High Arka, I have no interest in discussing the is/ought issue you raise. It's not the topic of this post. You have also demonstrated yourself to be a highly repulsive fool. I imagine my husband having to work with women like you and it's no wonder why he can't wait to get home away from the women of the world...;-)
High Arka does recognize that a woman's hypergamy and the scientific (heh) discovery that they are not attracted to responsive men is a behavior that would need to be forgiven. Does she spend her time here speaking of how a woman can combat this behavior (to not have one's attraction to their spouse be reliant on him, rather on the Source)? Does she spend her time instructing single women what to look for and how to deny her covetous need for more and even uncivilized and audacious displays of protection/provision ability? No. Of course not. She feels no burden to seek to do what the Bible instructs of her. She'd rather instruct and criticize men - a lane in which she does not belong.
Vox Day linked a Newsweek article about how men like responsive women but women like non-responsive men. Vox comments:
Men find nice women to be attractive. Women don't find nice men to be attractive. The Masters of Game have been observing this for years; science is finally beginning to test some of the Game hypotheses, and unsurprisingly, are confirming them. It's very simple. Being nice to an attractive woman is a display of low value. Being a jerk to an attractive woman is a display of high value. Women are drawn to DHV and repulsed by DLV. Because hypergamy."DHV" and "DLV" are "display of high value" and "display of low value," respectively, and "hypergamy" is marrying into a higher caste. And in case you're not up on this area of the internet, the quoted guy avows to be a PUA, or "pick up artist," who advocates strategies for men to better appeal to women, which strategies fall under the term "Game."
This particular setup, from study to opinion, had a lot of good fodder in it, so here we go.
(1) I paid for this? People think that churches get indirect subsidies from government, and they do, but keeping science on life support takes way more than religion. Three universities, two continents, and how many human-hours and millions of dollars went into making this idiotic study? All to produce an attention-getting banner headline for a couple days? What social benefits justified this one? If GQ or Men's Health had funded this study, that would be their own moral waste in pursuit of private profit, but what are so many public universities doing, spending NIH Grants, straight from taxpayers' mouths, in order to determine how to pick up Israeli co-eds?
The ivory tower is about as relevant as the newspaper--but the funding is mandatory. Newspapers become fluff pieces filled with celebrity crap just to get clicks, and universities are doing the same. Any remnants of "education" are out the window, in favor of a study that can get the institution mentioned in a click-obtaining article somewhere.
Really, what more evidence do you need to dismantle the western educational apparatus? Dick Cheney + Halliburton = Iraq, right? And in a just world, Cheney would be working, under guard, on an offshore oil rig for thirty years to life. This "sexy relationship" study is as equally cut-and-dried as that connection. We might as well build a four-story-high arse made of gold, and then blow it up in a nuclear test. You cannot be sane and support the western educational apparatus in the face of this obvious make-work theft designed to justify the salaries of a bunch of make-work research "jobs."
Also, still loving that imaginary distinction between "the hard sciences" and "the humanities/soft sciences." If a professor travels to England and studies Jane Austen's family home and correspondence to attempt to explain a contested passage in Sense and Sensibility, that is a primary-source, "hard" research act. If a different professor quizzes kids about how much they like each other, that is far squishier. And yet, Steven Pinker still pretends to be "more like" a chemical engineer doing hazardous materials research than like an unlicensed relationship counselor. The only reason those loopy spiritualists who called themselves "psychologists" are considered scientists now is that, when the Endless World War began, government needed some way to quickly funnel farmboys into different corps. So the money poured in, and now the school/military prison/career system relies almost entirely on these D&D form character tests. Why not dating, too?
(2) What girls, again? Like almost all the rest of these wonderfully stupid psychology tests, this one was limited to those students who, at one university in Israel, during one particular semester, were wasting their time reading bulletin boards near the psychology building, and who then decided to go participate in these studies. Even to psychologists, this isn't a representative sample. In fact, in the most publicly-avowed racist nation in the world, which gives explicit racial and ethnic preferences in its citizenship laws and university admissions policies, it would be ludicrous to say that this study says anything about "women."
(In Israel, the sample would also include those kids who had managed to get out of serving in the IDF at that particular point in time, which makes it a poor sample even for Israeli women.)
So what this study really tells us is that middle class/upper class college women from Israel, who enjoy taking time out of their lives to participate in studies that ask them about their sexual interests, have the preferences listed above.
(3) Yeah, but it's right. Nonetheless, the study results probably apply pretty well to a lot of western women, like Canamerisraelis and all that. That's why the Alpha Dude up there is so excited--because everyone knows that women prefer jerks.
What do we do with that, then? Assuming they did this study from a truly random sampling of an adequate control group of women across Canada, America, and Israel--maybe throw in Britain or France, just to lump in some of the other puppet empires--assume they did that, and the study showed the same thing, which it almost certainly would. What then? Is it really true?
(4) Dolla Dolla Bills Y'all. Why in the world would women prefer jerks? Why would they prefer aloof, distant men, rather than ones who appeared interested in them, regardless of looks or age or even wealth?
This is the fun point where we come across acculturalization. A Martian lands on Earth and walks across the fields in her spacesuit. The wind picks up, blowing some pebbles, some dust, and a crumpled wad of hundred dollar bills across the Martian's boots. On walks the Martian, looking for signs of civilization.
Wait--gasp! Why didn't the Martian take that money? Money is so important! Didn't she recognize it as anything more than litter?
Same story, except this time, it's an Earthling walking across the fields. The wind picks up, blowing some pebbles, some dust, and a crumpled wad of hundred dollar bills across the Earthling's boots. She throws herself to the ground, gasping in excitement. She smoothes out the bills, counts them, and hugs them to her chest, thinking, "What a great day!"
The point being that the hundred dollar bills only have value to someone who cares about them; someone who has learned that those particular things have value. If we're outside the system where we believe that the Fed's little printed monopoly money means anything, they're worthless.
So, too, with the "pickup" and "dating" advice that swells the web, like so many amateur issues of Maxim (but without the proper spelling or the reproduction rights to the pictures of curvy women leaning intently over pool tables).
What we're going to do here is threefold. First, we're going to lament how farcically stupid this non-new "Game" and "pickup artistry" thing is in its self-expression. That's not going to be news to anyone, but maybe it'll be a little funny, and definitely a little pitiful.
Secondly, we're going to discuss how this phenomenon of "how to pick up women" is not exclusive to women, nor to this time period on Earth. The "Game" people live in this strange temporal vortex where they both think that they're forging ahead in undiscovered territory, yet simultaneously rediscovering 1950s-style manliness techniques from the good times before feminism. They're doing neither, and when we look at this area, we'll get something that, if you're already smart enough to understand what "Game" is, provides more value to this discussion. The reason these "Game" dunces are worth paying so much attention to is that they fractally exemplify other insulated communities of narcissistic gluttons, and we'll see some crossovers to economics, political science, and other dangerous isms.
Thirdly, once we've established how internally broken the whole "Game" thing is, and how it really has nothing to do with "women" and nothing to say about chromosomes or hormones or whatever, we'll look at what it does speak to.
Terms of Game
The modern wave of men discussing how to get women is internally flawed--flaccid, you might say--in ways that should be so terribly embarrassing that any man wouldn't ever condescend to use the terms or claim association/agreement with the social movement. It's like belonging to "The Manly Men Club," but the walls are pink, the bartender only serves wine spritzers, and Stereo MCs are on auto-play every night.
"Game" is the first term, of course; as discussed previously, plenty of philosophers the world over have referred to life as a "game" in some way, and anything can be metaphorized into a game, but the modern term that these middle class white people used--the "capital G Game" version--is taken from urban African American men via a hip hop culture popularized by the sexually ambivalent producers of the recording industry. The same parent companies that put out Backstreet Boys and NSYNC CDs also promoted the music videos of angry black men hopping around stage with microphones, talking about "Game." And their Game was dealing drugs, surviving abusive households, and shooting cops. It was also not being manipulated by women into responsibility for an unwanted pregnancy, or getting wrung dry over a bullshit rape accusation, but it was primarily about street survival in a ghetto in a racist prison society.
So, for all of these middle class white people, now, using the term "Game" is crushingly pitiful. It's like being Seth Green in Can't Hardly Wait, the ugly little rich white kid who wears baggy jeans and says "yo" a lot, attempting to be just as cool as the rap stars he sees on TV. This is Game; this is Game; this is Game; this is NOT Game; this is NOT Game. The little squeezed-dick face, hipster douche Mountie thing just doesn't get to compete on the same level as black men surviving the American ghettos. (And in a side note, Afeni Shakur, the former Black Panther who raised Tupac herself, seems actually interested in helping poor kids, moreso than getting laid.)
