You know, people stop me on the street and ask me, “Obsidian, why do you go so hard on that guy OneSTDV”? Why, I say? Because its so easy to do, that’s why. I mean, he’s the gift that just keeps on giving, and it’s a lot of fun, too.
Take yesterday’s post from his site, where he laments the existence of the smash hit blockbuster movie, Twilight; as per usual, my comments will be interspersed throughout his missive:
“Science
Monday, November 2, 2009
Vampires: Master PUAs
So I decided to rent Twilight and see what the big deal is. For anyone not familiar with the current vampire trend, Twilight is about a high school girl in upstate Washington who falls in love with a vampire. Imagine The Notebook mixed with Dracula or just Buffy . The movie mainly revolves around the relationship between Bella and Edward, the vampire. Apparently, the author of the Twilight book series is a Mormon housewife. Yet rarely does such an accurate portrayal of the efficacy of Game arise in popular culture.
OBS: Right off the bat, OneSTDV gives clear, first person and damning testimony that he doesn’t understand the creature that is Woman AT ALL. Twilight may be the latest wrinkle in the Vampire genre of books and movies, but by no means is it a new one. More to the point, yup, the author of the series of books is indeed a Mormon, and she, like every other Woman on the planet, has an intense sexual natue that guys like OneSTDV simply cannot or refuses to grasp. This is a universal thing, from Amish Love, to Thug Lit, to the Barbara Cartland novels a century ago, to The Story of O, you name it. YES, OneSTDV, books lik Twilight are to Women what Belladonna and Jenna Jameson are to us, OK? Its Porn, and it makes BIG money, as the box office numbers from Twilight clearly shows us.
Now, I’ve never seen Twilight myself, and probably won’t because I really don’t have any reason to-but because I know and possess Game, and have studied and observed the creature known as Woman for a very long time, I can tell One that just about everything he saw in the flick is highly relevant in the seduction of a Woman, be it a highschool teeny bopper, or a dowdy Mormon mama in one of those throwback prairie dresses. The wiring’s all the same.
(Back to One): I first noticed the hilariously multicultural cast. Bella’s best friends include two nondescript whites, a black guy, an Asian guy, and an ambiguously biracial girl. Again, the movie takes places in upstate Washington.
OBS: Ahh, One, never one to miss an opportunity to satiate your racial animus, hmm? LOL. Of course, it simply cannot be possibility of Blacks living in upstate Washington, right? You do know that Asians have lived there for quite some time, right? And in any event, the very fact that you would bemoan something as unimportant as this, once again goes to show, that you fixate on things that completely takes you away from RELATING to someone else. As one who is so steeped in the intricacies of HBD, surely you’re aware of the tendency of such high IQ guys like yourself having trouble relating to others…especially females? Hmm?
(OneSTDV): Edward, the main vampire, uses essentially every Game trick available.
OBS: Ahh, the venom drips from One’s lips. Clearly, from what we can see here, OneSTDV dos have some base familiarity with Game, perhaps by way of the Mystery Method, but he fails to grasp its essence, hence he wouldn’t use words like “trick” and wouldn’t speak in such patronizing tones about the desires of Women and what TURNS THEM ON. Which isn’t nitpicky “critiques” of flicks like Twilight, for example. Hateration much?
(One): He’s introduced as a mysterious individual with little known about him. In his first meeting with Bella, he can’t temper his physical revulsion towards her, an act that, of course, prompts Bella’s interest. After that initial meeting, Edward engages in the classic push-pull strategy of Game, where he shows genuine interest in her, even showcasing higher value and sarcastic negging during a class assignment. In the climactic moment of the first act, Edward saves Bella’s life by stopping a runaway car, then plays it off as if nothing happened.
OBS: Let’s stop right there, because One’s said a mouthfull, surprise, surprise. First, yes, Women don’t like directness, unless in very rare situations. A good seduction is about the tease. It’s about the uncertainty, will it happen, can it happen, its not supposed to happen…which makes her want to happen even more. The Push-Pull strategy is all about one, NOT coming off as needy, which the vast majority of Men do, and two, creating more sexual tension, because unlike you or even me, One, Women NEED the rollercoaster high of their emotions going through extremes. The more you take a Woman through this, the more she will be attracted to you-SEXUALLY ATTRACTED TO YOU, which is hugely important.
As for DHV, and I’m pretty sure you know what that means, show me a Woman who’s turned on by an underling, and I’ll show you the Tooth Fairy. No Woman wants a Man beneath her, not even professional Dommes. It is important for the Man to show in some way, shape or form, that he has MORE value than she has. Edward, being “more” than Bella in every way, has done this…and she cannot help herself.
