The Male Experience

experience

A little over fifteen years ago my wife was pregnant with Bebé Tomassi. For most of her adult life Mrs. Tomassi has been a medical professional (radiology) so when she was knocked up she and her girl-friends at the hospital would take any free moment they got to sneak into the ultrasound room a have a peek at our gestating daughter.  As a result we have about 4 times as many ultrasound pics as most other couples get. I actually have images of Bebé as a multi-celled organism.

It was during one of these impromptu scannings that we discovered what gender our child would  be. We were both more than a bit impatient and didn’t want to wait for the silly build up the OBGYN would make of revealing her gender, so we hit up a girl-friend of my wife to do another ultrasound around the right trimester.

She scanned for a bit and said, “Oh yeah, you’ve got a girl.” We asked how she could be so sure and she said, “Her hands aren’t in the right place.” We were like WTF? Then she explained, “Almost always when the baby is a boy his hands will be down around his crotch once he’s matured to a certain phase in the pregnancy. There’s not much to do in there, so they play with themselves. Your daughter’s hands are usually up around her face.”

After hearing this, it was at that point I began to appreciate the power of testosterone. Whenever I read someone tell me sex isn’t really a “need”, I think about how even in the womb the influence of testosterone is there. For better or worse, our lives as Men center on our capacity to control, unleash, mitigate and direct that influence. Socially we build up appropriate conventions intended to bind it into some kind of uniformity, to prevent the destructive potential and exploit its constructive potential – while personally we develop convictions, psychologies and internalized rules by order of degree to live our lives with its influence always running in the background of our subconsciousness.

Experience

Women become very indignant when trying to understand the male experience. This is due in most part to women’s innate solipsism and their presumption that their experience is the universal one. Part of this presumption is due to social reinforcement, but that social presumption – essentially the equalist presumption – is rooted in women’s base indifference to anything external that doesn’t affect them directly and personally. If everyone is essentially the same and equal, and we’re acculturated to encourage this perspective, it leaves women to interpret their imperatives and innate solipsism to be the normative for men.

So it often comes with a lot shock and indignation (which women instinctively crave) when women are forced, sometimes rudely, to acknowledge that men’s experience doesn’t reflect their own. The reactive response is to force-fit men’s experience into women’s solipsistic interpretations of what it should be according to a feminine-primary perception of what works best for women. On an individual woman’s level this amounts to denial and rejection of a legitimate male-primary experience through shame or implied fem-centric obligations to accept and adopt her experience as his responsibility. On a social level this conflict is reflected in social conventions and feminine-centric social doctrines, as well as being written directly into binding laws that forcibly enact a feminine-centric perspective into our social fabric.

Feminine solipsism and the primacy of the female experience superseding the male experience begins with the individual woman (micro) and extrapolates into a feminine primary social construct (macro).

Virtually every conflict between the sexes comes back to the rejection of the legitimacy of the male experience. As I’ve stated in the past, for one sex to realize their own sexual imperative, the other sex must sacrifice their own. In virtually every dynamic I’ve ever written about the fundamental lack of understanding the male experience influences women’s perception of our sex. Whether it’s understanding our sexual impulse, our idealizations of love, or appreciating the sacrifices men uniquely make to facilitate a feminine reality, the disconnect always distills down to a fundamental lack of appreciating the legitimacy of the male experience.

It would be too easy a cop out to simply write this disconnect off as an existential difference. Obviously men and women cannot spend time in each other’s skin to directly appreciate the experience of the other. However, since the Feminine Imperative is the normative one in our current social makeup the presumption is that a feminine directed ‘equalism’ is the only legitimate experience. Thus the masculine experience is, by default, delegitimized, if not vilified for simply reminding the feminine that inherent, evolved sexual differences challenge equalism by masculinity’s very presence.

I reject your reality and replace it with my own…

Men just being men is a passive challenge to the feminine imperative; red pill awareness is a direct challenge to the legitimacy of a feminine primary experience. It’s important to recall here that the primacy of the female experience begins on the personal level with an individual woman and then exponentially multiplies into a social (macro) scale. When you assert yourself as a red pill Man, you are asserting your disconnection from that feminine-primary frame. This begins on a personal level for a woman, and then extrapolates into a social affront for all women.

The initial shock (and indignation) is one of interrupting her comfortable, predictable expectations of men in the feminine defined, solipsistic reality she experiences for herself. As even the most rookie of red pill Men will attest, the legitimate female experience rejects this assertion, most times with an amount of hostility. As expected, Men are met with the socially reinforced, prepared responses designed to defend against attempts to question the legitimacy of the primacy of the feminine experience – shaming is often the first recourse, even most passive challenges warrant shaming, but character assassination and disqualifications based upon a feminine primary perspective are the go-to weapons of the solipsistic nature of the feminine mindset (even when men are the ones subscribing to it).

The next weapon in the feminine psychological arsenal is histrionics. Aggrandized exaggerations and overblown straw man tactics may seem like a last resort for women to the man attempting to rationally impose his red pill, legitimized, male experience, but know histrionics for what they are – a carefully design, feminine-specific and socially approved failsafe for women. In the same vein as a Woman’s Prerogative (women can change their minds) and the Feminine Mystique, female histrionics are a legitimized and socially excusable tactic with the latent purpose of protecting a woman’s solipsistic experience. She’s an emotional creature and your challenge to her ego only brings out the hysteric in her – it’s men’s fault that they don’t get it, and it’s men’s fault for bringing it out in her by challenging her solipsism. And thus is she excused from her protective histrionics at men’s cost.

It’s important for red pill Men to understand what their presence, much less their assertions, mean to the feminine; their very existence, just their questioning, represents a challenge to individual, ego-invested feminine solipsism. Always be prepared for the inevitable defense of a woman’s solipsism. Even in the most measured approach, you are essentially breaking a woman’s self-concept by reminding or asserting that her experience is not the universal experience. There’s a temptation for red pill Men to get comfortable with a woman’s who accepts red pill truths, only to find that her solipsism has only accepted the parts of those truths that its comfortable with and benefits from. That solipsism doesn’t die once she’s acknowledged the legitimacy of your experience, anymore than your sexual imperative dies if you accept her experience as the legitimate one.


198 responses to “The Male Experience

  • thehumanscorch

    The question becomes, how do Red Pill men begin to turn the tide to have the legitimacy of the male experience recognized?

  • Sim

    This an indirect dig at Mark Minter?

  • Morpheus

    Rollo,

    Very deep piece.

    It’s important for red pill Men to understand what their presence, much less their assertions, mean to the feminine; their very existence, just their questioning, represents a challenge to individual, ego-invested feminine solipsism. Always be prepared for the inevitable defense of a woman’s solipsism. Even in the most measured approach, you are essentially breaking a woman’s self-concept by reminding or asserting that her experience is not the universal experience.

    Yes…took me awhile to realize this. Perhaps one of the final red pill lessons I learned. Of course, the next trick in the bag of tricks is to define men who identify and support the fem-centric perspective as “good” men of “character”. The men who don’t “go along with the program” are selfish bad men.

    Women don’t want to hear from men who say there is no spoon, and they certainly become hostile to men who would tell other men there is no spoon.

  • Morpheus

    The question becomes, how do Red Pill men begin to turn the tide to have the legitimacy of the male experience recognized?

  • Morpheus

    Accidently hit post before my typing my response…..

    I think the answer to that is one guy at a time.

    I don’t have a crystal ball, but I believe the peak of femcentrism occurred in the late 1990s. The Internet has created the medium for information to spread without the necessity of some “march in the streets” political movement. There are no politicians to lobby, no funding to get, although perhaps legal reform is a logical goal down the road. The “turning of the tide” will occur one guy at a time who decides to assert instead of supplicate or defer, and when guys choose not to play beta chump with expensive dinners.

  • Morpheus

    Guess again?

    LOL…initials are AG.

  • BC

    This an indirect dig at Mark Minter?

    LOL…initials are AG.

    Giggles is probably only tangential here.

