tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post1131345879963757750..comments2024-03-23T13:16:37.006-07:00Comments on Hawaiian libertarian: Praxeology & the truth of GameKeoni Galthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00842553742723239151noreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-58040534638018499582014-01-24T02:21:41.495-08:002014-01-24T02:21:41.495-08:00Islam teaches men to treat their women with kindne...Islam teaches men to treat their women with kindness and humor. Traditionally Muslim wen keep their maiden names after marriage and they have their own financial accounts they do not give up ownership of their property or business to the men. All Muslims who have a certain maximum level of wealth are obligated to pay Zakaat ( a charity of 2.5%)to certain groups and people in their local community. Islam is against Usury or money lending and charging interest and has many detailed laws regulating trade and commerce so it is avoided. The married woman pays her own Zakaat and is responsible for her own wealth.<br /><br /><br />Women however are not required to cook or provide for the family, if they do it is their choice and an act of charity. <br /><br />The man is responsible for food, clothing, shelter. The woman should be grateful to the man though it is recognized that women are generally ungrateful...they need to be gently reminded or educated to be ethical beings.<br /><br />Islamic law resembles the british common law, where jurists discover new laws within the framework given by their religion, and there are differing opinions available. There are no victimless crimes.<br /><br />Islam can be used to abuse and tyrannize people, when it becomes a 'state religion'. It can also be used by men to control and abuse women. It can be diluted to accommodate usury and the criminal state. <br /><br />Ibn Khaldun, a Arab sociologist before the modern world theorised that dynastic rule moved in historical cycles, that when the dynasty in power over ruled, over taxed and became decadent, the people on the margins of society (the rugged and independent) he called them the 'nomads'if they united under a leader and a religion would grow in power and take control.<br /><br />Applying this theory to our world, we can see that the poor in the cities and on the margins can create a new community and unite. They could easily overcome the decadent centralized state and fiat currency. We could start using gold and silver coins to conduct our trade, we could pay zakaat to people in our communities with one leader and we could overcome the state.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08242038588833160833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-66831432292856762312014-01-24T02:05:37.409-08:002014-01-24T02:05:37.409-08:00Banksters and the ruling elites want to create doc...Banksters and the ruling elites want to create docile consumers and workers who will not cause problems for them. They do this through divide and rule, get men and women to conflict, families are de-stabilized etc.<br /><br />To overcome this, both men and women need to become aware and to behave in ways that oppose the bankers. Men and women working as a team, raising children that will refuse to become enslaved to the banksters rule. Whole communities united and against the destructive centralizing state. They bypass state laws, use their own common laws and everyone is either united or outside.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08242038588833160833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-50077501460539580012014-01-24T01:59:57.415-08:002014-01-24T01:59:57.415-08:00Have a look at this which shows how PUA or Game ca...Have a look at this which shows how PUA or Game can be harmful<br /><br />David DeAngelo Undermines Your Progress<br /><br />http://lifestylejourney.blogspot.co.uk/2009/07/david-deangelo-undermines-your-progress.htmlUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08242038588833160833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-22620205707682750682014-01-23T21:55:52.976-08:002014-01-23T21:55:52.976-08:00Sorry Diff T, when it comes to comment systems, Bl...Sorry Diff T, when it comes to comment systems, Blogspot really sucks. I can only delete comments, not edit them. That is the ONE feature I really wish I could use from WordPress that Blogspot does not offer.Keoni Galtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-75064728939630992642014-01-23T17:21:18.526-08:002014-01-23T17:21:18.526-08:00@Keoni
