Don’t Fight, Win (Part I)

As we approach what could be a schism within the Manosphere, I accept what might have to happen, but I don’t have to like it.  We have a lot in common, but there’s also some substantial difference.  The latter may well overwhelm the former.  It is what it is.

However, as I’ve mentally explored the varying factions of the Manosphere, I’ve noticed a parallel with their respective approaches to Game and my own profoundly effective rhetoric.  When I argue politics, religion, or philosophy with somebody (in person), I don’t lose.  Yet, when I do it, I’m not particularly Alpha in the sense we use it.  I find common ground, bite my tongue when I want to call them a complete moron, and concede debatable points, but I change minds.  I can’t say I never “lose it” and rip somebody a new one, but I’ll tend to do it not when I first feel like doing it, I’ll do it when that’s the smartest move.

So here I am acting like a beta, getting better results than the loudmouths who are paid millions of dollars to go on TV and talk to the masses about how they should think about things.  Sean Hannity may not be a sexual Alpha, but he is a political one.  He’s the dude with legions of fans, a television and a radio show, he rips into lefty callers and guests on a daily basis, but I seriously suspect that lowly anonymous me may have turned more people away from leftism than he has.  I don’t think I’ve done it much at all on my blog (it’s almost impossible in today’s media environment to turn anyone with only the written word), but in person, I can almost do it in my sleep.

And I couldn’t help but wonder, have I somehow circumvented the laws of Game?  After all, don’t women respond best to being grabbed by their metaphoric pony tails and dragged into the cave?  How can I have a profound effect on them by not being like that?  Shouldn’t the hipster lefty chick respond best to being roundly dismissed?  Have I stumbled upon some exception to The Rule, or did I just learn that there’s more to The Rule.

It’s the latter, and it relates directly to the division between the Hedonists and the Moralists.  The rules of Game are the same, but we want different things from it.  That means we’re going to use it altogether differently.

The Frames of Game

The goal of the Hedonists, the PUA’s, is rapid sexual attraction.  They use Game to tap into the rawest aspects of femininity as quickly as possible.  Her individual proclivities matter only insofar as they can be manipulate her into being the generic female that spreads her legs.  There’s no need for lasting bonds, the only purpose of building rapport is to disarm her anti-slut defense.  Her character is irrelevant.  Sure, women may have different interests, values, and goals, but what matters is her internal animal and how to tap into it.

The Hedonist uses Game to manipulate every aspect of the female, her interests, fears, and highest nature into a frame that magnifies and accentuates her sexual instincts.

To the Moralists, the purpose of Game is different, so much so that some Hedonists might not even consider it Game.  Red Pill Moralists don’t disagree in the slightest with the Hedonists’ assessment of what excites a female, but to the Moralists, such knowledge is a means, not an end.  The Moralists seek something long-term, the quality female that many Hedonists no longer believe exists.  Whereas the Hedonist sees resistance to rapid banging as merely an obstacle to overcome, the Moralist sees such traits as a possible indication that she might be something more than just another ho’.

The Moralist wishes to manipulate a woman’s instinctual nature in such a way as to magnify her higher qualities.  He wants a quality girlfriend, a woman to support him through the tough times, a wife, a mother for his kids.

The error of the Moralist is that all too often, in his quest for such a woman, he over-estimates Woman’s propensity to be the type of woman he desires; he forgets that it’s simply not her natural inclination to be the way he wants her to be.  Blue Pill Moralists either disregard the visceral sex-drive of a woman altogether or dismiss it as evil, but even Red Pill Moralists can forget that no matter how many Bible verses she can quote off the top of her head, she’s going to feel a tingle when Aaron Hernandez appears on her television.  Even if you want to marry her and don’t plan to have sex for months, you’ve still got to turn her on.  You’ll never have access to what’s best in her if you don’t take what’s most base about her into account.

But the beliefs of the Hedonist can become self-fulfilling prophesies.  The PUA soon believes that women may well have no higher nature.  After all, how many times have they heard the “I never do this speech”?  How many Christian girls just happened to make an exception for him?  How often did the same lines work, the same strategies get through her defenses, the post-copulation pillow-talk follow the exact same pattern?

Yet should they be surprised when they view women as merely animals that they exact exactly like animals, entirely beholden to their instincts and devoid of any individuality whatsoever?  They go to clubs where women are most likely to give it up (and most likely to be mindless conformists), they quickly move onto another prospect when she doesn’t give it up right away (nobody really believes in waiting, NEXT!), they appeal explicitly and directly to the most feral aspect of Woman and then find themselves shocked that all the women in their lives are merely feral.

It’s like a stripper complaining that men only care about it tits and ass.

Unfortunately, in today’s West, the Hedonists have the upper hand.  Women haven’t been raised to value their higher natures, they believe in “letting themselves go”.  The Hedonist risks far less by assuming that all women are sluts than the Moralists risks by assuming they’re somehow enlightened.

And because so many of today’s Hedonists were once Blue Pill Moralists, because they’ve been burned by assuming the best in women, they not only assume the worst (perfectly reasonable), they write off the possibility of a woman being anything more than that.  Because they’ve learned the limits of their beta traits, they dismiss their beta natures altogether.  Because they failed to take the tingle into account so often before, that’s all they take into account now.

Which works when all you want is to make women tingle.  The Moralist, who wants to get the tingle but insists on more than tingle, has to develop a wider skill set.

Rhetoric

As I’ve dissected my own rhetorical technique, I’ve learned that it doesn’t defy the rules of Game, it merely mirrors the Game required of the Moralist instead of the Hedonist.  The Game of the Hedonist is sheer aggressive, overt dominance.  He takes no crap, surrenders no ground, controls and frightens.

Likewise, his rhetoric is brutal.  He emphasizes the ways in which he disagrees with his opponents, insults and smashes into them.  The goal is not to persuade, but to get the opponent to back down and melt away.

My rhetoric is more like that of the Game required of the Moralist.  I dominate without smashing.  The Game of the Moralist isn’t merely to get her to do what he wants, it’s to get her to want what he wants.  It’s softer, smoother, and takes more time, but when done effectively, its effects are much more profound.

I’ve never had problems in relationships for the same reasons that I can’t know anyone for more than a month without them becoming my intellectual disciple.  Those with Hedonistic rhetoric at first find me overly submissive.

Their minds change within the hour.

I rarely yell.  I agree and find common ground.  I inspire lasting change.

I don’t fight, I win.

This entry was posted in Alpha, Feminism, Game, Politics, Rhetoric. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Don’t Fight, Win (Part I)

  1. Peregrine John says:

    This is an excellent assessment, and – as usual – I find myself feeling relieved to know that someone with similar observations has taken the time to elucidate them. Not only is it something I can refer to later, but it’s strongly suggestive that I might not be so crazy after all.

    A now-(apparently-)abandoned blog I followed had an ongoing discussion, on and off, about the best approach to convince the largest numbers of people possible that what is frankly your view and mine of the world could have merit. The problem of untangling a sticky web of pretty lies, breaking through the emotion-based, kneejerk programming, and more was discussed. I was going to write an article for them based partly on something I read a couple years ago, a contrast between two approaches to dealing with a philosophically hostile environment: cowboy or secret agent. Hannity is definitely in the cowboy class. I have not found that to be especially effective. As I’ve told many a traditionalist, the days of Bible-thumping and doorknocking are long gone. They usually object to my description of conversion as a form of seduction, but for them at least I mean to provoke. They know I’m essentially on their side. It’s the ones trained to reject truth that one must be subtle with.

    I’ve obliquely mentioned my plans here before, which would be implemented by now if projects for others didn’t keep coming up. Not complaining here – income and portfolio pieces are always good! But things delay. In any case, most of what I have in mind is specifically to present reality in a way palatable to those trained to resist it. A combination of rhetoric, dialectic, and simply incorporating unplugged concepts into quotidian interests is my intended methodology.

  2. Martel says:

    If you feel so inclined, send me an email with your thoughts and/or plans. The address is in the “Full Profile” under the hammer to the right.

  3. earl says:

    ” I find common ground, bite my tongue when I want to call them a complete moron, and concede debatable points, but I change minds.”

    I often feel this is what St. Paul had to go through.

    The best way to change minds is to come to their level and not insult them.

  4. earl says:

    Also…what PUAs taught me is that playing it passive with women doesn’t work. Whether you like it or not…you are leading every interaction with a woman. Body language, vocal tone, mood, attitude, appearance all matter.

    So whether you are a Hedonist or Moralist you have to display dominance…however if you are the type that doesn’t use sex to display it…you have to go different routes.

    Approach her, start a conversation, get the number, call her up, plan a date, keep the mood up, reveal who you are to her and what you expect, acknowledge other people while she is with you, etc. Is it as fool proof as banging her the first night you meet her…I’d guess the success rate is the same. How many PUAs stay with a chick after banging her the first night? I’m guessing it lasts not much longer than a guy with no skills blowing it on the first date.

