Can game change the world?

[cervantesscthree]

This isn't yr regular post by the way. We all see and hear news about the type of sick sh*t some men do to get their c*cks wet, the type of stuff that makes me pray I don't have a daughter simply because I know the many uncomfortable extents to say the least, that men will go to, to get that vagina.

There's many of us out there that have benefited enormously from learning game: the teenager who stumbled across this stuff and stuck with it, the older guy who discovered this and saved his marriage, the man who brought himself together after a breakup, or even that guy who found this out later rather than sooner and is now pretty bitter as a result. Whichever one it is, it's changed lives. And I know many of these men could have very well been that sicko in the newspaper had it not been for the PUA business.

My point in this post is this, if every man knew game, or if younger males were brought up in a game friendly environment, do you think arranged marriages between men and kids would still occur? Do you think women in the more unequal parts of the world would have it easier? Do you think violence against women would decrease? Do you think male suicides would decrease? Or crime even? I think (or very much hope) it would, because I can’t be the only one to think: “what if these guys had game?” when I hear a story about a woman dying by gang rape.

There's many factors in this question here to do with culture and society, religion etc, but I’m not asking that, the basic question is, if these guys knew game, would the type of sh*t I mentioned above still be happening?

 

[Stagger Lee]

Game won't help. The only thing that would help is 1950's style values where women had to raise their value to become marriage potential, men and women mostly matched and paired off one-to-one, and good looking guys couldn't sexually monopolizes the women.

Game and feminism/hypergamy work hand in hand. I believe feminism was started by women who wanted society to facilitate women being more hypergamous. As long as a society isn't primarily monogamous and encouraging and fair to men being in a monogamous relationship, even if every guy had game still about 20-30% or so of men would monopolize most all the women.

The fundamental problem is that women are only sexually available at a rate of about 10-20% while men are sexually available at over 80% rate. It's similar to how there may only be a 40% rate of good jobs available. Everyone having a college degree isn't going to get more people jobs, it's only going to increase competition for the limited jobs.

There's one woman for every man and one man for every woman, but that requires them to match pair. Women only want to date up and men don't want to settle on one woman being as how messed up women are.

Step 1 to solving all the problems is to end all things feminism.
.

 

[cervantesscthree]

There's one woman for every man and one man for every woman, but that requires them to match pair. Women only want to date up and men don't want to settle on one woman being as how messed up women are.

Step 1 to solving all the problems is to end all things feminism.
.

I see, and the bit I've highlighted in bold makes sense, the second bit in bold sounds a bit off to me because to be fair, plenty of men are messed up too. I appreciate yr comment but I see a few problems in it, let's say we all match paired, and one man ended up with a loony lady and a another woman ended up with a violent drunk of a husband, you can't expect either of them to stay with those partners.

In my experience many bad relationships would be solved if the guy just mastered game, what I'm saying in relation to the comment about how messed up women are, is that many of these relationship problems would be solved if these betas became alphas. Unless she has genuine problems, not some bpd diagnosis made by a hurt bitter male who wants to pin everything wrong in a relationship on the woman, rather than it stemming from him not having game, or both. Besides that, I really do like the sound of match pairing, but I can't see how it would lessen the sick sh*t occuring in the world that I mentioned at the start of this thread. But I can see how a man learning that woman aren't scarce, would prevent him turning to desperate measures to get the vagina, if he knew how to reach the pool of women out there - game. I hear what yr saying about the majority of men monopolizing women, but surely if all men had game, women would adjust themselves accordingly to ensure they could obtain a mate that would stay beyond a quick fvck.

Also most men who can sleep with plenty of women and understand game tend to go through a period in their lives of sleeping around, before deciding it's time to settle, so maybe, eventually the monopolizing would be temporary as eventually the man would settle? Maybe, but to be honest I'm not sure about the last bit I just said!

You say step 1 is eradicating feminism, what's step 2 then?

 

[cervantesscthree]

Just one reply? C'mon people . . .

 

[btownbuck2012]

Not giving a f*ck can change the world, and I believe that "game" in its most basic, purest form is not giving a f*ck, i.e. calm, relaxed, EXPERIENCED. Been there, done that.

So yes, I think game can change the world.

 

[nismo-4]

I wonder what the world would be if there were no beta males in it.

 

[cervantesscthree]

Not giving a f*ck can change the world, and I believe that "game" in its most basic, purest form is not giving a f*ck, i.e. calm, relaxed, EXPERIENCED. Been there, done that.

So yes, I think game can change the world.

+ 1 rep

I wonder what the world would be if there were no beta males in it.

That's a good question, very similar to the one I asked at the top of this thread although simpler, it'd probably warrant the same answers.

If there was no betas then at least it would stop girls clinging as much 'cause another alpha would probably come and approach them the moment you've cut em off, that would be one small benefit amongst many:woo: