Monday, July 4, 2011

Alpha Mail: don't be a passive-aggressive bitch

While this advice applies to women too, it is absolutely vital for a man:
How's this for starters. As she left for a grocery run I told her we were out of a personal item. She protested and said I should get it. At first I tried to explain why she should then quit and said OK, I'll get it. Later she came back and said she'd get it, she didn't want to be difficult. I gave a cheerful chuckle and smile and said "too late".
To be blunt, it is terrible. It's bad enough when women behave like passive-aggressive bitches. It is MUCH worse when men behave that way. Think about it. If you wouldn't say something to another man, don't even think about saying it to a woman.

Anonymous made no less than three mistakes here. First, he should have ASKED her to pick up whatever the item was. Think about it. How do you prefer to be informed about something that is needed at the store when you are going out. "We're out of milk" is not a request, it is a statement. "Will you please pick up some milk?" is the correct and civil way to ask someone to do something. Information is not a request.

Second, if she is being a bitch about it - and admittedly, many women are completely hypocritical about refusing to do for others what they regularly demand others do for them - it is a huge mistake to argue or attempt to explain why she should behave like a civilized human being capable of reciprocity and enlightened self-interest. If she's in the mood to act like a useless animal, you are not going to be successful in attempting to reason with her as if she is a rational human being. You made the request, she said no, so leave it at that. Don't get mad, don't show your irritation, don't make any idle threats about future consequences, just calmly accept her response at face value and know that you'll have to do it yourself.

Third, while Anonymous did the correct thing in simply taking care of business himself, he subsequently blew it by acting like a nasty little girl. Saying "too late" and flashing a bitchy, passive-aggressive smile shows neither alpha strength nor sigma indifference, but gamma weakness. The correct response would have been to say calmly, "thanks, but I already took care of it."

The right time to act - not speak - is the next time you go out to run some errands. The delta tendency will be to silently acquiesce to her requests and do her shopping in the hopes that the positive example will change her behavior in the future. Hint: it won't. The gamma tendency will be to get into an argument about why you shouldn't have to pick up things for her if she's not picking up things for you. The alpha response is to simply say "No" and go about your business without regard for hers. Rest assured she will know exactly why you are refusing to act as her errand boy and she may subject you to the silent treatment for the rest of the day. But the next time she leaves the house, there is a very good chance she will politely ask you if there is anything she can pick up for you while she is out. Don't ask any questions, don't discuss it, simply respond with any requests that you might have.

Based on my experience, the sigma tendency would apparently be to completely forget the previous incident, agree to pick something up for her, get distracted and end up buying something that is completely unrelated to any of the planned or requested errands, and return home without anything that was on anyone's list. Today I went out to buy a gas cap and see about the car tires. Naturally, I came home with a portable roll-up hose system... it was half-price and came with a free jet attachment. You can't convincingly fake nonchalance, so if it doesn't happen to come naturally I would not recommend it. Go with the alpha approach and Just Say No.

Anyhow, there is really no excuse for men or women to refuse to behave in a reaonable and civil manner. A man can refuse to play along with a woman's self-centered and hypocritical behavior, in fact, he should refuse to go along with it. But it is counterproductive for him to stoop to her uncivil level, still less to utilize feminine tactics, in doing so.

51 comments:

Difster said...

I can attest to the advice here.

One time, I was in my girlfriend's room (it's a busy house, she lives with her family) and looking for the remote for the tv, it seemed to have disappeared.

It seems there was a hair brush on the floor near the doorway but dead in it's path, I must have walked past it several times in the last couple of minutes, but then so had she.

So she walks in a couple of seconds behind me, stands over the brush, points down and said (in a bitchy tone) "pick that up!"

I simply replied, "no." No snark, no bitchy beta boy snarl, no anger. Just "no." I suppose my eyes flashed a look of incredulous surprise that she even demanded that but there wasn't any anger involved.

But she got really mad and I got the silent treatment. Later, after she came to her senses, I explained to her that I don't take order from her though I do consider requests. I explained that I will not be talked to nor scolded like a child. And I further explained that if she wants me to do something she can ask and I will probably do it.

That day changed her behavior toward me in general quite a bit. She hasn't talked to me like that since.

Fhranko said...

Please explain the difference between passive aggression, brooding and sulking.

Difster said...

Brooding and sulking are methods of passive aggression. I think that term is kind of stupid really, I just can't think of a better one at the moment.

I suggest you look up clinical definitions of passive aggressive if you don't understand the term properly. It's very unmanly behavior though.

Fhranko said...

Thanks Difster.