    The only thing I would hold back on is physical contact until you get some time in. That stops your mental game cold if you go too fast there. Keep her hamster and imagination running. Plus it seperates the hos from the decent gals.

    • Alan K says:

      Spot on, Earl.

      Physical escalation is taught as an integral part of game. This is true and effective for bedding her, but oversimplified for general life. I want quite a lot from a woman, such as complete devotion — at least as much as possible. Physical domination is only one part/tool in the process.

      It’s fairly easy to generate attraction by guiding her through a room or touching her to punctuate some point of your conversation. This physical component is more of a trigger; it will solidify the mental and emotional control that you’ve already established. When properly mastered, she will surrender completely, and without any regrets.

      I wanted all of her. In th end, she was happy to give it. And still is.

  5. earl says:

    What is also funny…when I take the route of dominating without smashing…I’ve been called a white knight, mangina, and beta from the PUAs.

    When they start calling you that…as long as the insults don’t bother you…you are on the right track.

    • Martel says:

      An Alpha gets what HE wants out of life. Because so many Hedonists have no moral core, what they want is as much sensual stimulation as humanly possible.

      However, Moralist Alphas genuinely want something else. Among the things that I want in my life is JUSTICE, so even if I don’t get exactly what I want, if I was wrong, I still got what I want. This makes no sense whatsoever to a lot of people.

      If I had more hours in a day, I’d devote a lot of blog posts to the difference between selfishness and what I call “selfism”, selfism being enlightened self-interest. “Selfish” and “selfless” are two of the words I hate the most, for both incorporate much of what’s worst and best in humanity. We call wanting to have the best for our own children selfish, but I think that the Nazis who surrendered their own moral convictions to the State were selfless.

      But to the man who knows that he is also what he believes, what’s considered “selfless” may actually be more “selfish”. The Marine who throws himself on a grenade to save his buddies was epitomizing his own highest ideals.

      So I made a new word to describe that: selfist.

      • Alan K says:

        The Moralist Alpha wants the same things from his woman as the Hedonist does, but he also wants more, much more.

        I exercise more self-restraint than a PUA, but I also have more demands. There is your self-serving justice. I just hadn’t considered it that way. A helpful perspective.

      • infowarrior1 says:

        “If I had more hours in a day, I’d devote a lot of blog posts to the difference between selfishness and what I call “selfism”, selfism being enlightened self-interest. “Selfish” and “selfless” are two of the words I hate the most, for both incorporate much of what’s worst and best in humanity. We call wanting to have the best for our own children selfish, but I think that the Nazis who surrendered their own moral convictions to the State were selfless.

        But to the man who knows that he is also what he believes, what’s considered “selfless” may actually be more “selfish”. The Marine who throws himself on a grenade to save his buddies was epitomizing his own highest ideals.

        So I made a new word to describe that: selfist.”

        God is the moral standard by which all moral actions are to be judged. He is Justice.

      • Martel says:

        @ infowarrior: A Selfist person, being “enlightend” would act accordingly.

  6. John Apostate says:

    Thought provoking with a dash of inspiration. Subscribed.

    • DeNihilist says:

      How can you be a giving person, if at first you do not take care of yourself? One must fill the water bucket first (selfish) if the veges are to get the life sustaining water (selfless).

      Which when combined seems to be a Selfist act!

      Gonna steal that term Martel, love it!

  7. I somehow circumvented the laws of Game?… Have I stumbled upon some exception to The Rule, or did I just learn that there’s more to The Rule.

    Mayhap you’ve tripped from classical Game (excellent for large vector calculations like scoring a hottie) down into quantum Game (affecting microscopic factors which in turn affect the whole, instead of just redirecting force, e.g. getting a chick in bed for a night but nothing about her mindset or values changes).

    I find common ground, bite my tongue when I want to call them a complete moron, and concede debatable points, but I change minds

    I’ve done this a fair number of times. It’s far easier to direct a person to an unfamiliar place by driving them there, than by yelling “No, over THIS way!” while they don’t have a map.

  8. theshadowedknight says:

    It has been my opinion for a while now that what women are looking for is strength, discipline, character, or just masculine power. Whether the strength is used to lift up the weak or beat them into the mud, whether the discipline is used to dominate or subjugate, and whether the character is moral or immoral? It is irrelevant. The masculine power is the only measure. Being so rare, it commands a greater respect and desire than ever.

    How much thought do you put into drinking water? Now imagine yourself lost in the desert under the harsh and uncaring sun, and how important something as simple as water becomes then. Women are parched for lack of guidance. They are lost on a shifting ground, with their dreams as satisfying as the sand at their feet. Every new oasis is a mirage, and each time they drink the sand, hoping that this will finally quench their thirst.