Since you deleted comments on the post ent...@Keoni<br /><br />Since you deleted comments on the post entitled "Team Woman" can you edit my post in this topic to read "This is posted in reference to the first comment on the topic titled 'Team Woman'"Different Tnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-18183161302360983612014-01-23T13:39:23.576-08:002014-01-23T13:39:23.576-08:00Ok, game does not have to be about getting women, ...Ok, game does not have to be about getting women, but most men think about it in this way and try to use it, in that way.<br /><br />Hidden within game (when chasing after women) is the idea that the woman is always right, the man needs to make himself attractive by adopting alpha traits. In other words make yourself likeable to women. Change the way you dress, speak and act to get those perfect women who are always shit testing or trying to catch you out to see if you are worthy of her. You have to behave as if you do not care and are indifferent but you still play the game hoping to get her to bed.<br /><br />Women are far from perfect, sometimes they behave badly, as a man you either take her as she is or reject her, you do not let them behave badly with you and then you give them your time. As a man you need to either walk away or tell them that you will not accept that type of nonsense from your partner or do both. It is simple, no need for game.<br /><br />Islam teaches men to treat their women with kindness and humor. Traditionally Muslim wen keep their maiden names after marriage and they have their own financial accounts they do not give up ownership of their property or business to the men. Women however are not required to cook or provide for the family, if they do it is their choice and an act of charity. The man is responsible for food, clothing, shelter. The woman should be grateful to the man though it is recognisteal from a woman and call it 'charity.'<br />Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08242038588833160833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-55701169058432951262014-01-23T06:03:45.603-08:002014-01-23T06:03:45.603-08:00"Game simply attempts to show men how to get ..."Game simply attempts to show men how to get women. Women are the prize."<br /><br />Ugh. People, game does not need to be about women. Here is a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdkfZ7ya3k4" rel="nofollow">video of Ronald Reagan using a codified game technique in a debate</a>. Sex was not his motivation.Booch Paradisehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14620432665206273916noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-15898436563233887952014-01-23T05:22:59.122-08:002014-01-23T05:22:59.122-08:00This is posted in reference to the comment third c...This is posted in reference to the comment third comment on the topic titled "Team Woman"<br /><br />----------------<br /><br />In a new approach to the same dead horse:<br /><br /><i>*** Women often "fitness test" or "shit test" men. Men interested in mating with a woman need to learn how to recognize when she does this. When he ascertains that in fact she is attempting to fitness test him, there are several known responses that other men have employed with varying degrees of success, such as "agree and amplify."***</i><br /><br />Here is a differerent interpretation of this behavior.<br /><br />When the female's drive for rebellion against her established role gains dominance, the relevant behavior is displayed. Her drive to fulfill her role's obligations is not <i>allowing</i> the drive for rebellion to display itself, the drive to fulfill her role's obligation is being <i>subjugated</i>. When the male displays behavior which thwarts the drive for rebellion's attempt, the female doesn't <i>willingly or conciousely</i> subjugate the drive for rebellion to her drive to fulfill her role's obligations, the rebellion drive is weakened and the drive to fulfill her role's obligations becomes dominate.<br /><br />Contrast this with your interpretation that the behavior is a "fitness test;" The term itself is full of assumptions. First, that the female is <i>able</i> to determine fitness. Second, that the rebellious behavior is a means, not an ends... merely a test.<br /><br />Your interpretation of the behavior is similar to an antelope teaching its young to run from the lion until the lion is tired and gives up. The adult antelope then explains the lion is merely "testing" the antelope.<br /><br />It is harmful because the term itself will automatically conjure a conception that is unrelated to reality. Again, “fitness test” assumes that the female is the “judge” and is capable of determining “fitness”.<br /><br />The relevant conceptions of “judge” are: <br /><br /><b>adjudicator: a person, sometimes one of several, appointed to assess entries or performances in a competition and decide who wins<br /><br />somebody giving informed opinion: somebody who can give an informed opinion on something</b><br /><br />The relevant conceptions of “fitness” are:<br /><br /><b> suitability: <i>suitability of somebody or something for a particular purpose</i></b><br /><br />The relevant conception of “test” is:<br /><br /><b>A procedure for <i>critical evaluation</i>; a means of determining the presence, quality, or truth of something</b><br /><br />Again, the behavior you refer to as a “fitness” test is not a “procedure for critical evaluation.” <br /><br />Most importantly, the term itself implies that the female is “judging.” That she is capable of “judging.”