Anger

angry-151332_960_720

It is important to know how to be angry.

A big part of being a man is being good at games of chicken. A game of chicken happens when you have a dispute with someone, and neither has the decisive power to end it. In such a case, men circle each other, looking for weaknesses in the other to exploit. However, since you know the other man is doing the same, uncertainty follows. Uncertainty gives stress. Therefore, when such conflicts drag on too long, men tend to want to settle the dispute rather than prolong it. But, blinking first in a game of chicken means you lose, the other wins.

So the dominant strategy for a smart man is not to blink first. This is why war is easy, peace is hard: no one blinks, end up with war. Someone needs to blink, for peace. That is how patriarchal hierarchy is established.

Blink too often and you are judged weak. Blink too little and people know you’re full of shit.

Most men blink too often, especially soyboys. Turns out not blinking is pretty hard to do right; apt to get in trouble if you pretend to be tougher than you are. Therefore, evolutionary average tends to produce men that blink under pressure.

Then again, men instinctively realize blinking too often displays weakness and so sometimes veer to the other extreme: they don’t blink at all. While it is always better to err in the side of too little blinking, it is still an err. Too little blinking prevents cooperation.

Knowing when to be angry is part of playing games of chicken. A pet peeve of mine is boomer anger. When a boomer is angry, it is about how the trash is picked up late or, I dunno, about how the service isn’t what it used to be. Young people, meanwhile, are expected to live in trash, accept trash salaries, and don’t even have the money to be serviced, instead working shitty jobs in restaurants where they have to serve complaining boomers.

But I mean, I get it. You get angry about the stuff that irks you most, and if a late garbageman irks you most, well, you have a pretty good life otherwise.

Games of chicken are much fun to play with women. Women play them all the time, hoping you win them. They love it when you win. They want to see you win. Playing games of chicken with women is warm-up practice for playing games of chicken with men.

How to win at games of chicken is hard to explain. It’s mostly trial and error. Bluffing at the right time is a crucial skill, but so is bowing your head. It always stuck with me that Stalin, no matter how powerful he was, was increasingly paranoid. So was Mao. This was because they were playing a lot of games of chicken, on a level where too big a mistake cost their life. Pretty sure they were excellent at playing games of chicken.

With women, because they want to see you win at the game of chicken, life can be lots of fun, although it is less fun when they set you up against another man whom they also want to see winning at the game of chicken, which women are prone to do. This is the reason why we like patriarchy: so women can’t engage in their favorite pastime, namely getting men to fight each other. But otherwise, women are lots of fun to hang out with.

In this we are white-pilled: why do we play the game of chicken? Because we are having fun. Roosh and Heartiste are more black-pilled: they have let the game of chicken gone to their head. Heartiste for instance writes this post on love, but it is not really love. It is harem management: how to deal with unhappy women who want to be owned by you, while you are refusing to take ownership of them. Of that list, my girl has said three or four of those things to me, all of them during our courtship phase. Of course she still occasionally calls me an asshole, but mostly she rests her head on my shoulder and tells me that she loves me. That is how a girl says she loves you: she says she loves you. Not that hard.

A successful man in his 40s who is still a bachelor raises eyebrows, and rightly so. I think it is accurate to say that the reactionary position is, quite obviously, that a woman completes you. You maintain house, she maintains cleanliness. You make dough, she makes children. Yin and Yang. This gives peace of mind. You still play games of chicken, but they are fun, and if they are no longer fun, you can always hit her.

A long time ago, I was hanging with a successful man, professionally. One time, he got angry with his subordinates. I don’t remember what over. But I do remember the response of his subordinates: they were ashamed. They took his anger serious, for they knew he would not be upset without good reason. Consequently, they adjusted their actions and the man’s outburst fixed the problem. That is anger done right.

Generally, the best way at getting better at games of chicken is blinking less. Most people blink too often – hence the failure of Western men in passing Western woman’s shit-test. When in doubt, puff up your chest a bit.

But, even more generally, the best way at getting better at games of chicken is simply playing games of chicken and see what happens.

4 thoughts on “Anger

  1. “A game of chicken happens when you have a dispute with someone, and neither has the decisive power to end it” – at the level of present intensity of conflict.

    When you play a game of chicken it is important to always know what means the other man is willing to use . Not blinking is safe, if you can be sure that he will not escalate to anything you can’t handle. The game can escalate to a brawl or knives or guns or a lawsuit.

    So when you say: “Blink too little and people know you’re full of shit”, I agree, but that is hardly the worst that might happen. A more immediate problem is that the situation might escalate – up to and including lethal force.

    That best players are those everybody considers a bit loony, you know those who won’t mind spending some time in prison or hospital..

    If you think that the other guy might not blink and escalate, it might be better to escalate first (and harder) or to blink.

    1. True for drunken nightlife or when interacting with criminals. But in my day-to-day dealings, which tend to not be criminal, people have more to lose, are much much less willing to take escalate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.