I ask because if my fiancée does something which really pisses me off (rare). I will withdraw all my fun and affection and go about my own business without her. This is usually because I'm thinking about how best to verbalise my displeasure. I NEVER resort to arguing, usually pointing out where she has gone wrong is enough to prompt gushing apologies. I think I'm just demonstrating my self-control if I do this but I think some people would regard this as passive aggressive.

Vox said...

Sulking is usually considered passive-aggressive behavior. Brooding is not, because it is not exhibited in response to external stimulus. The clinical symptoms of the passive-aggressive personality disorder are as follows:

A pervasive pattern of negativistic attitudes and passive resistance to demands for adequate performance, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicted by four (or more) of the following:

1. passively resists fulfilling routine social and occupational tasks

2. complains of being misunderstood and unappreciated by others

3. is sullen and argumentative

4. unreasonably criticizes and scorns authority

5. expresses envy and resentment toward those apparently more fortunate

6. voices exaggerated and persistent complaints of personal misfortune

7. alternates between hostile defiance and contrition

Ken said...

Well, that explanation of sigma basically cements my classification of my father-in-law as such. Good to know.

King A said...

Women want direction. They cannot generate it themselves, for the most part. When a man blesses her with his decisiveness, the well-adjusted woman is pleased, not annoyed or vindictive. It encourages the couple's unity of purpose, it doesn't divide or cause additional rancor.

The woman in the e-mail regarded the man's observation ("we're out of Just For Men") as a challenge, and she shit-tested him in return. "Chuckle and smile and 'too late'." FAIL. Worse still, the man is encouraged by his online advisers to respond to (and thereby tacitly accept) this challenge rather than lay the groundwork for effectively ignoring it and all future temptations to try again.

MAN: "We're out of my hair dye."

WOMAN: "YOU should get that."

MAN: "I'll pick up your Kotex next time I'm grocery shopping."

WOMAN: "You never do the shopping!"

MAN: "Oh, that's right."

Or something along those lines. The banter of the privileged to his consort. But even this interplay shouldn't be necessary. If he has allowed the Captain-First Officer relationship to have degenerated so far, he has more fundamental issues to face than how to rationalize (with a woman!) his way out of a clusterfuck long in the making.

It's an art, gentlemen, not a science. Stop vivisecting your ladies' motivations so minutely and just assume command. You are combining the worst of both worlds: the comprehensively scientific approach of a research team of men with the emotional hypersensitivity, gossip, and second-guessing of a kaffeeklatch of women.

King A said...

The victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory. -- Sun Tzu

Battles are won or lost before the fighting begins. Victory is the residue of preparation. If the man finds himself engaged in a conversation of this nature, he has already lost. He has not set or enforced the predicate wherein the woman finds it impossible to imagine even attempting such a maneuver, and should she slip, the man's inactivity would be cause for her self-reflection and -correction.

Women grow bored with and thereby cease responding to the cutesy tricks offered in advice to this confused e-mailer. He has not earned a blunt "Just Say No" privilege, and such an approach would therefore come off as petty, not alpha. Vox then compounds this misunderstanding by recommending the man play niceguy ("correct and civil") in tone and syntax. "First, he should have ASKED her." Replete with sniveling all-caps emphasis on "ASKED." Can't you just hear the harridan saying ASKED like that? Here beta beta beta.

Joseph Dantes said...

Then there's the other end of the spectrum.

I've got a friend who's a borderline or full-on pyschopath.

This guy can get flings but his LTR game is a MESS. Not enough beta energy, rage and controlling behavior and bitterness. An inability to dissociate and play the game dispassionately.

No matter how good the LTR advice I give him, his character manages to ruin it.

I don't know what this guy can do at this point except give up on LTRs and get religion by reading the New Testament.

Joseph Dantes said...

For example, after his girlfriend cheated due to lack of beta, he flipped out and beat the shit out of her. I advised a cold shoulder until her shit tests stopped after this blowup. After 4 days she sent a suicide threat. He ignored it because he didn't want her to be able to manipulate him with that. She followed through, sleeping pills and alcohol. Week long hospital stay.

He just has no sympathy, no capacity to look at situations objectively and choose the right play.

Joseph Dantes said...

A pimp has to control his emotions and play a mental game. He doesn't have that capacity, period. And his nature guarantees challenges situations will arise. Situations he's incapable of dealing with properly.

Joseph Dantes said...

One of the toughest challenges to my game has been dealing with my mom's pressure to marry my live-in girlfriend. Doing so would be too much beta for now... I've had to live off her while repairing my health. I'd at least want to wait until financial independence, if not children. Make her earn it. Or, if I start getting too alpha in my lifestyle, as comfort and reassurance.

Mom just will not understand this. Traditional hardcore virtuous Christian, very justice oriented. Technically there's nothing wrong with a failure to formalize in the Biblical sense, but she wants the ceremony. One on one, this is a huge sticking point she just won't leave alone. And frankly, I understand her position... our values are nearly identical, and it kills me to disappoint her.

To avoid letting her break me down, I've simply had to avoid her. Any attempt to explain the game factors at play has been a total bust. Naturally it sucks to cut off your mom for a year or two.

I finally figured out how to solve it... conference calls with my gf.

They gang up and try to run some marriage shit tests, but I just fail to reply, let tension build, and finally release by changing the subject. It's a silent show of strong, a game of chicken, yet with no logical content they can use to escalate. Then there's nothing they can do but let the convo continue. And Mom sees she can't engineer a coup with my girl.

They girl talk and bond and harmony is restored. My Mom is still susceptible to game on an interpersonal level even though it could never corrupt her character. Basically I'm pitting Game against her traditional expectations, and drawing a distinction between that and properly religious expectations.

It's a huge relief.

In the future, I imagine this is how a formally married status will be - something I'll only acknowledge when I need an injection of beta for one reason or another.

Anonymous said...

So, Joseph, you are bragging about Gaming your mom?

Joseph Dantes said...

Oh yeah, another reason I avoid marriage for now - pot of gold at the end of the rainbow (PGER).

A girl always needs a PGER she's working towards to be happy.

Right now the PGER for my gf is primarily marriage and then a fuzzy future afterwards.

Once I give her official marriage, the PGER will move up to kids and house, etc. Which at present would be destabilizingly out of reach.

And yes, anon, I find it far more challenging to gain some degree of acceptance for a PUA-modified lifestyle with traditional Christian parents than to simply rack up notches.

TobyTemple said...

that was a classic example of a person who thinks others should be able to read their minds...

Vox said...

First, he should have ASKED her." Replete with sniveling all-caps emphasis on "ASKED." Can't you just hear the harridan saying ASKED like that? Here beta beta beta.

Don't be ridiculous. If you wish someone to do something for you, then you will usually have to ask them. Game doesn't make women read minds. Your fantasies of being the Alphiest Alpha are simply ridiculous. The most powerful and famous alphas habitually make polite requests of their lowest subordinates; the fact that their requests are received as absolute orders and complied with as such doesn't change the fact that etiquette is important.

You appear to be one of those who view all civilization as being beta. Which is fine, so long as you are content to shag stinking, hairy-legged ape women.

The attitude you indicate is why even effective pick-up artists with real Game have to move on to the next woman. Those who solely rely on appealing to the lowest female denominator can't hope to maintain relationships even when they want to.

Joseph Dantes said...

Daniel Rose, Lance Mason, Tyler Durden and even Roissy all appear to be capable of maintaining LTRs.

Vox said...

That's not a surprise. Because such men understand that Game is merely a tool that is useful in some circumstances and not useful in others. It is not a way of life, still less a religion. They have a much deeper understanding of it than do the pedantic acolytes who take everything literally and that Roissy himself mocks as victims of Asperger's Syndrome.

The idea that a man must be of low sex rank merely because he makes requests instead of demands is about as spergy as it gets. That is not alpha behavior, it is infantile.

Joseph Dantes said...

I get what you're saying, but I define Game more broadly, to encompass one's entire social way of life. I don't want to bifurcate my behavior. I think the gurus I listed mostly have a similar point of view.

Wendy said...

With regards to asking verses telling, why set up a situation where a woman is more likely to rebel against a command? She can rationalize "he was being a jerk" as the reason for not acquiescing if told to do something. She has no such excuse to fall back on if given a civil request.

indyguy77@work said...

"Joseph Dantes said...
Daniel Rose, Lance Mason, Tyler Durden and even Roissy all appear to be capable of maintaining LTRs."

TYLER DURDEN?

A fictional character? Really?

Giraffe said...

TYLER DURDEN?

Somebody blogs under that name.

King A said...

Vox wrote: Don't be ridiculous. If you wish someone to do something for you, then you will usually have to ask them. Game doesn't make women read minds. Your fantasies of being the Alphiest Alpha are simply ridiculous. The most powerful and famous alphas habitually make polite requests of their lowest subordinates; the fact that their requests are received as absolute orders and complied with as such doesn't change the fact that etiquette is important.

Your correspondent was asking for an application of theory to a real-life situation. You delivered him applied beta theory. ("Be nice.") Does alpha behavior apply in every human circumstance? Of course not. But the e-mailer was seeking alpha. And it simply confuses the matter to rechristen beta behavior as alpha, especially since the correspondent has not mastered his alpha impersonation well enough to allow occasional or deliberate slippage into beta for effect. You have to learn to walk before you can be called upon to tap dance, much less improvise.

Applied theory isn't Asperger Syndrome or "fantasy." It is applied theory. Particularly since it yields real-world results to which one of your commenters is attesting. No need for you to get your panties in a twist and lash out indiscriminately when someone points this out. It's a terrible, terrible approach to criticism to categorize a certain commentary and then focus on the deficiencies of those so categorized.

"If you wish someone to do something for you, then you will usually have to ask them." What else can I say besides: not in my experience. You are describing the predicate of the obsequious order-taker. They are in the eternal mode of requesting rather than directing.

Granted, my experience is nothing you can verify, and your inclination is to skepticism. I'd suggest that skepticism is the product of projection. Your surroundings do not bend to your command in your experience, and therefore you assume it is not possible in anyone's experience. The "uh huh, surrre" critique only gets you so far before we are forced to question from what faulty frame of reference you draw your inferences.

I do not regard myself the "Alphiest Alpha" nor do I see the whole of "civilization as being beta." I can understand why you would mistake me for a "pedantic acolyte" of Roissy: they are thick on the ground and as insufferable as you say. I surely recognize the limits of game theory, and it is indeed sad to see its practitioners ignore the method's limits. From the first I have felt like a tool by the mere employment of PUA jargon. It's silly, but with that silliness they have somehow clawed their way to a deep truth that must be engaged in this hyperfeminized culture.

Anyway, you are missing an opportunity to engage someone who is more on your side than Roissy's, and in so doing, you are driving away still others who do not privilege you with the favor of criticism. They rather remain silent and click on.

Markku said...

I'd suggest that skepticism is the product of projection. Your surroundings do not bend to your command in your experience.

Having done subcontractor work for Vox at one of the the offices he owns, I can attest to the fact that they do.

Stingray said...

King A,

Simply making a request can be done in a very alpha manner and I think this may be the manner to which Vox is referring. The alpha would simply say "Will you please get X from the store?" A straight forward direct request, said in a normal and direct tone with body language following suit. A beta would phrase it differently. Something along the lines of (I exaggerate slightly to better make my point) "Hoooney? When you go to the store will pleeeease pick this up for me? I really need it because . . . . and it would be such a big help. blah, blah, blah." Basically, asking like a girl would. The tone of voice and body language match the terrible way it is asked.

Also, if the beta and alpha both used exactly the same words, his tone and body language are going to give it away each time, and a women will see this before she even hears the words leave his mouth. She will be annoyed before she has a clue as to what is going on.

I don't believe that men observe body language and tone of voice like women do, but I assume this is what Vox is referring to in the correct alpha way to handle this situation. Giving direct orders in the manner in the way you are talking about, especially when you new to game and are trying it out, is just going to piss her off more, because he has now gone from weak gamma, to asshole gamma and that is far worse. (Change that to beta if that term does it for you.)

Joseph Dantes said...

Tyler Durden AKA Owen is the founder of Real Social Dynamics, the world's largest Game company, and was featured in Neil Strauss' "The Game."

Tyler Durden the blogger is someone else.

JCclimber said...

How can I raise my son to be both a polite Christian and alpha unless I model the behavior myself in the home with my wife?

Asking my wife to get something for me from the store is not beta, buddy. She is a capable woman and trusts and welcomes my leadership. That doesn't mean that she is my slave and must snap to whatever wish I may have, when I have it. I trust her to fit my needs into her schedule, a schedule that she manages to ensure that our family's needs are taken care of at home.

I'm a manager at my company. I can tell you that our vice presidents and directors ask their employees to do things, rather than tell them. What is really amusing is when some blowhard old school autocrat starts thinking these men are softies because they are polite and civil. They'll be just as polite and civil as they ask you whether you want to resign or be fired.

Vox said...

You delivered him applied beta theory. ("Be nice.")

I did absolutely nothing of the kind. Do you truly fail to understand the difference between "being nice" and "being polite"?

I think it is fairly well understood that I am not a nice person. I am even considered to be cruel by a few delicate souls. And yet, I am exceedingly polite in comparison with the modern norm.

"If you wish someone to do something for you, then you will usually have to ask them." What else can I say besides: not in my experience. You are describing the predicate of the obsequious order-taker. They are in the eternal mode of requesting rather than directing.

I have no doubt that our experiences are different. I have been a CEO of one company or another since I was 23. I was a director of a television company that was sold for $50 million. And I only issue direct orders rather than make polite requests in absolute extremis.

But you are correct. For the most part, my surroundings do not bend to my command, they preemptively conform to my expectations. If I actually have to issue direct commands, that is an indication that there has been a serious breakdown.

Anyway, you are missing an opportunity to engage someone who is more on your side than Roissy's, and in so doing, you are driving away still others who do not privilege you with the favor of criticism.

There is no conflict. I agree with most of what Roissy writes and he agrees with most of what I write on Game. Nor am I driving anyone away, people can read or not read here as they like. It is of little concern to me.

Vox said...

So what's a Neg?

A backhanded belittlement. It's a teasing insult meant to display high value and indirectly provoke without directly insulting.

"Hey, I like that dress! It reminds me of one my grandmother used to wear."

"You look really great... for your age."

What you said was not a neg and a neg would have been inappropriate in that situation anyhow.

Joseph Dantes said...

The distinction between politeness and niceness is a major missing point in my game. I plan to implement that immediately.

Duke of Earl said...

Politeness is the velvet glove you keep the steel inside.

Papapete said...

It isn't a sigma response Vox, it's being absentminded.

indyguy77@work said...

I think Vox meant the absentmindedness stems from the self-absorption, not vapidity.

But it would certainly be hard to tell the difference from outside the skull of his super-intelligence.

It does reminds me of the Rita Rudner bit where she said her grandpa was so brilliant he'd get insights and head off at a start to implement them.

Like after he'd tossed a baby into the air before before he'd caught it.

King A said...

Vox wrote: I did absolutely nothing of the kind. Do you truly fail to understand the difference between "being nice" and "being polite"?

Politesse and unobtrusiveness is the mark of a certain kind of person. Fair or unfair, it smells subliminally of weakness. Yes, those in the habit of requesting most likely do so because they must request rather than command. But that's not what makes the habit in itself so ineffective.

A habit of asking devalues the power of request. There are important and rare times when a man must make requests, just as he must on occasion give thanks, apologize, forgive, and make amends. The obsequient overinterprets this relatively infrequent necessity and makes it a reflexive pattern in his life, a mandate, an identity, thanking everyone, apologizing for everything, making more requests than an omega Antioch College student. Your e-mailer gave off that odor.

Game theorists promote blanket rules -- such as never apologize -- to break the beta of his bad unconscious habits, not to lay down eternal categorical imperatives. It's an art, it's improv, not a checklist. Your correspondent didn't need a reinforcement of weak game. He required a way out.


Vox: I have no doubt that our experiences are different. I have been a CEO of one company or another since I was 23. I was a director of a television company that was sold for $50 million. And I only issue direct orders rather than make polite requests in absolute extremis.

But you are correct. For the most part, my surroundings do not bend to my command, they preemptively conform to my expectations. If I actually have to issue direct commands, that is an indication that there has been a serious breakdown.


Tomayto tomahto. Not sure what the pissing contest is about. But the resume, and the urge to cite it, is illuminating.

The e-mailer needed better advice. His was a failure of "frame," not tactics. He obviously has little experience with eliciting a "preemptive[] conforming" from his surroundings and was primed for a lesson in it.


Vox: There is no conflict. I agree with most of what Roissy writes and he agrees with most of what I write on Game. Nor am I driving anyone away, people can read or not read here as they like. It is of little concern to me.

You aren't driving anyone away per se. You are missing an opportunity. Most will not bother with serious criticism when they witness your inability to engage it. They will click on. Not a fatal conceit, but the conversation here is weaker for it.

It's nice that you are simpatico with Roissy. But his shtick is about played out. Game has to grow into a broader critique of feminism or die in the PUA ghettos. You have intuited something that he is in the process of bungling, expanding game into pseudoscientific dead-ends like evo-psych and atheistic epistemology rather than a robust program of action. The result: inane, idiosyncratic political rants you expect to hear from drunk Uncle Ed at a barbecue rather than published to a sex blog.

Take my compliment. And thereby demonstrate -- rather than merely assert -- the condescending power of courtesy. Civil refinement has its purpose, but only in a context acknowledged mutual respect. Preceding our refinement, born as we were into the modern anomie, we must first wage rather impolite wars to reestablish that respect.

King A said...

Stingray wrote:

Simply making a request can be done in a very alpha manner and I think this may be the manner to which Vox is referring. The alpha would simply say "Will you please get X from the store?" A straight forward direct request, said in a normal and direct tone with body language following suit. A beta would phrase it differently. Something along the lines of (I exaggerate slightly to better make my point) "Hoooney? When you go to the store will pleeeease pick this up for me? I really need it because .... and it would be such a big help. blah, blah, blah." Basically, asking like a girl would. The tone of voice and body language match the terrible way it is asked.

Also, if the beta and alpha both used exactly the same words, his tone and body language are going to give it away each time, and a women will see this before she even hears the words leave his mouth. She will be annoyed before she has a clue as to what is going on.


I appreciate your reply. You are a woman, correct?

The "very alpha manner" you speak about relies on a predicate (or "frame") the e-mailer has not imposed on his woman. He has not laid the proper groundwork to expect a polite manner to be interpreted as originating from magnanimity rather than weakness or necessity. This is not a general argument against courtesy! It is prescription medicine for a very specific type of sickness. Vox's mistake was to not emphasize the importance of groundwork. Rather he suggested damage-control half-measures that do little to advance the relationship's lasting transformation.

Without establishing the predicate, an attempted alpha manner will likely come off peevish as you say ("Hoooney? ... pleeeease .... blah, blah, blah").

Words are, what, 10 or 20% of communication? So much more meaning vibrates into a person's consciousness from tone and body language. And with women, do expressly spoken notions count for anything? We're approaching 1% here. "I don't believe that men observe body language and tone of voice like women do." Bingo.

Poise, posture, tone, "state" -- they all communicate more than the choice of mouth sounds. (This is a hard concept to convey in this medium, it being a medium of the unvarnished, atonal, written word.)

I wouldn't advise the alpha aspirant to "Giv[e] direct orders in the manner" discussed. I'd advise him to exercise his inner-asshole, limber up that atrophied vestige, then more importantly regroup and begin implementing the preventative measures that preclude such shit-tests from achieving their full, acrid bloom. Or implementing a program that, as Vox put it, allows one's surroundings to "preemptively conform to [his] expectations."

The paramount takeaway is: Yes Beta, there is a different paradigm of behavior that he should try out. Vox has. Others have. Mirabile dictu! It works.

King A said...

JCclimber wrote:

How can I raise my son to be both a polite Christian and alpha unless I model the behavior myself in the home with my wife?

Asking my wife to get something for me from the store is not beta, buddy. She is a capable woman and trusts and welcomes my leadership. That doesn't mean that she is my slave and must snap to whatever wish I may have, when I have it. I trust her to fit my needs into her schedule, a schedule that she manages to ensure that our family's needs are taken care of at home.

I'm a manager at my company. I can tell you that our vice presidents and directors ask their employees to do things, rather than tell them. What is really amusing is when some blowhard old school autocrat starts thinking these men are softies because they are polite and civil. They'll be just as polite and civil as they ask you whether you want to resign or be fired.



You are reading too much into my critique, like Vox did, filling in the gaps with imaginary demons.

Asking per se is not the issue. A habit of asking is the issue. A reputation for asking is the issue. It is provocative, especially in women who sniff out weakness like bloodhounds. For that reason, a man should keep his powder very dry, and deploy a genuine request (or apology or gratitude) only when the occasion truly calls for it. Picking up suppositories or herpes cream or whatever that chump needed is not such an occasion.

There is a difference between a commander and a "blowhard old school autocrat." That difference is leadership. If your wife "trusts and welcomes [your] leadership," she will not treat your directives as uncivil or impolite. She will welcome them as a respite. One fewer decision to make, less work for her to do.

The danger is substituting that trust with the mere emblems of politesse. No one is fooled by that for long. Particularly women. A weak smile and a "too late" = a secret revulsion and she doesn't know wherefore.

I am a Christian man too. WWJD? Ask sinners politely to repent? Is there an instance of Jesus asking anyone, other than his Father in the garden, anything? Now there is Someone saving his request cred for a Special Occasion. Now there is Someone for your son (and yourself) to emulate. The inversion of Christian manliness into a habit of obsequious groveling is the death of civilization.

And when they lacked wine, the mother of Jesus said unto Him, "They have no ['PERSONAL ITEM']." Jesus said unto her, "Woman, what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come." His mother said unto the servants, "Whatsoever He saith unto you, do it."

Be obsequious with your Savior, yes. Indeed, bow your head, bend your knee to no one other, to nothing less than the Lord of Creation. But with your rebelling wife and her instinctive shit tests? With ambitious employees who lapse into chaos in the absence of direction? With male rivals encroaching on your flock? "I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

Desert Cat said...

"Limber up that atrophied vestige, his inner asshole..."

Ha! I like that. That was the beginning of my journey out of gamma hell.

I have to agree with you after all. Once you've re-established a paradigm of dominance, then more nuanced approaches will become effective.

Anonymous said...

The inversion of Christian manliness into a habit of obsequious groveling is the death of civilization.


@King A - I think you've hit on something here. So where does one who has succumbed to this inversion start?

Stingray said...

King A said,

"You are a woman, correct?"

"I wouldn't advise the alpha aspirant to "Giv[e] direct orders in the manner" discussed. I'd advise him to exercise his inner-asshole, limber up that atrophied vestige, then more importantly regroup and begin implementing the preventative measures that preclude such shit-tests from achieving their full, acrid bloom. Or implementing a program that, as Vox put it, allows one's surroundings to "preemptively conform to [his] expectations."

Yes, I am a woman and I agree with you in exercising the inner asshole. But, given what we both said about women being able to perceive so much from tone and body language he had better be spot on before he tries the asshole direct order route. His tone, stature, eyes, facial expression, etc had all better match perfectly or his wife will eat him alive. And if he crumbles, even slightly, afterwards he is going to have a hell of a time recovering from that. I think some men may be able to pull this instant asshole change off beautifully and then segue into using requests. But if the beta is so far gone, and could not pull off this all or nothing, would it behoove him to attempt to strengthen himself a bit at a time and make a direct alpha request and build into more game from there? Would his wife have a more difficult time seeing through the small increases in game rather than an all out asshole attack? If she truly is a shrew at this time, incremental may be better for both. Thoughts?

Markku said...

But it would certainly be hard to tell the difference from outside the skull of his super-intelligence.

You can tell from whether or not one apologizes after it has happened.

Papapete said...

King A, you do realize that your example refutes your argument, don't you? Jesus told His mother that it was of no matter to Him and not His time to manifest Himself. What did she do? She ignored Him and instructed the servants to do whateverHe told them to do. Jesus then reversed His decision and performed the first public miracle of His ministry.

Vox said...

But the resume, and the urge to cite it, is illuminating.

This is why I place zero value on your criticism. You made a false claim. I did nothing more than factually disprove it. And now, like a little gamma bitch, you're trying to transform your obvious error into a passive-aggressive shot.

This is behavior that is not indicative of anyone whose advice on Game is likely to be useful.

King A said...

Anonymous wrote: I think you've hit on something here. So where does one who has succumbed to this inversion [of Christian manliness] start?

I'm hearing this a lot lately: what's the plan, where do we start, how can we possibly begin to face such an enormity?

I only know to begin with myself and proceed in the concentric circles of subsidiary around me. Make your temple secure, get your fat, soft, semi-femi ass in shape, then be prepared to heed the drums of battle.

Men are abstract and universal (catholic), we want to change the world, we think in terms of Marx's Eleventh Thesis on Feuerbach. Women, with minds of particularity, have an advantage over us in this regard, mistresses of the oikos, unconcerned that the world has gone to shit so long as their household is intact.

Represent in church. Church has become faggy because men have left it and so it becomes still faggier and proceeds "turning and turning in the widening gyre." Defend the dignity of your sex. When you see a man acting like a bitch -- while the temptation is to think "Great, less competition for me and I look better in contrast" -- call him out on his perfidy, not publicly to embarrass him, but privately as a brother.

Finally, advice columnists and PUA braggarts should be more focused for war, not the "activism" of MRAs. Most of our would-be leaders take the hedonist position that it's all going to hell, let's grab as much pussy as we can, boys! An irresponsible attitude, yes, but more important, it is based on an error. Feminism is in its last, ugliest death throes and will not go out pretty ( http://tinyurl.com/3r2ueh9 ). This is precisely the time to go for the kill.

Niebuhr: "Nothing worth doing is completed in our lifetime; therefore we must be saved by hope. Nothing true or beautiful makes complete sense in any immediate context of history; therefore we must be saved by faith. Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore, we are saved by love."

King A said...

Papapete wrote: King A, you do realize that your example refutes your argument, don't you? Jesus told His mother that it was of no matter to Him and not His time to manifest Himself. What did she do? She ignored Him and instructed the servants to do whatever He told them to do. Jesus then reversed His decision and performed the first public miracle of His ministry.

While Cana can be read several ways, yours is not the orthodox understanding. But point taken.

I'm not sure she "ignored" Jesus. Mary is the model of feminine perfection, and here is an example of her female leadership (Athol Kay's First Officer): passive and obedient, deferring to her Son but not afraid to voice an opinion privately, and ultimately presenting a united front ("Do whatever He tells you").

I would think that, despite His initial hesitation and perhaps spurred on by His mother's advice, indeed His "time had come." He wasn't cajoled into a premature introduction by a mother who arrogantly ignored Him; it would be astonishing to contemplate Immaculate Mary behaving in such a way.

King A said...

Stingray wrote: [H]e had better be spot on before he tries the asshole direct order route. ... or his wife will eat him alive. ... I think some men may be able to pull this instant asshole change off beautifully and then segue into using requests. But if the beta is so far gone, and could not pull off this all or nothing, would it behoove him to attempt to strengthen himself a bit at a time and make a direct alpha request and build into more game from there? Would his wife have a more difficult time seeing through the small increases in game rather than an all out asshole attack? If she truly is a shrew at this time, incremental may be better for both. Thoughts?

You refer to her as "wife." It's not clear they're married. Not that it is totally dispositive, but martial status is relevant.

You're touching on something I've always been uneasy with about this subculture. Much of the man-woman push-pull is not a "game" at all. (Closer to a war.) Men are direct creatures, especially in contrast to the fair sex, we are not so given to misdirection and deception. All of this typical counseling for baffled neophytes to try little gimmicks just seems thin. One's forthrightness -- genuine forthrightness -- is what women will respond to. I'm not a player but I play one at the club only goes so far. This post was about a relationship. The techniques of "pick up" are of limited utility to the already picked up, and maintenance requires, as you say, a subtler hand.

That's not to say you don't toy with a woman's playful nature and tease and keep it mysterious. What fun would life be without that essential sexual dynamic? But eventually you have to bring some genuine virtue (vir = Latin for man) to the table.

So, yeah, he would have to be at the top of his game to "pull this instant asshole change off beautifully," and yeah, the likelihood of it blowing up into misunderstanding and confusion is substantial. He has to transition it smoothly, make her comfortable with a new paradigm. That's always tricky.

But tone down the "tricksiness" and crank up the faith: don't be a pussy and you'll stop acting like one. Let go of those sissifying myths imprisoning the inner-manchild and act your behavior into new unconscious habits. That is something which by its nature happens in increments, little instances here and there that grow in confidence as small successes build into triumphs.

That was my original criticism of the advice given to the emailer: too particular to the situation and not focused enough on the obvious root causes. He couldn't begin to pull off the smooth, loving firmness the woman needed to get (would have subconsciously thrilled to get) in that circumstance, so his best bet is to get to work fixing the circumstance at a more fundamental level.

Anonymous said...

sometimes you really need to know when to stop.

Jennifer said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

His lawyers have argued that the ѕtate's case was mainly circumstantial, and without communication, it will only fail to deliver business if you do still fall victim to political dithering and short-termism.

my weblog ... boscarol.com

Akashic Pulse said...

Damn you're psychotic. Poor guy that dated you.

logotrix said...

There are some really pathetic men on here. "Beat the shit out her"???? "Make her earn it" - re, marriage. What decade are you n? Nothing screams insecurity louder than a sexist male.

Pussy-ManiaGirls: http://goo.gl/w9Oepq said...

watching my collection, we have upload more video at here:

Collection Part 1:

Doggy Style and In Missionary Position

Hot Sex Anal With Amazing Girl Friend

Sex Under Hot Lights Bad Girls

Give Me The Cum

Cum In My Panties

Nude Amateur Teen Girls

Sexy Brunette Girls

Young Kinky Sluts

Busty Tattoo Chick On Car

Young Asian fucked anal

Latina Havana Ginger gets

Teen Threesome Porn

Hot Blowjob

Amateur Pulls Down Tanga

Sweet girl amazing hot

Sexy japanese babes getting their tight

TEEN BLONDE ANAL SEX ORGY




Collection Part 2:


Hot asian blowjob and pussy creampie

Sucking dick, Audrey put vegetables in all holes

Blonde love fuck

Naomi Russell And Her Royal Ass

Sexy blonde gives blowjob in the car

ASIAN XXX PORN VIDEO

JAPANESE XXX PORN VIDEO

ARABIC XXX PORN VIDEO

HARDCORE PORN VIDEO

GAY XXX PORN VIDEO

WATCH STREAMING PORN VIDEO

USA CELEBS XXX PORN

LATINA XXX PORN

LESBIAN XXX PORN

Hardcore Porn Celebrity

HOT TURKEY PORN MOVIE

INDIAN NUDES CELEBRITIES VIDEOS

UZBEKS Fuck PORN VIDEOS

HOT RASTA GIRL


100% MAKE you satisfy......








































Reply Delete

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.