    Given:
    “Aggrandized exaggerations and overblown straw man tactics”
    “a carefully design, feminine-specific and socially approved failsafe for women” and
    “female histrionics are a legitimized and socially excusable tactic with the latent purpose of protecting a woman’s solipsistic experience”

    I would guess it is more of a response to SSM’s rather ugly histrionics fit to Rollo’s previous post.

    There are no true Red Pill Women in the sense that men are Red Pill. Some may profess to be and and even appear to act Red Pill (for a time), but that is only because “right now they feel like (Red Pill).” But sooner or later, something happens to unleash their inner hamster and the Feminine Imperative rears its ugly head.

  • BC

    The question becomes, how do Red Pill men begin to turn the tide to have the legitimacy of the male experience recognized?

    By recognizing the refusal to admit or accept the legitimacy of the male experience for what it is – just another big shit test.

    Refuse to bow.
    Refuse to submit.
    Refuse to be shamed.
    Refuse to be arbitrarily redefined.

    Point and laugh, tease, agree and amplify, and then continue doing and thinking as you will while enjoying the impotent hand wringing and sputtering.

  • themaskandrose

    Rollo, I have to ask you a question that bothers me deeply.

    As a given, women resort to the exact same lines, shaming tactics and predictable responses to anything which they perceive as an affront to Feminine Primacy.

    That being said, what do you attribute this to? The fact that they all tend to use the exact same script?

    The reason this bothers me is because I cannot comprehend how literally EVERY woman could use the exact same tactics and even the same words in the same order, every time.

    On the one hand, part of me believes that they learn this indirectly–through hearing their mothers, aunts, sisters, friends, and other women on TV use these lines and tricks. Then, once they start trying them for themselves and seeing the effect, they eventually become “canned routines” and know how and when to use them with exacting precision.

    However–and this is what blows my mind–those canned routines simply cannot have sprung up organically in every woman. I cannot wrap my head around it.

    It seems to me, that much as PUA books spread specific tactics and routines to be used by men in specific situations, such that women in the book “The Game” began to tell Neil Strauss that they’d “already heard that one,” is it possible there is a book, or books, which explicitly and directly teach these things to women?

    Something they hide from us and guard with their lives, passed between females in some sort of secrecy? If there were a document which laid out every tactic in their book, including how and when to bring them out (and in which order), it would make far more sense to me.

    Please share your thoughts on this, I cannot tell you how many nights I have spent wondering how real people end up sounding like robots who all mimic each other and use the same script.

    Thanks Rollo,

    TheMaskAndRose

  • The Burninator

    @MaskAndRose

    Occam’s Razor suggests a simpler answer. Mass media. It is fully engaged in constant harping the female imperitive. If there were books, we’d each find at least one or more in our lives, lying around the house. We do not.

    Mass media, scripting out social exchanges, each show feeding on scripted responses from other shows. Electronic solipsism, directed from central offices and board rooms. Men have the Internet, vast, uncontrollable, undirected, it is our tool to counter the feminine hive mind of mass media. In the end, we win this game, you know?

  • The Burninator

    @BC

    Agree on an individual level. On a macro level however what you call for is extrapolated to mean mass civil disobedience. One cannot simply point and laugh and ignore Family Courts, they will slit a man from throat to groin and feast on his in innards with glee. If enough men challenge the laws however, we can turn the tide. Idiotic White Knights are our biggest enemy here though, we simply do not have enough awake on our side to counter Men Who Bow To Tears.

  • earl

    “She’s an emotional creature and your challenge to her ego only brings out the hysteric in her – it’s men’s fault that they don’t get it, and it’s men’s fault for bringing it out in her by challenging her solipsism.”

    Sounds like women have either lost the ability to…or don’t have the capability for empathy.

    Men however do have this ability which is why her hysterics sometimes work.

  • Lord Highbrow

    BC
    September 10th, 2013 at 2:05 am

    There are no true Red Pill Women in the sense that men are Red Pill. Some may profess to be and and even appear to act Red Pill (for a time), but that is only because “right now they feel like (Red Pill).” But sooner or later, something happens to unleash their inner hamster and the Feminine Imperative rears its ugly head.

    ——-

    You know, for a long time, I thought ‘can women really be red pill’? I have a lot of respect for GWW, but at the same time, I always wondered, ‘When is the hamster going to come out?’. Judgy Bitch also has a lot of good stuff to say, but geez, when her hamster runs, it RUNS! Then I read SSM’s ‘Pedestal’ post and realised ‘Yep, there is no such thing as a red pill woman’.

    I mean, that post was the biggest load of garbage I’ve read in the 8 or so years I’ve been in the manosphere. Essentially, it is her rationalisation that women should be allowed to act however they like and it is solely up to her man to control her and fix the damage done. She’s essentially saying ‘Women are no better than 5 year old children and should be treated accordingly’. So when men reject that idea, naturally it’s not because she is wrong that’s the issue, it’s because Red Pill Men put women on pedestals…

    To me, when a man says he is Red Pill, other Red PIll men hold him up to a certain standard and he either maintains that standard or fails. For SSM to assert that women should be able to label themselves as Red Pill, yet for some reason not be held to the same standard is all the evidence needed to show that there are no red pill women.

    So she can continue on in her Malibu Stacy-esque ‘Don’t ask me, I’m just a girl!’ way, I’m just glad I’m not the only one who sees that she isn’t all she’s cracked up to be.

  • Daniel Torres

    You’re all wrong! It’s the Barbie dolls. Barbies subliminally communicate with little girls while they are in the semi-hypnotic state of brushing their hair to teach them all they need to know about the feminine imperative on a subconscious level. Babies are evil I tell you.

    On a more serious note: Rollo, you are awesome. Your borderline obsessive abuse of big shiny words aside ( thank god for dictionary websites) you have truly opened my eyes to a world I actually WANT to live in.

    Ten years ago I wouldn’t have bought two words of this “red pill” drivel. By chance or fate however, I have had the opportunity to experience relationships as both Alpha and Beta. I was born and raised a true blue hard core white knight feminized bitch. It did not get more Beta than me. I was a full blown beta husband in my five year marriage to my first sexual experience. ONEitis and then some.(btw only 4 months of those 5 years actually included sex of any sort)

    I had a fairly successful follow up relationship for over two years with a rarely natural submissive girl. She was submissive (possibly due to being a virgin?) to such a level it FORCED the alpha out of me. Best sex of my life in that one. It only ended due to the manipulations of another girl who saw me as HER Alpha and spent six months carefully sabotaging the relationship.

    I admit towards her I was full on alpha without even realizing it. We became fuck-buddies but she always wanted more. I rejected her time and time again which only fueled her hypergamous fires. She got all tingly and horny whenever I would lose my temper with her and she constantly incited me to do so. She played games and ended our “friendship” multiple times but always came back. Eventually I cut her off myself. I had enough. When I immediately started seeing another girl who had her eye on me and was seen as primary competition for my former fuck-buddy she SNAPPED.

    I came to realize later that this latest girl was feeding off my Alpha vibes as well. I actually wanted a relationship with her so of course reverted back to preprogrammed white knight ways. Within a couple of months the sex got less passionate less frequent and eventually just mechanical and even plain annoying. After that ended with her cheating on me with her boss I stumbled upon this strange and mysterious word: Hypergamy

    I had to know more so a google search later I found my self here. I was starved sick and desperate for the red pill. I couldn’t swallow it fast enough. Thank you so much for this enlightenment Rollo. You have shed a new light on my entire life and brightened the road ahead.

  • The Latin Buddha

    Superb post. I was talking to a friend of mine about women needing to be told no more often. Since we live in a fem-conditioned society, the default response of people towards women is yes. And when you’re a red pill aware man, and you say no to a woman, you better get ready for a shit storm. It will be either tears or shouting of accusations of being a misogynist.

    I was out with my buddy two weekends ago. His roommate brought along her friend (let’s call her Mara), who also brought along her girlfriend. Let’s call her KT. We all met up at a bar but it was late so we decided to get breakfast at a local diner at like 3am. KT was very drunk and saying weird shit. Mara, who invited KT out, was not as drunk and was “taking care” of KT. KT was being rambunctious and my buddy told her she needed to settle down. KT snapped and my buddy looked at me like he was going to choke her. Again, we were all tired, hungry and a bit drunk. KT thought I said something to her and started saying how I didn’t give her shit. I was confused but I told her that she didn’t owe me anything for the cab ride I paid for. Since KT was drunk, she started crying. For no reason. Like a lot. In front of everyone. Mara, who was watching over KT, made a point to tell me she was drunk, that she is a single mother and that I should apologize. I asked her why I should apologize since I didn’t say anything inappropriate. She told me that I made her cry. I said: “Absolutely not!.” She then asked me again to apologize to drunk KT, with a raised voice, in front of everyone (and the whole restaurant). And I said: “No!” Her face and jaw dropped….that a man would say no to her. She was speechless. I kept eating my scrambled eggs and pancakes started talking to my buddy about some other random shit like nothing had happened.

    Women need to be told no more often. Why? Because yes has become the expectation to the feminine imperative (especially when convenient and beneficial to their agenda). Earlier that night (ironically), there was a girl passed out drunk in the middle of the street. There were 4 cop cars blocking the street. FOUR! For one girl. Who passed out from not knowing when to stop drinking. One of her friends was apologizing to the police officer for his (girl) friend passing out in the middle of the sidewalk. Nothing happened to the girl. She had just passed out from boozing it up. And the cops were there… waiting to help I guess. I tell you what though. If that had been me, a man, a Latin man at that, passed out drunk in the middle of the sidewalk because of not being able to know when to stop drinking, it would not have been 4 cop cars around me. It would have been one cop car and my ass would have been arrested. For what? Probably public nuisance or something like that.

    This illustrates the feminine imperative and female social conditioning vs. the male experience.

  • rambo

    As a man , you should never seek Validation or Recognition from a female / Society, Because you will never get. Take action -> Ignore all the noise.

  • The Burninator

    @Latin

    Good observation on telling women “no” more often. Then stick to it. Let the tears flow over and around you, continue living happily and let women figure out that they greatly overestimate the power of their sexual toolset.

    Besides, generally and no matter how immersed in Femi-conditioning, women get wet when a man puts her in her place and stands firm. The world needs more Sean Connery and less Alan Alda, ASAP.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    I would guess it is more of a response to SSM’s rather ugly histrionics fit to Rollo’s previous post.

    Ding! Ding! Ding! Tell him what he’s won Johnny,…

  • Rollo Tomassi

    @MaskandRose, this post touches on your question a bit:
    http://therationalmale.com/2012/03/13/the-hypergamy-conspiracy/

    Maybe not as comprehensive as you’d like, but I do have an upcoming post that’s kind of along the lines of your question. The short versions is that I think the consistency with which women from across many social strata and cultures will use the same or very similar social conventions and interpersonal tactics is both acculturated and innate.

    Innate in the sense that the purposes for developing and using them all stem from the same need – hypergamous filtering. Acculturated in the sense that those “techniques” have to evolve and adapt to the times and cultures in which they are used. Obviously in the age of mass communication and social media that acculturation is more easily disseminated, but the base motives for feminine social conventions is still rooted in that biological / evolutionary need.

    @Dan Torres, I’m glad you found RM, and thanks for the props. Stories like yours are what keeps me writing.

    Re: $10 Words. I actually think I’ve done pretty well in limiting my vernacular lately. Mostly as a result of having worked with an editor on the book for the last 4 months. Sorry, I guess I channeled my inner English teacher on this one a bit.

  • anon

    Well, maybe it’s just selection bias, but I’ve had the complete opposite experience. Most of the female friends I’ve (accidentally) shared red pill thoughts with have immediately agreed and weighed in with similar opinions. It’s the men that seem to go all WK/shaming/blue on me.

  • walawala

    “”Virtually every conflict between the sexes comes back to the rejection of the legitimacy of the male experience. As I’ve stated in the past, for one sex to realize their own sexual imperative, the other sex must sacrifice their own.””

    I believe guys themselves sabotage the legitimacy of the male experience by pedestalizing women, by being self-effacing with women, by considering themselves “lucky” to be with someone.

  • BC

    @Rollo

    A year’s free subscription to the blog?

    @Lord Highbrow

    I also thought that women might be able to become Red Pill, especially in the manosphere, at least until every single one outed themselves in some way or another. And you are spot on with it being just another form of pedestalization.

    @ The Burninator
    “If enough men challenge the laws however, we can turn the tide.”

    Short of socioeconomic collapse that brings physical realities to the fore again, you are never going to get anywhere by challenging and trying to change/fix the system.

    Men need to be willing and able to move their arse and assets out of the reach of women and their Family Courts and other State enforcers. And to be willing to burn to the ground anything that they can’t take with them. Like Rollo says, stop going in eyes wide shut. A Man who understands, plans and is prepared and able to walk away and scorch the earth behind him should it become necessary is a Man with a lower likelihood of ever having to do so.

  • The Burninator

    @BC

    Similar “cannot be done” sentiments once existed in regards to gun laws here in Ohio. It was certain, for decades, that no challenge would win and we best hunker down and wait for the revolution. A dedicated band of men said “No!” and refused to accept that route. Now we can, and do without license or permission, open carry regularly without cops doing anything but smiling and nodding, and concealed carry is easier to get than a credit card. Form special interest groups and alliances, get in close contact with your Statehouse reps, and you erase so many bad laws.

    Defeat is not an option, and no society really just collapses, short of a war. Some morph, yes, but economic and societal collapse is a rare bird.

  • Tin Man

    OK – anyone that believes there is such a thing as a “Red Pill” woman, is delusional in my mind. I appreciate that we (as men) want to believe this can be true, but it can’t (think SSM is a perfect example of this) because….

    As it has been stated before, women get their validation, proof and reality from the larger group. Men (from a biological/evolutionary perspective) will seek their own truth. Now, over the past few decades, men have become conditioned to seek social validation (tapping into their feminine energy as David Deida frames it) – and one of the best proofs is White Knighting and coming to the aid of woman – there are plenty of attention whoring men also – looking for external validation of who/what they are. But in general, Men are individualists and woman are social. It’s about where we seek our validation – and if we (all people) feel threatened, where do we look for support and comfort? Women will want a group around them, most men will seek solitude.

    Therefore, in my mind, the only real Red Pill humans are Men. Because only a man will be willing to not only look over the edge, but also be willing to figure out a way to cross the chasm. Women (in general, there are always outliers) will not even look over the edge.

    From my personal experience, the best relationship I had with my wife, was when I didn’t cower to her tears, words, or rantings (about almost anything), it was when I stood my ground or told her no. I was only when I started “giving in” or “keeping the peace” when the relationship started going south.

    I would tell any man to just test it for themselves. Start saying no to everything – and see how the hamster starts running.

  • Tin Man

    BTW, I love the picture you used for this post.. That is obviously one guy that will not say NO – I wonder how that’s working out for him?

  • The Burninator

    Yeah, that guy is a total tool.

  • Kate

    Only Christ (whether you take this event literally or symbolically) has the ability to confer benefit with a single action: his death on the cross represents his sacrifice so that others may be forgiven. In ordinary life, however, a man cannot satisfy a woman with one large, sacrificial action. A fantastic vacation five years ago does not make a woman happy today. Just as a great sex streak five years ago will not make a man happy today. From both sides, there needs to be a continual investment over time. The mistake is thinking these investments need to be large. Small actions that are not so hard to complete accumulate and add up to lasting relationships and happiness.

    A start to the definition of a red pill woman is one who can both be humbled and with whom one can reason. Her opposite is a woman who will not be satisfied with a man’s sacrifices for her until he has given her his entire life culminating in his death, an event which may potentially confer even more benefits. Naturally, there are gradations in between.

  • earl

    “I believe guys themselves sabotage the legitimacy of the male experience by pedestalizing women, by being self-effacing with women, by considering themselves “lucky” to be with someone.”

    It’s a combo.

    1) Not pedalizing their mission
    2) Putting women on the pedestal as their mission instead

    If we were too busy with shit we have to do and only have women as a break from that…we could care less about her hamsterizations.

    Which is why I say sex is a want…and our mission is the need.

  • Anonymous Reader

    Rollo
    Re: $10 Words. I actually think I’ve done pretty well in limiting my vernacular lately.

    “Dat’s not vernacular, dat’s a doiby!”


  • Stingray

    The reason this bothers me is because I cannot comprehend how literally EVERY woman could use the exact same tactics and even the same words in the same order, every time.

    There is no book (but that made me laugh) because it’s all based on feelings. It is incredibly hard for us articulate our feelings in a coherent way so when we hear a talking point that seems to connect with how we feel we latch onto it and run with it. With many, many people these points work beautifully so we hang onto them. When challenged, we go to the fall backs and that usually works. Even when it doesn’t really work, we can hamster ourselves into believing that it does.

  • Stingray

    Something else to consider with the solipsism making it impossible for women to understand certain things about masculinity is that 1) we want to be able to say we understand so that we can impress you with our understanding. 2) It drives us absolutely crazy that we are so curious about men and men only things and that you all basically couldn’t care less about women only stuff. We project onto that you should be just as curious about our knitting circles as we are about your men’s only clubs. We try to bridge a gap that cannot be bridge.

  • The Burninator

    Ok, I’ll bite. Outside of the technicalities and artistry in knitting, what would I or any man be interested in precisely? Those are gossip circles, correct, with knitting as an excuse? On the other hand if you we’re taking up a non-goss activity, I would be interested.

  • Stingray

    Burninator,

    I’ve never been but I would say that yes, they are for women to get together to talk with knitting as an excuse. Men wouldn’t be interested for obvious reasons. But I think women tend to believe that when men get together they gossip as well. And if your not gossiping then just what are those men talking about?! I MUST KNOW.

    That fact that you could not care less about our gossip is vexing. It’s not exactly rational but it’s there in a very big way, nonetheless.

  • The Burninator

    Stingray,

    Ok, here’s a man activity I participate in, biker rallies (motorcycle). Ride in, drink, talk about hot chicks, work, fun and or stupid things we’ve done that week, motorcycles, upcoming trips, boobs, sports, poker runs/memorial rodes, after parties and firearms. At no point do we go on about gossip or “feelings”, except lust and triumph which topics we do touch upon. We also have contests of strength sometimes, and hard rock bands drowned out all attempts to talk much after 8 pm or so. The few women that show up are either fugly (but down to earth and nice) or insanely hot. I have the hot ones hitting on me by around 7 ish, when I tend to branch off from my friends and isolate a few of them for after party prospects later that night.

    So now you know.

  • Jeremy

    I know what this post was for, and frankly, it’s brilliant Rollo.

    Allow me to put this in black-and-white. Rollo says…

    The initial shock (and indignation) is one of interrupting her comfortable, predictable expectations of men in the feminine defined, solipsistic reality she experiences for herself. As even the most rookie of red pill Men will attest, the legitimate female experience rejects this assertion, most times with an amount of hostility. As expected, Men are met with the socially reinforced, prepared responses designed to defend against attempts to question the legitimacy of the primacy of the feminine experience – shaming is often the first recourse, even most passive challenges warrant shaming, but character assassination and disqualifications based upon a feminine primary perspective are the go-to weapons of the solipsistic nature of the feminine mindset (even when men are the ones subscribing to it).

    The next weapon in the feminine psychological arsenal is histrionics. Aggrandized exaggerations and overblown straw man tactics may seem like a last resort for women to the man attempting to rationally impose his red pill, legitimized, male experience, but know histrionics for what they are – a carefully design, feminine-specific and socially approved failsafe for women. In the same vein as a Woman’s Prerogative (women can change their minds) and the Feminine Mystique, female histrionics are a legitimized and socially excusable tactic with the latent purpose of protecting a woman’s solipsistic experience. She’s an emotional creature and your challenge to her ego only brings out the hysteric in her – it’s men’s fault that they don’t get it, and it’s men’s fault for bringing it out in her by challenging her solipsism. And thus is she excused from her protective histrionics at men’s cost.

    And hence…

    http://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/08/30/he-was-unhaaaaappy/

    I like SunshineMary, but in that post she fails to acknowledge the male experience as being unique, separate, and not entirely comprehensible to a woman. She asserts that she is capable of understanding what it is like to be a man. If I can acknowledge that I cannot understand what it is like to be a woman, why can’t women do the converse? This post by Rollo provides the answer. It is a fantastically subtle yet powerful rebuttal to Mary’s unfortunate histrionics.

  • The Burninator

    In fact, I see numerous historical parallels between bike nights and ancient Germanic men gathering in mead halls to drink, boast, joke, slap women’s asses and have a great time. In fact, nearly identical except for the absence of the occasional dismemberment.

  • lovelost

    rollo,
    where did you get this picture?

  • Rollo Tomassi

    @lovelost, not sure. I’ve had it in my RM library for a while now.

  • HanSolo

    @maskandrose

    It’s mostly biological/psychological. And due to the fact that most men are pussy beggars and will give their left nut to keep their woman happy and from leaving them (thus cutting them off from sex with her and embarrassing the man in a pre-Un-selection kind of way so that other women in the small tribe will want to avoid him), men just put up with women’s hysterics and shaming and try to avoid all that to begin with.

    The fact of the matter is beta females usually have more sexual and societal power and value than beta males and so men act accordingly.

    Only when you get a highly-organized patriarchy where the apex alpha males ally with and slightly empower their beta males do the beta males have equal or perhaps slightly higher status than beta females.

  • Anonymous Reader

    Speaking of solipsism and women…

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/09/10/newlywed-wife-charged-with-second-degree-murder-in-death-husband-in-montana/

    Money quote:
    Nobody is shocked at all … She’d been telling people she knew she never wanted to be married, she just wanted to have a wedding, and that’s apparently what they were arguing about.”

  • Stingray

    Burninator,

    Heh, but that’s just it isn’t it? We say we want to know, but telling us isn’t enough. We want to be a part of it. We want to experience it. We want to see if the men will accept us and more than that, if they will like us. So, basically, it boils down to attention and female competition.

    In short, hypergamy.

  • Jeremy

    @Stingray

    …It drives us absolutely crazy that we are so curious about men and men only things and that you all basically couldn’t care less about women only stuff. We project onto that you should be just as curious about our knitting circles as we are about your men’s only clubs. We try to bridge a gap that cannot be bridge…

    Yes. Honestly, it cannot be bridged. I will never actually be interested to hear how the day of my female SO went. I will listen and hear the factual outline of what happened, I may even offer the best logical solutions I can offer, but ultimately 9 times out of 10 it is completely disinteresting. The 1 time in ten it is interesting, something actually happened that means something to the organization you work for, or something you said sparked some creative imagination in my head in which case I didn’t hear everything you said after I started imagining something.

    I’m not going to tell you that it shouldn’t drive you crazy. But take your pick, would you rather be driven crazy by being interested in man-things but not being able to be invested in them? Or, would you rather be insatiably interested in the female form, but be quite powerless as to when you get access to it for nearly 30 years and only loosely capable of getting it regularly the rest of your life? There’s no fairness, there’s only complementary biological competition.

  • Daniel Torres

    @stingray

    Burn wasn’t wrong in his replies about what men do/talk about when it’s just the guys.

    However, I think we can dig a little deeper:

    There’s a good reason why so much of the manosphere revolves around alpha/beta references. Men have pack animal instincts and that includes the way we socialize with each other. Just about everything we do and say to and around other men can be whittled down to competition for domination. Feminization may have confused our instincts of dominating women but our instinct to dominate other men is still fully intact.

    When I think back to almost every conversation I’ve had or heard among men there’s always this competitive undertone to it or the need to “one-up” the other guy. This starts even as children.

    “my dad can beat up YOUR dad!”
    “nuh uh!”

