Great Scenes Of Game In The Movies

One of the big problems with movies has been their complete turn to the beta side. Forgetting Sara Marshall and Say Anything are prime examples of the depths to which movies ostensibly aimed at beta males have sunk. (One would almost think it was a conspiracy.) All glib lowbrow humor and self-abasement, no admirable alpha males demonstrating how to properly game a woman. Nowadays, if the movie is about “gaming” chicks, like Hitch, it’s usually wrapped in some larger message that has the main character seeing the light and renouncing his past player ways. Fucking yawn.

Well I’m here to fix that. In a dispiriting feminized world ruled by the high PC priest alpha males and their feminist allies and abetted by the useful tools in the eunuchocracy, where our culture overlords are intent on the subjugation and emasculation of the worker bee betas who would be their competitors, you have me shining a light unto the darkness. In a new series I’m calling “Great Scenes of Game in the Movies”, I will link to videos of scenes from the classics where alpha males show how it’s done. You will see that game as practiced by the PUAs has been around for a long time, and that it works, and the only thing that changed was that a bunch of smart guys, using the findings of science and their own field experience, have bottled the magic of the Rhett Butlers and made it digestible for the masses. This radical revolution in seduction technology is a serious threat to the existing order, so it’s no surprise that the elites drip with fearful contempt for the hedonist’s philosophy and tools of the trade.

One of the commenters gave me this idea (BasilRansom?) when he linked to this video of a classic scene from Gone with the Wind:

Watch and observe, betas. Pay close attention to every word he says and nuance in his body language. Now I’ll break this scene down. My comments are in brackets.

***

RHETT: You will, though. And another thing. Those pantalets. I don’t know a woman in Paris wears pantalets anymore.

[too metro to notice fashion details on a woman? tell it to rhett butler. watch how he does almost exactly what i wrote about in this post. he has negged scarlett and raised his value in her eyes.]

SCARLETT: What do they… you shouldn’t talk about such things.

[bam. just like that… attraction.]

RHETT: You little hypocrite, you don’t mind my knowing about them, just my talking about them.

[he calls her out on her BS and passes her shit test with flying colors.]

SCARLETT: Rhett, I really can’t go on accepting these gifts. Though you are awfully kind.

RHETT: I’m not kind, I’m just tempting you. I never give anything without expecting something in return. I always get paid.

[beautiful. she dangles the beta bait but he doesn’t bite. and let’s her know he won’t be like the other pushovers.]

SCARLETT: If you think I’ll marry you just to pay for the bonnet, I won’t.

RHETT: Don’t flatter yourself, I’m not a marrying man.

[“don’t flatter yourself” is a great line, guys. learn it and use it. rhett does a good job here of flipping the script. scarlett is now in the frame of chasing him, instead of him chasing her for marriage. keep in mind just how powerful this technique was back in the day when men routinely offered their hand for marriage.]

SCARLETT: Well, I won’t kiss you for it, either.

[shit test #2. hey, she’s hot. she can afford more than one shit test. in fact, it’s required.]

RHETT: Open your eyes and look at me. No, I don’t think I will kiss you. Although you need kissing badly. That’s what’s wrong with you. You should be kissed, and often, and by someone who knows how.

[he passes shit test #2. watch carefully at 0:39. see how rhett moves his face in very close to scarlett’s face, as if he is going to kiss her and give her what she wants, and then pulls back right when the heat is hottest to deliver his killer disqualification line. this is a perfect demonstration of “push-pull” technique as taught by the PUAs. rhett is too smart for her games. he knows if he kisses her in this moment she has won a tactical victory… but lost her attraction for him.]

SCARLETT: And I suppose that you think that you are the proper person.

[more beta bait. how many beta friends do you know who would say “sure i am!”]

RHETT: I might be, if the right moment ever came.

[translation: i’m qualifying you.]

SCARLETT: You’re a conceited, black- hearted varmint, Rhett
Butler, and I don’t know why I let you come and see
me.

[you just know her panties are dripping wet now.]

RHETT: I’ll tell you why, Scarlett. Because I’m the only man
over sixteen and under sixty who’s around to show you
a good time.

[DHV. look at the expression on his face — AMUSED MASTERY. he’s bemused by her. and she can practically smell it — the musky aroma of a man who knows he’s the best she’ll ever get.]

***

There you have it. Learn from the greats and fall into an abundance of pussy.





Comments


  1. on November 20, 2008 at 10:47 am ironrailsironweights

    you just know her panties are dripping wet now

    I don’t think they actually wore panties in the 1860’s.

    And I’m sure women all had GNP’s.

    Peter

    Like


  2. nice. ever seen Roger Dodger?

    Like


  3. on November 20, 2008 at 10:57 am ironrailsironweights

    But seriously … would the Game as displayed in this scene work as well for a man who didn’t look like Clark Gable? Merely by his looks he would have high “dating market value” to women, and it’s safe to say that he could get away with more personality flaws than the average man.

    Peter

    Like


  4. I took Mrs. G to see this movie in the theater back in ’39, I don’t think I need to tell you what happened that night.

    Like


  5. Excellent decoding. Have you ever taken acting classes? You’re talking about what the acting crowd calls “subtext” — ie., what’s *really* being communicated under the dialogue surface. Wannabes should consider taking some intro-to-improv acting classes as well as taking PUA training. You start being able to read behavior a lot better, and you start feeling more entitled to fuck with other people — chicks! — emotionally.

    Like


  6. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom has some good scenes like this too.

    Like


  7. Watched this scene before many times. Solid stuff.

    Solid blog post overall.

    Some of my favourite alpha movies were the old James Bond flicks with Sean Connery. Shit was stellar PUA material.

    Remember folks, Sean was the man who said it was okay to smack a woman around a little if she got out of line.

    Here is a youtube clip on what I’m talking about:

    Pay close attention, Bond uses that line “Don’t flatter yourself.”

    Like


  8. You should be kissed, and often, and by someone who knows how.

    The scene is even better if you substitute a different word in your mind for kissed.

    Director Vic Fleming knew his stuff. Even among Hollywood types he was a legendary womanizer.

    Like


  9. Movies may have taken a turn for the Beta, but the classics are where it’s at. Romances especially.

    Brief Encounter – married Trevor Howard convinces married Celia Johnston to go out with him for lunch, playfully negs her the whole time. An excellent start to a heartbreaking affair.

    wish I had time to list all the others that come to mind… I’ll return.

    Like


  10. Very good analysis. Yes, they were both performing from a script written by a talented Hollywood writer, but that’s beside the point. Dialogue and interactions in Hollywood scripts are based much more in reality than you’ll ever know. The proof? The fact that you believe the actors ARE their characters, and that the characters are believable in their words/behavior.

    Well-crafted dialogue based firmly in reality is what makes a successful movie or television show. If the actors can’t deliver their lines convincingly, and the lines themselves aren’t based believable, they won’t create and emotional response in the audience.

    To Ironrail’s point, much of what makes Clark Gable successful in this scene is the fact that he was portraying a character who was much like himself. In other words, he didn’t need to stretch himself very much in the role. From his Wikipedia entry:

    When he was growing up, his stepmother raised him to be well-dressed and well-groomed, making him stand out from other kids.

    He was also musically and mechanically inclined, and read Shakespeare.

    When he was around 21, his acting coach was a theater manager in Portland, Oregon, Josephine Dillon (seventeen years his senior). She paid to have his teeth repaired and his hair styled. She guided him in building up his chronically undernourished body, and taught him better body control and posture. She spent considerable time training his naturally high-pitched voice, which Gable slowly managed to lower, and he gained better resonance and tone. As his speech habits improved, Gable’s facial expressions became more natural and convincing. After the long period of rigorous training, she eventually considered him ready to attempt a film career. [SIDE NOTE: He eventually married her when he was 23 and she was 40]

    Gable’s timing in arriving in Hollywood was excellent as MGM was looking to expand its stable of male stars and he fit the bill. Gable then worked mainly in supporting roles, often as the villain. MGM’s publicity manager Howard Strickland developed Gable’s studio image, playing up his he-man experiences and his ‘lumberjack in evening clothes’ persona.

    There’s a lot more there, so I’ll let you read the rest yourselves:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clark_Gable#Rising_star

    Like


  11. Another good movie for study, despite the real-life wimpiness of it’s main star, is The Thomas Crown Affair with Pierce Brosnan.

    Like


  12. on November 20, 2008 at 11:43 am ironrailsironweights

    Excellent decoding. Have you ever taken acting classes? You’re talking about what the acting crowd calls “subtext” — ie., what’s *really* being communicated under the dialogue surface.

    That brings up a point I’ve raised a number of times – many males, and high-IQ nerds especially, are poor at picking up on subtleties and subtexts and nonverbal cues. It may be due to their extreme focus on logic and detail, but whatever the cause it often manifests itself in the form of poor social skills and isolation.