<br /><br />----------------<br /><br /><br />At bottom, Vox is a Lutheran (maybe he admits this). He believes in "sola scriptura" (Scripture is self-authenticating, clear (perspicuous) to the rational reader, its own interpreter ("Scripture interprets Scripture"), and sufficient of itself to be the final authority of Christian doctrine" - from wikipedia), but does not <i>like</i> the neccessary outcome. Instead of viewing "sola scriptura" as a neccessary response to an inept <i>priesthood</i>, he elevates it to a good, in itself.<br /><br />Different Tnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-47475066530623072622014-01-23T04:07:25.857-08:002014-01-23T04:07:25.857-08:00Game simply attempts to show men how to get women....Game simply attempts to show men how to get women. Women are the prize.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08242038588833160833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-16425174540177242342014-01-22T16:16:30.782-08:002014-01-22T16:16:30.782-08:00Why is your business degree useless? Why is your business degree useless? Jacenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-45776378562034481692014-01-22T12:32:49.957-08:002014-01-22T12:32:49.957-08:00You lost me at "ascribed Creationist Christia...You lost me at "ascribed Creationist Christian" <br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-47859830766693995202014-01-22T07:45:03.979-08:002014-01-22T07:45:03.979-08:00@Eric
Thats it? You believe that anyone has any a...@Eric<br />Thats it? You believe that anyone has any awareness of you're burning question because it's "clearly illustrated" in a youtube movie that has less than 2000 views (most of which presumably come from the posters mom watching on a loop). Nothing you said, or that was said in the video breaches my casual dismissal. <br /><br />Beyond that, the fact that you believe that movie was either logical, or even coherent clearly shows that you have a neurotic need to dismiss game. <br /><br />Point 1 of the video: all pua culture divides men in to a binary system. Of the top five game blogs, 2 of them explicitly have much more granular systems. The others to my knowledge have no explicit system. <br /><br />Point 2 of the video: PUA REQUIRES adherents to go out and approach women. Well that's just a naked assertion backed up by nothing more than the fevered dreams of the anti-pua crowd. Vox Day explicitly states that his interaction with game theory is purely intellectual. Alternatively, show me one place where vox day, heartiste, roosh, athol kay, the rational male, or our host has stated that you must approach or interact with women, that failing to do so means that you are "out of the cult" or whatever. <br /><br />Point 3: to interact with something is to allow it to control you. I honestly feel a little silly addressing this its so stupid, but it was also the central point of his argument. That is not the normal definition of control. You could define it that way, but it would be stupid, because it also means to an equal extent that pua's control women, because the women are interacting with the men. It also means that I control Eric (you might say that Eric idolizes me) as he is interacting with me. <br /><br />Everything else in the video seems to be built from these 3 remarkably false premises. <br /><br />So to summarize, you justify your belief that you have the one epic question that has been plaguing the game community by linking to a youtube video that has been view less than 2000 times over the course of a year and a half. And beyond that the video does not even include your question, only some parallel thoughts. And even if we ignore all that, I address your concern, showing it to be casually false. Nothing you have said or done has countered that. <br /><br />Buddy, any one of these points is enough for you to be considered delusional. I'll trust our host that you may have had some useful things to say on other topics, holy hell have you lost your ability to think when it comes to game. Booch Paradisehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14620432665206273916noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-62094070427407250872014-01-21T22:51:13.950-08:002014-01-21T22:51:13.950-08:00I have found that "game" is useful in my...I have found that "game" is useful in my marriage. While not perfect, things have been better in my marriage. Game in a Pick up setting is sex worship,not female worship,or Goddess worship.Game works precisely because of not allowing a woman to be on a pedastal. In marriage that is what you want, to be head of your household without apology,or explanation. Understanding women is just a tool,that can be used for good,or bad.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440686174275990415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-82379189429516156082014-01-21T21:59:59.121-08:002014-01-21T21:59:59.121-08:00Booch:
No, it's not simply me who believes t...Booch:<br /> No, it's not simply me who believes this:<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwwHk3MymkA&feature<br /><br /> The whole marketing approach is fundamentally flawed as relationship tool, as the link above clearly illustrates.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-30356608406055324262014-01-21T21:55:13.144-08:002014-01-21T21:55:13.144-08:00One question for you so-called Christian Gamers:
...One question for you so-called Christian Gamers:<br /><br />Do you spend more time trying to sell Christians on Game? Or more time trying to sell Gamers on Christ?<br /><br />I think we know the answer to that.<br /><br />If you are preaching proper biblical manhood, you are flying Christs flag. <br /><br />If you are preaching Game, you are flying Roissy's flag. <br /><br />It is that simple. Pick a fucking side. Stop trying to be a "Christian advocate for Game". Ain't gonna happen. Its like saying you are "fucking for virginity", or "kicking ass for pacifism". Shit or get off the pot. Justinhttp://religionnewsblog.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-9323743736096090332014-01-21T21:54:54.587-08:002014-01-21T21:54:54.587-08:00Pisco:
I don't know why I waste time argu...Pisco:<br /> <br /> I don't know why I waste time arguing with Gamecocks, but here it goes:<br /><br /> "It's quite a stretch to believe that any man who's had enjoyable relations with women would think that way."<br /><br /> Mostly because I don't think that way, Dumbass. But a nice try at Shaming Language, anyway.<br /><br /> "Everything you say is rooted in the assumption that women have the upper hand."<br /><br /> And in a feminist society, they don't?<br /><br /> "...and the feminist assumption that all sexual relations are zero-sum open warfare."<br /><br /> That's the assumption that both Gamesters and Feminists make. What I'm arguing is that situation isn't normal. As proof of that, look at the rest of your own post: Gaming is all about competition; i.e. zero-sum open warfare. You can't separate Game from the FEMINIST idea of sexual competitiveness.<br /><br /> "It's also a truism...that straight feminists often respond well to men who don't take their ideas seriously."<br /><br /> This attitude is exactly why Game is positively dangerous for men to engage in. There are lots of guys rotting in prison under false accusations precisely because they didn't believe feminists really hate men, or that feminists don't really mean what they say.<br /><br /> "I don't really like people all that much."<br /><br /> Which is why Game appeals to you and men like you, because it excludes love as one of its elements.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-47787539248043579722014-01-21T17:44:44.151-08:002014-01-21T17:44:44.151-08:00Keoni,
OT: In light of your posts about the Boy S...Keoni,<br /><br />OT: In light of your posts about the Boy Scouts, I'm curious what you think of Trail Life USA and the American Heritage Girls. <br /><br />http://www.traillifeusa.com/<br />http://www.ahgonline.org/<br /><br />They're new, started by former boys and girls scouts who left the traditional organizations due to the politically correct changes.Ericnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-68397997673197776402014-01-21T13:15:32.859-08:002014-01-21T13:15:32.859-08:00"Rejecting Ev-Psych does not mean rejecting t..."Rejecting Ev-Psych does not mean rejecting the validity and veracity of biology or true science. You have to remember that the premise of Ev-Psych is that men and women do what what do, because we 'evolved' that way through the process of natural selection."<br /><br />And again, that is the paradigm.<br /><br />Based on that paradigm you form hypotheses. <br /><br />Those can be tested, if they are falsifiable. <br /><br />To say it as bluntly as possible, whether someone agrees with the paradigm means jack shit. <br /><br />Whether the hypothesis is falsifiable and stands the tests thrown at it is all that matters. <br />orionnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-78411495048098589402014-01-21T12:51:03.306-08:002014-01-21T12:51:03.306-08:00but regardless of how you wish to frame your analy...<i>but regardless of how you wish to frame your analysis of “human intersexual attraction and mating” you’re still doing biology and psychology.</i> <br /><br />Rejecting Ev-Psych does not mean rejecting the validity and veracity of biology or true science. You have to remember that the premise of Ev-Psych is that men and women do what what do, because we 'evolved' that way through the process of natural selection.<br /><br />I got no truck with making the empirical observation that women are hypergamous - they want to mate with the best possible genetics partner for their offspring. That's a biological observation of not just humans, but all life on the planet.<br /><br />In differentiating between Praxeology and Evolutionary Psychology, the argument is not about the facts of biology, but whether God created us that way, or we evolved from monkeys to be that way.Keoni Galtnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-86517567663822571402014-01-21T12:27:55.988-08:002014-01-21T12:27:55.988-08:00Nice try. Except that you simultaneously dismiss e...Nice try. Except that you simultaneously dismiss evolutionary biology as “ex post facto fairy tales” and psychology as “bullshit” and declare that asking “why” is irrelevant, and then turn around to employ action axioms “to describe the hows and whys of human intersexual attraction and mating behaviors.” <br />I have no quarrel with Creationism or modern belief in the supernatural that puts God on a pedestal,* but regardless of how you wish to frame your analysis of “human intersexual attraction and mating” you’re still doing biology and psychology. “Fitness testing” is a psychological principle applicable ONLY in the context of animals mating – in recognition of the natural fact that mental functions underpin individual and social behaviors.