Always Hold the Moral High Ground

Sometimes a girl might stun you by taking a moral high ground stance opposite you. To address this, you must be prepared to seize it back – with prejudice.

As Thanksgiving (if you’re American) winds down, I’m reminded of one of the cultural phenomenon we’ve seen over the past few years, with various people attacking the holiday and shaming those who celebrate it. “The settlers took this country from the Native Americans,” they say. It’s hardly a day for celebration, they tell you.

This movement to make others feel guilt over their heritage is part of a greater guilt/shame movement in Western society. The latest American presidential election, to a great extent, was a repudiation of this guilt/shame movement; it was to large extent a population saying, “We will not be scolded and chastised by those who think us their betters any longer.”

The competition for the moral high ground between different groups in societies never ends. However, it isn’t just groups that compete for the high ground; it’s individuals, too.

What holding the moral high ground is really about is frame control; it’s ultimate frame control. Because if the moral high ground is yours, facts don’t matter. Opinions don’t matter. Nothing else matters except that you are morally correct... And the other side, by opposing you, is the morally questionable. Which means the other side must yield authority to you.

The 500-Megaton Frame Control Nuke

The reason social justice warriors have been such an annoyance to men in the United States is that they automatically assume a position of moral superiority. Due to her inculcation, whether from Tumblr browsing or a Saturnian Pansexual Post-Racial Gender Studies liberal arts degree, an SJW has come to believe she is morally righteous, and her foe (men, often) is simply depraved. So you get this certain class of (often unattractive) people lecturing you about how awful you are and how ashamed you need to be for these abstract sins you supposedly commit simply by existing.

These people have never troubled me much, but that’s simply because I’ve never bought into their frame. They can usually tell I operate from a masculine headspace, so often won’t use the direct confrontation approach and instead try to slip their views in through questioning, like:

“But don’t you think it’s wrong that...?”

To which I tend to reply with laughter and an absurdist response.

For instance:

Her: But don’t you think it’s wrong that poor people have to suffer?

Me: [laugh] Of course I don’t think it’s wrong! Are they dying? No! They all have iPhones! These poor suffering poor people all have the latest iPhone model. I still have an iPhone 3G from 2008. Am I supposed to work harder and pay higher taxes so they can have two iPhones?

This is almost always followed up by the girl showing more attraction and escalation windows opening up soon thereafter.

When I was young, these gotcha-style “But don’t you think...?” questions used to make me freeze up. I knew agreeing was not the right answer, because it would make me sound like a woman. But I didn’t know how to disagree without being too much of an asshole.

The solution, I discovered, was just to disagree and amplify the asshole:

Her: But don’t you think equality is a good thing?

Me: [laugh] You mean giving women the vote, so they can vote to tax me more, then use the proceeds to pay other people not to work? That kind of equality?

It doesn’t matter what your actual opinion is, by the way. I don’t really know if women’s suffrage is a good or bad thing. Probably(?) not so great? But I don’t have enough data on it at this point that I have a super firm for-or-against position.

The point is whenever you get a moral high ground play like this, whether it’s a slide-in-the-back-door effort like the “But don’t you think...?” question, or it’s an outright attempt at shaming, like:

“Oh, don’t tell me you like [some personality she thinks is the devil]”

At that moment, you can’t win by agreeing. Because if you agree, all you’ll get is an, “Okay, good.” Like this:

Her: But don’t you think equality is a good thing?

Me: What? Of course I do! Why wouldn’t I think equality is a good thing?

Her: Oh, good. I was scared you were one of those MRA guys for a second there.

When she’s satisfied with your answer but unsatisfied with your masculinity.

You’ve lost. She thought you were dangerous and edgy, but actually you’re just boring and safe.

Exception: if you remain nonchalant, and kind of laugh at her as you respond, you can react this way and still have it be a win. You have to laugh at how silly/paranoid she’s being as you respond though – it can’t be a “Yes, Missus!” type agreement. Again, you would be eating her frame here – she accuses you of something and you laugh her off: “No, that’s ridiculous. You’re ridiculous.” It cannot be nervous laughter, where you’re laughing but she can tell you’re hoping she doesn’t think you are the thing she accused you of being.

The only time (other than the laugh/ridicule plus agreement option) you can agree and get away with it is if your position is MORE extreme than hers. For instance:

Her: But don’t you think equality is a good thing?

Me: No way. I don’t think equality goes far enough. In fact, I think the fact that a government is able to tell us what our rights are and what we can do is a fucking abomination.

That’s agreeing but not agreeing... Because it’s more extreme.

Why do the options that work, work? Why does it work to either dismiss her accusation, or to be more extreme than she is within it?

Because both assert a more dominant frame than hers.

Both give you the moral high ground. Simply agreeing with her does not (and looks instead like you are supplicating).

But What If You Actually Agree...?

What, are you trying to draft a constitutional amendment with this girl?

Or get her into bed?

:D

Generally you should avoid talking politics with women. But some of them just like to bring it up. Especially around election season. So you can’t always avoid it.

The point of talking to a girl you’re courting is not to write the next Magna Carter. It is to flirt. Then, after flirting, it is to take her home and screw her brains out. And perhaps to see her again another time if you and her both like each other.

Whenever anyone attempts to take the moral high ground over you, view it as a hostile act. You must always respond by eating the other person’s frame.

It functions exactly as tooling of any other variety; whoever attempts to seize the moral high ground (tool the other person) first puts himself in the more vulnerable position.

It’s a gamble: if his posturing (tooling) prevails, he gains frame control. If it fails, he loses frame control.

You want the other party to lose here.

After all, she started it.

An Example of How This Works

So for example, if she hits you with a, “But don’t you think...?” or a, “Don’t tell me you’re a...” remark, and you don’t have an answer, or you qualify/defend yourself, or otherwise bow to her frame, you lose frame control and she gains it. But if you eat her frame, she yields frame control to you. Most people can sense when they’ve lost to superior framing and won’t push the issue, so you’ll usually see a topic change after this. For instance:

Her: Wait, you don’t celebrate Thanksgiving, do you?

You: [laugh] Of course I do! What better way to commemorate our heritage and the birth of our nation!

Her: I guess.

You: I assume you don’t plan on turkey tonight. What are you doing instead then?

Her: Well, my family’s all meeting, but I don’t want to go to that. So I’m probably just going to...

And like that you’re off the topic (and you’ve gained more control of the overall frame).

Note: when you get hit with a moral high ground play like this, never answer with a question, because that keeps the topic alive and gives her an opening to retort (because you seem unsure of your answer if you need to ask for approval). Always use statements. e.g., don’t tell her, “Of course I celebrate Thanksgiving! Don’t you?” Instead, just use statements. No questions.

In the event she continues, you need to remove her argument in as non-hostile a way as possible (ideally, something that removes blame from all parties or casts doubt on the blame of the blamed party):

Her: Wait, you don’t celebrate Thanksgiving, do you?

You: [laugh] Of course I do! What better way to commemorate our heritage and the birth of our nation!

Her: But the settlers killed the Native Americans and took their lands.

You: Yeah, look – I don’t know. They killed some of them. 95% of the Native North Americans who died died as a result of European diseases sweeping down and wiping their populations out. This happened before the Europeans had even explored much of the Americas – they found an emptied-out continent in North America due to all the disease deaths. This is probably why the Americas were successfully colonized while places like India and China and Africa never really were – their populations were already too dense and unwelcoming to colonists. Many of the Native Americans intermarried with European settlers. There was warfare, and killing, and both sides attacked each other, but it was the start of our country, and we celebrate both the settlers and the Natives with it. So yeah. It’s a good thing. The tradition is there for a reason. You should lighten up and have some turkey. Want me to get you some turkey? Put some gravy on it and it’s pretty damn awesome.

Note how at the end of it you go back to being playful and even offer to do something for her (even if in jest) to lighten the mood and foster a spirit of cooperation (to get over the divisive feelings she had when challenging you on this).

If she likes you, she will let it drop at this. You’ve made clear you have good reasons, cast doubt on the blame of the disliked party (whether you or, in this case, the American settlers), and ended on a fun, flirty, and conciliatory note. You’re good.

If you don’t know much about the topic (maybe you don’t know much about the history of Thanksgiving), a simpler answer works okay too:

Her: Wait, you don’t celebrate Thanksgiving, do you?

You: [laugh] Of course I do! What better way to commemorate our heritage and the birth of our nation!

Her: But the settlers killed the Native Americans and took their lands.

You: Well, hey – look. I don’t know about all that. Maybe they did or maybe they didn’t, I’d need to go read a bunch of books and get back to you. All I know right now is that Thanksgiving is about eating a lot of turkey and mashed potatoes and hanging out with family members, and I love turkey and mashed potatoes and I have an awesome family, so it’s cool in my book. Seriously, you should have some of my aunt’s mashed potatoes. Want me to save some for you? I promise they don’t taste like dead Native Americans.

Now she can enjoy a delicious meal guilt-free.

The only time I’ve ever had something like this not work out has been when it was some kind of super-issue-obsessed girl who just could not let it go that I did not share her belief system on some core belief of hers. Those girls are extremely rare, and they probably weren’t going to sleep with you whether you kissed their butts on their key issues or not. Girls like meeting men who can intelligently and dominantly overcome their objections.

We’re mostly talking about dealing with curious / inquisitive moral high ground attempts. I won’t talk about addressing outright hostile moral superiority arguments, since I’ve covered that before. If you need that article, you can find it here:

• Using Moral Superiority to Turn Arguments
  

And while it can be powerful tech to use, I recommend you don’t go out and actively look to seize the moral high ground with girls like this (at least not until you really know what you’re doing with them).

It can easily blow up in your face if your frame control (not to mention handle on the subjects being argued) is anything but rock-solid:

You: Oh no, don’t tell me you think communism is a good idea! [laughs]

Her: [very serious] Actually, yes. It’s never been implemented correctly in any of the countries it’s been tried in before. And if you read Karl Marx [21st century American university system pro-communism argument]

You: Ohhh-kay. All right then. Yeah, I guess I’d have to think about that then. Hmm. Soooo anyway...

People often have substantial arguments for their belief systems, and if you aren’t familiar with their arguments or the material they’re arguing, you may have a hard time countering them.

Further, again, giving a girl the chance to go off on a political soapbox when your objective is to date her or sleep with her is... counterproductive, to say the least. You’re either going to lose power here (like the guy in the above example), or you’ll be hopelessly diverted (also like the guy in the above example).

So be real careful with this one. If you’re more advanced and want to play around with it, here are the rules:

• Only do it on things you know or suspect she doesn’t care too deeply about

• Mostly stick to ribbing her on things that are kind of silly (like: she keeps talking about tentacle porn or My Little Pony for some reason)

Always Hold the Moral High Ground

I don’t know if you’ve watched politicians go through scandals over the past decade or so, but the steps are ridiculous:

1. Guy gets caught in scandal
2. Furor erupts in news / media / Internet
3. Guy publicly apologizes, often with crying (“I’m a bad man!”)
4. Guy either steps down or is fired
5. News / media / Internet is smug, still hates guy
6. Guy never works again
   

What does this process get you, if you’re the one who’s attacked by those seizing the moral high ground?

Every time I see some guy get caught in something and start blubbering and begging for forgiveness, I stand there going, “What the hell are you doing, guy? Don’t you realize you’re going to lose everything you have and everyone will hate you?”

All you do when you yield is look like a pussy. No two ways about it. The only way to win is to beat these people at their game – not to throw your hands up and say, “I surrender! Please don’t kill me!”

Bill Clinton gets caught doing all kinds of shady / illegal stuff. Doesn’t apologize, shrugs it off, becomes beloved president. Continues to do more shady stuff and makes buckets of money giving really short speeches on nothing topics to bankers, industrialists, and foreign governments. Lives happily ever after.

David Petraeus and Anthony Weiner (a.k.a. Carlos Danger) both get caught in not-as-bad-as-Clinton scandals, immediately start blubbering and apologizing, lose their jobs, and become persona non grata in their old stomping grounds. No one asks them to give really short speeches for really big payments. Fade away into ignominy.

It’s the way of the world, folks. If you crack under pressure, no one respects you. If you remain firm, people hold you in higher and higher esteem, the longer your resolve holds out.

When she hits you with a moral high ground argument, the way to respond to this is to eat her frame. It isn’t friendly to try and seize the moral high ground over someone else; it’s combative. And when you make her submit to you, frame-wise, she will become much more attracted.

Because this isn’t just another eager-to-please boy she’s come across, who will tell her what she wants to hear for a shot at getting her panties off. This is a MAN.

And men are who she hopes to meet.

So hold steady. Hold firm to your convictions.

And don’t be afraid of being a little contrarian (even with your own usual positions) if she comes at you swinging a little moral high ground attempt.

It’s just a test. And women love to test men.

What they love even more is the men who deal with their tests and show them they can handle a woman.

Happy Thanksgiving,

Chase