Game

The Law of Sowing and Reaping

Posted on by Amir

shall not be up for repeal.

THAT is one of the most important things a person can learn. The Scriptures also tell us, “Your sin will find you out.”

My corollary to that: your character ALWAYS catches up to you. ALWAYS.

This may not always be a public revelation, although we often associate such reckonings with that. Everyone reading this has heard of prominent ministers (Jim Bakker, Ted Haggard) or athletes (Eugene Robinson, Julius Erving) or entertainers (Bob Hope, Bill Cosby) or politician (don’t even get me started naming them) who has been forced to admit to having one or more affairs. In the Scriptures, the sins of the Patriarchs led to disasters that continue today. Think of that every time the defecation hits the fan in the Middle East.

For most of us, the consequences are not so dire, but still humbling nonetheless. For many, that might include some “Aha” moments, where we realize the implications of our past choices. In the process, we suck it up, put on our grownup pants, accept the lessons learned, and thank God that things weren’t worse than they could have been.

King David committed adultery and murder. While he was allowed to live, the consequences were nasty: the child from the affair died; there was persistent strife in his house–including rape and murder–and David even experienced an insurrection from one of his own sons, which included his son publicly having sex with David’s wives and even the death of that son. After David died, Israel would remain united for one more generation before dividing. It was the beginning of the end of Israel.

Even today, the consequences of private affairs are fatal at times.

Steve McNair–a retired NFL quarterback and prominent Christian, as well as a married father of four–was shot to death by his mistress (Sahel Kazemi), who then killed herself. Had he kept it in the marriage bed, ceteris paribus, he’d be alive right now.

More recently, aspiring photographer a married mother of two, Sarai Sierra–lured by some contacts in Turkey–traveled there for a little extramarital adventure and wound up being beaten to death. Her children must now grow up without their mother and–worse–the reality that she died doing a very bad thing.

What bothered me about the two latter cases was (a) the media treatment of them and (b) the reactions among the men.

The media was actually pretty hard on Steve McNair. Sportscasters–who generally turn and look the other way at sexual indiscretions–suddenly became moralizers over the activities of McNair. To be fair, though, McNair was catastrophically unfaithful to his wife, and his conduct was not befitting his professed Christianity. I blasted his choices, while expressing sadness for how his life ended. The only thing worse than this would be if Tim Tebow had had an affair and then paid for an abortion.

But Sarai Sierra was a different case. The fact that she was married–and was on vacation to pursue some sexual liaisons with people she friended online–was not made prominent. Her death was viewed as more tragic among the media. The moralizers–who distanced themselves from Steve McNair–were out to lunch over Sarai Sierra.

But the manosphere did not miss a beat: they hammered Sierra over her choices.

Ultimately, we need to call it fair: Sierra and McNair are dead because they each made some very bad decisions.

In both cases, they have children who will now grow up with the stigma that their mother or father acted in very dishonorable ways. Sierra’s kids will grow up knowing their mom–who should have been faithful–slutted herself, having sex with a foreigner in a bathroom stall, before being beaten to death by a homeless man. McNair’s kids will grow up knowing their father–who should have been in bed with their mom at 1AM–was instead out on the town, chillaxing with his mistress.

But we also need to take these cases as a warning: if you court your lusts, that can be you.

On Game, Part 3

Posted on by Amir

In my first installment, I made the case that Game is Biblical; it is rooted in the Fall. Due to that fact, the knowledge of Game allows a man to deal with the opposite sex in honesty: pursuing her in the process of seeking a good thing (marriage) while accepting that she, like him, is a sinner and has ulterior motives at times.

Game is about dealing with the world as it is, not pedestaling folks by romanticizing them as what we wish them to be. The former is honesty, the latter is idolatry.

In my second installment, I made the case for how to deal with “tests”. I am not an expert, at the same time it is my experience that a man who can hold his own will win the respect of those around him–including the ladies–whereas a man who fawns and pedestals and idolizes and stumbles with verbose answers gets stiff-armed.

