Is Game Adversarial?

“My biggest problem with the Ro writers is that Game is by definition adversarial. It’s us against them, don’t let the bitch win. That is most definitely Rollo’s approach, yet he commands respect from men here. I can only assume that good men read a lot of Roissy, Roosh or Rollo, incorporate some small fraction of it, and use it to improve their relationships, rather than for nefarious means.”

Aunt Susan came up with this little gem and it got me thinking over the weekend. Is Game adversarial?

I can certainly understand how women with a vested interest in maximizing the dictates of their hypergamy would think so. It’s not in the collective best interest of women’s sexual selectivity (e.g. the feminine imperative) that men be educated in how best to access their vaginas. For the same reason porn and prostitution is socially stigmatized, any medium that makes for easier resolution of a man’s sexual demand necessarily devalues women’s most valuable agency – her sexuality. So from Aunt Sue’s side of the equation I can certainly see how Game could be considered adversarial, but is it really that malicious? Do we “not wanna let the bitch win?” I don’t think so.

Whenever I consider reasonings for Game I have to begin from the perspective of why Game developed in the first place. Game is the logical response, the inevitable countermeasure, to feminization and female primacy. In the foggy days of emerging internet proto-Game there wasn’t some diabolical PUA who thought “Ha! At last I’ve discovered the secret psychology to make those bitches pay for all their lies and wrongdoing!” There might be an MRA guy who has such a vendetta, but it’s not the PUA community. Game developed because men began to see the code in the Matrix. They used simple behaviorism, observable results and modified their social experiments until they could get to a relatively predictable, usable technique. The internet then gave them a global access to compare notes and develop their own approaches. Thus we have Game.

Firestarter

Now that Prometheus has stolen the fire of Game from Aphrodite and given it to mortal men, what will they do with it? Warm the hearts of women by knowing exactly what a man should be, or will they burn their homes to the ground in hedonistic pursuits? Let me allay some fears here first; it’s been my overwhelming experience that men would rather see Game as some, often underdeveloped, expedient to getting with their Dream Girl than to exact some revenge upon womankind. When they first become aware of Game, most chumps reject it wholesale – they’re too insulated in their feminization programming to accept it. Of those who don’t, the first tendency is to use it to get that one elusive girl who’s been forever out of reach, even if she’s just an idealization. Finally, there are the select few Men who really understand the mechanics of Game, internalize it and use it like an art.

For all the rationalizations against Game, very rarely is it used as a weapon. In fact Game doesn’t even approach the same level of weaponization with which women have classically used their sexuality as against men. Game’s been around for a decade, women have been wielding the power of the V for millennia. We take women weaponizing their vaginas as a matter of fact – men using Game, well that’s a major threat.

Now then, for the record, and to make Aunt Sue a bit more comfortable, let me express that I in no way believe that the sexes were meant to be adversarial. On the contrary, it is the adamant view of this blog’s proprietor that the sexes we’re, and are, meant to compliment one another. It is just in this belief that Game becomes a necessity as a logical step forward for masculinity in the face of the overwhelming feminization of the past 40 years. Game is only viewed as a retaliatory threat when it is interpreted from the perspective of  female imperative interests. True misogyny and misandry are both exceptionally rare social outliers, but a female imperative, cautious of protecting its eminence and control, will fling accusations of misogyny against anything it perceives as a threat to it. In fact the liberty with which misogynistic accusations are thrown about is the best evidence of the control female primacy exerts in society. If anything is adversarial it’s the deliberate 40 year push of feminization that imbalances the genders. Feminization has become so embedded and acculturated into society at this stage that anything that attempts to tip that scale back to the masculine side (i.e. Game) is automatically ridiculed at best or legally eradicated at worst. Ultimately, my intent is that Game – real, internalized, personality changing Game – will restore that complimentary balance to gender dynamics.

Aunt Sue’s beef isn’t about the utility of Game so much as what it’s used for. If I announced that there was this great new way of thinking that makes men want to be the best man possible to facilitate better committed relationships for women I could start my own cable channel and become a celebrity psychologist. Oddly enough, this is what most men want to do with Game; do exactly what women keep telling them is expected of them and man-the-fuck-up. Only when they do they’re called misogynists. All that being what it is, the root of the point of contention is that Game places men in a better position to facilitate their own sexual interests. If a technique could be developed that would virtually guarantee a desired sexual behavior from women it destroys their sex as the ultimate commodity for men. The root of every social convention women develop and normalize can be found in protecting the valuation of their sexuality. Take that away and they cease to become the ‘protected sex’ and join the ranks of the ‘disposable sex’.

