Tuesday, February 28, 2012

The Christianity of Game

I've previously insisted that Game and Christianity are not incompatible. I'm now going to go one step further and insist that, like science, it can be reasonably argued that the conceptual foundation of Game is actually dependent upon a fundamentally Christian worldview.

Consider the history of science. Although the concept of experimentation has been around since the first men discovered that the secret was, in the immortal words of The Newscaster, "to bang the rocks together, guys", it wasn't until the idea of an ordered universe subject to Natural Law imposed by a rational Creator had been widely adopted as the dominant intellectual paradigm that science, as a coherent concept and practice, was formulated. For all that some would pretend they are opposed, without Christianity, science in its presently understood form would not exist. It is not happenstance that science never developed in other religious cultures, even more technologically advanced ones such as China.

So, what is the most significant core concept of Game? I would argue that it is the immutably fallible nature of woman. If there is one concept that must be grokked in full by the would-be practitioner of Game, it is this. And for all that it is usually cloaked in the meaningless mumbo-jumbo of evo-psych, this is an intrinsically Christian concept, which insists a) all are fallen, b) male and female natures are fundamentally different, and c) Man is not materially perfectible. Progressive and secular science tells us that all states are mutable and all beings are perfectible. Humanism declares that reason is supreme. Marxism tells us that all consciousness is liable to modification. Buddhism insists that all such states are illusion. Islam is more compatible with the notion of female fallibility, but its severe fatalism is intrinsically anti-Game.

Only Christianity describes female nature in a manner that is entirely consistent with Game. Regardless of whether one considers hypergamy, the willingness to share Alphas, shit-testing, or pretty much any aspect of Game as explicated by its best theoreticians and practitioners, one can find a Christian conceptual antecedent for it. This does not mean that all the uses to which Game can be applied are consistent with Christian teaching anymore than the Christan belief in demons means that demon-worship is an aspect of proper Christian living. But at its core, Game is not merely compatible with Christianity, it is an articulation of some very fundamental Christian principles.

It may be vulgar to state that all women are possessed of a hypergamous and sluttish nature that they can only surmount, with varying degrees of success, by virtue of their willpower, but it is not at all incompatible with two thousand years of Christian philosophy.

63 comments:

szook said...

Yep, the Soul of Science meets Married Man's Sex life, that's about right.....

universityofman said...

Great perspective. I've always said that women find substance in things hoped for, and evidence in things unseen.(Hebrews 11:1) Their undying faith in themselves as unique, god-like individuals is just another example of how biblical teachings are accurate descriptors of the female mindset.

Looking forward to reading more.

Anonymous said...

"It may be vulgar to state that all women are possessed of a hypergamous and sluttish nature that they can only surmount, with varying degrees of success, by virtue of their willpower, but it is not at all incompatible with two thousand years of Christian philosophy."

I think this is right. Christian caritas does not mean unrealisticly ignoring who people are and what their faults are, rather true caritas involves true understanding even if that involves inconvenient truths.

Also, isn't game, properly exercised, a modern version of Chivalry? I know Chivalry is often denounced by gamers, however, could that be due to an insufficient understanding of what Chivalry actually was and was not? Is this understanding distorted by Cervantes? In the modern eyes of feminized women and emasculated men chivalry has been betaized by taking lion out of Christian manhood and leaving only the lamb. This is the view of Christ as merely only the Lamb of God and not also the Lion of Judah.

Game seems to be a modern response to this emasculated view of Chivalry. More study on this topic is necessary.

Ghost said...

And if anyone needs game, it's the guy who's been beta'd by his church. I was Mormon when I got divorced. I went to speak to the bishop about it, and he told me that I should stick with her and try to make it work. I said, "She threw boiling water in my face." After a stunned silence, he actually said, "well, women can tend to be a little over emotional. Is it really worth ending your marriage over?"

"maybe I wasn't clear enough; she brought the water to a boil, lifted the pan off the stove, and intentionally threw it at my face. That's not over emotional. That's fucking crazy." I stood up, walked out, and never returned to the Mormon church.

indyguy77@work said...

Then the question becomes how do you raise a boy to be a man in this trainwreck of a fallen world.

My 12yr old nephew apparently has Disinterest Game down to an art already, but I suspect this is because he is truly not interested in girls yet.

I'd love to see him in action, if only to point out how he's making his girlfriend want him more by depriving her of his interest.

thoumyvision said...

Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you. Genesis 3:16b

Right at the heart of game is the concept that women desire men who take charge and don't put up with shit. It all goes back to this.

Anonymous said...

