I’ve been thinking about the points raised by Snark in his post Why Do Women Link Game With Rape, and Whiskey in More Scary Vampires (both posts combined into FB’s Game And Gender Hierarchy), and it occurred to me that looking at this as a hierarchical model might not the best one to use–as More Liberal BS noted in the comments of FB’s post, calling it a hierarchy suggests some level of mobility for males within the status structure (my paraphrasing), and this is a thing generally opposed by women (who, as Snark notes, prefer men who “stay within their league”–again, my paraphrasing).
What struck me, in reading Snark’s post, is that I had seen a similar parallel to what he describes, elsewhere. In 2001, there was a mass-conversion of Hindu dalits (untouchables) in India from Hinduism to Buddhism. This was met with considerable consternation by the scheduled castes of India, sometimes to the point were violence was suggested to keep any further conversions from occurring. One would think, looking at the situation from a foreign perspective, that the other castes in Indian society would welcome the departure of the lowest ranks of their society–and, in a Western, hierarchical class model, this may in fact be true, because the obligations a hierarchical class system imposes on its lowest classes are different than those a caste system (the most prominent being that a class system allows for a great deal more mobility in status than the caste system would). The caste system is incredibly dependent on the maintenance of the status quo–if one caste can violate its boundaries with impunity, then all castes can, thereby rendering the system moot.
Is it any wonder, then, that feminists fear Game so? It’s subversive–a threat to the established order. Imagine it: an omega who studies Game can conceivably become a Beta, or an Alpha (should he be daring enough). A high-Beta might out-Game an Alpha, and take the woman home. Chaos enters the system, and nothing frightens those in power so much as finding that the foundation of their home has turned to sand.
But, in my obligatory caveat, while I did make Dean’s List twice while in college, I never graduated, and I am half-way through a bottle of Drambuie; all the above may be the epistemological-equivalent of whistling-out-my-bung-hole. Take it as you will.
In an additional note, the remake of The Wolfman opens on February 12:
I am most curious to see how The Wolfman will be received by those who gushed over Edward Cullen in Twilight. Will they note the similarities? The naked masculinity of the Beast in The Wolfman vs. the cultured veneer presented in Twilight–will they realize which is honest, and which is not?
Again, I am somewhat drunk. Take as you will.