What’s the end game of #MeToo? Will it be the “end of Game”? When any male romantic initiative is outlawed and the social consequences for flirting to gauge female interest are severe enough to cost men their livelihoods, femcunts think we’ll have a shrewtopia where only women solicit men for dates (sex). But that’s never gonna happen because women are constitutionally averse to making the first move. They don’t fall hard for passive men.
I can see a sexual market dystopia develop in which real true passion escapes to an underground romance bazaar where women can feel again what it’s like to be desired. To be hotly, remorselessly pursued by assertive men. They’ll miss that when it’s gone. (A reader says this is basically the plotline to 1984.)
In the meantime, the fantasy of women hitting on the men “they want”, while loserboys are straitjacketed by the State to observe the mate market from a position of forlorn impotency, is just that…a grrlpower projection of wishful thinking that denies the reality of female vulnerability and the need to feel pursued by men. Women who make the first move never feel right about it afterwards, because they know deep inside that men will agree to easy, no muss no fuss sex with women they wouldn’t normally hit on if the man had to initiate. So the pursuer woman always feels like her “conquest” settled for her. This is a rickety, poisoned foundation for the development of a committed relationship.
A reader wonders,
isn’t the goal to get the woman to pursue, though; and to make her feel like you’re settling to some extent?
We have to draw a distinction between a man presenting himself as a challenge to women and a man passively accepting a woman’s forthright solicitation for a date or sex. A woman who unambiguously approaches a man to get his attention and to start a convo with him knows she’s making it easy for him. She has reversed the sexual polarity with extreme prejudice, and no worthy romance can come from that.
Since unwanted groping has been in the news lately, it’s a good time to revisit the Game concept of “kino escalation“, i.e., getting increasingly physical with a girl to acclimate her to your touch. (Touch-ophobes don’t get laid.) The big distinction between Franken gropers and PUA probers is this: the latter operates within the context of receptivity cues from women.
Gropers like Franken cold-COCK, presumably, unreceptive women who had no inkling they were the subject of flirtatious intent until tongues were mashed deep down throats and tushes grabbed without forewarning. That’s not Game. That’s anti-Game of the sloppily aggressive kind.
There are two types of anti-Game: the socially awkward neediness of beta males, and the socially awkward pushiness of omega perverts. Neither resembles the studied charm and flirty teasing of the Game-aware man.
Touching a woman during a courtship sooner rather than later, and more frequently rather than sparingly, is an effective means of building a comfortable physical rapport with her. Women aren’t cognizant of their own arousal mechanisms, so when a man refuses to touch a woman she isn’t going to think “oh he’s so gentlemanly to keep his hands to himself”, she’s going to think “this man is uncomfortable around me, he must not have much experience with women…I don’t think he’s the one for me”.
So incrementally frequent and intensifying touching is a critical part of seduction. But it doesn’t start with the tits and ass, it starts with a light touch on the forearm or shoulder, maybe a breathtakingly shortened distance between lips and ear to whisper an in-joke, etc. A forearm graze may lead to a warm smile and her body leaning closer into you, which is your cue to touch her on a slightly more erogenous zone and let your hand linger a little longer.
This is the art of flirting, and it used to be unspoken common sense about how the sexes relate to each other, before the present day moral panic that is gunning for the obliteration of any romantic tension between men and women.