Dominance Plays

I was at a club peering down at the dance floor from a bird’s-eye view on a second story walkway. Laser lights painted the room and I tried to avoid direct retinal shots. Whenever you see balconies and laser lights, and the floor is thumping underneath your feet, you’ll know you have entered a portal to another world — the Douchebag Zone.

A large man bulldozed through the crowd. As he passed me, he put his hand on my lower back, grazing the upper butt cheek, to guide me, roughly, out of his way, as he grunted “coming through” in that tone that suggests he really doesn’t care if you’ll pardon his intrusion. Instinctively, I jammed his arm away with a quick swipe of my elbow. He turned around mid-stride and our eyes locked in steely gazes, but nothing came of it. Too many people were in the way for confrontation to develop.

I’m certain that had I been most any other man, I would not have thought twice about a d-bag pushing his way through the crowd and physically nudging me aside with contact on a vulnerable part of my body. But game has changed me. Intricate knowledge of human social dynamics has made me acutely aware of other men’s alpha body language. Where most either blissfully ignore or are unaware of dominance plays by competitor males, my burden curses me with heightened perception of the smallest slights (and the tiniest flirtations). A touch here, a shove there, a distracted look when I’m talking… every mannerism and status signal is a cue that an alpha dominance maneuver is in motion, and I need to make moves to avoid being victimized by the subtle pull of rank.

Some of you are confident that awareness is better than ignorance. But are you sure? If happiness is the measure of a life well-lived, who is happier? The mindlessly naive or the savvily vigilant?

Ultimately, we all want (in the loosest definition of the word) to secure the best mate(s) possible in our short time on this earth. Awareness of reality helps us achieve that goal much better than contented ignorance. But it comes at a cost.


  1. Ignorance is bliss, they say, but its not an option for me.

    Seeing and knowing these facets and subtleties and truths can be a burden, but I wouldn’t have it any other way. Bliss ignorance befits the sheep nicely, but not the shepherd.

    I’ll be the Shepherd. I am built for it.

    So are you. It is, therefore, our happiest state.


  2. I like posts like this. Self-awareness and humility are key to avoiding the fall of hubris. Everything has a trade-off – everything. If being a hard-wired to be 100% alpha male all the time was the answer, we (every male, at least) would be hard-wired to be that way. We aren’t. Pick your path wisely; understand that though the costs may be hidden, the are still paid.


  3. “Ultimately, we all want (in the loosest definition of the word) to secure the best mate(s) possible in our short time on this earth.”

    If God is dead….and life is meaningless…why should this matter either?


    • It doesn’t…except to your DNA. Good luck overriding that circuitry.


      • on November 29, 2011 at 4:29 pm The Real Vince

        It’s rather easy to trick our DNA: contraceptives.

        The evolutionary winners in the modern day United States tend to have very few sexual partners, often only 1, and they breed like crazy.

        If God is dead, then you can make your own meaning.


      • That not only flips Nietzsche’s dictum on its head, but it also brings us back to the beginning — that dark time before the internet and evolutionary psychology.

        There is more to the reproductive urge than the gametes. Contraceptives won’t fulfill anyone emotionally (duh). Anti-depressants might blunt the affect, but is that what you’re arguing for? A bunch of dudes medicating themselves into emotional and actual oblivion while the brown races flourish in savvy ignorance.

        Fuckin’ meaningful, man! way to go!!


      • Thank you. I’m so sick of people associating a Godless reality with a meaningless existence. For me, atheism gives our short lives so much MORE significance. Instead of a grand plan, created by sky god for us to blindly follow… instead of religions to excuse our errors and misdeeds, a Godless universe makes us more directly responsible for our actions, how we live and use our intelligence, and the world we leave for future generations. It isn’t that God is dead, and all is meaningless. It’s more like we all play a part in the collective effort of life and existence, i.e. we’re God itself, in the collective sense.

        I like the way Gene Roddenberry put it:
        “It was at Denver that someone wrote a question “What is your religion?” My answer was: “I do not belong to any church but I do consider myself a religious man. I believe that I am a part of you and you are a part of me and we are a part of all life . . . also a part of the creative force and intelligence behind life. Therefore, if we are a part of God then our lives are not brief meaningless things, but rather have a great importance and significance. All of us and each of us.”


      • Quoting Gene Roddenberry to justify atheism. You are utterly satire proof.

        Here’s a thought experiment: Who had more game? Kirk or Cisco? Or that dude from Quantum Leap?

        No no no, wait, even better, shhh, I got one, I got one. Shut up! Listen! No, listen! Who was hotter? The female borg or the female vulcan? Mrowww. And NO, a 3sum is not an option! hehehehe.

        Which way to the Will Wheton autograph signing?



      • Kirk obvs, he had a different woman every week. Kirk was grade A Alpha


      • I would rather be baptised by hellfire for eternity than face the disquieting truth of objective reality: the obliteration of one’s consciousness upon death.

        What fool would willingly choose to believe in eternal death? How could this be conducive to a healthy state of mind? Nay my friend, to stare soberly at objective reality is akin to opening one’s eyes in darkness. Nothingness awaits…no reason, no fate, no consequence. An empty void, stripping away all our grandiose claims of significance in this massive universe.

        Religion offers an effective placebo to this grave truth, but its effects evaporate rapidly once exposed to the facts of objective reality.

        Make no mistake, the intellectual burden of the atheist is far heavier, and his outlook far more grim, than any person of faith. Do not begrudge atheists for their choices, for the mental anguish they experience every day is far greater than that of many believers throughout their entire lives.

        [Heartiste: This is why I understand the religious impulse and don’t begrudge the faithful their choice to believe.]


      • Dark Triad wrote: “I would rather be baptized by hellfire for eternity than face the disquieting truth of objective reality.”

        We have a choice in the matter? Eternal torment or oblivion? Who confirmed this “disquieting truth of objective reality” for you beyond all possibility of doubt?

        There is no choice in what the mysteries are. What is is (or is not, not) independent of our knowledge or ignorance of it. The only choice is to act “as if.”

        If you think about that for a moment, you realize there is no comfort at all in that calculation. You begin with the premise that these things are simply unknowable in our present condition (“Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding.”). You end by positing, independent of all overwhelming evidence, that there is yet good in all this, somehow. Or you posit meaningless and oblivion and horror and evil.

        But then what to make of the fact of the good in our lives? And the beautiful? This is why good (“fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil”) and beauty are the first two concepts deconstructed by postmodern ennui. They must be, because the beautiful and the good must be redefined masks for ugliness and evil in order for a tragedy theory of all existence to remain consistent. And yet, and yet. I know some beauty simply defies quantification, and so do you. I know that being good is nonsensical, naive, and quite possible contributive to evil — but some spark in us urges that we do it anyway.

        Faith is actively deciding from which set of unexplainable phenomenon we will take our cue. Inexplicable good or unfathomable evil? I choose the former because I wake up every day, alive, healthy, and full of amazing capacities. I look upon this “and see that it is good.”


      • Atheism is a faith. It is impossible to live without a metaphysic. Equating the faithless with positive a-theism is simply erroneous. The only things without faith are things without consciousness. (By the way, do you wonder where that consciousness of ours comes from? Or the fact that there is something at all rather than nothing?) Only a rock or a cloud or a frog can properly be said to be “faithless.”

        Atheism is the positive assertion that life is unstructured and purposeless, unguided, unintelligible, and essentially absurd. It is the claim to know beyond any shadow of doubt, despite the impossibility of any relevant proof, of the presence of an absence. The default position cannot be “there is nothing,” when all of our senses scream to the contrary. Nor does faith say the default position should be “there is something.” No, the default position must be the agnostic’s creed: “I don’t know.”

        And not only don’t we know, what we make claims about is permanently and totally unknowable. Our entire frame of reference comprises of things that have beginnings and endings; the contemplation of infinity is impossible to a finite mind. So here we are, understanding only “through a glass darkly,” yet needing to make decisions of life based on ideas which are impossible to know. Faith simply does that with open eyes and a healthy appreciation of our insuperable limitations.

        Your declaration of the truth of “the empty void” and the futility of “grandiose claims” is the precise equivalent of anything said in The Apostle’s Creed, a statement of pure faith, with the only difference being that you are unconscious of the contingent quality of your claims.

        Make no mistake, the intellectual burden of the atheist is far heavier, and his outlook far more grim, than any person of faith. Do not begrudge atheists for their choices, for the mental anguish they experience every day is far greater than that of many believers throughout their entire lives.

        I’ve made “no mistake,” but it appears you have. I’ll grant you that “the intellectual burden of the atheist is … heavier, and his outlook … more grim, than” most theists. But I wouldn’t say “far heavier” and “far more grim,” and this certainly does not apply across the board to “any person of faith.” It doesn’t apply to me. The mistake you make is assuming the only purpose of positing a possible answer to the mysteries of life, and then acting accordingly, is to avoid “the mental anguish” of those who are certain life is absurd at best and a meaningless horror at worst.

        No, faith at the highest level acknowledges the possibility — or even the probability — of life’s meaninglessness and acts in spite of it. If God showed his face, there would be no need for faith. (Likewise, if nihilism were self-evident, there would be no need for atheism.) We begin knowing our choices must be made in the vacuum independent of God and certainty, and that requires acknowledging the possibility (or probability) that there is no God.

        Mine and the atheist’s faith in the nihil is exactly the same, only I have consciously taken arms against it while the atheist is “burden[ed]” under the despair of “What’s the goddamn point!” which exhausts his life in an infinite feedback loop. The opposite of despair is hope, and by hope I mean the theological virtue, not the empty Obamoid platitude. It is the virtue that permits perseverance through the waves of apparent meaninglessness, which are vivid indeed, but just as unconfirmable as any Panglossian declaration of “all things for the best.”

        Faith at other levels can be crude and cartoonish as you say, and truly, to each his own. Not everyone is made to stare into the abyss. But they can have faith in the truth reported by those who have seen “the horror, the horror.”

        It’s time the atheists step up their game. The characterization of all religion as “an effective placebo” is as crude and cartoonish as what you say our faith claims. It is an evasion. It’s not as if you’re the first people in history to discern the problematic nature of faith. In fact, the very problems of faith are internalized into the tradition of theology. Our respect for the opposition’s best arguments over the centuries stands in contrast to your assumption of our worst arguments as indicative of all we have to say. Aquinas’s Summa incorporates the highest quality criticism into its very structure. Keyboard atheists mock spaghetti monsters (or “placebos” or “opium of the people”) and call it a day. By the simplest rhetorical standards alone, you can see which tradition has the better probability of arriving at the truth.

        At very least, you should be aware that your declarations of “objective reality” don’t pass the smell test. The atheist response is typically an exercise in question begging. Yes, we men of faith do arrive at various claims about the nature of objective reality, but that is at the end of a dialectic process crucial to the integrity of our method. In refusing the rigor of our process, in equating faith with stubborn thoughtlessness, atheists must regard our assertions to be the equivalent of their own, i.e., naked positing against the abyss, “opening one’s eyes in darkness” and claiming to see something that isn’t there, with the only possible motive for our fabrications being abject, existential fear.

        Atheists begin with assertion — and proceed to tease out the consequences of a few core assumptions. We end with assertion –, after exhausting every other possibility. It’s high time you nihilist pontificators come down off the porch and start running with the big dogs. You think you’ve got something we haven’t considered? I am eager to hear it. And “objective reality,” “soberly,” “empty void,” “placebo,” “burden,” and “anguish” ain’t it.

        I don’t, in fact, respect atheists for what voluntary burdens they bear. Their “burdens” are the consequence of intellectual bravado, a way of claiming that everyone but them cowers in existential fear, and they alone have the cojones to face the possibility of meaninglessness. Horseshit. Atheists are so proud of their courage that they fail to understand a greater courage still: to bet one’s life on exceedingly small probability that a loving God exists, despite the relentless, persuasive, comprehensive, ubiquitous, and visceral indications to the contrary.


      • “If I were to wish for anything, I should not wish for wealth and power, but for the passionate sense of the potential, for the eye which, ever young and ardent, sees the possible. Pleasure disappoints, possibility never. And what wine is so sparkling, what so fragrant, what so intoxicating, as possibility!”
        ― Søren Kierkegaard, Either/Or: A Fragment of Life


      • Kirk had more game, clearly. He was banging all sorts of chicks- even green ones, even in the reboot.

        No threesomes with the two hotties? Damn…that just hurts.


      • on December 5, 2011 at 11:09 am skadhi_the_raverner

        Which convinced Susan Blackmore that religion isn’t just costly. if religion is on the way out in the West, then secularists will need to compensate in some way. The best men should have more children in stable relationships, without trapping the women of course lol.


    • It’s ESPECIALLY true if there’s no supernatural afterlife. That means the only immortality you’ve got is the memories and bloodline of your descendants.


      • Mortality is mortality. Not even the universe lasts forever.

        Nothing you do can possibly last forever. You and everything about you will eventually die.

        It’s not about living forever. Its only about living a while longer.


    • The fuck you’re talking about?
      God is not dead, he’s never existed.


      • The point of Nietzsche’s claim about god being dead was that no one lives their lives as though a god existed. This goes for even most religious folk. God is dead, and we killed him.


