt I think I’m a heck of a drummer.
That’s confidence.
If he asked me to go on stage and sing backup vocals, I’d go but I’d be scared as heck. The entire time I’d be fighting back my fear and lack of confidence in my singing ability.
That’s courage.
Appearing outwardly confident is not the same as confidence. Ironically, as you pointed out, that’s actually a Game concept–fake it till you make it–that has been a point of criticism of Game by some.
@Aquinas Dad said: “Two, a courageous man feels fear because he is not insane; that doesn’t mean it plays out across his face.”
You mean he hides his fear so he appears CONFIDENT instead of appearing COURAGEOUS IN THE FACE OF FEAR.
I said courage is an attribute that men admire in other men. And I understand that part of courage is the ability to suppress/control your fear.
I’m not sure though that women (as a group) understand the difference between confidence and courage I’m describing here.
Difference would be, courage would allow you to step on the stage and perform, confidence would tell yourself “that sounded good”
When it comes to Christian males, what I’ve found to be the largest trouble areas are:
-poor understanding of what the Scripture actually says
-poor concept of actual application of Scripture
-false humility, goodness if I had a nickel for every time a Christian male shot themselves down while talking to a female I’d be quite wealthy
“But I’m a Christian so you won’t like me to begin with”
Nothing quite like disqualifying oneself to convince her she really should not like you
Earlier post mentioned something about Hubris, from what I’ve seen, can totally believe it.
That and this sort of Multi Level Marketing approach to “Evangelize in Season and out of Season”
To me, the spirit is more of a one on one, Nicodemus/Christ dynamic, we live in a very cynical age 8to12.
The question arises whether Game’s interlocutors are natural alphas and thus just don’t get why men search for answers.
@8to12: “I have to wonder if if the men that denounce Game are themselves such natural alphas (at least in the way that attract women) that they can’t comprehend the absolute inability of other men to attract women at all.”
Donalgraeme: “I think the answer to your question is yes. Most are naturals. They have internalized a great deal, so much so that they cannot even recognize it. So when they give advice, it is always incomplete.”
I think that’s exactly what’s going on. Those who hate Game and also decry its adherents are themselves “natural alphas”, at least in some contexts. This explains why their exhortations are essentially “Oh come on, guys! Don’tcha get it? Just… Be courageous! Just be temperate! Just be prudent! Just do justice!! Just have faith!”
As ZippyCatholic says at his site just this afternoon:
“I’ve run a couple of small companies and haven’t had a ‘boss’ of any kind in decades”
This explains much. Zippy is a natural alpha, and thus just can’t understand why other men just can’t do what he does, and be what he is.
Boiled down to its essentials, what Zippy and AD advocate is an elaborate form of “Just be yourself.” It’s “Just be your good, chaste, devout, courageous, temperate, prudent, fair, faithful and merciful Christian self. You don’t have to do anything. You don’t have to try anything. Just be; and all these things will be added unto you.”
It’s destined for failure, unfortunately, and won’t help those most in need of it.
Same with Cane Caldo. He’s a natural alpha, a likable former player who was good with the ladies (formerly in a sexual sense, now a purely social sense). He just doesn’t get why guys can’t just be like him., and do what he does, and be like what he is. He doesn’t understand that some have to learn, have to study, have to practice.
I’d say courage is confidence if you trust God in your heart.
Like David going up to Goliath…if Goliath knew who David had on his side…he wouldn’t of got knocked out.
Deti,
Again with ‘just be virtuous’. “Just” mastering temperance (control of one’s own passions, desires, and appetites) can take a lifetime to really get it right.
Same with justice – can *you* be just? Truly, honestly just? What do you think taking a leadership role as husband and father *takes* anyway? A script?
Full disclosure; I’m a combat vet from Ft. Bragg who went to war with the French Foreign Legion (yes, really). I have owned my own businesses and been an independent contractor making plenty of money. I have been married to a former professional musician and competitive swimmer who went to a Seven Sisters school (and the tough one) and I have 5 sons who are, I am assured by others, great. My wife and I home school the kids and they are in the upper 1% of kids in standard tests. I am also a public speaker and a management consultant.
I reject the wonky labels of ‘alpha’ and ‘beta’ but, heck, if I am not an alpha, what is, right? I have money, courage, etc. No problem approaching, talking to, and engaging women, and I make my living leading other people.
So…. Why are you listening to a bunch of guys that need an artificial ‘toolbox’ to “…demystify women and level the playing field” in pursuit of a 2.7% ‘conversion rate’ instead of me?
And guys?
Confidence – the firm belief that you are capable of an action
Courage – the ability to do actions that you find frightening
Earl, good to see you “get it”.
This is a very ripe area for a Pastor or Priest to step forward and explain to young Christian men that if Paul could determine to go to Jerusalem and “know’ the cost, talking to a woman is child’s play.
They only have words to throw, not rocks that bounce off of your forehead.
Aquinas, I run a successful small business that focuses on natural products and involves direct sales and marketing, did not notice the Legion de Etrangere anywhere to be seen while doing so, all it took was putting side fear, realizing the product was worthwhile, and stepping forward.
The key is to take those inner qualities and project them..outwardly..which the youth of today has an extreme problem doing..Christianity has fallen out of public discourse.
Your Roosh’s, Rollo’s, Roissy’s:
“They are from the world; therefore they speak as from the world, and the world listens to them.”
1 John 4:5
Now to be fair…many Christian pastors also take on that same verse. Now do you see why so many people are so blind?
“And guys?
Confidence – the firm belief that you are capable of an action
Courage – the ability to do actions that you find frightening”
Thus Courage=Confidence, it is not the absence of fear, it is the accepting of fear and having the courage to move forward with confidence REGARDLESS of outcome.
“In other words, convert to Catholicism or Orthodoxy, all other brands of Chrisitianity are either: a) too lefty and put women (and mankind in general) on a pedestal (Protestant Churchianity), b) too demanding on mankind. Paul didn´t say: don´t sin!. he said: avoid sin and repent when you sin.
The main fault with protestantism and sola scriptura, etc is that most men aren´t worthy enough to properly understand God´s teachings. Everytime you browse your Bible you´re comitting the deadly sin of pride (hubris). Not because of your reading in itself, but because you believe you can interpret the Bible by yourself and without being designed by God to do so.
The Fathers of the Church, the Saints and ordained priests have direct acces to God and its teachings. You don´t. Unless one day God hmself singles you out and you ultimately become a Saint.”
Nice try but it will take more than that.
”
Your Roosh’s, Rollo’s, Roissy’s:
“They are from the world; therefore they speak as from the world, and the world listens to them.”
1 John 4:5
Now to be fair…many Christian pastors also take on that same verse. Now do you see why so many people are so blind?
Behold, I send you as sheep among wolves, be as wise as snake yet gentle as doves.
Matthew IIRC
A bit a of a different pov when it comes to social sexual politics.
When all of your eggs are put in one basket…that being approaching women…then your success/failure is all based in that.
When all of your eggs are placed in your mission…then your success/failure is all based in that.
When all of your eggs are placed in God’s hands…everything you do will eventually be successful. What happens during your mission and talking to girls are side effects.
And those w/o passion..run away
Definition of Game: Game is how you get your needs met in a social setting.
http://runsonmagic.com/2014/01/game-reveals-your-true-self/
Also, the book “No More Christian Nice Guy” has some great game advice from a Christian perspective. I recommend it.
As a former Christian, I agree and thank you for your post. Had I not taken the red pill, I’m certain I would have had a horrible dysfunctional marriage and probably killed myself. I remember asking the very innocent question at twelve “how do you get girls to like you?” and no one could answer me.
In every area of my life, I studied hard, worked hard, broke things down, and learned to execute. What drew me to game was that I could do that in my social life. You’re right – no Christian has successfully broken down relationships, despite having the best possible role models of traditional submission.
I believe it is because Christians are afraid of power. They’ve been told Christ was a meek woman and they need to be meek women too. No More Christian Nice Guy shatters that pretty hard.
Christianity hasn’t spiritualized feminism – it’s made being beta spiritual.
The funny thing is, after years of being a player, I’m in a better position for finding a wife than I ever would have been in the church.
Still organizing my thoughts around this. Thanks for stirring them. My wound with Christianity are pretty old, and seeing them in the manosphere is healing.
Christian men don’t need game, they need kinism. Once you read sites like FaithAndHeritage.com you’ll never be able to return to the Orthosphere. For those who really want to “put hair on their chest”, try the “Cambria Will Not Yield” blog. With the emphasis on ethno-nationalism, the mission changes and the wife or potential wife falls out of the focused cross-hairs on the “gamey” pedestal, she isn’t the man’s raison d’etre. You might also draw on the parallel that “Heartiste” is also pro-white.
Take, for example, yesterday’s comment section back and forth from Faith & Heritage:
Anti-white woman:
What this website and it’s authors promote are the teachings of Kinism, a legalistic cult that teaches justification by the Law instead of the Gospel of Grace.
Praying that the God of Grace opens your eyes…
F & H Mod:
The “justification by law” canard is the most damning to your credibility. There’s a reason the FAQ exists, and one of them is to stop the mouths of self-righteous women..
:D It gets heated enough, like some of the best “gamey” sites out there, and so for Serious Christians there is nothing realer than Kinism.
A.J.P.
@runsonmagic said:I believe it is because Christians are afraid of power. They’ve been told Christ was a meek woman and they need to be meek women too.”
Gentle, Not Meek
The original Greek word (praus) in the beatitudes means gentle.
When the early English bibles were first being translated, the words gentle and meek were synonyms. Meek had none of the negative connotations (spineless, submissive) it has today.
Even as late as 1828, meek did not have the negative connotations associated with it today. This is the definition of meek from Webster’s 1828 English dictionary:
Compare the above to a modern dictionary’s definition of meek:
Deficient in courage; spineless; spiritless; tame? None of those can be found in the 1828 definition of meek. And they certainly don’t correspond to the meaning of the Greek word “praus.” Yet (unfortunately), that is what most modern readers see when they read “the meek shall inherit the Earth.”
Thankfully, some modern English translations are breaking with tradition and using the more accurate word gentle.
@Aquinas Dad:
great, thanks for your credentials – so you are alpha as fuck – now can we read about your path from introverted awkward nerd to where you are now (because there are game bloggers who did just that)? Otherwise it boils down to problem of “natural alpha” who can’t understand difficulties of all these “betas, gammas and omegas” (in Czech we have great proverb for this, there may be some English alternative I’m not familiar with – roughly translated it’s “The satiated doesn’t believe the hungry one.”)
Padre99 said: “Confidence – the firm belief that you are capable of an action; Courage – the ability to do actions that you find frightening; Thus Courage=Confidence…”
I was going to let this go, but this courage=confidence thing is just wrong.
Courage vs cowardice.
Confidence vs fear.
Fear and confidence antonymns–they mean the opposite of each other.
Courage and cowardice are antonymns–the mean the opposite of each other.
If you look at the dictionary definition of confidence the word courage is nowhere to be found.
Likewise, if you look at the dictionary definition of courage the word confidence is nowhere to be found.
The difference does matter to the current subject, because women are attracted to confidence. A guy that displays courage but little confidence WILL NOT get the girl. Women find courage a desirable trait; confidence an attractive trait.
Take a high school dance as an example. After an hour of building up his resolve, a geeky guy with glasses walks across the room and asks a cheerleader to dance. He says “You wouldn’t want to dance with me, would you?” while never meeting her eyes. He showed courage but zero confidence.
As I guy, I would pat him on the back and say “you did a good job overcoming your fear and having the courage to walk up to her and asking her to dance. That’s they way guys think.
But, do you think the cheerleader was impressed with his display of courage? (In best valley girl voice) “ewwww; like barf me out; noooo!” His lack of confidence is a huge negative to her. It doesn’t matter how courageous (or nice or anything else) he is. His lack of confidence on display is a barrier she can’t get past (to the point that she won’t even try to get past).
Pilgrim,
Now I feel like Cane.
I told you, above, what to do. You need a step by step? Sure!
1) Set a regular schedule. When you get up, when you go to sleep, etc. so that you get good sleep as often as you can. Stick to it
2) Eat regular, healthy meals.
3) Sit down and decide what you want out of life. Make a list of, oh, the top three things you want. Now, take each thing and divide it into the steps you think you need to take to get there. For example, ‘I want to own a home with 3 bedrooms in a safe neighborhood’ – locate neighborhoods; price homes; calculate the down payment and the mortgage payments; calculate how long it will take you to save for the down payment; etc.
4) Start working on the first step of each goal.
– keep the goals written down and on you at all times. Look at them once a day
-every other week sit down and examine your progress. Write down how you are doing and how you can improve, if you need to
-once each three months re-evaluate your plan – were you too ambitious? Too cautious? Adjust as you need
-every six months re-evaluate your goals: should you change them?
5) If you are not social join groups and attend. Start with something simple like, oh, book readings. You can avoid a lot of talking (sometimes *all* talking) and get used to being around strangers in a low-stress public space. Then try something a bit more interactive like an evening cooking class for adults. Work up to groups that are part of shared interests, like rafting, or books, or anime, or whatever.
6) look at what you waste time on. Ever catch yourself flipping through the channels because nothing is on? yeah, stop that. read books; good books. Read classics, non-fiction, stuff related to your goals, etc. Do you have a friend that just complains, complains, complains and isn’t there for you? yeah – spend time with other people.
7) Exercise every day even if it is just walking around the block at first. Make it part of your schedule to replace the time wasters you threw out. Make a separate *reasonable* plan to improve your fitness over time. Adjust it like you do your other goals.
8) Stop lying. Start with ‘to yourself’. Don’t be rude, but be honest. “How do I look?” “I like you better in red”; “Do you think I should quit my job?” “Yes/no”; etc.
