By now I’m sure you’ve read the CNN article “‘The Demise of Guys’: How Videogames and Porn Are Ruining a Generation,” the latest “man up” shaming piece the MSM has belched out. I’ve written an essay for In Mala Fide addressing its main thesis that will be up later this week; I was going to include the content of this article in it, but I removed it because it was a diversion from my main point.
The argument that Zimbardo and Duncan are making in The Demise of Guys is that young men these days are socially retarded. Well, they don’t use the r-word because heaven forbid we offend someone with an IQ under 85, but that’s what they’re saying.
The problem with their thesis is that young women are as equally socially retarded.
You don’t need to take my word for it. If you’re a young guy out there trying to get laid, you have to deal with female social retardation on a regular basis. If you haven’t been out of the country or dated a woman from a non-Western culture, you likely think this retarded behavior is normal, instead of recognizing it as symptomatic of a sick, dying civilization. Half of what we think of as “game” is a coping mechanism for dealing with the social ineptness of modern women. Here are some examples of what I’m talking about.
1. Shit testing.
I know the seduction community’s line on this: a shit test (or “fitness test” if you’re a pussy) is an insult or remark that a woman throws out to determine your social rank. The thinking goes is that if you pass her test, you’ve proven that you’re a high-value man who can protect her from danger, because if you can’t pass the test, can’t stand up to her, how can you stand up to muggers, rapists and other bad men?
Only a nerd who’s never spoken to any woman aside from his mother could seriously buy this.
Think about it. Human beings are capable of determining someone’s status before that person even opens their mouth. How do they dress? What kind of body do they have? How do they carry themselves? When said person starts flapping their gums, they give away even more about their status through their tone of voice, choice of words and so on. If you can’t discern someone’s place in society within thirty seconds of laying eyes on them, you’re probably too stupid to be leaving the house without a chaperone.
But it’s more than that: the evo-psych explanation PUAs give for shit testing doesn’t make any sense. The seduction community claims human sexuality is a holdover from the caveman days. Can you imagine a woman getting away with shit testing a guy back in prehistoric times?
Caveman: You pretty lady. Me big strong man. Want go make bang-bang?
Cavewoman: Me no like you. How big your boom-cannon?
Caveman (grabbing Cavewoman by the throat, menacing her with club in the other hand): If you no want make bang-bang, me make you make bang-bang. Which you want?
Cavewoman (screaming): No, don’t hurt me! Okay, me make bang-bang!
Ten thousand generations of coercive sex later, civilization was born.
This is why trying to pass shit tests is a stupid idea. Pre-Agricultural Revolution, any woman who behaved like women today do would have been raped, then possibly had her brains dashed out on the nearest rock to make an example of her. The only women who survived long enough to bear children were the ones who shut up, laid back and thought of Anu, or those whose rapists got merciful and didn’t kill them afterwards. What PUAs call “shit testing” is the domain of two specific types of women, neither of whom you want to deal with:
- Social retards who think insulting a man will turn him on.
- Clinical narcissists looking for a codependent to feed off of.
The proper response to a shit test isn’t to pass it, it’s to walk away. And of course, only a masochist would get into a relationship with a woman who shit tests on a regular basis.
This is another personality defect of modern woman that PUAs attempt to explain away with evolutionary psychology. To a certain extent they have a point, but the extreme flakiness of American women has little to do with cavewoman thinking and everything to do with their inability to interact with other human beings.
To give an example, in my limited dealings with Russians and other eastern Europeans, they are much more blunt and direct when it comes to how they feel about you. This includes women and men. If they don’t like you, they’ll say so to your face; if they do, they’ll let you know it. The advantage here is that you always know where you stand with them, so when they consider you a friend or a woman says she loves you, you know they mean it. Others in the manosphere have noticed that non-Western women are more upfront about their feelings.
American women, in contrast, give out their numbers to guys they have no interest in, then don’t return their calls. Or they’ll arrange dates with guys then not show up. That’s the definition of social retardation right there: not being able to tell a guy upfront what you think of him.
“Oh hey girlfriend, that guy I met at the club on Saturday night just texted me. He wants to meet for coffee—oh wait, a new episode of Girls is on! Oh my God, what’s going to happen this week? Wait, what were we talking about again?”
Technology has only made flaking worse. The reason girls prefer texting over phone calls is because the former removes the human element. Ignoring a text is easier than ignoring a voicemail, and rejecting someone via a string of words is easier than doing it face-to-face. Facebook and smartphones are transforming an entire generation of girls into emotionally stunted weirdos.
Fortunately, the standard game advice on dealing with flakes is sane: forget they exist.
Some feminists attempt to defend flakiness and the headgames they play by saying something to the effect of, “Well, I tried to tell him I wasn’t interested, but he wouldn’t take no for an answer!” I don’t buy it, because most normal, socially aware men can tell when a woman’s not into them. If the only men you can attract are dorky stalkers, the problem is probably you.
This is socially retarded for the same reason flaking is. Women who friend-zone guys know exactly what they’re doing. They keep it up mainly because they want it both ways: they want to be able to lead men on and only sleep with a select few of them. It gives them an ego boost to get men worked up into a frenzy of lust for them. For any morons reading this, no, I am not arguing that girls are obligated to sleep with every guy who gets an erection looking at them.
What I am saying is that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
If you’re not into a guy romantically, it’s your obligation to tell him right off the bat. Don’t give me some nellie-assed excuse like, “I don’t want to hurt his feelings.” Your rejection may sting him now, but wasting weeks, months of his time will make him angrier than if you just cut it off from the beginning. And again, if he can’t take no for an answer, ask yourself why you seem to be attracting weirdos.
4. Dressing provocatively and getting upset that men are noticing them.
Both parts of that sentence are important. Again, in my interactions with non-Western women, very few of them get offended when men check them out, so long as they’re not creepy about it. That’s the whole reason for dressing sluttily: to get men to notice you.
The way American women react to ogling and cat-calling, you’d think they were all 11-year olds menstruating for the first time.
As Dave Chappelle said, “If you ain’t a whore, why are you wearing the uniform?” If you wear a low-cut top, men are going to stare at your boobs. It’s as natural as the sun rising in the east. That doesn’t make it socially acceptable or right, but unless you’re planning to castrate every man who sneaks a peek at your cans, you’re just going to have to shut up and deal. Life ain’t fair, snookums, not for girls or guys.
There are more examples of female retardation I can think of, but this post is already too long. Why not give your own examples in the comments?
Read Next: Women Are Not the Enemy