In response to the recent New York Times article, A Cold War Fought by Women:

I’ve been writing about this same set of ideas in various blogs for a couple of years.

If you ignore what women say to you, you’ll realize that it’s obvious: women have no shortage of potential sex partners (even ugly, short, older, fat, etc. women); women are consummately skilled in social and sexual manipulation (see women’s magazines and the entirety of female-centric popular culture); and men care far less about women’s fashion/appearance than women do (hence, the makeup, clothing, etc. are actually competitive devices that women use against each other).

From the article: The old doubts about female competitiveness derived partly from an evolutionary analysis of the reproductive odds in ancient polygynous societies in which some men were left single because dominant males had multiple wives. So men had to compete to have a chance of reproducing, whereas virtually all women were assured of it. But even in those societies, women were not passive trophies for victorious males. They had their own incentives to compete with one another for more desirable partners and more resources for their children. And now that most people live in monogamous societies, most women face the same odds as men. In fact, they face tougher odds in some places, like the many college campuses with more women than men. Translation: women have no problem getting sex, and never have. The problem women have is conflict against other women for the best sex partners, also known as sexual competition, which is the basis of this entry (continue reading below).

All the nonsense about women being “victims” of the “lustful and denigrating male gaze” is both a lie (women love sex, too) and a great way to shame men — in much the same way that women shame their female competitors, as mentioned in the article. Women dress in a sexy way in order to get sexual attention from men, to help them “win” the mating game against other women, and to signal their social status (weaker females will be bullied into submission by more socially powerful females).

One way to think of this is to recognize that most heterosexual men really couldn’t care less about what a woman is wearing. The whole “makeup-and-costume” game is purely for show — for women and by women, against other women. Everything else is just a manifestation of what I call “girl game” (slut-shaming, forming strategic friendships and alliances, ostracizing and bullying those who represent a potential status threat, emotionally abusive behavior against anyone who doesn’t conform to social pressure, etc.) — which is then turned against men when the time comes to find a mate. If it works, there’s no need to change it: emotional manipulation is stunningly effective precisely because it defies logic, motivates behavior, and cuts faster, harder and deeper than conscious thought.

The most valuable part of the article is the set of links that will show you more information. Read it and compare the ideas to your existing misconceptions about how women are “weak”, passive “victims”, “damsels in distress” who desperately need your love and approval, or whatever else might be giving you the notion that she is somehow not already gaming you in every moment that you two spend together. The reason that guys benefit from learning game is that the male version is essentially a reverse-engineered version of the exact same tactics that women are already using against men — which I also cover at length in the blog, with particular emphasis on online dating. The truly eye-opening part is that Girl Game is almost completely unconscious for most women. Women do it as a result of their social conditioning from puberty onward, so they often aren’t even aware of what they’re doing (you are also socially conditioned, which is part of what makes it so difficult to see your own mistakes). This is why women pretend to like Nice Guys and lie about being “non-judgmental”, among a catalogue of other falsehoods that I’m sure you’re all too familiar with if you’ve dealt with women for any length of time.

The presence of female-against-female (and against male) competition is everywhere once you learn to see it. And it will completely change your perspective about women in practically every conceivable way, making you less emotionally manipulable, more realistic in your thinking, more pragmatic in your approach, and also less cynical because you no longer have to buy into the “dark side” of the romantic fantasy. Women aren’t bad people, they’re just ordinary, narcissistic, egotistically self-absorbed human beings who have no particular need or desire to be altruistic toward you for any reason at all. Especially in the realm of sex/love in a modern society where social institutions have largely crumbled, women will act like sexual mercenaries far more often than not — which is what drives men to learn seduction (and also is the reason why women — and men who are still trapped in the grips of fake-feminist “woman empowering” Girl Game — try to shame guys for doing so). Read the article and consider its perspective; you might be surprised that it’s actually (un)common sense.