    Peter

    Like


  13. One more tidbit from Gable’s wikipedia entry. Believe it or not:

    David Bret’s book Clark Gable: Tormented Star (2007) claims that Gable had relationships with openly homosexual men and was “gay for pay” in his early career. It claims that Gable was branded a “sissy” by his father as a child, prompting him to adopt a macho image and denounce homosexuality.

    Like


  14. would the Game as displayed in this scene work as well for a man who didn’t look like Clark Gable?

    I don’t think Clark Gable was that good looking in the movie, just at first glance. As far as I recall, he was short, and had a kind of rat-like face. He certainly didn’t look like those tall, athletic Confederate officers that Scarlett grew up around.

    And of course my point is that his attractiveness to women is in his game.

    Like


  15. A fairly recent but obscure movie that shows good alpha game through the end is “The Wedding Date.”

    The TV show “Two and a Half Men” with Charlie Sheen is also a good one, although I swear that feminists take over the writing in some of the episodes, especially the ones in which he foreswears young babes in favor of “successful, accomplished” women his own age.

    Bot all in all, the brothers Charie (high alpha) and Alan (low beta) dynamic is true to life, and not in an ironic way either. In one of the episodes, they get Alan’s ten-year-old son Jake ready for his first dance, and Charlie teaches him some of the things that every friggin young boy needs to be taugh by someone.

    Like


  16. Gable’s great, and Victor Fleming’s direction is awesome. But let’s pause for a sec to acknowledge the sterling contributions made to this sizzling scene by two gals: novel-author Margaret Mitchell and actress Vivian Leigh. Not only were they not fooling themselves about what was going on here, they weren’t just reacting. They played major roles in creating the moment.

    So: were women in that era more honest about the sexual natures of women and men? Or were Mitchell and Leigh exceptional (maybe by virtue of being artists)?

    Like


  17. the “spatula” scene from Stripes should be on the list…the best BM movie, imo…

    Like


  18. on November 20, 2008 at 11:56 am Sebastian Flyte

    Definitely Ricky Raw. The seduction in Temple of Doom was supreme.

    The principle love story that most modern women have grown up with is Titanic, a movie that needs careful analysis. Billy Zane’s character had all the alpha attributes, including a brooding violent streak and narrcisism that yes, women find attractive. But he was ousted by a beta. Leo’s game was tight enough – making her feel inadequete, her life lacks spice etc. Tough to dissect.

    Like


  19. Michael,
    Any girl worth her salt is at least as invested in creating these moments as the men are. Pity that salt is what’s missing these days, in both sexes.

    Like


  20. @d

    i’ve stopped blaming women, and come to the conclusion that men are to blame. i’ve lived in one of the best places to be a single man, and one of the worst. now, i’m in DC, where it’s a little bit of both.

    part of what’s wrong with DC is that it’s full of over-educated, high-achieving women who seem to have forgotten, if they’ve ever known, how to have fun and think they’re biggest asset is their fancy masters degree. all that said, once you demonstrate your unwillingness to take their shit and can build attraction with a modicum of flirtatiousness and social skill, they really start to warm up.

    this leads me to think that the bigger problem with DC is that it’s full of whiny, passive-aggressive, liberal beta dudes who have been so brainwashed by the phony precepts of feminism and multiculturalism that they’re afraid to truly assert themselves. the result is a whole lot of sexual frustration.

    every girl i know in this town gives me sob stories about lack of interest from men. meanwhile none of them really have a lack of interest. what they have is a lack of interest from men they’re attracted to and that have the balls to just make a move.

    Like


  21. on November 20, 2008 at 12:20 pm ironrailsironweights

    A movie with a scene depicting Alpha behavoir in a non-sexual context is the otherwise forgettable My Life. Michael Keaton plays a man who finds out that he’s dying of cancer just about when his wife finds out that she’s preggo with a boy. He starts making life-lesson videos for his future son to watch when he’s older (and the father himself is dead). One video shows the right and wrong ways to introduce oneself to a roomful of strangers, such as at a business convention. The Beta way is hesitant and meek, almost apologetic, while the Alpha way is take-charge and forceful, done with the understanding that the people in the room want to meet you. It’s a classic scene.

    Peter

    Like


  22. So: were women in that era more honest about the sexual natures of women and men?

    I don’t understand why so many men insist on this. I’ve run into plenty of women – even believing feminists – who are perfectly aware of how it all works, even though few women are direct about it. In my late teens / early twenties I found plenty of older women eager to properly advice a young man.

    It’s like PC, everyone knows it but you can’t say it in public. Privately no one will care if you, say, hint that men are better at math and repairing cars, but try saying that in public and the feminists will crucify you.

    Like


  23. Lance, out of curiosity what were the two places that represented one of the best and one of the worst place for single men?

    this leads me to think that the bigger problem with DC is that it’s full of whiny, passive-aggressive, liberal beta dudes who have been so brainwashed by the phony precepts of feminism and multiculturalism that they’re afraid to truly assert themselves. the result is a whole lot of sexual frustration.

    What really scares me about these guys is that they don’t just buy into this stuff casually or pretend to buy into it to get laid, they seem to believe this stuff to the core, and are PASSIONATE about being male feminists. It’s sickening.

    I was at a blog where some guys where wringing their hands and crying over a movie poster that supposedly objectified women. It was this one:

    http://www.moviesonline.ca/movie_posters.php?id=12880

    I commented that using sexuality to sell is a part of female human nature, and is something they often use to their advantage whenever they can. I added that the only women who really hate the concept of objectification are ugly feminists, because they can’t use it to their advantage. The shrill beta chorus that rained down on me to defend feminists surprised the hell out of me. A lot of betas out there really, sincerely love feminism, and actually would be turned off by a woman who wasn’t a feminist.

    Like


  24. I think the feminist men have created a world for themselves in which they advance by being feminist men. They’ve got no reason to break out of the brainwashing because the brainwashing is working for them (at least in career and social ways). They go from magazine to foundation to think tank to political appointment … It’s like continuing in college, only without all those boring professors.

    Like


  25. Now I have to join in the movie recs. Ace of Spies is about Sidney Reilly, the real man who inspired James Bond, and he uses women and they love him for it.

    House of Cards, the one starring Ian Richardson, shows an elderly alpha male seducing a pretty woman who’s less than half his age while her smitten, young, beta co-worker gets LJBF’ed. It’s like a textbook comparison.

    Another Pierce Brosnan movie that shows some good game, particularly the push-pull (he flirts with the heroine, then immediately turns around and flirts with a better-looking woman, thus raising the heroine’s buying temperature when he goes back to her), is Victim of Love. It’s been released under a few different titles – Raw Heat is another – so look for the one with JoBeth Williams and Virginia Madsen.

    Like


  26. Much of the problem is that neither men nor women are interested in treating mating as a game, i.e. as something fun and playful to be enjoyed, something indirect and subtextual (it’s what used to be called ‘flirting’). As our society has opened the doors to all sorts of closets, we’ve forgotten how to live by codes (as in social mores but also as in secret codes). As we’ve become more ‘civil’ (as in ‘civilization’), we’ve become more rational and out o sync with subtext, emotion, etc. ‘Game’ is an attempt to reclaim some of that ground and some of that gamesmanship.
    [I’m all for the opening of most of those doors, by the way, but there are costs]. Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence is a terrific portrait of this process just after the point at which it’s become inevitable.

    Rhett isn’t just communicating how cool he is to Scarlett, he’s also communicating how damned much he wants her — precisely by not taking her. [Those girls you take home on Saturday nights – how many of them are interesting to you as something other than a fuck? How many of them would you be willing to put real work in for?]

    Liked by 1 person


  27. I don’t understand why so many men insist on this. I’ve run into plenty of women – even believing feminists – who are perfectly aware of how it all works, even though few women are direct about it.

    I think the key is AMERICAN (and UK maybe) women. When I went over to Europe, I noticed a big difference in their brand of feminists. They may have said a lot of feminist things on the surface, but they deep down knew the truth about human nature, even if they weren’t direct. In fact, it’s practically a shit test for them, they want to see if a guy is actually naive enough to buy into the feminist maxims or if he’s man enough to know what really pushes her buttons.

    With American feminists, the thing that makes them extra unbearable is that they sincerely believe many of their feminist maxims. Even amongst each other or alone with themselves.

    Like


  28. I think the key is AMERICAN (and UK maybe) women. When I went over to Europe, I noticed a big difference in their brand of feminists. They may have said a lot of feminist things on the surface, but they deep down knew the truth about human nature, even if they weren’t direct. In fact, it’s practically a shit test for them, they want to see if a guy is actually naive enough to buy into the feminist maxims or if he’s man enough to know what really pushes her buttons.

    With American feminists, the thing that makes them extra unbearable is that they sincerely believe many of their feminist maxims. Even amongst each other or alone with themselves.

    Not that I’m a proponent of feminism, but don’t you think you are committing a classic is-ought or naturalistic fallacy?

    Just because something IS a certain way does not imply that therefore it OUGHT to be that way.

