Powered by Bravenet Bravenet Blog

Subscribe to Journal

Sunday, October 7th 2012

3:49 PM

A Catechism of Game

“The Game is in the field.”

Earlier this week, Damon "The Champ" Young hosted an interesting discussion on the latest "attack on/against Game" over at Very Smart Brothas, and actually asked for my participation, to which I of course graciously responded. The following is an expanded excerpt of my initial reply. The original text appears in italics; my additional commentary follows in standard text format.

It should also be noted, that I had intended to write up a "catechism" on/about Game for sometime now, but had never gotten around to doing it; so I am glad for the chance to be able to finally put all of this down on paper for all time. 

1. What is Game?

A: Game is a constellation of sayings, actions and behaviors on the part of the human male, designed to win the SEXUAL attraction of the human female, based on a tight combination of in-field/in realtime study, practice and application of knowledge gleaned from Evolutionary Psychology.

All living things have a mating strategy; Game, therefore, is the Human Male's mating strategy. It is not the only one, and no, Game isn't for everyone (more on this below). Nevertheless, so long as living things exist, there will be ways, methods and means for them to reproduce themselves. So it is with Humanity, and in this case, Men. Hence Game.

2. Can Women “have Game too!”? If so/not, why?

A: No, Women cannot possess or acquire Game in the way a man can/does for the simple reasons that are laidout per EvoPsych theory. Read your David Buss. The notion that “Women can have game too!” is a pretty lie, a polite fiction in our “all things must be equal btw the sexes” age.

Women have two primary "tools" with which to work in the arena of the Sexual Market Place: their youth and their beauty, both of which are, in evolutionary historical and human ancestral terms, proxies for their reproductive fitness, and which Women have, in comparison to Men and their attraction triggers for Women, relatively little control over. The more of both a Woman has, the higher her Sexual Market Value (SMV) is. Other facets of her being, such as her personality, intelligence, chastity and so forth, while important, do not supercede the aforementioned "dealbreakers". This accounts for why "b*tches" - crazy and otherwise - can and will clean up out on the open mating market (read: Kim Kardashian) - because, more often than not, they have Youth and Beauty in abundance, which at the end of the day, is all that really matters from a Male mating POV. 

3. Are PUAs/Game one and the same?

A: No they are not. One is a studied practitioner who utilizes Game in a particular context; the other is as per defined in Question #1 above. A Man can practice game and not be a PUA; conversely, a PUA can be relatively weak in terms of his Game skillset.

Indeed, as I've noted the other day, not only is Game itself everywhere, but the vast majority of its practitioners are NOT "pickup artists". What the PUAs do - or, to let the horror stories of the ladies who complain about them tell it, *try to do* - is a highly specialized form of Game. Most Gamesmen that one will encounter, again, like I did the other day, are "naturals" and are far away from the niteclub environment. 

4. Is Game inherently “misogynistic”?

A: Does possessing a firearm automatically make one a criminal? The answer to such a query is that it is the inherent proclivities already present in a person in either case, that tells the tale. Game is no more or less “misogynistic” than anything else in our world-it all depends on the Man in question.

There is the notion among some, that Game automatically leads one towards "misogyny"; in fact, one of the biggest critiques of Game is that those who learn it do so because of their being spurned and/or burned by an unrequited love from the past, and Game gives them the tools for some kind of revenge. Although I've yet to see this play itself out in real life - and this comes from one who's hit up many a club/bar/lounge sarging with guys from a number of lairs - the critics unwittingly agree with my point above; that it isn't Game itself that is or makes on "misogynistic", but rather, it is the Man in question who is already "misogynistic" to begin with - hence my allusion to gun ownership above. A murderer is a murderer not because he owns a gun, but because he's a murderer - and as history tells us, when people want to murder, they will by any means necessary. 

5. Does Game work for all men? Can Game work on all women?

A: Yes and no. While in theory the answer to both queries would be “yes” in truth the fact is that Game rests mightily on a Man's inherent gifts, abilities, talents and perhaps most of all, dilligence in study and application. Just like all guys who step on the b-ball court arent gonna be LeBron or Jordan no matter how much they practice, all men arent going to be master seducers no matter how much they try, and this is due to their inherent limitations that we all have in one way or another. The same can be said of Women- while they are largely the same there are also some very important particularities as well; what would work in a niteclub environment won't translate well in say, a cafe. What would work on a party gal at the NBA All-Star Weekend won't fly with the Church Lady sitting in the front pew with the killer crown on. Studied practitioners of Game first know themselves; for when they do, all else becomes known.

Where people get the idea that there is a "cookie cutter approach" to Game, I do not know; they certainly didn't get it from Style and Mystery, I can promise you that, and if anyone comes on here or anywhere else saying that they did, you can tell them that Obsidian said they are baldfaced liars. Not only does Mystery make distinctions about Women numerous times in his and Style's writings, they also make the same distinctions with regard to guys, too. Moreover, I have gone on record numerous times, at some considerable length and in detail, about all of this - for example, please see my Styles Makes Fights - & Game post, and all the articles that are based on/flow from/are subsequent to it. Just like everything else about Humanity, there are generalities and particularities about Men and Women. These simple facts of life are not lost on Game, nor its students. 

6. Why do the Feminists hate Game?

A: For the same reason that a goodly number of women in general do-because it works.

The point above needs a bit more explanation. A central tenet of Feminist thought and belief, lay in the notion that all of Society is "constructed" artificially; in other words, inherent, intrinsic biology does not inform our cultural attitudes and so forth. And of course, all of this flows from the sayings, actions and traditions of the "Patriarchy" - that Men in particular, have imposed, against their will at that, these things on Women, for the express purpose and benefit of the Menfolk. 

However, upon closer inspection, we find this premise wanting. Nowhere is this more apparent, than in the area of Human Sociosexual Dynamics. For example, if indeed the "social constructionism" argument put forth by the Feminists were to hold water, how do they then account for the fact that not only Women themselves, but Feminists in particular, continue to select Men based on metrics such as height and wealth? EvoPsych explains both of these facts very well; but how does "social constructionism" explain it - and why do the Feminists seem to be perfectly cool with letting this "construct" alone, unabated?

Here we see, yet another blatant hypocrisy inconsistency in Feminist thought - for it is not EvoPsych that they hate, per se, but rather it is the EvoPsych that does not comport to their ideological worldview(s). Again, if they were consistent in their thought, they would hate EvoPsych for the aforementioned reasons, but they don't; this explains why you are highly unlikely to find many - if any at all - Feminists demandiing to pay for that first date. Yea, good luck with that.

In  any event, the main reason as to why Feminists hate Game - aside from the simple fact that it works - is because, as Champ rightly observed, it fundamentally threatens everything the Feminists believe about how the world works. Indeed, Prof. David Buss himself has been assailed and attacked by Feminists because his researches and findings do not comport with their sociopolitical ideologies. EvoPsych as an entire field of discipline is vilified wholesale by the Feminist Lobby, and for good reason - again, because if what Buss and others say, based again on their findings, are indeed true, it would then threaten the very existence of the Feminists. Their shrieks, while woefully misguided, are nevertheless justified. 

7. Is Game only about the clubs & “hooking up”?

A: It *can* be. However it has been demonstrated, and documented, numerous times, that Game can have profound applications in an LTR context as well. See: Married Man Sex Life and/or The Hawaiian for more on this.

As mentioned above and elsewhere, Game is everywhere, and this is true both in and out of the club; indeed, a common maxim in the community, is that a Man who is either married or intends to be, needs Game MORE, than the mere PUAs who hit up the clubs night after night. Why?

Because, unlike the PUA, who, even if his Game is relatively nascent and/or weak can rely on sheer numbers - the Law of Averages is very real, my friend - the Married Man has a more smaller pool to navigate in, and, he has much more to lose if things go south. The PUA can strikeout repeatedly with minimal losses in time or investment; not so for the Married Man. He's in it for the longhaul; he needs to know exactly how to keep his Woman both in love *and in lust* with him, for said longhaul. That, is where Game comes in - and one of the best kept secrets is, that it has mad wicked applications for LTRs.

8. Isn't it true that Game is shot through with geeks, nerds, losers in life and all manner of snake oil salesmen who make mounds of money off of their misery?

A: Yes-but isnt it also true that the Beauty Business-which includes everything from clothing to cosmetics to dieting schemes and even surgery, takes advantage of Women all the time-and makes several magnitudes more money off of their insecurity/misery in the process? In any endeavor in which there is high demand, there can be and will be charlatans. The Seduction Community is no different-but this has no bearing on the inherent utility of Game itself.

Surely, given the nature of this audience - one that tends to focus on Black folks - no one would disagree with what I've said. We know that not only do Black Women in aggregate spend an inordinate amount of money on the aforementioned items, but when it comes to their hair, it has been documented that their aggregate per-annum expenditure approaches upwards of half a trillion(!!!) dollars. And yet, what is the result - does anyone here seriously gonna make the case that every Sista that goes in for all of the above and more, come out on the other end looking like a Maya Dutchy Dime? Really? 

All that said though, the fact remains, that a trip to Curves, Sephora, and fill-in-the-blank lady's dress store can and will do wonders for the vast majority of Women out there - no, most of them won't be Dimes, but they WILL be much improved. The same principle is true with Men and Game. 

9. Is Game “manipulative”?

A: Yes-just like ALL human interaction is “manipulative”. We manipulate each other in ways big and small all the time-parents manipulate their kids and you can best believe that kids manipulate their parents; bosses manipulate their workers and vice versa; and on it goes. Game is no more or less manipulative than any other arena of human interaction. The only difference is that is has now been formatted and plotted out on a flowchart.

Women have been and will continue to be, among if not thee biggest manipulators of all time, because they do it all the time - and not just to Men, either. Indeed, Women know better than anyone that they can and will manipulate each other, again, all the time. Only a fool, a blind individual or a disingenuous Blue Pill would attempt to deny this fact. 

10. Is Game “scientific”?

A: If one accepts the premise that EvoPsych is scientific-and-that the fulcrum of Science is rooted in the principles of observation, comparison, hypothesis and testing said hypotheses with repeated results, then yes, Game is most definitely scientific.

See here for more on what is and is not, Science...

11. Why cant Men just be themselves?

A: Because if they were “just themselves” they wouldnt need Game to meet most women today.

As a result of decades of attempts on the part of the White Upper Middle Class Feminist Lobby - a subsidiary of the Cognitive Elite, I might add - Men all over today have been, in a word, whipped. Game, then, restores balance to the Force - just the way the ladies secretly like it.

Comment & reply, invited.

Now adjourn your arses…

The Obsidian
6 comment(s).

Posted by obat herbal hiv aids:

Thank you so much for all the info, greetings successful yah gan ..
Monday, February 3rd 2014 @ 1:46 AM

Posted by Arif Hosting Harga Murah dan Hosting Terbaik di Indonesia:

Posted by Reseller Tas Ori dari Senen:

great share.
Wednesday, November 6th 2013 @ 4:24 AM

Posted by Pete Alas:

The next time I read a blog
Wednesday, November 6th 2013 @ 12:53 AM

Posted by useful link:

Your blogs are totally worth giving time and energy.
Tuesday, November 20th 2012 @ 4:47 AM

Posted by HanSolo:

Hi Obsidian. Great post.

I just want to point out one flaw that doesn't take away from the overall message of the post but I saw you make the same claim on HUS. The half a trillion dollars spent annually on hair care is not possible. I looked at the article you sited and it quotes TargetMarketNews so I found this article:


It says personal care products and services are $6.6 billion. This makes more sense to me because if it were $500 billion that would mean about $12,500 per African American man, woman and child.

Anyway, just wanted to point that out and keep up the good fight. Come back to HUS. There's some good commenting going on right now.
Monday, October 8th 2012 @ 1:44 PM