Paul Elam does not have the answers you’re looking for (debate)

It’s a weird time we’re living in. If you’re reading this, odds are you’ve come to the conclusion that our society’s mainstream sources of information are broken. So like me, you’ve set out into the intellectual wild west known as the blogosphere. Out here, there are no laws, no certainties, and you have to make your own choices regarding who to trust, and who to ignore.

A man named Paul Elam recently suggested that you ignore me. Specifically, he suggested that you ignore the entire Game blogosphere:

“But the ones that remain, and make it a lifestyle, are just too enslaved to imagine red pill freedom, and likely not bright enough to learn what it means. They are literally institutionalized by their own desires and cannot imagine setting foot outside the city limits of Snatchville. The unquestionable black hole that exists in all these men is the place that should have held their core values and self respect.”

“Anyone who attempts to make an art form of passing a shit test has only succeeded in eating said shit and advertising themselves to the world as a shit eater (Yes, I know, but you get PUSSY!). Too bad such unfortunates seem oblivious to the fact that refusing to even participate in a shit test will have the same effect as passing one, except that it might help to eventually hook you up with a woman slightly less likely to yell rape the first time she gets pissed at you, or cut off your dick when you’re asleep.”

“And anyone who believes in tossing negs, concocted for the purpose of aiding in the score, only does so because they don’t realize that living by values that you don’t retreat from, one of them being that your self-respect is worth more than time in a common vagina, is the best neg you could ever hope to toss. But hey, if you like begging, eating shit and life with no values, The Chateau has room for you.”

The reference to the Chateau referring, of course, to Roissy.

I am sympathetic to the values and goals of the Men’s Rights Movement, to which Paul is a valuable contributor. But the movement is heading for a split. On one side will be the reasonable and principled Men’s Rights Activists, who will recognize and respect the desire of men to improve their lives, including their relationships with women. Those who are older and set in their ways may not be interested in writers (such as myself) whose goal is to help men lead better lives, but at the very least they will ignore us, while continuing to focus their attention on other men’s issues.

On the other will be the men who are angered by the growing phenomenon of men, recognizing that their understanding of women, sex and dating is imperfect, coming together to share knowledge and compare notes. These men will continue to lash out at practitioners of Game, pick-up artists, and whatever other label you want to affix on men trying to improve their fortunes with women. The latter side will gradually fade from importance in the marketplace of ideas, as their readers begin to understand their true goals – not to help others, or inform them, or share truths with the world. Rather, to soothe some inner torment, to fuel some deep-seated anger against anyone who dares to be happier and more successful than they.

Here is Paul’s advice for the contemporary young man trying to navigate the 21st-century sexual marketplace:

“O.K., so you want to get laid? Here’s how you do it. Smell clean, get in the proximity of women, and then ignore them. When they come to fuck you, and they will, shut up and let it happen.”

“Sorry, but there is little else to it. Women are wired to respond to men who walk with enough self-confidence and involvement in their own lives that they don’t need to invest any energy into bagging girls. They attract women naturally.”

But, as anyone who has ever stepped outside of their basement knows (including Paul, deep down) this advice is insufficient. A man who follows it will remain a lifelong celibate. Also perhaps, a lifelong A Voice for Men reader, as his celibacy breeds more bitterness, and thus more susceptibility to Paul’s particular brand of self-help advice for the modern man.

I have too much respect for Paul’s work to immediately relegate him to the second class of MRAs. We’ve all written things we later come to see as foolish. So rather than pile on, I’m going to offer him an opportunity for a productive exchange:

Paul Elam, I am challenging you to a public debate on the subject of game and men’s rights. You may choose the format, although I will suggest three posts each of unlimited length. You may also choose the proposition, or begin by simply laying out your thoughts on why men shouldn’t learn game. Or, you can respond to my points in this post. Or, you can respond to any points I’ve made in any post, ever.

If Paul chooses to take me up on this offer, great. I doubt we’ll come to a complete agreement overnight, but I will always respect someone who disagrees with me, as long as they’re willing to discuss our difference of opinion honestly. In any case, I’ll probably learn something. As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another.

If he declines? Well, I wish he and his readers all the best as they continue their pointless sideline sniping, while the real players conquer the world.

Recommended Content

Skip to toolbar