Tag: Alpha Game

Gamma spin in action

Here is how Dave Futrelle attempted to characterize the abortive debate on women’s suffrage I posted at Alpha Game, which he fled once it became apparent that he couldn’t get away with simply declaring himself the winner and would have to actually make a coherent case in support of female suffrage instead:

The very notion of two dudes earnestly debating female suffrage – in 2014, no less – struck me as beyond absurd, so I sent back what I thought was an appropriately dismissive Tweet.

    @voxday @RedPillPhil @heartiste Yes, women should have voting rights, because they, like men, are human. I win the debate! The end.Thanks!—
    David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) July 25, 2014

Apparently Mr. Day saw this tweet as my opening gambit in a debate that was now on, and replied with an attempted gotcha. Against my better judgment, I replied:

    @voxday @RedPillPhil @heartiste No. I vote where I live, in the US.. So are you contending that no women live in the countries they vote in?—
    David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) July 25, 2014

He replied, and I sunk deeper into the quicksand of this ridiculous “debate.”

    @voxday @RedPillPhil @heartiste There are a few basic requirements for having the right to vote besides being human but being male isn’t one—
    David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) July 26, 2014

At this point I realized I needed to shut this thing down as quickly as possible. So I posted a couple of quick tweets:

David Futrelle
There are a few basic requirements for having the right to vote besides being human but being male isn’t one

David Futrelle
There is no reasonable reason to deny anyone the vote because of gender.

David Futrelle
… and that’s preetty much the end of the argument, despite whatever spurious reason you come up with to deny women the vote. Debate over.

This is classic Gamma behavior. Their fear of failure is so great that in the rare instance they don’t completely avoid conflict, they engage only insofar as they can later claim that they weren’t really trying. They want their audience to believe that, of course, they COULD have roundly defeated their opponent, but they couldn’t bother for [insert excuse here]. Of course, they somehow always find the time to explain their various justifications for not really trying, which often takes longer than simply engaging in the first place would have.

Notice how Futrelle falsely claims I said I defeated him in the debate. That’s absolutely untrue. All I did was expose his inability to hold his own or to make his case on the subject. My only claim was this: “I was able to show Futrelle’s reasoning to be incorrect twice.”  Which was undeniably true. There was no winner of the debate since it never reached a conclusion. Futrelle simply ran away and now he is trying to provide a narrative to justify that abject retreat.

Futrelle’s fellow Gamma male, PZ, who has run away from a few debates himself, was quick to embrace Futrelle’s narrative:

Actually, Day proposed a debate on a subject that was settled in the USA about 95 years ago, and Futrelle laughed dismissively, and Vox Day declared himself the winner.

“Critics such as Futrelle and Scalzi are of low socio-sexual rank, which means that they have the usual gamma male’s distaste for conflict that has a clear winner. The reason is that as long as they can avoid losing, they can still claim victory in their delusional gamma style.”

Wait. But it was Vox Day who threw out a few non sequiturs and declared himself winner…this is confusing.

Again, note that I did absolutely nothing of the sort. It may be helpful to be reminded of the Gamma male’s core mindset, as provided by a self-admitted former Gamma male: “It’s not about being stupid, or even a chubby nerd, it’s about lying to yourself relentlessly about what’s right in front of your eyes.”

That’s how Gammas like Futrelle and Myers can lie so blatantly about me declaring myself the winner when in fact Futrelle was the only one who did so. They relentlessly lie, to others and themselves, because the truth is too painful for them to accept. Notice, too, that only one commenter on PZ’s site points out the obvious; other than him, no one calls them on their observable lies.

Can you even imagine that happening here? On a complete tangent, this pair of comments made me laugh:

daintydougal
rhetoric is no substitute for dialectic rhetoric is no substitute for dialectic… *head kasplodes*

fibinachi
Yeah! I second daintydougal. Out of all that, that’s the one that threw me off the most too. Just wow.

Keep in mind that these are the people who claim to be the intelligent and educated side. Then again, we were warned:

“[B]efore some audiences not even the possession
of the exactest knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For argument based on knowledge
implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.”

Sabotaging marriage

Male white knights and feminists should think twice before defending Spreadsheet Wife, as Troy Francis observes at The Return of Kings that her actions are nothing less than a public advertisement for anti-marriage:

The best creative agency in the world would have been hard-pressed to come up with a more effective advertisement against marriage. Rollo points out that getting hitched is no insulation from the sexual marketplace, and it is a common trope that men need to game their wives. But that’s a hell of a lot of work, and with the sexual rewards potentially so low, and with women being a depreciating asset over time, many guys could be forgiven for choosing not to bother and to remain single, learn game and spin plates instead.

You can read my take on it at Alpha Game:

The first thing is that this spreadsheet didn’t come out of the blue. It is almost surely a quintessential male response to a very typical female tactic: the demand for proof. Women often try to put men in a false “heads I win, tails you lose” position, in which they demand proof of the assertion, but if called on this demand, then try to argue that the anticipation of the need for proof somehow disqualifies its relevance. That is exactly what the wife is attempting to do here. She’s trying to use that the fact he made the spreadsheet and sent it to her on the road to retroactively justify her previous actions.

The worst response is arguably that of self-admitted white knight Dave Swindle, who is adroitly taken apart by Dr. Helen:

This response is classic white knighting where the spreadsheet guy is a
failure and this is why he can’t get sex. Note the word loser that is
used in Dave’s first paragraph. Of course it’s important to white knight
and call the guy a loser because that means that a man that doesn’t get
upset if his wife won’t have sex with him is a winner! A convenient
excuse to tell oneself on yet another sexless night. And of course, as
Dave notes, it is always up to the man to take responsibility for any
problems in the couple’s sex life. Wife doesn’t put out? It’s your
fault, man. You lack self-control.

The similarity between the normal female response and the gamma male’s does border on the creepy at times, doesn’t it? Anyhow, this should demonstrate how the instinctive and/or solipsistic reflex to defend Team Woman at all costs is observably detrimental to female interests in the long-term.

The source of misogyny

Socio-sexual delusions can kill when the “perfect gentleman” finally realizes that women don’t actually give a damn about all the things he was told they valued:

On the day of retribution, I am going to enter the hottest sorority house at UCSB and I will slaughter every single spoiled, stuck-up, blond slut I see inside there. All those girls I’ve desired so much. They have all rejected me and looked down on me as an inferior man if I ever made a sexual advance toward them, while they throw themselves at these obnoxious brutes.

I take great pleasure in slaughtering all of you. You will finally see that I am, in truth, the superior one, the true alpha male. [laughs] Yes, after I have annihilated every single girl in the sorority house, I’ll take to the streets of Isla Vista and slay every single person I see there. All those popular kids who live such lives of hedonistic pleasure while I’ve had to rot in loneliness all these years. They all look down upon me every time I tried to join them, they’ve all treated me like a mouse.

Well, now I will be a god compared to you, you will all be animals, you are animals and I will slaughter you like animals. I’ll be a god exacting my retribution on all those who deserve it and you do deserve it just for the crime of living a better life than me.

The popular kids, you never accepted me and now you will all pay for it. Girls, all I ever wanted was to love you, be loved by you. I wanted a girlfriend. I wanted sex, love, affection, adoration.

You think I’m unworthy of you. That’s I crime I can never get over. If I can’t have you girls, I will destroy you. [laughs] You denied me a happy life and in turn I will deny all of you life, it’s only fair. I hate all of you.

Humanity is a disgusting, wretched, depraved species. If I had it in my power I would stop at nothing to reduce every single one of you to mountains of skulls and rivers of blood and rightfully so. You deserve to be annihilated and I will give that to you. You never showed me any mercy so I will show you none.

You forced me to suffer all my life, now I will make you all suffer. I waited a long time for this. I’ll give you exactly what you deserve, all of you. All you girls who rejected me, looked down upon me, you know, treated me like scum while you gave yourselves to other men. And all of you men for living a better life than me, all of you sexually active men. I hate you. I hate all of you. I can’t wait to give you exactly what you deserve, annihilation.

The irony is that sexually successful men who generally hold women in contempt and are so often labeled “misogynous” neither hate nor harm women. It is the romantic, but sexually rejected young men who erroneously place women on pedestals they do not deserve that eventually come to hate women, once they finally realize that everything they were taught about the opposite sex was nothing but a pack of pretty gargantuan lies.

It’s not the men who laugh at women and disrespect them that are dangerous, it is the men who consider them to be pure and virtuous beings and romantically pine for them. Because, sooner or later, they are going to notice the dichotomy between what they believe of women and how women actually behave in an unrestricted environment.

Notice the equalitarianism too. Who, but a believer in the myth of equality, can conceive of “the crime of living a better life than me”?

A whiff of Hultgreen-Curie

At Alpha Game, it is observed that appears women in the military are closing the all-important suicide gap between male and female soldiers.

Meanwhile, at Castalia House, Anson contemplates the difference between “fluff” and “poorly done” in a review of John Ringo:

If a novel is poorly done, it doesn’t much matter what it attempts to do: it is a failure. (Although the topic of what makes a book either a success or a failure is a complicated one; that’s a topic I hope to dig into over time as these reviews continue).

Today, though, I want to speak about serious vs fluff. Lord of the Rings is serious. The Sword of Shana is fluff (it is also poorly done , but that’s not relevant). What makes LOTR serious while SOS (and, yes, someone please send help ASAP) is fluff? Intent, complexity, characterization, congruence between aim of the novel, tone of the language, originality of the world, nuance of the characters, depth of the moral code, etc.