There were any number of terms these godawful wiggers could've come up with to describe their attempts to have sex, and it's no coincidence that instead of being creative, they stole a term popularized by the literal blood of the 1 in 21 black men who died young at the peak of the artistic movement. Just as record companies managed to neuter rap--from poor urban people with real-world experience and desires of political activism, to middle class and wealthy blacks talking about girls and Escalades--the true meaning of Game was misappropriated by these wannabes.
Game was about revolution, and social challenge. It threatened corrupt police officers, and was cognizant of how gang control of ghettos was connected to corrupt law enforcement and the real supply issues of the drug trade. By likening the violent, terrible, sad struggle of ghetto survival, and by ironically lionizing the pursuit of money and the objectification of men and women, the real players showed, in microcosm, that American society was broken--when they won at it, by selling their records to white kids who thought the shooting and hoes were glamorous, they proved their point.
That very point is being rubbed into the faces of the people who now say "Game," by their very own hands. "We used to do 'em [booty calls] as adolescents, do you recall?" raps Tupac, and twenty years later, middle-aged white men non-ironically lionize their own booty calls, never having grown beyond that same adolescence. Even in his twenties, Tupac was able to reflect on that childish behavior as an actual matured individual, while lending most of his attention to more powerful social issues. In the meantime, white businessmen of 40 and 50 are still busy coming up with D&D graphs explaining how to be confident around girls.
Take The Red Pill
"The Red Pill" is another term these people favor. Being composed primarily of bourgeois man-children who didn't get it out of their systems in school, they think that they're discovering a forbidden city by "learning about women," which they apparently forgot to do during 7th grade.
Up there are the two Alpha Males responsible for blessing all the Pickup Artists with the term "red pill." As you can see, they exemplify the "get fit" and "man up" and "be inconsiderate to demonstrate high value" traits that Alphas like.
If you're not up on this, the Wachowski siblings, Andy and Lana, produced the Matrix trilogy. In the Matrix trilogy, Laurence Fishburne delivers the famous "red pill" line to Neo, telling him that if Neo takes the red pill, he will become aware of the Matrix, which is a system of control keeping humans blind to the real world. The irony here is rather large, considering that (1) Lana is a MTF transsexual, (2) the Matrix features a large cast of tough women, including one who regularly beats up men, and who is a brilliant hacker; (3) Neo, the male lead and hero of the entire trilogy, is undisputably a mild-mannered "Gamma" man, which to these "Game" people means he is too introspective and moody to talk properly to women or be respected. Also, Neo makes decisions based on his love for Trinity, which bring him into contact with the Maker, a wretched old "Alpha" male who believes in logic and is presented in the trilogy as evil; (4) Morpheus, played by Laurence Fishburne, who delivers the infamous "red pill" line, is another moody, introspective Gamma man, who harbors an age-old crush on the beautiful Niobe, a tough-as-nails hovercraft captain with whom he doesn't talk about their former relationship because his feelings are too strong; (5) Agent Smith, Hugo Weaving's antihero, is a sexless "Omega" rank, even more worthy of the contempt of these "Game" people than Neo and Morpheus; and (6) Mouse, the computer programmer kid presented as a positive character in the first movie, is another pitiful Gamma who programs "the woman in the red dress" rather than meeting real women.
The entire series is filled with characters that the Game people hate, and it was written and produced by a chubby gay dude and his transitioning sister, and it's mostly about how "true love" and computer hacking skills are cool--and how black and mixed-race people can survive despite the workings of white-created machinery--but just as they had no compunctions against stealing and misusing terms from urban blacks, the Game people happily steal more terms from that franchise to make their unoriginal point.
(The Wachowskis' traits are relevant here because every trait mentioned is considered to be explicitly negative--an offshoot of the "Sexual Revolution" and feminism--by the "Game" people. So it says something that they're so stunted that they have to steal terms from the Wachowskis to describe their culture.)
In Part 2 of this series we go beyond the internal problems with the Game/PUA/Alpha culture's structure, and delve into their theories about women, and how the accuracy of those theories are (1) limited to certain subsets of women, (2) a self-justifying process created by the theories themselves, and (3) equally applicable to non-female dating and sales situations, ergo having nothing to do with biology or "human nature," but rather, about our deliberate choices to make things this way.