Men’s Liberation Through “Game”

by Delusion Damage on March 18, 2011

The fundamental contract between the sexes, put down in law as the institution of marriage, unchanged for countless generations, was essentially this: the man provides the woman with food and shelter which she is unable to acquire on her own, and the woman in exchange provides the man with sex and children which he is unable to acquire on his own. It was understood in what’s called “the spirit of the law” that the wife was entitled to access to the husband’s income and whatever material wealth came thereof, and that the husband was entitled to access to his wife’s reproductive system and whatever offspring came thereof.

The contract worked great for a long time, but like all good things, it eventually came to an end.

The “women’s liberation” movement liberated women from their part of the deal – today men (as the majority of taxpayers) are bound by law to support women (as the majority of recipients of welfare, affirmative action, divorce settlements, alimony, child support, and other gender-biased wealth transfer programs in a similar vein), but women by law owe men nothing in return.

Even within marriage, only one side of the contract has survived: in the event of divorce, the high-earning spouse (usually male) is bound by law to support the low-earning spouse (usually female) through aforementioned wealth transfer programs, but he is not entitled to custody of children or monthly payments in the form of sexual access, which is what the logical counterpart of alimony would be.

Why do men continue to take such a devil’s deal?

Overwhelmingly, the answer seems to be what it has always been: for sexual access. When a man has managed to get hold of a decently tolerable and OK-looking woman who’s giving it to him on the regular – not an easy accomplishment for most men, given the sorry state of the supply of young women – the woman usually can, and usually will, pressure him into marriage using an implicit or explicit threat of withholding the supply of sex he’s worked so hard for. Most men cave and take the deal, bad as it is.

There are happy marriages, of course, where both parties genuinely want to commit to each other for life through an age-old ritual in front of their communities and families, and be recognized by law as a unit, and maybe some of them never regret it – but it takes only a cursory look at divorce statistics to conclude that these happy marriages are in the minority. Most marriages are not like that – most people settle. Most men don’t particularly want to get married – they only do it because their wives want it, and why shouldn’t they! The wives have everything to gain by marrying, the husbands nothing but the assumed promise of a continued supply of sex – and that promise is often broken once the papers have been signed.

Now there’s even “rape within marriage” – the final word on exactly what rights the law thinks a husband has in a marriage. When before the wife’s sexuality was his property which he bought by fulfilling his part of the deal, he is today still forced to pay the price but no delivery of goods is guaranteed.

With women long since liberated from having to offer sex in exchange for the husband’s resources (labor, income, wealth etc.), we are now living a time where men are finding liberation from having to offer women resources in exchange for sex.

This facet of “men’s liberation” comes in the form of a practice commonly known as “Game” – the scientific study of how to make oneself so attractive to women that they will offer one sex for free.

“Game” removes the main pressure forcing men into unwanted marriage by ensuring abundant sexual access to a variety of desirable women without having to trade them anything substantial in return. A man skilled in “game” feels much, much less inclined to marry than a sexually frustrated man trying to hold onto the one woman special enough to open her legs for him.

The common ground between the “game” sphere and the men’s rights sphere is obvious: men’s rights advocates have a need – the need to reduce the unilateral enslavement of men through marriage – and advocates of “game” have a solution that will do it. Many young men ignorant of “game” would take, and as the statistics show, are taking, a marriage with sex and unfairly stacked divorce laws over no marriage and no sex – but few young men would take any marriage over the prospect of free and abundant sex with a variety of attractive partners.

The benefits of “game” to the men’s movement don’t stop there. The delusional belief that wealth built up through hard work in the soul-sucking corporate machines of our time is required to attract women is endemic among men – learning “game” changes that. A man who learns “game” has little incentive to continue being the taxpayer who supports women living on gender-biased government handout programs. The more men learn “game”, the more the government must curtail its expenses.

“Game” is also beneficial to men as individuals. A demanding self-improvement effort, it tends to draw its practitioners onto constructive paths in life that lead them to improve their circumstances in other ways as well. Self-improvement gets into the blood of a man who practices “game” regularly, and this is evident in those men who have reached the highest levels of game. They have not only acquired a skill set but have undertaken an effort to rebuild themselves from the ground up, deprogramming the harmful delusions feminized society raised them into and finding out for themselves what it means to be a man and how to be the best men they can be – the experience of practicing “game” provides such a stark contrast against the lies a man is fed by our culture and education system that it automatically wakes him up to question more and more of what he’s been told. He stops buying the party line and learns to think for himself about how he really should live his life, learning to ignore popular propaganda about what a man should be and how he should act – another goal close to the heart of any men’s rights activist.

If men’s liberation is a strategic goal, encouraging them to learn “game” should be a tactical one. Its positive impact on men’s rights in the real world is simply too great not to be utilized.

Delusion Damage specializes in exploring the hidden causes of everything and figuring out how to make a lifetime as a man in the modern world the best it can possibly be.

{ 192 comments… read them below or add one }

Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: