Friday, July 2, 2010

What is Game for Marriage?

If you're reading this blog, you probably found it from a Game blog.  Therefore, I'm going to assume you have a basic understanding of PUA Game theory and its concepts and terms.

Pick Up Artists developed Game theory to increase their attractiveness to women for the purpose of sport fucking.  Game works.  Women respond to game.  And not just the skanks.  Women are attracted to dominant men, to strong men.  Women are not attracted to virtuous men because they perceive virtue as weakness.  This is true even of devoutly Christian women.  Christian women are humans, and like all humans are flawed and sinful. While everyone has a pretty good understanding of how sin affects men (e.g., we're all horndogs, we'll hit anything, we're promiscuous and unfaithful, etc.), I don't think we have a very good understanding of how sin affects women sexually.

All this presents a conundrum for the Christian man. If he approaches a Christian woman honorably and respectfully, he'll be blown out because she'll perceive him as a supplicating, low-testosterone eunuch.  It's hard to discern a vocation to marriage and whether she's the one if a guy can't get past a first approach.  If he's not immediately blown out, he'll be put in the Let's Just Be Friends category and will remain an Average Frustrated Chump (AFC).

This blog is intended to teach Christian men how to apply the principles of Game in their dealings with women in an ethical and moral way.  I realize we're trying to square the circle here, but I believe Game has some useful tools that a Christian man can use.  I hope this will become a conversation, and I welcome feedback from men and women, Christian and non-Christian.

This is not a Men's Rights blog or a Men Going Their Own Way blog.  I've read a lot of that material, and while there's a lot of merit in their critiques of marriage and marriage/divorce/family law, this blog is not the forum for that.  It's fine to mention it briefly, but don't hijack comment threads.  Take it elsewhere.  This blog is intended to help Christian men who are seeking Christian women for the covenant and sacrament of marriage.


  1. I'm really glad to see you tackling this niche. Athol Kay has a very good site, but I think there is room for several voices here. I don't think he has the explicitly Christian angle so this would seem to be good territory to explore.

    I'll return later and read more when I have some time.

  2. This site is a great idea. I notice you haven't updated since July. Are you planning to? Being a Christian myself, who has been reading about Game for a while now, I'd love to see your perspective on a number of the ideas being tossed around. A couple in particular:

    1) One of the biggest attractors to women is preselection. How can a Christian man use this to his advantage short of fornication? Is there any way a faithful Christian can "even the odds" against a non-believing player, or even a convert with a storied sexual past, to match their attraction to women? Is there anything in the Christian's toolkit to turn women on that these others lack?

    2) You mention the sexual affects of sin. However, the Gameosphere is nearly unanimous in attributing womens' behavior and preferences to evolutionary psychology. Even The Man Who Is Thursday, the only other Game-related blog run by a Christian as far as I know, subscribes heavily to evo-psych, though I've never seen him attempt to reconcile the two coherently.

    Where do you come in on this? From my perspective, the two views are incompatible. It makes no sense to say that our behavior and preferences are rebellion against the Creator (ie sin), if the very process that created us programmed us to behave that way.

    However, on the other hand, quite a lot of the female behavior being discussed seems to lend itself quite easily to an evolutionary explanation. On the third hand, evo psych seems to imply total nihilism and logical deconstructionism if taken to its conclusion, and I haven't seen any principled explanation from the evy-psych crown for why they seem to apply it in some circumstances but not in others.

  3. Dalrock, Deuce, thanks for stopping by and commenting. I'm late responding to these comments because I didn't realize they were here. I neglected the blog for awhile, but I am now going to try to post every day.

    Deuce, thanks for the two comments and questions. I'll address them in my next few posts.