    It’s not always that obvious. Sometimes its just about telling a better story, sleeping with a hotter girl, driving more or faster cars, liking a better show or football team. There is also that slight twinge of disappoinment and defeat when a guy ends a topic with “…yeah.”. Because he doesn’t have any ammo left for that conversation.

    Pack mentality can come into play as well. Think of football fans rallying together against other fans even in casual conversations. We thrive on competition and we have an innate need to establish a pecking order in all things involving other men.

    I could be talking out of my ass here but those are my observations.

  • Stingray

    Jeremy,

    There is no way I can answer you question as I cannot begin to imagine what it is like to go through what you describe as being a man. I remember trying to empathize with what you describe when my husband attempted to describe it to me once (of course I got indignant when he told me that I couldn’t possibly understand what it’s like to get hard for absolutely no reason whatsoever). I could not do it. I can’t even begin to imagine that. And just as you said, there are experiences that women go through that men could never understand. Women just don’t get why you don’t care (not that any of you should. Rather, it keeps us on our toes that you don’t).

  • BC

    @ The Burninator re: effecting systemic change

    I see. Good luck.

  • Jeremy

    Understand, it is not an insult to your intelligence to declare that you cannot fully empathize with my experience, simply based on sex. It is no more an insult to your intelligence than to suggest that you cannot fully empathize with what the bottom-rung of the dirt-poor has had to go through in China or India on a daily basis for the last thousand or so years. However, for some reason, if we dare to suggest that life-experiences or perspectives based on sex are different *and* incomprehensible to the other sex, people get indignant. We easily accept that differences in experience based on wealth or class can be incomprehensible to us, in fact there is scientific research to back this up. What happens to poor people when they win the lottery? Answer, they usually end up on the wrong side of the law for tax evasion and/or other problems. What happens to rich people when they are similarly blessed with unexpected gains? Answer, they generally just stay the same. Why is this? Different experiences yield vastly different perspectives on the value of money and the best uses for it. We’re all capable of understanding that our experiences with wealth or poverty while growing up shape us in ways that are truly incomprehensible to people of significantly different backgrounds, otherwise the famous (and misquoted) line from Marie Antoinette would not still be ringing through history (“Let them eat cake!”). However, only when it comes to difference in experiences between the sexes do we get upset at being told that we don’t understand.

  • Stingray

    @ Daniel

    Just about everything we do and say to and around other men can be whittled down to competition for domination. Feminization may have confused our instincts of dominating women but our instinct to dominate other men is still fully intact.

    And this probably gets to the very heart of it. I’ve been very blessed to be able to watch these interactions many times in my life and I love every minute of it. I think it has to do with seeing who will be the dominate one, who will win, because we want to know that man. More than just know him, we want to see if we can influence him. If we have the chance to know him, are we able to charm him and will how far will he let it go?

    This is one of the reasons men only places are so important. Simply having one woman there changes the whole dynamic, even if she doesn’t speak.

    ***Having said all of this and while it’s true, the simple fact that men more often have better conversation than most women is a big part of it as well.

  • Stingray

    Jeremy,

    Thank you and I understand.

    However, only when it comes to difference in experiences between the sexes do we get upset at being told that we don’t understand.

    It’s because we’ve been told that men’s experiences are more valuable than women’s (mostly by feminists). While it’s untrue, many still believe it because it’s felt. Men receive overt attention that women want. Therefore it’s believed that men’s experiences are better and more valuable. Women’s value tends to be covert and therefore we don’t feel that our experience adds as much value. While untrue, the feelings are still there for many. A lot of what’s gone on is women seeking the same attention that it is perceived that men get in the world. Again, for the large number of men, it’s not true, but it’s thought to be true nonetheless (Ex. a cubicle desk job that women have strived for is not exactly glamorous, yet look at the desire for careers above all for so many women today).

  • Jeremy

    @Stingray

    It’s because we’ve been told that men’s experiences are more valuable than women’s (mostly by feminists).

    Men’s experiences are more valuable… to men. They will remain so forever, regardless of what those experiences are. We could have society completely invert and have women on top, leading the developed world, and mens’ experiences would still be more valuable to men than women’s experiences. The reason this is so rests in biology, not sociology. Men and women are essentially sex objects to each other, and always will be. What they are trying to extract from each other is vastly different. Because men are really only trying to extract access to the female form of women from women, the accomplishments, experiences, gossip, etc… from women will always be lower on the totem pole. They will always be side-benefits at best and annoying verbage at worst.

    Likewise, with society inverted and women on top, men’s experiences will still be valuable to women. Women are trying to extract resource and social gains from men, so men’s experiences and status in the pecking order will always be valuable to women. What you’re trying to do when you nag your husband about his day is to find out if he got promoted, or if he made an interesting contact that means you’ll be invited to more prestigious affairs in the future, etc..etc.. Women are interested in male dealings because women are attempting to extract better living through their husbands. This is not a fault in women, it’s just their nature. Even if society were inverted, women would still want to know, even if only to make sure that their sub-par-non-connected husband didn’t embarrass them socially.

  • thehumanscorch

    Stated feminine imperative: “How much do you love me?”

    Actual feminine imperative: “How much can you elevate me?”

  • Anonymous Reader

    Open question:

    Is it just my mistaken impression, or do women as a group seem to have a real problem understanding the difference between “ought” and “is” ? “should be” and “are”?

  • BC

    @Anonymous Reader

    Yes, because Women strive for “fairness”* and tend to be sheltered from reality, whereas Men respect justice and must face reality (or get run over by it).

    * Scare quotes intentional; YMMV

  • Tin Man

    At the end of the day, “your” woman wants your life to be about her – I can’t tell you how many times my (x)wife told me “I just wanted to as important as your job” — at the time, I didn’t know how to provide an answer to that statement. So, I would just stutter and stammer about how she was important and I loved her, yadda, yadda, yadda.

    The proverbial Catch 22 – she wants to be the most important thing in your, above everything else, but as soon as that happens, she begins to have less and less respect for you.

  • Keyser Soze

    This is why “frame control” is imperative for men. If a woman gets control of the “frame” in a relationship, it’s shit for the man and, as Roissy has said, just imagine a new veiny cock sliding in and out of your woman.

  • YaReally

    @themaskandrose
    “That being said, what do you attribute this to? The fact that they all tend to use the exact same script?”

    Field experience.

    There are no theories in Game. Game is a result of field experience: trying shit out and analyzing the successes and failures for commonalities and slowly weeding out what works consistently and what doesn’t, and eventually distilling it all down to some consistent principles that are universally true (like “supplicating is unattractive” and “passing shit-tests builds attraction”).

    This is why if you take a Natural who’s never read The Game, but who’s banged a ton of women all his life, and ask him to explain what he does, he’ll describe (with difficulty because he does it all subconsciously) what he does and it’ll sound very similar to what PUAs teach.

    Is this fluke? Coincidence? Conspiracy? No, it’s just that when you go out enough and gain enough field experience, you end up coming to the same conclusions as the other guys who have a lot of field experience.

    As I’ve said before, part of how I can tell guys who go out (and actively apply game and push boundaries and push their limiting beliefs and get results) from guys who don’t go out is when they disagree with me and by extension the rest of the PUA community. So they say “having money matters”, and all that does is tell me they haven’t gone out enough and actively picked up without relying on money (or purposely handicapping themselves) and overcoming that limiting belief, because if they had, they would come to the same conclusion the rest of us who go out a lot come to: that it doesn’t matter.

    So wtf does this all have to do with your question?

    Well, the average normal dude goes our maybe twice a month, has a few close friends, occasionally interacts with a stranger here and there, spends a bunch of his teenage years playing Xbox and shit…he gets a little socializing in but not much really.

    Contrast that to a girl, especially a hot girl, who from age 13+ is BOMBARDED with attention, especially from men. Dozens of men a day, whether its the store clerk who badly tries to flirt or the BFF male friend who secretly has a crush or the teacher marking her grades based on how much she flirts or how short her skirt is etc etc.

    The average girl is forced into hundreds of thousands of social interactions with strange men all through her teens up till she hits the wall.