    Like


  29. @ T

    the ability to truly believe something exists in in an inverse relationship to how often and how effectively that belief is challenged. again, this is where i blame men. most men either give in to this feminist drivel or revolt against it with the most stereotypically male-chauvinist behavior, both of which only serve to strengthen these ridiculous notions in the minds of women.

    i think i need to write a post on how to effectively deal with women they throw out some bullshit they learned in their sophomore Gender, Society, and Basket-Weaving seminar. the best way is with a combination of playful dismissal, which lures them into thinking that you can’t refute their points, followed by a complete logical evisceration of their argument. if done correctly, and if the girl isn’t too far gone, you’ll notice a look of genuine reflection on her face, followed by one of reluctant acceptance. the dirty little secret behind disciplines like gender studies and cultural studies is that they are severely lacking in academic rigor. they start with their conclusions as a given, and then work backwards.

    Like


  30. d, this is for you:

    http://www.renegadezen.com/zen-stories/guteis-finger

    Now go forth find yourself some “enlightenment.”

    Or at least stop wanking, lest someone here take it at face value.

    Like


  31. Not that I’m a proponent of feminism, but don’t you think you are committing a classic is-ought or naturalistic fallacy?

    Just because something IS a certain way does not imply that therefore it OUGHT to be that way.

    Sorry Carl, I’m not following you?

    Like


  32. the ability to truly believe something exists in in an inverse relationship to how often and how effectively that belief is challenged. again, this is where i blame men. most men either give in to this feminist drivel or revolt against it with the most stereotypically male-chauvinist behavior, both of which only serve to strengthen these ridiculous notions in the minds of women.

    Oh I totally agree.

    Like


  33. Good lord, surprised that the guys here are buying into the modern desire to proclaim everyone gay.

    Like


  34. for some reason I was waiting for Rhett to slap her stupid fucking face. he’s GOT to slap her at some point in the movie…

    amirite?

    Like


  35. Peter,

    Don’t you think it’s more than a little odd that every sexy leading man in Hollywood was supposedly secretly bisexual?

    Do you think maybe, just maybe, most of these are just baseless rumors promoted by gay men to aid in their own gay male fantasies?

    I mean almost every famous figure becomes surrounded by rumors of sexual perversity. Which ones stick seems to depend on who pimps their agenda the hardest.

    There was already a crazy guy in the media claiming to have some sort of gay affair with Barack Obama. How long until gay activists run with this and start claiming BO as one of their own? There certainly seems to be enough homoerotic interest in him, if that guy who kept posting pictures in that one thread here is any indicator.

    TBO can be the new Lincoln.
    http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20041206/lincoln.html

    Like


  36. Some points:

    1.) You-all don’t remember the story in GWTW. Rhett’s Game didn’t work. Scarlett loves Ashley Wilkes through 9/10 of the movie while Rhett rages in frustration at his inability to win her heart. In real life, though, I admit that Rhett’s Game would probably have worked.

    2.) Peter, a man who is bisexual or even gay doesn’t immediately disqualify himself in women’s eyes from being sexually attractive, unfortunately. Some bisexual and gay men even flirt with women, too. They like to test their chops with the opposite sex from time to time.

    3.) Best Game on film that I can recall is Dennis Quaid’s in The Big Easy. Wins over a shy, uptight, and stubborn female lawyer – who is supposed to be prosecuting him, no less.

    4. ) One of the reasons I always rather like Game myself is that the best players know how to treat flirtation as play. Scarlett, incidentally, was a master (mistress?) of female Game. The books said that she thought of it as being rather like mathemetics: if you did or said x, men would respond with the complementary y. Part of the point of the story is that she has a strong masculine streak in her, underneath her aura of soft femininity, which she uses not to get love, but to get what she needs to survive.

    Clio

    Liked by 1 person


  37. on November 20, 2008 at 1:38 pm Dr. Grzlickson

    “I was waiting for Rhett to slap her stupid fucking face.”

    Now, see here, young man. There is no call for that sort of language. I told Mrs. G to cover her eyes.

    Like


  38. Best Game on film that I can recall is Dennis Quaid’s in The Big Easy. Wins over a shy, uptight, and stubborn female lawyer

    Perfect example of how sometimes even when you win you lose.

    Like


  39. Rhett: ” I never give anything without expecting something in return. I always get paid.”

    That’s the point at which I no longer feel any attraction to him. He just killed it off, revealing himself as a shameless, cold-hearted, self-dealing manipulator. None of the dialogue matters after that comment.

    Rhett: “don’t flatter yourself”
    It’s all in the context. That line can only serve in the context of egregious over-played arrogance. If his minions use it in any other context, it will be insulting and rude.

    Rhett commenting on Scarlet’s pantaloons served him only because it was risque. “Metro (and f-you) Rhett” would have insulted her style of shoe, mismatch between cape and dress, or color of scarf. “Sexy and romantic Rhett” would have commented on how her scarf color highlighted her pretty eyes, or how well-fitted her dress was.

    Like


  40. http://thisisnotimefortheinnocent.blogspot.com/2008/11/don-draper-shows-ropes.html

    my post with Don Draper of Mad Men showing how the FUCK it gets done during his time period. Supremely Alpha moves made in this clip. no one can ever date his abilities after this clip.

    Like


  41. Meh. Jedi game beats all:

    Stormtrooper: Let me see your identification.

    Obi-Wan: [with a small wave of his hand] You don’t need to see his identification.

    Stormtrooper: We don’t need to see his identification.

    Obi-Wan: These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.

    Stormtrooper: These aren’t the droids we’re looking for.

    Obi-Wan: He can go about his business.

    Stormtrooper: You can go about your business.

    Obi-Wan: Move along.

    Stormtrooper: Move along… move along.

    Like


  42. Clark Gable!!!!

    *dead faint*

    Like


  43. Not what I would call a classic scene of Game, but since it has just been released on DVD and I saw it recently, check out “Transiberian” starring Woody Harrelson and Ben Kingsley. GREAT film otherwise, but I particularly enjoyed the slow seduction of Emily Mortimer by Eduardo Noriega. She, the rather timid and reserved wife of Harrelson, he the worldly but “dangerous” bad boy traveling with his girlfriend. Watch the unflinching staredown he gives her when they meet, the way he deals with logistical obstacles like the husband, and the leading of the situation at all points.

    I liked it because it’s how I imagine my budding romance with Clio might transpire (well, except for that unpleasantness at the end). Partly because the Noriega character was somewhat Tupac-ish in general, but also because of the mindfucking way he breaks through reserved nature of the Mortimer character.

    Yeah.

    Like


  44. There was already a crazy guy in the media claiming to have some sort of gay affair with Barack Obama. How long until gay activists run with this and start claiming BO as one of their own?

    And wouldn’t we all love it if they succeeded?

    I’d love to see the Democrats try to hold conservative blacks and liberal gays happy together if the closet gay meme became common.

    Like


  45. Sorry Carl, I’m not following you?

    Think about the way in which evolutionary biologists, psychologists, anthropologists etc. describe the behavior of the human sexes. We have come to understand that females are the choosier of the two sexes. Males are more aggressive and dominant, whereas females are more nurturing and caring etc. Pretty much all of the PUA philosophy discussed on this blog is rooted in our understanding of evolutionary biology and psychology. This is is the so called “IS” (i.e. a descriptive statement about the way nature is structured or “IS”). Feminists may try to disagree with us here but they are dead wrong. These are empirical facts about nature.

    Now an “OUGHT” is essentially a prescriptive statement about how we should organize and live our lives (i.e. ethical statements, principles, and values). Where the fallacy comes into effect is when one tries to logically deduce an “OUGHT” (i.e. prescriptive statement) from an “IS” (i.e. descriptive statement).

    In other words, it “IS” a fact that women play a submissive role in nature in relation to men. It “IS” a fact that woman are the more choosier sex. It “IS” a fact that woman seek high value, alpha males and so on. Even though this “IS” the case in nature, we cannot therefore conclude that it “OUGHT” to be the case that women spend their time as homemakers and housekeepers, or that they “OUGHT” to accept as their primary role in life as being forever in servitude towards their men and children and so on.

    Does this make more sense?

    More info can be obtained by reading or goolging David Hume, naturalistic fallacy, is-ought problem etc.

    Liked by 1 person


  46. Ah okay Carl, I understand the concept now. Very good stuff, but I don’t quite understand how the is-ought fallacy ties in to my point on American feminists vs. European feminists. Can you clarify?

    Like


  47. They may have said a lot of feminist things on the surface, but they deep down knew the truth about human nature, even if they weren’t direct. In fact, it’s practically a shit test for them, they want to see if a guy is actually naive enough to buy into the feminist maxims or if he’s man enough to know what really pushes her buttons.

    My comment was merely sparked by that statement. The idea that feminist maxims must being inherently wrong because they are prescriptive statements that do not jive well with our human nature or what “is”.

    And just in case anybody becomes confused I am no feminist apologist.

    Like


  48. *recovering*

    Clio’s right about Scarlett’s love for the decidedly beta Ashley Wilkes. Scarlett rarely wins an exchange with Rhett but he, not she, keeps coming back for more and she only goes to him when she needs money. Rhett’s game would have worked with 90% of women, but I don’t think it impossible that a complex character like Scarlett – feisty and shrewd yet fundamentally girlish – would love a gentleman even if a rake like Rhett turned her on.

    I always thought Gable looked somewhat Slavic, and although his look is indeed far from WASP he is quite handsome. In the early days of Hollywood exotic vamps and atypical beauties abounded. Mary Pickford and Louise Brookes would be sent off for plastic surgery today. I think that Gable was more attractive and alluring because he didn’t look WASPY.

    As for he and Cary Grant being bi a lot of gay rumors around handsome actors turn out to be gay fantasy.

    T,
    I hate to find myself in the position of defending feminism but I really think that Anglo culture, not feminism itself, is to blame for the difficulty that whites in America, UK have with romance and flirtation. Everywhere else in the world people seem to understand this. I doubt that you’ve ever tried to coquettishly flirt with a white guy but many, many of them are completely bewildered by it.

    Like


  49. Hello, it really depends on where the White guy is from/how he was raised.

    In the south, they get it. Up north, some I met got it, but only if they had non feminist/moderate moms.

    Like


  50. Scarlett wants Ashley because she can’t have him. Rhett, for all his Game, made himself a little too available to her.

    Clio

    Like


  51. I got the clip from a collection of alpha male clips from a seduction torrents site. (The clip was already on youtube, but only the second half).

    It’s the best clip of game I’ve seen. While other films have may have equally alpha men, attraction occurs almost without precedent, the dialogue is sparse, and few techniques of the game are used.

    Rhett here is my ideal: direct, mastery of wit, amused self-mastery, devil may care attitude, toys with women, physically dominant. Shows her bullshit for what it is. Polish in spades. Ready to walk at any given moment.

    Roger Dodger is fun to watch, and very witty, but he doesn’t have any charm, repulsing his prospects. His delivery is too dry; he is the fellow who is brilliantly funny, but paradoxically not fun to be around.

    The movie criticizes men exactly like him, by having Roger fail in his attempts at seduction. He also gets needy with a woman who’s over the hill, an improbable prospect.

    T. –
    Are you referring to the clip where Indy and this blonde woman spar over who comes to whose room, they wait five minutes, and then Indy gets ambushed? I can get it. The lines aren’t bad, but Indy is reactive, and lacks Rhett’s grace.

    Don Draper of Mad Men is a gold mine. SNL did a satire of him, “Don Draper’s Guide to Picking Up Women,” that is, ironically enough, instructive – http://www.hulu.com/watch/40972/saturday-night-live-don-drapers-guide

    A couple clips of Don not taking shit from women – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-jlM7MxvZc

    Like


  52. Nic,
    That’s true the south is different. Especially the further down you go.

    Like


  53. Mackknife–

    ROTFLMAO re Stripes spatula scene.

    By the way, whatever happened to PJ Soles?

    Like


  54. Carl:

    My comment was merely sparked by that statement. The idea that feminist maxims must being inherently wrong because they are prescriptive statements that do not jive well with our human nature or what “is”.

    Okay, gotcha. I don’t think feminism is inherently wrong because it has prescriptive statements. Prescriptive statements that aim at equal rights can be a positive force. I was talking about erroneous descriptive statements that go beyond equal rights and start trying to argue that men and women are exactly the same in how they think, in what attracts them, in what they want and need from partners, in capabilities, in strengths, in weaknesses, in biology…those are the areas where I think radical feminism is often wrong. Some of their “ought” statements can be wrong too, but I wouldn’t say inherently so.

    Hello-

    I hate to find myself in the position of defending feminism but I really think that Anglo culture, not feminism itself, is to blame for the difficulty that whites in America, UK have with romance and flirtation.

    Interesting. How long has this been a problem with people in the UK? Any idea what caused it? I wonder if it was always the case. I was watching a BBC miniseries from the 70s about Queen Elizabeth starring Glenda Jackson (lots of good insights on how alpha females interact with alpha males and beta males). In that miniseries they portrayed British men at being very adept at romance and flirtation. What changed? Was it an after-effect of the repressive Victorian era?

    Like


  55. d speaks sense!

    Looking forward to some analysis of Cary Grant movies. Grant’s an interesting contrast to Gable: much smoother and more charming, much less heavy and confrontational. Yet that’s a good and effective kind of Game too — and plenty masculine in its own way. Of course, as Peter would point out, being one of the world’s most handsome men also doesn’t hurt. Plus Cary was athletic and could dominate when he wanted to (see “His Girl Friday”), even if he tended to rely more on comedy and flirtation than Gable did. Another good (if late-ish) Cary movie: “Charade.” Loads of sexy back and forth between Grant and Audrey Hepburn. He gets her pretty much hurling herself at him.

    Like


  56. Clio,
    That’s true to an extent, but the Wilkeses were the richest family in her county, and her family was only middle class. Also she was a smart scrapper without culture or refinement and she was drawn to the qualities she lacked in Ashley. Rhett had all of her “game” but was too much like her for comfort. At least when he chased for twelve years.

    Like


  57. Clark Gable has ‘amused self-mastery’ chiseled into his face, notably the hint of a smirk. Game does this to you.

    Like


  58. on November 20, 2008 at 3:00 pm Cannon's Canon

    My favorite alpha-male from the movies is the Grégoire de Fronsac character in the french film ‘Brotherhood of the Wolf.’ This guy opens some difficult sets and dissects them to isolate the count’s daughter. He deflects the mother-hen, casts the beta male aside, and wins the favor of the protective brother. de Fronsac uses the push-pull and neg tactics and does not bite at her beta bait, leaving her dripping wet for a rendezvous.

    His alpha posture throughout the movie is noticeable, as he is confident that no one can take his top spot on the hierarchy. Additionally, he rolls with a permanent wingman, Mani, who is physically dominant. Mani’s loyalty is a social proof, and de Fronsac even helps him get laid!

    Best of all, like a true alpha, de Fronsac openly claims a mistress from the local brothel, where he is escorted by the count himself! He is not clandestine with his promiscuity, but this has absolutely no effect on the girl he is gaming, as she silently accepts it. And after his conquest, does he stay in the rural French burb to live happily ever after? No, he returns to Paris to resume his fulfilled life.

    I really liked this movie when I first saw it, but after reading up on PUA game, it blew my mind.

    Like


  59. on November 20, 2008 at 1:01 pm ironrailsironweights

    Looking forward to some analysis of Cary Grant movies. Grant’s an interesting contrast to Gable: much smoother and more charming, much less heavy and confrontational. Yet that’s a good and effective kind of Game too — and plenty masculine in its own way.

    Wasn’t he also bisexual?

    Peter

    Like


  60. T,
    Britain’s class system has been vilified for many just reasons, but as it slowly declined gender relations were thrown out of whack. The class system prescribed sex roles for the nobility based on courtly flirtation which middle and lower class people imitated. As the class system declined many Britons lost their compass in many aspects of life. Everything written about here, the Pill, urbanity etc. affected the UK as well. Like whites in America they simply lost the old rules with nothing solid to replace them and to fill the void they drink. When I was there in the UK 4 years ago among my friends it was SOP for an British man to get drunk before having sex with a woman for first time, and the below article details the same thing. I sent it to John Derbyshire and he replied that there was still vitality among the lower classes. Personally I trust Theodore Dalrymple’s description of such men, so any other woman who wants football hooligans is welcome to them.

    http://www.spectator.co.uk/search/10205/the-tragic-ineptitude-of-the-english-male-.thtml

    Like


  61. You mean, her *pantalets* were dripping. It was not just a metrosexual remark, but a very risqué one, to comment on a woman’s choice of undergarment.

    Like


  62. on November 20, 2008 at 4:16 pm Peregrine John

    On the opposite side of things is Guys And Dolls, which I hadn’t seen in many years until 2 months ago, when a friend was starring in a production. I seem to recall liking it well enough before, but after learning more than a few things in the intervening years, I found the end of the story terribly depressing.

    Like


  63. I’ve read a couple of bios of Cary Grant, and it seems to me that the chances he had some gay dalliances are pretty good. I don’t think in this case it’s just a matter of gays laying claim to him. All that said, we’re talking about the onscreen character, not the real-life guy, no? The real Cary Grant (actually Archie Leach) once famously said something like, “Hell, I’d like to be Cary Grant!”

    “Cary Grant” is one of the great artistic creations of the 20th century, IMHO.

    Like


  64. Great point re: Brotherhood of the Wolf. A fantastic movie all round. And the scene with the furry fish – the guy openly shoves a vulva in everyone’s face at dinner. Dang.

    Like


  65. Interesting to note that this was written by a woman. Like Dangerous Liaisons, most of the good dialogue in the movie comes straight out of the book. There is more in the book that didn’t make it into the movie.

    Like


  66. While movies may have gone the ways of the beta, there’s plenty of alpha in TV, especially on HBO. A few shows with some very truthful depictions of alpha men come to mind: Deadwood, The Sopranos, Rome, and Mad Men most recently.

    Seems to be specifically cable TV, don’t forget The Shield and Sons of Anarchy too. The polar opposite seems to be NBC, which has to be the most betaized channel there is. I think that may be a big reason why they are in last place.

    Like


  67. Love it, love it. Can you extend this series to include TV shows? I want to read him on Don Draper.

    Like


  68. ” high PC priest alpha males and their feminist allies.”

    You mean like Bill Clinton paying lip service to feminism while gaming them from within?

    Like


  69. “In The Line of Fire” has some fantastic moments between Clint Eastwood and Rene Russo.

    Eastwood: They have you all around so the president can look good to his feminist voters.

    Russo: Do you make an effort to be obnoxious or is it a gift?

    Eastwood: It’s a gift.

    Like


  70. If we’re talking about the “woman’s worth is determined more by her achievements than her beauty and youth or raising children” type of feminism, the main proponents are

    a) unattractive women who believe that they can change human nature through social activism

    b) unattractive men who try to tell themselves that their girlfriend really is a catch

    Like


  71. Did you happen to watch the whole movie? Things don’t work out too well for your alpha hero, and it’s the beta-sissy Ashley Wilkes that she really wants.

    This really has to be about the worst movie you could pick to prove your point. The player gets pulled into her sinister shit and it blows up in his face. Meanwhile, the wussy beta does what he thinks is right and is dedicated to a simple, sincere woman who wouldn’t shit test a guy to save her life. And you know what? They’re happy while alpha and his girl toy are in endless turmoil.

    Yeah, not exactly the best example.

    Like


  72. “His Girl Friday” is similar in spirit to “Love in the Afternoon.” Both are about guys with top notch game skills in the end falling for someone with little or no game.

    Pupu loves this sort of lame duck triumph stories! Very inspiring.

    Like


  73. Fabian,

    “Gone With the Wind” was actually written by Margaret Mitchell in 1936 but your larger point may still apply. According to the wiki article:

    “Many researchers believe that the physical brutality and low regard for women exhibited by Rhett Butler was based on Mitchell’s first husband, Red Upshaw. She divorced him after she learned he was a bootlegger amid rumors of abuse and infidelity.”

    Like


  74. While movies may have gone the ways of the beta, there’s plenty of alpha in TV, especially on HBO. A few shows with some very truthful depictions of alpha men come to mind: Deadwood, The Sopranos, Rome, and Mad Men most recently.

    Is it just me or do alpha men just make for more compelling characters? There’s something about a beta that says ‘don’t care about me, I’m not important’ while alpha men draw you into their realities, in real life and especially in theater.

    I think the feminist men have created a world for themselves in which they advance by being feminist men. They’ve got no reason to break out of the brainwashing because the brainwashing is working for them (at least in career and social ways).

    Most people support the worldview that they believe will be most beneficial to their survival and success.

    Like


  75. nineteen thirty…..six I believe?

    Like


  76. An even more primal example of game with Rhett and Scarlett is the scene where he carries her up the red staircase and fucks her brains out. Nothing is shown after he takes her up, but only implied, which is the beauty of old Hollywood. In my mind is it much more powerful sex/love scene than showing people actually having sex, which seems to be the norm today in movies. He is drunk and she has been bitching at him and he gets fed up with her. The next morning her afterglow is phenomenal. It is the best demonstration of how to deal with a bitchy woman I have ever seen.

    Yes, the reason why Scarlett loves Ashley is because he does not want her, at least to the degree that she wants him. It is the old “ignore and conquer” theorem I have talked about before. Nothing gets a woman as insanely attracted to you as ignoring her to a certain degree, if she is already interested in you. Or perhaps it is the “push/pull” theory expressed on this blog also. Ashley made Scarlett wet in a way that Rhett never did, except, as just mentioned, when he fucked her brains out that one night she was bitching at him and he was drunk. She loved him after that.

    As far as men the Anglosphere being sexually inhibited, not knowing how to flirt, etc., well this something that Byron observed and wrote sarcastically on, namely, the stiff moralizing nature of England at the time, her hypocrisies, and how the Mediterranean regions and even the Near East were much better areas for lovers and the pursuit of passionate love affairs. It is still true to this day.

    Like


  77. Wonka:

    The reason why the book and movie were so successful is that is appealed to what women actually fantasize about: the strong, edgy, rouge, masculine man who makes them wet, the man they really desire, who would be Rhett Butler. He is the type of guy those dutiful wives are fantasizing about when they turn on their vibrators or are waiting for their fat husbands to get off of them during their once a month five minute fuck session.

    All women have an inner whore and guys like Rhett Butler bring it out. The novel is fiction, and the fiction is that Scarlett loves Ashley, but the reality that appeals to the audience is that the women reading and watching love and want Rhett, not Ashley.

    And seducing many women is a game inherently filled with turmoil and passion which is one thing that separates alphas from betas. Alphas are risk takers, betas are not. Seducing women is inherently risky, because you will deal with tumult, passions, rejection, but also lots of fine pussy too.

    And in reality Ashley’ wife would probably be getting fucked by Rhett while Ashley was away. Hell, he would probably be giving it to her up the ass several times a week and she would be so in love with Rhett she would soon forget about Ashley, until he came back home and she would pretend like nothing happened. But when Ashley fucked her she would close her eyes and think about Rhett.

    Like


  78. rouge should be rogue above.

    Like


  79. The movie is grand, but the original novel by Mitchell has greater depth. **supercilious**

    Margaret Mitchell is a personal favorite because she seemed to slice through cultural “pretty lies” so effortlessly.

    RECAP:
    Scarlett is the spoiled daughter of a self-made country gentleman. He natural attractiveness is magnified by her fierce spirit and wilfulness — basically she has Lady Game in spades.

    She has many suitors but loves Ashley Wilkes because he fits her romantic girlish imagination of what a husband should be: tall, handsome, well-bred and intellectual, fiercely honor-bound. He mostly ignores her while she schemes to “catch” him. Before the civil war, Ashley ends up marrying a distant cousin who is as gentle and mild as he is courtly. Scarlett secretly despises this girl Melanie but outwardly acts sweetly toward her.

    Before their marriage and Scarlett’s own (her boy-toy husband dies in the war) she meets Rhett Butler, who is a pariah in high society because at West Point he abandoned a pregnant paramour and was kicked out. Rhett is a man with no illusions, more outwardly savage than noble Ashley but with hidden tenderness in his heart, and he is drawn to Scarlett even as he easily reads her fickleness and self-centeredness. She in turn tries to play him with Lady Game — he’s too old and too disreputable for her to abandon her fixation with Ashley — and he toys with her right back. In each of several meetings she leaves irritated with him for being so unmanageable, and he leaves frustrated that she is so fixated on a man who would clearly be a bad match for a spitfire like her.

    (Let’s note here: in those days men with a villianous reputation were repellant to most women rather than secretly attractive.)

    Skipping over loads of plot, Ashley comes back a broken man, unprepared for the dog-eat-dog poverty of Reconstruction, and nearly gives in to Scarlett’s flirtations, but backs out with self-loathing. Eventually she agrees to marry Rhett Butler for financial security — she is still fixated on Ashley but Rhett loves her enough to take the plunge. They have a daughter who dies in early childhood in a freak accident, which splits them apart. Rhett eventually decides to leave, both because of the haunting death of his daughter, and because despite his best efforts Scarlett has never let him displace Ashley from her romantic inner life. A series of events, including Melanie’s death and Ashley’s dissolution, lead her to a certain maturity of character. As Rhett departs she desperately tries to woo him back, but he is already so embittered that he basically tells her to f*ck off, but with a classier spin.

    THE END

    Interesting character studies in the book. E.g. although Ashley Wilkes is a courageous and upstanding man, he stills finds himself vulnerable to being seduced by Scarlett. His marriage to Melanie is more friendly than lustful. Rhett is more than capable of standing up for himself, but still can’t resist Scarlett even though she’s no great beauty and is a manipulative little shrew towards him. Melanie is extremely sweet-natured, and endures Scarlett’s indirect contempt and abuse until (1) Melanie defies an angry crowd to protect Scarlett and (2) Rhett berates his wife for never seeing the strength Melanie has under her naturally demure character.

    Melanie and Rhett come across as the “heroes” of the book, but given Scarlett’s centrality and her incredible vigor and singlemindedness it’s hard not to admire her. She’s a Tony Soprano type character.

    Like


  80. Wonka – You’re right about the movie, but it’s irrelevant, because I’m pretty sure he is using this scene as a stand-alone example of game. The fact that the book was written in the 19th century (correct me here if I’m wrong on the date ladies) when public social values were diametrically opposed to those we have today makes it obvious why the characters in the movie turned out the way they did. It’s a morality tale. The characters with the qualities society valued back then – piety, modesty, honesty, kindness – would naturally get rewarded, while the manipulative, dishonest characters end up miserable and alone. The fact that we as a society have gotten to the point where a significant number of people today see it the opposite way says something none too good about where we’re at.

    Like


  81. So Scarlett in the book is no great beauty? Interesting…That’s one of the big problems when Hollywood adapts novels sometimes. Even if a female character is not supposed to be very attractive, they often end up casting a knockout in the role anyway.

    Like


  82. Southern Literature courses snobbishly turn up their nose at Gone With The Wind as a frothy bestseller, but it’s a fascinating novel. I read it in high school and reread it a few years ago. Every stage we went through with the Iraq War-patriotic hawks, testosterone soaked bellicose young men, hubristic top minds claiming it would be a cakewalk, world-weary voices of reason shouted down, occupying forces trying to remake an unfamiliar culture but ultimately unable to enforce law and order- is faithfully detailed. People say that Bush et al should have read Machiavelli to predict our Iraq mess, but it was all there in “Gone With The Wind”.

    Like


  83. on November 20, 2008 at 9:06 pm ironrailsironweights

    Today’s GNP pictures. A big thanks to Melissa.

    Peter

    Like


  84. @Mason

    (Let’s note here: in those days men with a villianous reputation were repellant to most women rather than secretly attractive.)

    Doubtful. Rustling the prim and proper feathers of the properly bred woman was probably as effective then as it is now.

    Like


  85. I can’t believe no one mentioned “the Tao of Steve” starring Donal Logue with a demonstration of game, if it works for Logue in the movie, and it does, you can see how it’s used.

    More recently, and applicably, Logue in “Life” shows how “Game” works for Joe Average. His character’s pursuit of the Sarah Shahi character is a classic. He does not hide his attraction. When she says she’s disgusted, his comeback is that was the exact same thing all THREE of his ex-wives said.

    His schtick is that he understands the Shahi’s character weaknesses (past drug/alchohol addiction) and offers support. He’s very masculine despite being fat and older than Shahi, and has a strong but not cocky or aggressive character that many cannot pull off. He’s self-confident, funny, and persistent. He never takes any of Shahi’s character’s disgust personally and makes a joke of it, that turns to basically all the other hot women he had failed relationships said that too.

    “Life” is worth watching for Logue’s character alone, and how he uses his ability to provide emotional support in a masculine way to win the girl. Who is WAAAY out of his league but very troubled and aggressive herself.

    Like


  86. @ T this is the type of woman you were commenting about yesterday <a http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOvqF4ZPDNM

    Like


  87. Rustling the prim and proper feathers of the properly bred woman was probably as effective then as it is now.

    There was no pill in the 1860s and condoms of the era weren’t that effective. The consequences of messing around with Rhett Butler-type were much more serious then than they are today.

    Like


  88. “There was no pill in the 1860s and condoms of the era weren’t that effective. The consequences of messing around with Rhett Butler-type were much more serious then than they are today.”

    Lady Caroline Lamb’s affair with Lord Byron was a good example of this.

    Like


  89. Rhett:

    1. Rhett doesn’t abandon a pregnant paramour. He gets caught in bad weather with a girl. I think they end up spending the night together waiting out the bad weather. I don’t think he sleeps with her. Decorum requires that he marry her, but he refuses too.

    2. I think he consorts with prostitutes and has mistresses. I.e. he’s not the marrying kind.

    3. He refuses to enlist in the Civil War, but then later secretly joins. He’s not a hot headed idealist.

    ————–

    “Gone with the Wind” is a terrific read. Highly recommended. Take it with you on your next cross country flight.

    As for the movie, the first half is terrific (pre-war, Civil War, Scarlett’s post war struggles). “As God as my witness, I’ll never be hungry again!” What a great line.

    The second half, the part which starts after Scarlett makes her fortune, is a mediocre soap opera.

    Like


  90. When she calls him a conceited, black-hearted varmint, you can tell she loves it. She gives him that “oh, you’re so bad!” look: narrowing the eyes, wrinkling her nose a little, and raising the upper lip — just like you do when you’re disgusted, but also raising the corners of her mouth as with a smile, indicating that it’s only mock disgust.

    I love getting that look.

    Like


  91. Another good read for alpha males, beta providers and cuckoo’s egg bastards is “The Thorn Birds”. Unless you, like me, like melodramas skip the miniseries. The female author delves into religion and a woman’s place in a man’s ambition. Smart realistic women have always understood the natural truths behind the archetypes of masculinity, but the factors discussed here (Pill, feminism etc) have obscured them.

    Like


  92. Follow-up, the challenge is being able to build a relationship with powerful, professional woman who as at least as much status as any prospective suitor, and does not need masculine monetary support but rather, emotional support.

    That’s a huge shift from the old movies, and Cary Grant and Rhett Butler and the rest don’t work.

    Probably the plague of Metrosexuals are Hollywood’s lame attempt to recognize the female shift-change, but not one that is something that works.

    Like


  93. It’s a movie. Movies. Are. Fiction.

    Like


  94. I don’t think the old movies are a good guide, because both men and women have changed too much.

    Now, you don’t have Scarletts. You have independent women who make as much if not more than most men, and have more social power than most men. Beauty and on average higher incomes than men particularly in urban areas.

    What worked for a very traditional woman would not for a more modern women, because as noted, the pill and condom changes things.

    The ability to offer masculine emotional support (calmness, as he has noted) is often a key advantage. If you are a tough, professional woman there are few emotional support systems in your life, outside of a more competitive relationship with female peers.

    Like


  95. Typing. Periods. After. Every. Word. Is. A. Lame. Cliche.

    Like


  96. For some of the most honest depictions between the sexes (i.e. alphas ruling the roost; women loving it), it’s best to check out pre-Code crackdown Hollywood. “Man’s Castle” has an awesomely alpha Spencer Tracy threaten Loretta Young with every sort of violence imaginable, and she digs it to the point of having his baby to keep him from leaving her.

    Like


  97. Had a major epiphany reading this.

    Most guys I have been involved with I knew why I was attracted to them. One guy though, who was never a proper boyfriend but a friendship that got complicated on a regular basis, I could never work out why I was so into him. He wasn’t very good looking at all (going bald in his 20s) and so not my type. And he wasn’t very nice to me most of the time.
    I’ve figured it out now – he was gaming me something fierce! He was never out and out cruel but he didnt flatter me, didnt put up with my shit and if he did give me positive attention it was rare and out of the blue. And he never apologised. AND I never felt I could manipulate him which is a first for any guy I’ve known.

    So yes Peter, Game does work even if the man is not physically attractive (though dressing well helps). I’ve dated really handsome men who I could manipulate and who I lost interest with. And seen handsome men who I lost all attraction to once they opened their mouths.

    So there it is.

    Like


  98. If you are a tough, professional woman there are few emotional support systems in your life, outside of a more competitive relationship with female peers.

    Good point. That’s why “Kich a Bitch” is in fact a feminist rallying cry. What do the partner-track law firm mavens with high heels and attache cases do to relax? Abuse their female underlings, that’s what.

    Like


  99. That’s a truism of feminist mentorship. Middle-aged, successful career woman takes a younger woman under her wing but becomes jealous of the younger woman’s popularity with men around the office and persuades her to dress badly, work long hours etc. essentially trains her to be as hopelessly single as she is.

    Like


  100. Hey, something that occurs to me? I notice that y’all have a tendency to blame a lot of current mating difficulties on contraception and on women having jobs. I think you’re a bit off on this one, in a way that’s worth pointing out. Yes, easily accessible contraception changes the rules in some ways. Yes women having well-paid fulltime jobs changes the rules in some ways. But (as I tried to argue where France goes, for instance) some cultures handle all that perfectly, or at least reasonably, well. In their personal lives women are still women and men are still men and no one’s lying about it.

    In my own life: well, in my mom and dad’s Depression generation, they had easy access to condoms and many more women had jobs than today’s educations tell you. (My own mom worked in an office for much of her adult life, for instance. I think I once read that 30% of women were employed in 1960.) Despite that, that generation was was as trad as can be. My own cohort (leaving college in the mid and late ’70s) — post-’60s dynamic women who did well in jobs, verrrrrry easy access to whatever we wanted sexually … Yet, some crazies to one side, loads of up-to-date sexy fun between the sexes.

    So it’s quite possible for women to be out in the world and for there to be easy access to contraception AND for the two sexes to enjoy a lot of fun/sensible courtship, mating, and sex.

    What has made all the difference, as far as I can tell, has been this: brainwashings and upbringings and educations. Y’all were lied to and mis-educated by politically-motivated tyrants. You were seriously spoiled by starry-eyed, well-meaning parents. All of which seems to have led young women to think they can have it all their way, and young men likewise (their women should be both sweetly chaste and great cocksuckin’ porn stars — wha’?). When both sexes think it should all happen on their own terms, things get very, very cold and hostile.