(In honor of the sucky Dallas Cowboys, Ame once showed me a humorous advertisement for Tony Romo Cologne: You use it, but the other man scores! Bottom-line: don’t be Tony Romo!!!)

In all seriousness, we need to dismiss the illusion that Game is only necessary for the single who wishes to get married. In fact, because men and women are fallen, and because–no matter how good you are–men and women take their fallenness with them into a marriage, Game is a continuous dynamic at varieties of times.

I must also concede that some of the things I am going to say will not be accepted across the board among the Game sphere. This is because the Game sphere is largely a secular lot, and they address the matter from a purely secular standpoint whereas I am addressing the matter as it pertains to the Christian.

Listen up, men. The husband who is always trying to accommodate, always trying to placate, always being agreeable, always avoiding conflict at all costs, is on the fast-track to marital disaster.

You need to understand, and understand well: you are going to piss off your wife. In fact, you are going to piss her off more times than you ever thought possible. And you had BETTER be able to handle it, or (a) at best, she is going to chew you up and spit you out well-done, or (b) at worst, you are going to snap and do some very bad–even criminal–things.

And here’s something you might not have thought: she WANTS you to provide pushback. She WANTS to see how you handle her tough side.

You know why? In marriage, it’s another variation of the “test”. In a sinister way, she is testing your mettle.

Now I hear the men protesting. “Amir, that’s evil of her to do that! Women should not test their husbands this way!”

Remember, this is not about how men and women OUGHT to treat each other; this is about the world AS IT IS. And–trust me–even the best wives I know will “test” their husbands.

No wife is perfect, just as no husband is perfect. Women are not angels with vaginas, nor are men replicas of Jesus who have sex with angels with vaginas.

We humans are all fallen creatures. Redeemed? Yes (if you are Christian). But as we live this life on this earth, we will all struggle with sin. It is what it is.

Does the Church submit to the Lord perfectly? Of course not. The last 2,000 years is a testament to God’s grace in spite of the failures of His people, just as the Old Testament is a testament of God’s grace in spite of the failures of His people before Christ. God’s people have never been perfect.

So why should we expect our spouses to be perfect?

The knowledge of Game allows you to deal with your–and your wife’s–depravity.

The good news: in marriage, Game can be easier than it is for the single. If you are bold enough to call your wife on her sin–even as you acknowledge your own–you’re halfway there. If you are bold enough to provide pushback and fight the urge to placate her, you’re 70% there. If you can do those things and be compassionate, you’re 90% there.

But here’s the thing: in order to do that, you have to be willing to handle her outbursts without getting frazzled. If she goes off and gives you the third degree, then don’t waste your time worrying about how you’re going to respond to everything she rails about. Take a step back and ask, “Is there anything else you’d like to add to that?” or “Do you feel better now?”

Sometimes, she’s just venting and you happen to be in the line of fire. Don’t take it personally; just let it roll off. Think unflappability.

Sometimes, she’s just wanting a good roll in the hay. (Now THAT’s my kind of “conflict”!)

Sometimes, she’s pissed about a longstanding issue that you may have forgotten about. (Women have great memories for those things.) If that’s the case, then deal with the issue calmly, but don’t forget to admonish her about Matthew 5. If she’s been boiling that anger for that long, that’s bad juju and you need to call her on it. But before you do that, you need to deal with your own sin in that regard: if you have allowed things to fester, then you need to deal with them.

And as you deal with your own sin, you can see your need to treat your wife with the grace you want God to give you, and that has a tendency to lower the tensions. If your wife is a Christian, and you raise the issue, she’ll–more often than not–respect you for it.

But here’s the thing: just like the Navy SEAL has to “earn the Trident every day”, you can never rest on your own laurels when you are married.

You have never “arrived”. Complacency will destroy you in a marriage. While that truth is for both sexes, it is ABSOLUTELY crucial to the husband. If you start losing her respect, she’s going to be less-inclined to follow you. And re-gaining that respect–once you have lost it–is not easy.

It’s a lot easier to stay on top of matters and maintain respect, than it is to regain it once it is lost.

Bottom-line:

(1) BE READY for conflict. The better you train for it, the better-prepared you’ll be to spot it and deal with the real deal. I recommend spending lots of time in the Proverbs.

(2) DO NOT run from conflict. Your wife will not respect a coward.

(3) LOOK for conflict as a platoon leader looks for an ambush. Be prepared for contingencies. If anything, this communicates unflappability to your wife.

(4) DO confront conflict when it shows itself. You wouldn’t give an enemy saboteur a pass, would you? Didn’t think so. If conflict shows itself, deal with it ASA-freakin’-P.

(5) DO NOT shove conflict under the rug. If you must defer it as you deal with your own sin, then fine. But deal with your own sin PRONTO! And don’t forget to deal with old business that has been tabled.

(6) DO deal with conflict gracefully. The best marital advice I received was from my noninally-Catholic aunt: never go to bed angry. I’ve done everything I can to follow that advice–even when it hasn’t been convenient–and it has proved valuable.

Oh, and I’m talking about the good marriages.

On Game, Part 2

Posted on by Amir

In the first installment, I made my case for acknowledging the dynamics of Game.

While–in the secular arena–Game is a tool for cads and even misogynists, in the hands of a Christian the knowledge of Game allows one to navigate through the tests and challenges that women present would-be suitors on the road to marriage, and also to navigate through the marriage relationship.

I made the case that Game–rooted in the Fall–is Biblical in that it accepts the fallen nature of the sexes. Women–just like the men–have ulterior motives and expectations. The knowledge of Game allows Christian men to pursue women without pedestaling them.

The caveat: the Christian man–while accepting that women are fallen–must also concede and navigate through his own fallenness. If a man pursues a woman and plays off her fallenness–without checking his own–he slouches toward misogyny.

The good guys out there will raise a point, one that I often wondered during my single days: “If we are dealing with Christians, then why should a woman be backhanded and use ‘tests’, rather than just be honest about what she wants?”

The answer: the “tests” are–for better or worse–her way of protecting herself from pretenders. To the bad women, they are looking for men with swagger. To the good women, the “test” is a way of screening out the bad guys who might not be “keepers”. We guys don’t always put all our cards on the table. Why should we demand that women do it?

(Assuming we insist on a dating culture where men and women are free agents and where arranged marriages are the exception and not the rule, Game is a natural consequence.)

Now, how should a man respond to “tests”? I would suggest that it boils down to two principles: confidence and wit. Most of the pro-Game sphere (Christian and non) is in agreement that the “agree and amplify” method is the best way to handle such “tests”.

Let’s take a some scenarios….

Let’s say you are dating a woman who has a bit of an attitude, and hits you with a derisive ‘test’ by asking you, “What kind of eunuch are you?” (Debbie Maken once asked this to a man during a date.)

Here are some ways this might play out:

Response #1: “Why should you care?”

Response #2: “The kind of eunuch who bangs lots of women.”

Response #3: “The kind who has more fun than an old maid.”

Oh, and make sure you SMILE pleasantly as you answer her. Why are those responses good? They turn the tables on her. If she’s going to hit you with a derisive test, then responding in a way that is flippant and witty and sarcastic will send her on the defensive. You’ve taken the bat out of her hand by telling her, “If you want to play that game, I’ll go as far as you want to go. Now let’s skip the BS, ok?”

Here’s another one. Let’s say she says, “I dunno if I’m ever going to get married.”

Response #1: “I know what you need: a cat. I have some friends…”

Response #2: “Yeah…you should consider joining a convent. Just south of here I know a place…”

Response #3: “I hear ya. Why get married? If I want, I can just play the field!”

