Humans do not want equality.  We strive at every turn to create order and structure.  Specialization.  Division of labor.  A vast network of people taking orders from someone higher up the food chain, separated by invisible layers of social abstraction.

The seduction community attempts to manipulate this system by analyzing the correlation between certain behaviors and a desired effect.  The method is crude, but the attempt to examine causal relationships in human behavior is valid.

Understanding the rules of any system increases the odds of working that system in your favor.  In essence, gaming the game.

Unfortunately, the average Player doesn’t stand a chance if their Game fails at the concept level.  Here are a few common fuck-ups Pick Up Artists make in their basic understanding of Game. Read more

(First Published at The Spearhead)

I have a problem with Evolutionary Psychology.  Specifically, I have a problem with how some members of the Game community interpret Evolutionary Psychology.  Evo-Psyche is used to define what it is to be a Man.

Evolutionary Psychology is a scape-goat science being used to market a product.

Once upon a time, men turned to God for explanations.  God lives in the gaps.  Then Man discovered the Scientific Method.  In the search for Truth, Man applied logic and reason to natural phenomenon and gradually the need for God dwindled.

“God works in mysterious ways,” became Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.

Science began filling in the gaps in Man’s understanding of the world.  As methods improved, scientific credibility grew.  Then the scientific community developed a tragic flaw: hubris.

As recently as last year, scientists were suggesting that men were a dying breed.  Fifteen minutes ago, scientists announced that they were wrong.  Eggs are good, eggs are bad.  You too can lose weight eating nothing but bacon.

Science had long abused its credibility to push biased, misinformed, and under-investigated theories.  People listened because they wanted to believe what they were being told.  All they needed were the relevant statistics so they could plead authority.

Then Climategate broke and the wheels came off.

Evolutionary Psychology is not an exact science.  It is controversial, meaning debatable, and therefore far from perfect.  Before you quote Dawkins at me, understand what I’m saying.  I am not arguing that Evo-Psyche has no merit, nor am I arguing that it is not an advancing field.

What I am arguing is that Evolutionary Psychology is not grounds for making broad, deterministic statements about the nature of human beings.

When I read statements like “humans evolved to . . . ” or “nature intended”, the thinking part of my brain short-circuits.  Humans did not evolve to do anything.  Nature has no plan.  The idea that survival and replication are Nature’s/Evolution’s goal is quaint foolishness.

This may only be a trick of the language.  These kinds of statements may only be poor wording that conveys an unintended meaning.  Then again, they may be an extension of Argumentum ad Naturam.  Humans evolved that way, natural selection allows only the best, therefore people should behave according X,Y,Z.

Evolution is a process of happy accidents.

Humans did not evolve with opposable thumbs so that we could survive better.  We evolved with them because having them didn’t get us killed.  The fact that our thumbs are useful is only a bonus.

Evolution happens by kludging.  For every million or so harmful mutations, one comes along that happens to be benign, perhaps even useful.  There is no purpose behind it, humans “read” purpose onto Evolution.  We invest it with our own meaning.

Science is supposed to be about observable facts.

“Humans have forward looking eyes, a trait common to predatory animals,” is a valid scientific observation.

“Humans have forward looking eyes because they evolved to be predators,” is not.

Using Evolutionary Psychology to define Manhood makes it easy to reduce men to polyamorous breed machines.  Extrapolating how men are “supposed to be” from a series of lower level physical properties, however factual, is nothing more than reductive determinism.

Meanwhile, a generation of men emasculated by feminism and the Sexual Revolution mope around, dick-hurt about their clumsy love-lives and willing to blame anyone but themselves.  They turn to Game because the people marketing it wave a magic wand and say, “Science!”

Does Game work?  Sure it does . . . but I suspect that its success has more to do with the confidence a systematic approach instills in men than with the credibility of its scientific underpinnings.

Before you dust off your pitchfork and burn a cross on my lawn, think aboutwhy men want Game to be a Scientific Fact.  Men want sex.  Game promises them that.  If Game truly is the magic bullet, then anyone can land the girl(s) of their dreams and all they need is a little practice . . .

While you indulge this thought, which sounds like the male equivalent of a Cosmo cover article, consider how other scientifically proven products have benefited you.

Has your magic powder increased your natural testosterone 1500%?  Did that magic pill increase the size of your penis?

Did Xenedrine and Hydroxycut make you ripped?

If so, I’ve got some magic beans you’re gonna love . . .