Post: #1

Analogous to the distinction between micro- and macro-economics, I believe we may make a division into micro- and macro-PUA. While micro-PUA aims to explain the dynamics of female attraction and how to push the buttons most effectively (so as to have better game in the field), macro-PUA instead considers these dynamics within the context of present-day social organization and looks at society-wide trends. Examples of macro-PUA include discussing the causes for the rise of feminism, the changes in society which led to marriage losing much of its benefit for many men, and so on.

I've been trying to compile some good content on these topics. Here's what I have so far:

Old posts by Roissy: Endless Dating, The Limits of Game, Don't Get Married, Compassion Creates More Cads, Obesity To Blame For Game, State Of Nature, The Best Thing Society Can Do For Beta Males, How to Save Marriage, Decivilizing: Human Nature Unleashed, Love In The Time Of Game, and Sexual Dystopia: A Glimpse Into The Future.

There are some strands of commonality between these posts, but I'm having a hard time figuring out how to verbalize them. Suffice it to say that these posts give some solid info relating to the rise of feminism, the gradual disappearance of the social, governmental, and physical factors which enforced monogamous arrangements, the return to a more primal kind of sexual climate, the cause for the 'player revolution' (which this forum, and the PUA community more generally, embodies), etc.

And a series from T. AKA Ricky Raw: The Myth of the Middle-Class Alpha Male.

This series delves into a lot of topics, for example the relation between democracy (one person, one vote) and monogamy (one man, one woman), the causes behind the feminist revolution, and so on.

Together the Roissy posts and the Ricky Raw series seem to give quite a nice start to an analysis of how the sexual climate in society has evolved throughout history, where we are today, and what consequences we may expect from certain changes.

Anyway, if any of those posts are new to any of you, I would definitely recommend reading them (as long as you're interested in what I'm calling 'macro PUA', rather than being interested only in the more practical stuff). And if any of you have in mind some high-quality posts that I didn't link to here and bear on these topics, please let me know!

Post: #2

Post: #3

Maybe it is the Wild Turkey/Nyquil combo I have going on right now, or the first words of the first post of a new member stating "Analogous to the distinction between micro- and macro-economics, I believe we may make a division into micro- and macro-PUA.", iit is time for bed.

Thanks for the laugh Tuth.

Post: #4

I'd probably look through dalrock and Rollo. After that you're talking about books. Ww Anton, that one chick that talks about the historical and social nature of women, and unfortunately evo psych.

If macro wasn't important, nobody would pursue poosy paradise.

Thanks for coining the term, cause it's a good way to categorize some of the more esoteric game concepts.

WIA

Post: #5

Interesting topic.
Macro-PUA, while this may sound funny to some, is essentially just a meta-analysis of game information.
I think that since we are primarily a community that relies on the anecdotal experiences of our members, it is very important that we do compile all of our data for a meta-analysis.
Although it would be absolutely fantastic to have game experiments conducted with the scientific rigour of controlled variables and large sample sets that can have powerful statistic frameworks applied to them, this is never going to happen anytime soon. No university will receive a budget for funding studies that will essentially validate the fact that women are hypergamous whores. Especially given the feminist slant that is so widely prevalent in academia.

Excellent first post and thank you for the resource of links that look at the "big picture" of game (ie. macro-pua / game meta-analysis).

Post: #6

This sounds like a combination of mental masturbation and over-analysis.

You don't need to say the "right thing." You can say almost anything as long as you have certain core beliefs.

Post: #7

(07-21-2015 05:48 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  I'd probably look through dalrock and Rollo. After that you're talking about books. Ww Anton, that one chick that talks about the historical and social nature of women, and unfortunately evo psych.

Thanks for the suggestions. I'm checking out the first three now. Which chick are you referring to, though?

Post: #8

(07-21-2015 04:29 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  This sounds like a combination of mental masturbation and over-analysis.

You don't need to say the "right thing." You can say almost anything as long as you have certain core beliefs.

You don't need to say the "right thing" for what? I'm not sure what your criticism is or how it's relevant to this topic.

Post: #9

Yeah I'm siding with Truth Teller. "Game analysis" stuff makes my head hurt. Unless OP is planning to publish some cutting edge, social science papers on the topic, I don't see what the point in this stuff is. All you need to know is that the West is against the interests of men, and act accordingly.

The "practical macro side" is just 'act unilaterally with self-interest'.

Post: #10

(07-21-2015 12:11 AM)Periphrasis Wrote:  Analogous to the distinction between micro- and macro-economics, I believe we may make a division into micro- and macro-PUA. While micro-PUA aims to explain the dynamics of female attraction and how to push the buttons most effectively (so as to have better game in the field), macro-PUA instead considers these dynamics within the context of present-day social organization and looks at society-wide trends. Examples of macro-PUA include discussing the causes for the rise of feminism, the changes in society which led to marriage losing much of its benefit for many men, and so on.

I've been trying to compile some good content on these topics. Here's what I have so far:

Old posts by Roissy: Endless Dating, The Limits of Game, Don't Get Married, Compassion Creates More Cads, Obesity To Blame For Game, State Of Nature, The Best Thing Society Can Do For Beta Males, How to Save Marriage, Decivilizing: Human Nature Unleashed, Love In The Time Of Game, and Sexual Dystopia: A Glimpse Into The Future.

There are some strands of commonality between these posts, but I'm having a hard time figuring out how to verbalize them. Suffice it to say that these posts give some solid info relating to the rise of feminism, the gradual disappearance of the social, governmental, and physical factors which enforced monogamous arrangements, the return to a more primal kind of sexual climate, the cause for the 'player revolution' (which this forum, and the PUA community more generally, embodies), etc.

And a series from T. AKA Ricky Raw: The Myth of the Middle-Class Alpha Male.

This series delves into a lot of topics, for example the relation between democracy (one person, one vote) and monogamy (one man, one woman), the causes behind the feminist revolution, and so on.

Together the Roissy posts and the Ricky Raw series seem to give quite a nice start to an analysis of how the sexual climate in society has evolved throughout history, where we are today, and what consequences we may expect from certain changes.

Anyway, if any of those posts are new to any of you, I would definitely recommend reading them (as long as you're interested in what I'm calling 'macro PUA', rather than being interested only in the more practical stuff). And if any of you have in mind some high-quality posts that I didn't link to here and bear on these topics, please let me know!

Post: #11

(07-23-2015 10:31 PM)Phoenix Wrote:  Yeah I'm siding with Truth Teller. "Game analysis" stuff makes my head hurt. Unless OP is planning to publish some cutting edge, social science papers on the topic, I don't see what the point in this stuff is. All you need to know is that the West is against the interests of men, and act accordingly.

That's actually my intention.

I'm an academic economist, and it seems to me that certain sections of the PUA community have constructed some of the best groundwork yet for a new kind of scientific approach to particular aspects of gender relations and gender politics--a kind of approach which looks more like certain schools of economic thought than mainstream psychology or sociology. (Note here, where Tyler Cowen says that Roissy "thinks like an economist". This is not a random claim.)

The problem is that most of this groundwork is trapped in hopelessly inflammatory language and stands alongside plenty of idiosyncratic conjecture and theorizing. Almost no rigorous academic would take it seriously. And that's a pity, because in a very short span of time the PUA community has made obsolete most of the theories on sexual psychology and gender relations that came out of academic psychology and sociology over the past century. Finally a dialogue unencumbered by silly political correctness has emerged to tackle the problems of both the dynamics of male and female sexual psychology, along with the sexual climate as a whole and all the implications which come with that understanding! Yet many of the most intelligent members of society wouldn't give it more than a moment's chance because of the reckless presentation.

My goal, then, is to translate some of the theories into more rigorous, academic language, along with extending them, filling in some of the gaps, and slotting the whole thing into a greater whole which would include economic analysis as well. Hopefully then we could get some of the more scientific and rational people in our society paying attention to these important questions.

Post: #12

My friend, that's not going to happen given our current social climate.
Game and human gender dynamics have way too many ugly truths that nobody wants to confront.

Better to shove your head in the sand and believe every person as "the one" out there for them.
Easier to believe that we should practice monogamy instead of the natural few alpha males having a monopoly on all of the hypergamous females.
And much, much better for society and the feminist imperative that men be chivalrous gentleman and not the asshole badboy that the ovaries crave so bad.

Post: #13

(07-24-2015 10:08 PM)Periphrasis Wrote:  

(07-23-2015 10:31 PM)Phoenix Wrote:  Yeah I'm siding with Truth Teller. "Game analysis" stuff makes my head hurt. Unless OP is planning to publish some cutting edge, social science papers on the topic, I don't see what the point in this stuff is. All you need to know is that the West is against the interests of men, and act accordingly.

That's actually my intention.

I'm an academic economist, and it seems to me that certain sections of the PUA community have constructed some of the best groundwork yet for a new kind of scientific approach to particular aspects of gender relations and gender politics--a kind of approach which looks more like certain schools of economic thought than mainstream psychology or sociology. (Note here, where Tyler Cowen says that Roissy "thinks like an economist". This is not a random claim.)

The problem is that most of this groundwork is trapped in hopelessly inflammatory language and stands alongside plenty of idiosyncratic conjecture and theorizing. Almost no rigorous academic would take it seriously. And that's a pity, because in a very short span of time the PUA community has made obsolete most of the theories on sexual psychology and gender relations that came out of academic psychology and sociology over the past century. Finally a dialogue unencumbered by silly political correctness has emerged to tackle the problems of both the dynamics of male and female sexual psychology, along with the sexual climate as a whole and all the implications which come with that understanding! Yet many of the most intelligent members of society wouldn't give it more than a moment's chance because of the reckless presentation.

My goal, then, is to translate some of the theories into more rigorous, academic language, along with extending them, filling in some of the gaps, and slotting the whole thing into a greater whole which would include economic analysis as well. Hopefully then we could get some of the more scientific and rational people in our society paying attention to these important questions.

Godspeed.

Post: #14

Seems like there is a huge opportunity for an academic to become the academy's expert on the idea of the red pill. By that, I mean a lot of journalists and such would contact that academic for a viewpoint on any discussion of modern sexual relationships, etc., and so the academic could become relatively famous (and, all the lucrative book-writing and such that comes along with being someone like a Krugman).

Still, as others have mentioned, it will be difficult to execute given the PC culture of academia, in particular. It could be tenure suicide or it could be a home run. Best of luck.