This Twitter exchange 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. It's not even a little bit difficult to expose their inability to intellectually hold their own, let alone beat us, even when using the very limited medium of Twitter.
RedPillPhilOf course, their cognitive disadvantage isn't the only reason they prefer to stay at a safe distance and snark and posture rather than attempt to directly engage and destroy our arguments in front of our supporters. 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.
@DavidFutrelle our all-stars like @heartiste, @Steve_Sailer, @ChuckGLP, @Aurini, @voxday would intellectually eat you alive
Vanilla Rose
@RedPillPhil Um, this is embarrassing. For you. @DavidFutrelle has ripped the writing of @heartiste, @voxday et al to shreds. Regularly.
RedPillPhil
he won't directly debate them though. He just makes snarky little hit pieces.
David Futrelle
I've written many times about @heartiste and @voxday. They're (accidentally) hilarious!
Vanilla Rose
@DavidFutrelle exposes the stupidity of the writing of @heartiste, @voxday, @rooshv and others.
Vox Day
Snarking and posturing != ripped to shreds. He's simply not in our league.
David Futrelle
Vox, you rip yourself to shreds every time you open your mouth or type words on a screen.
Vox Day
Irrelevant. Even if true, in that case, you're still not doing it. It doesn't support the claim.
David Futrelle
I'll take on any "dark enlightenment" bloggers (that's hard to say w/ a straight face) in a cat pic duel.
Vox Day
Why not take me on in an actual debate. An easy topic like: should women have voting rights?
David Futrelle
Yes, women should have voting rights, because they, like men, are human. I win the debate! The end. Thanks!
Vox Day
Sorry, David, you haven't won yet. Yes, you are human. Did you vote in the recent EU elections?
David Futrelle
No. I vote where I live, in the US.. So are you contending that no women live in the countries they vote in?
Vox Day
I'm demonstrating to you that merely being human grants no voting rights. Do you concur?
David Futrelle
There are a few basic requirements for having the right to vote besides being human but being male isn't one
David Futrelle
There is no reasonable reason to deny anyone the vote because of gender.
David Futrelle
... and that's preetty much the end of the argument, despite whatever spurious reason you come up with to deny women the vote. Debate over.
Vox Day
You're begging the question.
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. 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.
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.
0 comments:
Post a Comment