  4. on November 29, 2011 at 11:39 am Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

    lzozozlolzzllzlz heartistse i love you!! lzozlzlzlz

    it’s the simple things in life that ddta make it full!!!!


    liek i remember one time on the dance floor this douchebag elbowed his way in on my chicck lzozlzlz like he didn’t just take the free side her front, but he tried to push da gbfm off her back lzzzozo totally touching me in the prcoess. zlozzl well as i don’t butthex like tucke rmax rhymes iwth goldman sax i don’t want no dudes touchcing me on da dance flororo rlzozllzolzoz the song was eminemss “this looks like a job for me so we need a little conrtotorversey caus e its just so empy without me lzozlzlzoozozlzo”

    so i’m beee bopping and dancing 2 da beat and i let my elbow fly into da douchetards face “you only get one shot do not miss your chance to blow yo” and boom lzozozlzozo right in his face and down he goes lzozozlzo

    he was twice as tall as me so it was easy to get the uppercut in on him zllzozozozolzooz

    and the thing was? i totally ignored him just turned my back on him as i knew da pussy douche wouldn’t be coming back 4 more zlozlzlz

    anywayz i rememebr grindidng on dat girl oall the way into the back roome zllzozz heshshe was hototieie hott lzlzzz splooooogegegeeieieiei

    but now sadly when i go to clubs
    like you hertsistes i t=stand high above
    and look down on the dance floor
    and i see
    a bunch of bernakiifed asscoked pre-spinster gold diggers
    legions of metorooseuclaiized ocuhetarederd, feminissized men
    and i realize
    dey deserve each other
    and i
    go home
    and read
    like homer’s iliad or odysysys
    or mossoses’s exodus
    or hamlet
    or one of the other books
    the bernakifiers deocnstructed in the deosuling and debtifying of the WEST lzozozlzllzlzlzozo

    but anywayzz heartsiste
    i got you back
    da GBFM does got everyoenes’s back
    and next time a bernakified douchebag tries to elbow tehir way aorund you
    to secrtely assockong tape a sceteirve taping of butthexi with a girlt without da gdietehrls ocnctehenstsh lzozzl

    da gbfm will drop themz lzozozozozo

    for i will be with you



    • on November 29, 2011 at 12:52 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)


      Bring Back Prima Noctes! Braveheart: “Grant them prima noctes. First night, when any common girl inhabiting their lands is married, our nobles shall have sexual rights to her on the night of her wedding.” lolzlz!

      “Longshanks: Nobles. Nobles are the key to the door of Scotland. Grant our nobles lands in the north. Give their nobles estates here in England, and make them too greedy to oppose us.
      Advisor: But sire, our nobles will be reluctant to uproot. New lands mean new taxes, and they are already taxed for the war in France.
      Longshanks: Are they? Are they? The trouble with Scotland is that it’s full of Scots. Perhaps the time has come to reinstitute an old custom. Grant them prima noctes. First night, when any common girl inhabiting their lands is married, our nobles shall have sexual rights to her on the night of her wedding. If we can’t get them out, we breed them out. That should fetch just the kind of lords we want to Scotland, taxes or no taxes.
      Advisor: A most excellent idea, sire.
      Longshanks: Is it? “

      –From Braveheart

      I wish they would bring Prima Noctes back!!

      Imagine just one other man having rights to your wife, for one night, before you got her.

      That would rock!!

      Today the master fiat class gives the first rights of your wife to an endless array of douchetards, starting in elementary school, commanding her to see lying, peacocking, manipulative, girly beta males as alphas, while seeing manly alphas as betas; as her mother exiled her true father long ago, under command of the fiat masters.

      From an early age they teach her that her ginatingles rule the world, not Jesus, nor Thor, nor Zeus, nor Moses. When she gets knocked up, they reward her with fiat dollars which Ben Benanke hand delivers in his helicopter.

      Today, when she kisses those kids and sends them off to school, she leaves traces of dozens of other men on their cheeks.

      Make no mistake–she is working for the Fed, and if you question any of this she will take your children away and the feminist police will search your home to determine how many assets of yours she will get. For again, all the Fed can do is create debt, and to convert this debt into physical wealth, they need men, like you, to work and labor for it. lozlzlzl!

      You know you tasted it when you kissed her a couple times on those early dates–that salty prima nocta form those who violated her orfices a few minutes before. And now she pwns u, the kids, and the home! And you have to pay 4 ur own cuckolding!!



    • on November 29, 2011 at 3:07 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

      hey heartiststtetsts!!!!

      i have notcied a couple speleleing errororos errors in your ways words and i have fixed them vbecasuee you beemever know when neoocn womenz like chalrortte allen will be dropping by here to check your rgramamamrz grammarz lzozlzllzozozlzozozozo

      I was at a club peeing down on the dance floor from a bird’s-eye view on a second story walkway. Laser lights painted the room and I tried to avoid direct cum shots. Whenever you see boobies and laser lights, and the floor is thumping underneath your wonker, you’ll know you have entered a portal to another world — the Douchebag Zone.

      A large man buthhexed through the crowd. As he butthexed me, he put his hand on my lower ballsack, grazing the upper buttseuxal cheek, to guide me, roughly, out of his way and into position for a good neocon cnoeocncosevtaiev butthexing, as he grunted “coming through” in that tone that suggests he really doesn’t care if you’ll pardon his intrusion because he was once on a panel with jonah goldberg and tucker max rhymes with golamdna sax at the same time lzozozolzolzll. Instinctively, I jammed his arm away with a quick swipe of my elbow. He turned around mid-stride and our cocks locked in steely tangles, but nothing cummed of it. Too many people were in the way for a butthexual confrontation to develop.

      I’m certain that had I been most any other man, I would not have thought twice about a d-bag buttheixnt pushing his way through the crowd and physically butthehxixng me like tucker max hryemes iwth godlmana sax nudging me aside with contact on a vulnerable part of my body. But game has changed me. Intricate knowledge of human social dynamics has made me acutely aware of other men’s alpha butryehexual language. Where most either blissfully ignore or are unaware of dominance plays by competitor males, my buttehexual burden curses me with heightened perception of the smallest slights (and the tiniest flirtations). A touch here, a shove there, a distracted look when I’m talking… every mannerism and status signal is a cue that an alpha dominance maneuver is in motion, and I need to make moves to avoid being victimized by the subtle pull of wank.

      Some of you are confident that butthexual awareness is better than ignorance. But are you sure? If happiness is the measure of a life well-lived, who is happier? The mindlessly naive butthexed or the savvily vigilant who keep da lotsa cokas outta der anushole?

      Ultimately, we all want (in the loosest definition of the word) to secure the best mate(s) possible in our short time on this earth. Awareness of reality helps us achieve that goal much better than contented ignorance. But it comes at a cost.



      • He turned around mid-stride and our cocks locked in steely tangles, but nothing cummed of it.


        I think that was the header of some SPAM I got once!


    • Men are bernakified too?


  5. My favorite confront situation is when people on street bump on me and ask “don’t you look where you are going?”, then I ask back “do you?”; and if they’re bold enough to say yes I finish with “then why did you bump on me?”. The last statement usually makes them ragequit or stop to storm on me; either one I usually ignore and go away.


    • You’re not handling this the wrong way. Putting yourself in a position where people are willing to “storm on me” is foolish. A better way to react would be to say “you walked into me” calmly, confidently and walking away.

      In addition, you should work on your body-language. Outside of drunken enviroments where people are riding on Dutch courage, I have never experienced someone being so brazen to ask a question like that in the street. Being on the good side of six-feet helps, but walking strongly and powerfully with purpose, and keeping your head and eyes up will work wonders. Few will stand up to a strong-man, everyone and their daughter will stand up to a weak man.

      Here’s a great primer: and I’d recommend David D’s Body language videos. You can get them from


  6. All knowledge comes at a cost. The happiest person in my life is a mentally retarded guy who used to come once a week to help mop up at a shop I had. That store is long gone but the guy still stays in touch. His IQ is relatively low, but his lack of knowledge provides him more happiness than I’ve felt on average. He’s got a great girlfriend (also with a lower IQ and physical abilities) and I can’t imagine a better couple.

    Still, the knowledge that I have and share is one that, had I been aware of it at 18, would have saved me literally 6 figures in divorce costs, bad first dates, and the emotional pain of being given the short end of the nice guy stick. I’d rather bail quickly on a gal who gives a micro-expression of low attraction than stick with one that gives macro-expressions of interest (but is really just using me until a higher status guy she wants comes around).

    Knowledge is power, and power is like fire: you can only control it for so long until you singe your eyebrows. Better to get burned than to die in the freezing cold, though.


    • “Of knowledge, planted by the tree of life;
      So near grows death to life, whate’er death is,
      Some dreadful thing no doubt; for well thou knowest
      God hath pronounced it death to taste that tree…”

      — Adam

      “One fatal tree there stands, of knowledge called,
      Forbidden them to taste: Knowledge forbidden
      Suspicious, reasonless. Why should their Lord
      Envy them that? Can it be sin to know?
      Can it be death? And do they only stand
      By ignorance? Is that their happy state,
      The proof of their obedience and their faith?

      O fair foundation laid whereon to build
      Their ruin! hence I will excite their minds
      With more desire to know, and to reject
      Envious commands, invented with design
      To keep them low, whom knowledge might exalt
      Equal with Gods: aspiring to be such,
      They taste and die…
      Live while ye may,
      Yet happy pair; enjoy, till I return,
      Short pleasures, for long woes are to succeed….”

      — Satan

      He ended; and his words, replete with guile,
      Into her heart too easy entrance won:
      Fixed on the fruit she gazed, which to behold
      Might tempt alone; and in her ears the sound
      Yet rung of his persuasive words, impregned
      With reason, to her seeming, and with truth.

      “What fear I then? rather, what know to fear
      Under this ignorance of good and evil,
      Of God or death, of law or penalty?
      Here grows the cure of all
      , this fruit divine,
      Fair to the eye, inviting to the taste,
      Of virtue to make wise: What hinders then
      To reach, and feed at once both body and mind?”

      — Eve

      So saying, her rash hand in evil hour
      Forth reaching to the fruit, she plucked, she eat!

      [Milton, Paradise Lost]


      • on November 29, 2011 at 3:28 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)



        [1] Now the serpent (da lotsa cockas) was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
        [2] And the woman said unto the serpent (da large coakckkas), We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
        [3] But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
        [4] And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
        [5] For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
        [6] And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
        [7] And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
        [8] And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.
        [9] And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?
        [10] And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.
        [11] And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?
        [12] And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.
        [13] And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.
        [14] And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
        [15] And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
        [16] Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.


        [17] And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
        [18] Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
        [19] In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
        [20] And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.
        [21] Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.
        [22] And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
        [23] Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
        [24] So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.


      • “This tree [of knowledge] is not, as we are told, a tree
        Of danger tasted, nor to evil unknown
        Opening the way, but of divine effect
        To open eyes, and make them Gods who taste…
        Not dead, as we are threatened, but thenceforth
        Endued with human voice and human sense,
        Reasoning to admiration….
        For bliss, as thou hast part, to me is bliss;
        Tedious, unshared with thee, and odious soon.
        Thou therefore also taste, that equal lot
        May join us, equal joy, as equal love….”

        — Eve (the first feminist) to Adam (the first beta)


      • Yup. This is why most feminists hate, hate the garden story. For it is a giant fucking warning of the conditions under which paradise is lost.


      • Food for thought.

        If Adam was the first Beta, and he was still in a state of perfection after the woman ate but before he ate, doesn’t that mean that in a perfect world, men are betas? A perfect world would be filled with Beta men? This is all theoretical and I know it does not apply today because the circumstances are different. A perfect world, perfect men are Betas. In a world of sin, the closest men can get to perfection is to be alpha but they will never be complete for beta is his natural state (strive for perfection including/GIVEN a perfect world, of course, man can never make the world perfect again, only God can when he remakes everything and in a perfect world, alpha men would FSU but again, that shouldn’t happen because a perfect state of man in a perfect world is beta)


      • The theologically systematic answer would lie in the character of Jesus. Was He alpha, or omega; lion, or lamb?


      • WTF are you talking about? You’ve taken these bedtime stories a bit too literally, bub… unless you’re high right now. That would explain it.


      • The lesson “in a perfect world all men are betas” exposes the SLAVE MENTALITY christian ethics are built upon. Yes, that is what the bible would like you to believe. The truth is that there will always be the strong and the weak, and that if you believe yourself to be weak with no chance of becoming strong (this is a hallmark of the beta mindset – see David Alexander), your next best strategy is to try to pull everyone down to your level by convincing others that to be alpha is sinful. The bible does this in an indirect way, and congratulations for beginning to see it.

        Pride is considered the worst of the seven deadly sins… from Wikipedia: “From In almost every list pride (Latin, superbia), or hubris, is considered the original and most serious of the seven deadly sins, and the source of the others. It is identified as a desire to be more important or attractive than others, failing to acknowledge the good work of others, and excessive love of self (especially holding self out of proper position toward God)”

        What does this tell you?


      • If Adam was the first beta, then in a perfect world, the beta always fucks it up.


      • Food for thought = fruit for betas.

        tony wrote: “If Adam was the first Beta, and he was still in a state of perfection after the woman ate but before he ate, doesn’t that mean that in a perfect world, men are betas?”

        Adam is not “in a state of perfection.” If you want to see the Alpha answer to Eve’s offer, read Paradise Regained. Or find it in the later verses of The Battle Hymn of the Republic: “Let the Hero, born of woman, crush the serpent with his heel.”

        The moment Adam saw Eve returning from her original skankification, she didn’t have to say a word; Adam knew she just fucked up the universe:

        Yet oft his heart, divine of something ill,
        Misgave him; he the faltering measure felt;
        And forth to meet her went….
        To him she hasted; in her face excuse
        Came prologue, and apology too prompt.

        She gave Adam her pathetic little female sales-pitch, furnished to her direct from the serpent. Or, “So glistered the dire Snake, and into fraud / Led Eve, our credulous mother, to the tree / Of prohibition, root of all our woe.”

        Sinless Adam Alpha didn’t buy it for a second. Or, You stupid bitch, what have you done…

        On the other side Adam, soon as he heard
        The fatal trespass done by Eve, amazed,
        Astonied stood and blank, while horrour chill
        Ran through his veins, and all his joints relaxed;
        From his slack hand the garland wreathed for Eve
        Down dropt, and all the faded roses shed:
        Speechless he stood and pale, till thus at length
        First to himself he inward silence broke.

        And Adam’s judgment stark judgment of her world-beating, hypergamous stupidity:

        How art thou lost! how on a sudden lost,
        Defaced, deflowered, and now to death devote!
        Rather, how hast thou yielded to transgress
        The strict forbiddance, how to violate
        The sacred fruit forbidden! Some cursed fraud
        Of enemy hath beguiled thee, yet unknown…

        Or: “You arrogant ass. You’ve killed us.”

        Now, tragedy of tragedies, this manly judgment of Adam’s is immediately followed by his uxorious betatude, his White-Knight partaking of the fruit!:

        And me with thee hath ruined; for with thee
        Certain my resolution is to die:
        How can I live without thee! how forego
        Thy sweet converse, and love so dearly joined,
        To live again in these wild woods forlorn!
        Should God create another Eve, and I
        Another rib afford, yet loss of thee
        Would never from my heart: no, no!

        Adam casts himself on the funeral pyre of his wife, a perverse inversion of bride burning that provided the Ur Beta model and set in motion every generation of supplicant husbanding. The world falls off its axis and time slips out of joint because of the first case of oneitis. Adam’s “resolution… to die” — for how could he “live without” her? — is the original sin. When Eve ate is irrelevant: what else do you expect of a woman in thrall to the very inventor of The Dark Triad? But when Adam joined in, his insipid romantic weakness confirmed the destiny of the human race as the unholy product of a woman giving in to temptation. What is the opposite of a pedestal? That is Eve’s place in the Eden/Milton mythos.

        So, The Book (and its blind 17th century poet) had “hypergamy” sniffed out a couple ages before The Method and The Game thought to fabricate their gratuitous and infinitely less poetic mythologies.

        I feel
        The link of Nature draw me: flesh of flesh,
        Bone of my bone thou art, and from thy state
        Mine never shall be parted, bliss or woe.

        Thanks for all the “woe,” ye chump of chumps.


      • maybe lucifer was the first alpha. ‘non serviam’- i will not serve. of course in ‘paradise lost’ he had the best lines.


      • King A and GBFM finding common ground. I sense one of literature’s rare and great collaborations in the making.


      • carolyn wrote: “maybe lucifer was the first alpha. ‘non serviam’- i will not serve.”

        There was One who preceded Lucifer and his petulance:

        In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men.

        This idea that the alpha does not serve anyone or anything but himself is omega dreaming. When you are on the outside of power looking in, all you see is the strong man’s willfulness and imagine it comprises the indispensable part of manly independence and leadership. If you are the downtrodden chump, you imagine the absence of restraint to be the whole of liberty, since restraint defines your lowly existence. You can’t tell a slave that there is a such thing as too much liberty (libertinism); the very notion is nonsensical to him, like telling a man dying of thirst that water intoxication is an equally mortal danger.

        You are not alpha if your notions of power are contingent on fantasy. Yes, your delusions may allow you to exude the behavior that is indistinguishable from alpha. Fooling yourself helps you fool others. If you are in the presence of a superior, you are essentially a pitiable fool for not acknowledging what the world can see. Superiority is more than posing and assertion. It must correspond to real qualities.

        What anti-Christian dolts fail to understand is what Christ’s final act of alpha dominance did for the rest of us, which is, unifying command absolutely and personally in a single man, thereby leveling the playing field for the rest of his confessors, and leaving the pagans and neo-pagans to squabble and tear at each other in their quixotic encroachments on each others’ sovereignty.

        Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord….

        In other words, no more bowing to hierarchies of men with their claims to divinity, no more tribal pissing contests requiring us to sniff out the alpha from the pheromones wafting out the glands and pores of the asses of dogs. You have one master, and good news, the only one you are required to serve also happens to have brought the universe into being and holds your existence at his whim:

        He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities — all things were created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. He is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning, the first-born from the dead, that in everything he might be pre-eminent. For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things….

        Submitting to the power of all things is the only possibility to have power over anything. The idea that man can live free of any master is preposterous on its face, but that has not stopped men in every age from imagining themselves the authors of their own creation and the free-floating announcers of their own authority, owing nothing to anyone, a sui-generis entity. These are the hallucinations of the soulsick spiritual beta, enthralled by forces he has chosen to ignore so that he might play pretend at being master. Like the guy who puts up with his female boss by day and lets out his frustrations at night, the a.m.-cubicle-warrior-cum-p.m.-PUA imagines his kept existence is liberty because he acquired some effective street magic that works on drunk sluts in the age of the whore.

        But I know, I know, I’m going too fast. How can anyone conceive of the utility of game theology with a stunted understanding of game and a complete ignorance of theology? So let me put it in simpler terms.

        “Gotta serve somebody.” If you think this doesn’t apply to you, it is proof of your sci-fi escapist, comic book fantasy conception of your place in the order of reality. The Christian revolution allowed that servility to be attached to the greatest possible master. You don’t have to be a believer to understand how this fiat leveled the playing field in a State of Nature where life was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”

        When Christ said, “My kingship is not of this world; if my kingship were of this world, my servants would fight….” he established an alternative to the rule of fellow men. By having a direct line to the name “which is above all names,” you are liberated from the claims of every power on the planet who claims sovereignty over your life, from publican to emperor, from postmaster to Führer. “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

        The fools who deny this true liberation have choked off the source of what little power they might have had. It is an attempt at alpha to strut around and make claims on your surroundings with, “Because I say so!” but the fact that you are Ned Ryerson from Punxatawney, Pennsylvania does not exactly imbue your “say so” with much force. It is a rather stronger claim on your surroundings to indemnify your command not “In the name of Ned Ryerson,” nor even “In the name of my lord,” but “In the Name of The Lord, God of creation, Sovereign of all on earth and under the earth.”

        There is no such thing as non serviam. The question isn’t whether to serve, it is what to serve. You must serve. Any other conception of power is operating only a few doors down from the psych ward, where the congenitally deluded claim to be The Deposed King of Canada in Exile because they forgot their a.m. meds.


      • I will not serve. I will accept no other place but ruler of all. I will make all others serve ME. Not some fictional character. ME.

        MY kingdom come.

        MY will be done.


      • Let us know how that turns out for ya, coolguy.

        Oh, and interrupt the Megadeth marathon on your iPod every 30th song with some palette cleanser. It might help BREAK THE HUMAN CHAINS WHICH BIND YOU.



        /Dave Mustaine shreds a bitchin solo


        /devil horns
        /tongue flicker
        /mosh pit



    • Hey Pulsotic! Yo, wesco! Sup?

      I’ve got John Milton, Handel, Michelangelo, Bach, and primary texts that have survived three thousand years. What do you got? Besides sniffing each others farts and giggling?

      You characterize the foundational mythos of Western civilization as “bedtime stories” and reply with a fucking Wikipedia reference. That’s not even a knife to a gunfight. That’s rubber band artillery against a carrier group. You omega tools.

      “What does this tell you?”!!!! It tells me you should be silent and thought a fool rather than opening a combox and removing all doubt.

      SLAVE MENTALITY in all caps too. You’re soooo metal, brah!

      Do tell us “what the bible would like [us] to believe.” Do dilate upon what “[t]he truth is,” dear philosopher of the back of the cereal box.

      Get out of my way, you aggressively horny mongoloid children. You smell of Hawaiian Punch and janitor puke-sawdust. Go hump your mother’s leg.

      E wrote: “The theologically systematic answer would lie in the character of Jesus. Was He alpha, or omega; lion, or lamb?”

      Both/And. “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” (Rev 22:13) Christ is the “Lion of Judah” and the “Lamb of God.” King of kings, Lord of lords, more Alpha than alpha. “The New Adam.”


      • Jesus as portrayed in the gospels was omega. He died a 33 year old virgin.

        [Heartiste: By choice, presumably. I have no doubt that Jesus could have cleaned up if he wanted to. Fame gives men those kinds of blessings.]


      • Which gospel was that? The Gospel According to David D’Angelo?

        Here you sit atop the pinnacle of civilization, the product of blood and toil and tears and sweat of generations sacrificed, long dead, the “best that has been thought and said” organized in such a way to give your pathetic anonymous existence a life of ease and free from real pain, and the most curiosity you can summon to inform the judgment of the single most important figure in the history of mankind derives from how you imagine an ancient Jewish carpenter might perform with the ladies down at your local bowling-alley/nightclub.

        Jesus of Nazareth founded a way of life, a mode of thinking, a religion and a church that each exponentially founded institutions that have lasted two thousand years. His followers toppled the greatest civic power known to man and transformed it into a vehicle to transmit his gospel, and two of the six billion inhabitants on the planet are baptized in his name. But you got more digits on your Droid RAZR than he ever did, so he must be “omega.”

        The howling fucking ignorance. They don’t know what they don’t know, or even that they don’t know. And completely shameless to boot. Incontinent toddlers face-deep in their own diapers.


      • King A,

        Jesus of Nazareth was an enlightened being. He was one of many whom has existed on the earth. His teachings are wise. His followers, especially today? Not so much.

        Today the teachings of this man are used to justify the deaths of innocents, as has been the case pretty much since he left the planet. Jesus said and did many wise and great things. Christians? Not so much.

        In America today, his name is invoked to justify the foreign misadventures in nation-building that characterizes the hypocrisy-laden, holier-than-thou, suicidal, homicidal, dying political ideology known as neoconservatism. Is that the political demigod to which you bow, King A? Are you willing to continue bankrupting the nation to continue foreign misadventures? Do you want to bomb those Iranian islamist heathens back to the late bronze age?

        Your bombastic preaching clearly is cut from the cloth of the social conservatives. I’m betting the rest of your political ideation falls directly in line with the neocons. You want to tell other people how to behave, whether it’s in the bedroom or in other nations.

        There are many wise traditions on this planet; Christianity is only one, and it’s a damned limiting one at that. Christianity was meant to clean up the region in which it originated; the middle east at that time, much as now, was given to tribal warfare, excesses of all kinds, and generally ignorant and threadbare intellectual & social culture, bedraggled by conflict. Much as today. Has Christianity succeeded in pacifying the region? In corralling Islam or Judaisim, two other tired, ignorant tribalist religions? It is to laugh.

        Its usefulness has been outlived. Now, in our time of science and greater intellectual freedom, the orthodox churches are dying. More intellectually stimulating, more free, more just, more kind, more loving, more benevolent, more interesting religions, philosophies, and ideologies are coming to prominence. Thank God and about time! We’re all a bit tired of lonesome old priests manhandling the choir boys while simultaneously moralizing against the sexual nature of humans.

        Painting with a broad brush, christianity, as the other two middle-astern tribal religions, tend to attract people who are uncomforable with human-ness, and thus who seek to deny human nature, who want to repress sexuality, who want to judge others (against Christ’s very teachings), who moralize, who forcefully proseletyze, who sin while attacking sinners. The narratives you paint above are perfect examples of this. Would J. of Nazareth deign to denigrate people as you do? Rhetorical. You’re an ass of a Christian. Like most of them.

        Christ was awesome. Christians, and neocon/socons such as yourself, can go fuck themselves, and/or each other, until you learn to truly live as Christ did. I won’t hold my breath.


      • Yeah, you’re arguing with straw men. Sounds like you have some serious beef with “neocons” and a confusion between Christianity and the Republican Party of the United States. There’s really not much legitimate substance to your argument for me to sink my teeth into. Try bulking up some meat on those chicken-bones.

        But I do appreciate the conviction of your reply. The best I can say about your low-grade paranoia is, I kinda sorta see where you’re coming from, but life is too short to spend long correcting the fever-dreams of the semi-educated. Especially when they think telling me to go fuck myself is some decisive conclusion yielded from superior wisdom.

        None of us are capable of “truly liv[ing] as Christ did.” Luckily our “original” dysfunction has already been figured into the model, and our only duty is to aspire to perfection, rather than thinking we can achieve it unaided. The attainment of perfection is possible, but not through our own ordinary graces.

        Let me encourage you to complete your abbreviated education this way. Consider that “Jesus of Nazareth” himself did not regard himself as merely “an enlightened being” as you call him. He claimed himself something much more lunatic: to be the only begotten Son of God. He further held himself out as quite the opposite of “one of many.” No, he defined himself as “The Way, The Truth, and The Life,” and that no one could be redeemed except through him. Yes, “His teachings are wise” indeed, but independent of his claims to divinity, they are worse than useless. As his most successful apostle said, “If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.” He is liar, lunatic, or lord, and nothing in between.

