Another Game concept is the idea that all women are "hypergamous" which as I understand, can mean several things. Number one, that 80% of all the women only desire (and have sex) with 20% of all men and the rest of the men go without sex which sometimes leads them to commit crimes and atrocities (see my previous post on the topic).
Number two, that all women desire alpha well, sex, and "beta bucks" that is, in their youth they like to fool around with "alphas" who are apparently all penniless losers so that when the women "hit the wall" (at the age of about 30 since they apparently aren't able to reproduce after this age) they suddenly demand bucks from a beta provider.
Number three, after they get married they all desire "to trade up" and will divorce their beta husband at a drop of a hat, to start chasing alphas again (though at the same time we are informed that alphas aren't interested in the "dried up" women after the ripe old age of 35, but whatever).
Now let's look at these claims more closely. The first one is obviously exaggerated as there are plenty of men who could only be described as "gamma" in Gamer terminology who manage to score with women. Of course, these women aren't exactly the "top tier" and I think herein lies the problem because the Red Pill adherents all want to have only 9s and 10s (They rate all women on the scale of 1-10). So the whole 80/20 divide sounds like a projection to me: the men are basically accusing women of trying to get a better deal out of "the sexual market place" while they are desiring the same thing themselves. They also seem to forget that women don't owe strange men sex, either.
Claim number two is somewhat closer to reality, since modern women are taught that they are sexually emancipated many adopt male mating strategy. It's hardly a secret that it used to be pretty much expected of young men to "sow their wild oats" before settling down with a "good girl". However, this is more complicated than some "feminist imperative" dictating women what to do through their "reptilian brain". In our society, women are encouraged to be financially independent so that they don't need to lock a provider husband as quick as possible. Add to this easy availability of birth control and abortion, and illegitimacy carrying no stigma any more and you get the current situation.
As for number three, you can thank the no-fault divorce for the easy way out of marriage for both men and women.
Now many Red Pill adherents openly proclaim that the "traditional patriarchy" was a much better, stable society while on the other hand teaching men to simultaneously avoid marriage and try to bed as many women as possible using "Game" for these purposes. They also blame women for the fact that the society has changed so much. Further on, they claim that in the past women weren't materialistic, every man had plenty of sex on demand, his choice of virginal young hotties to marry and so on and so forth.
How true are these claims? Obviously in the past there was less open sexual promiscuity since it was frowned upon and many girls did marry as virgins or had only one sexual partner whom they married later. However, this means one thing: there was less sex to go around. Of course, there was prostitution and some girls "who did it" but they weren't exactly the cream of the crop. So if something, men used to have less choice of sexual partners than they do now. Plus, chasing skirts as the only objective in life was considered caddish and severely criticised. Men were supposed to have a higher purpose in life than that.
Considering marriage, in Northern Europe both men and women traditionally married at a later age than in the USA or Southern Europe as this post of mine demonstrates. The reason for it was that the man was expected to be capable of providing for his future wife and children and unless he was independently wealthy, it took him some time to get established. The women they married weren't exactly spring chickens, either as the graph shows. Also, the idea that all the women (especially of the lower classes) stayed "young and hot" as opposed to now when we have better nutrition and dental and medical care, is hilarious. Have you ever seen the pictures of these ladies after they got 6+ children? They weren't expected to look like MILFs and they didn't.
Now divorce is really a societal scourge but who is responsible for the current mess? As far as I can gather from what I read in UK, for instance, before no-fault divorce was introduced, the presumed guilty party couldn't even start divorce proceedings. So if the woman abandoned her husband he could divorce her if he so desired, but she couldn't divorce him. Of course, she could live together with some guy but if she had a child he couldn't inherit because he was illegitimate. When UN was founded after the WWII they introduced the Declaration on the Rights of the Child, which among other things, demanded to end the difference in status between children born in wedlock and outside it.
Of course, in 1950s UK illegitimate children got the same rights as all the others. The could go to school, they could get medical help, people weren't exactly throwing stones at them, but they couldn't inherit. So erasing the stigma of illegitimacy was more about destroying the traditional family than helping children. And yet, what do Gamers propose? They teach men not to marry mothers of their children as it gives them a "whip hand" over her. They also want to abolish all the alimony and child support but they seldom talk about abolishing "no-fault" divorce or encouraging women to be housewives which gives men economic power in their marriage.
This all makes me think that they aren't really serious about restoring traditional family at all. Some of them claim that Game used in marriage will stop the wife from divorcing her husband. Divorce is always a disaster so if it can be stopped with some Jedi mind tricks, that's fine with me. However, while it can help some individual man, society on the whole will only change when the laws change. If only all these guys spent so much energy working for a political change as they spend decrying evil Western sluts while simultaneously exchanging tips on how to get them into bed, we'd probably see the revival of Victorian morals by now.
It's really that simple. If you are serious about restoring traditional family there are some changes to be considered, such as making all divorce fault-based with guilty party undergoing some sort of punishment for the breach of contract, reintroducing the distinction in status for children born in and outside wedlock, encouraging married women to be full time homemakers and reinstalling the provision in the family law which makes the husband the head of the family with the financial obligation to provide for his wife and children. Unless it happens, family disintegration will continue, with Game or without it.