    Anyway: I’d love to see you ease up a bit on contraception and women-having-jobs. Both are often nice things. Rotten upbringings and shitty educations, though, deserve a whole lot more of your ire.

    Like


  101. Good morning Mr. Blowhard

    *pouting*

    *shaking curls*

    Like


  102. on November 21, 2008 at 10:22 am Cassandra Goldman

    I just finally remembered the movie I wanted to suggest: Suspicion with Cary Grant and Joan Fontaine. This handsome devil gets a nerdy rich girl to marry him by criticizing her hairdo and calling her “monkeyface”.

    Like


  103. Hey, something that occurs to me? I notice that y’all have a tendency to blame a lot of current mating difficulties on contraception and on women having jobs. I think you’re a bit off on this one, in a way that’s worth pointing out. Yes, easily accessible contraception changes the rules in some ways. Yes women having well-paid fulltime jobs changes the rules in some ways. But (as I tried to argue where France goes, for instance) some cultures handle all that perfectly, or at least reasonably, well. In their personal lives women are still women and men are still men and no one’s lying about it.

    This is the point I was trying to make earlier with European feminists versus American feminists, but I don’t think it came out as clearly as you put it.

    Like


  104. That’s a truism of feminist mentorship.

    Intresting, makes sense. Can we say that professional mentorship for men and women is very different: men groom their successors, and women manage their (younger) competition.

    Like


  105. Hey guys, this should be great to discuss. A piece on how the bad economy is even forcing rich alphas to cut back on their mistresses. Mistresses are getting “laid off.” Does this mean that rich men will be hoarding less of the women? Will betas be able to benefit now?

    http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2008/11/18/rich-cut-back-on-payments-to-mistresses/

    Like


  106. Intresting, makes sense. Can we say that professional mentorship for men and women is very different: men groom their successors, and women manage their (younger) competition.

    Or maybe the problem is men USED TO groom their successors. Now they seem content to just let them figure it out for themselves, or let them be groomed by their mothers or academia, leading to horrible results. If more men DID groom their successors like they used to, the popularity of Game would not have skyrocketed I think.

    Like


  107. Correct Ricky, very correct with regards to life in gerenal. But in the professional world, I still see the older, senior men take smart younger guys under their wing without apparent ulterior motives.

    Like


  108. It’s like we have this instinct to build up our younger counterparts in our own image. Even in the virtual world, we do a whole lot of motivatin’ and mentorin’ of David Alexander, who strikes us as a smart and pleasant kid who — as many of us feel — just needs a little patronship.

    Like


  109. PA: gotcha. You’re 100% right about that example.

    Like


  110. Michael 2B, I must tell you that on the subject of France you begin to sound like Margaret Mead on Samoa.

    Clio

    Like


  111. “I’ll tell you why, Scarlett. Because I’m the only man
    over sixteen and under sixty who’s around to show you
    a good time.”

    Translation: There’s no one else to put up with your B.S.

    Once again folk, it’s all about the ratio.

    Like


  112. Mentoring is just an excuse to be nostalgic: you think of the days when you were dumber, you think of the mistakes you’ve made that made you wiser and it all only reminds you of how much wiser you are now that you’d know what to do in those situations.

    Wisdom increases a man’s sex appeal, so mentoring always reminds the man of what he has gained, and even if you’re married or old enough that young girls are out of range, you can try your prowess at the game by having younger men do what you’d do.

    Women can’t play the game by proxy.

    Like


  113. Watch Paulette Goddard in The Women, which came out the same year as Gone With the Wind. She was cast as Scarlett up until the last second and imo would have been the better pick; the role she played in The Women WAS Scarlett O’hara. And then it would have been her face down through the ages instead of crazy-ass Vivien.

    Like


  114. Women can’t play the game by proxy.

    They do to some extent when they try to guide their younger relatives toward making the right choices in love.

    Presumably there are fewer ulterior motives between an aunt and her niece, than when an older supervisor advises her hot younger employee to cut her hair short.

    Like


  115. on November 21, 2008 at 11:44 am ironrailsironweights

    `Hey guys, this should be great to discuss. A piece on how the bad economy is even forcing rich alphas to cut back on their mistresses. Mistresses are getting “laid off.” Does this mean that rich men will be hoarding less of the women? Will betas be able to benefit now?

    One-third of the rich people with extramarital lovers surveyed for the article were women. Relatively few of them were reducing the amounts of money they give their boyfriends.

    Peter

    Like


  116. hello 10:08

    You are referring to Sigourney Weaver in “Working Girl”, aren’t you?

    Like


  117. essentially trains her to be as hopelessly single as she is.

    If the female became successful while dressing poorly and spending long hours at work, regardless of what happened in her life, she’s going to feel that’s how she became single. In other words, it’s the difference between “avoiding my mistakes” and “imitating me” with the big problem is that the latter may involve specious reasoning.

    It’s like we have this instinct to build up our younger counterparts in our own image.

    Since I lack children, my nephew sorta fills this role for me. I may not have the influence that I want over his life, but at least I know that I tried something, and that some things eventually filter downward.

    an older supervisor advises her hot younger employee to cut her hair short

    Am I the only guy who isn’t freaked out by the short hair cut thing? A girl at work cut her hair, and it’s somehow made her a bit more seductive and attractive. My non-date g/f cut her hair too, and it looks better at it’s current medium length than at it’s longer length, IMHO, and she’s no longer late from having to straighten it. I just suspect that it honestly depends on the girl because other girls at work who went for short hair don’t look any better or in one case, worse.

    Like


  118. on November 21, 2008 at 11:55 am ironrailsironweights

    Am I the only guy who isn’t freaked out by the short hair cut thing? A girl at work cut her hair, and it’s somehow made her a bit more seductive and attractive.

    I’m totally freaked out by women’s hair. In a different way.

    Peter

    Like


  119. I may not have the influence that I want over his life, but at least I know that I tried something, and that some things eventually filter downward.

    it usually works out this way: he might subconsciously emulate you by the example you set, but as far as any advice you give him, he’ll think that much of what you say is idiotic, useless, and irrelevant to his generation. Then, when he’s about 30-35, he will see how right you were.

    And at that point you’ll enjoy having beers with him at a barbecue.

    Like


  120. he’ll think that much of what you say is idiotic, useless, and irrelevant to his generation

    Given that he lives in a questionable area in the ghetto, and the 12 year difference between our ages (similar to the gap between and dad and me), I would suspect that may happen. OTOH, he’s a very optimistic boy in regards to his future, and he’ll always surprise me, and as I’ve said, he’s much smarter than he lets on.

    I think the best conversation that we’ve had was when he noted that I was the only one of his uncles who couldn’t fight, and how that bothered him…

    Like


  121. Polonius’s advice to Laertes was pure gold. But that didn’t stop Hamplet from calling him an “old fool.”

    Like


  122. on November 21, 2008 at 12:45 pm Comment_Blowhard

    Mr. Blowhard said:
    ****
    You were seriously spoiled by starry-eyed, well-meaning parents.
    ****
    I was. Was I? I don’t remember that part.

    Was good old grandma ‘well-meaning’ when she dropped 20,000 dollars on slot-machines in six months? Was good-old grandma well-meaning when we had to pay for her air-conditioner when it broke?

    All old people are Strong. And Tough. And Good. And Smart.
    It’s a wonder where all the Weak, Foolish, Bad, Dumb children come from isn’t it?

    Like


  123. Mr Blowhard – You have brought up an interesting point about immaturity being the main culprit causing difficulty between the sexes. Though I can’t completely give up the idea that contraception and monetary freedom have contributed much to the problem, there is abundant evidence to support your assertion as well. One of the major social trends of the past 40 years has been society’s increasing tolerance of adults who act like self-centered, impetuous teenagers. Narcissistic people tend to have trouble getting along with everyone, not just the opposite sex, and there is plenty of evidence for that as well (high litigiousness, road rage, petty crime etc). I’ve often thought about this social trend, but I never made the connection to male-female relations. I’ll have to add a chapter to the book I’m working on, “Nation of Children”.

    Like


  124. “The polar opposite seems to be NBC, which has to be the most betaized channel there is.”

    Dwight Schrute: beta or alpha, or unclassifiable freak?

    Like


  125. Comment_Blowhard – You misunderstand what is meant by “spoiled”. It only partially has to do with money and material possessions. Many kids today are spoiled in the sense that they are brought up by permissive parents and permissive schools who lead them to believe that their opinions are more accurate/intelligent/deserving of consideration than they really are. In other words, they get a chip on their shoulder and adults don’t bother to knock it off. Your average 16 year old is higher on swagger and attitude than they are on worldly wisdom. In fact, the swagger is usually there precisely BECAUSE kids know they don’t know dick and they’re trying to compensate. If adults don’t set them straight, kids can turn into adults who think every opinion that leaves their mouth is blessed truth. Why listen to anyone else when you think you know everything? Putting a bunch of self-righteous people like that in a room and asking them to solve a complicated problem together can lead to some serious conflict to say the least.

