The IF BOOKS COULD KILL Podcast with Michael Hobbes & Peter Shamshiri picks at Neil Strauss' "THE GAME"

[Datelessman]

I only decided to share this because I thought it might interest some fellow posters. I'll lay out the context for people who aren't into podcasts.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-game/id1651876897?i=1000588298127

Michael Hobbes and Peter Shamshiri are two journalists/writers/podcasters/commentators who have worked at a variety of places. Hobbes, for example, wrote for Huffington Post for a stretch, among other places. This podcast in particular, "IF BOOKS COULD KILL," examines best selling books that commonly sell in airports whose ideas or topics sparked a lot of social trends in pop culture for the worse. Hobbes, in particular, often runs with themes about how bad ideas spread like wildfire and and examining how and why to try to improve, or at least to smell BS better. He also avidly debunks things, like "moral panic journalism." Most if not all of the books so far were published 10-25 years ago or more and they not only go into the book, but the negative impact on society or pop culture, as well as follow up with the authors' lives. Especially since most or all of these books are still in print and can easily be had at an airport, or even pharmacy somewhere.

This is the fifth episode and it tackles "THE GAME" by Neil Strauss, which both exposed and, ironically, cultivated the pick-up artist "community." Strauss, who claimed to be examining it as a journalist but clearly enjoyed tapping all that booty and bragging about it, became like the Sith Lord PUA Guru for a while, issuing orders to the Stormtroopers online (and writing another book). Over time, this became the foundation (or toxic soup) for "incels" and the proto-fascist pipeline like the Proud Boys. This book is still the Bible for tons of online dill weeds who want to scam desperate dudes into buying books.

DNL naturally was one of those dudes swept into the lifestyle, was a PUA and had the sort of breakdown that one of the book's stars, Mystery, who literally got a VH1 series, underwent. In some ways his entire online career has been a way to try to make penance for it, as well as offer an alternative (while using some of the few good bits from it).

It is 55 minutes long, but the last 2-3 are just promos and plugs. If you ever wanted to read the book WITHOUT reading the book, if that makes sense, give it a whirl. The commentary and discussion is both funny and informative. Obviously, they talk about how sexist and awful the book and it's cast usually are. One of their major debunkings of the book note that it is set in L.A. in the early 2000s and 99% of "the game" and those who succeed at it do so with drastically younger and usually intoxicated women. Dudes who are pushing 30 but still manipulating 17-19 year old's into bed and treating them like toys are common within the tome.

The irony is I was probably the perfect audience for this book. In the 2000s I was in college, a virgin, and at my most depressed and bleak about it. Yes, as bad as all of my online rants and ravings here and on the other forum were since 2015, that is the MORE POSITIVE version compared to when I was in my early 20s, when I used to literally go to my old elementary school playground some nights so I could be alone to cry about being lonely. Yet I never gravitated towards this lifestyle or mindset in response. I was the target audience for this baloney at it's founding and I was in my physical prime, yet I avoided it. And I am glad for it. I would rather die a virgin than have the sorts of shameless, regrettable, manipulative and awful sex "encouraged" by Strauss. I don't want to hurt, trick, or disappoint anyone, especially someone I am attracted to. I like to think that is because I am a more moral persona and not a sociopath, but who knows. Maybe I was just lucky.

Anyway, I found this fascinating, so I wanted to share.

[inbloomer]

I had a listen, out of interest. Three points stood out to me:

1. The presenters had nothing but sympathy for men who struggle to find social connection and sexual success.

2. There's no evidence at all that the Game techniques ever worked. Where those men were achieving success, it was from a) screening for the most vulnerable women that could just about meet the legal bar for consent; b) even then having to play a heavy numbers game; and c) having more conventional attractiveness in the first place than they realised.

3. Although the kung fu classes I was doing at around that time weren't as such about picking up women, they shared some features with the Game. There was the same sense of men just slightly older than you setting themselves up as "gurus", with elaborate titles and veneers of confidence and ability, but just under the surface were all their old insecurities and mental health issues. Also the "one true faith" effect, where you were encouraged to believe that anyone learning any fractionally different system was wasting their money, whereas you were learning the one secret system that would definitely work.

[Datelessman]

I had a listen, out of interest. Three points stood out to me:

1. The presenters had nothing but sympathy for men who struggle to find social connection and sexual success.

They did (and do). I especially found it fascinating when Hobbes would note how many of the various norms and procedures in heterosexual dating were counter-productive and almost go out of their way to make things more awkward and difficult than necessary. DNL mentions this at times too but Hobbes has a better way of putting certain things.

