Post: #1

What if you went to a country where everyone had game? Would it mean that the lizards were easier and more cooperative or would it make them closed off and make only the 5s available?

Is it the lack of game that has made lizards harder in certain countries or is it the presence of game that has done so? Is game from an infrastructure level as well as an individualistic level?

Infrastructure game: Not giving lizards the platform or leverage to wreck families based on their emotional whims i.e. false rape cries, men ain't shyt, divorce based on irreconcilable differences.

Individual game: Roosh, Krauser and the other gurus.

I was just talking to a few spars today and some of my Toronto cats etc and this came to mind.

Thoughts?

Post: #2

Well to put a spin on your question, after living in the gulf Middle East where a tonne of dudes Didn't have game but a tonne had money, the 5 s were for the picking. Well, the population was skewed heavily and a whole lot of other factors came into play.

Speaking if this occurred in a normal demographic, the women will still get their breadwinner betas and the alpha will pump and pump and pump her until he moves onto the next one.

Post: #3

(09-17-2014 05:13 PM)Moma Wrote:  What if you went to a country where everyone had game? Would it mean that the lizards were easier and more cooperative or would it make them closed off and make only the 5s available?

Is it the lack of game that has made lizards harder in certain countries or is it the presence of game that has done so? Is game from an infrastructure level as well as an individualistic level?

Infrastructure game: Not giving lizards the platform or leverage to wreck families based on their emotional whims i.e. false rape cries, men ain't shyt, divorce based on irreconcilable differences.

Individual game: Roosh, Krauser and the other gurus.

I was just talking to a few spars today and some of my Toronto cats etc and this came to mind.

Thoughts?

Only the 5s would be available. It's like the question of making men as a whole more "alpha". Which you can't. You can make them more "manly", but alpha is relative to other men, and a woman values a man relative to other men. If everyone had game, we'd have to resort back to the other method of proving superiority...fighting. It's a good time to be a woman in the west, which is why I don't take their complaints seriously

Post: #4

Roosh had that post a while back about needing fame, game and steroids to get laid in America a few decades from now.

So if you're patient you'll get an excellent answer to your question.

Post: #5

(09-17-2014 05:33 PM)Seth_Rose Wrote:  Roosh had that post a while back about needing fame, game and steroids to get laid in America a few decades from now.

So if you're patient you'll get an excellent answer to your question.

While I agree with Roosh's premise to some extent, I think so many dudes will simply give up and drop out that simply through resiliency and a dedication to self-improvement a man would do just fine. Women will start to curb their demands. Most guys, at some point, have gone through long periods without sex or female affection, so we're more use to it. Women don't. They NEED male sex/affection much more than the other way around.

Post: #6

Ratio of:

young 6.5+(cute thin) females to males looking for sex

Is the most important factor when discussing this.

Great ratios and great game most girls have decent to good attitudes and are open to sex and guys have harems.

Examples of these in a liberal culture are NYC and Santa Barbara, many cats have decent game and there are lots of girls. It creates an abundance mentality therefore guys won't settle. Girls' N counts rise exponentially due to competing for relationships and attention. Guys stay in the game much longer than other places.

Bad ratios and great game is a shark tank hell if you are not on top. Guys will lock 7+ girls down ASAP, I theorize their N counts won't rise as much as they are in a candy store of BF opportunities. The 5s and 6s get tons of attention and are passed around alot.

Demographics are everything.

Post: #7

I would go to a different country.

Why deal with competition if you don't have to?

Post: #8

I think it depends on the kind of game you are talking about.

If its infrastructure game, it would be like Russia or FSU, a few south-east Asian countries, sure the girls will have less attitude. But that doesnt mean the guys are more alpha. So in the end it sorts out that hot girls with rich guys etc;, but the beta guys will have to deal with less shit.

If its individual game about entertaining women, it will just balloon out to even more cock riding and using/disposing men. It just heightens the illusion for women that men have to entertain them to have sex. Disaster.

If everyone have game but the women are not pretty and have attitude problem..... nevermind

Post: #9

(09-17-2014 09:20 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  I would go to a different country.

Why deal with competition if you don't have to?

If everyone had Game, but women were as entitled, overweight and in the minority as is the case in the West - it would be a fucked-up arms race.

Game would be counting for way less and only the extremes of wealth, fame and looks would have an easy time attracting girls.

But on a different note - a society of men who ALL have Game is not going to come about. Why? Because the men would start becoming Alphas/Sigmas, the men would start delving into more than Game, they would start to go Red Pill, they would start questioning authorities like most Sigmas do, they would be a fucking pain in the ass for the ruling plutocracy. And most important of all such a society of men might have to start an influence on women. No one would marry, hardly anyone would be having children, hardly anyone would be paying child-support, hardly anyone would put in 80 hours a week to excel at his job for a chance to attract 30 year old aging pussy for Beta-marriage. The whole card-house would come crashing down and society would have to react in order to survive or we would see Mad Max style anarchy take hold.

In my opinion - if Red Pill becomes too popular, then it will be combated more vehemently or sites will be taken off-line. That's why I think that it will remain a fringe movement - most guys only waking up to it as they sit in their post-divorce-masturbatorium and try to make sense of it all.

Post: #10

Pro - Cockblocking would go down by 80%

Con - The prettiest women would probably flee because there wouldn't be anyone to pedestalize the pussy

I vote to keep the thirsty guys around; they make my job easier

Post: #11

You would really need some kind of edge or gimmick to stand out. Something to set you apart from the flocks of other guys with game, some kind of peacocking would prally work in your favor.

Of course if you stayed in a country where all the bros had game for a year or two it would put you leaps and bounds ahead of guys when you went back to a normal country.

Post: #12

(09-18-2014 04:31 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  If everyone had Game, but women were as entitled, overweight and in the minority as is the case in the West - it would be a fucked-up arms race.

Game would be counting for way less and only the extremes of wealth, fame and looks would have an easy time attracting girls.

But on a different note - a society of men who ALL have Game is not going to come about. Why? Because the men would start becoming Alphas/Sigmas, the men would start delving into more than Game, they would start to go Red Pill, they would start questioning authorities like most Sigmas do, they would be a fucking pain in the ass for the ruling plutocracy. And most important of all such a society of men might have to start an influence on women. No one would marry, hardly anyone would be having children, hardly anyone would be paying child-support, hardly anyone would put in 80 hours a week to excel at his job for a chance to attract 30 year old aging pussy for Beta-marriage. The whole card-house would come crashing down and society would have to react in order to survive or we would see Mad Max style anarchy take hold.

In my opinion - if Red Pill becomes too popular, then it will be combated more vehemently or sites will be taken off-line. That's why I think that it will remain a fringe movement - most guys only waking up to it as they sit in their post-divorce-masturbatorium and try to make sense of it all.

Zelcorpion, I don't think infrastructure game and individual game has a need to co-exist. In this sense, you wouldn't have anyone questioning at the level you think. Men with game would put in work because having personal resources is part of game.

You have game at different levels. From an individual standpoint, you have:

You have broke game where you pique her sexual interest enough by leveraging a perceived high sexual value so that you get pu$$y. This is usually done when it's obvious you are broke and there is no way you can realistically radiate that you have high financial clout.

You have rich game where you pique her sexual interest by leveraging a perceived (or ACTUAL) high social value due to financial status and bang her on YOUR terms. Those who are pimpish with it may bang a nice looking lizard and leverage her looks to get a harem of lizards or on another level, those may leverage it to win the obedience (and or Money) of more BETA men who don't have ready access to those lizards.

You also have relationship or marriage game where one may or not choose to be mongamous but leverage game to MAINTAIN the lizard's sexual coupled with a perception of value from her so that she doesn't step out of line and challenge the man's authority.

Depending on time or desire, one may use leverage this game to keep his wife/girlfriend/common law in check and stay sexually monogamous with her OR still leverage the game in the same aspect and step out and enjoy other lizards WHILE ensuring that the main nest stays intact.

Post: #13

(09-18-2014 07:57 AM)MY DETROIT PLAYAS Wrote:  Pro - Cockblocking would go down by 80%

Con - The prettiest women would probably flee because there wouldn't be anyone to pedestalize the pussy

I vote to keep the thirsty guys around; they make my job easier

Thirsty guys ruin the plot. Look at cities like Toronto, it's like a parched desert there. The guys are thirsty and so beta (excluding my RVF crew and some minorities) that the lizards even go south to look for 'real' men.

That's why oddly enough but the higher the game level, the better is for men in general, in my experience and observation.

Post: #14

Free market capitalism in its purest form; a rising tide lifts all ships. Everyone would just be "better", putting forth better effort, which takes as much lifestyle lock as it does game. Women and men would present themselves better, as stiffer competition snuffs out the under performers. Meaning less or no beta men, which would result in fewer flakey lizards. Russia?

Post: #15

(09-18-2014 06:07 PM)Vaun Wrote:  Free market capitalism in its purest form; a rising tide lifts all ships. Everyone would just be "better", putting forth better effort, which takes as much lifestyle lock as it does game. Women and men would present themselves better, as stiffer competition snuffs out the under performers. Meaning less or no beta men, which would result in fewer flakey lizards. Russia?

Do Russian men have better game than American men or does their individual game seem to be highlighted by the fact that the infrastructure game behind them is intact?

Post: #16

If every man in said country had good game, other aspects would gain importance. Style, wealth, status, fitness, dick game etc.

Great questions, really interesting to ponder on. I wonder if monogamy would be more prevalent in such a situation. Even low value men would theoretically have game, picking up women of similar value.. As well as some outliers that could pull women of 'higher value' than themselves.