Spread Christmas Cheer!

The Difference Between Game And The Red Pill

Rivelino explains,

GAME is all the techniques and strategies to get better with women, including negging, cold reading, push pull, frame control, but also self improvement topics like working out, better posture, career development. the RED PILL, in contrast, is the deeper understanding that women are not sugar and spice and everything nice, that they in fact have a strong need to be sexually overwhelmed and dominated, that they are fundamentally emotional and childlike, that their concept of truth is not the same as that of men, and that their core nature is not to be loyal. the red pill teaches men to love and appreciate women as they are, not as we want them to be.

That’s about as clear and succinct a definition of the two value systems as I’ve read anywhere.

There is, of course, plenty of overlap between Game and Red Pill. It has to be, because the Red Pill is the child of its father, Game. Game came first and opened possibilities to explore human dynamics in a new and fresh way. In fact, the Game “worldview” predated the exact same Red Pill worldview. Most of the well-known and well-regarded Game tactics are grounded in Red Pillian (or, for you true old skoolers, evo psych-ian) theories about female nature. These theories received a thorough working-out in the field (see the old fastseduction.com forums for testimonials from tens of thousands of men over the past decade or two), and the experimental process was efficient at sorting the successful seduction strategies from all the competing hypotheses.

Not to butter my own whole grain bread, but I believe with oh-so-innocent earnestness that it was Le Chateau that first made the connection between Game and the wider culture.

Spot The Overgaming

If I pounce on readers, it’s because I want you to grow as men and as Lotharios. Tuff luv. So I had to take a swipe at this text convo that reader “rlcooper” passed along.

Been reading your stuff for a while but recently realised how fucking necessary this stuff is. Just wondering if you have the time to critique some text game, free to publish. I’m a dumb ass, I know.

me: depends on what i can expect
her: hahaha nah idk. do you have expectations
me: nope, i’ll just let whatever happens happen
her: that
her: that is always a good plan
me: you know from experience huh
her: i just reckon life is better that way
me: maybe cos it is
her: true 🙂
me: you’re doing well, i like compliments
her: hahaha
her: dont want your head to explode
me: wow, never heard of a woman so frigid
her: what?
me: i’ll keep the euphemisms down
how cute, you don’t get it

Ok, spot the exact moment when he overgamed.

Take your time.

.

.

.

Got it?

It was here:

wow, never heard of a woman so frigid

Push-pull is a powerful seduction technique. Push-push-pull is good, too, in certain circumstances and in limited doses. But push-push-still pushing-woops time for a desperate hail mary pull is toxic overgaming. If you tease and taunt a woman long enough, she’ll eventually think a) you aren’t really interested in her or b) you’re a prick, and not the sexy kind of prick.

Right after she texted

dont want your head to explode

was the perfect time for easing up on the jerkboy gas and reeling her in gently.

no worries, i can take all the flattery you can dish out

I don’t know what happened after this chat, but I bet it wasn’t as good as it could’ve been. Constant pushing (or “going cold”) is a tell of insecurity; women have hindbrain antennae exquisitely tuned to pick up the slightest perturbations in male self-confidence. This is the art part of the art and science of seduction. You’ve gotta know when to hammer strike, and when to stay your hand and give the helpless nail a little kiss on the head.

One other observation. When he said

you’re doing well, i like compliments

it was in reply to something she wrote which wasn’t technically a compliment. But logic isn’t all that crucial to a right proper seduction. Women value feelings far more than they value internally logical conversation. The lesson here is that you shouldn’t fret too much about making sense to a woman as long as whatever you’re saying is delivered with a stout-chested bravado.

Champion Of Promiscuity, Or Garden Variety Skank?

Recall the CH definition of feminism:

The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.

The goal doesn’t have to be consciously intended for it to be operative. Most feminists aren’t thinking, “I want to enlarge the sphere of acceptable expressions of female sexuality and shrink the sphere of acceptable expressions of male sexuality.” But conscious awareness isn’t necessary for subconscious desires to percolate up through the prefrontal cortex and get rationalized as a moral crusade for an invisible sex inequality.

Taking their actions and their steady stream of contradictions at face value, it’s evident that feminists loathe male desire. How else to explain the facility with which feminists hold competing and incompatible worldviews in their frazzled hamster brains?

Vanity Fair had a very favorable write-up of Strayed in a recent issue and at one point states that Strayed “is a champion of promiscuity”.

In the very same issue, VF has a profile of Russell Brand, and gives us this gem:

Which brings us to a sticking point: for all his talk of prayerfulness and humility, there persists an image of Brand as a bounder and a cad. Does this compromise his credibility with women? I put this question to Suzanne Moore, a liberal, feminist columnist for The Guardian who is, in many respects, politically sympathetic to Brand. “It’s funny. I have a 13-year-old daughter, and she absolutely adores him—he seems designed for young people who are just getting into politics,” she said. “But he still has this history, no matter how much he cloaks his sexism—and I’ll call it sexism—in this new spiritual talk. He plays this double game, being very self-aware of his past misdeeds, but I don’t know how much respect he has or shows to women.”

Which begs the following: How would VF cover a Strayed-Brand hookup? Champion of Promiscuity Hooks Up with Misogynist Pig, seems about right.

The feminist schizophrenia in terms of liberated promiscuity coupled with our “rape culture” brings to mind that classic scene in Little Shop of Horrors with Steve Martin as the sadistic dentist and Bill Murray as his masochist patient.

Further proof, as if it was needed, that feminists and weak-minded women who chant along monotonically with their idiocy, really only have as their purpose the construction of a world where men are harangued and shamed for their natural male sexual desire and women are exalted for theirs. Thus, we get nonsense like relabeling skanks as “champions of promiscuity”.

Why do feminists want this world? Because most feminists are ugly, sexual marketplace losers who have to give away their putrid pussies for free to get any action, and they take out their resentment on men and on the normal women who love men as men and want to satisfy men in the way that only feminine women can.

Love Letters To Mass Murderers

A Norwegian regular reader passes this along.

Major Norwegian newspaper VG (vg.no) today have prison authorities confirm that mostly women send letters to Anders Breivik, the anti islamist who killed 77 people in 2011. Many of the letters are love declarations.

In the paragraph “Get [receives] letters from all over the world”:

It reads:

– He gets all kinds of letters. Senders [“Spammers” like Google Translate suggests is not the word used] are from all continents, some are very young, most of them are women, he gets some declarations of love, but the majority of the letters express support for his political views, says Hillesland.

Original link in Norwegian:
http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/terrorangrepet-22-juli-anders-behring-breivik/fengselet-stanser-breiviks-massebrev/a/23360188/

chicks dig jerks
yes they do
a jerk in jail
is extra diggable too!

Breivik is no Don Juan in the looks department, but he still gets more marriage proposals behind bars than a law-abiding beta male will ever get buying drinks for girls at bars.

Exhibit Anders in reflexive female desire for killer men should be heartening in at least one small way to dissident rightists: You can put to rest any theory that states young, fertile women must be won over first for a revolution to get off the ground. Nah. Assert your principles, start the revolution without the women, and the women will follow once you burnish some serious badboy iconoclast cred. Add a dollop of charm and a reckless disregard for the feelings of others, and the women will come running.

In totally unrelated news, J.K. Rowling has no idea why so many Harry Potter fangirls LOVE LOVE LOVE morally dubious badboy Draco Malfoy.

The Iconic SJW Face

It’s hard to choose one face that stands — or scrunches — above the rest as the iconic social justice warrior (SJW) face. But I believe I have found it.

This Harry Potter tranny was snapped at a Ferguson protest in Portland. Like most SJWs, she is a raving beauty. That knitted brow which will never unknot. Those beady, judgmental eyes. The boycut. The thin, sexless lips pressed into a perpetual Puritan’s scold.

The overall impression one gets is of that fat judge with the testicle chin in Pink Floyd’s ‘The Wall’.

All she(?)’s missing is the pitchfork and torchlit mob, and a witch to burn for heresy against the Church of Anti-Racism.

If only degenerate SJWs could see themselves the way others see them…. I doubt anything would change. Cult religions and their followers are immune to the emotions and sympathies that sway normal people.

Balancing Comfort With Unease

Lurking_Gorilla asks,

I have a game question. Where is the balance between her being nervous around you versus her being comfortable around you (to open up sexually)?

CH Maxim #44: “Women can’t feel impassioned without also feeling a little unease.”

No doubt. It’s better she feels a little nervous around you, and afraid to say the wrong thing, than to have the kind of lazy comfort you see in long-term couples.

But what’s the right mindset for keeping her in that state of butterflies and excited nervousness (different from the infamous “dread”) long term, while also getting her comfortable and feeling a connection to you? Comfort is especially important when going for the bang. But beyond that, too much comfort is a passion killer.

A smart game question. The comfort phase of pickup gets short shrift compared to the attraction stage, but the reality for most men is that if they blow it with a woman, they will likely blow it at some point during the seduction when a woman needs to feel emotional connection and trust. Typically, this “blow it” point will fall somewhere between one hour after meeting and the third date. (You’ll know you blew it on the second date when she greets you with a hug instead of a kiss on the third date.)

We’ll talk more about the comfort phase for getting the bang in future posts, but for now let’s focus on striking that balance between comfort and unease in LTRs, because it is true that women respond most delightfully to men who can at once arouse and soothe their anxieties.

In order to pull off this feat effectively with a woman you have known for a while, you have to be just a little bit sociopathic. A rom-com sociopath. The grist is push-pull (or hot-cold): You say one thing one minute, and it’s seeming opposite the next. Or, your words and behavior don’t match. In an LTR, what this means is that you’ll want to acquire a patina of unpredictability. Just a patina, though. Too much comfort is a passion killer, but too little comfort is a relationship killer.

My go-to hot beef injection of exquisite unease usually takes the form of flirting with other women at social events I’m attending with my girl. Plausible deniability, a bit of earshot-buffering room space, and a good sense for timing the exit of an illicit conversation are all valued skills in the art of keeping your woman hanging on those tempting tenterhooks.

If you have some natural social grace and charm, you won’t even have to seek out the attention. As a pre-selected man feeling no particular urge to GET LAID NOW, other women will gravitate to your side. Don’t underestimate how villainously competitive women can be when naughty thoughts of stealing away a taken man intrude. There’s a reason a woman fearful of abandonment with save her sharpest claws for the other woman casting eyes upon her man.

Naturally, you will abide these mischievous trollops. You are a man, after all, who enjoys the company of women after 5 PM. That such company might simultaneously inflame distress and lust in your main mama is a quirk of the female sex which you have no moral duty to police.

Later, when you are tasked by your stressed-out girlfriend to describe “who” it was you were talking to, and “what” it was you were saying (and all the while she will attempt, O wonderfully frail and transparent creature!, to hide her concern under a facial smear of detached inquisition), you will by no means readily disabuse her of the notion that another woman, heaven forbid!, was interested in your scintillating presence. Instead, you will smartly express feigned naivete as you gleefully, even recklessly, recount how interested the interloper seemed in your goings-on and your collegiate sense of humor. Or, if you’re the sly type, you might just shrug off your girlfriend’s questioning with an opaque, and slightly distracted, “She’s a nice girl.”

If your girlfriend is a sensitive Susie, you’ll have to pull back on the reins a bit more than you’d at first like. The sensitive girl can easily let her imagination, or nightmares, get the best of her. In that case, a gentle, but masculinity-affirming, “You have nothing to worry about, baby”, will suffice.

If your girlfriend is a real tough nut (i.e., a road-worn slut), you might happily upbraid her when she slips on her inquisitrix robe. “Somebody’s jealous.” Or, “This insecurity doesn’t sit well on you.” For added punch, don’t leaven your words with a chuckle of camaraderie; speak them with a poker face.

This is the end of Lesson One in How To Balance Comfort and Unease in Your Woman. The next lesson will publish precisely one month after the first commenter bitches about there being too many politics posts too many game posts.