DALROCK AND THE FALSE VALUES OF GAME

      Manosphere writer Dalrock has penned a new article titled Why Game is a Threat to Our Values, which has received considerable acclaim from members of the Red Pill Cult. To explain briefly, 'Game' is a pseudoscience supposedly offering new 'revelations' about gender relations. Dalrock and other Manosphereans have grafted these notions on to a skeletal framework of religion and posit that they are bringing back some 'original' form of Christianity. In reality, their 'Christianity' is an admixture of Gnosticism and pop-psychology with a good measure of Machiavelli, Nietzsche, and Rand thrown in. 

      What Dalrock argues in his latest tome is that concepts like chivalry and its concomitant social valuation of women has corrupted society and that Game is destroying these values. "As a Christian," he writes, "the destruction of these values can't happen soon enough." Which of course echoes the same desires as the Cultural Marxists and the Radical Feminists. But it doesn't square with actual Christianity---in which Christ taught respect for females and often protected them from abuse. 

      Part of the problem for Dalrock and the other cultists is that the see Christianity through the lens of Game---when they should be evaluating Game through the lens of Christianity. Game is their real religion whether or not they choose to admit that fact. Thus Dalrock's article is filled with subjective assertions based on his own faulty conceptions of reality. 

      As an example, he first asserts that Feminism is dependent upon male chivalry (a male feminist argument); and then says: "But while chivalry is closely related to how we measure the virtue of a man, a man's chivalry is not in itself how we measure a man's virtue. In our society a man proves his virtue by his ability to seduce women."

     What society is this guy talking about? Look around and ask how many monuments or holidays we've bestowed on men who were great seducers of women. There are none: absolutely none. Yes, it is true that some of our great men had pronounced sexual magnetism: but we don't honor them for that. Our society values men and celebrates their virtues on the basis of their accomplishments. Granted, Political Correctness may distort some actual accomplishments; but the general principle is the same. The difference is simply that the PC crowd honors the depraved achievements of wicked men. 

     Dalrock also explains that romantic love is nothing more than sexual desire: which is the same position that Orthodox Marxists hold. "As a society we're obsessed with generating sexual attractiveness in women" he asserts, as though feminine cultivation of physical attractiveness is some recent phenomenon, "We see this ability as the most pure test of goodness in a man. A woman's feelings of sexual attraction are a mystical force, godlike for non-Christians and God's message for Christians." This is not true at all: our society is deeply hostile to heterosexuality---especially where it concerns men. But he continues: "We can't see how incredibly crass this is because we call it romantic love, but romantic love is more deeply intertwined with sexual desire than many are willing to admit."

      Under the Khmer Rouge Regime, Dictator Pol Pot held the same attitude and actually instituted official 'mating seasons' for his subjects. Now again, Dalrock is not only spouting Marxism, his assertion is essentially the Gnostic position that there is nothing holy about matrimony and that sexuality is morally indifferent. 

      Besides that, his assertion this passage also implies that men are never romantically attracted to women. This again stems from his reductionist perspective from Game: that attraction and sexuality is purely physical with no other component attached. In his cult it's commonly taught that Eve---not the Devil---caused Adam's Fall. One can easily see the latent homosexual overtones of building a philosophy around the core idea that females are the downfall of men.

      "As I've already noted," he continues on, "Chivalry is what converts Feminist demands into concrete action." No it isn't. Feminist demands are converted into concrete action when political and economic interests see profit in giving into them. "The threat from Game is comes from its assault on the belief that chivalry is sexy and therefore chivalry is virtuous."

      Dalrock's thinking is completely screwed up. The latter passage shows again that sex is the motivation for what we call chivalry and nothing could be further from the truth. The reason that civilized peoples practice respect for and protection of women is that women form, collectively, a vital social polarity which men must defend if civilization is to survive. Not understanding this very basic sociological concept is the danger posed both by the Red Pills and by the Feminists. 

       Even some of the most primitive cultures understand what Dalrock can't seem to grasp. Ancient peoples used to obliterate rival tribes by taking their women as spoils of war. Not only did losing their women cause these tribes to collapse, it strengthened the dominant tribes by bolstering the feminine social polarity. 

      The old values held for centuries and they are still the best. And I think that we can safely assume that they will outlive both Feminism and the Red Pill Cult. 

                                                       Manly Alpha Leaders in Action