        I know: hard to believe such a fairy tale in this glorious utopia we’ve fashioned for ourselves, this magnificent “time of science and greater intellectual freedom,” but there it is. If only we could écrasez l’infâme once and for good, what greater science! what greater freedom! It’s that simple, why can’t those damn simpletons shake their superstitions already! Don’t they know what earthly pleasures they have forsaken!

        Really, brother? Do you really think something so obvious that it occurred to one Charles P. Revoluzione of Peoria, Illinois hasn’t been considered and absorbed into the counter-criticism of a two-thousand year-old institution long before you or Voltaire or Dan Brown had your eureka moment? Objectively, what are the chances?

        Here you are telling me to live “truly as Christ lived” while rather randomly excising the most important factor of that life — the unmistakable self-declaration of his divinity.

        So in your brief message above, you fail to do what you demand of me: you demand I stop cherry-picking the teachings of Christ that redound to my political position, even as you cherry-pick the claims that redound to your own hatred of conservatives.

        None of your amateur dog-and-pony show is foreign to the Christian. We already understand the take-it-all-or-leave-it-all nature of the choice Christ has posed to mankind. We know it’s a package deal, even as his detractors insist on reassembling an incomplete picture of him and calling it the whole, for the purpose of delegitimating his entire project. So not only are we already aware of what dangers you warn about and what malice you accuse us of, we put wisdom derived from those observations into practice and live it every day. That means we are not deluded into thinking Jesus was some hippie feminist who went around meekly saying, “Hey mannn, if that’s your bag, that’s like cool, mannnn,” which is the erroneous template from which you render your cartoonish condemnation.

        But even that is predictable, and I remain unfazed, if a little weary, of the repetition born from such obvious and uncontested ignorance. “You will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake.” It’s part of the gig. “Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad….”

        At least throw us to the lions or martyr us by the thousands. That kind of hatred might get me to stir. I hope you aren’t dismayed to hear that your impotent little baby-rattle of invective, “Christians … can go fuck themselves,” doesn’t quite rise to the level of impressing me.


      • on December 3, 2011 at 2:24 pm (r)Evoluzione

        King A,

        You are a wordsmith and a gentleman, or so it appears. I admire your writing, and you write intelligently & passionately. You take a punch quite well. So I’m going to shift gears, and look at things a bit differently. Let’s look at the cultural context of christianity, shall we? Context is nothing without backstory, so here goes:

        I grew up catholic, went to bible school starting out early. I studied the liturgy, I exegesized and memorized. I asked for penance and received, and repented and all that happy horse shit. It did nothing for my understanding of the world, nor did it assist me one iota in becoming a better person; it merely pushed an agenda of self-hatred, of shame. The agenda of control was obvious. It’s another form of superstition, like earlier religions that came before it.

        As anything is, church experience (for most) is not unmitigated bollocks, but does have its benefits. Church provides some community interaction and cohesivenes, it provided rites of passage, it provided an avenue of introspection. But it fails as an intellectual experience. It’s a lot of ‘do as I say, not as I do.’ A lot of hypocrisy and superstition.

        The bible makes infinitely more sense when viewed as a cultural document rather than some sort of code of living to adapt to the modern world. It is not some timeless, eternal book of sage wisdom, but human stories of historical events passed on through generations. It’s fallible, and full of human foibles.

        Serious anthropological study of the bible demonstrates that the book is a collection of stories of conquered tribes; it’s intertribal warfare stories, stories of environmental degradation and the suffering that ensues when the land is beyond its carrying capacity. It’s stories of the chaos that emerged when man could no longer survive as hunter-gatherer, and began to try to live as pastoralists & agriculturalists, who were struggling to contextualize and understand their experiences. Yes, it’s clear they experienced spiritually important events. But just as often, they were responding to the conditions of their time as living, breathing mammals just as much or more than as spiritual beings.

        One reading of Deuteronomy is all it takes to understand the backward, punitive nature of their lives, and this document and its utter unsuitability to the modern world. If you want that world, go live in Kabul, where raped women are forced to marry their rapists, where adulterers are stoned to death. These old tribal religions are simply not advanced enough, not nuanced enough, not understanding nor inclusive of human nature, to be useful in today’s world. It’s a backward way of life for a backward people. That it lasted this long is a testament to the resistance of change in humans.

        I’ll agree, as I’ve already written, that Jesus was an admirable and elevated individual. But so was Buddha. So was Lao Zi, so was Morehei Ueshiba, so was Black Elk. Each wise man offered advice germane to the social and geopolitical milieu in which these sages lived. To take any of their works broadly and out of its native sociological context is simpleminded, at best, and a concerted work of cultural hegemony at worst. Which is what you seem to be engaging in. You want your culture to lord out amongst all others (heh). Which is why earlier I connected the dots. Socons are to culture what neocons are to politics. And neither are any better than the Islamists. Both demand that their god be accepted as the one true god, their beliefs be accepted as the one true belief.

        What’s to separate you from Abdullah, Mohammed, and Shah? Again, rhetorical, there is no difference. It’s trading one set of cultural hegemonic beliefs for another, both with their roots in ancient mesopotamia, when humans began to pastoralize.

        I just don’t get why you’re here. What is your aim in this forum? What do you intend to accomplish by jousting amongst us who simply wish to discuss life, women, and the charismatic arts? Do you deny game’s effectiveness, or do you simply deny that it should be practiced?

        Do you really think you’re going to get any of us playa-players to man up, become good socons, go back to church, and wife up some crazy Americain woman? Do you really think your words do anything but galvanize us further towards game?

        Or are you really here to fulfill your need to bash heads with the young bucks, to get your churchy points for proseletizing amongst the heathens and fill up on self-righteous holier-than-thou status jockeying?

        I mean, what the hell do you want from us?


      • (r)Evoluzione wrote:

        I grew up catholic, went to bible school starting out early. I studied the liturgy, I exegesized [sic] and memorized. I asked for penance and received, and repented and all that happy horse shit. It did nothing for my understanding of the world, nor did it assist me one iota in becoming a better person; it merely pushed an agenda of self-hatred, of shame. The agenda of control was obvious. It’s another form of superstition, like earlier religions that came before it.

        Your understanding of real, true, and abiding faith was arrested in your adolescence. Since that time it appears you went seeking for metaphysical replacements (multicultural relativism [Black Elk? wha?], evolutionary psychology, question-begging Epicureanism), which, if you had spent part of your mature mind analyzing, you would have found them just as epistemologically impoverished as I do.

        I just don’t get why you’re here. What is your aim in this forum? What do you intend to accomplish by jousting amongst us who simply wish to discuss life, women, and the charismatic arts?

        There are several reasons why I’m here, none of them a big secret. But the one relevant to your question would be: because that’s what witnessing means. People like you drift through life on unchallenged assumptions. I can challenge those assumptions directly by calling you out, but this method is as effective as disembodied pick-up lines over Facebook are to women separated from a man’s presence.

        Or I can establish my presence, based on behavior, credential, patent virtues, and bona fides (or, put differently, my “wordsmith[ery],” “gentleman[liness], “admir[able] … writing,” “intelligen[ce] & passion”) and then require you to square the circle. Only so many of your stock dismissals of a man like me will suffice to explain away how a person of my character can find your answers to the great questions of life so inadequate. I am the living contradiction to your unexamined immaturities. Who I am, not what I say, is the disturber of your just-so stories. I am the rock in your shoe. You can never again say you know no man of the sturdiest possible faith who isn’t either a dupe or a dullard.

        Read Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Logos works reasonably well as a persuasive advice, but only with the few philosophers in a world of sophistry that lacks the patience for dialectic. Pathos is for women and excitable young men. But ethos is the one that lasts.

        Do you deny game’s effectiveness, or do you simply deny that it should be practiced? [Not at all. Hundred-and-eighty-degrees to the contrary.] Do you really think you’re going to get any of us playa-players to man up, become good socons, go back to church, and wife up some crazy Americain [sic] woman? [None of the above.] Do you really think your words do anything but galvanize us further towards game? [I would hope they do “galvanize” you toward game, and I know they do, and that is crucial to my mission.] Or are you really here to fulfill your need to bash heads with the young bucks [Partially true, I am here to exercise a will to power, the “unexhausted, procreating life-will.“], to get your churchy points for proseletizing [sic] amongst the heathens and fill up on self-righteous holier-than-thou status jockeying? [I have no idea what this means.]

        You misunderstand who I am. “Who do men say that I am? … But who do you say that I am?” It doesn’t matter so much what I claim but rather who I am. Concentrate on that. Infer my character from my words and my deeds (such as they are on an all-word medium).

        I represent the BASF of game. I am not here to spoil the party but to elevate and expand the party. To save the party. I did not come to abolish game but to fulfill it. Your major malfunction is never having encountered how game might work outside of a certain common type of “playa-player” who typically practices it (the urban, atheist, selfish, Epicurean loner) for a single limited purpose (keeping his leaky bucket filled with pussy juice), and so you assume a certain lifestyle is required of it. You don’t see the application of game beyond the small realm of possibility in which you were introduced to it, the most obvious and most immediately gratifying realm. I don’t begrudge your basic training at all. I celebrate and encourage it. Getting a firm grasp of the fundamentals is essential for anyone to get to the next level.

        Game theorists have rediscovered something that is quite ancient but has been dormant for a century, and they think they have stolen fire from the gods. All well and good. Except once you have plundered the Promethean power, to use it exclusviely for low purposes is to squander it. It’s like stumbling upon the Ring of Gyges and using it to rape women (cf. Kevin Bacon and Rhona Mitra in Hollow Man). Understandable. What’s the first thing most men would do if they happened across a unique power? Use it to acquire pussy. That goal forms the universal language of men, and just like new media is driven to early adoption for porn (telephone, VCR, internet), such must be the inaugural focus of game.

        When you’re neck-deep in strange trim, life is good, and the ambition to seek new vistas naturally wanes. Not only does ambition suffer for its easy satisfaction, philosophy suffers for fear of ruining a good thing. What more could anyone want, and why would you go tinkering with my sweet little arrangement? The possibilities beyond getting your nut go from merely uninteresting to non-existent, and then from non-existent to threatening.

        I mean, what the hell do you want from us?

        I am here so that you “may have life, and have it abundantly.” At the same time, I know that, of the one-in-a-hundred who recognize the offer in front of them, not one-in-ten of them will take the deal. That works for me. I prefer my operations lean, elite, and mean.


      • @King A
        I like the cut of your jib. And that’s coming from an atheist, no less.
        I’ve spent enough time in non-Christian cultures to know that they are mostly backwards (Islam, I’m looking at you.)

        I’m no believer, but I’m a Christian. The Bible works. The more we learn about evo psych, the more we learn how right it is.


      • Which is more alpha:

        “Love your enemies. Turn the other cheek”


        “Man’s greatest joy is to slay his enemy, plunder his riches, ride his steeds, see the tears of his loved ones and embrace his women.”

        Genghis Khan >>>>>>>>>>> Jesus

        (also Khan was real and Jesus was a fictional character)


      • GENERAL: This is good, but what is best in life?

        KING A THE PUSSY: The open steppe, fleet horse, falcons at your wrist, and the wind in your hair.

        GENERAL: WRONG! Anonymous! What is best in life?

        ANONYMOUS THE AWESYMOUS: To crush your enemies! see them driven before you! and to hear the lamentation of their women!

        GENERAL: That is good! That is good.

        So fuckin metal, bro. Like you don’t even know how metal.

        Anonymous >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> King A


  7. Displays of alpha dominance can also be very helpful in the situation you described. Sometimes all it takes is a look and a certain cock of the head or move of the shoulders and people will instinctively move out of your way. There is nothing rude or asshole about it. People see this and they simply move.


  8. Uh, yeah, I’m not sure starting a fight in a club over some stupid shit when someone moves past you is really worth it. You get moved past all the time in clubs, especially when you’re clinging against the rail as you have nowhere to sit because you’re by yourself in a club!


  9. No, it’s best to be self-aware. Those who are trained to notice and process what occurs around them are usually the survivors… not necessarily in a violent manner, but in typical social settings as well. It’s analogous to a skilled martial artist who concludes the fight mentally before ever throwing the first blow. Move and countermove are already considered, discarded or prepared. Game and the red pill are part and parcel of this philosophy; knowing what the woman will do in response to your moves. It works against other men, too.

    Hamlet was right: “Let it work;
    For ’tis the sport to have the enginer
    Hoist with his own petar; and ‘ shall go hard
    But I will delve one yard below their mines
    And blow them at the moon.”


  10. Great post. Practicing game gives you the tools to lead women, assert yourself with women and gives you mastery of your future with women. One of the secondary benefits is that it will grant you the nous to take control of your life and dealings with other men.

    By the way, if anyone feels like reading a book on assertiveness they should check out “When I Say No, I Feel Guilty” by Manuel J. Smith PH.D. Brilliant and practical advice for becoming a better man.


  11. damn, lifting and stopping propecia is a bitch, that testosterone just jumps through the roof. You start fantasizing about jamming someone.


  12. Some of you are confident that awareness is better than ignorance. But are you sure? If happiness is the measure of a life well-lived, who is happier? The mindlessly naive or the savvily vigilant?