Why are these responses good? They allow you to hold your ground. You’re communicating to her that (a) you realize she’s “testing” you, and (b) you’re ready to fight for her. After all, such a response tells her that you really are chasing her.

Here’s another one. Let’s say she says, “Why aren’t you married yet?”

Response #1: “Why aren’t you married yet?”

Response #2: “Why should I get married?”

Response #3: “Are you applying for the job?” (If she says no, then you need to REALLY amplify the consequences for her: suggest cats, lifelong missions, old maidenhood, and keep smiling while you do this!)

Why are these responses good? (a) They are brief and to the point, (b) they turn the tables on her, and (c) they reflect unflappability.

When you ask her about her take on long-term commitments (marriage), and she says, “I’m not wanting to talk about that. I’m guarding my heart.”

Response #1: “What do you mean by that?”

Response #2: “I know of a convent in Bardstown…”

Response #3: “It’s hard for a man to compete with cats.”

These responses will put her on the defensive. She may be pissed at you, but you’ve turned the tables on her. Some will drop the facade and start clarifying. Others might break it off. At worst, you walk away with self-respect.

All women will not be this brash. As you get older, they’re going to ask pointed questions. That is not all good, nor is it all bad. Just remember: answer in a way that conveys confidence in as few words as possible. DO NOT act like the sheepish, aw-shucks pushover who fawns over her and stumbles on questions.

Also, remember that Game will not win EVERY time. The PUAs are only successful about 30% of the time. But think of it this way:

(a) unlike the PUA, if you are a single Christian, you are not looking to get laid tonight. You are only looking to land a gal in a relationship that leads to marriage; and

(b) you only have to be successful ONE TIME to land a relationship that leads to marriage.

On “Game”, Part 1

Posted on by Amir

First, a couple disclaimers:

(1) “Game” is the common term used for the high-percentage means for men to attract women. I use that term because it is so widely-used, but we could call it any number of things. Call it “Intersexual Dynamics”. Call it “Boy/Girl relations”. I don’t care. The nomenclature is not as important as the dynamics. But I will call it “Game”.

(2) When speaking affirmatively about Game, one often gets tagged as a defender of the pickup artists (PUAs), most notably Roissy. To clarify: I am not a defender of Roissy. While he is correct–crudely so–about the dynamics of Game, he represents the “Dark Side” of the matter.

The objections that I often get from women about Game typically follow along these lines:

(a) Not all women are like that (NAWALT);

(b) Game is for insecure men;

(c) Game is a tool for men who don’t really like women.

Well, I think I can speak to those issues, and I can also speak to both the single and the married folks.

Here are my bona fides…

For one, while I am (happily) married, I was single for almost the first 43 years of my life. During those years, I was heavily-involved in my churches in a variety of capacities. I taught, I served in para-church ministries (maternity home, crisis pregnancy center), and even occasionally preached. I did some time at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, excelling academically as a conservative amongst a parade of liberals.

I can speak firsthand about the terrible presentation of Jesus in the Church: the non-confrontational, metrosexual Jesus. I can speak firsthand about the “children’s ministry” which was/is overwhelmingly staffed with women who teach from curricula that is feminized at best.

I can speak firsthand about the Christian Nice Guy paradigm that gets promoted from the pulpit, which teaches men that they are the problem even when they are not.

Men, in turn, either (a) bolt the Church altogether, (b) embrace the “Nice Guy” persona that attracts women like a man wearing a pink rabbit t-shirt, or (c) spend years fleshing out–either in singleness or in marriage–what real Christian manhood entails, as they aren’t learning that from the “men” in their church.

I’ve seen the dynamics of Game firsthand. When I was young, I reasoned that only certain types of women are attracted to men with it. I reasoned that, within Christian circles, certainly women are not attracted to that.

Oh, but I was wrong. During college, I saw a few gals in the Christian fellowship group fall for that same type of man. These weren’t “bad” girls either. They were otherwise very good gals who were attracted to the man with Game, just as a few of the guys fell for the hot babes who–at best–were hangers-on in the church.

Then, after college, I started working at a crisis pregnancy center. For the next three years, I got to see–firsthand–what went on under the radar in church circles.

Where I lived–Anderson, Indiana–was a church town. They are the home of Anderson University, a Church of God (Reformation Movement) institution. It was relatively conservative, and was smack in the middle of Gaither Country.

Well, the clients at the crisis pregnancy center were–overwhelmingly–church-attending professing Christians. Many were students at Anderson University. And they were sowing their wild oats. Some were abortion-minded, but most were ambivalent about what they were doing. About half of them weren’t even dating fellow believers. I asked those, “You’re going to a Christian school, and there are plenty of Christian guys there. What’s wrong with them?” The answer was along the lines of, “Well…I’m friends with some of them, but…”

It didn’t occur to me that they were drawn to the Alpha types outside the Christian circles.

My best friend from those days–EK–had gone to Anderson University, and carried on a sexual relationship with a non-Christian for all four years. In her senior year, she became pregnant with his child, and this led to a shotgun wedding. After eight years, that marriage ended in divorce. In retrospect, I asked her, “You were brought up in a Christian home, you went to a Christian university, and you had all kinds of Christian men around you. Why did you choose to date–and have sex–and then marry–a non-believer?” She said he was a leader who naturally attracted her. She felt that she could eventually change him.

He was an Alpha.

After my CPC days, a couple years later I started frequenting online venues for Christian singles. It was very common to hear Christian women say, “I feel more comfortable with the men outside of Church than I do with the men in the Church.” While the term Alpha never came up, whenever I asked one of them about the men they dated, those men exuded the qualities that we would all identify with Alpha males.

During my time in teaching roles in the church, I saw women–overwhelmingly–drawn to the “cool” men. Those relationships rarely ended in marriage, but they almost always became sexual and left a trail of damage. Again, these women weren’t what I would have called “bad girls”. They were, however, naturally attracted to those types of men.

My point here is not to put women down for dating “bad” men. Far from it.

The real issue here is what attracts the sexes.

What attracts the men? (a) a nice, plain-looking gal or (b) a hot babe in a revealing outfit?

While there is nothing inherently wrong with (a), most red-blooded males would have to admit that (b) is more naturally-attractive to the men. (Oh, and trust me: I can count as many cases where MEN–just like the women who fell for the bad Alphas–fell for the hot babes.)

It’s the same question for women: What naturally attracts the women? (a) a short guy who dresses neatly and is clean-shaven, or (b) a tall man with one or more tattoos, long hair, and a goatee?

Notice that I am not talking about what is right or wrong, but rather what naturally attracts men and women.

Keep in mind that I am not knocking the naturally-attractive of either sex, or even those who are naturally-attracted to them.

I am simply pointing out the reality: Game is about what qualities generally attract women.

This is neither a good thing, nor an evil thing. It simply is.

The Christian man who understands and accepts that fact will be in a better position to understand, appreciate, and–yes–court the opposite sex.

Assessing Tracy Clark Flory

Posted on by Amir

At this point, the story of Tracy Clark Flory (TCF)–the sex-positive feminist columnist who once defended casual sex and is now sort of revisiting that position–is not news. Susan Walsh and Vox Day–as well as Roissy–provide scathing assessments of TCF.

My intention here is not to pile on TCF about her sexual past. She’s not a professing Christian, I don’t know her, she doesn’t know me, and–if anything–I sort of feel sorry for her. I would have more ire for her if she were a Christian, but–given that she does not claim any such affiliation–my only serious gripe with her is that she spent her most promiscuous years promoting that lifestyle for others.

That said, her story is instructive to both men and women.

For the men, it is important in that it provides a real-life portrait of the discretion that a man needs to have when dating someone. TCF–like Kate Bolick–is not immediately repulsive to men. In fact, both TCF and Kate Bolick are relatively attractive. Bolick, for someone in her 40s, has done an impressive job taking care of her appearance.

And that’s the problem for men here: APPEARANCES! Yes, men hate hearing the admonition about “inner beauty”. They dread the words, “She has a great personality!” And that’s not to say that outer beauty doesn’t or shouldn’t count: it does, and no amount of shaming tactics will change that fact.

At the same time, the men tend to forget about that “beauty is fleeting” clause in Proverbs 31.

The cases of Kate Bolick and TCF underscore the need for the guys to have discernment. This is because there are women life Kate Bolick and TCF in the Church. They have a certain charm, and even the appearance of godliness. They may not be regulars in the singles classes, but they’ll show up at special functions. They’ll dress suggestively enough to appeal to the men who are “looking”, while speaking the right spiritual jargon to make you think they are genuine. They may even play the game so well that you will not be aware of their loose morals.

How do you win against those types if you’re a guy? You have to be honest about your own lusts and desires and motives. The guys who fall for those types are every bit as depraved as the gals for whom they fall. In fact, I would suggest that they don’t “fall” for the loose woman as much as they “swan dive” into sin. They crash–head-first, with a smile–into sin.

Don’t think it can’t happen to you? That’s evidence that it can.

Now how is TCF’s case instructive for the women?

Ladies, her case is a WARNING to you. Wanna know how?

Let’s say you are wanting to get married–to a good, stand-up guy–and have kids with him. Let’s say that have the following pedigree:

(1) You are 28 years old;
(2) You started having sex when you were in your teens;
(3) Your college life was rife with “hookups”, often with alcohol involved;
(4) Even after college, your dating life was a series of short-term sexual relationships with Alpha males;

While everyone is going to have SOME baggage, this type of past is indicative of a lot of the self-inflicted type. While your chances of marrying well aren’t zero, they have gotten worse–not better–with age, due to those choices.

Now, let’s say that, instead, you have the following pedigree:

(1) You are 24 years old;
(2) You are either a virgin or–at worst–have had no more than three partners in your life, none since high school;
(3) Your college life was straight-laced: you did not play the hookup culture, and you dated with good boundaries;
(4) You work hard, and the group with whom you hang is upstanding; you don’t frequent the bar scene.
(5) While you find yourself naturally-attracted to Alpha males, you check yourself because you KNOW that those types, while interesting, are as cunning to the women as the scantily-clad hottie is to the men.

The tragedy is that, while TCF is still young (she’s 28), she has the following working against her:

(1) She probably can’t even count the number of partners she’s had;
(2) She does not seem to grasp what commitment is;
(3) She is in total denial about what she has done with her life;
(4) Her most fertile years were spent riding the carousel.

While I support TCF’s right to destroy her life–and she’s doing a great job of it–I would also point out that she’s reprehensible for teaching others to do as she has done.

And THAT is another area that women need to heed: people like TCF do what they do because THEY NEED YOU TO BE A SLUT IN ORDER FOR THEM TO HAPPY! THIS IS BECAUSE THERE IS STRENGTH IN NUMBERS!

The sluttier you are, the better it is for her ego: it allows her to feel better about herself.

Women’s Sex Tourism

Posted on by Amir

While I gave up pedestaling long ago, I still found this tidbit unpleasantly surprising.

Gentlemen….if she starts talking about taking a trip to the Caribbean–without you, of course–let’s just say that it’s a VERY BAD SIGN.

And to the ladies who are into this sort of thing….don’t kid yourselves. If there’s something instructive about this article, it’s that, while you may be getting the attention you crave, the locals over there have special names for you.

Yes, they’ll ravage your body and even take payment for their pleasure. Just remember, though: to them, you’re just an affluent slut. A “milk bottle”.

Over here, though, you are worse than a slut. If you pay for it, then you are as much of a loser as any man who pays for it.

HT: Vox Day.