    Like


  126. Mr Blowhard – You have brought up an interesting point about immaturity being the main culprit causing difficulty between the sexes. Though I can’t completely give up the idea that contraception and monetary freedom have contributed much to the problem, there is abundant evidence to support your assertion as well.

    Maybe there is a positive reinforcing loop going on here. Maybe the two concepts are interrelated. As in, perhaps the increased access to contraception and radical feminist ethics has exacerbated the immaturity. One thing that makes our leftist politics in America so different is that it’s always been characterized by an adolescent yet militant, rebel-against-your-parents temper tantrum type of attitude. Urban historian Fred Siegel coined the term “riot ideology” to describe this type of liberalism. There’s a great piece about this temper-tantrum teenage-rebellion aspect of American big city liberalism, it’s a roundtable discussion of liberal historians brutally critiquing Boomer-era big city liberalism and discussing “riot ideology,” and it nails it. Long but enlightening:

    http://www.city-journal.org/article01.php?aid=1574

    Like


  127. Cassandra,

    YES!!! “Suspicion” is fantastic!

    Johnnie: Well, if the worst comes to the worst and there’s no other way out, I’ll have to…
    Lina: What?
    Johnnie: Borrow some more.

    Carey Grant = George W. Bush?

    Like


  128. SD,

    Dwight is a stealth alpha. The first couple seasons he was portrayed as a fantasy/sci-fi nerd who constantly sucked up to his boss, but his inner alpha is starting to be seen.

    He is farmer and extremely self-reliant. That gives him some alpha points but of course, his cuckolding of Angela underneath the nose of idiot preppy Andy Bernard is what most gives him alpha. Angela stays with Andy because she wants a beta provider husband, but she can’t resist the untameable spirit of Dwight.

    Like


  129. Michael Blowhard:

    In my own life: well, in my mom and dad’s Depression generation, they had easy access to condoms and many more women had jobs than today’s educations tell you. (My own mom worked in an office for much of her adult life, for instance. I think I once read that 30% of women were employed in 1960.) Despite that, that generation was was as trad as can be.

    In addition to the other things you mention, one very important factor is that these were times before the extreme social atomization that is characteristic of the modern Anglo-American society. Life was not car-centric, far more people spent their whole lives without moving around the country, and they cared much more about what their extended families and other social networks thought of them. Also, there were far fewer opportunities for socializing anonymously in reputable ways. Thus, a slut/cad reputation was probably far easier to acquire and far more costly, and young folk’s life ideals were primarily shaped by practical examples of reputable and successful local people, not by the messages peddled by the education and popular media nowadays. If you look into communities in North America that still have extensive tightly-knit social bonds, like e.g. various ethnic communities or more serious churches, you’ll discover patterns of behavior far different from the mainstream.

    My own cohort (leaving college in the mid and late ’70s) — post-’60s dynamic women who did well in jobs, verrrrrry easy access to whatever we wanted sexually … Yet, some crazies to one side, loads of up-to-date sexy fun between the sexes.

    I would bet that your experience wasn’t very representative of those times. It seems to me like your social skills and natural game are well above average, so you probably stood out of the crowd in your youth, especially if you were (and perhaps still are) handsome too. Your mistake is that you’ve concluded that the average loser dudes had the same great time as you back in the day.

    I’m sure girls were more promiscuous on average back then (at least outside of backwaters), and it was probably easier to meet them at venues where you didn’t need the elaborate posturing of the sort that’s required to pick up girls in clubs nowadays. But I can’t believe that guys who lacked natural game were getting any more action than today — execept perhaps to the extent that they were willing to go for the really ugly girls. (The latter does seem plausible, because porn wasn’t an easily available alternative.) “Loads of up-to-date sexy fun” for everyone, including dorky guys and ugly girls, sounds to me like a naive Margaret-Mead-esque fantasy.

    I mean, even nowadays, an alien visitor who has seen nothing but modern pop-culture would conclude that just about everyone is hooking up like crazy all the time, except for a small number of ultra-dorks whose social role is akin to the Elephant Man. While in reality, the overwhelming majority of guys are just going through rejections from girls, occasional long relationships, and even longer dry spells. I don’t think the legends of the wild rock’n’roll days are any more accurate when it comes to a typical guy’s experience.

    Like


  130. I would bet that your experience wasn’t very representative of those times.

    From the late 60s through the 70s the sex ratio was skewed more favourably for men. Ordinary guys may have had more opportunities then.

    Like


  131. @Aussiegirl (if she’s really a girl.)

    “And he never apologised. AND I never felt I could manipulate him which is a first for any guy I’ve known.”

    So you’re not wife material. You’re a female douchebag chimp who interprets interaction solely through status hierarchy lens. That means you cannot have honest interactions with anyone. This dooms you to shitty relationships with wimps who apologize for everything or loser male douchebags who can never admit fault in response to evidence.

    In short, you were raised poorly and cannot appreciate real men. You’re doomed.

    Like


  132. Archibald Leach started out poor, insecure, from a tragic family background, undersexed, and sexually ambivalent. He also happened to be the best looking man in the English-speaking world. Over many decades, he slowly turned himself into the character, Cary Grant, he played onscreen. Over the last three decades of his life he enjoyed some of the happiness he had long brought to his millions of fans. Interestingly, he attributes the turning point from unhappiness to happiness in his life to psychoanalysis under the influence of LSD (all perfectly legal in Californian in the 1950s). He attributes his iconic performance in North by Northwest to himself finally feeling like the Cary Grant characters he had always played.

    Like


  133. Most of the Golden Age Hollywood leading men were big men, well above average in height (Gable was close to 6 feet, and he was shorter than John Wayne, Gary Cooper, Cary Grant, Errol Flynn, or Jimmy Stewart) and looks.

    Spencer Tracy and Jimmy Cagney were not, but they had lots of Irish charm. It might be worth analyzing a clip of Humphrey Bogart in action, who was short, funny-looking, and lisped, but had intelligence and attitude.

    Like


  134. In Pupu’s mind, the most memorable, touching, self-destructive bad boys in movies are:

    – Humphrey Bogart in It’s a Lonely Place
    – James Mason in A Star is Born
    – Nicolas Cage in Leaving Las Vegas

    Like


  135. I knew there was another movie I wanted to mention: Shallow Hal. The previews were obnoxious, but the movie turned out to be really fun. The protagonist has been magicked so that he sees people’s inner beauty. We see people from his POV, and it’s striking to see all these really goodlooking people with bashful beta body language. The contrast shows just what a big difference that body language makes.

    Like


  136. Cary Grant making Ingrid Bergman ache all over in “Notorious.”

    Like


  137. Daniel Day-Lewis in The Last of the Mohicans.
    The soundtrack alone is orgasmic.

    Like


  138. “don’t flatter yourself” is a great line, guys. learn it and use it.

    Where have I heard this before?

    Like


  139. One of Pupu’s favorite scenes in Notorious is when Alicia (Bergman) and Devlin (Grant) were out riding to catch the attention of Alicia’s old flame Sabastian who was riding with another grand looking girl. Ingrid Bergman is of the fatalistically romantic sort with whom game is too dangerous to play.

    Anony, Pupu will put The Last of the Mohicans on her holiday video list.

    Sara, you are the feisty type. Boys pick on you 🙂

    Like


  140. Learn from the greats and fall into an abundance of pussy.

    Don’t know if anyone has mentioned this yet, but Rhett got very little pussy Scarlett.

    Like


  141. Pupu

    Sara, you are the feisty type. Boys pick on you

    Put ’em up, Pupu! I’ve been looking for a worthy sparring partner for years. I could’ve handles Rhett Butler, but we are too much alike. Very little else, but sparring would get done. What’s a feisty girl to do?

    Like


  142. I repeat: Rhett got precious little pussy from Scarlett! Precious little! Why use him as an example then?

    Like


  143. sara I,

    Because he got tons of pussy from lots of other women. That is, it’s “offscreen”, but the novel heavily implies that he’s laid women all over the world.

    The novel is a female fantasy. Alpha males are known to have sex with lots of women, so enter Rhett Butler, who, we are given to understand, seduces women all over the place as he travels the world.

    The female fantasy is to have exclusive, or at least primary, claim over an alpha male, so no matter how many other women Rhett lays, he still wants Scarlett, enough that he eventually marries her and apparently gives up most other pussy, except for his steady mistress, Belle Watling.

    Like


  144. Sara: I had a mental orgasm when I read the phrase “precious little pussy”. Thanks! 😉

    Like


  145. Going through this again, Catching on wintertime movies. Great alpha moment from Metropolitan: “Rick Von Slonecker is tall, rich, good looking, stupid, dishonest, conceited, a bully, liar, drunk and thief, an egomaniac, and probably psychotic. In short, highly attractive to women.”

    Any suggestions for omega moments, “You complete me?”

    Like


  146. This is just too hard for the typical Beta to master a seamless passing of shit tests and beta bait.

    It is too much to expect the average student of the Game to master.

    Like