The Alpha Dogs on the Red Pill Subreddit are totally taking “text game” to the next level.
You know how it is when a Hot Babe 8 texts you and you start typing out a reply because, you know, that’s what people do when they get texts, and then you get ready to click “send” because that’s how you send texts? DON’T DO IT! SENDING TEXTS WHEN YOU WRITE THEM IS TOTALLY BETA.
Instead, show her who’s boss by scheduling your text to be sent later. THEN SHE’LL THINK YOU REPLIED LATER BECAUSE YOU’RE SO COOL AND BUSY AND ALOOF and totally not desperate to get in her pants or anything!
And your phone makes it easy! As noahbish explains:
She’ll be like, why didn’t he answer me, maybe I’m ugly and he’s too SUPERCOOL for me, and totally not someone playing stupid high school dating games by scheduling his response for later because, really, who would even do that.
Truly, there is nothing more alpha as fuck than scheduling your texts so you won’t seem beta as fuck.
Also another totally cool thing you can do is to text “370HSSV 0773H” to people and when they ask what it means tell them to turn their phone upside down. Ha ha! OWNED.
This progression makes no sense, mainly because you are using “informed” in two different ways: to refer to the consumer’s information in the first paragraph, and to the retailer’s information in the second one. That’s actually a fallacy of informal logic, called equivocation.
It also makes no sense because you are assuming that the person in charge of these decisions at the retailer is blindly following trends and not bothering to inform zirself, which is an assumption that you are not qualified to make.
And heaven knows that the world must revolve around what Crissa thinks is troublesome or odd.
But they didn’t pull a random game. They received complaints about a specific game, so they reviewed it and decided to pull it. How is that random?
@Michelle, actually, I’m fine with text only, my phone is bad with actual calls (I think it’s the lifeproof box blocking some of the sound, but I don’t know for sure), but it texts beautifully. So I can text with my eldest, it gets through, zie can respond whenever, it’s all good.
The difference between my stance being informed by your deliberate choices and your random, arbritrary actions is a point easily made although with ultimate slight differences. I don’t see the need to harp on the difficulty of asserting the intentionality of others – or are all hypothethicals banned for lack of concrete facts relating to them? Crissa’s point was clear enough, even if expressed without full formal rigour. What’s the exact need to respond so exactingly technical to a statement of opinion?
Also – banning GTA 5 a full year after release is silly, especially so because it is the eight or ninth entry in the series and violence against people has featured prominently since it was a 2d game two decades ago. There’s being informed and then there’s being slow.
Bit of a late reply. I’ve been trying to be more active here (since I only recently stopped delurking), but I have a lot going on IRL right now.
I’ve seen all this before, so I’m not really shocked. Most TRP/PUA methods are ridiculous.
@Plaat
I’ve heard self-identified PUAs talking about their success rates… I can’t remember the exact numbers, but it was VERY low for someone who spends most of their time trying to pick up women. It’s almost like PUA/’alpha’ game doesn’t actually work as well as misogynists claim.
Hell, I’m pretty sure I’ve heard someone on TRP say “The Red Pill works 100% of the time if you ignore rejections.” …Yeah.
(Again, I don’t have the links to these, so it’s fine if people don’t take them at face value. I used to frequent TBP a lot, so I’ve read more ridiculous quotes than I can remember.)
@WWTH
Well, of course it’s censorship! Censorship is defined as “businesses doing things that affect dudebros.” Well, not in any real dictionary, but I’m totally going to add it to Urban Dictionary and that’ll show you all that I’m right.
@hamstering
Yes, hamstering is just the idea that women trying to ‘rationalize’ things is like a hamster running frantically on a wheel. It’s a way for pillers to dismiss any woman’s opinion on relationships, feminism, etc. as ‘hamstering’, so they don’t have to actually engage with women on topics like gender inequality or relationships.
It’s basically a way of saying “women can think, but not as well as men.” It’s the same logic that practically every misogynist in the history of ever has used, except it’s also offensive to hamsters.
My success rate on sales calls is 100% if you ignore all the times that people hang up on me, tell me to piss off, or say “no thank you we already have that”?
@Mezza
I actually remember seeing something along those lines myself. Strip away all of the misogynist trappings, and pick-up artistry is basically just a numbers game where you handicap yourself by being a solid douche.
Yeah, I also think banning GTA V is silly. I’d like less misogyny in games, but that’s a pretty ineffectual way to do it. In fact GTA has such a history as the poster child of violence/misogyny in games that in some ways it serves to undermine the overall impression of sexism in the industry as a whole, which of course can’t be fixed by petitioning stores not to stock a game.
I’m also not sure why we are picking on someone for saying that something seems odd. What are you supposed to say if something seems odd to you?
Yeah, don’t get me wrong – I’d much rather Rockstar stopped making such bothersome games, or at least tried making them with just a bit of flair. But what’s the point of banning GTA 5 exactly?
It’s not like they stopped selling GTA 4 when there’s a mission where you literally kidnap a woman, punch her several times to knock her out or other such things. I don’t recall them ceasing sales back when the Hot Coffee mod thing was a thing people talked about (it’s a mod that unlocks parts of the game wherein you have sex with people). In Red Dead Redemption you can kidnap women and tie them to railroad tracks to be run over by trains, and this grants you an achievement. Don’t see people not selling the game for that. Rockstar has kind of a history with their simulations including various ways to maim and murder men and women, which is fine if that’s what you want to play, yet “Rockstar Games games” is not a category I see banned very often.
No no, much rather stop selling a game a year after release when most people pre-ordered and those who didn’t probably have it by now.