    So, like guys going out to collect mass experience and distilling down what works and doesn’t work in game, women are out being forced to collect mass experience and distill down what works and doesn’t work for dealing with men and getting their way etc.

    This is why the socially awkward ugly girl might not be very good at it, but the smokin hot 10 can have 50 guys txting her all day begging for her attention and doing anything she wants, all wrapped around her little finger. She simply has a fuckton more field experience in distilling down what does and doesn’t work.

    This is usually all subconscious for girls, the same way it’s subconscious for Naturals…they were both “forced” into learning it by circumstance (having tits for girls, or being in favorable situations as a Natural like being naturally good looking or playing sports in high school etc), whereas PUAs learn this stuff consciously because we purposely go out to rack up mass field experience.

    The average decent looking girl has more reference experiences of dealing with the opposite sex by 18 than most guys have of dealing with the opposite sex their entire LIVES.

    So ya, it’s basically field experience, not a super secret vagina conspiracy theory lol

    This is also why guys with game flip so many attraction switches in girls…because they have so much field experience for how men are supposed to react to their shit that when you react differently they’re blown away and intrigued and aghast and you rock them off their stable footing. So they shit-test you because that always works for them as they’ve learned over the years, but you pass their shit-tests and they’re blown away again. No one has ever done that to them except their dad or older brother etc. Who is this guy who doesn’t act like all the others?

    And it’s all attraction from there.

  • strauMan (@strauMan)

    Solipsism indeed.

    My favorite line when asking a woman an objective point of view regarding a specific behavior I’ve noticed many women do is…”I don’t do that.”

  • Tin Man

    @YaReally…

    Thanks for the reference point – because I hadn’t thought of it that way – but it makes sense.

    Completely different and off point from the aspect of Game, but I once asked a black friend the question “why is that black people think white people have it so easy?” (side note – we have very similar background, upper middle class, live in the neighborhood, same college degree, etc. and so on)….and his answer was…”Because I have a lifetime of experiences to tell me it’s different.”

  • Donttreadonmatt

    Regarding so-called red pill women: Women can talk a good game when it is about other women, when it’s NAWALT, or as another commenter said “I don’t do that.” The moment you point out that the red pill woman does in fact do those things from time to time, that indeed AWALT, then that undigested red pill vomits right up out of her into your face.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Red Pill women are what happened to the girls you knew in high school who had way more male friends than any girl should.

  • Anonymous Reader

    Red Pill women are what happened to the girls you knew in high school who had way more male friends than any girl should.

    They are still women, who when feeling personally put upon will confuse “some” with “all” and “ought to” with “is”, though. MDTT, but on some topics lately on some (cough) blogs I’m seeing Red Pill Women doing this rather a lot.

  • furiousferrett

    “Regarding so-called red pill women: Women can talk a good game when it is about other women, when it’s NAWALT, or as another commenter said “I don’t do that.” The moment you point out that the red pill woman does in fact do those things from time to time, that indeed AWALT, then that undigested red pill vomits right up out of her into your face.”

    Haha.

    It’s funny. As long as you word it right you can almost always get a girl to agree with most red pill truths. In wording it right, I mean red pill truths apply to every girl but her. LOL.

  • Jeremy

    I would like to think I could never be so arrogant as to presume that I am incapable of being insulted for being a man based on the accusations of others against the male sex. In fact, if I ever chose to pay a psychiatrist who was worth his salt, he would likely tell me there are episodes in my life where I felt exactly that and haven’t dealt with it fully.

    That being said, I have to believe that I have learned to accept the fact that my own experience going through life is not so much incomplete, but the best experience that my sensory ignorance will allow. My experience in life (and really, in any human’s life) is and will remain such a fog over the truth, even to my death. Accepting the limits of ones own mental abilities is indeed the beginning of knowledge. I would never suggest that accepting ignorance is easy. Actually, coming to grips with the pathetic capabilities of ones own mind is frighteningly difficult. The human brain does not like to accept how stupid it is, it likes to operate in a kind of misty void where it presumes it knows what’s going on around it. The reality is the opposite, the mind has a horrible understanding of what’s going on around it.

    But grasping your ignorance is the start, only from there can you accept that the landscapes on which people interpret the exact same events can vary as wide as the known universe. It is from that platform that accepting what other people are telling you actually starts to make any form of sense whatsoever.

    This is why it is difficult for me to deal with Mary’s histrionics. That is what they are, histrionics. She reverted into rebuilding-the-mound-mode so fast my head almost spun. I did not expect a woman so red pill to fail so badly at understanding what was being said by Rollo and Deti. She almost *wanted* Deti and Rollo to be insulting her mental capacity, she wanted it so badly she conflated two different arguments into a single offense against her sex that was nearly unforgivable and deserving of a beatdown.

    This means many things to me. It means that because I believe myself just as capable and existing in the same mental ignorance as anyone else, that I must have a pet belief on which I would knee-jerk defend just as Mary did. There must be some subject out there for which I would behave just as Mary did. That is scary enough. However, what it also means to me is that Mary, and other red-pill women, have not acknowledged their own ignorance.

    That is frightening. It means they are operating on a false presumption. They are reading manosphere blogs and writing their own manosphere blogs under the presumption that they can understand everything (an entirely false presumption) and that because they’ve heard what male writers have said, their understanding either is or can be perfectly clarified. It means that Red Pill Women Bloggers are actually more dangerous to men than feminists, because they know not their own limits and fail to explore them.

    Understand, I am not specifically elevating male writers as bastions of correct paradigm enforcement. However, when forced to choose between two people who may from time to time profess to understand where I am coming from, all levels of ignorance being equal I will most assuredly choose the person who can most closely match my own experiences in life. This would directly exclude female authors in the manosphere.

    What anyone who would presume to blog should first recognize is the limits of their own intelligence, the fog and perspective limits on which their sex, class, culture, country, etc… put on their words. Seek to improve your abilities at all times, but never lose sight of your own capabilities so that you do not errantly step outside of your own experience while professing to explain to someone else what their experience is.

  • One reason I’m happily married | Crowhill Weblog

    […] I saw this quote in an otherwise interesting post that brought this to […]

  • Kate

    Jeremy: Feel free to read her comment about me on this thread: http://therationalmale.com/2013/07/29/the-script/

    and her exchanges with me and other posters regarding me on this thead:
    http://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/08/17/female-self-deprecation-is-a-way-of-bragging/

    and then tell me why you were surprised to learn she is actually entirely entrenched in the feminine imperative.

  • Stingray

    Red Pill women are what happened to the girls you knew in high school who had way more male friends than any girl should.

    Assuming you mean friend as actually friend (I admit that I can’t tell if you might mean that red pill women have slept around) then this is true of me. Is this a bad thing and if so, why?

  • Stingray

    Is it just my mistaken impression, or do women as a group seem to have a real problem understanding the difference between “ought” and “is” ? “should be” and “are”?

    Feelings are, regardless of whether or not they are relevant to the topic or even in the range of the topic. What actually is at that point, is so easily rendered irrelevant.

  • furiousferrett

    “then tell me why you were surprised to learn she is actually entirely entrenched in the feminine imperative.”

    Sunshine Mary and the people that hang out at her blog like Earl are really just Traditionalist Catholics that take from Rollo and the other sphere bloggers what suits their ideals.

    So they agree with Rollo when it already fits in with Tradcon Catholicism and disagree when it goes too far. The reason you see so many Catholics here is the divergence between RM,CH, Roosh’s red pill truths and traditionalist values and how RM explains why those traditional values are for the best. However when Rollo says something they don’t agree with they get huffy.

    It’s not really surprising when you look at it from that end.

  • Stingray

    Men’s experiences are more valuable… to men

    Right. And, boy do women want you to pay attention to our own experiences. Otherwise, we think, how can we compete? Despite what feminists will have you believe, women very much do care what men think of them (all but the omegas, if you will). Women might not have attraction for them all, but their opinions still very much matter.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Well, when SSM insinuates my daughter is, or will be, a slut I have to draw the line. Fuck her, I’m done with the red pill pick-and-pull “christians”. I tried to be cool, I made efforts not to refer to her kids, I try to christian-coat things to blunt the edges of truths that might get taken the wrong way,I had her back when she got doxxed and had her FB hacked,..but you call my girl a slut, and then scrub the comment, fuck off.

    The Churchies have a deep enough hole to dig themselves out of, and they just get more pissed off when confronted with fact that it’s Game-aware men and PUAs who had to show them just how screwed up their religion has become, the truths of the FI and a slew of other intergender dynamics they think they should already have covered from reading the Bible.

    Just like every other “red pill” woman blogger, she doesn’t want answers, she just wants affirmation. Facebook isn’t satisfying that attention need so the next logical extension for a stay-at-home mom is to start blogging. And when the manosphere takes her at face value and it’s not affirming? Then the mission statement switches to “a blog written by a woman for women”

    I used to like the discussion there because it gave me hope that Game principles and red pill awareness might sink in for some guys in a christian venue, but there’s such an inbred resentment of having any manospherean point out truths to them it’s next to impossible.

    I’ll just stick to Dalrock who’s got a much more balanced approach.

  • Anonymous Reader

    Is it just my mistaken impression, or do women as a group seem to have a real problem understanding the difference between “ought” and “is” ? “should be” and “are”?

    Stingray
    Feelings are, regardless of whether or not they are relevant to the topic or even in the range of the topic. What actually is at that point, is so easily rendered irrelevant.

    Then the “should be” or the “ought” is tied up with emotion, and the “is” being purely reality oriented is just not as interesting?

    Next up: “some” and “all” and “me”. For a few years I’ve been banging the drum that “some” and “all” are not synonyms. First it was to the feministas, who are very often fond of sweeping generalizations of the “all men are rapists and that’s all they are” type. More recently, I’ve tried to explain to the feminized tradcons that NAWALT really is without meaning as a response to most criticisms of female behavior. Because “some” and “all”.

    Reading (ahem) some recent blog posts elsewhere, I realize that the third entry – “me” – is needed. Because of solipsism, whereby women read a critique of female behavior and the immediate reaction is I don’t do that!, as if individual women are the logical center of any possible discussion.

    Rollo, screenshots are your friend…

  • Kate

    Don’t take it to heart, Rollo :( Your daughter is actually one of the luckiest young ladies in the universe to have your knowledge to guide her. And that about your wife and her friends sneaking off to do the ultrasounds is one of the sweetest stories I’ve heard in a while.

  • Jeremy

    @Stingray

    Right. And, boy do women want you to pay attention to our own experiences.

    Well, I would like women to pay lots of attention to and be mesmerized by my stunning physique, I’d like to be able to just put on a special pair of boxers and have any woman want me, but that just aint going to happen like it happens for in-shape women and lingerie.

    Long ago, before I can remember, my mind gave up on the idea of being able to attract a woman by physical appearance alone. That doesn’t mean I don’t want my woman to appreciate that I kept myself in shape. It means that I accept that I will never, and should never, expect to compete with her at her max level of value in the SMP.

  • Jeremy

    I can’t imagine raising a daughter with the red pill perspective I have now.

    I think I would rather raise any daughter of mine as a nudist than try to accurately convey the truth of the SMP to her at the age of 13-14-15.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Sunshine Mary and the people that hang out at her blog like Earl are really just Traditionalist Catholics that take from Rollo and the other sphere bloggers what suits their ideals.

    Case in point: She links to a Roissy post about home schooling today. Convenient.

    http://sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com/2013/09/11/take-heart/

    As I said, her blog is just about affirmation of belief, not objective inquiry.

  • Jeremy

    @Kate,

    I did not see SSM’s handling of you and Minter. She seems to have defaulted to a tried-and-true method of shaming via holier-than-thou intimidation. That’s not necessarily FI, but it’s certainly stereotypical of arrogant Christianity. That’s actually kind of sad, I thought she was more well-spoken than that.

    I honestly got the impression that you were looking for a man in the manosphere Kate, I honestly did. It’s fair for you to call me out and correct me on that, but those were my feelings even before your wedding announcement. I don’t see anything inherently wrong with this behavior, except that I truly believe that male-spaces should be male -spaces. That said this is really not too different from Hugo sleeping around while being a prominent male feminist. Humans will be human wherever they set up camp, and absent and exclusion policy there’s nothing wrong with “being a male cheerleader for the access”. Just please keep in mind that sometimes human beings just need to be around people who see where they’re coming from, and only those people.

    As such, I find your commitment to MM to be very much outside the spirit of the manosphere because you sought out men in an area where men in pain were looking to exchange ideas with other men…, but ultimately what was done is not worth condemnation. If I were to throw stones at you for looking for men where men congregate I would be just as guilty as the arrogant Christians of the world who might condemn young men for trying to find the spring-break vacation site with the greatest bikini-to-sausage ratio.

  • FuriousFerret

    Rollo, next time a female manosphere blogger pops up, why don’t you just ignore them. It seems to annoy you when you try to befriend and guide them and they ultimately reject it. I just think it’s a lost cause. Women simply will never ever accept a male take on the red pill because it’s in direct contradiction of what they want from this world.

    Do you really think pampered upper middle class women are the ones that really going to agree with a reality in which their position isn’t exalted whether be behind the scenes or up front? SSM and Susan Walsh have no incentive for it. I don’t blame them though. I think it’s probably unreasonable to think people of their background could.

    Let these girls cluck alone where they can do no harm.

    SSM and her crew don’t even want the red pill. They want a time machine.

  • Anonymous Reader

    SSM and her crew don’t even want the red pill. They want a time machine.

    …fried ice…

  • BC

    affirmation of belief, not objective inquiry

    Spot on. This should be a litmus test when judging whether a person is worth spending time on.

  • Ton

    Nothing proves the red pill truth Rollo laid out in his post like having a daughter.

  • BlackPoisonSoul

    SSM implied that, hey? Piss on her indeed (she’s obviously not worth fucking). Just remember the Guide to Birdwatching in the Manosphere: this one would seem to be an Elusive Wife.

    That said, stay cool man. Many women get their hornies, an erotic little charge, out of making a strong man lose it – its a creepy game they play. When you catch that creepy little fuckin’ smile on her mug, you know that’s when she’s got you and she knows it too.

    Another of the female shit-tests in this world.

  • Tin Man

    “However, what it also means to me is that Mary, and other red-pill women, have not acknowledged their own ignorance.
    That is frightening. It means they are operating on a false presumption.”

    OK, I wasn’t going to be crude, but I will…the false presumption is that they can talk the talk AND walk the walk. As hard as it may be for a Man, I can’t fathom how hard it would be on a woman to ingest the Red Pill. But if I’m being real and honest with myself – I don’t really care. And I don’t really believe there are such things as “Red Pill woman” to me it’s an oxymoron.

    And it’s called the Manosphere for a reason — because it is where Men gather to learn, talk, digest, discuss, debate, give “attaboys” or a swift kick on the ass. I’m not here to pander to women – hell, pandering to a woman is what pushed me onto this path. I don’t care is they hang around, hell it’s free air, but really, I could care less what these woman say – it has not value to me in this area of my life. And I have witnessed to many woman seem normal, then all of sudden go BSC – leaving me just shaking my head in wonder.

    Rollo (and the other men here) keep up the good work. And I want to thank all of you for being here – it’s a great to have you (virtually) along for the ride.

  • Kate

    @Jeremy: I have little further to say regarding her comments. In my opinion, they speak for themselves. As for the impression you have gotten, I understand why you have it and can practically pinpoint the comment that earned it. But, no, my purpose in coming here a year and a half ago was the last stop in an already long journey to understand men in order to have a better relationship. I hoped to help as I could in exchange and was not here to exploit anyone who might have been in a weakened state. I specifically chose my former handle to indicate I was *not* looking. Conversing with conservative, intelligent adults was something I could only find online.

