Friday, August 16, 2013

And now, the PUAs...

The other day I wrote a fairly long post which addressed a part of future strategy recommendations and included a fairly strong diatribe admonishing MRAs for being so closed minded about PUAs and Game Theory.  I also pointed out the extremely useful aspects of Game Theory, and how it translates to the Political stage nicely.

In this post, I would like to address PUAs and Game Theorists.  Firstly, I would like to ask one simple question:  Are you fucking crazy?

Seriously, I can't think of a more likely group to fall afoul of the Feminist Police State than the aspiring PUA (experienced playas usually know how to navigate the shoals).  Why the Hell would you denigrate and ostracise those who are trying to let you know what dangers you are exposing yourself to?  It's the figurative equivalent to getting pissed off at the guy warning you of the deadly rocks below, because it fucked up your chance to impress the hotties with your cliff diving skills.

It is impossible to argue the MRM and Game Theory and all the rest aren't irrevocably intertwined as it is, let alone as it should be.  We use the same damn lexicon for the same concepts, we share the same opinion of our sociopolitical opponents, we face the same accusations of misogyny and are routinely lumped in together.

And the best I can tell, both groups are trying to dissociate from the other out of fear of 'looking bad'.

And that is fucking pathetic.

It's pathetic that MRAs are afraid of being tainted with the smell of unapologetic male sexuality, and it is equally pathetic that PUAs fear the association of actually giving a fuck about anything male related will lead to a pussy drought.

Sure, you might have contempt for the 'losers who can't get laid', and I fully acknowledge there are a lot of MRAs that can't.  A whole lot in fact.  If this differs from the general male population, I'll eat my own shoes, but sure I'll stipulate to that.  And you may even be narcissitic enough to let men you could help flounder so it makes your pickins easier.  But to contend that MRAs are somehow 'bitter losers' based on their (presumed) appeal to women is to utterly ignore the vast majority of neophyte PUAs are there *precisely because they can't get laid, and want to learn how*.

Chew on that one for a while.  The average PUA board is FAR more likely to be full of dweebs who can't get laid than an MRA board, simply because PUA boards are *about improving your success with women*.

So, like I said to the MRAs the other day, stop being such fucking hypocrites and grow the fuck up.  As a society, we are dealing with some pretty disabling shit, both socially and legally.  Each of these two 'movements' have much to contribute to the other, and the circular firing squad's utility is fast diminishing.

We can watch it all go to shit, or we can at least try.  Stop being afraid of looking bad for once, would you?


  1. PUA is the private sphere, MRA the public. Your posts on PUA are confused. People will do whatever what they want privately, you've got this whole thing fubar. There will never be some "public platform" of an MRA + PUs integration. MRA is the public platform of the men's movement. PUA and MGTOW are men's private thoughts, desires and inclinations.

  2. Public activism (ie, marches and protests) will have zero effect on the power elite. It is only by becoming a mass movement, by changing the way people think, that success is possible. Game theory and MGTOW come in there. Personal attitudes will cut off the Petty Tyrants at the knees.

    MRM = structure. MGTOW?PUA (Same thing, by the way) = attitude.

  3. There's already MRA PUA integration

    Most pua's & gamers support the mra

    It's anti-masculinists & anti-male activists like Paul Elam who dont want gamers & pua's in the MRA

    The fact is Paul Elam's turned AVFM & the MRA into nothing more then a publicity campaign, he pays lip service to real activism, spending more time promoting his site on youtube then he does promoting real mens rights activism

    Paul Elam is a pale version of what a real masculinist & pro-male activist site should be

    There's no activism on AVFM, & real activism doesnt even get covered on what should be a pro-masculinist site

    Criticising women, criticising society & promoting masculinity, should be the number one priority for all men

    1. I just can't agree here. Paul is doing exactly what he needs to be doing, frankly. I believe the problem there lies with other people heavily involved in the site. but that aside, there is a HUGE danger in dictating what people should do or say.

      This is often confused with the concept of definition, meaning 'what makes an MRA an MRA?' for instance. There can, and should, be a core set of goals involved. But there should NOT be uniform approach to obtaining that goal. That is a strategic failure, and guarantees the approach will be less than optimal.

      Everyone has a different priority. Some people are better at communication / persuasion than others. Ergo, some ideas will rise to the top, others will fall by the wayside.

      This is how society works. Serious schism becomes the birth of a new State. We should not interfere with this concept. We should attempt to guide the focus not through criticism of methods chosen or even focus chosen, but through criticism of demands for conformity of thought and speech.

      We need to guard against a new form of Political Correctness, not enforce it. Get it?

  4. Stop being afraid of looking bad for once, would you?

    Couldn't agree more there.

    WAY too much time is spent by the MRM tripping over itself trying to prove how harmless they are to people that they KNOW aren't listening.

    Red pilling more young men is more important than PR at this early stage. (In fact I'd go so far as to say that AVFM's 'coming out of the closet' was premature.)

    And the feminists do our advertising for us.

    There is, however, one minor bone to pick with the PUAs.

    It's that they frame themselves incorrectly.

    They conflate success with women as a conquest.

    As if they're Genghis Khan riding into town, sword a cleavin' making concubines out of the best looking chicks.

    But that is NOT how it works.

    What they're really crowing about is how many hoops they can jump through!

    I'm no historian but I'm pretty sure that Genghis Khan never jumped through no hoops.

    1. If you've ever seen 'War of the Worlds', picture things this way:

      There are three 'legs' on the invading aliens in the movie. Think of those legs instead as giant vacuum cleaner hoses. On each of those legs is a label. One says MRA, another PUA, the third MGTOW. The main body at the top also carries a label. "Red Pill".

      PUAs that are obsessed with getting female attention are simply kids in a sandbox discovering the drought they've experienced is controllable. This is usually followed by the realization that 'safe' relationships are impossible, and their own exploits are the proof. Some PUAs go into Bravado mode when confronted with this, others wanly advocate a marriageless society (basically, acknowledge the MRA stance), depending on how far up the vacuum tube they are to the Red Pill destination.

      MRAs go through the same process, only they begin by railing at the System rather than trying to get laid. They are still, however, focussing on their main concern socioeconomically. MGTOWs come to the Red Pill because they simply lack the interest in mainstream shit, and Red Pill sites are flat out interesting reads. And the articles usually make more sense than the Mainstream ones they read every day.

      Point is, MRAs have no more right to criticise PUAs that 'don't quite get it' than PUAs have to criticise MRAs the 'don't quite get it' (many MRAs are identical, seriously identical to RadFems in their approach to social engineering with the belief that women should be 'made to' find poorer men attractive, or desire stable Beta providers. They reject Game because they typically don't like what it says about themselves OR women in general, not because it's "hogwash". Blue Pill infects many who purport to instruct others, let's put it that way.

  5. Btw I meant Paul Elam is anti-masculine, making him anti-male

    I didnt mean he's an anti-male archetype, far from it ...

    What I meant to say, you cant have a mens rights movement, without masculinity, its ludicrous

    Which is essentially why the AVFM is filled with lefties

    Paul Elam has obviously done alot of good for men, that is glaringly obvious & what really counts

    I'm pretty sure he'll continue to do so, the new direction over at AVFM is a game changer

  6. I think the MRM in general is full of Lefties as a result of a concerted effort to March Through this Institution too. I think the Red Pill will live on.