Hell, for effective treatment, look rather to Rockstars Manhunt or Manhunt 2, two games wherein you hunt people. And murder them. Fairly often in incredibly graphic and disturbing ways. Those were banned in several countries for being amazingly fucked up. Australia denied classification, which meant it couldn’t be sold at all.
That’s effective, and makes a clear impact, and has a definite point. A store half-assedly banning a game a year after release when your store has already sold 90 % of the volume you’re going to sell of said game? That’s just playing politics, and makes kind of a mockery of the pretensions of concern for women. Oh, they’re important enough to defend. Sure. In the off-season. Once we’ve already done our business.
Target and KMart were saying exactly that, in response to petitions by their customers. KMart apologised for not being on top of the misogynistic shit in GTA5. Shops aren’t obliged to carry any particular item. Sounds like you’re pushing a FREEZE PEACH line here – well screw that, if so, because it wouldn’t apply even if this were the US.
katz – Crissa’s proving to be little more than a troll, doing nothing but trying to create drama in every thread she comments in. She’s not going to get a good response to this sort of shit.
Do people actually think that a retailer as big as Kmart or Walmart is aware of the content of every game (or movie, or whatever entertainment product) that they carry? From their perspective those games may as well be cans of soup, they’re not going to know or care about the specifics of the content unless someone tells them that there’s a problem with it (which in this case people did).
But it’s not off season for retailers, it’s pre-Christmas. And GTA 5 had just been released for new platforms – PS4 and Xbox One, with release of a Windows version in January.
There’s still plenty of sales to be made.
>
Oh, they re-released it? I wasn’t aware of that fact. My malapproportioned rage seems out of proportion, I guess. So that’s some small difference then! Goodie.
I still think banning it is silly, but sure, at least they’re reasonable about it.
“Strip away all of the misogynist trappings, and pick-up artistry is basically just a numbers game where you handicap yourself by being a solid douche.”
Er, well … on the surface, certainly, the more advances you make to women the more likely you are to “get lucky”. But … it seems to me that however much they may look like they’re trying to get laid, they really can’t repress their hostility to women enough, so “C’mn and sleep with me, lady” comes out more like “Go fuck yourself, you’re nothing but a snooty c*nt.” So, if I’m seeing it right, the misogyny overrules the desire to get laid, and the douchebaggery IS the point..
Count me in on thinking the GTA V banning is silly and, ultimately, useless. I get that people complained, so they removed it… assuming because, like Walmart, they are a family-friendly store. But the GTA series has been the same since it was 2D (like Fibinachi said), and if they hadn’t caught on by now (it’s not difficult to know what the GTA series has been about since its inception) then they aren’t actually looking – it seems to me that they’ll stock whatever they think will sell, and only care about the content when people complain and they want to look good. (This is a long way of saying it strikes me as an empty, meaningless gesture undeserving of applause.)
*Full disclosure – I play the GTA series and enjoy it, problematic elements aside.
I’m starting to think it’s actually more about impressing other douchey PUA’s than anything else.
@Tracy & Grumpy
Well, yeah, if you’re not going to be charitable about it :-P.
I feel like at some point, the whole concept of PUA actually did start out with the (still reprehensible) kernel of “I want to trick that woman into sleeping with me,” but since it doesn’t work, at all, for its frothing minions at least, it’s become just another wing of the woman-hating “manosphere.”
At Falconer – It works on Macs, too?! OOoooh!
Thank you!
@Falconer – ZOPMG!!! GOG is the greatest thing in the world!!!
Yeah, I found it, and it says it works for Mac, AND it was on sale, and I have just downloaded that, and a few other games I have missed, and I AM ASO ECXCIETEDD!!!
So, I’ve got Lord of the Realms, and Planescape Torment and Icewind Dale and Pirates Gold…
I kinda went off the rails, but it was all on sale!!!
Off to play, now. Thanks so much, Falconer!!!!
@Fibinachi
Crissa’s reasoning was bad, and here’s why I care: because Crissa never contributes anything to a thread except to be contrary, and I’m not impressed by it. If zie’s going to be contrary everywhere zie goes, zie can at least apply good reasoning. This halfhearted “I disagree with everyone for ill-explained reasons” is just trolling.
They’re not BANNING anything, they’re simply not selling the goddamn thing. Talking about two chains banning it is as silly as claiming it’s censorship. They’re not obligated to sell the fucking thing, and they’re responding to complaints from customers. I am reeeeeallly side-eyeing all the cries against what they’ve done.
Are those the only places in Australia where people can buy games? Cause if not, they don’t have the power to ban or censor anything.
(Also because they’re not the government.)
cassandra – no, there’s any number of shops where one can buy the things. There are (gasp) shops that only sell games.
Going on current performance, we might be better off if Target and Kmart were the government.
I don’t really care if a store decides not to carry a game or not. What cracked me up is the hypocrisy. If feminists can’t critique sexist tropes in games because businesses can do whatever they want, gamer bros can’t critique retail chains for not carrying games because businesses can to what they want.
I really don’t think Target was being political when they pulled the game so debating it’s effectiveness is besides the point. Target doesn’t care about anything but the bottom line. I should know, they’re headquartered in my city. The Australian division got complaints and made a business decision. That’s it.
Funny story: an acquaintance of mine used to work for Target testing the air quality in stores. It was all top secret and she was discouraged from really talking about it. Apparently they didn’t want the public knowing the air quality had to be tested. I don’t know why though. Personally, it makes me feel better knowing they’re making sure there’s nothing toxic in their air.