So apparently I just had a debate with Vox Day?
A couple of days ago, you see, a Twitterer calling himself RedPillPhil suggested I was a bit of a coward for taking on an “easy target” like A Voice for Men rather than taking on the leading intellectual lights of the so-called “Dark Enlightenment” like … Heartiste, and Vox Day … who I actually write about all the time.
My laughter must have carried all the way to, well, wherever Vox Day lives, because Mr. Day soon appeared on Twitter and challenged me to a debate — on women’s right to vote. The very notion of two dudes earnestly debating female suffrage – in 2014, no less – struck me as beyond absurd, so I sent back what I thought was an appropriately dismissive Tweet:
@voxday @RedPillPhil @heartiste Yes, women should have voting rights, because they, like men, are human. I win the debate! The end.Thanks!
— David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) July 25, 2014
Apparently Mr. Day saw this tweet as my opening gambit in a debate that was now on, and replied with an attempted gotcha. Against my better judgment, I replied:
@voxday @RedPillPhil @heartiste No. I vote where I live, in the US.. So are you contending that no women live in the countries they vote in?
— David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) July 25, 2014
He replied, and I sunk deeper into the quicksand of this ridiculous “debate.”
@voxday @RedPillPhil @heartiste There are a few basic requirements for having the right to vote besides being human but being male isn't one
— David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) July 26, 2014
At this point I realized I needed to shut this thing down as quickly as possible. So I posted a couple of quick tweets:
And then, quite literally, I went and took a nap.
Later I discovered that Mr. Day’s possibly imaginary wife, known only as Space Bunny, had weighed in with her own attempted “gotcha.”
I thought that was that. So imagine my surprise to see that Mr. Day had retreated to his blog Alpha Game to boast about his great success in “exposing a Gamma.” That gamma being me.
In his typically pompous prose, Mr. Day explained that his Twitter encounter with me
should help illustrate why the critics of Game are so hesitant to directly challenge any of the leading Game bloggers; despite their pretensions they know very well that they are overmatched.
Oh, plus I’m a fat loser who can’t get laid:
Critics such as Futrelle and Scalzi are of low socio-sexual rank, which means that they have the usual gamma male’s distaste for conflict that has a clear winner. The reason is that as long as they can avoid losing, they can still claim victory in their delusional gamma style.
“Delusional Gamma Style” was Psy’s little known followup to Gangnam Style.
Notice how Futrelle tries to immediately declare himself the winner. This is normal. It’s all about the spin with gammas; substance is to be avoided to the greatest extent possible because the more of it there is, the harder it becomes to spin the selected narrative. They are undefeated in their own minds, victors in a long series of imaginary encounters.
At this point Mr. Day – apparently oblivious to irony– declares himself the winner:
But even in a short, character-limited exchange such as this, I was able to show Futrelle’s reasoning to be incorrect twice, so it is little wonder he does not dare risk a more in-depth encounter with me or one of the other men. The longer it went on, the more inconsistencies I would have been able to expose. Once he realized this, he promptly repeated his initial position and retreated.
Yeah, I’m sure you would have done a bang-up job showing me that since it’s ok to restrict people to voting only in the places in which they actually live, it is also ok to deny votes to women.
This is why we are winning. This is why we will win. Our critics and our enemies have to run away from us every single time we enter a new arena. All we have to do to continue convincing men of the truth of our perspective is to avoid getting lazy, to keep developing and presenting refined ideas, and to remember that rhetoric is no substitute for dialectic. And every time there is a minor encounter of this sort, more people will see that there is no rational foundation for the feminized dogma our opponents are so ineptly defending.
You just keep telling yourself that.
EDITED TO ADD: Just noticed this amazing comment on Vox’s site, from someone called Doom. (What’s with misogynists and their supervillain names?)