His ability to stop a speeding car that’s about to make Bella roadkill is yet another demonstration of Ed’s showing DHV-then notice how he shrugs it off. It ain’t no thang.
At that point, you could ring out Bella’s panties, she’s so sopping wet.
(Back to One): He continues the push-pull method, rejecting her curiosity, then quickly displaying interest in what she thinks. He again saves her, but furnishes the mysterious image by skirting her questioning.
OBS: YES. Never, ever, give straight answers to a Woman’s questions, is buzkill to her clitoris when you do. Turn every question into a question. I’ve said before that Game has wide uses, not just in terms of getting laid. Robert Greene talks extensively about this. When Ahmedinejad came to Columbia U to speak, notice how he handled every question tossed his way. And note the overall reception he received from the American public. Bollinger, the president of Columbia, was painted like the bad guy, and Ahmadinejad came off smooth as silk. My point, One? Don’t be Bollinger. Women don’t get hot for Bollinger.
(Back to One): Of course, Bella becomes increasingly intrigued by this bipolar, standoffish, yet charming individual. She obsesses over her new friend and finally discovers the truth about him. Bella confronts him in a shadowy forest where the following scene plays out (paraphrasing):
Edward: I want to taste your blood. I want to kill you. You’re like a drug to me. I’ve killed people.
Bella: I don’t care. I’m not afraid. Then they laid down together in the grass looking up at the sky. I won’t continue as to avoid spoilers. The movie on the whole is quite boring. I don’t understand the hype.”
OBS: No, OneSTDV, with your Aspbergy ways and need to “change” stuff, you wouldn’t. But the deal is, that Women are drawn to interesting guys, and one major way to maintain a Woman’s interest is to NOT TELL EVERYTHING ABOUT YOURSELF. Let her mind fill in the blanks.
Second-Women LOVE danger, the sense of taboo. Remember, Women have to risk a great deal more to have sex than you or I or any other guy reading this does. Make the risk worthwhile, by presenting a compelling reason for her to drop her drawers for YOU. The sense on her part that you could, if necessary, rip another Man’s head off…even backhand her if she gets too outta pocket…is a HUGE, PRIMAL TURNON for Women. Don’t take my word for it, One-conduct one of your world famous studies on the matter. Read up on the Romance novels, which makes Billions of dollars a year, worldwide. Attend some of the conferences for Romance novel writers. Email, call and ask them questions, and report back all the results, complete with flowcharts, grids, graphs, coefficients and the like.
One final point. You don’t need me to tell you that Women are far and away more drawn to the paranormal and supernatural than are Men, for the most part. The reasons for this are quite simple, and since you’re such a dashingly smart guy, OneSTDV, I’ll let you hazard a guess as to what that is.
But I will say this: so long as you show open disdain for that aspect of what makes a Woman a Woman, not only will you never understand them, they will prove to be the bane of your existence all the days of your life, not just personally, but professionally and socially, too. Please see my post on Watson for more on this point.
Now adjourn your Beaker ass. ![]()
The Obsidian
46 Comments
You need to learn how to link and quote.
And your obsession with me is starting to become humorous. Are you going to respond in detail to every single one of my posts? You’re funny.
What an embarrassing trainwreck this blog is
One,
Quote you? I posted your entire “review”, sir. And what’s humorous is that you have guys like “STFU” on your blog and following you around.
Now then, want to actually address the topic?
The Obsidian
————
I want this blog to be successful so I offer the following recommendations:
GRAPHICS
- change to dark letters on white background; this is an areas where your preference needs to yield to the demands of your “customers.”
- provide a visual separation between comments
- Visually separate cited text from your responses in the main blog article. Use blockquotes to cite someone, and normal style to respond. As-is, it’s near impossible to follow the he-said / I-respond back and forth.
- I like the small sans-serif typeface; it looks clean and doesn’t sprawl down into an endless column, like many large-font comments sections do.
CONTENT
- enthusiasm is good because it’s a testament to the author’s high levels of intellectual energy, but limit postings to one a day. Multiple postings per day disperse commenters because there isn’t a single thread to follow.
- go easy on the “blogwars.” You may have problems with OneSTV or FeminX’s writing, but this is starting to look like a personal obsession. I see what you’re doing here: Roissy will on occasion eviscerate some author. You are a cool guy, dude, but you don’t have Roissy’s bite. Few do.
- Link to the primary sources you are citing; not linking is amateurish and lacking in good faith.
Best wishes in your blog’s nascent days, and thanks for giving us another venue online to come together sometimes in the spirit of adversarial debate and sometimes camaraderie of agreement.
————
PA,
You know, while all the advice is I think coming from a good place, now it’s starting to get a bit much.
I said at the very outset that I would be commenting on nearly everything and everyone. Seems OK for damn near errbody else to do it, but as soon as Obsidian does it, there’s a problem. And as for obsessions? Mine makes Roissy’s obsessions with ugly folk, fat people, especially Women, and the like look like a gnat next to an elephant. Same deal with OneSTDV or FemX. These folks obsess over stuff and over such a long period of time that I guess its become part of the background noise. I comment on them because, one, I can, and because I think what they have to say is often ridiculous. *shrug*
Of course, they, you or anyone else can come on here and register your thoughts, but this “advice” thing is starting to get old. The main reason why I went for a very simple format was so I could “hit and run” with posts and responses from my smartphone, as I’m often not in front of a PC to tinker with posts and the site all day. That plus, I don’t like all the shit so many sites have, it’s bewildering to my eyes. Yet, you’ve never heard me complain about it, have you? I either participate on said sites, or I don’t. Problem. Solved.
So, with all that said-what do yo have to say about the actual post?
The Obsidian
“When Ahmedinejad came to Columbia U to speak, notice how he handled every question tossed his way. And note the overall reception he received from the American public. Bollinger, the president of Columbia, was painted like the bad guy, and Ahmadinejad came off smooth as silk. My point, One? Don’t be Bollinger. Women don’t get hot for Bollinger.”
So Bollinger became the bad guy simply because he was portrayed as one? Again, this is like conservatives being stigmatized as villains without any further introspection and the Left devours this fabrication. In an earlier thread, you claimed that Democrats were not to blame for using techniques of this nature. Why is this so?
Obsidian
a few points:
the font size in the comments should be increased just as in the posts
the obsidian background is cool
another game blog is too much. You have a comparative advantage in astrology. Why not blogging about it a little?? You could be like dennis mangan, who blogs about paleo stuff while exploring his comparative advantage of being the only paleo blogger with nutritional/medical knowledge
Obsidian, seriously, some of PA’s recommendations are good ones. I know because OneSTDV who I also dislike gave you some of the critiques you may want to resist them on principle, but the white text on dark background critique and the separation of comments critique should really be followed. Don’t let your dislike of OneSTDV keep you from following some good advice.
Hi Joe,
Actually, my disdain for OneSTDV doesn’t have anything to do with it. Simply put, there’s a reason why I selected the look of my site. I didn’t conduct a poll about it.
But the other things merit consideration. When time permits, I’ll tinker with the place a bit more.
Strange how no one actually comments on the topics, though…
Oh, and Gig, I’ll be discussing astrology soon enough. Just haven’t quite gotten around to it-yet.
The Obsidian
You need to quote, as in indenting quoted passages.
For some reason, all my comments are being moderated (you should check into the comment settings or something):
OK so I just read the post. It seems I did pretty well summarizing the Game aspects of Twilight.
And I’m pro-Game so I don’t understand how I’m a “hater”. I think Game is a great equalizer and I’ve written posts on this:
http://onestdv.blogspot.com/2009/08/study-supports-game-concept-of-pre.html
http://onestdv.blogspot.com/2009/09/are-social-cons-afraid-of-game.html
Once again, you attribute motivations and opinions to me that have no basis in reality. And nice ad hominems. You argue like a emotional leftist.
I have “fear of a black background”
I changed my mind.
“Always bet on black”
Pons,
Yesterday, we discussed the differences between Franklin and Adams, how each was perceived by the French. Today, we’re doing the same wrt Ahmadinejad and Bollinger-the latter of which would probably recoil at the very notion of being lumped in with Conservatives of any stripe-yet the bottomline result is the same.
Pons, what you’re not getting is that facts, logic, reason, they don’t move people. Passion moves people. Emotional connections moves people. Appealing to them, that’s what moves people. And people, in this case Men, who are good at this, will succeed over those who either can’t or won’t.
We can argue why that should be until the cows come home, but in the end, it won’t make a difference. For the modern day GOP, they have a number of choices to make, and interestingly enough, being that today is Election Day in key areas accross the country, we’ll get a glimpse into the future of GOP depending on how today’s election results turn out. For my part, it doesn’t matter one way or another for me, because I don’t have a hand in changing the course of how the GOP does business anymore than you or anyone else here. I, like you and others, am merely an interested bystander, eagerly awaiting the poll results.
As for your wider question-look, it’s always easier to assign blame to others instead of taking that hard look inside and making the changes necessary in order to be successful. Quiet as is kept, the biggest reason why Game doesn’t “work” for lots of guys is their refusal to make the needed changes in order for it to work. That’s fine, but they shouldn’t then complain about the why’s and wherefores of the world. There is something to be said about stoically accepting one’s fate.
The Obsidian
Tupac, heh heh. One of my favorite throwaway movie lines.
Joe, you said that you also disliked OneSTDV. His “housekeeping” commentary aside, exactly what about him do you dislike? I’m just curious.
The Obsidian
well, i don’t really comment on the topic for two reasons. first, i’m not really interested in the twilight thing and how it relates to game. second, i don’t really want to get into an involved lengthy discussion on this site because reading such a lengthy discussion with the small white font on black background with comments that all flow together like one giant essay…honestly it would drive me mad. that’s why i mentioned those changes. with those changes i’d be more interested in lengthy debate.
as for why i don’t like OneSTDV, i just find him to be a sloppy thinker. its not so much his racism that bothers me so much as how piss poor his jumps in logic tend to be. also, he just reeks too much of loser and desperation to me, anyone who spends that much time on hbd and hbd-related sites, it’s like his sole purpose for living. something disgustingly pathetic about that, to attach one’s whole identity to validating one’s worth with pseudoscience.
———
I don’t have a “personality” in mind for OneSTDV. I generally avoid the pure HBD crowd as being too rationalistic, atheist, and nerdy for my tastes.
Having said that, I think what they write about is valuable, just not my crowd, temperamentally speaking.
The characters I actively “dislike” are very few. Mostly it’s arrogant, mouthy, aggressive nerds who thump their chest in claims of being great at Game, while clearly being individuals with extremely limited experience with women.
There was that Aggie character who got on my nerves at Roissy’s, Clio’s, and on his own blog a year ago, and I think I helped chasten him a little. Being 25 or so, he wasn’t abnormal in running his mouth, and my e-smackdowns surely helped him in the growing process.
More recently, there is that “Horsey” character who I seriously suspect is a virgin. He mada an ass of himself at GirGame, and he too got some of my smackdown. He, alas, is 35, so his prospects at becomnig cool are less bright that Aggie’s were.
I’ve also engaged in some verbal spars with other/random characters at Roissy’s, but I thought nothing of them one way or the other, just fun blogging.
———
“Pons, what you’re not getting is that facts, logic, reason, they don’t move people. Passion moves people. Emotional connections moves people. Appealing to them, that’s what moves people. And people, in this case Men, who are good at this, will succeed over those who either can’t or won’t.”
Well, feminism certainly appeals to the sensibilities and emotions of women but can the encouragement of feminist trends in culture and law–which resulted in no-fault divorce et al.– be deemed a ’success’?
Joe,
Capital letters are a great idea at the start of sentences, especially when the font is so small that I cannot make out a period from a comma.
I still can’t post so maybe I’ll try this again.
I read through the post and I don’t understand how I’m a “hater”. I’m pro-Game (why else would I link to Roissy and In Mala Fide) and I’ve written a few posts advocating for it as a gender equalizer:
“Are Social Cons Afraid of Game?”
“Science Proves Game concept of Pre Selection”
Once again, you falsely attribute motivations and opinions to me that I have never expressed. And of course, nice ad hominems.
And quoting: split up the posts so they’re easier to read, as in readers can tell what you said and what the given author said.
Pons said:
“Well, feminism certainly appeals to the sensibilities and emotions of women but can the encouragement of feminist trends in culture and law–which resulted in no-fault divorce et al.– be deemed a ’success’?”
OBS: In a word-YES. The bottomline is, they found an issue or series of issues that fired people up, and ran with it. And in fairness, the same thing is happening right now wrt the Teabaggers. Where they go from here though, remains to be seen.
The Obsidian
OneSTDV,
Replies below:
“I read through the post and I don’t understand how I’m a “hater”. I’m pro-Game (why else would I link to Roissy and In Mala Fide) and I’ve written a few posts advocating for it as a gender equalizer:
“Are Social Cons Afraid of Game?”
“Science Proves Game concept of Pre Selection”
OBS: Merely linking to something or even adding a site to one’s blogroll doesn’t necessarily mean that one advocates said blogs or sites; they could be providing their readers the means to which they might be able to assess material for themselves and allow them to come to their own conclusions. That’s the approach I’ve taken with you, since you want to suggest that I’m being unfair with you in some way.
My reason for why I used the word “hateration” in my comments wrt you was because of your use of the word “trick” in describing the Edward character in the film Twilight. Clearly, you didn’t think very highly of said Game moves, which is your right to think so. It is then my right to call you clueless, an Aspbergy nerd and a hater.
“Once again, you falsely attribute motivations and opinions to me that I have never expressed. And of course, nice ad hominems.”
OBS: Thank you! Takes one to know one. As for your motivations, again, I posted the entirety of your comments on the matter at hand. If anyone’s misrepresented themselves here One, it’s you, not me, and not anyone else. Perhaps you’d like to take this time to clarify your thoughts on the matter of Twilight and Game, then?
“And quoting: split up the posts so they’re easier to read, as in readers can tell what you said and what the given author said.”
OBS: I did; my comments are clearly preceeded by “OBS”.
The Obsidian
Because I used the word “trick”, I hate Game? Anyone who reads my blog and sees me comment on Game blogs knows that’s completely absurd. You’re making an entire generalization off my use of ONE word.
Hilarious. As STFU said, this blog is a trainwreck embarrassment if that’s the means by which you validate your points.
It’s like arguing with an angry child who can’t form coherent thoughts and retreats to name-calling (“It is then my right to call you clueless, an Aspbergy nerd and a hater.”) and emotionally charged rants.
LOL. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black (“Astrology: Astronomy For Idiots”). Whew!
Again: I posted the entire “review” of yours (Twilight) here on my blog. The overall tone of it was quite dismissive of what the film was all about, a good part of which had to do with Game. I dare you to actually engage me on my response to yor “review”.
The Obsidian
Obs, I think the guys that pose as “gamers” online understand game even less than I, a socially conservative woman, does.
Just check out Fbardamu’s comments to me over on his blog.
He’s throwing out some net statistic that the median average of number of sexual partners for a woman over a lifetime is 3 (yes, three!), and that “hot babes” are more likely to have less sexual partners than 4-6’s.
Sure…. maybe our grandmom’s and SOME of our mothers may have had 3 sexual partners over their lifetimes (2 out of 3 being husbands)…. but any American woman under the age of 50, unless she is a nun or extremely cautious and conservative, has well over 3.
And I’m speaking as one of the few cautious and conservative women who NEVER goes to a bar or nightclub.
I think what alot of these guys can’t face up to is that the “hot babes” of their dreams whom they are hoping to settle down with someday, are not worty of being put on the pedestal that they are putting them on.
And they even think they can prevent such women from cheating on them.
You guys have not yet figured out just how sly and cunning we women are, despite all your macho and misanthropic posturing.
3 partners in one lifetime in new millenium America?
You’re kidding right?
That statistic must’ve been taken in Turkey or Armenia or something.
“Yet rarely does such an accurate portrayal of the efficacy of Game arise in popular culture.”
Yes quite dismissive.
The review is basically just a summary of how Bella’s attraction to Edward is fostered by aspects of Game. You’re really reaching here because you’re so desperate to condemn everything I write.
Notice how no one has actually commented or agreed with your actual post.
“Because its so easy to do, that’s why. I mean, he’s the gift that just keeps on giving, and it’s a lot of fun, too.”
You need to get out more buzzay. lol
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell:
Facts > assertions.
I addressed that over at my place. You don’t seem to have a rebuttal, here or there. I am not alone in my opinion either – both Chuck and Thursday agree with me.
Proof?
Well, you’ve just disqualified yourself from any further debate on this topic.
You don’t know how female adultery works. Hint: it’s not a random, unpreventable occurrence. Here’s a link. And another.
Yes, we have. And if you truly understood game, you’d understand that a man who internalizes it properly is well-equipped to deal with “sly and cunning” women.
I’m qualified to speak on this topic because guess what Ferdie? I’m a woman and most of my friends are women. I don’t go to bars and clubs, but some of them DO. Even the ones that do not, they have all had more than 3 sexual partners and they are not even 50 yet.
Many of them have been divorced, some twice. Before and after their marriages, they had boyfriends they were sleeping with. Some did even slept with men who were not their boyfriends but rather, “friends with benefits”.
Some of these women are very conservative, very cautious, and even devoutly religious.
Again, more than 3 partners – granted though, the men they slept with were men they had actual relationships beyond just dating.
You are COMPLETELY out of the loop if you think the post-modern American woman will die at the age of 87 having slept with only 3 men.
Completely clueless.
I suggest you start hanging out with women who will tell you the truth for once.
(hint: you might have to dress in drag)
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell:
DADT, 2009: “Even the ones that do not, they have all had more than 3 sexual partners and they are not even 50 yet.”
DADT, 1972: “How did Nixon win? Nobody I know voted for him.”