    There is another level to this, though. A higher level. One does not have to be ever vigilant as the next level is simply a natural reaction to another’s alpha display. The vigilance comes in the form of not over over escalating. But one does not have to be ever vigilant for this, only in the moment.


    • I find that I tend to be socially submissive for this reason, I’m afraid that if I get into a dominance war with someone I will lose control and end up killing them and going to jail and getting ass raped by bubba, so I avoid getting into those situations as much as possible.


  13. Harland
    Uh, yeah, I’m not sure starting a fight in a club over some stupid shit when someone moves past you is really worth it.

    Thank you Harland; Jeez… sometimes this game code seems like nigger training.

    (((shakin my head)))


    • that was my thought on this post-sounds like the way black men without a pot to piss in are always on the lookout for any ‘diss’. confrontations among them often end with someone getting hurt. all for ‘honor’.

      my suggestion to our host is let it go and try to forget he exists. the source is after all, a perfect stranger, who he’ll never see again.


  14. Keeping your posture dominant and lifting weights rapidly reduces the pool of people who will start shit with you.

    People can sense when you are willing to scrap


  15. It is part of what I call the Gift of Anger. I tell people that anger is what helps you keep from getting mistreated in life. When you feel it, let it show, but don’t let it control.


  16. I don’t know, in my experience the sort of behaviour you were subject to is typical of insecure men who are above average in strength.

    People are used to think that betas can only be WoW playing nerds, but there are lots of muscular, gymmaniacs betas.

    Whenever you hear about a fight that broke out in a club, you can be sure it was either some muscular beta or a prole or both involved.


    • I find it amusing that posters are so quick to classify people willing to escalate minor social-dominance ploys into outright conflict as “beta”. They couldn’t be futher from the truth. These sort of people are alphas- but they are proles as well; physical dominance/fitness and social dominance is their sole way of displaying their alpha credientals- what else do you expect them to do- talk about their condos in fort greene and ivy league bonifides?

      They are exerting physical dominance, and through it social dominance, and gaining mating opportunities from it- that is text book alpha.

      I suspect that the “beta” comments are largely from intellectuals who would like to think that their smarts and upper class sensabities with tofu/soy latees and overt sensativity should make them more “alpha” (attractive mate material) then some roided meathead that knows how to shove.

      The hatorade comes from them subconsciously knowing that this isn’t the case…


      • Amen to that, nyc. That’s one insight I wish et al would expand upon: the existence of multiple alpha-beta scales. A douchebag with orange skin, moussed hair, gold chains, and ‘roid muscles is stone Beta at a Yale alumni event, but he’s the primo stud Alpha on the Jersey shore.

        (Though it should be noted the multiple scales are not entirely exclusive. A wealthy woman can fall for a muscular pool boy, and all the guidoettes fantasize about some sharp-dressed Wall Street guy picking them up in his Jaguar.)


      • “That’s one insight I wish et al would expand upon: the existence of multiple alpha-beta scales. A douchebag with orange skin, moussed hair, gold chains, and ‘roid muscles is stone Beta at a Yale alumni event, but he’s the primo stud Alpha on the Jersey shore.”

        We call that situational value/confidence and it’s a good point to keep in mind. In one city I lived in, the atmosphere of the bars was very Jersey Shore so I learned to take girls from guys by literally TAKING girls from guys. Walk up, grab the girl, pick her up over your shoulder ass in the air, and literally walk off with her (even out the door of the club sometimes, bouncers hate that one lol). Verbal game didn’t mean much there, and guys who could physically dominate like that were high value in that environment. (oddly, you’d think this would lead to constant fights, but it doesn’t, the other guys were physically dominant too and most of the time would actually have a begrudging respect for you for out-playing them at their own game, like an intellect going “Touche’.” Physicality is their “language”)

        Another city I lived in, the atmosphere was more Yale alumni at the bars and verbals and social proof were king. Physical stuff would put everyone, girls included, on your guard, because they were all worried about maintaining their socialite reputations and that kind of behavior was neanderthal and low value in that environment, so verbal wit and being able to lead social circles and demonstrate social calibration and intelligence was high value.

        An idiot could argue that this is supplicating to women “do what you WANT, don’t try to be what SHE wants you beta white knight lolololz” but it’s just social calibration and choosing to demonstrate the part of your skillset/personality that will be the most efficient in your environment.

        “(Though it should be noted the multiple scales are not entirely exclusive. A wealthy woman can fall for a muscular pool boy, and all the guidoettes fantasize about some sharp-dressed Wall Street guy picking them up in his Jaguar.)”

        Also very true. There’ll always be a few girls who’ll respond to your type even if she “shouldn’t”. It’s just a lot harder if you’re in the opposite environment from your type because she’ll have extra Anti-Slut Defense worrying about what her peers think. It’s totally do-able, but the logistics are usually more fucked. Isolation and under-the-table number exchanges are good for these situations, where you’re removing the social pressure of her peers, and often she’s SO relieved to have found someone of your type and have this secret chance to go for it that she’ll make it extremely easy to fuck her compared to if she were in an environment with dozens of your type.


      • You mean all those married EPL Yale bitches wouldnt consider spreading their wihtered snatches for some Guido dick?


      • It’s text book *lesser* alpha.


  17. heartiste

    Some of you are confident that awareness is better than ignorance. But are you sure? If happiness is the measure of a life well-lived, who is happier? The mindlessly naive or the savvily vigilant?

    Although too deep a philosophical question for most posters to answer before rapidly degenerating into a Yousuck Fingerpointing Fest, it’s always been the ignorant who are blissful.

    Increased knowledge only validates increased awareness of what you
    don’t know.


  18. “There’s no going back now, is there?”

    “No. But, even if you could, would you really WANT to?”


  19. As a Beta, one spends life hoping that luck or “fate” will bring them recognition, sex, love and fulfillment.

    As an Alpha, one spends life learning the shortcuts to get those things and, in doing so, realizes how they are less challenging and more tawdry than anticipated.

    Pick your misery, baby.


    • on November 29, 2011 at 3:02 pm View from inside a hot chick

      I “make my own luck” when it comes to recognition and fulfillment. And with game, now also when it comes to love and sex. I do so by doing excellent things.


      • If you became so good at love and life, through assertiveness and other alpha qualities, that achieving these goals/perks/goods was no longer challenging, would it still be meaningful and satisfying to you?

        Or would uncovering the very simple underpinnings of behavior leave you feeling bored?


    • Agreed. And I have been a beta for too long,mutha fucka!!!


  20. ANY dude that goes to a club and has the “tough-guy-homee” look on his face is a beta who’s more interested in impressing other dudes than seeing and responding to the cues from the ladies. Anyways laughed at that shit, and if they didn’t act like such dicks, I’d feel sorry for them.



  21. Ignorance is bliss just like being a beta who takes your wifes’ last name/ stands by her when she cheats or dates/marries a woman with kids not your own is being a media “real” man.


  22. I think the real take-home message from this experience is how context-dependent Game really is. A big douchebag bumped you in a crowded, frenzied atmosphere that wasn’t conducive to open conflict…so none took place. I imagine the situation would gone entirely differently on a largely empty street corner after last call at the neighborhood pub.

    This goes for my personal experience, as well. I’m kind of a big guy myself and I’ve been the big douchebag in the story as well as the other guy. If a guy is smaller than me–and most guys I run into are–and he attempts to stare me down and hot pussy is around it’s my policy to escalate into physical conflict. However if I run into a guy who is a 6’6, 300 lbs bodybuilder, I tend to find a way not to take it so personally.

    Game–and dominance—is context dependent. The same guy who would stare me down in the club prolly wouldn’t do it on that empty street corner. Smart guys learn to navigate these currents appropriately.


    • “If a guy is smaller than me–and most guys I run into are–and he attempts to stare me down and hot pussy is around it’s my policy to escalate into physical conflict.”

      Beating on smaller guys gets you hot pussy?

      Man, you need to stop beating off your smaller guy.


    • This is pathetic. Game and dominance are not context dependent. Your cowardice, however, is.

      Ok i’ll beat down the little guy, but run from the big guy.

      Also escalating straight to the physical violence? Serious lack of mental/social resources there. Your dominance play failed, now your only option is beat down (small guy) or run. (big guy).

      And what happens when the little guy, with the big ego, slips a knife between your ribs? Or pulls a gun?

      Dominance is not governed only by the size of your body.


      • Im curious to hear how that goes for him. I’ve seen this exchange between big guys and the little guys play out many times. If the little guy actually has the guts to fight the big guy even if the little guy gets the snot beat out of him he gets props for having the balls to fight and his social status goes way up. The big guy status doesnt go down but It didnt look like it went up either.


  23. Here is an anti nigger training suggestion for those of you who may experience such an event; only escalate when a female or your female is shoved out of the way by some punk saying “coming thru…”

    and then only with words, specifically words ASKING if the punk has some type of social or vision defect.

    Raising a question about a person is more effective than making a statement about a person because it causes each person witnessing it (including the female) to join the frame you just created by mulling the question you raised in their own mind.

    Question marks are lethal in game.


  24. Ok, I think the point is that the host maintained frame in a club at the risk of having an idiotic fight with another idiot. There’s always someone bigger, taller, or more used to barging through crowds, so it is tough. Some of us are considerate and let people by, others hold their ground, but in this case, touching the host’s ass was a grope too far.


  25. For some strange reason, this post conjures images of interchangeable yuppies, pretentious business cards, and phony appointments at Dorsia.

    Now, if you excuse me, I have to return some videotapes.


  26. dragnet–



  27. I do not believe the old axiom “ignorance is bliss”.

    We have many, many sad ignorant people in this world.

    Rather, control is bliss, or the perception of control. If you’re informed enough to know you’re not in control, you may feel the effects of it. But if you use your knowledge to gain control, then I doubt you’d feel poorer for it.


  28. Never appear to be a pussy, but pick your battles wisely. Look confident, not belligerent. There are a lot of idiots who met their demise outside of clubs — and some inside.


  29. Nothing that happens in a club or bar is worth fighting over. Especially not being pushed out of the way by a drunk or for god’s sake fighting over a girl lol

    The awareness game teaches you is only half the formula. The other half is the detachment from ego game should teach you. When you have the awareness but still have the ego, you feel “dissed” all the time because you see these little slights and have to save your pride by escalating it so you don’t feel like a bitch. And now you’re risking death, paralysis, or a lawsuit over something that didn’t need to happen.

    A lot of guys who learn PUA game and our AMOG tactics go through this phase and are fucking impossible to hang out with during it. They see every interaction as a battle of alpha dominance and while those dynamics ARE always subtly going on, they’re obsessed with staying at the top of the pack even if it means other people find them obnoxious and rude. Everyone becomes an enemy, especially other guys, even friends. It takes a while before they realize that it’s okay to let most of that stuff go because it doesn’t really matter in the long-run and most people don’t even realize they’re slighting him. The lion learns he can laze in the sun and let the jackals nip at him because he knows when it really counts he can tear the fuck out of everything.

    When you truly don’t care what other people think of you, walking away is easy. There are other bars, other nights out, and tons more women you can get.


    • Nailed it, YaReally.

      Great perspective.


    • Well said I agree 100%


    • “When you truly don’t care what other people think of you, walking away is easy. There are other bars, other nights out, and tons more women you can get.

      Isn’t that like the lion leaving his pride?

      You are spot on about not escalating because of ego (novices don’t realize this), but there are times when you surely need to escalate that have nothing to do with ego (intermediates don’t realize this).


      • Depends on what you’re leaving, obviously. Your lion’s pride isn’t “a drunk chick” or “a bar you like” and jackals aren’t “a guy who nudges you out of the way” or “a guy who calls you a faggot”.

        That’s all walk-away-able. If your pride is “your LTR or children” and the jackal is “a guy trying to physically hurt them” that’s entirely different, out come the claws.

        I think the biggest issue is that most people haven’t been through much in their life so they haven’t learned which is which. I have a hot-headed buddy who hates getting tooled by rich douches and wants to hit them. I had to tell him “dude if you start swinging every time a rich guy at a bar tries to tool you to impress some girls, you will be in multiple fights every night we go out. That shit just isn’t worth getting worked up over.”

        If you go out once every month or so like most normal people (ie – not gamers), the guy bumping into you or spilling a drink on you or trying to tool you is a big deal because an “alpha battle” is such an unusual situation and you’re so unprepared for handling it. When you’re out every week it’s like fuck it, that stuff happens all the time, let it slide. There are girl’s over there, who cares what the guys are doing?


    • “The lion learns he can laze in the sun and let the jackals nip at him because he knows when it really counts he can tear the fuck out of everything.”

      knowing that lions will get at hyenas if they get too close, i was skeptical about this assertion so i did a quick youtube and found proof that what you say is not true, at least on that particular point.

      i agree about avoiding fights in clubs but also think ppl like the antagonist in the OP should be stood up to. if they aren’t, they just go around pushing everyone around and it becomes an acceptable method of behavior rather than one which should be quickly snuffed out in the most socially acceptable way possible. I think the OP handled it well, but if it ever gets physical even basic boxing or MA skills can quickly handle anyone dumb enough to get hostile on a whim.


      • Shit man, I’M not telling Christopher Walken he doesn’t know his wildlife! 😉

        Replace lions and jackals with rhinos and flies if you like. Or Mr Miyagi and the Cobra Kai.