Actually, when women see these debates, they choose the strong side. I don’t think they always understand, or agree, but they instinctively know strong from weak, and generally choose strong. But then fall back into confusion without a steady stream of strength, which most men haven’t been presenting them. Game is changing that, from what I am seeing. There is as much hope as there is time. Then again, as things are setting up, a break will be for the good.
Game isn’t just a sexual struggle, it opens up much else in life. Men who begin to master game aren’t willing to be helpless in other parts of their lives. That bites into the need, and want, of bigger government. Zoom!
Ladies love mansplaining assholes! Soon the governments of the world will crumble before us!
—
@aebars- Prepper or Nice Guy. The former I may at least be able to wheedle some DIY information out of, the latter I actually have fun taking to task.
@pecunium
From what I’ve read, the “feud” (it’s almost entirely one-sided) had been going on since 2005, long before Beale wrote his infamous racist diatribe. Beale’s obsession with “McRapey” (his oh-so-clever nickname for Scalzi based on completely missing the satire of one of Scalzi’s posts “praising” conservative politicians for advocating on behalf of rapists) is so pervasive, Scalzi was able to turn it into a very successful fundraiser for charity.
I’m going to vote yes to Mrs VD likely being a fake bunny, because if she isn’t then this happy couple spent the early morning hours of July 19th taking turns criticizing ex-Viking punter Chris Kluwe via twitter and spend most days tag-team twitter attacking John Sclazi. Ah, sweet romance.
Space Bunny seems like a robot “Christian, libertarian, wife, homeschooling mom”. There’s lots of raging about the hateful irrational left, evil gun control, Sharia law fear mongering, anti-vax propaganda, anti-environmentalism, immigration hysteria, anti-gay something, Hobby Lobby fist pumping and links to dire websites like Twitchy and Town Hall. No sign of a personality, humanity or joy. If this white bread Michelle Malkin does exist than she and Mr. Super Intelligence deserve each other.
I view any self-congratulatory celebration of a Twitter takedown or a tweet-based debate victory as my cue to ignore that person forever.
@bunnybunny: I suspect a lot of people – and this goes double for MRA’s, PUA’s, etc. – never quite get over their teen years, when most people haven’t grown into their confidence yet…not even the ones who seem confident, who are, more often than not, covering up their teenage insecurity with a thick layer of asshole. Still, confidence is an attractive trait, so the confident ones – and the “confident” ones – have little trouble getting a date.
A few years down the line, most people grow up. The people who didn’t have confidence develop some, they start getting more dates, and they begin to be able to tell the difference between people who are actually confident and those who are just assholes. Still, even if the bitterness fades for most of us, the impression that assholes are the ones who get dates has been formed, and it’s hard to shake. The MRA’s, PUA’s and MGTOW’s of the world aren’t interested in shaking the impression or the bitterness.
That’s my hypothesis, anyway. What do y’all think?
Ahem. I also hate-read Beale’s blogs because
masochismI believe that “know thy enemy” is very good advice, and he actually did do an outline regarding the “socio-sexual” rankings on men from alpha, beta, et cetera. You can read it here. Trigger warning for obvious misogyny as well as general wtfuckery.@Sarah:
That was… amazing. Hilarious, even. I can’t help but notice that practically every category of male either despises, is contemptuous of, or is confused by women. I also can’t help but notice how every category is simultaneously framed in terms of a college frat party and an adult environment with business executives.
Also new to me is the concept of a beta as a largely happy alpha lackey. Where does that even come from? Like, in what group of people is it common for exes of the leader dude to marry off to one of the leader’s followers? A cult?
The earnestness of the descriptions is what gets me, and the earnest confusion towards the “lambdas” and “sigmas” who don’t follow The Game yet still do well with women. Like, how could someone who doesn’t buy into our oppressively restricted view of human relationships possible have human relationships? Must have something to do with “free weights and mustaches.”
Oh, look, it’s every manosphere guy in existence!
Hey, I never said that they were self-aware about it.
Man, that was something: I do think Teddy would benefit from reading what he wrote in conclusion:
Now, it is important to keep in mind that it serves absolutely no purpose to identify yourself in some manner that you think is “better” or higher up the hierarchy. No one cares what you think you are and your opinion about your place in the social hierarchy is probably the opinion that matters least.
I’m also amused at the faux precision. The, “lifetime sexual partners” stated as a ratio to average (and the “omegas” with the strange status of a hard number, rather than a relative one).
It is confusing that he uses “beta” differently from everyone else talking, “game”.
@Sarah
Man, some of these comments…
This guy needs to read some novels, somebody get him a copy of Middlemarch.
Wait, there are diagrams? I didn’t realize this was so scientific, forget my suggestion about novels and continue monitoring gammatudes with your bitterometer.
@ brooked
I didn’t bother to read the comments, but based on the bits you’re quoting all I have to say is “LOL nerds”.
Their hierarchy used to have three levels; now it has seven. They resemble Brave New World more closely by the day.
Someone should ask them how alpha it is to sit around debating the intricacies of whether white knighting is or is not part of the delta sphere.
I’m confused as to how “average” guys can have 1-1.5x the average number of sexual partners. Isn’t that above average?
It’s just because your girl brain can’t do math.
I think the averages are of different things. If there’s a bell curve in terms of… I dunno, financial and social success outside of sex? Then they believe that the curve for number of sexual partners is skewed towards the top.
</non-snark>
<snark>
On average, most people believe they are above average. I guess even with their theoretical models, they don’t want to bruise the egos of most of the male population by insinuating they might be getting less sex than average.
I don’t think Vox Day is trying to agrue that if we don’t let children vote, we don’t have to let women vote either. I think what he’s trying to say, though he’s doing it pretty poorly, is that David’s argument that all humans have the right to vote is flawed. Which it is – but David has already said he wasn’t really trying to form a strong argument, because the topic didn’t really merit one. Vox is treating David’s flippant dismissal like an actual argument, then declaring himself the winner.
But when they don’t want to argue with you, you can retreat to your personal blog and claim their refusal to engage proves that you were right!
Don’t forget the Zeta males. Actually learning the alphabet you’re using is misandry!
I don’t think being omega/zeta is considered positive per se, but they do seem to enjoy having an excuse for their lack of success with women/life in general that doesn’t require admitting their own faults.
From the VD article Sarah linked:
Heh. “Non-stop dancing of attention.”
I wonder if the Attendance Dance is anything like the Safety Dance.
Oh gawd, my eyes nearly rolled out of my head. Get back in there, you!
And yeah…why the hell does a man who’s presumably happily married to a perfect trophy woman care a shit for being “alpha”, having “game”, etc.? Isn’t he done with that frat-boy crapola YET? And what the hell kind of example does he think he’s setting for his kids?
I guess Teddy-boy just has to do SOMETHING to feel…adequate, considering what a bobble he’s made of his professional (?) life thus far.
If it were skewed towards the top, then an average guy would have fewer than the average number of sexual partners.
katz: It’s because they are using the mean for one, and the median for the other? I think it’s because the omegas have less than two partners in their life (and sigmas have .5 avg) and that drags the mathematical average down while the socially, “average” dudes get more.
It’s so rational.
@katz:
Argh, you’re right. Momentarily forgot how to math. I think pecunium got closer to what I was trying to say.
Here’s a natural experiment – Hungary might go Dark Enlightenment…
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-28/orban-says-he-seeks-to-end-liberal-democracy-in-hungary.html
Wonder how THAT will work out for them, and whether Dipshit will start denying it says anything about his stupidity…
I guess we can’t know since omegas are listed as absolute, rather than relative, numbers.
But if you take the old “10% of guys get 90% of girls” chestnut, then an “average” guy (that is, one in the 90% category) would get 1/5 the “average” number of guys.
Average number of girls, rather.