There are only two ways to take relativist wins: (1) withdrawal your support to gain compliance, (2) impose your authority.
If you can withdrawal support to gain compliance, perhaps from an interchangeable cog, you are already a winner. Removing support won’t help you to become a winner like it will help you stay a winner. To become a winner by support withdrawal, you must develop some coveted value that can be taken away. Can you learn to hit a 90-mph fastball for a home run? Odds are if you have winning talent as determined by sheeple consumers, you would have exploited that talent to be in a position to say no.
Saying no to raise your price is fundamental among relativists. Sheeple will serve you if you have scarce value and will not otherwise. A son has scarce value to a mother by default, but not to any other liberated women. That is why the man should foster scarce masculine emotional value that women fear not having or losing, to offset the man’s natural need for sex. What a man might be able to cultivate, and I expect only if he works at this full time, is to provide sexually charged emotional adventure per female porn (h/t Krauser).
The other way to win with relativists is simply to use force. There is an art to this. No one likes to be a loser, but sheeple are bred to lose often and yet thrive. The law of conservation does not allow sheeple to be winners generally, at least not without a prolific pool of producers to cannibalism. The welfare state is not the wilds in which the female mindset was crafted.
Sheeple will happily lose to a relative winner if they feel the best they can do is associate with said winner.
Women want to be conquered by a man who knows how, which presumes he can win as a relativist in good standing. Men’s standing is constantly under assault by the state and women. Hence, the catch-22. I did not say the cost of chasing pussy is feasible. For most men it is not.
Where, as among the Lacedaemonians, the state of women is bad, almost half of human life is spoilt.
—Socrates, Rhetoric, book I.
Until your SMV places you, a man, in the top tier of alphas, getting laid is not a numbers game. It is always a skills and attributes acquisition game. You would be a fool to not have a cost-benefit analysis in mind every day of the rest of your life for everything you do. With enough field rejection and observation, that fact becomes pretty darn clear. Your time and vitality are precious and non-renewable. Desperate times do call for desperate measures, or stay home and suppose sour grapes.
Corrupt violence interferes with free market violence. Either socially structural type of violence, top down or bottom up, could be directly and primarily physical or it could be directly and primarily psychological, but it is force or violence. The thugs of the state can’t control all the plebs all the time, but they can control some all the time and make prominent examples of them that scare the rest of us. For those not under direct physical control (the control of resources and opportunities instead is indirect physical control), the elites can also create a herd narrative, actually a complex of narratives, that sanctions their rule. Today’s orthodox religion is political correctness or selective socialism.
The power structure holds because bureaucrats firstly protect their relative authority (over others) and secondly extend their authority (over others). If you are not relevant to the maintenance or extension of a social relativists authority, you are not likely going to be targeted to lose so that the relativists can win at your expense.
Real politics like the mock politics of sports is played on the field not on paper.
Base social skills of the xx with no regard for memes except to further genes are the best social skills in decline. Might makes right always. What social relativist will and won’t do in conflict can be very accurately determined if the relevant data of contextual power structure and the social position of the relativists is known, at least in theory. Modern seduction cannot work if it is not so.
The bluff is the cheapest and easiest way to impose authority, and t&a will try it every chance they get. You can’t change the game without sovereignty, but you can identify their techniques and perhaps adapt them for your purposes. There is no reason xy can’t be better than xx at psychological violence and physical violence.
Corrupt power structures are permeable and pliable at the extremities.
That concludes explication of the theoretical social context of asshole game. The two fundamental aspects to consider are:
(1) female attraction to primitive win-lose masculinity superlatively combining self-entitled assertiveness and herd psychology finesse, and
(2) economic and political agency as unequally distributed among and wielded by social relativists.
Can you guess how to apply the theory? Can you come up with a field exercise or methodology to test the theory of asshole game? What techniques might be useful to the art of asshole?
—‘Reality’ Doug, 12 October 2015