Anyone got a transcript? I refuse to give his site traffic.
Tucker's really pathetic. If he thinks masculinity should be about drunken one night stands with low quality sluts (which is how he had his claim to fame in the first place), that's fine for him, but I choose to hold myself to a higher standard, as does much of the Manosphere. Not that I'm saying that the former is a bad thing of course, it's just not something I primarily aspire to. Maybe that's part of what he's trying to attack, much like SJWs foaming at the mouth to attack their natural superiors.
At any rate, he's really in no position to claim himself as some sort of model to follow for a healthy and fulfilling expression of masculinity. He's a sophomoric frat boy and his woman is about as feminine as Michelle Obama. He's certainly not someone I want to be.
I'm not even sure how "scientific" game can really be in the first place. Aside from the things we already know (look good, have status, be cool and interesting, take the lead, don't be a pussy), this is really more of an art. Everyone's got their own style, preferred type of girl (who will always be making her own decisions), etc.
Far too imprecise to be considered a science. And that's something that I thus far haven't seen Tucker even say. His gimmick seems to be that his show is so revolutionary because he's bringing "dat real science," but the entire premise of game being a science is something I take issue with in the first place.
Interesting how he bases his show on this, while at the same time calling PUAs (who we can more or less associate with the early game community) frauds. The two seem to share a similar belief in a one size fits all systematic and "scientific" approach, at least from what I can see.
Tucker's really pathetic. If he thinks masculinity should be about drunken one night stands with low quality sluts (which is how he had his claim to fame in the first place), that's fine for him, but I choose to hold myself to a higher standard, as does much of the Manosphere. Not that I'm saying that the former is a bad thing of course, it's just not something I primarily aspire to. Maybe that's part of what he's trying to attack, much like SJWs foaming at the mouth to attack their natural superiors.
At any rate, he's really in no position to claim himself as some sort of model to follow for a healthy and fulfilling expression of masculinity. He's a sophomoric frat boy and his woman is about as feminine as Michelle Obama. He's certainly not someone I want to be.
Quote: (10-10-2014 11:26 AM)Krusyos Wrote:
1) I would love to see the "scientific research" he says proves his beta method. As far as I know, every VALID scientific study (ie peer reviewed, blind, etc.) does nothing but give credence to the wisdom of the "misogynistic shitlords" on ROK and RVF.
I'm not even sure how "scientific" game can really be in the first place. Aside from the things we already know (look good, have status, be cool and interesting, take the lead, don't be a pussy), this is really more of an art. Everyone's got their own style, preferred type of girl (who will always be making her own decisions), etc.
Far too imprecise to be considered a science. And that's something that I thus far haven't seen Tucker even say. His gimmick seems to be that his show is so revolutionary because he's bringing "dat real science," but the entire premise of game being a science is something I take issue with in the first place.
Interesting how he bases his show on this, while at the same time calling PUAs (who we can more or less associate with the early game community) frauds. The two seem to share a similar belief in a one size fits all systematic and "scientific" approach, at least from what I can see.