Game and the Closed Christian Market

Christians true to their faith won’t worry much about relative sex rank.
We learn about the Game Theory of Socio-Sexual Response because it explains reality. It represents human behavioral science at its best, observing real human behavior and building a frame of reference which accounts for it. It really is that way, and people who were total losers are finding relief from their misery and social isolation by using the principles derived from Game.
Your basic assumptions about what matters in life will shape how you use Game. Virtually every theorist will admit to his or her moral biases and we can generally see how their plan of action fits that bias. I’m just one more. My bias is biblical Christianity. It is natural my applications of Game would come out different from that of some much more popular writers. You can even critique my answers, but if you don’t understand where I’m coming from, you’ll miss the point.
I am not ignorant of sex rank. That’s a reference to relative marketability, desirability in the eyes of the average member of the opposite sex. I have described some of the popular grading and ranking schemes. What most other writers don’t grasp is that Christians, by definition, are a closed market. While beset by all the same weaknesses and desires as any other human, part of being a Christian is striving to rise above certain tendencies common to all humanity. We don’t accept what may be the norm for others. It’s not about claiming superiority, but a desire to find something more suitable to our faith than what comes with the human moral autopilot.
It’s not about success but striving, about a desire for what God calls “holy.” Holiness means recognizing the broken tendencies and building a resistance to their power. Thus, a large element in my teaching about human sexuality assumes the ancient prohibitions about doing sex the way everyone else does it. Christians are bound under a moral apprehension that sex is all good and right, but with certain restrictions. We have to get ours the way God intended.
So we don’t participate in the open market, at least not knowingly. We use common reactions to our presentation as a means to communicate with everyone, Christian or not. But we will not take seriously sexual overtures from those not morally and spiritually qualified as fellow believers and followers of Christ. Further, while we accept them from each other, we don’t follow the regular open market rules within our own market. Our rules are different, and sex rank is — in theory at least — not a valid consideration. It is at most icing on the cake, not fundamental.
A major implication of this is my assertion it rests with women to make the first move.
The Christian man is at his most adorable when he is fully engaged in his mission. His Christian sex rank is his commitment to Christ, a sense of calling which shapes his whole focus, the reason and guide for all he does. There are sure to be problems with this, as most Christian women are struggling to shed bad habits, just as the men are. It doesn’t help there is a cultural mythology in Western Christianity which is every bit as stupid as the slightly different version for non-Christians. But we teach Christian women their best hope is learning to value men sexually who may not have a lot of time and energy left to pursue them. We don’t change the fundamental rules, but redefine what’s hot.
Because her divine mission inevitably includes supporting her man, whomever he may be, she enters the market not by enticing the prospects, but first by putting herself where her best prospective mates are already at work. She finds her best market in the types and kinds of activities which reflect her own sense of mission, her talents and interests. That’s not the whole story, of course. It’s where things start. We believe our God will surely fill in the blanks, by moving us together with good prospects in His own timing. Yes, we believe and teach in the miracle of God steering events, though I do not teach there is only one right person for us to marry at any given time. The choice may seem totally and mutually obvious for some folks in some contexts, but this is not a given. God blesses unions which are founded on His revelation. So her efforts to engage the imperatives of that revelation, at whatever level she best understands things at any time, are linked to a promise to make things work out in her best interests.
Nothing here suggests just how a gal should make that first move, or what it means in concrete terms. My assertion assumes she will work that out on her own. If she’s doing the right thing from the best motives, her behavior will draw the attention of good men who would need her. She’s also going to have to trust that same God to help those men want what they also need. But at least conceptually, it’s up to her to find a way to signal her interest. That ranges from something as subtle as simply being there consistently to support him merely as a fellow Christian, up to bluntly stating her desire for courtship. She has to be her best self, whatever that means, and move with the Spirit.
We also teach he is supposed to understand she is not debasing herself, not reducing her value to him, as it would be the case outside the Christian market. He is taught to read this differently than men who operate on secular values, or any other religion. We use the parable of God bringing Eve to Adam; God’s best choice comes to the man.
We make a grave error when we think God is not interested in such things. She also has to have her faith strong in hand if the guy pays no attention, or seems uninterested, or even rebuffs her overture. She has to decide whether it’s just a matter of waiting, of pushing a bit harder to make sure, or looking elsewhere. It can be wrenching and painful, and she will surely seek the advice of wiser Christians. All these things are possible and all consistent with faith itself.
Doing things the way most Game writers suggest, with their reference to sex rank in the secular sense, and the male pursuit model, is wholly inconsistent with that faith.
Addenda: I forgot to mention, the primary reason for doing things backwards is because most Christian fellowships have failed to institute the proper biblical system of arranged marriage, or more accurately, elder-guided match making. Most churches don’t have proper elders, either. In the New Testament, elders were the organizational leaders, versus the spiritual leaders typically called pastors. An elder is the head of household, but a church is about shared spiritual identity, not DNA. Churches are supposed to organize along the lines of extended family households, with elders guiding or advising in decisions such as whom to mate. Remove that, and we are left with girls having to make their own way, as it were.