This is some rambling that started out as a comment at Dalrock’s and got way too long. It started with this quote from Dalrock (my emphasis in bold):
The focus should be on returning to the Biblical model of marriage. Right now I think it is painfully clear that the churches and pastors are with very few exceptions ambivalent at best and outright hostile at worst to the biblical definition/frame of marriage. If you fix that problem how much “game” is actually needed?
Probably not much. Some guys might still use game to compete over the prettiest girls, but you wouldn’t need it to get a wife and stay married. I always look to the example of my grandfathers, because both had long, happy marriages to women who were devoted to them until their deaths (and since). Yes, they had some natural game in the sense that they were reasonably confident and masculine, like most men of their era. But they were also mild-mannered and kind, with plenty of the “beta” traits (in the sense that some writers use that term in a positive sense). I doubt anyone would have called them “dominant.”
However, they married women who had been taught to appreciate (if not tingle for) those traits and see marriage and children as a worthy vocation, and they lived in a society that backed that up. So they didn’t need the kind of swaggering, peacocking, overwhelming game that’s required today to keep girls from giving you fake phone numbers. The level of swagger that you get from an average 18-year-old man who hasn’t been taught to apologize for his existence was plenty. Could they have found wives and sustained life-long marriages today? I don’t know, but it certainly wouldn’t have been as sure a thing.
A man today hasn’t just lost the support of the churches and other institutions; they’ve gone over to the other side. So to win, he has to become that much stronger, more powerful, more dominant. He — I, as someone who inherited a lot of my grandfathers’ niceness — can’t afford to play as if those groups were still on my side. I’ll get trounced. Those qualities they handed down to me aren’t enough by themselves without all that backup. I have to overcome that new opposition by learning to be (or at least act) more dominant than comes naturally to me. Enter Game.
Should I need game? No, and in a reasonably virtuous, Christian (though fallen) society I wouldn’t need any more masculinity than I was born with. But I was born a couple generations too late for that world, and we’re not going to fix this one before I’m gone (more on that below). I’m stuck with the current situation, where, if I want a woman to tingle for me and stay that way, I have to be dominant enough not just to overcome her innate defenses and satisfy her natural hypergamy. I also have to trump all the Go-Girl and Special-Snowflake programming she’s received over the years, plus everything she’s been taught about women being more spiritual, plus everyone telling her to focus on her career, and so on. I have to outrank all of those influences in her mind, if I hope to hold her attraction.
Now, obviously her virtues and principles matter too, so I don’t want to discount that. A woman with a good set of innate traits who’s been raised well will combat those harmful influences to some extent. But they’re still there, still impinging on her awareness every day, so they can’t help but have some effect on her, and that effect I have to overcome. So my job will be easier if I pick well, but still not as easy as if I had those churches and other institutions on my side.
Then there’s another question: Perhaps we can’t fix the churches and society in my lifetime, but I’d like for them to be fixed, and I wouldn’t want to damage them further. So, if I use game to improve my personal situation, am I making it harder for that fix to happen someday?
I don’t think so, as long as I always keep it within a Christian framework. When I first learned about game, like a lot of guys, I took advantage of it for a while to get laid. That obviously did further damage to society, because it raised those women’s N’s and made them just a bit less suitable for marriage. I might even have created some alpha widows. (Ok, probably not.) So game applied sinfully will certainly make the situation worse.
But some men argue that even using game only in non-sinful ways, as in to keep a wife tingling, is harmful because it raises women’s expectations even further, and because of the competitive nature of women, it makes it that much harder for that man’s wife’s friends’ husbands to keep up. I see their point, but I don’t see a better alternative that isn’t fantasy. Yes, the ideal solution would be to bring women’s expectations back down to the level of my grandmothers’, but how do you do that — how do you return “to a Biblical model of marriage” — when every freakin’ societal institution is driving those expectations through the roof? The only way I see that happening is through a major economic and political collapse (possibly something involving brimstone) that makes the Go-Girl lifestyle impossible again. And if that happens, women will go back to appreciating providers regardless of whether some men today game their wives or not. So it seems to me that using game for licit purposes won’t prevent the problem from being fixed if the circumstances come along that could fix it, so I’m in the clear.
Incidentally, I’m not suggesting that men sit poolside and wait for the crash either. I don’t think we can fix society as a whole without a crash, but I do think we can have a positive effect on the people near us. Every time I don’t supplicate to a woman, I’ve done one very small act to lower her pedestal a little. By sharing the red pill with men (and especially boys) in little ways, I hope to save them some of the agony I went through. We can still get back to that Biblical model of marriage in individual families and small churches, and that’s worth doing.