<br />Certainly, you can retreat to the “deductive reasoning” of Medieval Scholasticism – if only to get around the pesky empirical problems of Creationism – but your “action axioms” would have zero real-world value if their validity as deductive principles rested solely on a priori revelation. It is only through the empirical trial-and-error methods of the PUAs, through their countless approaches and rejections, and by their mindful observation of numberless ‘sensory’ experiences with women and “testing in the field” - rather than by theory or pure logic - that these particular ‘axioms’ of Game have been accepted. In other words, an untested or non-falsifiable axiom is scarcely more than ‘wishful thinking’, no better than a feminist slogan like “equality,” which is nowhere to be observed and validated in the wild. <br />Ultimately, this is not to say that Vox, Dalrock and other Christian apologists, including you, have nothing to offer to those of us who base our understanding of the natural world on empirical observation and testing. On the contrary, even non-practicing PUAs can use previous experimental results in order to engage in reasoned model building and inquiry. It is disingenuous to claim, however, that your “action axioms” can refer to anything besides biology and psychology. Finally, it should be clear that if and when an ‘axiom’ is not confirmed by the PUA experience, the axiom should be relinquished, not the experience.<br />* [Note: I’d rather place God on a pedestal than man (socialism) or woman (feminism).]Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-76113002736593700872014-01-21T11:09:14.299-08:002014-01-21T11:09:14.299-08:00My wife has a much better time grasping the biblic...My wife has a much better time grasping the biblical concepts of man, woman, marriage and, yes, game than some guys who keep trying to write this off in order to simply attempt to be right.... (Which is exactly why our marriage is, after fourteen years, the envy of most other people who even spend five minutes with us...)<br /><br />Is not the book of Genesis the very warning to men about idolizing the pussy? Isn't that what 'game' theory is all about? Or did I miss something in seven years of following this?<br /><br />Was not Adam the very first BETA male?<br /><br />Was not Eve the very first "shit tester"?<br /><br />Was not Adam putting the pussy on the pedestal when he just could not utter the word "NO"?<br /><br />And that would just be within the context of being with a "wife".... <br /><br />But what about the version of Genesis before the 'wifely Eve' narrative replaced the first adaptation featuring "Lilith"??<br /><br />Was not Lilith the girl who had NPD? BPD? The single mom? The Cock Carousel rider? <br /><br /><br />It's really that simple. <br /><br />For every guy who gets their life straightened out by trying to learn game, there is a woman who is trying to get HER answers by reading Dr. Phil. But both sexes have one thing in common... All the information gathered is OLD NEWS....Old Testament. <br /><br />Please feel free to troll and discredit it all. I'll be back just as soon as I get unwrapped from my wife's legs..... <br /><br />Blessings to all....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-41176262314780327012014-01-21T09:35:44.496-08:002014-01-21T09:35:44.496-08:00I find this amusing because I, too, face a lot of ...I find this amusing because I, too, face a lot of religious hell about Game, only from the other side. As a card-carrying, tree-worshiping neo-pagan I catch it frequently from my feminist coreligionists who take moral issue with my stance on Game and such. Apparently all the equality of divine polarities in Wicca works best when the masculine portion is pure Beta. You give them a whiff of Alpha and all of a sudden you're an oppressor who pisses them off and dampens their panties at the same time.<br /><br />Still, that doesn't shake my faith in my religion, just my flaky coreligionists. The very devout pagan men I know have embraced the paleopagan concepts of masculinity with a robust passion, calmly ignoring or engaging the very loud voices of the feminist majority and accepting that their perspectives on divinity and masculinity just ain't gonna match up with Rowena Silvermoon's pre-chewed popular feminist paganism. And that's . . . OK.<br /><br />Similarly we get questions (and plenty of scriptural references) from our fellow Christian men who cannot understand why we cleave to an overtly-feminist religion when we are so clearly invested in our own sense of masculinity. How can we be Men and revere the Goddess . . . and put up with the crap our priestesses throw on a daily basis? It seems like pure idolatry (and in some cases it is, unapologetically) to bend knee to the Goddess in reverence while castigating the antics of her priestesses. Some of us seem like really manly dudes -- so why?<br /><br />Part of the reason is a difference in the basic conceptions of divinity between the Abrahamic faiths and the wisdom traditions, but part of it is pure devotion to the religious ideal that holds the masculine and feminine divine principals (the God and the Goddess, to us wacky heathens) are less "equal" in the feminist sense and more subject to the equilibrium of their complementary nature, according to our observations and experience. Just because a bunch of whiny priestesses want to complain how we're hogging all of the masculine energy doesn't mean that we have to capitulate and concede the point. We have seized the opportunity to follow the majority of our ancestors and be the primal men we desire to be, without the consent, advice, or counsel of women. We have, in essence, applied a type of spiritual Game to our situation by ignoring the shit-tests of our female co-religionists. We remain no less devoted to the sacred nature and holy value of the feminine side of the life-force . . . we just figured we could do that without having someone with an XX chromosome standing around telling us what the Goddess <i>really</i> wants. We figured it out. Just like any good mother, she wants us to grow up to be good Men.<br /><br />This is pertinent to practicing Christians in this discussion because whether or not Game is idolatry, immoral, amoral, ethical or fattening, it is effective. Rationalizing away reasons why you shouldn't use it because it might endanger your soul or lose you your Grace is a pointless endeavor. Game might be a sin, according to some Semetic cosmic ruler (one reason my religious peeps eschew a text-based religion), but no reasonable divinity would insist you live without the life-sustaining sexual elements implicit in human experience.<br /><br />Or, in other words, "Sin boldly . . . but love God." --Martin LutherIan Ironwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09776355241706284910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-24259088079002564072014-01-21T07:03:27.416-08:002014-01-21T07:03:27.416-08:00@Eric
You seem to think that any interaction wome...@Eric<br /><br />You seem to think that any interaction women enjoy is "pedestalization". It's quite a stretch to believe that a man who's had enjoyable relations with women would think that way. I may be wrong, but it's a safer bet than most. <br /><br />Everything you say is rooted in the assumption that women always have the upper hand, and the feminist assumption that all relations between the sexes are zero-sum open warfare. And you talk like you think you can't ever win. <br /><br />It's also a truism - borne out by my experience - that straight feminists often respond very well to men who refuse to take their ideas seriously. Just keep it light and friendly and keep turning it into a joke. After a while they usually melt. If they don't, at least you didn't give them the validation of having their crazy ideas taken seriously. <br /><br />I've argued with a lot of women. They aren't men. The factual content of the argument is a distant second to the social interaction, in pretty much all cases. Their favorite game is they try to get you to take them seriously, and lose. It's a game. <br /><br />It's a boring game if they're not cute, though. For me at least. But I don't like people all that much. Marc Pisconoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-48991205829303765832014-01-21T06:44:28.466-08:002014-01-21T06:44:28.466-08:00@Eric
Off the top of my head, The Mystery Method (...@Eric<br />Off the top of my head, The Mystery Method (kind of the original game book) discusses how game is used in business, to meet new male friends, and was even developed as a way of getting better tips, not sex. <br /><br />The reason that you think "no Game apologist has ever explained how Game can possibly function without an emphasis on idolatrizing female sexuality", is because you have not read that much, and no one but you particularly finds it to be an interesting question. I've never heard of it before, and I can dismiss it off hand as I know that the origins of game techniques was things like home to home sales and books on how to dominate a business meeting. These were retooled for meeting women, and work there to. So it's not just that you are wrong, it's that you're casually wrong. And it's not just that you are casually wrong, but that while you are casually wrong, you believe that you have the one epic question that has defeated all comers in some awesome struggle that exists only in your mind.Booch Paradisehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14620432665206273916noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4256367009985298221.post-16080215973856062692014-01-21T06:05:43.938-08:002014-01-21T06:05:43.938-08:00Shenpen said...
"I wasted about a thousand ho...Shenpen said...<br />"I wasted about a thousand hours of my life studying this Austrian Economis / Praxeology thing, and I can tell you, it is crap."<br /><br />Just curious, what did you read? Human Action?J.D.W.noreply@blogger.com