        The only problem with standing up to the guy in the OP is you won’t change anything. At best you’ll knock him out and he’ll wake up hungover and think you suckerpunched him and be even more angry the next time he’s out. At worst you’re going over that balcony you’re leaning on and he does a little jail time while you live in a wheelchair from landing on your neck.

        The bar is such a unique testosterone rage charged atmosphere that it’s not worth getting into it there. That guy probably isn’t pushing little old ladies when he’s sober at the mall but when you feed him alcohol, play MMA fights on the TVs, add some rejection from girls at the bar, his GF making out with a guy downstairs, his boys egging him on, some jerk spilling a drink on him, etc. and you’re dealing with an entirely different person who’s not in a state of mind where he’s open to being taught lessons and changing his behavior.

        …unless, you know, you stab him 50 times in the gut. I’m sure that would be convincing, but is that what you came out to the bar for?


      • even rhinos swat flies w their tails. but yeah, i hear your point. its a tough call and completely situationally dependent. i think there’s a fine line btw standing your ground (even if physical) and escalating.

        i do disagree about lessons not being learned. i once budged my way through ~20 ppl to get into a campus bar, and one dude was mad and bitched me out. i smirked at him at the time, but it did work in that i never did it again and feel bad that i ever did. i don’t think its so much “teaching lessons” as it is not making the gains of bad behavior worth the trouble (social pressure).


      • I disagree as well. In my twenties I picked alot of fights and got my ass kicked and won some. Then I’d be back to my usual bullshit of fighting in a few days. The only thing that would of taught me a lesson is getting stabbed or shot. Either one of those happened and I would have mellowed out very quick.


      • Pretty much my attitude but still have been in a few fights when I felt there was no other choice.


  30. You can’t un-know that the rosebush has thorns… but it doesn’t make the roses any less pretty.


  31. Maybe I’m missing something here… but why do you need knowledge of game to understand what’s going on here? The average person might not use the term ‘alpha body language’, but he will understand that Mr. Coming Through is exerting dominance through his gestures and posture. And that means, either do nothing and look like a tool, or respond in a similar fashion.


  32. “If you’re informed enough to know you’re not in control, you may feel the effects of it. But if you use your knowledge to gain control, then I doubt you’d feel poorer for it.” — W. Durand

    Maybe, but this is utterly dependent on the situation. In a crowded nightclub, you ain’t in control of shit. If you think you are, you’re drunk.


  33. Wilhelm Durand

    I do not believe the old axiom “ignorance is bliss”.

    We have many, many sad ignorant people in this world.

    Yeah, wtf do Shakespeare and all those dumbass philosophers like Socrates and Plato know.

    Rather, control is bliss,

    Heavy is
    the head that
    wears the crown


    • Socrates and Plato thought the opposite. The notion that ignorance is bliss comes from the Judeo-Christian tradition. But this notion is one of the key differences between the Judeo-Christian intellectual tradition and the Greco-Roman intellectual tradition. Understanding that having knowledge requires making a tradeoff is not foreign to Plato–think the allegory of the cave and the disorientation that occurs when one returns to the cave after seeing the light outside. But Plato (and pre-Christian Greek and Roman ancients) would still assert the superiority of knowledge to ignorance. Just as, even as we see the tradeoffs that the knowledge and practice of game brings, we would still choose knowledge over ignorance in a heartbeat. When it comes to game, we reject the notion that ignorance is bliss. And, if Plato could comprehend the evolution of social dynamics and sexuality, so would he.


      • By evolution, I mean historical evolution.


      • Ignorance desires less is more to the point. One doesn’t miss the unwanted. I have sex with hot girls which means I would miss that more than a virgin.


      • Synthesize wrote: “The notion that ignorance is bliss comes from the Judeo-Christian tradition.”

        You mean the tradition that says, “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free”?

        Or the tradition that appended λόγος to Θεóς?

        Do you mean the tradition whose theology provided for the idea of an intelligible universe and a cosmos separate from God, and therefore laid the foundation for experimentation which led directly to the scientific method?

        Or the tradition that undergirded Christendom, which allowed the space for an accumulated storage of profane knowledge in a way the Orient, Africa, India, Mahometan Arabia, the Sioux tribe, and everywhere else on the planet could not match until they adopted modern Western technique and technology?

        Whatever. You got a public school education and you were the One Child Left Behind. Just don’t start wondering aloud, What Would Plato Do?

        Plato would fuck a boy in the ass. He labored in the innocence of philosophy before The Kairos.


      • Demonstrating knowledge of etymologies and facts does nothing to help your argument. Especially when you are wrong even about these.

        Before I correct these minor errors, I will correct your overall conception. For the Judeo-Christian tradition, man’s predicament in the world is caused by knowledge. Recall the story of the fall. The knowledge that caused the fall cannot be rectified by more knowledge. The knowledge that caused the fall is indelible. This knowledge can only be controlled–by obedience to Law, or by Faith, broadly speaking. This is the “truth” of the Judeo-Christian religion (the truth that sets one free): a knowledge of God and His Laws, a knowledge that comes from revelation, not from reason. This is not a knowledge about life. In fact, knowledge of life, according to the Old Testament, is not the province of the blessed; it is often the province of those who work against Yahweh. For Judaism, and later, Christianity, knowledge obtained through reason about life is useless without faith and obedience. It cannot change our sinful nature.

        For the classical tradition, on the other hand, man’s predicament is caused by civilization itself. The purpose of philosophy becomes reconciling nature with custom (civilization)–and providing for a custom that fits nature. Once one has the knowledge of right custom, one resolves the predicament. This is what truth is to philosophy after Socrates: knowledge that comes from reason, not about God or the gods, but about the nature of life itself, and how to live properly according to that nature. Through such knowledge, we can in turn change our own nature: our emotions and our decisions.

        It should become clear, then, the compatibility between the ancient conception of knowledge and the good life and the practice of game. Game has emerged as a result of the socially destructive and life-negating principle of feminism. It has subverted nature. Game, in turn, seeks to restore custom to its natural state. Because feminism itself is so fundamentally opposed to nature, game in turn must become conscious–game is also opposed to nature. But game is opposed to nature in such a way that it neutralizes feminism’s opposition to nature. Game, then, becomes the exercise of reason in such a way that restores custom to nature THROUGH REASON. The exercise of reason that restored nature to custom was the objective, indeed, of classical philosophy. It is not only for this reason that Plato would have supported game. An exegesis and interpretation of the Republic would show Plato’s views not to be inconsistent with game in many other ways–though we would have to reinterpret what Plato means by pleasure.

        Now for your minor error. The term theology does not come from the Judeo-Christian tradition. It comes from Plato and Aristotle. And logos does not even mean knowledge, anyway. As far as the word theology is concerned, it means speech. So, theology, speech or discussion about God. Incidentally, to translate “-logy” as “the study of” or “the knowledge of” is actually tremendously misleading, even for a conception of modern science.

        This is my way of returning your steely gaze. Who the beta really is depends on who does better in the clubs. But let us make it clear who, at least on this small bit of turf, is really the king.


      • sometimes i think its unfair that philosophy majors struggle to find employment, but then i read metaphysical screeds like this and i understand.

        “This is my way of returning your steely gaze. Who the beta really is depends on who does better in the clubs. But let us make it clear who, at least on this small bit of turf, is really the king.”

        ah, internet chest-thumping; particularly amusing when done through the clackety-clack of piano fingers engaging in pompously elegant QWERTY-dances.


      • Ignore this loser, Synthesize, carry on.


      • I wasn’t talking about etymologies, sparky. I was talking about intellectual traditions. No shit it’s a Greek word and a Greek practice. Your claim of the Christian worship of ignorance is annihilated by the very origin of the university in Christendom, constructed to be the academy for theologia, the “queen of the sciences.” If Christianity can be boiled down to some autocratic-Islamic conception of God, to the point of saying mere knowledge itself caused all sin, how in the world did the most robust application of reason to God’s ways develop in Christendom? Who cares who invented the word? Why would knowledge-hating Christians permit the abominable appendage of logos to Theos?

        Forget that. Let’s make it simpler for the sophomore in the really interesting philosophy survey course. Why did Christendom have libraries? Because ancient classical habits of accumulating knowledge die hard? Why did Christian monks bother transcribing and translating the pagan philosophers while Europe was being sacked? How in the world did a dark age Franciscan friar come up with the modern scientific method? How could that have been allowed, much less commissioned by Pope Ignorance Is Bliss IV?

        Your weird digressions about game are better left unremarked upon.

        “Recall the story of the fall.” Let’s, shall we? Your plonking literal translation of mythos and metaphor forms the spine (not literal spine!) of your claim that Christianity is anti-knowledge. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil represents God’s prerogative to define good and evil. It is the symbol of the chaos that ensues when man makes himself the measure of the universe, not the emblem of the first couple’s holy ignorance. Adam and Eve did not know evil so long as their will coincided with their God’s, which allowed for near-comprehensive latitude:

        You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.

        That means they were at liberty to do just about anything except assume God’s prerogatives. The moment they attempt to “be like God” in that regard was the moment they transgressed, the moment all evil was created, and the moment evil diverged and distinguished from the good. Before that action, there could have been no human knowledge of the possibility of evil. That particular prelapsarian knowledge was, is, and must remain God’s alone.

        Christian inquiry is better understood as the fusion of Jerusalem and Athens, rather than your facile Jerusalem v. Athens, faith v. knowledge formulas. I understand why such theories are popular now that the Christian revolution in knowledge so comprehensively transformed science as to become invisible and even inspire “enlightened” individuals, ignorant of historical origins, to rail against the foundations that made the Athenian love of wisdom the universal norm of the planet.

        Did you know the “Tree of Knowledge” is not fully descriptive but rather is short for “The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil”? Please tell me there is more to your wild neopagan Christianity = Worship of Ignorance theories than this rudimentary error. Who is feeding you this garbage? I want to talk to your TA.


      • I am put off by your aggressive tone and your excessive (and wrong) reading between the lines of my statements. For this reason, I do not trust you and therefore will not engage in a comprehensive discussion on these matters. I do believe that you could teach me something, but you are not here primarily to teach, but to preach. And this taints your message for those who are looking for what is actually true.

        I state the facts as I see them. I read scripture, and I worship. But the truth comes first; I am its servant, not the other way around.

        Your invocations of historical facts do not get to the heart of the issue. Nobody said that Christians exhorted ignorance. What was said, in fact, was that certainly the classical philosophers did not. And that the scriptural support for the sorrows and unrighteousness of many kinds of knowledge, especially when divorced from knowledge of God, is ample. And that, moreover, where knowledge is lauded, it is knowledge of God. For a Christian, reflection on good and evil, without the guidance of faith, is wrong. Likewise, reflection on ANYTHING, without taking into account faith, is wrong. Reflection on good and evil, in itself, is not proper for a Christian–and yet, this is at the heart of post-Socratic philosophy. Knowledge of the world and the ways of the world are secondary in importance to the knowledge of God. This means that all your examples of Christian science are superfluous. Christianity was not at the heart of any scientific revolution. Au contraire, the scientific revolution was peripheral, though not excluded in possibility, to the basic tenets of Christianity. Christianity was there at a time when a revolution was called for. You’re right to contrast Islam and Christianity. Islam’s prohibition against reason is much, much stronger than Christianity’s. But the anti-intellectualist attitude is clear in the Old Testament, even if not definitive.

        I will share with you some snippets from Aquinas, a philosopher I have been too long in putting off reading.

        “… the believer and the philosopher consider creatures differently. The philosopher considers what belongs to their proper natures, while the believer considers only what is true of creatures insofar as they are related to God, for example, that they are created by God and are subject to him, and the like.”


        “… it should be noted that different ways of knowing (ratio cognoscibilis) give us different sciences. The astronomer and the natural philosopher both conclude that the earth is round, but the astronomer does this through a mathematical middle that is abstracted from matter, whereas the natural philosopher considers a middle lodged in matter. Thus there is nothing to prevent another science from treating in the light of divine revelation what the philosophical disciplines treat as knowable in the light of human reason.”

        For Aquinas, then, and I believe the same goes for Christian philosophy at large, faith is the starting point. It is from the starting point of faith that reason takes its lead. For classical philosophy, the shared perception of the things of this world was the starting point. I think you’re right to see the Christian tradition as a fusion of Athens and Jerusalem. But it is not an easy fusion. Which is why Christian philosophers have always been attempting to come to terms with it, to the present day. This is because this fusion contains clear tensions. Which I believe I have at least superficially expressed.

        Final remarks. The next time you address me, you will address me respectfully, or you will not get a response longer than a few sentences. I hope you are young. If you are, please put your energy to good use. You seem to have potential. As it is today, you are behaving like a reactive beta, and until that changes, you will be treated like one.


      • Synthesize wrote: “Nobody said that Christians exhorted ignorance. What was said, in fact, was that certainly the classical philosophers did not.”

        Synthesize had written earlier: “The notion that ignorance is bliss comes from the Judeo-Christian tradition.”

        No doubt you intended to convey something more sophisticated and subtle, and misread subtleties account for the appearance of contradiction in your words, which no doubt you will take pains to explain, if it is further deemed that I have addressed my fellow combox groundling with the sufficient “respect” to warrant such gratuitous generosity to issue forth in more “than a few sentences” of your prose. I am guessing we will be treated to a digression about the difference between “exhorting” and “comes from,” or perhaps how “Christians” per se are not “the Judeo-Christian tradition” per se, or maybe how one does not necessarily “exhort” what he believes to be a, if not the, cause of “bliss.”