Ladies, thank your lucky stars for Game. With any luck the strong, masculine, decisive, confidence necessary for applied Game will become internalized by men, thus giving you the Men you really want – the Man Up guys you love and hate so much, but really love all the more. Worry less about a guy using Game to create his personal harem and more about a guy not fully realizing what Game can really teach him.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

Leave a Reply

  Subscribe  
Notify of
Mike C
Guest
Mike C
Offline

Aunt Sue’s beef isn’t about the utility of Game so much as what it’s used for. If I announced that there was this great new way of thinking that makes men want to be the best man possible to facilitate better committed relationships for women I could start my own cable channel and become a celebrity psychologist. Oddly enough, this is what most men want to do with Game; do exactly what women keep telling them is expected of them and man-the-fuck-up. Only when they do they’re called misogynists. All that being what it is, the root of the point… Read more »

(R)evoluzione
Guest
(R)evoluzione
Offline

Indeed–game is manning the fuck up, but it’s doing so on men’s terms.

Rollo Tomassi
Guest

I get that question a lot. Generally it’s couched in absolute terms, would I want my daughter to get hustled by some PUA running Game? In all honesty I’d be more concerned with her getting saddled with a faithful loser only to ditch him for a better guy after she’d had kids with the loser. It’s my job to teach her to know the difference by living the example. Perhaps the best compliment I’ve ever received was from my wife when she told me she hoped our daughter would be blessed with a Man like me. My girl is already… Read more »

Eyecontact
Guest
Eyecontact
Offline

When women talk about men “manning up”, they are not interested in average beta men becoming more alpha and attractive. The concept of personal transformation is alien to them. A beta is a beta. Any attempt for him to appear more attractive to women is purely trickery.

Women want the alphas that they love to be more commitment minded, more beta… that is what they mean by “manning up”.

ASF
Guest
ASF
Offline

Excellent point.

Mike C
Guest
Mike C
Offline

The concept of personal transformation is alien to them. A beta is a beta. Any attempt for him to appear more attractive to women is purely trickery.

Funny you say that. Just recently, over at Susan’s HUS, we got into the discussion about Game and men learning and adopting it for about the zilliionth time, and one of the female commenters made a series of comments that are basically indicate the above is spot on.

Dan Fletcher
Guest
Dan Fletcher
Offline

Love how women bemoan game as trickery then spend an hour putting on make-up.

Game is no more adversarial than make-up and cleavage.

Eyecontact
Guest
Eyecontact
Offline

No-one likes to be tricked. But the thing is, the man practicing game will eventually become the real deal, as he imbibes a new mindset.

On the other hand, it’s just so disappointing when that padded, shaped bra finally comes off… do women have any idea how that feels? To invest time and effort into a woman based on a false premise. I submit this is the real reason men don’t call the next day…

susanawalsh
Guest

FWIW, I am on record as being pro-Game, for the exact reason you describe: it increases the pool of sexually attractive men. I also believe that Game is amoral – only as good for men and women as its application. I do not consider Game misogynistic in the least, though again, it can be promoted that way easily by misogynistic bloggers. Overall, men realizing their own agency in pursuing their own sexual interests is beneficial to women, as long as they can filter out the cads from the dads. The quote from me here specifically addresses the kind of advice… Read more »

Johnycomelately
Guest
Johnycomelately
Offline

“Women want the alphas that they love to be more commitment minded, more beta… that is what they mean by “manning up”.

As of yet I have only known one beta to become an alpha (oddly only to women, his male friends still think he is a shmuck) and it took a lot of steroids and human growth hormones to accomplish it.

Rollo Tomassi
Guest

You’re not nearly familiar enough with my posts to make that judgement. Neither did you really get the take home message in Wait For It? You predictably took it as an ultimatum (sex or else) because the feminine reality is your only reality. If it serves the feminne it’s “correct.” The reason what I, or Roissy, or Roosh, write about resonates with men is because it is SO reliably consistent with other men’s experiences and observations – and now we have a global forum to compare notes. I realize how threatening that is to female primacy, so the first presumption… Read more »

susanawalsh
Guest

I realize how threatening that is to female primacy, so the first presumption is to take it as adversarial. Well, that’s a binary view. I do not believe in female primacy, or male primacy. I believe in the differences between the sexes, and that mating is a negotiation between two parties with conflicting mating strategies. There are bloggers who use Game to acquire, sustain and increase attraction in LTRs, e.g. Keoni, Athol Kay, Vox Day. By definition, their view focuses on the give and take between the sexes. It’s the Captain/First Officer model, which I suppose is a male primacy… Read more »

Mike C
Guest
Mike C
Offline

Wait for it was warning for men, not an ultimatum for women. ***It was a warning meant to dissuade guys from over-investing in women with less than an optimal interest in them. It was a warning against whiling away their efforts and time warming up in a woman’s bullpen while other hitters got their turn at bat.**** In other words, it was a warning that directly benefits men, and as such it’s a threat in woman-world. The idea that it might serve both men and women’s interests to be involved with a partner ****they’re both enthusiastically interested in**** doesn’t even… Read more »

Rollo Tomassi
Guest

This is a riff off another comment, but I may do a full post on this: Even if your goal is to be in a long term relationship/family and to be a successful provider for your wife and offspring, it is better to take the “lover” (Alpha) approach. It is not difficult at all for a guy who has attracted a woman and slept with her to later decide “I want to provide for you”. That option is always available, and there’s nothing contradictory about an Alpha deciding to pair bond with a woman. However, the opposite is not true.… Read more »

Good Luck Chuck
Guest
Good Luck Chuck
Offline

You aren’t going to convince modern women that game isn’t adversarial because the same women you are trying to convince are the ones diving into the cock buffet while claiming they would prefer a romantic candlelit dinner.

The mating game on the other hand is very much adversarial. This adversarial nature is of course sugar coated with things such as “love”, but make no mistake; the nature of two people coming together to form a sexual bond is rooted in individual survival instincts. Love is transient and is only there to facilitate the transaction.

samseau
Guest
samseau
Offline

Of course game is adversarial. People have known this since the dawn of time.

“All’s fair in love and war.”

Go read a Greek play. This is old news.

loveiseasy
Guest
loveiseasy
Offline

Cheers, well put.

trackback

[…] also reminds me of a post by rollo, how most men want to learn game to bag their “dream girl”, not to turn into […]

trackback

[…] three years ago I considered this question in a post. My critic at the time posed this to […]

rugby11ljh
Guest
rugby11ljh
Offline

This is the best post I’ve haven’t read from this site. It’s about self improvement and constant push in new direction of goodness and growth. Self improvement is hard but looking ahead and working on it nonetheless is essential to overcoming the older version of your past.
It’s essential in learning about ourself which to me is game it’s the modern day version of the force. It’s the thomps that Harvey Mansfield speaks about in manliness.

rugby11ljh
Guest
rugby11ljh
Offline

“Thomos” auto spell is on.

Alec Leamas
Guest
Alec Leamas
Offline

Caught this from Twitter, Rollo. Good post. I think that Game is necessary adversarial in the sense that it is a countermeasure to the FI, which is a means and method of sorting men and discarding the overwhelming majority of them into the Beta (valued primarily for utility) pile. The FI will always seek more data by whatever means about a man to make the sorting most accurate – which is to say to disqualify all Betas who present themselves (unless settling for resources). Game obscures access to the totality of this data and therefore defeats the female mating strategy’s… Read more »

Nathan
Guest
Nathan
Offline

Game – real, internalized, personality changing Game

I did that Rollo, took 3 years. Good timing. Thank you for this.

Nathan
Guest
Nathan
Offline

” it’s winner take all.”

Susan you dumbass. It’s always winner take all.

globo.com
Guest
globo.com
Offline

Using the correct advice you will note that you don’t need certainly to spend a lot of period with deals.

TantumErgo
Guest
TantumErgo
Offline

@Rollo I have only just come to this article almost e i g h t years after you wrote it! But then again, I am something of a slow learner … This strikes a chord of dawning realisation with me that, after a failed 25-year marriage and three other equally disastrous love relationships (I discount my pre and post-marital casual sexual encounters) — two of which were LTRs, ‘internalising game’; being the best kind of man that you can be (mentally, spiritually and physically); and developing a self-interested focus on your own development with a strong Mental Point of Origin… Read more »

%d bloggers like this: