Why Churchianity and Feminism are the Same

A commenter over at Vox Day said Game seems to be all about “exploiting women”.

That’s nonsense. While exploiting women is an honorable vocation, Game encompasses so much more. Here is my definition:

“Game is the discipline concerned with optimizing sociosexual status, that considers sexual feedback. Game also draws upon a wide array of disciplines that are relevant to this goal, although they are not directly concerned with sexual feedback.”

That is the short answer, but it’s unlikely to enlighten the ignorant. So here’s the long one, courtesy of the brilliant blogger The Social Pathologist:

Indeed when sweet Taylor gets carnally intimate with Tommy the thug, the only explanation that the conservative gives is that Taylor was manipulated into performing the depraved acts. Never does the Social Conservative acknowledge that the woman is finding the manipulation extremely pleasurable and that she is allowing herself to be manipulated. There seems to be a failure to recognise the moral agency of women when it comes to sexual matters because the ideal conservative woman is relatively asexual (except when it comes to reproduction) This, of course, plays into directly into feminist hands when they wish to avoid the moral consequences of their actions.

The hi-jacking of Christianity by its ascetic-members has tended to downplay the carnal component of male /female relationships, instead focusing on the moral virtues. Christian romantic love, as formulated by these gnostics, was all agape and no eros. Love in this context effectively become a relationship between two disembodied souls, and practically, this is manifest in how Christians give each other marital advice. Its all about care and communication, treating each other fairly and justly, but far less talk about looking sharp, keeping in shape and eliciting sexual desire in each other. In fact, a lot of the ascetic-Romantic conception of love seems to be premised on the fact that corporal reality doesn’t matter. For example, if a husband were to say that he doesn’t find his obese wife–who still loves him– attractive, opprobrium will usually be directed towards him and he would be attributed with moral fault. Apparently, according to the ascetics, love is meant to conquer all …

These types tend to conflate Christ’s sacrificial love with erotic love, which are two separate things. I can chose to sacrifice may life for a woman, but I can’t choose to have an erection in the presence of an unattractive woman. …

Whilst Social Conservatism and Feminism are two different ideological currents, both share the same effective conception of female nature; a nature that devoid of fleshy biological sexuality. Hypergamy strikes at the core of feminism in flatly refuting it’s gender equality and it strikes at Social Conservatism by upturning it’s conception of the feminine …

But this of course pre-supposes that a sexual argument is a culturally valid type of argument, something which social conservatism dismisses from the outset as a “base approach” to the subject.