        Please. Save your typing strength for someone with the patience to parse your animadversions into coherence.

        “I state the facts as I see them. I read scripture, and I worship. But the truth comes first; I am its servant, not the other way around.”

        “In the beginning was the [λόγος], and the [λόγος] was with God, and the [λόγος] was God.”

        Nota bene: the scripture you read, which presumably informs what you worship, proclaims the simple equivalence of God and truth and permits no rivalry between them nor superiority of one over the other. Therefore your religion of “the truth comes first” is an attempt to establish a false choice between Christianity and truth, which is based on your fundamental misunderstanding of a Christian’s relationship to the truth, a relationship which in fact is the precise equivalent of his approach to God:

        “For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Every one who is of the truth hears my voice.”

        Not, “Every one who hears my voice hears the truth,” but “Every one who is of the truth hears my voice.” The truth itself is the Christian λόγος (Word) of God. That means Plato spoke it without naming it, insofar as what he said was true.

        That is Christian theology direct from scripture. Your I Am The Servant of The Truth Before Scripture pose is only possible by misunderstanding the truth of that scripture. You set up a dichotomy between God and truth to claim Christians celebrate the utility of ignorance, but that dichotomy is a figment of your imagination or a fragment from your incomplete education and no part of the Christian tradition.

        I get it. I studied the ancients in college, and I was quite taken by the enduring wisdom of the pagan and modern secular classics. I wanted to “worship” the truth as an act of liberation from the staid and stuffy religious tradition that so infused my childhood and therefore became synonymous with the oppressive ignorance of immaturity.

        What they don’t tell you is that the ancients comprise only half of the story, and not even the good half. It’s like reading the compelling prologue and preamble and exposition of a good novel that ends without a climax. It’s like banging a beautiful girl without getting to nut. Do go read the Angelic Doctor Aquinas — St. Thomas, that is. Get down with another St. Augustine while you’re at it. “Every one who drinks of this water will thirst again, but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst.”


      • Synthesize pouted: “As it is today, you are behaving like a reactive beta, and [wah wah wah]…”

        Mercy, what I would do to exterminate this obnoxious habit of labeling every practice with which one takes issue as “beta.” I’m beta why now? Because I corrected someone’s error? Because some commenter who — as is the insufferable practice around here — takes himself and his predilections as the measure of All Things Alpha, labels every disagreement beta, and thinks that suffices as a devastating retort?

        “The next time you address me, you will address me respectfully, or you will not get a response longer than a few sentences.”

        The bravado is pathetic, especially when you have zero leverage, especially on an internet forum. Next thing you’ll do is threaten to withhold your attentions from me for not having addressed you as Herr Doktor Professor or for having failed to salute your bedsheet colors flying high on the flagpole above your treehouse/sovereign republic. I’ll endeavor to survive the exile from your heart best a pseudonymous sometime-interlocutor can manage.

        You’re “put off” by my “aggressive tone”? Son, you done wandered into the wrong tavern in the wrong part of town. New to this site, are you?


      • Synthesize

        Socrates and Plato thought the opposite. The notion that ignorance is bliss comes from…

        Oh darn it, look what I started. And, you missed my point.

        But, carry on.


  34. Mr. Coming Through is exerting dominance through his gestures and posture. And that means, either do nothing and look like a tool, or respond in a similar fashion

    Nope, he is being an insecure jerk. Guys who walk like that scare women away.


  35. Nice post. I’ve said this before, but I’ll say it again: you are my favorite PUA theorist, as you seem to consider the possibility that the whole game has major downsides – for one’s own mental state as well as for society at large.

    Somewhat relatedly, I find that the players in life are never happy, they are obsessed. I saw it yet again with one of the players I know a few days ago – sitting outside a local bar. He doesn’t drink, but he’s always there – it’s his main hunting ground now, since he got booted a few years ago from a local golf course where he used to volunteer after a few too many women complained to the management.

    So anyway, he’s sitting there, near to two women, one elderly, one youngish and semi-attractive. And he goes into his usual predatory circling — moving around, opening up brief conversations with people around him whom he knows (including me) obviously to make himself an object of attention, and to give him a chance to exchange glances at his new prospect when she notices him. When I left, he was sitting down nearby the ladies, and beginning to croon softly, singing some pleasant oldies love-song. He plays the percentages. He touches a lot. He has a constantly shifting harem (I like to call it his “stables.”) He does quite well. But he’s never happy. You can see the anger in his eyes.


    • People are born with set levels of happiness. We have ups and downs, and life circumstances make a difference, but studies have shown that we have a happiness set point.

      It can be altered, through mindfulness and compassion excersises, and sometimes through peak experiences or near death experiences, but generally you can’t assume that a persons lifestyle is a cause of or much affects his happiness set point.

      On the other hand, some of us men can not be happy unless we are getting laid regularly.

      And on the other other hand, hedonism is an art form. Your friend might be doing it wrong. Personally I can’t imagine that hedonism is being practiced to the greatest potential if one does not have sexual love and bonding in his life.

      A life without a girl who is in love with you is an inferior life.


      • Hi —

        You’re right about the set levels of happiness thing. They’ve done studies.

        You say my “friend” might be doing it wrong. I don’t think he really ever has much happiness, his set level is rather low.

        I don’t think he’s ever studied PUA stuff, but he does it all. He’s a natural, and by that, I mean a sociopath.

        Interesting you mention mindfulness and compassion exercises — I thend to think Buddhism has a lot of truth to it. Of course the Buddhists would also tell us that sexual desire is one of the strongest bonds that tie us down to samsaric cycles of rebirth – something to be overcome.

        I tend to see that PUA naturals are socipaths, so no great hedonism lies there, and most people who train themselves to be PUAs don’t get much joy out of it either. There is always an uncontrollable obsession to it — you say, “A life without a girl who is in love with you is an inferior life” but lets take that apart — to start with “a” girl — PUAs can never bring themselves to settle for just one, or for just any number — that’s why they are successful at the game — they are salesmen who never rest on their laurels, constantly playing the percentages —

        Which leads to ONE thing I strongly disagree with Heartiste and other PUAs about — their insistence on only bothering with nothing lower than a 6, 7, 8 or whatever, and their instistence that women universally get old and ugly sometime in their thirties, if not at 25 or something: the real-life players I see hit on and take home ALL types — the beauties most of us could never hope for, AND the uglies and the oldies. “A girl” would make a sane man happy; a need to have every girl in the world can’t lead to happiness.

        And that “in love with you” part — doesn’t heartiste-ist teaching lead to the inevitable conclusion that women are incapable of romantic love? Let your alpha guard down, and she will move on? Players don’t make women fall in love with them; they don’t capture their hearts, they fuck with their heads. They know it too.


  36. As much as every master of the universe claims otherwise, there is always a wonder if their insanity, their dedication, their transformation into who they are is any better then the beta schlub playing world of warcraft at the end of the day.

    It depends on at the end of the day what makes you really happy. If you are happiest in that storm of emotions in a sea of people man, rock on.

    Figure out what way of being you want to spend most of your life in, then work towards that is all I would say to you.

    Personally I thrive in impossibility. Unfortunately the price of participating at high levels in the world of impossibilities requires complete secrecy. At least you can share your craft with people! And I am thankful for it.


  37. Who’s that motherfucker who dared bullying you? Next time just call me, I’m gonna kick his ass.


  38. There is some good advice here.

    You have to pick them wisely these days. I ask myself do I want to spend hard time in a jail full of rapey coons over this? And It could even turn out worse.


  39. “As he passed me, he put his hand on my lower back, grazing the upper butt cheek, to guide me, roughly, out of his way, as he grunted “coming through” in that tone that suggests he really doesn’t care if you’ll pardon his intrusion… I’m certain that had I been most any other man, I would not have thought twice about a d-bag pushing his way through the crowd and physically nudging me aside with contact on a vulnerable part of my body.”

    Man, that first sentence sounds like chick lit porn. Perhaps he’s into ass-rape dominance game. Animals will often mount other males in a show of dominance.

    BTW why exactly is your upper butt cheek “vulnerable”?


  40. […] relates something I’m sure most people have experienced in crowded places: I’m certain that had I […]


  41. The awareness is alpha but the hyperanalysis is alpha-mimicry. The awareness does not manifest itself in such detail — where he touched him, what his arm did, whose eyes went where. It is rendered in the mind as abstract instinct — I am in the process of being dominated.

    Predators have eyes in front of their head. They are so focused on their quarry that the periphery blurs into irrelevance. They plow forward with purpose and confidence and often at blind risk to themselves. In contrast, prey have eyes on both sides, so they can be focused on detail, any slight shift in the landscape, to get as much advanced warning as possible to any possible threat.

    The alpha mode is instinct-heavy, almost insensate. A shark with blood in its nostrils making a beeline. When you are on the prowl, you notice only the details relevant to your mission. Touchiness is the mark of prey.

    All contextually dependent. If the back-touching clubgoer dude was between Heartiste and his prey, then it is alpha to dispose of him. If he is part of the background noise, it is touchy/sensitive to consider it his moment to throw down the gauntlet. If everything seems a threat, you’re acting like quarry.

    That’s why you’re a meathead if you are manhandling people at will in a crowded situation like a club. You’re basically looking for a confrontation and will soon get one, even if alphas are sparse on the ground. Betas and omegas are not docile sheep in social situations, they are defined by their docility toward women. They have pride, and they know not to allow themselves to be “dissed.” Whether they can back it up or have the courage to react proportionately in such a situation is a different story. Non-alphas are just as likely (if not more likely) to make a scene over a slight as alphas because the weak lack serenity/confidence in their own presence. ARE YOU FUCKIN TOUCHIN ME, BRAH? COME AT ME, BRAH.

    [L]egend has it that when [Frank Sinatra] sang at the Democratic National Convention in 1956, then-Speaker of the House Sam Rayburn came up and threw an arm around his shoulder. “Hands off the threads, creep,” Sinatra is supposed to have snapped.

    Alpha or touchy? If it’s Sinatra you have to assume alpha. Is there a golden mean between cringing supplication and touchy overreaction? Yes: you don’t have to propose a duel in order to signal your unwillingness to be manhandled. Holding one’s ground, eye contact, a simple word suffices. You don’t have to duel, you just have to be ready to duel. The prepared man’s body language exudes “don’t touch” like a grizzly bear. The sensitive man’s body language blends him into the landscape like a snake in the grass.

    It’s cool to pretend you’re a caveman and the rules of civility/politesse do not apply to you. But, especially in urban situations, where your very residence requires a compromise to your physical sovereignty, a lack of self-control with regard to social dynamics is more the sign of an omega-spastic than the sangfroid of a man with his act together. “Amused mastery” means neither under- nor over-reacting. There are so few events or people that will cause an alpha to move. Reaction requires a ripple in the pond of aloofness. It’d better be a boulder and not a pebble.

    But I repeat myself:


  42. […] relates an incident where a burly bar-goer beefed his way through a crowd and then subtly tried to move […]


  43. Nothing that happens in a club or bar is worth fighting over.

    LOTS of stuff worth fighting for happen in clubs or bars, they just don’t happen every week.

    Unless, of course, the guy is a muscular beta, brave enough to fight guys smaller/skinnier than him but who freaks out about approaching women.


  44. I give guys a double pat on the upper back when trying to get through. They comply most of the time.


  45. Example 102139712983721 why we need DUELING


  46. meh, remember, AMOG and alpha shit like this are frames. It’s like the Situation picking fights with other men in the club when Snookie doesn’t let him grind on her. Fighting is losing. By definition, the alpha is the one chillin’ wit da hotties (think Paulie D).
    Staring down at a dance floor from the catwalks is a good way to circulate while scoping it out without letting the ol’ SMV get stale, sure sure, but aren’t the few Douchebag Zone’s in DC really better named Dubai? Are there any good clubs left where the prime real estate isn’t near the bar or at a table?


  47. The Bernakification of women continues…not having sex with your wife can get you fined


  48. The pinnacle of excellence
    Is to subjugate your enemy
    Without fighting


  49. Where do you draw the line ? In the years I like to call my ‘Fighting and fucking’ years something like this could quickly escalate in to a messy situation. Is this testosterone fueled bravado really alpha? Honestly looking back I see myself as a bit of a wanker. I did some boxing some various MA and now days I find the day to day aggressive mentality a bit tedious.


  50. Getting into a fight may be a lot of fun but I doubt it is going to help get you laid.

    How about an insult reaction like farting on him when touched? If not that then how about a belch?

    A better reaction to the stare down would be after the hand slap say “Hey man! I don’t go that way!” and give him a look that says Yuck. Imply he’s a fruit. A stare down puts him on the same level. Remember, he’s a douche bag so he’s beneath you. Keep him there.


  51. Poor little girl:

    I got a couple of theories:
    – She’s a big slut who confessed her craving for big dicks.
    – Being a popstar doesn’t bring a lot of alpha male groupies.


  52. on November 29, 2011 at 8:11 pm Carthy McCormac

    It used to be very common in my experience to ‘have’ to move out of the way for people in line at the coffee shop, walking down the street, in the grocery store, wherever. I can vividly recall the ‘why me?’ sentiment.

    When I realized I didn’t have to move for anyone, I not only stopped moving, but also stopped feeling compelled to move. I’d like to think that no douchebag has control over whether I feel the need to maneuver out of his way, no matter where he puts his hand.


  53. At work, I have an underling who is bigger and younger than me who lifts a lot of weights and clearly does a lot of roids. At times, he seems right on the edge.
    Someone once said that the only ones of us who know where the edge truly is are the ones who have gone over it. But where I work, there is way too much at stake to even think of going there.
    So I force the frame of “I am your older brother. Things will happen my way because I am here to teach you the Way.”


  54. Here’s what happened to me when I ran game on a 35 year old woman I met on the Internet..
    She collected me at mine, she had to, I haven’t got a license.I’m banned for drink driving. As I ran game on her she responded well I thought and I decided I’d get her to jump through a “hoop”. “Pull in to this shop here” I exclaimed, “I need to get my protein bars”. While I was running across the road one of my shoes came off and all the change fell out of my pocket whilst bending over and retrieving the shoe. Money was tight last week so I had to pick it up,the traffic could beep all it wanted. As I glanced at her car whilst picking up my change I could tell she was uneasy. I took off my jacket to accentuate my arms while I got the protein bars. I knew, once she saw me and those bars it would make up for the little slip up outside the shop.when I came out of the shop she was driving away.I didn’t know why but she told me that night on live chat her father had died and she wouldn’t be around for a while.I have a sneaking suspicion she could be lying.


    Kind regards,
    Ian Hunt.

    (its all bullshit I’v been pissing myself writing that whole thing)


  55. Never try this in Baltimore with an African. Even in the nice strip bars I go to (and there are bad strip bars), lethal events occur over the mildest insults when an African is involved

    A while back an off duty African cop pulled a gun in a bar when the dancer dissed him in front of his buddies.

    Or, the African soldier who got shot ten times leaving a bar by another African off duty cop, drunk, because of a mild altercation over a woman. The dead man had grabbed her ass or something. The drunk cop, driven to the police station, just kept talking about how pretty all those women were, right after he had killed a man over nothing.

    And, they carry weapons, either on them or in their car, where they will gladly go to get them and wait for you, then kill you as you leave the club. This happens in Baltimore. No casual piece of ass is worth endangering yourself.

    A lot of people are just too stupid to mess with, especially around women and alcohol. Trust me on this.


  56. There are limits to this.Every day, every man is going to face little slights and acts of disrespect. But you can’t got beating up every bouncer and snotty bureaucrat. Unless you’re a gutter alpha who tolerates prison and have a harem of single moms and loyal hooker employees waiting for you when you get out. The rest of us have to play it cool.

    Case our host talks about: His action is OK since it is in response to mild physical aggression. But I wouldn’t go facing people down for less serious acts. An Alpha doesn’t always have to take the hero route, you can choose your fights. And getting in a fistfight for a drunken slapper is deranged.

    As for the people talking about using Mixed martial arts and the like: They’re good exercise, and you learn how to take and give a good punch, but they’re not necessarily going to help you in a bar fight.

    In a late night fight, the aggressor has a big advantage, unless they’re drunk.
    And chances are, they have friends. You might still win, but forget about fancy routines and strikes, because it’s a confound space and you’ve probably had a few drinks.

    And God help you if someone whips out a knife, because the best martial artist in the world can’t stop knives every time. My Krav Maga instructor used to say a knife block worked 50% of the time, on average. You die or get hospitalised half the time.

    So it’s worth fighting to protect your friends or your woman, but other times there is no disgrace in a decent withdrawal.


    • Amen.

      Don’t win the battle to lose the war.

      Best to let minor “toolings” slide. The best revenge is a life well lived(or fucking their girlfriend on the side).


  57. And any would-be Rambo should remember, the more fights you’re in, the higher the chance you’ll wind up the Belle of the Ball in State prison for a bunch of armed robbers and rapists with HIV and a taste for prison pussy.


    • Armed robbers ain’t shit without their arm, and rapists ain’t either unless you have a vagina. The issue in prison for anyone that can handle himself is being outnumbered… ie. the fucking gangs.


  58. OT: Judge Judy gets jealous of asian chick wearing mini skirt


  59. Using touch to guide a stranger out of the way isn’t an ‘alpha dominance’ move. It’s moving someone out of the way in a crowded zone.

    It would only be ‘alpha dominance’ if you’re engaged in a business/social interfacing with the guy that is more meaningful than a 1 second crowd walk-thru. If he were a subordinate from work, an orbiter in a female target’s social circle, or something similar than it can be construed as alpha dominance….but not in the scenario that you described.


  60. It’s hilarious. Everyone wants to be THE alpha male at the club.

    A very similar situation happened to me. Yet when I elbowed him off, he stopped and tried to stare me down. I kept walking, and saw him walk off deflated 3 seconds later in my peripheral.

    Nor do I let any bouncer put their hands on my chest. This isn’t a dominance episode, but rather self-respect at work.

    “But game has changed me.”

    Really? Hope you’re only referring to noticing the activity, and not letting yourself be moved like a sack.


  61. The best part of dominance? The only lefty men who have it are those who don’t really believe in the purported lefty values, and merely spit them out to nail the easy, ugly lays that are lefty women.

    About 10% of the lefty men are these.

    the rest (90%) are weak-willed, womanish, small-dicked losers. Their women seldom meet dominant men who are proud of their cocks and opinions.

    Makes them easy targets.


  62. Interesting Digit Ratio studies:

    Masculinised men like action films and femininised men like romance films:

    Women resist mate guarding by feminised men:
    Also feminine women more possessive of partner:


  63. on November 30, 2011 at 4:27 am Green Gangrene

    Now that we got in to philosophy… The greatest thing that you can “achieve” in a human life, is happiness. When you have it, nothing else matters.

    Do in life what makes you happy, that’s really all there is.


    • Life isnt a video game, you dont “unlock” happiness and then live the rest of your life in constant bliss. Happiness is dependent on outside factors such as
      sex, money, companionship etc and to be able to provide these things for yourself requires constant work, and in the case of sex and companionship, constant “game”.


  64. LOL ok but what happened next?


  65. Nigger moments are for… well…


    Try not to be one.


  66. This is a touchy subject. I have always been a physical guy and pretty Alpha in most of ny dealings with women and certainly with men. The Chateua has helped me to hone my skills better with women and replace possible hasty responses in anger with thought out game when in comes to women..but my problem was never in dealing with competition from dudes. One of the things I have noticed in some friends of mine learning game and learning abt being alpha, is that they are sometimes hyper vigilant in their reactions to what they perceive as alpha. As a doorman on and off for years, practitioner in various fight sports I have learned to more easily size up guys and their motives along with their actual value as alpha …this is not an exact science but I’ve gotten good over the years. Sometimes a guy is really is attempting to be an alpha and others is just a lumbering drunk or eveb just a naturally clumsy person


  67. Has anyone else experienced the extreme difficulty in posting from your smartphone? Jeez..


  68. Ignorance is only better if one is unaware of a need or desire.

    In Gilbert & Sullivan’s “Pirates of Pensance”, the other pirates convinced the lead character that the only woman on the crew, his wet nurse, and the only woman he has ever met, was the finest woman on earth due to the crew’s assurance of such. He was all ready to marry her.

    That was until he saw Linda Ronstadt, by chance.

    In a like manner, if a man has no idea that he CAN get hot women, he is blissfully happy as a modern major beta getting a bone from a hog. Once he realizes there is better, ignorance of knowing HOW to get better women makes him most miserable.


  69. That sounds like a stressful way to live. Glad to be a woman.


    • Glad to be a woman.

      get back to us on that after you hit the wall.


    • It has the potential to be. The man’s world is a constant fight for dominance. Even amongst good friends everyone has to be sure to protect their pack status.

      But from the perspective of many males, the female’s world is even more stressful. Constant petty bickering, back stabbing, gossip, indirect tactics, shifting alliances, etc…. No one stands and fights.

      I prefer the more direct male world, but that’s probably because my brain is wired to deal with it. The reverse is probably true for you.


  70. This is the sort of knowledge I learned growing up in a not so nice neighborhood. Betas get robbed, plain and simple. So the path to survival is to be suspicious or even a bit confrontational when people invade your private space. A situation like this club example I would suspect that this guy was testing the waters for either a potential or actual wallet swiping. Most (clueless white kids “herbs” as we called them in NYC in the early-mid 90s) people keep their wallets or other valuable things in their back pockets.

    So in this case if you automatically challenge this tool for invading your space, even in a crowded club, it will demonstrate that you’re not to be fucked with if he thought to escalate things later.


  71. more awareness……more pain…..argh!!! BUT….awareness still trumps ignorance .


  72. I too, like posts like this. However, as someone who tends to live in their head, I find reacting to the subtlest of alpha dominance maneuvering on a consistent basis to be overbearing. You’ve said in the past that an alpha male is best defined by their attraction of women that see them as high status among other men. In that regard, subtle cues of dominance have little affect on my reaction unless I’m also in the presence of women. A sort of, “know your audience” thing.

    There’s also an argument to be made that the conscious awareness and reaction to these cues might suggest an “alpha mentality” that isn’t fully internalized, and may never be. I think natural alphas (of which I’m not) pick up and respond to these things on a very instinctive, subconscious, level. For those of us that learn game on a very conscious level, it should really be about picking and choosing your battles. I think there’s also something to say about someone who can turn on and off the switch of indifference.


  73. Yep…no turning back now


  74. “Also note that the female resistance to mate guarding by the male is *stronger* when she has already cheated.”

    It is strange. The guiltier they are, the more vehement their denials; as though feeding it steam and increasing its visible force. They perceive risk to be greater (being detected) and take stronger measures to avoid it (vehement denial).

    And that’s another of the hamster’s dead giveaways, a survival mechanism not lending itself to human politics.


  75. Yeah Alpha’s come in many forms. In the words of the famous Kenny Rogers… “Know when to hold ’em, know when to fold ’em, know when to walk away and know when to run..” In other words sometimes its the clear choice to step up and be a man no matter what ..addressing a situation and remaining firm, standing your ground and preparing for a physical confrontation if need be. Then there are times where its def lose / lose and no matter how Alpha you are, the fact that your IQ has allowed you to survive long enought to be in a club drinking in the first place can tell you that keeping a stiff upper lip and giving back what you get is not a good idea when:

    A.You somehow didn’t notice how scketchy a bar or club was when you entered it and are surrounded by sub humans with IQ’s averaging in the 80 range. This is a lose / lose and not only should you just leave, if you don’t it will probably end up in a 10 on 1 mobbing if you’re not careful.


    B. You have tight game and there is a ton of talent around. You refuse to let your night get ruined by a subtle bump, slight graze or glare from some club asshole. *Again, an all out diss or a clearly aggressive act should be answered in most cases (see rule A)

    Point is, like above, some guys overeact. I know ex betas (still very beta but improving) who are sooo into this Alpha reframing shit, that I have heard argue with close friends about whose elbow is on his side of the table, or if your drinking glass is over the center line on the table. These things (clearly) are infractions on the rules of territory and alphaness….right? Now to me this just makes him sound more insecure and lame but to him he feels he is making strides in becoming more territorial and this more alpha. This is exactly the kind of person who might make a stink and get the shit beat out of him over a perceived nudge, diss or simple bumping in a crowd which could have just been ignored 90% of the time. Again guys, listen to Kenny Rogers


  76. on December 1, 2011 at 9:28 am drunicusequus

    The Douchezone is sort of a jungle – ruled often by gorillas & snakes.
    All the same, I go there (rarely) to have a good time. I’m on the shorter side, at 5’9″, but I can also bench press 300 lbs, and I look it.
    If some 22 year old meathead would like to lose a tooth, spend the weekend in the holding center, or get worked over by several equally enormous bouncers (who often know how to handle themselves) I let him do exactly that.
    I know perfectly well that I could kill a man with a punch to the jaw, chest, or throat, and that knowledge leaves me secure enough to tolerate an occasional drunken shove.
    No one gets laid in the holding center, at least not in the preferred manner, and as a former insurance executive, I do my damndest to avoid courtrooms, police, plaintiff lawyer pirates, or any unnecessary fisticuffs.
    I’m alpha enough to be above drunken brawls with Jersey Shore Ed Hardy scum.


  77. A few years ago I was in a club with a co-worker. We had had a safety celebration dinner with an open bar earlier. He is alpha. All of a sudden he shoves me hard in the chest. He was extremely fucked up. I looked at the long neck in hand, and thought of knocking his ass out. Reason kept me from it, and we are still friends.


  78. I tend to ignore people unless they are my friends. But I try to be polite. I can come across as a little bit scary, but I am a sweetheart inside.


  79. You know, this is a problem, I am a nice guy…considerate and empathetic. Should I give this up and become a dick, or what steps can I take to give off a better frame?


  80. There’s a show called Bully Beatdown. MMA guys v.s. alpha bros

    MMA guys are pros so of course they win. And they’re wearing pads. But it’s still a fun show to watch.


  81. […]  Solve mental problems in your head. Play another sport. Transform social interactions from passive acceptance to active awareness (most of you know what I’m thinking: game). Instead of playing the same old board games over and again, crack open the instruction booklet for […]


  82. […] in this case GBFM had double-dipped from his own blog.  In response to Heartiste’s “Dominance Plays” GBFM offers some new comments, and then slides in an additional classic chestnut posted […]