    Pickup artistry works because it uses the power to break down her defenses. Moving the wall from the way by smashing it to the ground, through sheer might. When you use more subtle strength, you are using a lever to move the world, so that the wall now stands wherever you decide. The use of your more reserved dominance is not as brutal and obvious as the simple smash and grab of the pickup artists, but it is more effective.

    How many barbarians saw the Romans as weak city dwellers, only to die at the tip of a Legion spear? All those apparently weak civilians fed and paid for a fighting force still renowned after being gone for over a thousand years. Who are the Goths? Those weirdos with black makeup and gay chains all over their stupid looking clothes. Who are the Vandals? Those damn kids that spray paint the underpass. Let the pickup artists crow. They are going to be eating it soon enough.

    The Shadowed Knight

  9. Pingback: Taking Sides on the Manosphere Schism | Anarcho Papist

  10. @Martell

    Crap, I posted my last comment in the wrong post, could you delete my comment at

    https://alphaisassumed.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/schism/comment-page-1/#comment-1675

    thnx

    • DeNihilist says:

      Now that is funny, especially when I read the following post. Talk about a mangina!

  11. A repost of my comment from Anarcho Papist …

    You guys have no idea how screwed you guys are … you guys are about to be swamped by manginas & blupillers … lmao

    Roosh & the pickup & game communities are making a strategic move to distance themselves from the trainwreck the moralist communities are about to become …

    I for one am going to enjoy seeing your moralist communities devoured by mangina’s & blue pillars

    Precisely because the moralists thought themselves above the savagery of us masculinists ….

    BWAHAHAHAHA

    I for one applaud Roosh & the gaming & pickup communities for running like hell away from the coming trainwreck of mangina’s & blue pillers

    I suggest you moralists do some serious thinking & do the same …

    I dont think you guys will …

    Which makes the whole scenario even more hilarious … I’ll bring popcorn & watch you guys crash & burn

    Good times …

    Moralist communities devoured by mangina’s & blue pillars, exquisite, poetic justice

  12. Pingback: This Week in Reaction | The Reactivity Place

  13. The divergent nature of the various “members” of the “manosphere”, combined with an influx of n00bs, was bound to lead to a fragmentation of the collective. I think this is good, as people will explore the various paths that their desires lead to. Some of them will thrive and become the basis of a long-lived movement, while others will die off and be relegated to the scrap heap of bad, unworkable ideas.

  14. Pingback: Lightning Round -2013/08/21 | Free Northerner

  15. DeNihilist says:

    { You’ll never have access to what’s best in her if you don’t take what’s most base about her into account.}

    Oh, you mean accept her totality. In other words, fuck your wife like an animal physically, make love to her emotionally.

    Unfortunately, too many guys think that during sex, they’re making love. Nope, your satiating the base desire, the lowest chakra, so you must do it with animal ferocity. This releases the energy from the base chakra to climb to the higher, emotional ones, where you then can be loving and get reciprocated for it. Unless she becomes enlightened, eventually the energy drops back to the base (with my old lady anywhere between 2-3 days), and again, only base behaviour will have any tingle effect.

    • Martel says:

      In those situations my keyword is dominance, but not necessarily in the 50 shades sense. Maybe fast, maybe tender, maybe playful, always what I want when and how I want it, and never what she expects. I feel like I’m writing and conducting a symphony at the same time, and I leave her spent and overwhelmed.

      But alas, I’m being chaste until I find a woman who actually deserves it.

      • DeNihilist says:

        Yup, I hear a lot of men say that since they’ve been together/married for a while, their wife/girlfriend doesn’t initiate anymore/less often. The truth shall set you free guys, it is her way of asking to be dominated in bed, as Martel states, not violence, but control of the act. For most women the ability to orgasm is dependant upon them being able to completely immerse themselves in the act. Not direct it.

        PUA’s like Roosh, who state that when having sex, they only care about their ejaculation appear to be very betamax to me.

        It is not what you do that makes you alfalfa, it is how you do it. Even washing the dishes, if done with intent and awareness is more alfalfa then banging some different broad every night.

  16. DeNihilist says:

    { Women haven’t been raised to value their higher natures, they believe in “letting themselves go”.}

    Which would be fine if they did it with the least bit of awareness, as eventually, they may move beyond the base, themselves, and start to elevate their energy into the higher chakras. This goes equally for the PUA’s!

  17. Pingback: Malcolm’s Lament | Alpha Is Assumed

  18. Pingback: Gunshy | Alpha Is Assumed

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s