9) Spend two months tracking all of your expenses. Every nickel. Write it all down. Now, make a budget that gets rid of all the stupid waste and stick to it. Save. Avoid debt as best you can.
10) Think about every purchase you are making. Do you need it or want it? Is it part of your goals or not? Is there a way to get this cheaper?
11) Pick something that makes you nervous/scared. Now do something that makes you confront it. Afraid of heights? Take a footbridge every week. When that doesn’t make you nervous anymore move up to, oh, walking a cliff-edge trail, whatever. Then move on to the next thing.
12) Remember those group activities, above? Well, use them to get to know women without planning on dating or sleeping with them. Learn what you really want and like in women (If you aren’t familiar with women you might be wrong/not know).
13) Once you feel you know what you like and want ask a woman to coffee or something just to talk. Get to know her better on this outing. Try to simply enjoy it and try to have her enjoy the time, too. Be up-front you are interested in knowing her better, thank you.
Now, do it again with a different woman. And then another. Don’t hide this (no lying includes no deception) just honestly tell them you want to know them better.
The goal is to make sure you really do know what you like and want and that you can actually detect it in a woman.
14) Now that you are sure you know what you want
[side note. BE HONEST about this. You might think you *should* like, oh, blondes with huge tracts of land, but if you really like shy brunettes under 5’4″ well, there you are. Don’t lie to yourself)
start looking for it. Continue to enjoy your time in groups, continue to build friendships, but look for what you want.
That’s a start. This is the beginnings of temperance, justice, prudence, and courage. Master yourself first and leading others is simple.
I would say that the best way to master oneself…prayer and fasting.
Jesus did both often…he was after all human in all ways but sin.
Thing is, cannot be explained, only demonstrated.
This is were the written word falls short
@Aquinas Dad said: “Pilgrim, Now I feel like Cane. I told you, above, what to do. You need a step by step? Sure!”
As you are writing your book, keep in mind that some people need exactly that: a step…by…agonizingly…slow…step…guide.
If I wrote a book on mathematics, handed it to someone, and then told them “I told you what to do in the book; you need a step by step?” when they asked for clarification, would I or they be at fault?
There’s not point in telling people to RTFM (read the fine manual) if the manual is written in a manner they can’t comprehend.
Remember the old saying: everyone is ignorant about something.
Or, to apply it to this discussion: everyone doesn’t “just get it” about something.
@Aquinas Dad:
great list, thanks. Now try to be honest to yourself and try to guess, how many men around you could make list of virtues into practical step-by-step guide like this (you can try it even as some kind of experiment) to see if I’m really so dull as it may seem to you…
(P.S.: how I made you and Cane feel? Slightly annoyed? gee, sorry you had to endure that)
No, not annoyed.
It feels like I’m telling you the sky is blue and the reply is ‘those people said the sky is yellow’; I say ‘look up’ and the reply ‘ I need a list of instructions on how to look up’ follows.
@Aquinas Dad:
speaking of feelings, to me discussion with you felt like:
game folks: “what you look for is in ABC and you can get there by doing D,E,F”
you: “no, game folks are wrong, what you look for is in GHI and getting there is simple, it’s over there”
me: “what exactly does ‘over there’ mean. Can you give step by step instructions as game folks do?”
you condescendingly give step by step instructions, while saying that “over there” ought to be enough for everybody, implying I’m utter idiot for not decoding it properly…
Pilgrim,
You asked for step-by-step instructions (and not politely) and are now resentful I gave them? Gratitude is an outgrowth of justice and prudence.
I stopped my sons from ungrateful when they were toddlers.
Free Northerner:
After reading your post, its comments, Zippy’s last couple ofposts, and Cane Caldo’s last couple of posts, and AD’s posts, what I’m hearing from the traditionalist brigade is:
“Man up and get married!”
“Man up and get jobs!”
“Just be cool.”
In other words, the advice from the churchian/Christian/Catholic side is EXACTLY what has been criticized mercilessly.
“Just be nice. Just be yourself.”
“Just practice the four cardinal virtues: Courage, Temperance, Prudence and Justice – with no practical instruction.”
“Just be virtuous.”
“Be handsome. Be attractive. Don’t be unattractive.”
—————————
I don’t know why Simon Grey, Slumlord, Zippy and his ilk don’t just come out and say it: “Man up and marry the sluts!”
Cane is tool, and zippy is probably dominated by the women in his life.
The overwrought feminine discourse tactics used by both of them are quite telling.
By the way FreeNortherner, the parable of the good Samaritan comes to mind. Neither the priest or the Levite are of any help. The lowly Samaritan is.
Additionally:
James 2:16
“and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that?”
There’s cane in a nutshell.
If I had to bet, he is in an unhappy relationship, and therefore resents anyone else feeling fulfilled.
I’ve never understood this. Even though things have turned out quite grim for myself, I’m always partially buoyed when I see someone else escape my circumstances.
That is not so Deti, none of their advice is bad, or even unChristian, the written word is not conducive to relay the advice needed.
Sort of like asking “she smiled at me, what does that mean!?!?”
I say, the starting point in any discussion would be “what do I find attractive in a woman”?
THAT is the starting point, to be blunt, there will be no Eleazar leading a baggage train of camels packed with booty for a dowry for a woman for Isaac to marry coming around any time soon.
IE, women and men have free will as well, we have to figure this stuff out for ourselves.
Perhaps anti game advice, but hooking up/marrying a women with children is NOT the end of the world, or means one is less of a man, or Beta, or whatever, what Game demands is you’d go into that situation with eyes wide open w/none of the Disney bullshit men have had pumped down our eyeholes for decades
Aquinas Dad-
The incentive to creating good moral men is to give them a young pure woman (and the resultant children) for whom they are responsible to lead, care for, and sacrifice for.
You’re probably too new to the sphere to really have a firm handle on the thoughts and opinions of the men who populate it.
I’ll be amazed if your book produces actual successful marriages. You probably can correctly describe a Biblical marriage, but your “code of honor” approach probably will only work on the men who are already considered attractive.
The more I read the Christian men in the sphere (with a few exceptions), the more I understand why the Church is failing.
I believe if there is any alternative at all, it has to be cultural, not global. So you gotta put a country code before every blog post title, so to speak.
For example I find it really weird that in America it seems there are only selfish people and Christians (and sometimes selfish Christians) so there is no such thing as a traditionalist, conservative, unselfish atheist. I mean for example both my wife and me consider ourselves married for life, dissolving our individual interests and disregarding our individual needs because the needs of the family come first. Yet we are both atheists.
It seems in Eastern Europe there are many people who think like us: just because you don’t worship Jesus you don’t have to worship your ego.
But it seems in the US it is either worship Jesus or yourself, sometimes both.
So I guess there is no really global alternative.
Deti,
You continue! I did think you were being an onscuratanist, now I realize you just know what you know and facts won’t change your mind.