What is "game" with a capital G? There are so many different schools of pick-up artistry and seduction that sometimes teach entirely contradictory ideas. There are self-proclaimed PUAs out there who teach you to be a nice guy.

Christianity is certainly not compatible with, say, Roissy's view of game (treating women like cattle, cheating on them to amplify attraction, etc). Mystery's, Style's, and so forth, maybe.

Vox said...

Christianity is certainly not compatible with, say, Roissy's view of game (treating women like cattle, cheating on them to amplify attraction, etc). Mystery's, Style's, and so forth, maybe.

You completely missed the point. Read it again, more slowly this time.

artie said...

So, what is the most significant core concept of Game? I would argue that it is the immutably fallible nature of woman.

and man? I think a man putting women on a pedestal or (worse) hating them for what they are is as much a sign of the fallible nature of man as the common behavior of women is for woman.

To me, Game was always foremost about self-assessment and self-improvement, the bettered interaction with anyone (including women) only being a by-product.

Mortarmanmike said...

I believe your analysis to be spot on. It is truly amazing that the Bible does such a wonderful job of illustrating these concepts that modern people find so difficult.
For example: Idolatry - placing anything other then God in God's place. Pedastalizing women is in effect idolatry. The Bible consistently warns against the dangers of idolatry (both spiritually and here in the world.)
Ecc 1:9 ... What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.
So why is it we have to keep relearning this same thuths? That is the real question.

Anonymous said...

I would only add that Game sharpens the focus of the sin nature when one's Christian wife walks out on him, takes the children and sits in the same church with her Bible on her lap as though Jesus is high-fiving her for fucking up a family and forever wrecking the childhood of two kids.

Ian Ironwood said...

Of course, I take issue not with your comparison of Christianity and Game, which I won't deny are plausible (but unhelpful to me). But I do dispute that radical monotheism is a necessary precedent to either the pursuit or the fulfillment of sophisticated Science. That it happened in the West that way is one thing . . . but non-Western cultures have advanced Science independent of and in collaboration with the Christian West for centuries. It is a Christian conceit to think that their brand of radical monotheism is required for a cultural development just because it happened to be present in such a context in your experience.

Personally, I feel that the evolving Neo-Pagan perspective, informed as it is by Science, is a more accurate spiritual reflection of the manifestation of Game than the Christian, relatively anti-sex version. While Christianity sees all men and women as fallen and flawed, NeoPaganism views them as works-in-progress in need of wisdom and guidance, not punishment and shame.

To many of us (but not all -- NeoPaganism is a profoundly eclectic and syncretic group of traditions) the dominant and submissive roles of men and women in a sexual relationship are part of a holy dance whose ultimate goal is procreation and the fulfillment of which is a profoundly spiritual experience. We don't view women as fallen or flawed, just incomplete. The two genders are congruous and complementary, when balance is achieved within a relationship. But it is the duty of the husband and the wife to both continuously strive for balance, while both acknowledge that it is a never-ending, constantly changing challenge to do so. That is the beauty of the dance, the perpetual Great Hunt that rewards your efforts with wonder, adventure, security and prosperity. In that context, Game is quite literally a part of a sacred pursuit, as the dominant male "hunter" seeks to pursue and approach the more submissive "prey", the female. The tension between the opposites and the impetus of the energy of the Hunt turn the whole narrative of seduction into an often-transformative primal religious experience. Instead of feeling shame and guilt about sex (which many married Christian couples often do, even after their union has been sanctified) to Pagans sex is a sacrament that blesses both parties, and Game is the instrument through which that sacrament is made manifest..

The idea that a solitary demiurge is somehow required for any of this is amusing, at best. The priests of the Pagan Greeks invented Science, remember, and under their influence some pretty profound discoveries and inventions were made. In contrast, the Church took an almost universally anti-Science stance throughout most of its history, and true progress through the Scientific Revolution of the 1800s was only achieved once the inherent limits of radical monotheism as a concept had been left behind. While the idea that one divine individual is responsible for all of creation might be useful as a spiritual or even theoretical exercise, it is not only not required for scientific advancement, it is often the greatest obstacle to such work.

Vox said...

The priests of the Pagan Greeks invented Science, remember, and under their influence some pretty profound discoveries and inventions were made. In contrast, the Church took an almost universally anti-Science stance throughout most of its history, and true progress through the Scientific Revolution of the 1800s was only achieved once the inherent limits of radical monotheism as a concept had been left behind.

You're completely wrong and you quite clearly know very little about the history of science. You're also wrong about paganism, which in its modern and artificial form bears no resemblance to the various ancient forms.

