Why the topic of "GAME" is Integral to the Manosphere
My wife discovered her new favorite sitcom a couple of months ago, The Big Bang Theory. All of the re-runs are aired on TBS in blocks of 4 shows at a time, several nights a week, so she programmed the DVR to record all episodes. Over the course of a couple of months, we've eventually watched every episode that has aired...well she has.
I've basically heard most of the episodes while I'm online and she's watching the tube.
Just listening to the show in the other room while I'm surfing teh interwebz, I found myself chuckling at some of the more clever dialogs, insults and endless nerdy-dungeons&dragons/Star Trek/Star Wars/Comic Book references. After hearing several episodes, my curiosity got the better of me I began to actually watch the show with her.
No doubt, the show is amusing.
But there is so many subtexts, themes and motifs that are subversive, social engineering.
A Social Engineering PROGRAM to emasculate masculinity and to masculinize femininity.
Modeled gender dysfunction that exerts it's insidious influence on the unsuspecting and unaware viewer.
Monkey see, monkey do.
For the "red pill" viewer, I found that I don't even have to think about it anymore, I instantaneously identify the subtexts, themes, and subversive dialogs designed to subtly influence the viewer as I watch it. Once you recognize the processes used to subconsciously influence the viewer's mind, it loses it's power to influence you.
Now, the idea for this post has been stewing in my mind for quite awhile now...after having viewed a few episodes, I already knew I'd eventually get to a point where a blog post would almost write itself....and today is that day. So the first thing I did was search for an image of the show's cast to use, which brought me to this blog post by some guy I've never heard of before, Jamey Stegmaier: Why I stopped Watching the Big Bang Theory, and Why You Should Too.
He makes some good points...on one level, he recognizes a few of the negative PROGRAMMING aspects of the show - behaviors and dialogs that contribute to the continually declining state of our society -the wanton cruelty, narcissism, solipsism and general nastiness the characters abuse each other with for the viewers humor.
Stegmaier's main point focuses on the show's protagonist, Sheldon Cooper:
The problem is that Sheldon’s quirks–all of which are disruptive and unkind–are written for laughs. The writers are saying, “It’s okay to be rude and inconsiderate, because really it’s funny! Really!” If you watch Sheldon too much, you will find yourself (either outloud or in your inner monologue) correcting people for the most inane things. A friend will say, “Now that everyone’s here, let’s get started,” and you will mumble in response, “Well, technically, everyone’s not here, because ‘everyone’ infers that all humans are here, and not only are not all humans here, but if they were here, they couldn’t fit into this pitiful excuse for a living room.”
That’s my main point. Sheldon is a terrible example for a person, a friend, and an inner monologue. He makes the show, but he also makes it a terrible show.
I agree with Stegmaier that the character of Sheldon makes the show (in most scenes, Sheldon demonstrates the concept of maintaining a very strong frame), but his verbal cruelty is hardly the worst thing...after all, every character in the show engage in personal nastiness and cruelty in nearly every scene. That's par for the course in all network TV sitcoms since Married With Children became a smash hit in the 90's. From Seinfeld, to Friends, to It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, the sitcom genre of cruel humor at character's expense has become a staple of the genre for close to 20 years now.
Of course, while I agree with Stegmaier that immersing yourself into a Tell-A-Vision PROGRAM that normalizes interpersonal degradation and cruelty is corrosive to your personal attitude and can influence your real life relationships, the entertainment value cannot be denied...in the same way watching people die on TV can certainly be riveting entertainment.
Many of the putdowns, insults and double entendres in the shows script are clever and funny, which is of course what makes it so subversive and corrosive...and contributes to the coarsening of the culture at large. But Stegmaier is clueless to the deeper subversion found in the PROGRAM....Brave New World Order gender and sexual morality programming.
And it can be summed up perfectly by the second picture and caption that Stegmaier posted regarding the character of Penny, the Female Protagonist of the show:
"Okay, so there is ONE reason to watch The Big Bang Theory."
Indeed, this is precisely the PROGRAMMING to which I am referring to. Despite all the negativity that Stegmaier recognizes in the show that has gotten him to "quit" watching it, the visual physical beauty of the female is a virtue that trumps all other considerations. Of course, Stegmaier is being facetious here...but he unwittingly points out precisely what is so subversive about this show.
Observing Penny's role and how all the other male characters interact with her is the real programming process being imprinted into the subconsciousness of the viewer. The examples on the show are legion. You can go to the show's website, and pick out any episode at random, and if you know what to look for, you'll see it.
Penny is the Queen Bee of the show. She effortlessly manipulates all of the male characters in the show's cast. All of the male characters unquestioningly are willing to do anything for her at the drop of a hat. Only Sheldon is partly immune to this - but that's more because of Sheldon's narcissism and OCD take precedence over his sex drive. Penny cannot manipulate him with her sexual attractiveness, she usually has to resort to bribery or extortion to manipulate Sheldon - but she still usually finds a way to get what she wants.
But above all else, the core substance of her character is this: she is entitled, because she is hot.
There are multiple episodes in which she castigates all of the males in the room with some variation of "YOU GUYS SHOULD ALL BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES!" Her shaming always works to inspire repentance and grovelling for forgiveness. She is in fact the unquestioned moral arbiter of the show...yet her only truly redeeming virtue in the show is really nothing more than her function as eye candy. Her character is largely shallow, solipsistic and self-serving. She does many things in the show for which she herself should be ashamed of...but there are no guys on the show capable of exhibiting a spine and taking a stand and calling her on her behavior. She's on the Pedestal, and all males grovel for her approval.
The guys will do anything for her, because she is hot, even if the male characters know they have no chance to gain her sexual favor. She LJBF's all the male characters of the show except for the character of Leonard...and all of the guys still white knight and beta-orbit her in nearly every scene.
With Leonard, she alternates between LJBF-ing him and having a friends-with-benefits type of sexual relationship. The on-again-off again "romance" is the most sickening and disgusting aspect of the show.
Penny leads, Leonard follows.
The character of Leonard is passive aggressive, simpering, sackless and has a severe case of oneitis for her. He is only spurred to act bravely or assertively if Penny shames him into it or promises a sexual reward. He has no say in the status or direction of their relationship, it's completely at Penny's whim, and he just has to accept her choice and go with however she "feels" in any part of the show. When they are "together," he begs and pleads for sex. When they are apart, he feigns disinterest and approval for Penny's other boyfriends in her presence, than mopes, seethes and plots to disrupt her new relationship when she's not around.
In short, for the viewer who understands "the red pill" and how female hypergamy works, the relationship between Leonard and Penny is completely unrealistic and artificial. Leonard has almost zero alpha traits, he is the paradigm of the NICE GUY white knight. In fact, during many of the episodes in which they are "just friends" Penny often "dates" other guys- athletic, dumb jock alpha types...which of course is the only realistic representation of today's sexual marketplace.
No matter how many other guys Penny sleeps with, Leonard is always ready and willing to take her back, and not judge her negatively for her steadily increasing partner count in anyway. When she is dating other men, he still is ready and willing to do anything for her at anytime.
In short, this show, with it's witty dialog, humorous banter, and clever SyFy pop-culture references, is a very well-crafted series of BNWO socially engineered programming.
It models precisely the sort of behaviors and attitudes that 'beta-ize" males and "empower" females with an entitlement mentality. It models to women how to use flirtations, their physical beauty, and verbal shaming to easily manipulate men rendered hapless by their male sex drive...while modelling to men the attitude that they have no control, and the only correct behavior is to do whatever SHE wants him to do.
My little excursion back into becoming a "regular" viewer of TellAVision Programming reminded me of one of the favorite sayings of Tom Leykis (the "Roissy" of talk radio in the late 90's/early 00's): "TV is one big, giant vagina."
There's a reason why Game has become one of the most discussed topics in the manosphere, and it has nothing to do with the claims of some anti-gamers who conflate PUA hucksters and their overpriced workshops and materials with Game the Theory.
The anti-Gamers fail to understand (some of them don't even try) the kind of Programming most of us Gen X and millennial males have grown up with. The Big Bang Theory is but one instance of the literally thousands of sources of similar programming we have been subjected to our entire lives. Many men grew up in homes without Fathers, and their only male role models to shape their attitudes and beliefs and how to interact with women are the emascualted, female-subservient role models on the TellAVision.
Monkey see, monkey do.
Most times, after getting scorned, LJBF'd, rejected, cheated on, divorced, stripped of their property and children...only then do men even begin to question their own attitudes, behavior and actions with regards to their relationships with the female gender. Then some of them find the red pill on teh interwebz, and for the first time in their lives, "GAME" gives them a framework for understanding how the subversive influences of our Matriarchal culture have shaped their behaviors and affected their life trajectories.
This is the real value of Game Theory (not the PUA lifestyle) to the discussions throughout the Manosphere.
It is counter-programming...reverse social engineering for both men and women alike.