‘Just be virtuous’ is laughable – it is a way of life that takes decades. And as far as living the cardinal virtues. You’re right! Other than 2,000+ years of literature ranging from Proverbs to the Imitation of Christ, from St. Augustine to Ven. Fulton Sheen *no one* has ever talked about it but me!
In truth, of course, the books on practical steps on building character lines vast shelves. They may not be fashionable, but they are there and they last.
And the ‘Just be nice. Just be yourself’ BS I shot down in this comment thread. Good != nice; just isn;t nice. And developing a virtuous character is about opposite of ‘just be yourself’.
Of course I am not sure why I bother. In 1-3 days you’ll be telling me I never said any of this, anyway.
Jack,
“The incentive to creating good moral men is to give them a young pure woman (and the resultant children) for whom they are responsible to lead, care for, and sacrifice for.”
Nope. Sorry, but no. The incentive to create good, moral men is to have good, moral men. The incentive to become a good, moral man is to be a good, moral man. Not all good, moral men marry (for a variety of reasons, from early death to priesthood). You can strive your entire life, become a truly virtuous, upstanding man and never have a wife or children. Why?
The word ‘fair’ describes the weather.
That being said, being a good, moral man does make it more likely that if you are searching for a good, moral spouse you can attract and keep one, but it can’t guarantee anything.
But in the end you will still be a goof, moral man.
And I love the assumptions I keep getting!
“If you knew more of the manosphere”
“a code of honor only works for attractive men”
“I know why the Church is failing”
It is like Deti who, despite repetitions of the list, believes no one, no one at all, but people in “game” teach masculinity. Not only is that far from true, “game” doesn’t teach masculinity!
You think the handful of English language bloggers here are the only ones discussing marriage issues, masculinity, or the collapse orf morals? Do you *really* think that? Do you really, honestly think a good, decent ugly man just can’t find a good, decent wife? Like your comment on the Church is shows me that one of the biggest issues facing young men in the modern West is a sort of ‘hyper-informed parochialism’; people who spend a tremendous amount of time reading on a subject and are yet ignorant of core sources and alternatives.
And what do you think living honorably is *for*, anyway? Just to get laid? Just to get a wife? No, it is because it is how men live! Good, decent men, anyway.
‘Yeah, but what do I *get* for being a decent, honorable man?’
If you’re asking that question you’re missing the point.
Aquinas –
You’re still new here, so I will take that into account.
I still hold to the honorable course despite the lack of any real temporal incentive. Honor for the sake of honor is a tough sell though.
Even God Almighty, in the original covenant with Abram promised blessings in a transactional arrangement: “If you do X, I will do Y”. He also promised a curse for transgressions.
It is possible to get modest numbers of people to act correctly in the absence of incentive, and possibly even in the presence of adverse incentives.
The way to prevent premarital sex, for instance, is not to create a situation where – against biology – Christians have to wait until they make it through college and then get married while remaining celibate. The correct way is to promote early marriage, and make a stable society that allows young marriage to occur and succeed.
There is a denial of biological reality in the modern Christian parent that thinks that young Billy or Suzy should make it all the way through college and then build their career, and then finally marry late 20s or early 30s.
This situation practical guarantees that the majority of their kids will fall to temptation before they make it the 10+ years to marriage. Of course, pompous idealists love to huff about how “greater commitment to moral behavior” would stop all this.
Yes, the Pharisaical mind is always re-emerging in new ways, and this is no different. Placing burdens grievous to be borne, and doing nothing to help.
I am looking forward to your book. I expect to see moral imperatives artfully cross-dressed as though it were instructional procedure.
There is a tone-deafness in such advice. Just another person telling everyone they have to be moral and “everything else will follow”. This is the blue pill in its original form. And one of the most notable attributes of blue pill thinking is the idea that if one is failing, they must simply double down on their current methods, rather than reconsider those methods.
A small club of self-righteous Pharisees will always exist. They will engage in petty, technical arguments about trivia, and they will create tone-deaf “solutions” for their lessers to follow. And their lessers will suffer, and the Pharisee will be smugly validated in their superiority.
The organized church is tearing itself apart, a little bit at a time. This is because the Pharisees sit around their meeting tables, dallying with esoteric arguments.
Christ met the sinners and the broken where they were, and without any of the arrogance being displayed over at Cane’s or Zippy’s. Those two get too much joy out of posturing as winners to actually provide anything like real help, and they don’t care about men who have fallen behind any more than Churchian tools like Mark Driscoll care.
“Honor for the sake of honor is a tough sell though.”
To some, sure.
And the covenants with about particular blessings, not about virtuous or honorable behavior. Virtue (and honor, really) are just compliance with natural law.
[etc. and] “…Christians have to wait until they make it through college”
[skip a bit]
“There is a denial of biological reality in the modern Christian parent that thinks that young Billy or Suzy should make it all the way through college and then build their career, and then finally marry late 20s or early 30s.”
This BS is actually the original impetus to write a book!
As i mentioned a few other places it was discussion with TLM Catholics who insist their daughters do the entire ‘college + career + etc’ that compelled me to start.
Indeed, it isn’t just wrestling with biology it is to deny the catechism; marriage is a vocation and we are not to delay our vocation for material concerns. This is part of why prenuptial agreements are forbidden; in addition to implying a non-sacramental attitude towards marriage they are making marriage contingent on material benefits. How is ‘making sure my daughter can support herself’ any different than a pre-nup, really?
“I expect to see moral imperatives artfully cross-dressed… …blue pill thinking is the idea that if one is failing, they must simply double down on their current methods…”
I did, indeed, laugh out loud at this.
So you think the problem with guys that can’t get a date is that they are too courageous? Too prudent? Too just? Too temperate (in the real sense)?
Do you really think teaching men to be brave, in self-control, to make good decisions, and to treat others as they deserve to be treated is ‘doubling down on what they have been doing’? You don’t see those thins as something that will not only help them get and keep a good wife but will improve their lives in general?
If you do you’re a buffoon.
Of course, your opening line,
“You’re still new here, so I will take that into account.”
gave that impression from the beginning.
You keep using the words Pharisee and Pharisaical but you obviously don’t understand them. The Pharisees were people who prided themselves on particular phrases, on particular scripts, on particular ways of doing or saying things in a legalistic manner; they looked to particular worldly scholars as people to emulate. The scholarly ‘leaders’ came up with lists of rules on how to live, restrictions on dress, scripted ways of speech, etc. that, if you followed them would yield desired results.
Christ, on the other hand, spoke of the transformation of the person, interior change as opposed to outward signs. Would interior change lead to outward change? Yes, and outward practice was valuable, too, insofar as it led to interior change.
Just my opinion, but someone praising “game” should think twice before calling someone who is advocating improvement of character a Pharisee. Up to you, though.
Christ *did* meet the broken and the sinners where they were, He absolutely did.
He also told them to quit sinning.
Your book will be full of truth, of that I have no doubt.
I don’t think it will help, or change anyone’s life. I have no objection to training and polishing young mens’ honor to a perfect chrome finish.
Won’t probably help them attract a wife much. If honor must be perfected before it is of value, then we are lost, because no one is perfect.
If there is some unpublished threshold that we are all missing, please enlighten me. I see plenty of young Christian women giving it up for men of zero honor. If the only way to combat this is to turn Christian men into the whitest of white knights, so that the gleam from their armor entrances the young harlots and leads them – moth to a flame – back into the fold, color me skeptical.
Our current social structure is almost perfectly designed to oppose moral living. The church even applies a mildly sanitized version of this culture within its own walls.
Perhaps your book will be a brilliant guide to those young enough that they have not been fed to the cultural meat grinder, in which case, best wishes.
But the preaching of moral imperatives to Christian men in their late 20s and older has been pretty much covered. If this is the essence of your message to them, then I would also include a chapter on learning to love the benefits of celibacy. I’m not joking, either.
In the meantime, the only course of action that I think will bear any real fruit is going to be bringing slutty women to the full realization of their sin, and the defrauding of their future husband, such that they just might be able to reach a state of true humility and repentance.
Think “Prodigal Wife” – returning home to the kind of man God intended for her, her time wasted, her inheritance spent, damaged and weary.
Hey, it might even put a servant’s heart into them, rather than having them see Godly men as “settling”.
Almost forgot:
And No Rings for Sluts ™
“Honor for the sake of honor is a tough sell though.”
To some, sure.
To most. Something about a narrow gate. Why create an environment that makes the narrow gate even more unappealing?
Just to prove what a spiritual ninja you are? Again, tough sell.
This horse is just about dead. But I’m going to leave this here and then move on.
The anti-Game rhetoric says
1. “read Proverbs to find out about the nature of women”
2. “Proverbs says that a good wife is from the Lord; therefore, you need to wait for the Lord to provide a wife for you.
3. You aren’t owed a wife.
4. The four cardinal virtues are all you need: Courage, Temperance, Prudence, Justice.
5. It’s not the church’s job to teach Godly masculinity, traditional masculinity, or indeed, any kind of masculinity.
6. Don’t look to players, cads or men who are good with women if you want to find out how to get a good wife.
That advice doesn’t work anymore.
It doesn’t work when you have NO ONE teaching masculinity. From fathers, most boys get either “don’t do this, don’t do that” or “can’t live with em, can’t live without em” or “shit, I don’t know what to do”.
A lot of boys don’t get even this from their dads, because they never see their dads, because their mothers frivorced them.
The masculinity model many boys get from their dads is one of being beaten down by life, failure, divorce, substance abuse, or isolation. If he’s lucky, he has a dad who at least has a job; but most of them aren’t “succeeding”.
The masculinity model many boys get from church is “man up and marry the sluts”. According to the milquetoasts at most churches, “real men” weep at altar calls and have women rub circles on their backs while they flagellate themselves publicly. “Real men” extend their arms and cry like little babies in public during worship. “Real men” celebrate all women’s “purity” and literally lay themselves down over puddles for women to walk on their backs. He is base, evil and criminal merely for the natural desire of wanting sex.
The masculinity model many boys get from entertainment is that men are either (1) guido dumbass douchebags; (2) bad ass action heroes; or (3) dweeby bumbling husbands who would be poor, broke or dead were it not for their sensible, wise, and good natured wives.
I fear that men will get the wrong message from Zippy, Cane and others proposing an alternative to Game premised on DON’T do [fill in the blank] and “a good wife is from the Lord” and “just be virtuous” and “just man up” and more particularly, “Just Man up and Get Married!”
Many men will read this advice and say:
I’m virtuous. I’m a good Christian man. I’m courageous, temperate, prudent and fair. So….I JUST NEED TO BE MYSELF. JUST BE YOURSELF.
I don’t need to do anything or be anything. Cane says that Proverbs says “A good wife is from the Lord.”. So…. I just need to wait on God. He will do all of it. I don’t need to learn anything. I don’t need to do anything. I don’t need to unlearn things that don’t work. I don’t need to learn things that do work.
I shouldn’t do what the “bad men” like players and cads do. So… the advice Zippy has for me is DON’T DO THIS, DON’T DO THAT. But…. No one ever tells me anything I should do.
Cane tells me that living life is an art, not a science. You can’t live life by a system. So… I don’t have to change anything, be anything, learn anything or do anything. I should just live my life the way I want to live it; and a good wife will just come to me.
Everyone tells me it’s not the church’s job to teach me how to be a man. OK. If I can’t learn it from dad (because he doesn’t know and therefore can’t do it) or from church (because that’s not the church’s job) or from older men (because they have neither time nor inclination) or from players (because they are bad, bad men), then where do I get this information?
Aquinas Dad tells me to read books. So when I read the books, will I then know the art of being a man? So…. I don’t have to practice it?
Finally, when pressed, AD lays out a few suggestions like early to bed, early to rise, eat well, just go up to girls and talk to them…. Ahhhh. So now we’re getting somewhere. So it IS a science. There ARE techniques and things to be put into practice.
Men need to realize that this “advice” from the anti-Gamers is incomplete. If they do not, it will be misinterpreted as “Just be yourself” and a litany of “don’t do this, don’t do that”.
It is also a useless set of exhortations from natural alphas who just can’t understand why some men need more practical information and advice. So, they throw up their hands in exasperation and bleat “Oh, come on, guys?! Don’tcha get it? Come on, just go talk to a girl! Just go lose weight! Just go learn a hobby!! Just be social! Just get an education! Just make money! Just be handsome! Just be attractive! Just don’t be unattractive!
In other words…
Just MAN UP!
Jack,
You’re a stitch. ‘Work on being just’ from my mouth becomes ‘be perfect’ in your ear. ‘Treat people as they deserve’ from my mouth becomes ‘be the whitest of white knights’ in your ear.
“I see plenty of young Christian women giving it up for men of zero honor”
I don’t. maybe you are hanging out in the wrong circles. Maybe after thinking “game” is somehow masculine you don’t know what honor looks like. I have no way of knowing.
What I *do* know is that I have been dealing with this stuff for years and that for every guy coming to me claiming ‘I am a good man and there are no good women’ I have a girl coming to me claiming ‘I am a good woman and there are no good men’. I think both sides are messing it up and I think “game” is just adding to the confusion.
Jack, what do you want in a wife? What do you offer as a husband?
Ask:
Christian. At least somewhat right of center politically. At least average looking. Height/weight proportional (1950s standard). Cautious with money. Dresses like a girl, wears a little makeup. High level verbal skills with a penchant for lateral thinking. Reasonable levels of emotionalism and drama. Not a stick in the mud. Spontaneous, or compatible with same.
Bid:
Christian. Loyal. 6-figure income. House. Extremely high level verbal skills, strong work ethic, excellent with money. Musician. Spontaneous, unafraid to indulge in some luxuries, provided such indulgences are given due deliberation. Regarded as very entertaining to know and talk to. Socially confident. Tattered remains of chivalry still partially functional.