    I do understand the desire to be with people who share your experiences. I’m not a man, so I can’t ever understand what it means to be a man. But I do know what its like to give away half your assets in a divorce. I have made decisions with my heart and not my wallet and sought to be fair and not ruin a person financially. This- in girl world- is basically declaring yourself an enemy to women.

    So, I have ended up in some sort of no woman’s zone. I have long since given up on having friendships with women, and friendships with men are generally out of the question. More than enough men around here have said: “You’re not welcome on our side either.” So, while I apologize for how people received the news, I have no reason to apologize for finding what everyone in the world is searching for: understanding. I consider myself extremely lucky to have made this separate peace in the battle of the sexes.

  • Ton

    I doubt women can be truly red pill, that would require coming to terms with the ugly reality of her inherited nature.

  • Donttreadonmatt

    Someone commented earlier that he can’t imagine being a red pill man and raising daughters. I have two young ones, and when they’re talking innocently about what they want to be when they grow up, if they say “I want to be a mommy with five babies!” I respond, “That sounds great!” I’m sure some non red pillers would respond with discouragement, “Oh, you don’t want to just be a mommy, do you?” I think it starts right there with that question.

    I don’t let them watch too much television, other than PBS (which sometimes I have to correct the PC BS) and over the air Qubo. Too many commercials on the other kids stations. I get them outside to play every day. I’ll never let them watch some prepubescent teen star on Disney, that’s for sure.

    I’m getting them to love real music, not that techno shit. They know how to make devil horns, and they’ve growled out Christmas carols for laughs. This one is a little difficult to manage, though – it seems women are wired to like crappy music. I think men’s brains can filter through all the complicated melodies, harmonies and rhythms of metal and symphonies, where women just hear noise.

    No pierced ears. I just shake my head when I see little babies with pierced ears. Luckily, my wife had no intentions of mutilating my little babies.

    Only plan for the future is this: when the lads come a courting, and I have the talk out by the woodshed, my talk has changed from my pre to post red pill mindset. Rather than silly, posturing, implied threats, I’m going to tell the young man that it’s his job to be a man and to not do anything stupid, even if my daughter wants it – that it’s his job to make the decisions, to be strong, to be rational, and protect my daughter and himself. And if he doesn’t do it, then I’ll have to do it, and he won’t like that very much at all. So I guess there still is a threat in there for tradition’s sake.

    Other than I’m just winging it, hoping that my knowing the truth results in the right parenting decisions. I would love to see some posts on how a red pill man raises his daughters in this blue pill world.

    \m/

  • Stingray

    Don’ttreadonMatt,

    I’ve written on that topic if you are interested. In case you have skipped my comments, I am a woman, so you may not be interested.

    http://verusconditio.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/raising-a-daughter-part-1-2/

    http://verusconditio.wordpress.com/2013/05/15/raising-a-daughter-part-2/

    Apologies if I’ve overstepped given this thread.

  • Stingray

    Jeremy,

    Acceptance is a rational reaction to what you describe. I wish women would get this. Dalrock has a good post up today about this. Women are required to have moxie these days. Without it we are considered meek. Meek is unacceptable in girl world.

  • Stingray

    Then the “should be” or the “ought” is tied up with emotion, and the “is” being purely reality oriented is just not as interesting?

    It’s not that if just not as interesting, it’s that he “is” is painful. The pain kicks in the hamster which then does it’s best to get rid of the pain. Truth be damned.

    As to “some”, “all” and “me”, if it’s not expressly said we automatically think “well, he is talking about women. I am a woman, therefor he must be talking about me.” THIS is why feminist use sweeping generalizations like you stated. If they can make some men feel bad about rape, make them scared, manipulate their feelings, then they can change things to their advantage. Only, men don’t think this way. So, they turn to the women and make them scared and then the men respond to these women’s emotions.

    Now, is thinking that all of this applies to “me”, “some” or “all” rational? Of course, not, but we can’t help feeling it. That doesn’t mean that we can’t then stop and work our way through it and then realize one particular thing does not apply to us. But there is also a danger in this is that the hamster will say NAWALT even when the topic pretty much covers all women with a functional brain. (BTW, “I’m not like that” is our way of competing with other females to get your attention.).

  • Tin Man

    @Donttreadonmatt

    Love the part about the future dates — and losing the posturing and coming from a standpoint of “here’s what a man does” — great stuff, thanks for sharing.

    I have struggled with the whole “what to tell my daughter” – she’s 16 and very naive in certain ways and very grown up in others. So, any thoughts in this whole area are always welcome.

    I’ve been a bit more straight forward with my boys, and stopped sugar coating things and helping them to protect their feelings, their mom sitll provides lots of that. As an aside…my 14 year old told me he broke up with his GF (which I stated, why even have ONE GF, but that’s another thing) because she was flirting with one of his friends. I said “Good, if she doesn’t respect you, no need to get mad, just next her”. I realize that even at 14, this can be a shit test, but he needs to get over the “but I love her” crap now – and get good at know he is the prize and there is another one in the wings.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    @Stingray (& Kate), just as a statement of purpose, I never moderate the comments here. This is a blog written by a Man for men and women. Anyone is welcome to add their take on anything I post and, other than blatant spamming, I never edit, scrub or modify any comment, whether I agree with them or not.

    Open discourse is essential to an objective marketplace of ideas. Sometimes that mean civility may suffer, or toes get stepped on, but no idea, no statement of belief and no assertion of fact or point can ever be tested in a condition of censorship.

    Any man or woman is welcome to post here (even Matt King as loathe as I am to read him) with their input, just be prepared to face critical inquiry from the forum when you do.

  • Tin Man

    And for those wondering how I just showed up here — I’ve been commenting for a while, just under “Yep It’s Me” instead of “Tin Man” — the change over happened a week or so ago. Later Men….

  • Tin Man

    @Rollo…

    I, for one, appreciate your stance in your comment area. There are plenty of other sites which have either always, or are now, moderating comments. I usually don’t even bother reading their comments, know that the potential is there so skew the “message” to their own way of thinking. Personally, I like the comments of woman – not that I know what they are getting out of it or really care for that matter – because they either provide some bit of information I hadn’t considered, or they are just laughable (but that goes for those men rushing to the defense of ALL woman also – I like the comedy of it all and allows me to test some of my own thoughts processes).

  • Rollo Tomassi

    I actually value the input of women on RM, if for no other reason than they tend to organically prove my points – whether or not they agree with them.

  • Elspeth

    Red Pill women are what happened to the girls you knew in high school who had way more male friends than any girl should.

    I did have male friends in high school, but that wasn’t the impetus for my interest in men’s issues. I grew up in an all male household for the first 10 years of my life and was always sympathetic to the plight of men.

    At first the plight of black men, and then boys and men across ethnic lines when husband moved us to the suburbs. The disparity in treatment between the genders in schools was startling.

    I have no interest myself in being a manosphere blogger, but I do find the conversations here fascinating.

  • Donttreadonmatt

    @stingray

    Thanks for the links. Some useful tips and ideas. The problem comes when mom and dad don’t agree and don’t work as a team, or as captain and first mate. Given the theme of Rollo’s post and this comment thread – that there really is no such thing as a red pill woman – it is up to the man to lead and be the head of the household, and weather those storms that come from time to time.

    Here’s the way I see it, and I don’t know jack: A man needs to build the frame of the household – setting and maintaining the frame with his wife – because the little ones are living under that structure. That frame not only strengthens the connection between husband and wife, but it protects and nurtures the kids living beneath it, and they grow strong and healthy. If the kids look up and see holes in the roof and the frame swaying and cracking and splintering, and from time to time with a strong gust of wind the entire roof blows off, they get pretty scared and wonder whether they’d be better off building a lean-to out of some twigs and dirt outside in the woods. Or they seek out other structures that appear to be safer and stronger – at school, on television, in music, with their friends. At a minimum, they’re waiting eagerly for the day they can get the hell out from beneath that rickety structure, ill-equipped once out in the world to recognize a sound structure from a faulty one, having never seen one before.

    So pick up that hammer, gents. It’s up to us.

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 3,613 other followers

%d bloggers like this: