On my last post the discussion turned to how likely the average man was to have learned about the mechanics of sexual attraction. TFH argued that the time is approaching where this information will be so widely available that if one hasn’t started picking it up it is an indication of unwillingness to learn, not lack of exposure:
As bad as feminists and ordinary women are, by the end of 2015, we will reach the point where some men will have to be told that ‘you cannot entirely blame the burglar if leave the front door open with a neon arrow pointing to it, while you go out of town’.
I won’t try to predict the saturation of information by 2016, but right now very few men over the age of 25-30 have ever heard of either the manosphere or the concept of game. Even so, exposure is the least of our challenges. Feminism is the dominant ideology of our age, and learning that women are attracted to men who lead them is tantamount to crimethink. It doesn’t matter that it is true; entertaining thoughts which counter feminism is a terrifying prospect. This is perhaps more the case for those who don’t see themselves as feminist, and especially those who consider themselves anti-feminist because they oppose abortion, think men have a duty to man up and marry a woman once she has had sex with enough other men, and believe that men have a duty to act as a traditional protector and provider (but not head of household) so their wife can decide if she wants to have a career or stay at home.
The proof of our challenge with older men is not how many have ever heard of Roissy, but the hundreds of millions of Christians who have spent a lifetime avoiding and denying the parts of the Bible which offend feminism.
The best we can hope for is to help those men who are willing to challenge the dominant ideology and overcome their lifetime investment in a mental model of romance which fails miserably but “everyone knows” is right. I don’t think posts like my last one will spark a movement, and that isn’t my intent. I’m simply hoping to help the handful of married men who are ready to learn, and in doing so help a few more kids grow up with their father in the home.
But there is another side to this. Younger men, the ones now in high school, college, and perhaps a few years older, live in a very different world than the one older men came of age in. When I was in college in the late 80s and early 90s, half of all women still married before the age of 24. As I explained here, this influenced the actions of women going back to their late teens. Very large numbers of women were still interested in having a steady boyfriend while in college, and soon thereafter marriage. If you were a man in college without a girlfriend, at least you saw your friends having girlfriends, and you saw the men just a few years older than you getting married.
Now the majority of women are spending a decade after coming of age sexually pursuing a small percentage of the most attractive men. When given the choice, young women have overwhelmingly chosen hookups over commitment. If you are a young man witnessing this, the lie my peers and I were brought up with that women naturally commit for life is forever exploded. The flower of women’s youth is now dedicated to the men who can generate the most “tingles”. In this environment the answer to the question of why young women are focused on the attention of a small number of men (and how to possibly join those men) is a secret the KGB couldn’t have kept. Even if you aren’t able or interested in joining the small group of men, the truth of game will be in front of you every day.
All that was missing was a clear explanation of why women obviously behave in fundamentally different ways than conventional wisdom predicts. Men like Mystery and Roissy and now countless others have done just that. Knowledge of “game” is rapidly becoming mainstream for high school and college age men. They don’t have to learn it from the internet, they hear it from the very men their female peers are falling all over. As a result it is starting to show up both in character archetypes and even in the dialog of movies aimed at young people. One example which comes to mind is the remake of a 1980s vampire movie, Fright Night 2011. Early in the movie we see a fairly ordinary high school kid with a surprisingly hot girlfriend. His very manner shows an understanding of game, and this struck me when watching the movie even before this exchange where one of his peers asks what his secret is:
[referring to Amy as they watch her walk away]
Mark: Did you find a freakin’ Genie Lamp, man? Make a sacrifice to the hot ass God? Cause how do you get that?
Charley Brewster: It’s just game, man. Rock solid game.
[Charley walks away]
Mark: He doesn’t even have a car!
This generational shift is the real threat to feminism, and there would be no way to stop this if you wanted to. Shut down every blog in the manosphere and the only question is how long before all of the institutions of our society, from the church and academia to the police and the Supreme Court are populated by men who understand what game teaches. This won’t mean the end of feminism, because the power is already deeply entrenched and we will still have what Rollo has coined the feminine imperative. However, it will mean that feminism won’t have a choke-hold on the discourse, and won’t be able to make men fear the crimethink of examining the true nature of men and women.