If you think the experiences of you and those in your social circle invalidates a peer-reviewed scientific study, you are an incredibly solipsistic dumbass. The world is much larger then you and your friends.
And I note you have nothing to say in regards to my assertion that women of middling attractiveness (read: Plain Janes) tend to be the sluttiest. Your concession of this point is duly noted. Have a nice day!
Part of my social circle is abnormal (the religous folk) and part is of it is reflective of the current norms (single moms and dads open for “dating” (means having sex).
If even the religious folk are doing it?…..
…..well…..you know the rest…
Now, how many partners has the average club-going female University student in her senior year racked up? (in 2009, not 1959)
OBS: No, OneSTDV, with your Aspbergy ways and need to “change” stuff, you wouldn’t
Yes, I am 100% 1std is on the spectrum. Reading some of his comments will quill any doubts if you’re unsure. A dead give away is need to “change stuff”.
My brother has the same problem. If things, even small things like his shoes aren’t lined up properly, it can make him very upset.
Mu Remember, Women have to risk a great deal more to have sex than you or I or any other guy reading this does.
Thank you thank you thank you for pointing this out.
Mu so long as you show open disdain for that aspect of what makes a Woman a Woman, not only will you never understand them, they will prove to be the bane of your existence all the days of your life, not just personally, but professionally and socially, too
Uh huh. *Nods head in agreement*. Well said
OneSTDV,
Replies as follows:
“Yet rarely does such an accurate portrayal of the efficacy of Game arise in popular culture.”
Yes quite dismissive.
The review is basically just a summary of how Bella’s attraction to Edward is fostered by aspects of Game. You’re really reaching here because you’re so desperate to condemn everything I write.
OBS: Actually, it’s not that hard to do; again, I quoted your remarks wrt Twilight in their entirety. This is your parting shot:
“The movie on the whole is quite boring. I don’t understand the hype.”
OBS: Compare and contrast w/your leadoff quote above-and then please explain how the two quotes align with each other, sir?
“Notice how no one has actually commented or agreed with your actual post.”
OBS: You missed a spot. Please review Chic Noir’s comments.
The Obsidian
DADT,
The back and forth btw you and my buddy Ferdi notwithstanding, I don’t recall reading many PUA writers who are all that consumed with how many guys Women are sleeping with. For example, neither Mystery nor Style focuses on this issue in the least. Are you familiar with their works?
Also, given your age etc, I am wondering what you think of the topic at hand, and of the “reviewer”, OneSTDV. Comments?
The Obsidian
Chic Noir,
Yea. OneSTDV claims to be friendly toward and have some understanding of, Game-yet his many comments completely belie these statements.
For example, a few weeks back he holds up NY Giants quarterback Eli Manning as the “appropriate” example of an Alpha Male as “defined by Men”, a absurdity, since anyone with even a smattering of knowing Game Theory understands that Men are the last ones to define the term-it is, has been and always will be defined by what WOMEN THINK. Which explains why Tom Brady has Giselle on his arm, and Eli Manning has…?
Another example-OneSTDV’s recent comments covering the Sweatlodge Tragedy that was in the news. He goes on and on about how the West and basically, White guys are constantly maligned by the SWPL class, but what he either doesn’t or can’t get, is that for Women, the supernatural is HUGELY important-Oprah, with her 40 MILLION viewers every week, is living proof of this fact (to say nothing of the smashing successes of Twilight or Interview With The Vampire, etc.).
Finally, note One’s own parting shot in the post I repost above-he thinks Twilight is “boring” and cannot see what the “hype” is all about. How can anyone who understands Game say that? What is up with that?
In another post on his site, about a week ago, “Astrology: Astronomy For Idiots”, OneSTDV once again launches into a Rainman-like hissyfit because people, and let’s be honest here, especially Women, are into something he simply cannot understand, let alone knows anything about. Instead of trying to educate himself as to why Astrology has maintained a steady existence in the Human Psyche for some FIVE THOUSAND YEARS in nearly EVERY HUMAN CULTURE, he instead defiantly declares that Science, and ONLY Science, has any legitimate bearing or insight on Human Affairs-yet another clear and present example of just how far his Aspbergy-ways have deeply affected him. I mean, who BUT such a type of guy would seriously make such an assinine argument? You mean to tell me that Faulkner, or Hemingway, Shakespeare or Dickens, Voltaire or (Tennessee) Williams had nothing to offer in terms of understanding Humanity, because they weren’t in the Hard Sciences and instead wrote stores, dramas and plays for a living?
Puhleeeease.
OneSTDV’s got sme serious problems. His psyche leads him here because its trying to tell him that he needs help.
And it’s part of the Black Tradition to do just that.
The Obsidian
““The movie on the whole is quite boring. I don’t understand the hype.””
It’s pretty simple. The movie was boring. Usually boring movies or any other boring media aren’t popular. What an aggressive dismissal of Game!
You’re just starting to look sad. Don’t be so desperate that you must attack everything I write, doing so by nitpicking tiny little words or sentences and trying to formulate an entire generalization around them (especially because the generalization couldn’t be more wrong). It just makes you look petty, as does your puerile name-calling.
Obviously, the review was pro-Game, as am I (“the efficacy of Game”, “science proves Game concept”).
OneSTDV,
You’re also wrong when you say in your “review” of Twilight above, that “rarely does one see the efficacy of Game on display” or words to that effect. Wrong, wrong, wrong-the same year Twilight came out, we had another huge blockbuster hit that had Game in it all day, everyday: Iron Man, starring Robert Downey Jr. I trust you’ve seen it. I’ll be reviewing it soon, along with many, many other contemporary films that give clearcut examples of various types of Game, for the benefit of my esteemed readers.
Are we learning yet?
The Obsidian
This will probably be my last response because i don’t engage in petty Internet battles like you do:
-Eli is a leader of an intensely competitive social group (his team), has a strong work ethic, performs fantastically under pressure, thrives in an intense media market, and has risen to the zenith of a particular skill area. If that’s not something other men should aspire to, then I don’t know what is.
-”He goes on and on about how the West and basically, White guys are constantly maligned by the SWPL class”
OK, clearly you don’t read my posts. This was about the glorification of pseudoscience above the medicinal practices of the West. It had nothing to do with men vs women, it was about science and how social practices (i.e. race) effects the way people view what is the best route for treatment. But of course you always have to misconstrue the arguments to make your “white women suck” point.
-I went against Astrology because it’s ridiculous. I could have written a post about energy crystals, UFO’s, or ghosts instead. Plenty of completely false ideas have been around for 5000 years. You going to start up an alchemy club too? Hey Newton was into it!
-And where did I ever state the humanities has nothing to say about the human condition? More false statements attributed to me. Hell I’ve even said black violence isn’t entirely explained by genes. But no ignore all that because it doesn’t jibe with your agenda (“make white women as the scapegoats and black men as the winners of society”).
And once again, nice ad hominems. How exactly does that buttress your argument?
Continue to make yourself look petty and angry. It’s enjoyable to watch.
Hi OneSTDV,
Replies below:
““The movie on the whole is quite boring. I don’t understand the hype.””
“It’s pretty simple. The movie was boring. Usually boring movies or any other boring media aren’t popular. What an aggressive dismissal of Game!”
OBS: Now, is that a scientifically-based statement, or one that is purely subjective, One? According to Wikipedia, Twilight took $37MIL to make, and made back more than $383MIL in gross revenues-thats what, more than TEN TIMES its money back? Yea, it was a huge flop because soooo many people were soooo bored by it…
“You’re just starting to look sad. Don’t be so desperate that you must attack everything I write, doing so by nitpicking tiny little words or sentences and trying to formulate an entire generalization around them (especially because the generalization couldn’t be more wrong). It just makes you look petty, as does your puerile name-calling.”
OBS: As Chic noted about her own brother, if the shoe fits…
Anyway, I “nitpick” because I aim to, with considerable success, demonstrate just how wrongheaded and downright dumb many of the tings you say actually are. Like I said, you’re the gift that keeps on giving. Merry Xmas!
“Obviously, the review was pro-Game, as am I (“the efficacy of Game”, “science proves Game concept”).”
OBS: You have an odd way of showing admiration, LOL. *One does Rainman-style twitching*
The Obsidian
analogies, outside engineering and math, are very misleading in any situation. it is a common nerd behaviour to establish some “insightful” analogies like “vampires have game”
you could also say that mosquitoes have game. They do as they wish, don’t care about risks, they always go for the kill. Or that lampposts are alpha: they always stand straight, erect in a phallic way, oblivious to weather or opinions of others and so on
see the pattern?? outside the very hard sciences, analogies are a very poor guide . Yet they are extremely masculine, women are incapable of making or recognizing analogies. the word used to describe the many aspects of masculinity that repell women is “nerd”
OneSTDV,
One more time unto the breach, old friend…
“This will probably be my last response because i don’t engage in petty Internet battles like you do:”
OBS: Translation-no, I (OneSTDV) only engages in an Aspbergy echo chamber with folks who agree with me on every jot and tittle…
“-Eli is a leader of an intensely competitive social group (his team), has a strong work ethic, performs fantastically under pressure, thrives in an intense media market, and has risen to the zenith of a particular skill area. If that’s not something other men should aspire to, then I don’t know what is.”
OBS: Men have worked and died heroically for ages, and it didn’t mean a damned thing to Females. Go read Psychology Today. WOMEN DECIDE WHO ALPHA MALES ARE-NOT ONESTDV. Capice?
-”He goes on and on about how the West and basically, White guys are constantly maligned by the SWPL class”
“OK, clearly you don’t read my posts. This was about the glorification of pseudoscience above the medicinal practices of the West. It had nothing to do with men vs women, it was about science and how social practices (i.e. race) effects the way people view what is the best route for treatment. But of course you always have to misconstrue the arguments to make your “white women suck” point.”
OBS: Then not only do you read you own posts, but you evidently don’t read your own commenters either, at least one of whom had noted that, based on the people YOU listed had been effected in said tragedy, WERE ALL WHITE WOMEN. So…you were saying?
“-I went against Astrology because it’s ridiculous.”
OBS: You went against Astrology because you’re ignorant. And mad that no one finds Quant Guys like you hot.
“I could have written a post about energy crystals, UFO’s, or ghosts instead. Plenty of completely false ideas have been around for 5000 years. You going to start up an alchemy club too? Hey Newton was into it!”
OBS: To quote the Great Man himself: I have studied the matter, One-YOU, have NOT.
“-And where did I ever state the humanities has nothing to say about the human condition? More false statements attributed to me. Hell I’ve even said black violence isn’t entirely explained by genes. But no ignore all that because it doesn’t jibe with your agenda (“make white women as the scapegoats and black men as the winners of society”).”
OBS: Again, more pot calling the kettle black-when did I ever say that Black Men were the unqualified “winners of society”? I’ll tell you what, you show me that quote, and I’ll show you the quote where you clearly have disdain for anything outside the hard sciences for its ability to properly inform society about the why’s and wherefores of the Human Condition. Fair enough? You go first.
“And once again, nice ad hominems. How exactly does that buttress your argument?”
OBS: Very simple-you’re a dick.
“Continue to make yourself look petty and angry. It’s enjoyable to watch.”
OBS: Not quite as enjoyable as my routine pawning of your insufferable ass.
Holla back…
The Obsidian
1. The supernatural appeal to women because we use a type of thinking that we call “female intuition”, it something that most men don’t seem to have or understand.
2.vampire are broken humans. Women love to fix people.
Chic,
Yes, both of what you said has some merit. However, there is a deeper reason as to why the supernatural/paranormal has such a strong pull for the Female. Let’s see who among us (OneSTDV) can figure out precisely what that is…
The Obsidian
“In a word-YES. The bottomline is, they [feminists]found an issue or series of issues that fired people up, and ran with it. And in fairness, the same thing is happening right now wrt the Teabaggers. Where they go from here though, remains to be seen.”
Yes,feminism has been successful for excited, energized feminists/leftists but has their agenda been a success for everyone else? Based on the backlash by ‘teabaggers’ regarding economic policy and MRAers regarding divorce laws, I would say not.
“In a word-YES. The bottomline is, they [feminists]found an issue or series of issues that fired people up, and ran with it. And in fairness, the same thing is happening right now wrt the Teabaggers. Where they go from here though, remains to be seen.”
Yes,feminism has been successful for excited, energized feminists/leftists but has their agenda been a success for everyone else? Based on the backlash by ‘teabaggers’ regarding economic policy and MRAers regarding divorce laws, I would say not.
Sorry… forgot to say great post – can’t wait to read your next one!
Obs, can’t comment about Twilight. I go to movies once or twice a year, if that (and prefer foreign films, documentaries or realistic stories to fantasy and sci-fi), and I don’t watch TV (never owned one, never want to). I don’t read fiction either.
The only media I expose myself to is the internet, really.
So far between Fbard, Roissy, GirlGame and your blog, you appear, by the way you conduct yourself online, to be the most cultured, well-mannered and polite of the bloggers.
The others lash out in passive/aggressive style with foul language betraying their rather low-class upbringing.
Their hatred for women probably stems from their hatred for their mothers, who were more than likely unfit for parenthood. More than that I won’t say. We know how people get when you start talkin’ ’bout their mamas.
DADT,
Thank you for the kind comments.
The Obsidian
One Trackback/Pingback
[...] Roissy and Obsidian have argued in the past that women, not men, determine which males are alphas in the context of [...]