Industrious, currently working a full time job, running a profitable side business, and starting another one.
Deti,
“It doesn’t work when you have NO ONE teaching masculinity.”
Yup, I was right. Less than 3 days.
You’re right; you aren’t owed a wife. Or sex, for that matter. And? Go earn one.
“I’m courageous, temperate, prudent and fair”
Fair? ‘Just’ isn’t ‘fair’. I’ve alluded to as much. And the prudent and just man knows he is never perfect and always needs to improve himself. You just keep proving that you don’t even understand those four *words*.
[to praphrase] ‘I should act as evil men act’. No, you shouldn’t.
“Everyone tells me it’s not the church’s job to teach me how to be a man.”
I am part of the set of ‘everyone’ and I am explicitly telling you to learn masculinity from the Church and the Saints and theologians of the Church. Again, you appear to be unable to understand/remember things you have read in this very thread. Or are you confused that Proverbs is in the bible, that St. Augustine was a bishop, etc?
“Aquinas Dad tells me to read books. So when I read the books, will I then know the art of being a man? So…. I don’t have to practice it?”
*sigh*
So you are completely unfamiliar with Catholic spiritual writing? They typically contain a wealth of advice, including how to speak and interact with others, the sorts of activities that are to be sought out and avoided, etc.
Indeed, since I am in the middle of re-reading Gopfert’s ‘Moraltheologie’ from 1897 with its very practical guide on how young men and women are to meet and court and it is one of about 17 books on these lines I am working from as I build a bibliography this is *almost* funny. Catholicism is awash with guides on how to both teach young people to be comfortable with the opposite sex and develop the skills necessary to court and marry.
You haven’t heard of them? Well, since when is that someone else’s fault? Especially since I keep mentioning that they exist. Or is this akin to how I keep giving you a list of Catholic organizations that teach masculinity and you keep repeating,
“It doesn’t work when you have NO ONE teaching masculinity.”
or variations?
I am slowly being forced to conclude that you are either too emotional about this subject or that you are dishonest.
[long quote] ““Oh, come on, guys?! Don’tcha get it? Come on, just go talk to a girl! Just go lose weight! Just go learn a hobby!! Just be social! Just get an education! Just make money! Just be handsome! Just be attractive! Just don’t be unattractive!
In other words…
Just MAN UP!”
This. Is. HILARIOUS! No, really, it is.
You here claim that these things (‘go talk to a girl/lose weight/etc.’) are exhortations to “MAN UP”
First, I never thought advising a man to be manly was some sort of insult or fault.
Second, WTH do the proponents of “game” tell you to do?
‘Go to the gym and get in shape’ = [according to Deti] ‘MAN UP!’
‘Use these scripts/games/etc. and just go try them on women’ = [according to Deti] MAN UP!
‘Have a career so that you are attractive’ = [according to Deti] ‘MAN UP!’
In short, if Roosh or Heartiste tell you to hit the gym, lose weight, and practice scripts until you have enough confidence to speak with women that is ‘teaching masculinity’ and ‘providing step by step instructions’. But if *I* tell you to have a routine, exercise, eat well, and ease into social situations until you are honestly comfortable with women I am telling you to ‘MAN UP!’.
Like I said – hilarious.
Deti, etc., I get it – you resent me. I have what you want and that makes you envious. But what makes you think that means I am wrong? Indeed, why doesn’t that make you conclude I am *right*?
Jack,
That is a very reasonable set of expectations. How old are you? How young/old would you look? And if you are socially confident do you attribute that to “game”?
Aquinas-
The market disconnect could be due to the apex effect, which is operating full-force in both secular and Christian circles.
I couldn’t begin to tell you how many plain-jane Christian women rejected me while they pined away for the one or two very attractive guys in Church (who already had girlfriends that were much, much, hotter than plain jane). This is what happens when women make idols of relationships.
But, hope springs eternal, I guess. I knew a lot of women who went dateless while relentlessly trying to get on the radar of of the small handful of Church alpha males.
And get over your opposition to the classification system. You don’t understand its intent I think. They are rhetorical devices, not hard categories. Think of them as shades of a color, used to describe the effect presented to the observer.
It does no one any good to pretend that classifications of male attitudes and behaviors are too “individual” to draw some soft outlines of them.
Besides, these terms are here to stay, and you are only tilting at windmills to refuse to work with them.
It’s like when women fight the 1-10 looks rating that men use. Sorry, but it is a useful conversational tool, and it is not going anywhere anytime soon.
Aquinas – You are falsely assuming that the advice of hitting the gym, etc. is the whole of the law from Roissy, et al.
Let me put it in terms of carpentry:
Aquinas dad: “You need to make nicer furniture. You need to sand the wood more. Use better stain.”
Roissy: “You need to make nicer furniture. You need to sand the wood more. Use better stain. Always let the varnish sit for 30 minutes after mixing before you use it. Mix a small amount of paint thinner with the wood filler, or it will crumble. Don’t use that kind of stain with that kind of wood. Here’s how to prevent getting sold crap at the lumberyard. Don’t skip grades of sandpaper between sandings. Your joints suck because you are not sharpening your tools. Here’s the best way to sharpen them. Here’s how to hide a mistake so you don’t have to start all over again.”
I could go on with a similar example in the field of accounting and business, and I could really go to town with an example from my own profession, which I don’t want to reveal here.
Point is, that Cane and his ilk offer high-toned but useless ‘advice’, which is really nothing more than moralizing. Pickup artists are willing to put great effort into teaching the real techniques.
I am a committed Christian, but I say – to my shock and chagrin – that I have received more light from Roissy and Roosh than I ever have from the church.
This is not to make them into saints, but rather to show the absolute bankruptcy of the church when it comes to meaningful, actionable advice. No shortage or moralizing and platitudes, of course.
The organized church has finally succeeded in making me a dedicated opponent of theirs, rather than just passively ignoring them. Christ is not in them. Because I see too many lies.
Aquinas:
Your “advice” and views aren’t wrong. They’re theoretically correct as far as they go.
The problem isn’t that it’s wrong; the problem is that it’s incomplete. It’s therefore woefully deficient and pretty much useless for most men today.
Like most men who have chimed in on this on your side of the aisle, you’re a natural alpha who’s great on theory; but you’re either unable or unwilling to bring it down to the practical.
I really don’t want what you have; what I have is sufficient for the day. You can insult me, denigrate me, run me down and call me names all you want; but that won’t complete your advice or help the men you say you want to help.
By the way, I know deti, and he is far from envious or resentful. I’ve been reading him since he had the old screen name.
Deti would be happy for any man who has succeeded in a Biblical marriage. What Deti, and men like him despise is the stubborn promulgation of wrong information, no matter how well-intentioned.
From your earlier description, you might very well be a “natural alpha”. If so, then you are probably not going to be of much use as an adviser to any but other alphas.
I’ll bet you didn’t know that most of the secular pickup artists would never claim to be a natural alpha. In fact, most are very open about how they had to develop those aspects. Many of them would admit that they are essentially only emulating alpha traits.
Imagine a beautiful, smart woman who is advising plain-janes: “just be yourself!!!” Which works, if you are beautiful. Genetic lottery-winners often have trouble understanding the common people. Occupational hazard, I suppose.
I understand this because I was almost a “natural” at my chosen profession. I have had to learn to temper my impatience with those around me who are not quite as good, or as skilled as I am. Thankfully, I had just enough difficulties in a few job skill areas that it helped me learn to break the job elements apart so that I could guide others. The areas I was most “natural” at were the hardest to break down and share meaningfully. I just “got it”.
All over the internet, secular and Christian men alike are praising the efficacy of Roissy’s advice (and other men like him). Myself included. The man may have saved my soul, in some ways. I’ll always feel a debt to Roissy.
“Be warmed and filled. Oh, and if you aren’t too bad for you.” That’s all the Church has to offer men in this domain.
Go ahead and improve mens’ honor, it certainly can’t hurt. But it will not answer the problems in this area.
One other thing. You know, the Church actually throws more shaming language at Christian men who want to have a fulfilling sex life in a Biblical marriage than it does at the unrepentant womanizers.
It’s like the Church wants to demonize the male sex drive, so that even in the marital bed, it’s kind of like men should feel like they are getting some kind of treat to which they are not really entitled.
So even in full compliance with the Bible, it is still bad for men to want this. Personally, I think this proves that the Church is a sick, evil place completely run by the feminist imperative.
Know what? I am unashamed of the fact that my biology wants to bang every single hot girl I see. I work to curtail these carnal impulses of course, but I was not the one who put them there.
Jack,
“I couldn’t begin to tell you how many plain-jane Christian women rejected me while they pined away for the one or two very attractive guys in Church”
I am far from surprised. After all, I wrote this
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2013/12/10/fear-to-greed/#comment-101460
Yeah, I know it is bad. I do. I have five sons, this is on my mind!
And as far as the classifications my opposition is threefold;
1 – they are both too rigid and too loose. ‘Beta’ has come to mean ‘anything and everything that I don’t like’ while ‘Alpha’ almost *can’t* mean a guy lie me because I don’t kick puppies or cheat on my wife.
2 – They are based on the speculation of outsiders on what they think women think, specifically while referencing a particular sub-set of women.
3 – Their own numbers are terrible; the low ‘conversion rate’ indicates that their models are deeply flawed if not outright wrong.
“Pickup artists are willing to put great effort into teaching the real techniques.”
Yeah – seduction techniques. Seduction techniques aimed at women of low morals. Seduction techniques aimed at women of low morals devised by men with admitted poor social skills.
I can go on.
From a purely practical stand point how can seduction techniques, etc., help a dedicated Christian man find a dedicated Christian woman?
I know that when all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail. I I wasn’t aware before this guys like you and Deti would have convinced me. I’m trying to tell you you can’t use a hammer to tile your bathroom.
You know your little furniture analogy? here’s my take on it.
You have spent a lot of time reading a manual on how to build chairs. You’ve talked to a lot of chair builders. But you don’t want a chair, you want a fireplace. Cane and I are telling you
‘Guys, chair making techniques don’t make fireplaces. While carpenters may know carpentry masons know masonry. Why don’t you look at manuals on masonry?’
And the reply is,
‘I have never heard a mason explain how to make a chair; not even a bench!’
‘I have already looked deeply into chair making instructions and have never encountered any masonry instructions. They simply don’t exist!’
‘Masons don’t teach anymore. You have to go to carpenters to learn anything about fireplaces’.
etc.
Meanwhile, I keep referencing a number of guilds of masons while I have a stack of masonry books with the step-by- step instructions of building a fireplace sitting on my desk.
Jack,
That is a very reasonable set of expectations. How old are you? How young/old would you look? And if you are socially confident do you attribute that to “game”?
43.
No woman older than me. Unless she looks lots younger. How young would I go? As young as I can get and still have her be intellectually compatible. I recently went on a date with a 28 year old.
My confidence is not based on game, although I can use game if I choose. I do tease and toy with women a lot. They seem to respond better than when I was more serious and intentional.
My confidence is based largely on the fact that I am usually one of the smartest people in the room, although it is refreshing to be in groups where I am closer to the average. Also, my high intellect shows up as humor and social savvy as opposed to awkward mensa-style weirdness.
My burden is my moral convictions. If I could abandon them, I would not want for a decent supply of quite acceptable female – uh – attention.
My biggest problem is that I lose girls when I won’t sleep with them. The figure me for a religious guy, it makes them feel slutty, and they vanish. A few have actually said that. If I meet a nice low-mileage girl, I may have to stoop to banging her sooner rather than much later in order to lock her down.
I wanted to marry a girl with an N<2, but the only ones I met that matched that were usually quite overweight.
Jack,
“I’ll bet you didn’t know that most of the secular pickup artists would never claim to be a natural alpha… [etc.]”
No, I am well aware. I have read their blogs, their books, watched their youtube videos, listened to their podcasts….
I’m a scholar, remember?
Let me tell you a personal anecdote.
I was a soldier for years. Tactical out of Ft. Bragg. I loved it and I got to work with some great guys. I also was trained over and over and over in certain tasks.
About, oh, 4 years after I got out I was living in a new neighborhood and saw some guys in a field in camo with plastic weapons running around. I went to check it out and it was a group of high school kids that loooooved the army and war games playing a game with toy guns and water balloons.
I noticed this weird thing they all did when they ran into the ‘command base’ (a play house thing) – they all held their guns at this weird angle. I* asked them about it and on of their dads had taught them that. It was ‘how soldiers entered rooms’, they said.
Well, I had been a soldier trained to enter rooms for years and had never seen that. I started showing them how I had been trained. About an hour later that very dad came over and asked them
‘What are you doing?’
‘Mr. Aquinas showed how the army really does it!’
We met, I went over to his house, and he showed me a book he had that was by a ‘tactical expert’ on how the army does stuff, basically. It got a ton of stuff right, but a ton wrong. Uniform stuff. Cleaning an M-16 stuff. A lot of tactical stuff. The bio of the author mentioned he had been a cop, not a soldier. And not SWAT, either.
I explained what i had been taught, how it worked,. why it was done, etc.
He thanked me.
Next weekend the kids were back to that weird, cock-eyed pose as they went in. Why?
Well, the book said….
End personal anecdote.
Much of your advice has already been tried. And found wanting. PUA techniques are not necessarily incompatible with Christian intent.
Fire can warm, or it can burn. Water can quench, or it can drown.
Point is, if a man wants a chair, he does not need to be told he really wants a fireplace instead.
Also, you need to read the Vox Day male taxonomy to get a better picture. You are still stating what you THINK alpha and beta mean.
What is a Sigma?
A Gamma?
A Delta?
I understand that you desire to see these conversational tools removed from use. What would you offer in exchange? Nothing?
Just a vague “it depends”? These terms, while imperfect, have brought some clarity to the discussion. Either replace them with terms and concepts that enhance clarity, or be swept aside in the discussion by those unwilling to return to an era where there was no basis for obtaining an intellectual handhold on these concepts, however flawed they may be. Are you sure that your objection is not based on some offense of your morality, rather than your desire for more accuracy?
Partial clarity has come. Improve on it, replace it with better or be sidelined. It is the agenda-driven person who wants to deny others the use of terminology.
Great anecdote. Problem is, that men who apply game tactics actually report more success with women.
Now, if they were using this to game inflatable plastic women, then I would chuckle right along with you. So your anecdote does not apply.
If these men were only TALKING about what worked with women, without actually trying it, or using it in some online game, then your anecdote would hold.
I’ve tried it. It works better than being nice. In fact, being an arrogant jerk occasionally works quite well. It almost got me a same-night lay with a girl (only because I declined). She was cute.
An aside:
I also detect the subtle undertones of shaming language – that these men are “children with toy guns”. Perhaps you did not intend this, but I think there may have been a little bit of that in there. And you cast yourself as the superior, omniscient giver of real truth.
Having been subjected to an endless barrage of shaming language as a reward for my years of manosphere commentary, I am quite immune to it, seeing it as the textual tinnitus that it is. I alternate between weary indulgence of it, and occasional amusement.
For instance, if some girl at church overheard me talking and said “you just sound like an angry man”, I would reply with “that’s what all the fat girls say”.
Oh yes, I would. In front of others too. I take no prisoners anymore, and I will go full nuke on any girl who tries that shit with me. I will destroy her ego with suddenness and ferocity such that she thinks twice about shooting her mouth off so cavalierly again.
“Much of your advice has already been tried. And found wanting.”
By whom? I have not found it wanting, nor men like me.
I do, yes, know all about the ‘gamma/delta’ bit. Indeed, I personally love the idea of sigmas. It doesn’t make it accurate.
Hey, I reject historical materialism, the dictatorship of the masses, etc. and find no need to replace them for they described nothing that is real. They were part of a framework proven false. Why cling to the apparatus of a failed theory? Using squishy, made-up terms to describe something that doesn’t exist does not add clarity.
But you don’t want a chair, you want a fireplace. You keep saying so! Yet you cling to the carpenters….
“A fool receiveth not the words of prudence: unless thou say those things which are in his heart”
“…men who apply game tactics actually report more success with women”
More success than what? The zero they had before?
http://zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2014/01/08/how-about-earning-a-living-playing-the-slots/
“…subtle undertones of shaming language…”
One of the many ways that PUAs sound like feminists is right here.
‘Don’t you dare shame us!’ they shout, ‘Don’t tell us to man up! Don’t call our morally reprehensible actions shameful!’
I get that they are chasing girls that go to slut walks, but must they speak like them, too?
And your example cinches it. Your response,
“that’s what all the fat girls say”
is a catty little gibe, like a teen girl.
Of course, that’s negging for you.
Jack, I appreciate your time here and elsewhere but you can’t be honest with yourself, I can’t expect you to be honest with me.
But as a self-described Christian at least *try* to re-read and understand proverbs and Sirach, OK?
A bigger fool doth fancy himself the font of that wisdom. If you have lost men like me, you have truly lost this battle. You know little of me, or my real goals, or of my former self. You think your presentation is new to me? It is more like arriving at the point of ‘eleven bottles of beer on the wall’ – surely this musical harangue must end soon?
I’m glad you have a tight enough circle of existence that everything is so clear to you. Clarity goeth before a fall, to paraphrase.
Keep banging the drum; you will accrue a certain number of followers, and you should be satisfied with such disciples as you receive.
Oh, I haven’t “tried” your way yet? Perhaps. This reminds me of apologists for communism who complain that their ideology was not “tried” in a pure enough way. For a method or path to be valid, it must be robust. And to be robust, it must produce meaningful results to the extent it is applied.
You have no idea what it took to make me an opponent of the organized church. But it finally happened. I will not abandon my Christian faith, I’m not going to have it corrupted by the Church. The Church has much repenting to do.
Neg? That’s not a neg. Do you even know what a neg is? Obviously you don’t.
Calling her fat is a straight up, aggressive insult, designed to deliver maximum emotional damage for her having the temerity to go half-in with shaming language.
A neg is a form of verbal ambiguity that could either be a put down or a compliment. The intention of a neg (regardless of whether it works or not) is to build attraction. In the case I state, I would not be trying to build attraction. I would be nuking an ego. Intent to destroy ego, not attract.
Nice try with the “teen girl” thing. But girls never have the balls to go all-in from the first volley. I know, because I have nuked girls’ egos on several occasions. They retreat. As they are designed to do.
So you’re wrong about the purpose of a neg, miscategorized my statement as a neg, and confused passive-aggression with active aggression.
I can see why you’re anti-game – you have not a clue what it is about other than a very confused roadmap to it, the provenance of which I have no idea.
I bet your wife and daughters own you. You need game more than I do.
I’ll make this very simple for everyone.
The problem with AD’s otherwise good advice (and with the positions of Game naysayers like Cane and Zippy) is that the exhortations to the Four Cardinal Virtues, without more, will appear to Christian men as advice to “JUST BE YOURSELF”. It will be misinterpreted as “BE NICE; BE YOURSELF”.
Telling men that Proverbs promises that “A good wife is from the Lord” will be misinterpreted as “You don’t need to change anything, do anything, learn anything or be anything. You just need to wait on God, and He will drop a good wife in your lap.”
Telling men that life is an art will tell many men their lives are hopeless. That will also tell many other men that they aren’t the problem; that they don’t need to change, learn or take action.
There are two solutions I can offer. The short-term alternative (or at least one alternative) to conventional game is to try online dating. I’d say this is often the way to go, and most especially if you are Christian and there are not good candidates in the local church where you hold membership. That is precisely where I met my wife. Although, admittedly, I used a site that was very specifically for Reformed and Presbyterian Christians, so I cannot vouch for the larger ones (Christian Mingle) per se.
Of course you still should put together an interesting and witty profile on such sites, and you still need to project confidence, likeability, and charm, both online and when you finally meet the girl in person. Be able to hold down a good conversation. The nice thing about this kind of online forum is that it is much more conducive to you being able to share your “resume”, as it were- your accomplishments, history, and credentials that identify you as a competent provider and spiritually mature candidate.
The long term solution is for, as another fellow put it, women to change. We shouldn’t have to game worthwhile, mature, godly Christian women. The only way that will happen is when godly fathers raise their daughters in such a way that godly attributes (not just morality but in a holistic and biblical sense) are prized above the trappings of modern alpha maleness. It will probably, in fact, involve Christians returning to something like the courtship model that was replaced by our modern concept of dating less than 100 or so years ago. Churches that call themselves biblical and Christian will have to encourage fathers to lead their daughters to the right man or men for consideration of marriage. A girl still needs to be wooed, but the father would be able to reject men who are all game and no virtue.