Vox said...

I would be remiss if I omitted addressing this:

While the idea that one divine individual is responsible for all of creation might be useful as a spiritual or even theoretical exercise, it is not only not required for scientific advancement, it is often the greatest obstacle to such work.

Rancid ahistorical bullshit. You obviously know nothing of the histories of China and Japan, and are forgetting the technological retardation of the former Eastern Bloc.

Anonymous said...

Ian,

Technology is not science.

I'll leave it to others to rip apart the rest of what you said.

Athor Pel

Mortarmanmike said...

No, but technology is the application of science. Science without application is as useful as ... well nothing.

So what were the scientific achievements of those wonderful neo-pagans and other multi-theist to which you allude? You know, the ones that weren't shackled by the mean ole' Church during all those years. China? India? Nippon? Mongols? The entire african continent? What great scientific discoveries were they uncovering while Christians languished away in ignorance?

Without recognizing the concept of the Creator, scientist just keep kicking the can down the road. But that is besides the point of the article I think. Anyone who spends even a little time in the Bible can easily recognize the concepts of game. The fact that the modern church misses this puzzles me greatly.

Anonymous said...

Tantric Buddhism addressed masculine-feminine dynamics in a much deeper fashion than Christianity ever did.

Jonathan Wolfe said...

"It may be vulgar to state that all women are possessed of a hypergamous and sluttish nature that they can only surmount, with varying degrees of success, by virtue of their willpower, but it is not at all incompatible with two thousand years of Christian philosophy."

As a Catholic, I would say that it is not just personal willpower, but Grace itself that allows us to overcome the worst of ourselves. Reception to grace varies with the condition of each soul, of course.

"No, but technology is the application of science."

Not necessarily. It wasn't science that led the Chinese to gunpowder. It was mere observation that black powder sparks up. They stumbled upon gunpowder the way man stumbled upon fire. Finding uses for natural resources is not the equivalent of science. There was no scientific method involved in discovering, for example, that hurling plagued corpses into cities hastened their surrender by spreading disease, or that diverting rivers can starve peoples. Science is a radically different animal.

rycamor said...

Game viewed in light of Christianity is a good antidote to the smarmy fairy tale idea of sex and marriage painted by much of the modern church. Gentleness and respect is fine, but without firm leadership on the man's part, it will lead to failure.

On the flip side, true Biblical Christianity is a good antidote to whiny-boy gamma thinking. Being a nice man, a hard-working provider, and a faithful husband is no guarantee that your wife will dote on you, or that she won't get fat, or that she won't leave you. The God of the Bible promises *in general* to bless those who follow him and curse those who curse him (it is presented as a culture-wide truth), but it also tells us that there is plenty of injustice in the world, and we shouldn't be surprised at it. Our faith is supposed to be made of sterner stuff.

Hebrews 11 starts by naming some of the great victories of faith, but it ends with a list of terrible things that have happened to the faithul: "Others were tried by mocking and scourging, yes, moreover by bonds and imprisonment. They were stoned. They were sawn apart. They were tempted. They were slain with the sword. They went around in sheep skins and in goat skins; being destitute, afflicted, ill-treated (of whom the world was not worthy), wandering in deserts, mountains, caves, and the holes of the earth. "

Compared to that, so what if your wife doesn't treat you like the king you think you should be? So what if the cute girl in your youth group doesn't notice your plays for her attention? (Stop it!) So what if your woman doesn't show appreciation for the sacrifices you have made? Whining cannot fix things, only make it worse, and it is a downright sinful thing for a Christian to engage in. Shoulder past such trivialities and move on with pursuit of your utmost for His Highest. If she won't follow, in the end it is no concern of yours. However, it is the best chance you've got.

Anonymous said...

"You completely missed the point. Read it again, more slowly this time."

I think I did understand what you said, though you are free to correct me if I am wrong. Yes, Christianity is compatible with what you describe as the core of game.

However, I think that people usually mean when they complain that Christianity and game are not compatible is the various maxims that advice men to treat women badly. Of course the two agree that humans are fallen creatures.

Women are hypergamous, women shit test, women are willing to share alphas, and there is nothing in Christianity to contradict that. But it is not necessarily the case that responding to this unfortunate state of affairs by creating a bad boy asshole persona is consistent with Christianity. Even Roissy claims that about a third of women are not attracted to assholes, or at least don't don't require one to satisfy them, so the Christian doesn't necessarily need, or is allowed to, make a 180 degree change to his personality to find his spouse.

R. Bradley Andrews said...

Pick a name anon. Use a fake url and you will be fine.

What caused the order you claim in the universe if nothing was there to make that order. "It just happened" is as bogus in that as in a mathematical proof that says "then a miracle happens." You can claim all the "dance" you want, it doesn't make it true.

As a previous poster noted, discovering something by happenstance is not the same as discovering it by methodical research.

You require a belief in consistency to bother trying to figure out how they work.

Markku said...

Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you. Genesis 3:16b

This is an odd verse in the original Hebrew, because it doesn't use the normal preposition "for", but rather "against". New Literal Translation says: "And you will desire to control your husband, but he will rule over you"

Koanic said...

Very nicely done, but a little too strong on the evo psych bashing. You're "conveniently" forgetting sociobiology, and all those neurotransmitter monkey genes we share. The case for science being Christian is strong; Game is merely Christianity-compatible.

Anonymous said...

"Tantric Buddhism addressed masculine-feminine dynamics in a much deeper fashion than Christianity ever did."

This is correct and so does Taoism. Taoist Yin Yang theory perfectly describes the gender dynamic in an almost scientific way. The same understanding can be found in Tantric yogic traditions. What understanding of game and what premises of game you can find in the bible is about 0.1% of the immense amount of precise analysis you can find of it in these traditions. They view the whole universe as an interplay between male and female yin yang dynamics at every level. David Deidas work, which has been praised by many pickup artists, is derived from these eastern spiritual traditions. If you want to get a deeper understanding of game then read up on taoism and tantra.

Anonymous said...

"The priests of the Pagan Greeks invented Science, remember . . ."

Uh, it was only when the Greeks ignored their Pagan religion and took a monotheisitc view towards the "one" did the ancient Greeks like Aristotle begin to do "science." And the history of modern science bears out an important relationship with Christianity and not other religious sects. Anyone arguing to the contrary did not know who Pascal, Newton, Bayes, or Mendel were. Nor do such people understand that the Copernican revolution and the Galileo affair only happened in the context of the Church and Christianity. ["He refused the reasonable third position which the Church offered him: that Copernicanism might be considered a hypothesis, one even superior to the Ptolemaic system, until further proof could be adduced." Point being that the Church was defending reason against Galileo who was jumping to a conclusion, hardly scientific on his part]. Nowhere else was such scientific enquiry to be found.

And finally, all that neo-Paganesque dance crap is effeminate nonsense.

R. Bradley Andrews said...

Galileo was an obnoxious twit from all I have read. His "persecution" was due to his personal style rather than some anti-science bias. People need to watch their sacred cows.

Anonymous said...

To Ghost - I completely agree with you about the church misleading men in this area.

I am currently in the process of stepping back from the organized church due to the outright fallacies it teaches, it's anti-male nature and just general disinterest in the weekly gatherings which seem mostly aimed at hooking new members.

If I did not have a kid that I think is benefiting from attending, I would completely unplug.

G

PC Geek said...

To Ghost

Much of the church may be (unfortunately) feminized to the point of total retardation, but remember that Christ Himself is not. Christianity is patriarchal through and through and has no illusions about women and their batshit insane behavior.

Many MRA/MGTOW types cannot tell the difference. (BTW I am not claiming that you are one of them - just a general observation.

I always wanted to get married, but I have read too many divorce horror stories (check out Elusive Wapiti's latest post for some more fun on that front) and seen too much total solipism and feminist bitching from modern women to possible take the plunge.

Game or no game modern ameriskanks are not worth anyone's time.

Anonymous said...

"The same understanding can be found in Tantric yogic traditions. What understanding of game and what premises of game you can find in the bible is about 0.1% of the immense amount of precise analysis you can find of it in these traditions."

The thing I always found interesting was that in the tantric tradition, women were considered the active ones in sexuality, not that man. See also: Vajrayogini.

Orville said...

Anyone who spends even a little time in the Bible can easily recognize the concepts of game. The fact that the modern church misses this puzzles me greatly.

Because churchians abandoned the source of truth. A person, church or denomination that does not allow the truths in the Bible to keep them in check will always decay into some fetid religion.

And I'll note too that there is no shortage of pagan religions whose primary deity is female or has a token male god with a stronger female goddess.

M. Simon said...

The Jews got there first:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MJ25Ak02.html

Anonymous said...

Conservative Lutherans call it "orders of creation" and often describe the first sin as Adam failing to exercise his duty as head of household, and first priest, to instruct Eve, and Eve's usurpation of authority from Adam.

http://www.intrepidlutherans.com/2011/05/order-of-creation-and-headship.html

Jum said...

That "meaningless mumbo-jumbo"? It's not just in "evo-psych".

Denton said...

Couple of short observations: First, many of the commentators are revealing a very limited understanding of Christianity - It appears everything is based on the western branches of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism (and for the fellow who goes for his kid, may I suggest an Orthodox Church? We're often accuse of being unfriendly to women...)

Secondly, one could say the basis for Game is here: Genesis 3:16. Part of it in one translation goes: "your desire shall be for man and you will chase after him, and he lord over you." So cursed to be the chaser, not supposed to be the chasee...

Nice post.

R. Bradley Andrews said...

"The thing I always found interesting was that in the tantric tradition, women were considered the active ones in sexuality, not that man. See also: Vajrayogini."

I have not read much in this, but this would make it the equivalent of the modern male fantasy of the attractive sexually aggressive woman that permeates so much modern entertainment.

Quite a bit earlier, but the same principle.

Lucas said...

Great analisys, VD.

Anonymous said...

To the poster above who dodged the boiling water, and also to the man whose ex-wife attends his church:

I am female, and got divorced in the 80s in an area with a very high cost of living. My husband wanted to "be free." He demanded that our small children remain in the local area "because it was their psychological home" but didn't want to pay child support or alimony, and weasled out of paying whenever he could. He wasn't a Christian, but I was.

My church encouraged a "wait and see" attitude. Just pray, and pray, and pray some more (while you and the kiddies are living under a bridge) and JESUS will work a miracle and the whole family will be back together!

My ex was also a sociopath, which other people did NOT understand, and fellow church members broke my heart with their "takes-two-to-tango" view of divorce. But if the other person has a pot of boiling water, you really do have to leave!

I hope both of you find a different church. You'll have to look long and hard, because 90% of the churches in America left Christ behind in the dust on their quest toward modernity, but there are good churches out there.

I'll pray for both of you.

Anonymous said...

I will pray for you. I am sorry you are deluded.
Game is more akin to Satanism.
http://altreligion.about.com/od/satanismlaveyan/tp/nine_satanic_statements.htm

Toby said...

Anonymous said...
I will pray for you. I am sorry you are deluded.
Game is more akin to Satanism.
http://altreligion.about.com/od/satanismlaveyan/tp/nine_satanic_statements.htm


I'll pray for you so because you are stupid and needs an IQ improvement.

Anonymous said...

I do not fundamentally disagree what you said in your post. I think that you are right, and I have a newfound respect for this blog.

But as a theologian (and a game-blog reader), I would insist that this connection is much deeper yet...

Let me explain:

Where does the most powerful bonding take place between a man and his wife? In consummation of course. One blogger has said, "But it is one very special part of your marriage relationship that you cannot share with anyone else. God has designed it that way, just for the growth, joy, pleasure and benefit of your marriage." How true. Upon serious reflection, we see that all roads in marriage lead to this most special and intimate of moments. At the very least - assuming that both a husband and wife share godly conversation, reflection and prayer - this "act of marriage" is the ultimate expression and strengthener of the shared love between a husband and wife (for conversation, reflection, and prayer can all accompany this).

Insofar as I am in Adam, I desire this union for reasons entirely of the flesh. My desire is to consume and to possess – and to satiate my lust (even if I have success in limiting these twisted desires to my wife, both in my external behavior, and to a lesser degree, my inner thought-life). Eros. Insofar as I am a New Man, I desire this union - this conjugal union - that I may participate in one of the greatest and most powerful gifts that God has created, for by it, a husband and wife are made one flesh, and are bound together as one. Agape-driven eros.

Nathan Rinne said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

....could you please remove my last comment.... I'd rather be anonymous : )

...Can this final consummation become the most important thing that a Christian – particularly a Christian man – looks forward to? Without a doubt, the greatest sign of this final consummation - the greatest Promise - is the Lord's very body and blood that He gives us in His Supper. That the eyes of our heart would continually be opened to this amazing reality! And yet, even as we fail to see and experience this as vividly as we should, any man, regardless of the maturity of his faith, will not fail to have an amazing experience of divine favor when he lays with his wife. And again - is it possible that for him this sign, as wonderful and as glorious as it is, can only pale in comparison to that greater reality towards which it points him -an eternity with our Lord? In truth, what greater thing could we work towards? What greater thing could we long for? What greater thing could we pursue? The overwhelming greatness, pleasure and power of the act of marriage are only a foretaste of the feast to come.

But even here - God's Kingdom comes without our prayer... It is He who pursues us! He is the One who really longs for us, His bride! He is the One who works - who is working all things for the good, leading up to the end. It is not we who pursue or try to effect the end - to bring about consummation - but He who does this. It is He who works all in all, and we can only reject His subtle and not-so-subtle advances. He will not be tamed as He does all that is necessary to protect, treasure, win, ravish and woo us. This includes crushing those other "lovers" who would lovelessly use us for their own empty purposes, that we may be His forever.

Aside: God is as the ultimate Alpha male, whom all the prettiest girls want to sleep with. This God, however, does not limit Himself to the beautiful ones only, but to the lowly and unattractive. More - He veils His own attractiveness and desirability, so that it is hidden. More - He ravishes and takes all of us for His own Name’s sake, which means nothing more than He is the only One that exists who not only unfailingly desires each and every person, but truly loves them, enjoys them, and remains faithful to them. He will not be tamed as He does all that is necessary to protect, treasure, win, ravish and woo us. This includes crushing those other "lovers" who would lovelessly use us for their own empty purposes, that we may be His forever.

And we are moved to sing of this great love - from this great Lover.

That He might have us forever... for we are His.

Anonymous said...

Funny... trying to be anonymous and all... and with one slip of the keyboard.

So, yeah, if you could just remove my name from that post, I'd appreciate it.

Here's a summary that gets to the heart of it for persons who don't want to read all the stuff I wrote above:

God is as the ultimate Alpha male, whom all the prettiest girls want to sleep with. This God, however, does not limit Himself to the beautiful ones only, but to the lowly and unattractive. More - He veils His own attractiveness and desirability, so that it is hidden. More - He woos, ravishes and takes all of us for His own Name’s sake, which means nothing more than He is the only One that exists who not only unfailingly desires each and every person, but truly loves them, enjoys them, and remains faithful to them. He will not be tamed as He does all that is necessary to protect, treasure, win, ravish and woo us. This includes crushing those other "lovers" who would lovelessly use us for their own empty purposes, that we may be His forever (So yeah, with this view Roissy pretty much ends up being the Anti-Christ [even though we can learn from him])

God's Kingdom comes without our prayer... It is He who pursues us! He is the One who really longs for us, His bride! He is the One who works - who is working all things for the good, leading up to the end. It is not we who pursue or try to effect the end - to bring about consummation - but He who does this. It is He who works all in all, and we can only reject His subtle and not-so-subtle advances.

Desert Cat said...

Yeh. This is what Song of Solomon is all about.

Will S. said...

"Regardless of whether one considers hypergamy, the willingness to share Alphas, shit-testing, or pretty much any aspect of Game as explicated by its best theoreticians and practitioners, one can find a Christian conceptual antecedent for it."

Indeed; as per shit-testing, Genesis 3:16 can be translated as in the New Living Translation:

Then he said to the woman, "I will sharpen the pain of your pregnancy, and in pain you will give birth. And you will desire to control your husband, but he will rule over you."

Ever since, women have strived to control their husbands - and been pleased and satisfied when they couldn't, and only temporarily happy, even if for a fairly lengthy time, when they do end up ruling him. It is a paradox, which the Bible recognized as starting right from the time of the Fall, as a consequence of the Fall.

ray said...

genesis 3:16 was a PUNISHMENT for the prior rebellion of woman for

1) superseding the man's authority, as given by God; and

2) establishing herself as moral/ethical authority (knowledge of good and evil, legalism, matriarchy etc)

all the rationalizations in creation wont change the fact that Christ and Game are incompatible; absolutely nothing in the bible about it, and nothing in Christ's heart about it either

gaming people is a concession to matriarchy (which should be resisted and overthrown, not conceded to)

the Game/PUA hucksterism has already diluted the righteous messages of the m.r.m. -- now our feminist nations can continue to ignore the apartheid inflicted on western boys and men, pointing out that male insurgency is merely about adolescent gaming/seduction of women

the bible is sufficient to ascertain (and correct) the fallibilities of woman, and to go beyond the bible into the vanities of the prideful male mind is error

every generation wants its own Genius System, its own Baby, guess this one's yours

Desert Cat said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Desert Cat said...

"...the righteous message of the MRM..."

oy vey...

"...gaming people is a concession to matriarchy (which should be resisted and overthrown, not conceded to)..."

BS. Game is highly effective at undermining the matriarchy, because it demonstrates it's premises to be the big pack of pretty lies that it is. Not to mention effective at restoring control in relationships back to men, which is where it (biblically) should be.

You MRA/MGTOW gamma sorts haven't got a prayer of changing the status quo. Whether you threaten to hold your breath 'til you pass out or huff and take your ball home, you're doing nothing to effectively reverse the trend toward matriarchy. Only gamers are actively, one relationship at a time, reasserting male dominance.

Anonymous said...

I think you're right on the money. The Garden of Eden and the fall of Eve were THE very warning as to what happens to a man if he does NOT have game within the context of a Christian marriage. It was Adam's JOB to say one simple word.... "NO". The simple lesson for all men is to NOT become "p-whipped". It's THAT simple. I urge ALL men to go and just read Genesis and then apply it to modern day relationships, instead of just ignoring the real metaphorical implications that, unless heeded, mean SURE DEATH to all men if they allow a woman to run all over them.

Glad to see others are finally catching on to this concept...

Cheap WOW Gold said...

What is "game" possessing a cash G? There are so loads of distinctive colleges of pick-up artistry and seduction that occasionally train completely contradictory ideas. There are self-proclaimed PUAs on the marketplace who train one to acquire a good guy.
Buy Runescape Gold
Christianity is completely not compatible with, say, Roissy's wrist watch of gaming (treating girls like cattle, cheating on them to amplify attraction, etc). Mystery's, Style's, and so forth, maybe.
Buy World Of Warcraft Gold

Scott6584 said...

Very interesting reading, I must say.

Initially, when it was first introduced to me, the concept of "Game" had very little appeal to me. I was not interested in trying to take advantage of women. But I got divorced a few years ago from a woman who had an affair (she claims it was only emotional) with a guy at work.

Over the 20 years of our marriage, I gradually succumbed to her efforts to control me, all in the name of trying to love her sufficiently. The most frustrating aspect of all was there were times in our marriage when I temporarily stopped caring about her at all, and it was in those times that she seemed to want me. So the concept of "Game" perfectly describes what happened in our marriage. Also, the guy she had an affair with was a power broker in her company, so that applies also.

So, in my relationship with her, I fell into playing a beta role over time because I thought marriage (in a Christian context) demanded it. However, I am a natural Alpha. It was why my ex-wife was attracted to me in the first place. In her mind, all the other guys at the church were wimps.

How do I know that I am naturally an Alpha?

In almost every context you can imagine, I have either taken charge, or been asked to take charge. It has always been a mystery to me why, but it also has seemed unnatural not to be in charge. The two times I served on juries, the rest of the jurors just assumed I would be jury foreman. I didn't seek it. I became jury foreman by acclamation. In my last job, after four months teaching in a techical college, and with no other academic experience, I was asked to become the Director of the Education department - essentially the supervisor over all the Program Directors and every instructor. As for women, since I have been divorced these last 3-1/2 years, four different women, ranging in age from 17 years younger to 9 years younger, have pursued me for marriage - and I'm not talking about ugly lard-butt girls. I'm talking about the hottest female instructor in the college jumping into my bed last year, and this year, a 29 year old hard body who is on the city cycling team (rides 450 mile races for fun) pursuing me - a 46 yr old who is overwieght and has a son only 7 yrs younger than her.

Prior to reading several of your articles, I truly did not understand why these things happen to me. But apparently, some of us play the "game" without realizing it. One of the articles I read about Practicing Eye-Contact seemed obvious to me because I have always established and maintained eye contact with men and women. It has never occurred to me to look away or drop my gaze if someone returns it. I always interpreted a returned gaze as an invitation to conversation.

So the articles you have written here have given me insight into who I am naturally, and why people almost instantly defer to me on a regular basis. They have also explained to me why I was so miserable in my marriage, and why, ultimately, trying to act like a non-dominant male in order to stop the complaining of my ex-wife led to the destruction of my marriage.

Scott6584 said...

However, as a Christian man, I still cannot subscribe to the objectification of women, and the callous use of women that the Game calls for. But I do recognize the truth of how you describe women. But Christianity (as opposed to what I call Churchianity) still demands that we offer grace to those who do not deserve it. In this case, it would be women generally.

Certainly, much of what you describe about women, I have seen since becoming single. The "attractiveness" of women generally is not very high. I can understand why you recommend just using them and throwing them away. The 29 yr old who is currently chasing me has two sons by two different men, and is a harrigan (complete with the tramp stamp) that no man in his right mind should consider marrying. But instead of wanting to take advantage of her (which I could easily do), my impulse is to help her two sons that she has no idea how to properly raise.

So just because you have "game" doesn't automatically lead to taking advantage of women. You still have the option to exercise self-control. When I was 20, and two roommates, aged 26 and 30, each tried to bed me, I resisted due to the morality taught by my Christian father.

So the question not answered in this comparison of Christianity and Game is this: For the Christian man who recognizes that most of what you say about women is true, and who is an Alpha Male by nature, how do you harmonize the observations you have accurately made about how women actually act with the imperatives of Christianity to treat one another with kindness and gentleness, and to exercise self-control? Gentleness is not weakness. You can be firm without being hard.

Finally, I have seen others in the church teaching their sons to be Beta males. I have never countenanced it. My own 22 yr old son is very much in charge of himself, and doesn't allow women to rule over him. Both his younger sisters have tried and failed. You don't have to be a Beta male to be in the church. But we in the church do need to recognize how we are setting our young people up to fail. Despite the ways in which the application of Game is incompatible with Christian principles, the observations about the hypergamous nature of females is something we need to address head on, and not avoid.

modernguy said...

If you want to be informative you have to be clear. What you are talking about here is the descriptive aspect of game, the part that describes women as they behave. In that sense, yes, it is compatible with Christianity because they both describe women in the same general way, although the Bible does not do as good of a job. If klingons came to earth and described women as they are and as they tend to behave their observations would also be "compatible" with Christianity. So you're really not saying much.

The parts of game that most people have a problem with are the prescriptive part. The manipulation, the falsification, the promiscuity. Those parts are probably not compatible with Christianity.

jessa said...

I'm not sure where you all go to church, because our last 5 churches were entirely male led, with no women ever allowed to teach or hold positions of authority (except for over children.) And men were taught to lead their families, and wives were taught to submit to their own husband. We loved each church and learned a lot. But being military, we have to move and leave our fellowships behind.

I do think some aspects of game come alongside Christianity, but it depends on the heart attitude. Is it to get more sex, or is it because God commands husbands to lead? More sex might be a side benefit, but it should not be the motive.

King A (Matthew King) said...

This thread needs expansion and constant rebooting in the game community until the big-thinking, itchy-pantsed dolts understand their only recourse for the reconciliation of the political and the personal, or the social and the sexual, is through an institution which has refined the approach over twenty centuries.

Science as we know it is Christian. Period.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_Catholic_cleric%E2%80%93scientists

There would be no controversy about this if our educators were teaching Aquinas rather than Harriet Tubman. Experimental science, the scientific method, and the technology that derived therefrom, require two assumptions (based on simple faith): that the universe was created (i.e., a separate entity from God) and that the universe is intelligible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChuJ-9ypeqs
[watch the entire keynote address, but particularly the beginning of this clip]

and

http://www.wordonfire.org/WoF-Blog/WoF-Blog/March-2012/Philosophy-Intelligibility-and-the-Natural-World.aspx

[What's up with the HTML link tags? Do they work in this comment system?]

Anonymous said...

Foly shucking hit!

Anonymous said...

So why is it we have to keep relearning this same thuths?

Thuths?

If it's truths you mean - the drooling idiot any XY individual becomes when experiencing breasts should give you a clue.

Despair said...

The Mormon church is chop full of betas and gammas.

Shaun said...

I couldn't help but notice that this post doesn't actually cite any scripture... and scripture being the essence of Christianity, you cannot philosophies without it.

M. Simon said...

The Jews got there first. And still contribute to science and technology way out of proportion to their numbers.

Dr. Raphael Mechoulam for instance. The Christian West has done a very good job of persecuting those interested in his discoveries.

A fellow here attributes Jewish intelligence to Christian persecution.

http://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/cochran/overclocking.html

And of course centuries of Christian persecution of the Jews laid the foundation for some very momentous events of the 20th Century. Until the Christians came to their senses temporarily.

Ana Baptist said...

Guess what:

"The Bride of Christ is possessed of a hypergamous and sluttish nature..."

If that's how you see women, that's how Jesus Christ sees you. After all, you are a bride. And while we're on the subject of Genesis:

"And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel."

Enmity for the woman - whether the Bride of Christ or physical women - is a mark of the Antichrist. The societies that brutally oppress women are all the same societies that brutally oppress Christians.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhPbJV85hqs

ribut ariadi said...

Thank you for your very nice article, do not forget to read my articles also humor dewasa, status fb galau, status fb romantis, status fb lucu, kata kata cinta, kata kata cinta, kata kata bijak , Kata Kata Galau, kata kata indah, kata kata bijak, kata kata cinta, kata kata romantis, kata kata motivasi, status fb lucu, status fb romantis and many other interesting articles on my blog that.

treepti shorma said...

If you like, please enter my demons games. Giveaway starting after midnight tonight till 10/31 at midnight...I'd love to see you enter! It's open to everyone.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.