And Daniel cites Philip K. Dick’s preferred method of future-scrying:

[B]ecause the mystical experience of writing to anticipate the future will most certainly be inaccurate, one is more likely to anticipate the future by looking to the past…and scrambling it.

Sterilizing tomorrow’s mothers

This comment from an Alpha Game reader should suffice to explain why all the efforts to push girls into technology careers are destined to fail:

Recently had an opportunity to observe an event specifically designed to expose high school girls to programming and coding. The event had corporate sponsors and top flight IT professionals. Workshops were designated for Code Divas and Design Duchesses.

A team of 20something women – ostensibly there to either relate and demonstrate how STEMMY girls wound up being successful or serve just to serve as relatable emotional conduit for the girls – were on hand. They primarily passed the time on phones checking Facebook or whispering about how living arrangements with Mr. So-and-So were frustrating them. Or so I overheard.

The high school girls with high SMV followed the basic directions in the workshop assignments, played with their hair, and generally looked bored. A couple of achiever girls actually thought outside the box and did some coding options that didn’t need hand-holding by the instructor.

When visiting information kiosks set up by local colleges and universities, the institutional reps asked the girls what their plans were for college. Of those I heard one-third didn’t know, one-third were entering health care (i.e. nursing), and one-third wanted to start their own business. Out of 60+ girls, less than 3 were actively interested pursuing anything programming or coding.

What could be taken from this event? The young women enjoyed the day, learned a few things, took the free stuff laid out to them, and less than 1% of them will become programmers or coders.

An effective use of resources, no doubt. The planners could probably get better results by recruiting from the stoners smoking behind the trash bins. The college plans indicate that 90 percent of these young women would be happiest becoming wives and mothers, as its the one profession that combines nursing with entrepreneurial activity. It’s interesting to see that teaching, which was once a young woman’s preferred form of ersatz motherhood, has become less popular as the schools become ever more vibrant.

This sick thing about our society is that we are actively dissuading these young women from doing what they want to do, what they are designed to do, and what society needs them to do, in favor of trying to coerce them into doing what they don’t want to do, what they’re not very good at, and what society has absolutely no need of them doing.

We’re seeing more women, like the policewomen in the UK and the female marine in the USA, angrily pointing out that they were set up for failure. And that is exactly what is happening to these “Code Divas” and “Design Duchesses”. Pushing careers they don’t want on them isn’t a way to empower or liberate women, it is a cruel means of turning them from the domestic queens they were meant to be into sterile, sub-par worker bees chiefly employed as office sex toys.

Don’t be that Gamma

Over at Alpha Game, I’ve posted a TV ad for the Ford Fiesta that is as perfect a portrayal of a Gamma male in a relationship as I have ever seen. It’s almost flawless, as it shows the passive-aggression, the conflict-avoidance, the subservience, the tendency to pair up with unpleasant women, and the insecurity, all in a thirty-second ad. It even has the supplicating body language.

In other words, it is an excellent guide in male behaviors to avoid at all costs.

Epic Gamma Fail

It’s always amusing to be lectured on feminist dogma by white-knighting gamma males desperate for female approval. A brief background:

  1. I wrote an Alpha Game post on the widely reported fact that most women who obtain computer science degrees don’t end up sticking with programming very long. I attributed this to the same reason women don’t write much hard science fiction; they are disinclined to put in the hard work required because they don’t enjoy it and it’s not a field where the usual trick of playing the “I’m just a little girl” card doesn’t get the men to do their work for them.
  2. A commenter added: “I think too many of these girls who get drafted in under the “MOAR
    GIRLS!” banner never see real work, then bail when they encounter it.
    Who will be at a technical conference debating the fine points of
    something technical, or the fine points of a pun, and who will be taking
    selfies in a mirror with a sign like “I am doing programming!”?
  3. Enter White Knight #1, who promptly took it to Twitter, encouraging male programmers to take pictures of themselves doing programming and posting them to Twitter with the hashtag #iamdoingprogramming.
  4. The gammas, sending the possibility of attracting some rare female attention, promptly committed the aforementioned epic gamma fail.
  5. One Ted Mielczarek ‏promptly declared the need for a Pink Programming Police. “We need some sort of HN-terrible-comment database that we can use as a “do not hire” blacklist.” He also threatened to never hire me. Oh, well, maybe I can find a job at Tor….

Apparently people with decades of experience in software development are simply supposed to ignore everything they have seen and heard while embracing the GIRLZ CAN 2 CODE movement. I have a better idea. Let’s take a scientific approach and simply mandate female employment on all mission-critical financial programming projects from now until the financial system collapses.

We know mass default and credit contraction is necessary to clear the system, so we may as well kill two birds with one stone.

Of rhetoric and Game

Badger points out how the vicissitudes of human psychology tend to elevate the rhetorical effectiveness of those with little ability to argue at the expense of the logically and dialectically correct:

Like the mistaking of kindness for weakness that plagues today’s nice guys, there is some element of the human mind that frames lengthy and incessant counter-argument as a position of weakness and insecurity. He who masters pithy, concise (and indirect and ambiguous, I might add) communication commands a stronger image of rhetorical confidence and state control than the bloviating firebrand whose logical appeals may indeed be without equal.

It is extremely rare the wordsmith who can write (or speak) at length without the perceptible loss of audience attention, credibility and alpha points. While there are publically-known exceptions, the fact that they are known and notable underlies the exception.

I suspect this is why what I think of as the “high-low” approach is unusually effective. It helps anchor one’s more intellectually flighty sallies and secures them against rhetorical dismissal by those who can’t follow them.

There is a massive difference in perception between being the recipient of a breathless, circuitous infodump and being the recipient of a long lecture after the lecturer first coldly informs you that this is going to be a long, detailed, and painful experience because you are so woefully ignorant that there is simply no other choice if you are not to be left drowning in the swamp of your stupidity.

Another factor here is that simple binary thinkers tend to view multiple reasons as being somehow contradictory even when they reinforce each other. After all, if reason X is correct, then reason Y is at best unnecessary, and therefore to mention it must be indicative of a weakness in X. This is, of course, profoundly stupid, but has a rational foundation in that people who have no case do tend to take the spaghetti approach and throw out everything they can in the hope that something will stick.

However, when each reason is not perceived as an alternative, but rather a hammer blow driving home the previous point, the perception of weakness disappears. Granted, fair or not, this tends to be viewed as cruelty, but the sad reality is that in a fallen world, a man often benefits more greatly from being viewed as cruel, and therefore strong, than as kind, and therefore weak. Kindness is not weakness, but far too many people, women in particular, perceive it to be so.

Advice on a wedding day

Morpheus of Just Four Guys is getting married, so I thought I’d give him a few points of advice:

Congratulations and best wishes to Morpheus and his new bride. As a long-time married man, I thought a few words of advice might not be amiss:

  1. Never hesitate to admit when you are wrong and apologize as soon as you realize that to be the case.
  2. Never admit you are wrong when you believe that you are not. Stand
    your ground in the face of her tears and hold firm in the face of her
    anger. Never appease in the interest of short-term peace.
  3. Learn
    to let things go. In every conflict, there is a point at which there is
    a choice between conflict and conversation. When you choose conflict,
    let your choice be a conscious
    one and not a reaction.

Read the rest at Alpha Game.

Top 10 Game blogs

The quarterly report on the Top 10 Game blogs for the third
quarter of 2013 is now up on Alpha Game. What is most interesting about it is the way it shows
considerable growth across the board, in line with the widespread
expectations that the Androsphere would begin garnering more mainstream
attention this year.

  1. Return of Kings: 19,257 (+23,568)
  2. A Voice for Men 31,452 (new to list)
  3. Roissy: 35,799 (+19,649)

See the rest of the list there. I found two things to be interesting. First was the fact that every single top Game blog significantly increased its Alexa ranking in the third quarter. Second was the observation that the Androsphere’s gamma male critics, who frequently try to claim that no one reads the Game bloggers, happen to have considerably less traffic than the leading Game bloggers do.

This means we can expect more hysteria and more nonsensical attacks on the Androsphere as it becomes increasingly evident that more and more men are breaking their cultural conditioning and coming to terms with at least some aspects of the Game perspective on intersexual relations.

And on a tangential note, I was reminded of a previous question from a reader concerning the apparent dichotomy between my claim of more Google pageviews than McRapey and Whatever’s higher Alexa ranking.

You may recall this McRapey tweet: “All the dudebros who adamantly maintain I don’t get 50K visitors a day are totally right. #HaHaHa” 

It is little ironic, but as it happens, Whatever’s global Alexa ranking is still slightly higher than VP’s despite the US rankings now falling in line with the actual pageview traffic. Despite the big day in August that McRapey cited in a futile attempt to support his wildly exaggerated readership claims, not only has VP surpassed Whatever, but Alpha Game is fast catching up as well.

Alexa Rank in USA
23,846  Vox Popoli
47,018  Whatever
58,514  Alpha Game

Hey, at least he still has the most popular blog in SFWA, right? To say nothing of his Participation Hugo. Anyhow, given the way in which the mainstream media has barely begun to become aware of Game, I wouldn’t be surprised if Alpha Game also passed up Whatever in the USA by this time next year.