Game Theory, Part 3: Females

As noted, women are hardly immune to game. In modern Western societies, the vast majority of women are not fully conscious of game, and it is predictable precious few approach reality about their own placement, or how it works at all. They participate in spite of themselves. However, even women know instinctively the whole issue of socio-sexual hierarchy for themselves is placement in a parallel structure. The problem for us is realizing women by their nature are in some ways less variable than men, yet in another sense are far more variable, forcing us to organize the hierarchy differently. I find there are fewer levels for them than for men when it comes to this particular model.

Savvy gamers will focus on getting what they want from women, but a part of what they seek is not the same bland thrill from each conquest, but the infinite variability each woman represents. Men are actually more predictable in one sense, because game is their way of handling the real world for this narrow interest of sexual conquest. But prediction requires a longer, more detailed list, which list is much more firm by the very nature of maleness. The whole model itself is a man’s model. This is more about understanding men and how they pursue their interests. It offers no justice to women, but it does answer a man’s questions. Understanding it will also help women decide how to escape this beast. What is offered is the reality of a broken, damaged world, but a good hard look at how it actually works. Never mind what ought to be, this is; this is how men with feral desires and sharp intellect run the world, at least in reference to human sexual behavior.

Men are wired to seek one thing: beauty. That quality can be broken down into two obvious factors. First is mere physical manifestation, as this is initially what gets a man’s attention. While physical appearance is the dominant factor, feminine arts can serve to move a gal up or down a notch. Feminine charisma is a thing unto itself, but it attaches itself firmly to the man’s perception of beauty. Both are a matter of taste. The second factor is relative value in terms of ownership. What does he gain in “owning” her? Aside from the question of preening his own status in the hierarchy, she must be able to perform the sexual function which a man’s instincts tell him is possible based on that cursory visual examination. Men are wired to equate “hot” with “good ride,” even as they realize more consciously this remains to be explored.

The paradox here is a genuine virgin seldom performs well. Virtually all of men’s sexual psychosis is wrapped up in the fantasy of forcefully seizing something before any other man can soil it, but while most men are probably willing to expend the time training their virginal brides, they aren’t so patient with casual encounters. So while a highly skillful and experienced woman has her place, she’s just a replacement for masturbation. That middle ground where most men prefer to operate — sex as recreation — places a premium on minimal experience. Not actual experience, since no one expects an honest accounting of that, but the mere perception of her sexual experience level. He can pretend he’ll be better, more memorable in her estimation than a small number of predecessors, but knows he’ll be lost in her mind when that number amounts to a herd. Some refer to this as the Slut Factor. Again, it’s not a matter of actual body counts, but reputation. Perception is reality.

These two factors alone will relegate females in any given social situation to three primary tiers, and a good deal of space below that. There is no useful distinction below the line. There are as many scales are their are men enunciating them and using them, but there seems poor consensus for how to apply a hierarchy below the first three. Individual men are seldom unanimous in their evaluation of all the women present for any particular social occasion, so the hierarchy remains quite fuzzy; the correlations of the female hierarchy are weaker than for the one men.

Naturally Tier One is the rare creature no one can ignore. Other women hate her, and every man wants her. A high Slut Factor can pull her off the top row, but she can get away with a lot more, for much the same reason Alphas do. Her ability to flirt artfully and portray herself as the greatest thing any man could ever hold is a significant factor, but being a One still means she has the physical assets. This is the woman with perfectly symmetrical facial features, big eyes, small nose, narrower mouth and chin, prominent cheekbones, smooth skin, and long flowing hair. Take note: Men universally prefer long hair. Every word otherwise on this subject is a lie; the data from genuine objective research, every time it has been tried, is overwhelming on this question.

While cultural and personal tastes vary in terms of relative slenderness, a balanced proportion is the most significant asset. Behavioral studies point out men are hard-wired to read balanced proportion as highly fertile. These women are hard-wired to take maximum advantage of whatever window of opportunity their Tier One status gives to capture a stable provider of resources for her nesting instincts, such as they may be. She is fully aware of her status, fully game aware, and will competitively ride the Alpha merry-go-round for all its worth. They tend to be less deluded about game, which is how they hold their status. Marriage is merely symbolic, and often serial. Many Ones have children, but genuine nest-building doesn’t seem to happen much.

Still in the competition are Tier Two women. For whatever reason, she doesn’t quite rate first notice among the rest of the women — perhaps less charisma, or something in the physical presentation is less than perfect. However, a major factor in many of these is simply the matter of game savvy. Few of them will acknowledge their own secondary ranking, but men are seldom confused about it. They’ll ride the Alpha merry-go-round, too, but the very nature of being Alpha means she’ll never get all of him, and certainly less of him than a One. If she comes to her senses early enough, she marries a Beta and finds other ways to compete. She gets her best deal from the Betas, but a surprising number miscalculate, and play too long, ending up with Deltas.

A disturbingly high number of Twos profess a belief in the cultural orthodoxy, even as they respond predictably to game. This would mark a Two as an accessory, a toy, not a keeper. Amusingly, the primary failing characteristic is the hyper-competitive behavior pattern which betrays some insecurity that doesn’t afflict the Ones. In this sense, a Two may be a One in every way except self-confidence. So while a One can sometimes be a bitch and get away with it, Twos have to be more careful or they fall quickly down the scale. Being a Two tends to be the most fragile status for any given woman because precious few are comfortable with it.

Tier Three is the bulk of female humanity. This is the girl next door. She may well be quite the physical specimen, even a perceptual virgin, but lacks the competitive instinct, or perhaps carries some star talent but lacks on looks. She arrives at her Three status simply because she isn’t in the running, for whatever reason, to capture an Alpha, and knows it. To the degree she games, it’s only brief forays answering the call of nature. On the other hand, Threes make the best wives in the long run because of that. It’s a totally different category from the first two tiers, for whom game is life itself.

Sub-Threes: It’s hard to classify the rest. It’s not that lesser women don’t get in the game, simply because some level participation is a mere matter of making oneself available. But no one in the game takes these lesser creatures seriously except losers from the male hierarchy. These are the ones most likely to work at enforcing cultural mythology. While a depressingly high percentage of them actually do gain positions of real power in society, they scatter along a featureless wasteland of socio-sexual failure. They may be variations on too slutty, physically repulsive, a shrill harpy, project a creepy vacuuming neediness, or a thousand other ways women disqualify themselves from a game they really want to play. These are most likely to benefit from avoiding the game. We won’t pursue that here, except to note there are gay women, too, but it’s hard to find useful measures of their numbers, either in bulk or as a proportion. Visit any social scene where gays dominate, and men vastly outnumber the women (in terms of biological identity).

The question of feminine physical beauty remains the greatest paradox in the Game Model, as far as men are concerned. Women tend to take advantage of their assets, but frankly all their efforts are not aimed at provoking men’s notice, but the envy of other women. It’s not about the man, but the other woman. It seems to define her existence on some level. Where there are no valid competitors, women tend to act far less feminine; there simply is no game for her. She becomes nothing more than the animated trophy of the victor among the competing males.