Mister Softee

mr_softee

I have friend named Floyd. Floyd is in his early 50’s and spent the better part of his life in the military. He’s in fairly good shape for his age and has the rough, but stoic attitude of a soldier who’s seen actual combat. He doesn’t talk too much about those years, but he is an interesting guy and has a wealth of world-learned experiences that he’s more than ready to let you know about.

Floyd is not what I’d call a Type A personality, but he does have the pragmatic ‘get it done’ personality taught in the military, and he’s prone to being opinionated. At the risk of splitting hairs again, I’d definitely say he’s Alpha, but in a subdued, matter-of-fact, self-evident sense rather than the stereotypical in-your-face douchey Alpha caricature most beta chumps like to associate it with. Being a Man comes natural to him, and his expressions (or non-expressions) of such irritates the betas we know – but in a passive sense rather than an aggressive one. Just being who he is, often enough, gets eye rolls from our more plugged in friends.

Unfortunately Floyd’s Game-ignorant. After his discharge, he followed the ex-military formula for marriage by getting involved with a very domineering woMAN who promptly got ‘accidentally’ pregnant 12 years ago. They have a son whom they share custody of, the divorce not being final until last year. For all his Alpha cred, he followed the ‘do the right thing’ script right up until the finalization of his divorce. In the military, he was ostensibly a badass; with his ex he was always trying to find a solution to her problems with a rational ‘get the job done’ approach. He didn’t see the method behind her madness then, he does now.

Since the finalization Floyd has gotten together with a new girlfriend, Ann, who is the polar opposite of his ex. Against my advice he’s moved her into his home, but the bright side of this arrangement is that Floyd has learned the importance of maintaining Frame with her. Maintaining Frame with Ann isn’t too difficult for him as she’s about a point below Floyd in SMV. She’s not unattractive, but Ann loves Floyd because he takes care of business like the Alpha  her ex never was.

I was hanging out with Floyd last weekend and the conversation got around to how unlikely it was that Ann would get with a hard ass like Floyd. She say, “Oh that’s just his schtick, he’s really a big softee. Underneath all that he’s really a sweet guy.”

The Scripting

Now I realize these are the words of a 48 year old woman who’s vested interest and second chance at long term security are in my tough-guy friend, but it struck me that no matter how genuine a Man can be in his personality, no woman wants to accept a personality that is incongruent with her own imperative.

The main reason for this is rooted in women’s innate solipsism. If the reality doesn’t fit with her interpretation, rationalize the reality to force fit it to that interpretation. The nuts and bolts of it is that Floyd represents a valuable prospect at a second chance for provisioning. Floyd is not an overly emotional or emotionally available guy, but to reconcile the wish that he would be, Ann must tacitly endorse that he is; “you just don’t know him like I know him.”

A lot of freshly unplugged guys have trouble accepting Game as being anything more than an act – a series of behaviors meant to elicit a response in a woman, and once she’s been attracted they can go back to their regularly scheduled personality. They rely on rote memorization instead of learning and internalizing Game. What a lot more don’t understand is that even in their blue pill Beta Game days they also followed a similar ‘acting’.

This acting is encouraged in much the same way as Ann was attempting to distort her own reality. As with most women, they fall in love with a dichotomy; they want a sweet guy, who’s tough and gets shit done. If one of these aspects is out of balance her rationalization engine (i.e. Hamster) will make subconscious attempts to compensate for it in her words and beliefs. “I want a sweet guy with a good heart” is boilerplate for the feminine imperative because it ‘sounds right’. Men hear this and ‘act’ on it in the deductive belief that it will endear him to women in general.

The greater truth is that, for all the conflicting messages about men needing to get in touch with their feminine sides, and then men need to Man-Up, your personality is still going to be rationalized to fit a woman’s psychological ideal.

Upping the Alpha Doesn’t Mean Offing the Empathy

I think too many critics in the manosphere believe that the underlying message is about men needing to kill off the emotional, sentimental or impassioned aspects of their personalities. I would never advocate this. Firstly because I don’t think it’s entirely possible, but more importantly, you shouldn’t have to. No man should lessen himself or his human experience to accommodate the feminine imperative.

When I wrote Kill the Beta people assumed I meant that doing so would also include killing of the better parts of their  personalities. Beta is a mindset in the same way Alpha is. You can be an emotional Alpha, and women will swoon, but be an emotional Beta and you’re doomed to feminine pity. Emotions and passions only reinforce a self-defeating loop for a Beta mindset, but in careful, self-controlled measure they strengthen an Alpha mindset.

The problem is in the measure. Most Betas, raised from birth to believe that women want a “sweet man with a good heart”, build a personality around that message. Thus we have several generations of men trying to out “sweet” one another. In the end of The Game Neil Strauss worried that PUA practitioners would turn into “emotional robots”; men only aping the behaviors that have value in their getting laid and not genuinely emotional. I think his worries are unfounded, because most men of the last generations have such a foundation of ‘being in touch with their emotions’ the issue is more about the self-control necessary to maintain that emotionalism.

Upping the Alpha doesn’t mean offing the empathy. Game doesn’t mean learning sociopathy – it means learning control of one’s psychology. Most Betas find themselves miserable because they’ve been raised to believe that self-expression and open communication of emotions are the keys to successful living with women. It’s interesting that for all the understanding about how women are wired for emotion and men are wired for reason that it should be the men of the last generations who are more emotionally expressive than any preceding generation.

Guys like Floyd aren’t any less emotional or compassionate or sentimental, they simply know the value in controlling their more ephemeral aspects. They know when to apply it and when to withhold it. They know the reward value a rare display of emotion means to women who want to write their own script for the Man they’re in love with.


89 responses to “Mister Softee

  • Anna

    Many good points in this one.

    I’ve seen hordes of women who try and change how their boyfriends/husbands are, from the way they speak and dress to what they perceive as “fun” on a Saturday night. It’s even worse when I look at the men I know in the gaming community…sell your PS3 (only “boys” play videogames), get rid of your D&D stuff (nobody wants to date a nerd), stop going to conventions like Gencon/Origins (shouldn’t you want to be with your woman, instead of your friends).

    Honestly, I see these poor menfolk everyday at my gaming store…it’s enough to make a cat sick. I understand that there may be things the woman is also giving up to make the relationship work, but I sincerely doubt she is changing her very lifestyle the way her man is “required” to do.

    Which brings me to my question; What is the point of Game, if it makes you out to be someone different from who you are? Wouldn’t it be better to simply teach Beta men that they are fine people already, and that they only need more confidence and the ability to say “This is ME, take it or leave it, but I’m NOT changing!”?

    Just Be Yourself

    The Ballad of Clark Kent

  • Stingray

    They know the reward value a rare display of emotion means to women who want to write their own script for the Man they’re in love with.

    The reward is huge. A man like Floyd does not show his emotions to just anyone. Not many people, especially women, are going to get much more than a tiny glimpse of the “big softy”. Getting the reward of more than a glimpse makes a woman, somehow a special snowflake. We swoon for this . . . until the “big softy” overflows with emotion and then we lose interest.

    When a man doesn’t show the emotion to us, we are just another person. Then he shows a bit, meaning he is pulling us into his world or pulling us up to his level, but we are not at his level. He is holding us beneath him but with him still. If he continues to outpour the emotion on a regular basis, he then puts us above him on a pedestal and that is when we lose interest. If the man can keep us under his umbrella by giving us some emotion, but not put us above him he will turn into our “big softy”.

  • M3

    “no woman wants to accept a personality that is incongruent with her own imperative.

    The main reason for this is rooted in women’s innate solipsism.”

    I assume this is also the same motif when a woman exclaims that the dude she’s with i really an awesome guy deep down, all the while you’re telling her that she didn’t just accidentally hit the wall with her face.

    I used to believe the hamsterization and verbalization of any variant of ‘he’s just a xxxxx, you’re just not around to see it’ was always a face saving/status protection mechanism. No girl wants to be known as the girl who chose stupidly (the male variant being ‘but she treats me so well and she’s so different from all those other girls, shes not with me just because im rich”

    so how far does the imperative go to blinding? how deep does the solipsism go? do they *truly* believe the words coming out of their mouths at the time when telling others ‘oh hes X, you just never Y’.. because im sure a woman getting beaten in the face at the time actually knows her man ain’t a big ol’softy.

    I think it’s more delusion, burying the truth and creating an alternate reality. And once the relationship finally ends, and the dirt starts to sift.. all those rationalizations disappear and she’ll finally unleash all the ‘how could i have been so stupid’ ‘what did i see in him’ ‘how could i let him treat me that way’ etc…

  • don julian

    Floyd is not an overly emotional or emotionally available guy, but to reconcile the wish that he would be, Ann must tacitly endorse that he is; “you just don’t know him like I know him.”

    brilliant, thanks for this, a lot of things make more sense now

  • taterearl

    “They know the reward value a rare display of emotion means to women who want to write their own script for the Man they’re in love with.”

    And therein lies the difference…when a woman earns a man’s emotions they are of great value to her. If she gets them off the bat from a guy just because she happened to notice his existence…it means very little. Girls want displays of love from guys they respect.

    If there is one good thing about years of beta-ness is that I’ve had good practice to know what it is…but now I dispense it on my schedule when the woman shows some investment. For now I have to keep on the alpha train to have that as the default personality.

  • JS

    What we now call Frame was in previous centuries called honor. Men were very protective of their honor, knew the importance of maintaining it, and were always on guard against–and would not suffer–slights to it. Men knew not to challenge another man’s honor and could expect a violent reprisal if he did.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    What was really funny that I left out was Floyd’s response to “He’s really a sweet guy.”

    Straight face deadpan and in all seriousness,

    “No, I’m not.”

  • Erudite Knight

    It is tragic seeing a alpha man broken. I had two good friends, one was a MMA fighter, and the other a playboy with a new girl every month, both dominate in getting girls. Then they each got a ‘dominate’ girl in the picture who promptly broke them down in servile betas. The girls are not hot, and are bitches.

    I use their example of what not to do.

  • Team-Red

    The best thing to do is to avoid women that are like that. There are tells very early on in the dating process you can pick up on if a woman is dominating, bossy, and should be avoided in getting involved with. Some guys like a woman that leads and it usually comes to bite them in the ass months or years later. My advice if you do get involved with a woman like this is to never give an inch, and maintain frame at all costs. Once there is a crack in the armor she will penetrate it and break you down bit by bit. A man is better just moving on and finding a submissive woman rather than deal with a type A woman.

  • NeotheLeo

    I agree with Team-Red. Is any woman worth constant “gaming”? I think not.

  • taterearl

    I had to deal with a dominating, bossy woman with a weekend work trip a couple weeks ago. Even with all my frame, game knowledge, and staying dominate…I was wore out by the end of the weekend.

    I can’t imagine having to do that day in and day out for years in a marriage.

  • greenlander

    dude, I can only say that you write an awesome blog.

  • pantyfx

    Your story isn’t just women – it’s life.

    People will call you whatever they need to justify your existence in their lives.

    It’s then you’ll realize you can be _ANYBODY_.

    Enjoyed it Rollo.

  • Sundance

    “The nuts and bolts of it is that Floyd represents a valuable prospect at a second chance for provisioning.”

    I’m suspect “provisioning” is a minor concern for many gals looking for mates these days. I believe this is why the bad-boy, douche with swagga is very much on the menu with chicks (sadly) even with many wel past prime gals. They don’t need or particularly desire a responsible breadwinner.

    Also most women have some sort of career supporting them by the time they are in their 30’s, yet they often still seek a stable relationship. They desire a monogamous relationship which satisfies a host of needs/wants. I’m sure provisioning is in the mix but I think overall contentment is what she appears to be after from my read of it.

  • FuriousFerret

    “Being a Man comes natural to him, and his expressions (or non-expressions) of such irritates the betas we know – but in a passive sense rather than an aggressive one. Just being who he is, often enough, gets eye rolls from our more plugged in friends.”

    I believe this comes from having to stare into the mirror of their SWPL souls and having the instinctive knowledge that they are effeminate males which is replusive to our innate pyschology. They have to validate their SWPLness and are irritated by the other man ‘not playing by the rules’.

  • driversuz

    Floyd sounds like a Wolf Alpha – hardness and softness in balance. Unfortunately this makes him a good target for predatory females.

  • SomeChick

    “Upping the Alpha doesn’t mean offing the empathy. Game doesn’t mean learning sociopathy – it means learning control of one’s psychology.”

    This.

  • 3rd Millenium Men

    “I think too many critics in the manosphere believe that the underlying message is about men needing to kill off the emotional, sentimental or impassioned aspects of their personalities. I would never advocate this.”

    True Rollo. It’s first and foremost about maintaining control in the relationship, ensuring women look up to you. You can demonstrate those other attributes from time to time, so long as you continue to be in control.

  • The Shocker

    You know, most of what constitutes an alpha isn’t how he relates with women, but how he stands in relation with other men. In fact, even looking at alpha as this intrinsic thing (while feel-good for the myopic crowd here) is very limited.

    Alpha is relational between men, whether it’s two friends or a group. The reason no single definition of alpha exists is that you can have a marginal alpha nerd amongst two nerds, or you could have a natural who exhibits the intrinsic qualities frequently discussed in case studies like these who is the ineluctable beta next to a better specimen. You can ask any woman to identify the dominant guy in a group and they can tell you- and it’s a larger factor in determining their buying temperature than the man-&-woman PUA narrative represents. PUA allows for shortcuts, and circumventing the fact that a man is not a consistent alpha is one of these.

    Intrinsic alpha qualities correlate with alpha standing though is less successful in practice than proscribed. I mean, how is it so frequently possible that woman, who does not study alpha, who does not hone her intrinsic qualities described by the community, so frequently come to dominate their partner?

    I find there are two strategies in interpersonal argument, arguing through social domineering and arguing through arrival at the truth. Intelligent people gravitate towards articulating the truth as they see it or as it is useful, though intelligent people often develop social domineering skills as well since they are the more effective (especially around unreceptive audiences like women or the intoxicated). Social tactics are more efficient and determine social standing in a direct way (something nerds learn to avoid). A dark truth is that’s totally okay to be wrong as long as you’ve won through social tactics and make the other reason how to re-assert themselves- women do this all the time. The exact opposite of what truth-seekers prefer.

    For example, there is a level at which a man identifies with alpha standing and develops strategies to undermine others and really commit to being unassailable- this often involves behavior distasteful to most men, especially intelligent men. How exactly does an alpha react to status checks? Does he pirouette out gracefully, or make a joke? Or does he employ two-eyes-for-an-eye and escalate so that you learn not to challenge him? Tyler Durden ‘spikes’ this behavior when a chick’s friend challenges him- it’s not natural to a genetic beta like him. It’s just one example though important- the game community doesn’t discuss man-on-man or man-on-men alpha tactics because it’s gay.

    It’s a fantasy to think the intellectual or truth-seeker is intrinsically- or frequently in a relational context- the alpha. Like Dr. King Schultz in Django- it’s the fantasy of a nerd like Tarantino that logic, reason and truth-seeking will triumph in interpersonal conversation even against southern neanderthals. Venues for being smart rarely exist in society, and with women you have to win them over through social tactics before you get to impress her with your truth-seeking frame (which is just a data-point in her book, a datapoint of intelligent seed). So the enthusiastic truth-seeking that often occurs in these forums, it’s intrinsic merits aside, is symptomatic of people reacting to their low status or low SMV in the face of a cascade of content from our host that a pathway towards high SMV is possible. Not very far from a guy in LA talking about his Lambo or buying shots even though he knows it’s wrong, it’s people flexing what they do have in the face of failure. The social status dynamic y’all delight in is simply emergent.

    It’s like how I destroyed AB Dada. I don’t know why I didn’t mention this earlier, but I was the trolls that embarrassed him and finally got that clown to leave. While there was some truth-seeking, it was the successful social domineering tactic of labeling him as a pathological liar (which he is), and pranking him under pseudonyms like Jesus and his own name which he failed to recover from that neutered him. Until you all internalize social tactics you will not frequently be the alpha in a social context, and you will not know alpha.

  • The Other Jim

    Anna wrote: “Which brings me to my question; What is the point of Game, if it makes you out to be someone different from who you are? Wouldn’t it be better to simply teach Beta men that they are fine people already, and that they only need more confidence and the ability to say “This is ME, take it or leave it, but I’m NOT changing!”?”

    I thought part of Game was negotiating Shit Tests from women properly?

    One of the finest compliments a man will ever receive is when his girlfriend shrugs in frustration and says something to the effect of, “I’m so pissed, I can’t change you…”

    At that point a man should look her in the eye and state very clearly, “Yes, so either help or get out of the way…”

    Most women will start to make a break for it, the one’s that stick around might, just might be keepers.

  • Not Carrie Bradshaw

    Interesting post. To me, game represents not just mimicking alpha traits but internalising them to the point of actually being alpha – not just to get women, but to succeed in life generally. I have come across this saying many times but it never gets old – get your own house in order and everything else would fall into place. There is nothing more off-putting to women (and everyone else for that matter) when a man tries to obtain the spoils or rewards of success when his “house” is falling apart around him.
    To me, alpha means exhibiting and internalising traits that come from a position of strength – directness, honesty, etc strength that comes from perfecting your many skills and abilities (-ie you don’t need to be underhand or deceptive to get things done or get what you want).

    Which comes back to the point that when Alpha men show traits of sensitivity such as tears, it does not take away the fact that he is a man of strength. To me, it means he is strong enough not to worry about how his tears will be perceived. If you need to worry about how you are being perceived, then you are probably not alpha.

  • anotheronetakesthepill

    m3: “so how far does the imperative go to blinding? how deep does the solipsism go?”

    I think it’s connected to the tingles. Once they disappear (easier to achieve by a beta man) there comes the reality check

  • AlphaBeta

    “Upping the Alpha doesn’t mean offing the empathy. Game doesn’t mean learning sociopathy – it means learning control of one’s psychology”

    American women, of course, deserve the sociopath

  • Westcoaster

    A litte off-topic here, but wondering what Rollo thought of the Manti T’eo “online dead/fake girlfriend” hoax that has flooded the media. Toss the lying and cover-ups away, the one big question that only CBS sports radio has asked is, “Why does a big, testosterone, All-American football star at Notre Dame need an online girlfriend?” One radio jock went on to talk about the hoardes of beautiful women on campus and how men should not be tied down at this age let alone an All-American football player. He was not afraid to say this last night, he went off, it was great.

    I went to a small college with small-time sports and even the third-string football players were getting amazing chicks.

    This is wrong on so many levels, but the first question is, “Really? Manti T’eo couldn’t find like 100 hot chicks at Notre Dame?”

  • Emma the Emo

    Hmm, I always wondered why women who date, for example, violent men, often say “he’s nice, really” or some version of that. It really does look like wishful talking. Or a way to protect the guy from white knights who can start to white knight the abused woman.

  • ylam

    Shocker, why did you destroy AB Dada?

  • Martel

    @Emma: It probably has to do with solipsistic selective memory.

    First, she likes Alpha, and the capacity for violence demonstrates that as much as anything. Second, take the frame of Rollo’s post here, the she wants to think her guy is a sweetheart, that she could only love a guy with all those soft, endearing traits. Third, there probably was one time in early 2010 when the violent dude he looked deep into her eyes and said, “You’re so beautiful. I’m so lucky I found you.”

    The Hamster now has his energy-pellet, and it’s enough to keep that wheel spinning for years. He’s Alpha every day, and treats his abused dog far better than he treats her, but there was a time when she saw that special side of him that only she was able to earn. Therefore, all the people telling her to leave him “don’t know him like I do”; only she knows the real him.

    Apparently, as Anne Bolelyn was waiting to have her head chopped off at the behest of Henry VIII, she continually referred to the time after they first met when once she made him cry. Even though he almost beat the shit out of her for having a miscarraige right after it happened, Anne believed he really wasn’t that bad of a guy and that he was going to reprieve her right up until the moment the axe struck her neck.

  • L.V.X.

    Fact remains: the easiest job in the world is to have a vagina in America.

  • Ace Haley

    I know this is off-topic and maybe even disappointing to hear but Tiger Woods…The guy’s trying to convince his ex-wife to marry him again. This after she chased him around with a golf club, smashed his windscreen, thereby making him lose balance, and then took away a hefty sum from him to exact revenge.

    This is a man at the top of his profession. Hell, he IS his profession. He can have any woman he wants (even after the divorce) yet this is the behavior he resorts to. I personally don’t know what to make of that

  • Ace Haley

    @LVX: Damn straight. On a different matter but kinda related, having a penis is harder than a lot of people think, no pun intended.

    It’s like having 2 completely different people sharing the same body. One wants to be rational but the other just wants to go in whenever. You have to calm it down or it’ll have you doing some crazy shit. It doesn’t care about paying 18+ years for child support even if that’s not the most beneficial thing to the man. It doesn’t care if it ruins a man’s life. It keeps a man in the game even when the man knows a chick is putting him through too many hoops. It keeps him in the game even when the girl has given him signs she doesn’t want him hence what you see with orbiters.

    Push comes to shove and the little head tells the big head what to do. Look at all these women benefiting ($$$$) from pro athletes who apparently didn’t know any better than to wrap it up.

  • BC

    Shocker, why did you destroy AB Dada?

    Because shocker and his ilk have delusions of SocialKenny?

  • L.V.X.

    Haha yeah and as my father’s best friend Mike wrote in his yearbook their senior year: “Remember, only one head’s meant for thinking”.

    I was around 12 years old when I read that; my father said it would make sense when I was older.

    Problem is, our penile hamsters may be as strong as the womynz vulva’s wheels rotary. However, we rationalize what’s bad for us – like shitty relationships, bitchy women, emotional abuse, self-destruction for the sake of love, etc… They just tend to rationalize what benefits them – like shitty relationships, bitchy men, emotional abuse, provoking self-destructive behavior in men they ‘love’, etc…And the victor’s always the woman ’til the man finds a new one to pit his experience against, as she wins by nature of having a vagina. End of every story. Birth of every plight.

    No wonder Milton hated women & was hellbent on writing Paradise Lost (skip that epic and jump straight to Don Juan if you want any sense of entertainment); too bad Swedenborg didn’t have the same effect on Blake – though at least he was happy in his homemade Garden of Eden with an Eve of his own. I just wonder if William, while sitting naked in the garden with her in accord with lore, accepted the fact that she’d offer him an apple too, and if he’d eat it with a passive poesy’s delighted smirk. An insane one, I imagine, given that he didn’t really sleep, again according to lore.

    Shouldn’t the saying be: takes the apple and bites it too; or, eats the apple and offers it to you (instead of takes the cake and eats it too)?

    I wrote a very long tangential diatribe about how women have no right to complain in America. But, as a man, I have no right to give women the ability to claim they have a right to complain. So I must confess, we’re all humans, but beneath that first fatal flaw lies the fact that most of us are pretty shitty examples of what possibilities we admire may exist were we able to actually actively pursue what we know is right vs. what we pretend is OK. And jarringly much of those issues do stem from gender dimorphism & ethnocentric disillusionment. Where America’s dream is best pretended to exist, and even in dream American’s can hardly resist the temptation of allowing themselves to abide by it’s veiled pretense.

    Only in America does the Future pre-exist: written by proselytized hands paid to puppeteer the masses for a competitive wage cut by taxes. Ah! I just say so much Nothing it’s hard for me to even find a truth in what I say.

    But, seriously, I tend to be serious when I least expect it. And men aren’t given enough credit for their ability to think automatically with two brains, one being tripartite and overflowing with excitation, the other being purely pleasure-release driven & excited consistently careless of resultant consequences, and on top of that actually remain stoically morally acceptable on the whole, despite a few bad apples who were eaten too.

    So we all, men and women, are rendered nearly retarded by nature of our reproductive organs pending stimulation. What gives!

  • Anna

    @L.V.X.

    It just means that we both need to be aware and cognizant of the power our clitoral/penile heads have over our more logic driven ones. Once this is acknowledged, men and women alike can make more rational (albeit less pleasurable) decisions about their sexuality.

  • HUMAN

    But we all are aware of that. And the lack of pleasure assumed by accepting such a stance would make Caligula or Ilāh hag-Gaba donate their testes to a Christian laymen.

    I guess, what I mean, is that this is all just common knowledge, experienced daily, and I don’t see anyone or anything – Game, PUA, MGTOW, etc…- capable of doing anything beyond describing the phenomena they observe. And only those who are happy with themselves and have a life built up for them (by all appearances) are to be the Voices that are heard.

    Anyways, we all are evolved or devolved versions of our Self seeking pleasure, despite any arguments against that truth.

    So, who can be a commanding authority on what Pleasure-seeking is acceptable, and what pleasure-seeking is detrimental? That’s probably the main issue.

  • gregg

    I have written this several times but I have to repeat it. Sense of manhood is so pathetically linked (BY DESIGN) to pussy that all this manosphere knowledge has (in the real world) limited room to operate.

    Unless men can define themselves by values outside vagina, they reamin slaves. Despite all the informations, men are moving about the floor in semi comatose state and crawling into vagina. Most men are (by design) able of becoming total slaves to women no matter how many informations they have.

    This endless writing about “how to be ..ehm .. alpha (aka SLAVE), how to monkey – dance to get laid, what to do to be worthy of pussy, etc.” actually proves one thing – men are deprived of their peace of mind unless they have their manhood CONFIRMED by women. Unless men find a way to be emotionally stable and happy without women, there is no chance of changing anything except of using FEAR and government power to deprive women af all their rights so that women NEED men to survive and pathetic slaves – aka men have their confirmation.

    Paradox is that if men do manage to find their peace of mind without women, they will naturally stop monkey-dancing for women and withdraw all unnecessary attention from women. Given this, women would panic and DO WHAT is necessary to have men – their slaves (resources, security, etc) back. If it means to be “nice and feminine” they will do that.

  • Anna

    @Human
    I would say the only authority on what pleasure seeking is acceptable/detrimental is yourself. Obviously if your pleasure seeking becomes THE source of all motivation in your life, that is a sign of addiction…other than that, if you aren’t harming yourself/others, you need to pay good attention to your wants/needs and satisfy them as best you can at the time. (I’m talking about only sexual pleasure seeking here…I realize pleasure can be had from helping others/completing a challenge/etc.)

    @Gregg
    That’s what I’ve heard from some of my more open customers. It’s one thing to LEARN game…another thing entirely to want to use it/be capable of using it. No man/woman should ever have to feel validated by how much or how little sex they’ve had. If you’ve got a clit, you’re a woman. If you’ve got a penis, you’re a man. **

    It doesn’t matter if you’ve had 0 partners or 200…None of that experience or prowess will change what sex you are, or what you’re capable of as a sentient being. Do we all have sexual urges? Pretty much. But it’s one thing to acknowledge the basic human need for intimacy/touch, and another to let it become the definition of who you are.

    Personally, I don’t need any ONE man. I care deeply for my lover, and certainly appreciate what the men and women in my society have wrought to allow me to get a job, pay my bills, have a home, etc. But I know many others of my sex (and some men as well) live solely to leech off this same society…and appear to be fine with not giving anything back. To me, this is unacceptable, but I’m not sure if things would change in quite the way you detail above, Gregg. I feel it would take more to create true equality in Western society. Perchance we could hear from others in regard to this topic?

    **Yes, I realize there are intersexed/hermaphrodite people. I believe they should make the choice of what sex they are before any unnecessary surgery takes place…same as I feel that male babies should not be automatically circumcised.

  • xsplat

    American women, of course, deserve the sociopath

    To which Bronan25 at http://bronanthebarbarian.com/2012/11/08/fly-fresh-and-barbaric-presents-manospambots/ would reply that we’ve come across a particular type of spambot. The:

    AmericanGirlsSuckBot

    While there is a general agreement that gender relations are kind of fucked up in America and that there a lot of women acting like slobs around here, AmericanGirlsSuckBot takes that shit to a whole ‘nother level. Everything that is wrong with this country can be laid at the feet of women. Every American chick is fat, every American chick is a ballbusting cunt, and every American girl dresses like a dude. When one rejects you, she is an ungrateful bitch. Fact.

    Similar to SlutsAreEvilBot, this bot has never once met an American girl that was worthy of his sought after attention. They’re all shit. All of them. And you should expat yesterday. Try and dispute this with your own experience or the experiences of countless other dudes you know, and you’re in for a world of annoying text. One would think that these bots use all of this to excuse their failures, but that would be too obvious, it can’t be that.

    We’re not going to dispute that there are a lot of fucked up fatass chicks out there,or deny there are plenty of cunts out there- that would be false. We’re not even trying to defend them, but come on, there are plenty of cool, non bitchy, sexy, man pleasing chicks out there as well. We have been with plenty of them. But here’s the catch: You have to, you know, be attractive yourself in order to get one. AmericanGirlsSuckBot’s insistence upon continued blanket statements about American women in comment threads, regardless of topic, reveal more about him than American women.

  • taterearl

    “Given this, women would panic and DO WHAT is necessary to have men – their slaves (resources, security, etc) back. If it means to be “nice and feminine” they will do that.”

    Start by getting them all off hormonal birth control. Those things turn women into the monsters we see today.

  • Anna

    @Taterearl

    That probably wouldn’t do very much, unfortunately. While there are side effects with hormonal based birth control (which includes the patch, ring, pill and shot), the majority of side effects are not mood related.

    In users who experience side effects, they most often report the following;
    -headaches
    -nausea
    -dizziness
    -loss of appetite
    -mild mood swings
    -spotting
    -increased or decreased libido
    -mild cramping
    -breast tenderness

    Most users also report that these side effects either greatly decrease and/or vanish after the 3rd-5th month of using the same type of birth control. Changing type or dosage seems to exasperate the problems in some users for a short time.

    Also, an interesting fact I found out recently is that about 15% of ALL hormonal birth control using women don’t even use it to prevent pregnancy. These 1.6 million women use it to treat various disorders, which would otherwise lead to endomyopic pregnacies, moderate-severe vomiting/mood swings during her period, early menopause, certain types of infertility and a host of other issues.

    Among users who did not exclusively use it for these reasons, 58% said they used it to prevent pregnancy AND to take care of medical problems. That means that relatively few women are just using hormonal methods for “birth control”. So…we probably won’t be seeing many women who would give up this specific medication without a hell of a fight.

    I think that we should be concentrating on creating a male-oriented “pill” instead, which should help lead to a more equitable sexual marketplace. Of course, barrier methods will still have to be used to prevent the spread of STDs…

  • taterearl

    “That probably wouldn’t do very much, unfortunately. While there are side effects with hormonal based birth control (which includes the patch, ring, pill and shot), the majority of side effects are not mood related.”

    Really…you are telling me affecting a woman’s hormones chemically won’t affect her mood. Because a woman’s natural state is that her mood is affected by hormones.

  • Anna

    @Taterearl

    What? No…did you read everything I wrote?

    I just said that the MAJORITY of side effects are not mood related. If you read my list above, there are 9 common side effects…only 1 is mood related (mild mood swings). Our hormones control a heck of a lot more than just a man or woman’s mood, lol.

    Besides a man’s androcycle occurs quite a few times a day, a woman’s menstrual cycle only occurs for 3-6 days out of a month. (Unless she has PMS, which is a very unfortunate condition.)

    As someone who took the Pill for 3 months just to see what it was like, I can honestly say that I only experienced 2 of the 9 side effects; Breast tenderness and increased libido (and that’s saying something!). Not every person has the same chemical makeup in their brain/body, so no…not every woman is going to have mood changes.

    And without going into TMI territory, I will tell you that I personally only experience weight gain during my “monthlies”. I’ve never had mood swings, cramps, bloating, PMS, and all those other things that 98% of women seem to complain about. Just lucky to be a high T woman, I guess.

  • Anna

    @Taterearl

    Here’s a really nice picture of all the glands that are responsible for the creation of hormones in the human body. As you can see, there are many different ones. Some regulate mood, yes…but others regulate puberty, metabolism, circadian rhythms, menopause/andropause, flight or fight response, etc.

    Can you tell I loved biology in school? Lol

  • FuriousFerret

    “@Taterearl
    What? No…did you read everything I wrote?
    I just said that the MAJORITY of side effects are not mood related.

    LOL.

    Taterearl, did you not listen? Geez, when princess says something you’re not supposed to question. She said that the pill doesn’t do it so that must be what the truth is. Pay attention next time man.

    LOL.

  • BA

    Totally OT, the photo makes that David Lee Roth song about the Ice Cream Man, begin playing in my head.

    I’m your ice cream man, stop me when I’m passin by……

  • JS

    Anna wrote: “Which brings me to my question; What is the point of Game, if it makes you out to be someone different from who you are?”

    Seems to me that there are 3 levels here. There are ones values: your sense of right and wrong. This will not attract or repulse women so you can keep them as you are. Then there is your personality: your tastes, your likes and dislikes, your hobbies. This won’t attract or repulse women either, so you don’t have to change this. In fact, often if she likes you she will come to adopt your tastes; if you like hiking and you get a girlfriend she will some to like hiking, or your taste in movies or anything else. On top of this there is your attitude or frame. Now this does attract or repulse women, so you should adjust it accordingly, but this doesn’t really amount to changing yourself. In fact, it more amounts to a refusal to change yourself or be afraid of being who you are.

  • Anna

    @FuriousFerret

    Very funny. “Princess”? Yeah, right! Wouldn’t be caught dead with that sort of mindset.

    Taterearl pointed out that I said the MAJORITY of side effects from using hormonal birth control are not mood related…and made it sound like I said NONE of them are, when in fact I did include it.

    I was simply wondering if he had read my entire comment, or if he’d stopped at the 1st of my 6 paragraphs. That is all. I’m not trying to be confrontational, but if he DIDN’T read anything past the initial paragraph I could easily see where he would be confused.

    I also think you’re messing with me a bit, but that’s another topic, eh? Lol

  • Anna

    @JS

    Thank you for your answer, it was quite helpful.
    However, I’m unsure of why you think that morals and personality are not attractors/repulsors. I realize I’m not of a feminine mindset, but surely this isn’t always the case…

    If you’ve the time, can you expand on this a bit more?

  • taterearl

    I don’t much care about the bodily side effects of birth control. They are bad enough that I don’t know what woman would want that poison in their body…my point was to say the mood and hormonal changes are the worst part side effect of birth control. They change you completely.

    They change your view on what men you find attractive. Most notably…the guys that act more beta you are more attracted to on that stuff. The minute you get off the pill you are more attracted to alphas.

  • Anna

    @Taterearl

    It’s not “poison”, it’s birth control for about 42% of users, and medicine (or a combination thereof) for the other 58%. Some unfortunate women would have very poor quality of life without these products.

    Be that as it may, I’ve not come across any studies that show differences in attraction values while on hormonal “birth control” products. As I said, I personally only experienced increased libido and breast tenderness while taking them for 3 months, and I only did it as a experiment to see what (if any) changes I’d notice.

    I was in the 4th year of my relationship with my lover. During my time on the pill, I did not find him (or other males) more OR less attractive, though I was more aware of their natural scent/pheromones. Now, 2 years later, I still feel the same about him.

    I’m willing to accept that some women DO experience the sort of changes you describe. Again, we are all different people…individuals can have different reactions to the same product/food/medicine/allergens/etc. Also, we only covered this topic for 3 weeks (6 classes) in my Human Sexuality course. We certainly didn’t cover EVERYTHING I about this topic in those 18 hours.

    If you know of a study by a reputable institute, university or hospital that backs up your claims, please let me know. I will gladly read it and accept what you say. (Not to mention pass the information on to my mother and younger sisters, who take “birth control” for medical reasons.)

  • YaReally

    “your personality is still going to be rationalized to fit a woman’s psychological ideal.”

    There’s an old PUA saying that goes something like: “Before a woman has sex with you, she’ll look for any reason NOT to. After she’s had sex with you, she’ll look for any reason to justify having sex with you.”

    It’s 100% true and it’s why it’s VERY easy to go from fuckbuddy to girlfriend…because she’s looking FOR shit that would justify her being with you so you just throw her a few pebbles of boyfriendy behavior and her hamster goes “yes!!! I knew he wasn’t a player, I don’t sleep with players, he’s really a Nice Guy which is what I consciously believe I want despite my sub-conscious behavior!”

  • Anna

    @YaReally

    Ewww. That’s rather pathetic.
    I think that if you need to pull reasons/justifications out of your ass every time you sleep with someone, well…maybe you’re not mature enough to be having sex.

    Sex is great. I love having sex. It can be an intimate bonding experience, a casual way to get rid of frustrations, a chance to engage in power exchange, or a playful bit of fun between mates. If you constantly need to rationalize it before and/or after…I’d say you are doing it wrong.

    But that’s just me.

  • ImmoralGables

    @Anna

    Wow thank you so much for your insightful comment! You add way more value here than YaReally ever would and after reading your comment, I am now totally convinced that not all women are like that.

    Sincerely,

    No One

  • Rollo Tomassi

    @Anna, wasn’t sure if you’d noticed these links I attached to your first post but, these will help you understand the Just Be Yourself social convention:

    Just Be Yourself

    The Ballad of Clark Kent

  • Anna

    Okay…?
    I’m not sure what prompted such high levels of sarcasm, but whatever. Have a pleasant day.

    P.S.- I sincerely doubt I could add more value to a conversation than YaReally. For one thing, he probably comments a lot more. For another, he likely deals with womenfolk a hell of a lot more than I do, and thus can see (or be the recipient of) more bullshit than myself.
    I still stick by my opinion that anyone who acts that way is an immature moron.

  • Anna

    @Rollo

    No, I didn’t see them before. Thank you for reposting…both of them were very interesting.

    I agree with your JBY post to an extent. For example, my lover recently wanted me to lose some weight and dress feminine every once in a while. So, I’ve gone from being 172 lbs in December to being 162 now (and will hopefully be my goal weight of 155 by February.) I also got a new haircut, and asked my girly sisters to teach me how to wear more makeup.
    In return, I asked him to also lose some weight, and to go out to dinner with me more than once a month. (It’s on my dime, so why not?)
    Telling someone that they would be more attractive if they did X, Y, and Z should NOT be considered offensive or mean. Asking your spouse/lover/boyfriend/girlfriend to change a little bit is fine. You want them to be someone worth looking at, someone who will ignite interest when they walk in the room…but only go home with you.

    But I just don’t think that people should have to hide their personality to be attractive. For men, this should mean putting it out there that you play Magic, collect comics, work on vintage cars, enjoy fishing, whatever. It just seems like, by framing yourself as some Alpha jerk, you’ll get more women to bang, but you will still be hiding yourself.

    Am I still missing something? It seems like it…

    Liked your Clark Kent one too, even though none of your story is kosher in regards to the comics. I was curious though; Given that the name of your book is “Identity Crisis”, why didn’t you continue the theme and use The Atom and The Elongated Man + his wife, instead of Lois, Bruce and Clark?
    Sorry, it was the first thing I thought of when I saw the title of your book. Lol

  • Rollo Tomassi

    It’s just a working title.

  • Anna

    @Rollo

    And I’m positive it does the book justice. If it’s available for the iPad or Kindle, I’ll have to buy it later.
    Have a good rest of your day, sir.

  • itsme

    yes, let’s keep feeding the trolls…

  • itsme

    Some unfortunate women would have very poor quality of life without these products.

    true, some women do need birth control for medical reasons, but you’re forgetting a larger even more important female demographic that would suffer tragically without birth control: sluts.

  • Martel

    Never mind the “analysis” that follows. I’m pretty happy for this kid. Hope she follows through.

    http://thoughtcatalog.com/2013/if-this-boy-gets-1m-facebook-likes-his-crush-will-sleep-with-him/

  • Martel

    Actually, the chick “logic” in the analysis is pretty funny.

    “Doesn’t he value her friendship?”

    No.

  • Anna

    @itsme

    I hardly consider them an “important demographic”. I’m no prude, but I find it extremely distasteful when people have such casual sex. It takes a wonderful, potentially sacred activity and turns it into just another thing to give away.

    There’s a difference between being “sexually liberated” and just being an alley whore. Not that I find anything wrong with actual prostitutes…at least they’re honest.

  • Tilikum

    For me, controlling the psychology meant cutting out alcohol completely.

    Exponentially tighter game.

  • D-Man

    “I think that we should be concentrating on creating a male-oriented “pill” instead, which should help lead to a more equitable sexual marketplace.”

    Give men control over their sex hormone (testosterone)? Hah.

    We vilify them for that. We call them freaks, or “cheaters”. Look at Lance right now.

    One of my main takeaways from the affair: here’s a guy with one testicle and cancer, he goes on a well-managed drug plan, and he wins seven Tour de France titles….

    Now, he’s an exceptional individual, and our culture is still mired in figuring out what “fairness” means in sports, but….

    Why haven’t we heard anybody saying: “This is amazing! Maybe drugs aren’t so evil after all!”

    Because right now, our culture is still squeezing out steaming coils on the notion of male competitiveness, and testosterone is THE hormone of competitiveness.

    Testosterone (in both sexes) goes UP when you win a contest and when you’re socially dominant. It goes down when you lose, and when you feel shamed. That’s right. As a man, your test levels are directly correlated with your sense of PRIDE.

    And for the last 40+ years, pride has been systematically encouraged in women, and strongly discouraged in men. Ironically, the word itself has even been appropriated by Gay culture. This is one (but by far not the only reason) test levels have been plummeting.

    Why did Lance go to Oprah, and not Letterman (who knows something about getting busted) or an actual SPORTS reporter? Because it fits the cultural script…

    Anyway, I know what you meant by a male-oriented pill, and that you didn’t mean testosterone… what you meant was a pill that would allow men to make themselves sterile at will, and therefore have control over consent in reproduction. That would indeed change the playing field… but not as much as people think.

    First of all, we’ve always had consent: pull out and blast on her back. Secondly, I doubt many guys would elect to take it. And third, women would still use access to intercourse as means to get men to tailor their behavior according to her wishes.

    The real male pill is already here.

    THE RED ONE.

  • Anna

    @D-Man

    Interesting stuff. You are correct, I was talking about the male contraceptive pill…but you bring up some good points about the use of sex hormones in sports/competitions. I’ll admit that I don’t know much about this side of it. Seems I will have to familiarize myself with this.

    If I may, why do you not think many men would use such a pill? Sure, it still won’t protect against STDs but it is a better way to avoid pregnancy than pulling out (doesn’t work all the time due to precum), and if you’re sure of her fidelity you won’t need to decrease your pleasure with a condom…

  • Cream

    Rollo, you’re the Hari Seldon of the modern world. Leave capsules programmed to open 50, 100 and 500 years from now with your instructions for manhood on how to proceed. (Comment based on Foundation by Issac Asimov)

  • Rollo Tomassi

    @Anna, From Fem-Centrism:

    Sexual Revolution

    I got into a hypothetical debate with an online friend as to what it would mean to humanity (and masculinity in particular) if a new method of birth control was developed with the specific and unique ability to allow men to control conception to the same degree women were given with hormonal contraception in the mid-sixties. I thought it interesting that human effort could create reliable contraception for women in the 60′s, yet in 2011 we can map the human genome and yet not figure out how to afford men the same degree of birth control?

    Put simply, the feminine imperative will not allow this.

    Imagine the social and economic damage to the feminine infrastructure if Prometheus gave such fire to Men? Imagine that balance of control veering back into the masculine; for men to literally have the exclusive choice to fulfill a woman’s sexual strategy or not.

    The conversation got heated. Men could never be trusted with such a power! Surely humanity would come to a grinding, apocalyptic end if the feminine sexual strategy was thwarted by reliable male contraception. Societies would be sundered, populations would nosedive, and the nuclear family would be replaced with a neo-tribalism dictated by men’s sexual strategies. Honestly, you’d think the discovery of atomic weapons was on par with such an invention.

    The ridiculous, pathetic endemically juvenile and perverse masculinity that 50 years of feminization created could never be trusted to further humanity in pursuing their sex’s inborn imperatives.

    Yet, this is precisely the power that was put into the hands of women in the 1960′s and remains today. The threat that male contraception represents to the feminine imperative is one of controlling the framework of which gender’s sexual strategy will be the normative. Prior to the advent of female-exclusive hormonal birth control and the sexual revolution that resulted from it, the gender playing field was level, if not tipped in favor of masculinity due to men’s provisioning being a motivating factor in women achieving their own gender imperative. Latex prophylactics were available in the 40′s, and this may have afforded men a slight advantage, but both parties knew and agreed to the terms of their sexual activity at the time of copulation.

    Once feminine-exclusive birth control was convenient and available the locus of control switched to feminine primacy. Her imperative became the normalized imperative. His sexual imperative was only a means to achieving her own, and now the control was firmly placed in favor of feminine hypergamy. Whether in the developing world or in first world nations, the onus of directing the course of humanity fell upon women, and thus the feminine reality evolved into what it is today.

  • BC

    Clarke’s Third Law: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

    Red pill blog paraphrase: Any sufficiently solipsistic female commenter is indistinguishable from a troll.

    I love comment threads that let you laugh while reading.

  • Anna

    @Rollo

    Quite a bit of sexism you’ve got in that excerpt there.
    If one half of the population can be given control over their bodies and be able to plan exactly when it is time to have children, I see little REAL reason why the other half should be denied it. On the contrary, I see laws being enacted in the US and the UK that would make me fight for this ability, were I born a man.

    Fem-Centrism, huh? Yet another thing for me to read, it would seem. I thank you for sharing it.

  • Rooster

    “We vilify them for that. We call them freaks, or “cheaters”. Look at Lance right now.
    One of my main takeaways from the affair: here’s a guy with one testicle and cancer, he goes on a well-managed drug plan, and he wins seven Tour de France titles….”

    Are you f***ing kidding me?!!!! Please don’t use that sociopath bully to prop up your unscientific chest-beating. This guy ruined lives and oppressed people who were just telling the truth under oath. Have you even been keeping up with people like Betsy Andreu and her husband?

    Seriously dude, pick your f***ing heroes wisely. The lying prick indulged in EPO (hyper-oxygenating blood) much more than steroids so your ‘testosterone is great yeah!’ stance doesn’t even match up to the actual situation.

    Seems like you’d rather be a ‘big man’[sic] on a manosphere blog rather than get your facts correct.

    Well great, well done. And we’re supposed to be convincing women that it is they who have a hamster spinning away….

  • xsplat

    Testosterone (in both sexes) goes UP when you win a contest and when you’re socially dominant. It goes down when you lose, and when you feel shamed. That’s right. As a man, your test levels are directly correlated with your sense of PRIDE.

    Ya, it’s interesting to take that fact up against a womans behavior in a club when she snubs you. Aparrently some girls act on an innate programming to try to lower your testosterone. Women deliberately create the beta class of men, as if their sexual strategy for provisioning depended on such a class, and therefore when not confronted with an obvious alpha, they are programmed to try to lower his test.

  • D-Man

    Haha, easy there Rooster, I’m not trying to defend the guy. Check your projector, looks like there’s a smudge on the lens…

    My point is: our culture is nowhere near greenlighting men, in the prime of their lives, to take control of their sex hormones, and thus the direction of their lives, artificially. But we have done so for women, and there are social consequences.

  • Rob

    “…know when to apply it and when to withhold it”, isn’t that a Kenny Rogers song :)

  • Rob

    “…Seriously dude, pick your f***ing heroes wisely. The lying prick indulged in EPO (hyper-oxygenating blood)” – not to get too involved in this whole Lance Armstrong one nut debate but I always smile when I read someone complain about Lance Armstrong using PED’s to win the Tour de France. No one ever seems to notice if the 2nd place winner in the TDF is also using performance enhancing drugs, or 3rd place winner, or 4th, 5th, 57th, etc. Please stop complaining about athletes using performance enhancing drugs to win competitions, if you enjoy watching football, baseball, hockey, soccer, basketball and any other sports, you’ve probably noticed that more than a few of your favorite athletes might be doing the same thing – don’t bitch about one athlete doing this unless you’re ready to point the finger at all of them. – Lance never told anyone he was Jesus, it took a lot of “ball” to admit to everything on Oprah, that couldn’t have been easy.

  • patrick

    Totally OT: Rollo, you’re a psychologist. I study psych and girls often ask me what I study so I tell them. I usually get a response like “then you can analyze me?” and I don’t know how to proceed from there. Seems like an extremely good opportunity to get into more personal stuff but I totally black out every time I hear something like this.

  • Solomon

    could it be that her “sweet guy” accusations are conclusions she came to not because he oozes gooey mashmellow poetry when you are not around, but maybe she calls him ‘sweet’ just because he is self-controlled well enough to not say and do the harsh and cruel stuff she is used to, but instead bites his tongue out of practicality for the result he wishes (prospering them both)

  • Adam

    Girl: “can you analyze me?”

    Me: “Hell yeah, I love anal.”

    You’re welcome.

  • Adam

    Somehow related: http://ghilliemor.com/staff.php

    The boss’ wife is described as “The Real Boss”. She also “still finds time to keep David (who’s the fucking boss!) and the others organised”.

    The guy is a former policeman and worked in the intelligence. True alpha.

  • Sir Alan

    Great post, Rollo. One of the pitfalls where many new guys to Game lose themselves is in trying to be a stereotypical Alpha. A lot of guys usually overdo it and wonder why its not getting them laid, then they proceed to say that it’s a bunch of bullshit because it didn’t get them laid. Well, duh. Most people don’t want a one-dimensional cartoon character as a mate. Most of the girls I’ve slept with wanted to sleep with me not only because of physical attraction but because I managed to assert and maintain a realistic alpha frame while being a three-dimensional person. This gave me a much smaller margin of error when attempting to hook up with chicks compared to many other guys.

  • Don’t Lose Yourself | Sir Alan's Spire

    [...] to be an alpha male in order to attract and maintain women. Rollo Tomassi over at the Rational Male eloquently illustrated this point. Because these men lack experience that comes from being indulged in a red pill perspective, they [...]

  • Eric

    Rollo,

    Military men ought to be a targeted audience for your red-pill teachings.

    As an Army veteran, I can attest that being socialized as a soldier is to learn positive masculinity in terms of a man among men. While not immune from political correctness, there is a stand-off distance from civilian society that preserves within the military perhaps our last best repository of traditional masculine values and culture.

    Before I joined the Army, the military seemed alien and threatening. What I found, instead, is the nature of soldiering just made sense to me on a basic level as a man that I had not experienced before the Army. Soldiering opened my eyes to the intrinsic higher value of manhood. I have not found the same masculine fit since returning to civilian society. (Granted, I didn’t become a cop.)

    However, the Army does not cure Beta. The military – as you imply – does not teach soldiers how to handle women and deal with feminism. When soldiers apply the 7 Army values (loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, personal courage) to women, they simply don’t receive the same positive feedback they get from applying the Army values on the job among soldiers. If anything, their heightened engagement with masculinity in male terms obscures their understanding of women. Editorially, I believe the disjunction between the masculine culture of the military and the feminized culture of civilian society is an unacknowledged reason why many seemingly capable veterans are tripped up in their transition from military life to the civilian world.

    The masculine values that soldiers learn are invaluable, and our society would be made healthier and stronger if veterans could spread those values upon their return to civilian society. However, in their current condition, military-sourced masculine values are fragile in the context of feminized civilian society.

    I believe the solution is adding formative red-pill teachings to the traditional masculine lessons received by impressionable young soldiers. Doing so will empower and protect the soldiers in their immediate personal lives, especially important for the soldiers who are anxiously distant (Dear John, Jody) from their love objects. And, by the time they are mature veterans returning to civilian society, their traditional masculine values hybridized with red-pill awareness should be robust enough to thrive in feminized civilian society. From their success, the combination of red pill and traditional masculine values can spread.

  • Anna

    @Eric

    This is very true. The teaching of these core values in our military makes for soldiers/citizens who understand how people should act towards each other.
    I’ve personally seen what you speak of with numerous members of my extended family…my Grandfather and Uncle (Army), my Aunt (Air Force), and most recently my younger brother (Marines). Each one of them changed what they thought was attractive in a mate, and when they returned to civilian life, found spouses who upheld the values the military taught them (though to hear them tell it, this was quite difficult).
    Even my brother, who only recently joined, no longer hangs out with the girls/guys he used to…During his holiday break with the family, he said that none of his old girlfriends and only one of his guy friends displayed the values he now holds dear.
    If only our society saw fit to teach these core values in civilian life, I’m positive we’d be better off.

  • AnonWriter

    When soldiers apply the 7 Army values (loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, personal courage) to women, they simply don’t receive the same positive feedback they get from applying the Army values on the job among soldiers.

    This is because what really matters most to women is how a man makes her feel. Its been called ‘female solipsism’ in many places, and maybe it is, but the point is that women put much more emphasis on their own feelings than men do. Most men can’t relate to this because they project their own male values onto women, and then are confused when these values are not respected and admired by women in the same way that men would. Women are not hard to figure out if you don’t fall into the trap of believing they are like men.

  • Martel

    @Eric/Anna Your military experiences differ heavily from mine. I know I wasn’t in the world’s best MOS, but I found that PC had taken over damn near every aspect of every unit I was in.

    The Army Values were drilled into us as theory and a list to be memorized but not practiced with much consistency.

    However, you are correct in your assessment that military males would be a great target audience for this stuff. It’s still better than society at large and males who enlist would undoubtedly be more receptive than those on a college campus.

    Also, it might help lower divorce rates which has become a serious problem.

  • Eric

    Martel,

    First, I’m rooting for the success of your red-pill mission.

    Believe me, as with any soldier or former soldier, I can gripe about the Army, too. Bitching is a soldier’s god-given right, time immemorial. Nonetheless, the red-pill movement is looking to make the leap and germinate somewhere. I can’t think of a better suited real-world laboratory for the red pill in our society than the military community.

    A comment I made a few weeks ago at Ian Ironwood’s blog:

    In early stages with short reach and low resources, it would be productive to target parts of American society that are better suited as incubators and concentrations of young men who are predisposed to the red pill.

    While the obvious places and groups are college campuses and students, I believe better fertile ground for the red pill can be found in the military community.

    Our military is predominantly male with young men. Soldiers come from diverse backgrounds and, for effective incubation, return to diverse backgrounds. Soldiers eventually leave the military and return to civil society, and most do so when they’re still relatively young. The military teaches valuable life lessons and does a lot to prepare departing soldiers, but there is still a disconnect between military life and civilian life that trips up too many young veterans. The military doesn’t teach its young troops how to navigate a feminist society. As incentive, the red pill can be a practical solution that not only enhances soldiers’ social lives while they’re serving but also helps them master the pitfalls of the transition from a masculine military community to a feminist civil society.

    While the military is far from immune to political correctness and ‘man-up’ chivalry, the military has retained more traditional masculine values and patriarchal structure than any other major part of our society. The cloistered military community provides greater protection for the red pill to take hold. Young American soldiers mostly live and work in the company of men, with a minority of female soldiers, within a masculine culture – not a feminist campus or white-collar workplace. Many young soldiers, in fact, join the military desiring paternalistic guidance and a masculine formative experience.

    In short, the military provides fertile ground for the red pill where men and young men are concentrated. They’re open to the red pill and desire masculinity. Most of them will spread out in civil society within a few years. The red pill will help them make the transition, and in turn, they will spread the red pill that has helped them. The relatively masculine culture within the military is conducive to … red pill teachings, and the setting is at least semi-protected from the policing reach of feminism compared to campuses, workplaces, and other parts of society where young men are concentrated.

    Add: Many young veterans go to college soon after leaving the military. If you believe in Mencius Moldbug’s Cathedral concept that holds forth academia as a source of culture, then it would be best both for the veterans personally and the advancement of the Manosphere movement for soldiers to be red pill proficient by the time they’re preparing to take off the uniform and enter the SMP and evolutionary political struggle on campus.

  • Seraph

    “his endless writing about “how to be ..ehm .. alpha (aka SLAVE), how to monkey – dance to get laid, what to do to be worthy of pussy, etc.” actually proves one thing – men are deprived of their peace of mind unless they have their manhood CONFIRMED by women. Unless men find a way to be emotionally stable and happy without women, there is no chance of changing anything except of using FEAR and government power to deprive women af all their rights so that women NEED men to survive and pathetic slaves – aka men have their confirmation.”

    A LOT of freaking wisdom right here…

  • So I’m at the coffee shop line-up on a cold morning when.. « M3

    [...] so well by their very nature! Then they rationalize it away by telling everyone within earshot “Oh you don’t know him like i do, he’s a big ol’ softy”. Sure he is toots. Sure he is. The entire feminist belief system that a majority of men are shallow [...]

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,647 other followers

%d bloggers like this: