Thursday, February 2, 2012

Awareness is not an antidote

Susan Walsh wonders if female knowledge of Game precludes its function:
1. Does female knowledge of Game reduce its effectiveness?

We know that in matters of state, politics, athletics, and commerce it’s important to keep strategy secret for maximum impact. If a competitor finds out what you’re up to, it’s very difficult, if not impossible, to recover. Is this true in dating as well?

Little Miss HUS has experienced some serious negging and push-pull in the last couple of weeks. Rather than feeling intrigued, she’s ready to Next this guy. As she said to me:

Can’t game Blogdaughter, bitch!

This was said in jest, but does it have an element of truth?
No, unless one confuses principles with tactics. And even then, it usually doesn't matter. The principles of Game would stand intact even if a specific tactic were to become less effective with foreknowledge. However, as Roissy has pointed out on several occasions, the fact that a woman is aware a man utilizes Game is no more going to make him less attractive to her than the fact a man is aware that a woman is wearing a push-up bra makes her any less attractive to him.

If anything, men tend to both enjoy the view provided as well as appreciate the woman showing that she is willing to put in the effort to be attractive. When women claim that a specific Game tactic isn't effective on them - snowflake alert - because they are aware of it, in most cases, this is only the obvious consequence of the man who is using it being of insufficient socio-sexual rank. Game isn't magic and it's not going to turn the average man into Tom Brady or whatever the Hollywood flavor of the day might be.

Whether they care to admit it or not, women enjoy getting negged and dissed and push-pulled for the sake of the experience. As Penelope Trunk has demonstrated, they even enjoy "domestic violence" for the sake of the drama and self-importance it provides. And the enjoyment exists regardless of whether their enjoyment of it is enough to push a man employing such tactics into the attractive zone or not; notice that Little Miss HUS didn't actually state that it was the Game tactics that were the impetus to throw the guy into the discard bin. They may be the only reason she hasn't done so already, even if she doesn't think she is intrigued.

It sounds as if even with his apparent knowledge of Game, Mr. Push-Pull was always borderline in Little Miss HUS's eyes. The informative thing would be for Susan to track if similar behavior were to prove successful when utilized by a more attractive young man, or if stronger Game were successfully employed by a young man of comparable attributes.


Anonymous said...

Just because I could theoretically score at will on a pre-school team of kids does not mean that I'd even survive crossing the field against Real Madrid.

It certainly doesn't mean that I am somehow impervious to the "laws of soccer."

Sounds like HUS is annoyed to be on the field with the JV squad. Maybe she is better than that, maybe she isn't.

Doesn't mean she owns the game.

Der Hahn said...

The guiding principle of Game is that women will always rationalize their attraction, and by corollary their lack of attraction, in social acceptable terms to themselves and to others. “He had good Game” and “He had bad Game” isn’t more informative than any other justification a woman might give for why she found a man attractive. HUS really has a blind spot for this in assuming that women can be taught to recognize ‘cads’, not realizing this is the retroactive justification for getting caught up in a relationship that becomes unwanted.

JCclimber said...

My last 4 girlfriends knew I was a player. 3 of them accused me of it before we even began dating. But soon began to rationalize dating me anyway.

The one who became my wife insisted on a full STD screening before sleeping with me, however. Had to tone down the alpha behaviors a little, in fact.

If anything, knowing someone is using game just makes them more intriguing, as you begin to observe and analyze every word, every body language cue, every movement, every phone call and text. Pretty soon you're completely obsessed with figuring him out.

If he's got good game, then that hamster will have just the right amount of fuel. The issue with HUS is that the person doesn't have good game, yet.

Anonymous said...

If your game is good then it doesn't matter if women know you are using. Game isn't just about the technique. The non-verbal cues women get from good game are what matter. A guy with good game could narrate his actions and still be effective. The narration of the game would become part of the game itself. Think Will Smith picking up Eva Mendes in Hitch. Yeah that's just a movie but I've seen similar in real life.

Bad game, however, is even worse if the girl knows your using it on her. It comes across as extra loserly.

Anonymous said...

Heh, I bet Roosh has banged a ton of girls who would swear up and down that game would never work on them in a million years.

Anonymous said...

I doubt 'Little miss blog' even has a clear understanding of game. Her mother certainly doesn't.

Someone blindly subscribing to the tactics of game without the principles will run into reactions like this. Or he tried to shoot above his mark. Or Little Miss Blog wanted an ego boost by shooting down someone she recognized as actually wanting her enough to demonstrate it to her and a pat on the head from Ol Mrs Blog. Who knows?

The fact that they question is a sign they don't understand.

mmaier2112 said...

"Or he tried to shoot above his mark."

Why would this matter?


SarahsDaughter said...

The initial question is interesting to me. I thought immediately "does the knowledge of gravity reduce its force?"
From what I understand of Game is that it is the observance of behaviors of those that are successful in attracting women/keeping them attracted and the acknowledgment that if one desires to be successful in the same realm, to implement those behaviors.
When I get negged by my husband, my response is predictable and consistent. I get pissed, and turned on at the same time. Even if I psychoanalyze the situation: "you intentionally negged me," my response is the same. I can actually identify opportunities that he'd have for obvious negs. He keeps me on my toes, I don't really ever know when they're coming, but no matter the situation, I can not control my immediate reaction to them. I don't apologize for that nor deny it. Just as a woman with little boobs push them up/enhance them with the latest technology. The response to her breasts is natural, not something men should apologize for, nor feel like he's been betrayed when he learns that her C's are actually itty bitty A's.

Anonymous said...

"nor feel like he's been betrayed when he learns that her C's are actually itty bitty A's."


Seriously, though, if the response to breasts is natural, then so is the sense of betrayal, just like a woman's sense of disappointment (anti-tingles) when the higher beta/alpha she thought she had turns out to be a gamma/delta poser spitting canned lines because he hasn't internalized things yet.

Which is to say, yes, show your best side, but don't get upset if, when shown to have falsely advertised, the other person's reception cools.

Doogan said...

I've been mentally chasing my tail on this one, and I'm still not sure about it.

I think knowledge of Game can hinder its effectiveness in the same way that knowing a car salesman's tricks can help you avoid getting ripped off. However, the nature of Game means that this knowledge is only actually useful to a small number of women in a small number of scenarios. And I'm not certain that this set isn't so small as to be effectively nonexistent.

As Der Hahn pointed out, Game relies on a woman's tendency to rationalize her attraction. If she can't rein in her tendency to rationalize, then it doesn't matter how much she knows about Game. But if she can, then it doesn't matter how little she knows about Game.

At best, knowledge of Game is only helpful to the extent that a woman uses knowledge (as opposed to emotion) to evaluate a suitor.

SarahsDaughter said...

@ Anon: Okay, I don't actually know what a man thinks when he realizes the perceived A's are actually itty bitty C's.

Does he feel betrayed?

There are enough girls on the girl tree that if the gamma/delta is able to achieve desired results (attraction) and then back slides, he shouldn't be discouraged to continue on with the same initial behavior and learn from his mistakes on subsequent endeavors.

Even while married. My husband back slid for almost a year (after losing a quarter million in a business and entering a bit of a depression). His comeback was no less effective. It was still a matter of "F=ma." He tells me he miscalculated "a." Once he figured out what "a" was, he doubled it which led to 2xF.

SarahsDaughter said...

I wrote that wrong...perceived "C's" are actually itty bitty "A's"...sorry.

Anonymous said...

@SD: If the "C's" were one of the things that attracted him in the first place, then yes, there will be likely be some disappointment. Does that mean the girl is going to get kicked out of bed for having A's? Most probably not. But if she is looking for an LTR it is an additional hurdle to overcome if, again, that is one of the things that initially attracted him.

Anonymous said...

In cases where the individual practicing game is still unskilled, it might matter. Because when called out on a specific technique, rather than maintaining frame and plowing, they will backpedal, try to justify themselves, maybe even apologize. So the game practitioner should be prepared for an opportunity where his target is capable of identifying a technique he's using. Smirk like a pimp, dismiss her charge, and keep on gaming.

Susan Walsh said...

It sounds as if even with his apparent knowledge of Game, Mr. Push-Pull was always borderline in Little Miss HUS's eyes. The informative thing would be for Susan to track if similar behavior were to prove successful when utilized by a more attractive young man, or if stronger Game were successfully employed by a young man of comparable attributes.

Yes, I think this is right. To be clear, Little Miss HUS is a fan of Game, like her mother. When deployed well, it makes interacting with the opposite sex more fun, and it is very effective at moving things forward, which avoids wasting time.

When deployed poorly, or, as in this case, in ways that the woman can identify the plays as they occur, the lack of mastery is a DLV. I think this is especially true of asshole Game.

Daniel said...

Yeah. Game isn't Fight Club.

LP2021 Bank of LP Work in Progress said...

In my case, being aware of Game is informative and educational helping me understand others. It makes little difference to me, if a man uses Game or not. I still respect them and their choices.

Anonymous said...

Why would Susan consider a man and a woman he wants to date to be "competitors"? A questionable analogy. I could see how two men might compete to date the same woman, or two women compete for one man -- but does gaming a woman mean you're competing with her? That doesn't sound right, even to one as inexperienced as me.

Doug1 said...

I think her knowing about game and that he’s using it on her might well hurt when a guy is first trying to learn game and get good at it. I don’t think it hurts much once he is good at it.

Game will work best on a girl though if her first impressions of him are as an alpha who’s got game down pat, or better just naturally has it.

Anonymous said...

To thwart this, you will never hear from them, for like you, they can get ahead of their competition
automatically since searchers will see their site first. The road to page one ranking in
search engines.

Also visit my web page ... search engine optimization copywriting

Post a Comment