The thing which makes the whole "angry incel/MAGA/MGTOW troll" crisis ironic there IS a lot of sympathy for men (and women) who struggle with this. I've been interacting on this board and DNL's main one for at least 7-8 years now and I admit I can be stubborn, argumentative, and at times have an unenlightened view on women. Yet I still get plenty of sympathy and understanding from people. Granted, I'm not a he-man woman hater, but the point stands. It is just when some people who struggle with this go too far into "hater fascist lunatic" territory that they start to lose sympathy, which is totally fair.

But, yes, I did appreciate that while Hobbes and Shamshiri were critical of the book and some of the PUA gurus, they weren't using that to just lash out at dudes who struggle in general. They actually seemed to feel, as I do, that it is a genuine shame that a lot of genuinely vulnerable and suffering people out there turned somewhere for help or answers and the "best" they had was THE GAME.

2. There's no evidence at all that the Game techniques ever worked. Where those men were achieving success, it was from a) screening for the most vulnerable women that could just about meet the legal bar for consent; b) even then having to play a heavy numbers game; and c) having more conventional attractiveness in the first place than they realised.

Definitely. I remember nearly a decade ago when I used to frequent cyber cafes I used to meet some "unique" characters, and one of them was this guy who tried to act like he was some PUA or dating guru. Unfortunately I had been less than shy with one person about my dating frustrations and word down the grapevine reached him (turns out men gossip WAY worse than they claim women do; it could be argued 99% of sexism is just projection, men claiming women would do what they already do to women). He would often brag about "the tail" he would get and how he could "help" me, but eventually he revealed his strategy: targeting younger, intoxicated women, especially during major holidays and especially overseas. It came to a head when he tried to invite me to his latest international jaunt for New Year's Eve to target pass-out drunk women at parties. I found it disgusting when he told me that and I started calling him "a date rapist" to his face. He didn't like that much and after some "c'mon bro" whines he eventually left me alone. A year or two ago I ran into someone who asked about him, and I still identified him as, "the date rapist."

So much of the toxic baloney that men bring to dating boils down to entitlement. And once someone feels entitled, they can justify doing nearly anything to anyone.

I do agree that many of the "gurus" are genuinely conventionally attractive and while there is always room to grow, conventional attractiveness is a +1 to all stats (basically). I think you've mentioned a few times that DNL is conventionally attractive. It's easy to claim all of the absurd tricks in THE GAME work when the person using it has an advantage they don't see or haven't cultivated fully.

I sort of look like Brendon Frasier in THE WHALE, only with more hair and not quite as heavy, or tall. I'm not hideous, but I am not getting any advantages. I have to charm on my first attempt. I can't survive any negative first impressions or hesitancy. Whereas Mystery could get away with his absurd dating cosplay in part because he was attractive despite it. Hobbes even mentioned how Neil Strauss had a genuinely interesting job (being a journalist who routinely covered celebrities) and had some genuine charisma behind the GAME baloney to fall back on. But, even this is rebutted by the idea that they were ALL piling on vastly underaged, and usually drunk, young women in California in the early 2000s. I mean, I bet I could be Mr. Cool too if I was going to bars and looking to weed out the drunkest looking 21 year old with a costume and toolkit, but I don't because I am not a selfish sociopath, nor envy them. And that isn't getting into reprehensible actions like the GAME dudes manipulating many of their "girlfriends" into plastic surgery, boob jobs and/or getting jobs as strippers just to boost their egos. Like Hobbes, I would have liked to know what happened to many of these poor women.

Heck, I would be hesitant to date a 25 year old at this point. "Half my age plus eight" leaves me with a 28 year old, but honestly I would really rather stick to women in their 30s at youngest (while preferring women around my own age and yes, even older). I actually had a debate with my mother about this very recently. I mean if I dated a 28 year old and said, "I used to play STREET FIGHTER II TURBO in the arcades all the time," she'd rightly say, "Um, I couldn't because I was born when that came out" and then I'd feel like a vampire. That happened when I did a speed dating event at the NYCC in 2015 and 90% of the women there were a day over 21. I'd mention being a fan of certain franchises when they were beginning and then realizing that the women I was speaking to weren't born yet. I often joke that the first time I felt old was when I was in my 30s speaking to a 19 year old online (for non-dating reasons) and she didn't know who John Candy was. I aged about 50 years in a second.

3. Although the kung fu classes I was doing at around that time weren't as such about picking up women, they shared some features with the Game. There was the same sense of men just slightly older than you setting themselves up as "gurus", with elaborate titles and veneers of confidence and ability, but just under the surface were all their old insecurities and mental health issues. Also the "one true faith" effect, where you were encouraged to believe that anyone learning any fractionally different system was wasting their money, whereas you were learning the one secret system that would definitely work.    

Yeah, a "one true path" effect can take place in these circles. In social psychology it is called "groupthink."

[Sponsored content]