The Second Set of Books

books

One of the cornerstones of red pill truth is in men coming to terms with what amounts to (in most cases) half a lifetime of feminine conditioning. It’s interesting to consider that there was a time (pre-sexual revolution) when a man wasn’t in someway socialized and acculturated in his upbringing to give deference to the feminine or to become more feminine-identifying. There are plenty of other manosphere bloggers who’ll run down in detail all of the many ways boys are now raised and educated to be what a feminine-primary world would like them to be, but at the heart of it is a presumption that boys should be raised and conditioned to be more like girls; conditioned from their earliest memories to be better providers for what women believe they will eventually want them to be as adult ‘men’.

For men who’ve become aware of this conditioning through some trauma or personal crisis that prompted him to seek answers for his condition, we call this period our blue pill days. I think it’s important to make a distinction about this time – whether or not a man is Alpha or Beta doesn’t necessarily exclude him from the consequences of a blue pill conditioning. That isn’t to say that a more natural Alpha Man can’t see the world in a red pill perspective by his own means, but rather that his feminine-primary upbringing doesn’t necessarily make a man Alpha or Beta.

The Blue Pill Alpha

I’m making this distinction because there is school of thought that being blue pill (unaware of one’s conditioning) necessitates him being more Beta. To be sure, feminine-primary conditioning would raise a boy into a more feminine-pliable man – ready to serve as the good Beta provider when a woman’s SMV declines and she’s less able to compete with her younger sexual competitors.

However, there exist more Alpha Men also conditioned to be servants of the Feminine Imperative. These men make for some of the most self-evincing White Knights you’ll ever meet and are usually the first men to “defend the honor” of the feminine and women for whom they lack a real awareness of. Binary absolutism and an upbringing steeped in feminization makes for a potent sense of self-righteousness. Blue pill Alphas live for the opportunity to defend everything their conditioning has taught them. To the blue pill Alpha all women are victims by default, all women share a common historic suffrage and any man (his sexual competitors) critical of the feminine are simply an opportunity to prove his worth to any woman in earshot who might at all find his zealousness attractive.

The Second Set of Books

On June 15th, 2011, Thomas Ball set himself on fire in front of Cheshire Superior Court in New Hampshire. While I strongly disagree with his decision to self-immolate, I understand his sentiment. In last week’s Possession, Living Tree attempted to call me to the carpet about how a man might come to the conclusion of suicide or murder once he’d become confronted with a total loss of all his personal and emotional investment in life:

But Rollo, you just justified murder as “logical”, by illustrating that insecurity is the prime motivator for this man’s life (and many others, I’d imagine). The decision may have be understandable in an empathetic sense, and he might have seen it as logical at the time, but there is nothing logical about it. You are making extreme beta-ism seem more and more like a mental disorder.

Just for the record, I’d argue that ONEitis, however extreme, is in fact a mental disorder.

I haven’t justified anything, murder or suicide, I’ve simply outlined the deductive process men use when confronting the actualized loss of their most important investment (or perceptually so) in life. They are convinced and conditioned to believe that women are playing by a set of rules and will honor the terms of those rules, only to find that after ego-investing themselves for a lifetime in the correctness and appropriateness of those rules does he discover in cruel and harsh terms that women are playing by another set of rules and wonder at how stupid he could be to have ever believed in the rules he was conditioned to expect everyone would abide by.

Suicide or murder is certainly a deductive and pragmatic end for some men, but by no means is it justified. Thomas Ball, for all of his due diligence in uncovering the ugly processes of the American divorce industry, was far more useful alive than dead in some symbolic suicide. He wasn’t the martyr he probably expected he’d be, he’s just a footnote.

For all of that, Thomas Ball and his last message to humanity serves as an excellent illustration of a man coming to terms with his own conditioning. In his message Ball makes a very important observation about his legal ordeals. He comes to understand that there are two sets of books rather than the one he’d been lead to believe that everyone understood as ‘the rules’ everyone should play by.

The confusion you have with them is you both are using different sets of books. You are using the old First Set of Books- the Constitution, the general laws or statutes and the court ruling sometime call Common Law. They are using the newer Second Set of Books. That is the collection of the policy, procedures and protocols. Once you know what set of books everyone is using, then everything they do looks logical and upright.

Ball was of course making a political statement in his account of going through the legal system and the cruel education he got in the process, but when men transition from their comfortable blue pill perspective into the harsh reality that the red pill represents, the experience is a lot like Ball discovering that the set of books (the set of rules) he’d believed everyone was using wasn’t so. Likewise, men who’ve been conditioned since birth to believe that women were using a common set of rules – a set where certain expectations and mutual exchange were understood – were in fact using their own set. Furthermore these men ‘just didn’t get it’ that they should’ve known all along that women, as well as men’s feminization conditioning, were founded in a second set of books.

In and of itself, this is a difficult lesson for young men to learn and disabuse themselves of before they’ve invested their most productive years into what their blue pill conditioning has convinced them they can expect from life and women. However, when a mature man, who’s based the better part of his life and invested his future into the hope that the first set of books is actually legitimate set is disenfranchised by the second set of books, by the actual set of rules he’s been playing with, that’s when all of the equity he believed he’d established under the first set of books counts for nothing. Literally his life (up to that point) counted for nothing.

When faced with the prospect of rebuilding himself after living so long under false pretenses, after having all he believed he was building turn up to be a lifetime of wasted effort, he’s faced with two real options. Recreate himself or destroy himself. Needless to say suicide statistics among men are a strong indication that the majority of men (Betas) simply don’t have the personal strength to recreate themselves. Thomas Ball didn’t.

There’s usually a lot of disillusionment that comes with making the transition to Red Pill awareness. I’ve written more than a few posts about the stages of grief and acceptance that come along with that transition. Guy’s get upset that what they now see was really there all along, but it’s not so much the harshness of seeing red pill dynamics in women or a feminized society play out with such predictability, it’s the loss of investment that cause the real sense of nihilism. When I wrote Anger Management, the overarching reason most men experienced what they called a righteous anger, wasn’t at how the second set of books had been dictating their lives for so long, but rather it was anger at having invested so much of themselves in the first set of books and losing that very long term investment.

The good news is you can rebuild yourself. A lot gets written about how nihilistic the red pill is, but this is for a lack of understanding that you can recreate yourself for the positive with the knowledge of both sets of rules. One common thread I see come up often on the Red Pill Reddit forum is how Game-awareness has completely destroyed a guy’s world view. I get it, I realize it’s a hard realization, but their depression is only for a lack of realizing that they can become even better in this new understanding than they were in their blue pill ignorance.


311 responses to “The Second Set of Books

  • jf12

    Yes, Oneitis is a mental disorder, and it is the same as infatuation, being in love, limerence, etc. The redpill truth is that for a man, being in love doesn’t “work” as a technique. A man in love is automatically beta.

  • Sao Feng

    why give lyingtree any attention?

    No amount of logical discussion can get past the hamstring. It’s me-me-me all the way

  • donalgraeme

    This concept of “two sets of books” meshes well with the “They Live” sunglasses analogy. Once you put on the sunglasses, you can start to see the second set of books all around you.

  • Carlos

    To be honest, it is fairly disheartening at first to take the red pill.

  • Carlos

    By the way, I have three children and I think it was a serious lapse in judgement and self-control for Mr. Ball to hit his four year old hard enough to draw blood. Of course, that doesn’t justify the what they system later did to him with his spouse’s facilitation.

  • Glenn

    Fucking brilliant. It took the three most important women in my life – my daughter and two sisters turning on me for me to finally get it. My ex leaving me for another man left me twisting in the wind for 20 years as I sank deeper into hopelessness, denial and anger. After Parental Alienation and lies and endless denigration and being used for money, I still hadn’t gotten it. I felt as though I’d failed in every way possible. How could I have dedicated myself to being a husband and a father and to being a father figure and great brother for my sisters, only to have every last one of them turn on me? I realize now that I even actually took pleasure in the 220k in child support I paid over 13 years, that at least I felt like I mattered to some degree, that I was “providing” even while I was shit on. I thought that was part of being a man, being unappreciated.

    It took all of that for me to wake up. One of the things that I think most men don’t want to face is that this isn’t just about sexual relationships with women. It’s about how women are towards men and how we internalize it all. Rollo is so spot on when he talks about the anger at wasting my life dedicated to these people. When this all first hit me, how disposable I was, how my suffering was utterly uninteresting to any of them, how now that I wasn’t some hot shot (I became sick which crashed my career and negated my social status) – I could not believe I had wasted my life on these people, that I had dedicated so much of my love and time and energy and money on them. I felt that I had wasted my life. At age 50, I was literally spent – and then I lost my job. I stared into the abyss, but for me, it wasn’t the first time as in some perverse sense, my abusive upbringing and other suffering had already brought me to that brink earlier in life. I knew that exiting was final, a terminal solution and since I’m an atheist, I know that’s it. I hung on to the idea that as long as I was alive, maybe something good could happen to me sometime, someday. It’s that thin thread of hope that my life dangled from.

    And then I discovered the manosphere. I found out that I’d been playing by a set of rules that simply didn’t take my happiness or satisfaction for myself into account at all. I began to see the outrageous level of disregard for men and boys and fatherhood and masculinity in our society, and gleefully perpetuated by women, the hate and dehumanization for what it was. Even more disturbing was to see how I had internalized this view of myself. Ashamed of my sexual desires, disappointed in my financial choices and lack of “responsibility”, crushing myself for having “failed” in my career. At let me tell you at 50, and now 51, this isn’t a joke. It feels final. When you get to my age, there aren’t any do-overs left.

    But then I just saw it all for the bullshit that it is, and somehow or another decided that my life is worth living, just because it is. That I deserve to be happy and joyful – no matter what. That I could look myself in the mirror and know that while I may have wasted my investment in those illusions, that I also had done my best. The awakening for me has been nothing short of an utter shift in my energy and optimism and feeling of being alive itself. While it’s still uncertain and the old programs do try and run themselves in my head, I have stepped out of them. I’m not here to fucking serve anyone. This may sound odd, but for me it also applies to other areas of my life. My Dad (a terroristic monster and abuser of Hollywood proportions) is dying. I have been trying to help but find it very upsetting, but was telling myself I should go and try and be nice as the last time I had run him around to doctors all day he’d really pissed me off and I let him have it (verbally). You see, this Red Pill shit has changed me. I’m not anybody’s doormat and if you are a man who’s abused me and I’m being nice enough to take care of you, you had better be nice to me. And he wasn’t and I simply would not tolerate it.

    I felt the familiar guilt of obligation, the dialog about me being “a good son” and doing it so “I could look myself in the mirror”. It felt the same as all the other obligations I had taken on in my life like a bit slapped into my mouth and I realized I didn’t have to go. Fuck him too, he nearly ruined my life before I got out of the gate. I owe him nothing and have already paid him 1000 times what he is due. You see, today, I put myself first. I don’t account for myself by what I think I should be anymore. My happiness and peace of mind and what serves me are more important than anything. I know this site is about women, but this sense of obligation felt like chivalry, like a “good man” does the “right thing” no matter what. This whole lecture that went on inside myself for most of my life about what it means to be a good man and pushing my petty feelings down. So what it turns my guts into acid to be around him? Grow up, “do the right thing”. Fuck the right thing. It’s time for me to get mine and everyone else can get in line behind me.

    And anyone who doesn’t like it can kiss my ass. Daughter, sisters, lovers, father – I’m not anyone’s mule anymore. Whew, I hope this makes sense to other guys here. Thanks Rollo as reading your stuff has been hugely helpful to me in this journey.

  • Badpainter

    “why give lyingtree any attention?”

    Because she is a perfectly typical representative of the common strain of anglo-bourgeois-feminine-imperative. We benefit by seeing the clarity of her feelings without the distraction of the prejudgment of knowing what she looks like. And she’s not particularly hostile. I would place her in a feminist zoo in the habitat labeled Canuckistanian Gyno-Marxist.

  • onasendai

    This is another classic from you Rollo, on par with War Brides in my opinion.

    After reading how Glenn was awakened to the manosphere I too thought back to when I realized I was working with another set of books that I never even knew existed. It’s really disheartening to realize that there are a lot of guys out there that only experience this criminal reality when everything that they’ve worked their entire wealth building years are on the line. Their jobs, their bank accounts, their children, and their homes…. Everything that they truly internalize as their contribution to society gets lifted up under their feet and some guys can’t pick themselves up when they land.

  • earl

    Personally I think it behooves every man to be red pill while maintaining a sense of the blue.

    If you think the red pill is nihilistic…I suggest reading the book of Ecclesiastes in the Bible. That has to be one of the most nihilistic books in there.

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ecclesiastes+1&version=NLT

    And yet it still presents hope for everyone that while life is ultimately futile…you should still enjoy it.

    I see no problem with nihilism as long as it doesn’t take you down completely that life is bleak. I see no problem living in blissful ignorance as long as you aren’t surprised when the truth constantly smacks you upside the head.

  • john

    The second set of book covered by feminism. Hard truth.

  • Vi Nay

    It is tough to accept the truth, but the reality is men split into 3 groups:

    1) A small percentage of men who have always attained a natural ability to deal with women – these are usually high social status jerks who, due to inundated female followers, become relaxed with the comprehension another will always be around the corner.
    2) Men who forever live in the blue pill world. Even those who accept that female choices are somewhat illogical still continue i vain hope.
    3) Men who have learned and accepted the reality, and they adapt to suit.

    I always think the below link is worth a look in view of point 3).

    http://www.vinaywcmd.com/2013/12/christmas-stocking-fillers-santa-nice.html

  • Andy

    There are parallel educational tracks for boys and girls that are separate and very unequal. Girls, are told formally and informally through their school, society, and their families,that they can ignore the very same rules that apply to boys. The concepts of honor, honesty and responsibility for your actions are stressed to boys only, to keep them moral and productive.

    These same concepts are treated as optional at best for girls. Boys are expected to limit their options to what is good for society. Girls are told anything that gets them what they want is fair game.

    There a few unspoken assumptions that are responsible for the differences we see between what is expected of boys and of girls.

    1. Civilization demands that someone do the hard work of keeping it
    going. This requires qualities such as discipline, reliability, dependability, honor and courage.

    2. Society doesn’t require that both sexes do this, as long as at
    least one of them is.

    3. Men have been stuck with this responsibility, and women have
    happily avoided it.

    4. Society continues to indoctrinate males that they must have these
    qualities and to accept the responsibility for running civilization.

    Society also continues to indoctrinate females that they don’t need
    to have these qualities, and should be free to concentrate only on
    their desires and wants.

    5. In spite of the unfairness of this arrangement, and the freedom
    that only women enjoy (as their participation in the furthering of
    civilization is strictly voluntary), society still cannot resist the
    urge to further advantage women and disempower men.

    Here’s a brief list of some of the qualities that make civilization
    possible. Below each quality is a description of how each quality is
    taught to boys versus how it is presented to girls.

    Honor
    Boys are told to value that which is gained through hard work and
    playing by the rules. For boys only, taking advantage of someone
    else, or winning by not obeying the rules is looked down upon, and
    it invalidates the win completely.

    For girls, honor isn’t something to strive for. All that IS important is that they get what they want. And the easiest way to do this is to not be limited by any ideal. This is probably the foundation of girls’ emphasis on making decisions based on whether it can get them what they want rather than whether it is moral. The ends justify any means.

    For boys, honor is intended to limit their choices and potential actions. Girls are aware that they can appeal boy’ sense of honor when required. For example, girls may ask for some sort of handicap in a competition, or may continue to request another chance until she wins.

    When only one person follows the rules in a game or a sport, the other is considered to a cheat. Unfortunately, when that other has no sense of honor, labeling her as a cheat has no power to change her behavior.

    Honesty
    Any guess which sex is told that manipulation is a completely acceptable, and in fact, a necessary method for getting what she wants? No wonder this is such a lonely word.

    Accountability/Facing the Music
    When boys get in trouble, one of the non-negotiable parts of their subsequent disciplining is that they offer an unqualified admission of guilt, Usually this occurs in two parts – admitting what they did, and then explaining back to those in authority why it was wrong. Usually, no rationalization is accepted. Also, their punishment is not necessarily lessened as a reward for coming clean.

    In other words, boys are forced to accept and admit the truth, even when this is a bad negotiating position for them. Also, they are expected not to make excuses, but just to take whatever punishment they get without complaint.

    Contrast this to a girl’s expectation not to be held accountable for anything. She never has to admit a truth, even to herself. You can see this expectation in their word choices, such as beginning an explanation of something she did that she knows you won’t like with “Now, don’t get mad…”. Girls explain rather than confess, and the purpose her explaining is to make her feel better, not to accept blame and punishment.

    In rare circumstances when you hold a girl to account for her actions, she usually expresses shock or anger – “why are you being so mean?”. Holding a girl to account for anything makes YOU the one with the problem. Didn’t you get the message?

    Self-Reliance
    Girls are encouraged to have an “always a victim” mentality. Other people (boys) owe her something because of this. Every new demand women make of the government will be couched in these terms. The idea that she should take the initiative and make the effort to get what she wants, and do it independently of government or men, is not considered.

    Maturity
    Only women have the option of never growing up. A woman can generally get her wants and needs met by drafting a man or the government to meet them. Her draft pick also serves as her buffer against the hard realities of life. Not having to face reality means no growth on any level. This won’t make her a helpful or useful partner for anyone, but it frees up a lot of time for her to do other things. Those other things generally do not include becoming independent, engaging in self-examination, or showing appreciation.

    Equality
    Isn’t a concept of equality that benefits only one of the sexes distorting the meaning of the word? Yes, and that doesn’t bother women. Any existing advantages that men have must be removed, while any existing advantages that women have must be protected. But the inequality inherent in women’s re-defining of “equality” is just the beginning. There are all sorts of ways women start out with an advantage – affirmative action, changing the rules or lowering the standards, or by requesting to be judged on a scale that doesn’t take quantifiable results into account.

    Unfortunately, this means that girls are never forced to acknowledge boys are better than they are at anything. If women are convinced that they can “compete” against men, they take this as proof that they are, not just the equal of men, but really, their superior. After all, they bested men at their own game. Even if they had to change the rules, give themselves a head start, and keep playing until they won.

    Equality to women is a tool to get what they want rather than an ideal state of things. In fact, once they hamstring men using Equality, they are free to engage in rigged “competitions” with men, where the men have every inherent disadvantage but none of their natural advantages.

    Inflating girls sense of themselves through these rigged games leads to the unearned, but very real (to them) sense that women are better than men, and what’s worse, a very disrespectful attitude toward men. For all their talk about equality, women never want to compete with men on equal terms. Even the most competitive women would prefer a rigged game to a fair one. And you can see why, it offers a sense of accomplishment and the enjoyment of winning with none of the actual work. Or accomplishment. Or winning.

  • Different T

    Thank you, Rollo.

    ——————-

    The manosphere is considered nihilistic because it is.

    Nihilism states that there is no purpose to in human life. Therefore, no fundamental identity. As Glenn’s comment illustrates, this can lead to an embrace of hedonism. It can also lead to an embrace of buddhism or similar. I recall a post from Mark Minter a long time ago where he basically said “I just wonder about my house now, doing nothing because there is no point. I don’t get happy, I don’t get depressed, I just do what I want. Today the only thing I did was go to the grocery store.” To which Kate responded, “That’s great. You’re living!”

    The “treatment,” in those cases, has the same goal, the cessation of pain. Whether by avoiding it outright and seeking pleasure or glorifying the lack of any emotional response, the person can longer tolerate negative stimuli. The constant is that the reality outside of the person no longer has any place in their world view except as something to be avoided.

    ————————

    When I wrote Anger Management, the overarching reason most men experienced what they called a righteous anger, wasn’t at how the second set of books had been dictating their lives for so long, but rather it was anger at having invested so much of themselves in the first set of books and losing that very long term investment.

    The question not being asked is the most important. Was that first set of books created by emotional whim or as a response to the realities of human life?

    Have those realities fundamentally changed or has an enormous amount of energy been spent creating and maintaining the illusion that those realities have changed?

    This relates back to “Nihilism states that there is no purpose to in human life. Therefore, no fundamental identity.”

  • deti

    This seems particularly appropriate here:

    http://redpillpushers.wordpress.com/2013/12/29/shocked-bitter-angry-men/

    ” *** men hate, with an unbridled passion, not knowing the rules of the game that they’re playing. We are so goal, rule, structure, and boundary oriented, that to be competing in a contest where the rules are unclear is anathema to the male spirit. For men, realizing that the world you knew was a complete lie, and you were a fool working against his own best interests is akin to a blazing dagger being plunged into the masculine brain, and the pain may never fully go away.”

  • Glenn

    @ Different T – Hedonism? That’s what you got out of my comment? Wow, that’s just bizarre. Rather, what I’ve realized is that by putting service to society and family and women ahead of my own self-interests, I’ve damaged myself. I put the bit in my teeth and just pulled and valued myself by service to those roles. I remember in my early days as a Dad with a stay at home wife, realizing by being absent 5 days a week for 10-12 hours a day that my daughter would grow up closer to her mom. That she might even resent me. But I told myself that even if I was never thanked for facilitating this very closeness with her mom and all the provisioning, that this was just part of the bitter satisfaction of “being a man”. That I had to take satisfaction by knowing I was doing the right thing, even if I wasn’t going to be respected or acknowledged for it, that they asymmetry of that relationship was just the way it was and that I would have embrace the suck.

    Not so for me now. Relationships are reciprocal. Without respect from my daughter, I don’t want a relationship with her. With women, I’m no longer willing to act as though my libido is a character defect or that romantic expectations are “normal” or morally superior to the more casual relations I prefer. My relationships with men have always been two way streets, whether with my two brothers or male friends. This balance is what I bring now. I still care about many things, family, community etc, but the self-sacrifice that seemed as the essential nature of masculinity to me, that I had internalized to such a ridiculous extreme is gone. Equanimity and fairness are essential to me now, and I’m out to be as self-seeking as everyone else in these settings are, placing a real priority on my happiness, my joy, my dignity and my values instead of shoving it all down. Being a man used to seem to me to be an exercise in endless delayed gratification. Not anymore.

    If that’s hedonism to you, I suggest you look up the word. I am a humanist and a bit of an Epicurean, but that is about not believing there is an all powerful man-in-the-sky who should live for. There is an ethical hedonism, fyi, and in fact, the “pursuit of happiness” reflects this. It makes me happy to do good, but doing good now means I get my needs met and don’t suffer in silence, and that before doing good for others, I make sure I’m taken care of.

  • swiftfoxmark2

    The problem is that most men fail to understand that women will not love men in the same way that men will love them. Once you understand this and accept it, you will have a much healthier relationship with your wife or girlfriend.

    There’s nothing wrong with being in love, but for men it holds a radically different meaning than for women.

    As for the Second Set of Books, they are very real and a huge problem in this day and age. Because women are usually only good at administrative jobs, they tend to go to bureaucratic middle-management when working for the government. As such, we have a lot of women interpreting the laws, policies, and mandates of their superiors in their own way to suit their own perspectives.

    This is why we see child support being forced on men who were defrauded by women (either tricked into getting her pregnant or raising a baby who is not their own). This is why we see men paying ridiculous amounts of alimony to their working ex-wives. And this is why mothers get custody despite being financially unable to and/or having cheated on her husband (which should be a dis-qualifier for custody in a sane, reasonable court system).

    There are ways to beat that system though. I’ve heard of men who have gotten their ex-wives charged with perjury for statements they made in family court. All it requires is active engagement, should you end up in a divorce scenario.

    And please, understand that Oneitis is an age-old pagan concept. Nobody on Earth can make you whole, no matter who they are.

  • BC

    The Second Set of Books can only be maintained if many are brainwashed to follow the First Set of Books.

    The way to deal with the Second Set of Books, if outright avoidance to starve the beast is not possible, is to become aware (Red Pill) and subvert them (Black Knighting, Game).

  • earl

    As far as laws in the family court system…remember laws can be bent and they can be broken.

    Men want rules with a system that plays fair. Women want the opposite. It’s a female centered society…so the system doesn’t play fair and the rules don’t matter.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    @Glenn and Different T, there’s an important distinction between ‘hedonism’ and ‘enlightened self-interest’.

  • Water Cannon Boy

    I’ve always wondered if anybody’s ever looked at what child support gets set as versus what was actually spent on children before the split.

  • Scooterpie

    Women make the rules up as they go. If a “rule” suited them at one point or was advantageous to their hypergamy it is valid. If it no longer meets their needs they discard and create a new one.

    I would like to put a visual in your heads to help you all remember what playing by the rules can get you. If you have seen the film “No Country For Old Men” there is a scene where the character Anton Chigurh played by Javier Bardem confronts Carson Wells played by Woody Harrelson. Chigurh prior to killing Wells asks “If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?”

    What use indeed! Let that statement of red pill truth sink in even if it is not entirely in the context of what we are discussing here. It’s application is still potent for us none the less.

  • mikedtzo

    This is an amazing post and probably one of the most succinct I’ve ever read here, and should be included in Rational Male’s Best of Year Two. I can’t think of a better intro to the manosphere / red pill / RM world than to read this in order to get up to speed.

    There’s a moment where you finally realize that, all along, you’ve been coerced into playing by a rulebook that is designed to work against your interests and is a functional handicap to play by. What man in his right mind would continue to play by those rules?

    A lot, I’m sorry to say. The pathology of reflexive chivalry and white knighting has been instilled in a lot of us since birth, set there by our female family (often unconsciously) and culture at large; it can take a enormous amount of work (in my case) to quell the interior voice that you’re less than a man for choosing other rules. But when you realize the other side has their OWN self-written rulebook (designed to give them the home court advantage, and it was never meant to fall into your hands), that’s the moment when the shock of being duped for 40+ years turns into anger.

    One thing we men learn early is to uphold the concept of FAIR. Finding the rulebook changes all that. Yes, a red pill mindset is essentially nihilistic, but it’s the nihilism of utter clarity. If you continue engaging with women according your original set of rules, you’re a stone fool and prepare yourself to be stripped of everything you own, will ever earn and hold dear.

    From my perspective as a single, divorced, 48 yr. old; learn as much as you can about how women TRULY operate, share what you learn with other men in need, invest 110% in yourself ONLY, and learn to walk away from anyone – friends, family, vagina and employers – that does not support you.

    Invest in the 2nd set of books.

  • Laguna Beach Fogey

    The transition, as shocking as it is, can be done. I did it in my mid-20s, right before the advent of Game and Red Pill thinking, on my own, without help from anyone.

    It was eye-opening. Suddenly everything made sense. (My Red Pill awareness also paralleled my awakening to racial, cultural, and social realities). I lost friends and became estranged from family members as a result.

    The cross-over, once you make it, gives you an inner peace, calm, and confidence.

    The only possible downside to being a thought criminal is that, for me, women have lost some of their “feminine magic”. Now, I’m under no delusions about them. I’m not sure I could love one the way I did when I was a younger man, which, upon reflection, I think is a good thing overall.

    Speaking of books, Rollo, I’m almost finished reading yours for the second time, and have recommended it to two friends.

  • Badpainter

     An old joke about the rules.

    1. The Female always makes THE RULES.

    2. THE RULES are subject to change without notice.

    3. No Male can possibly know all THE RULES.

    4. If the Female suspects the Male knows all THE RULES, she must immediately change some or all of THE RULES.

    5. The Female is never wrong.

    6. If it appears the Female is wrong, it is because of a flagrant misunderstanding caused by something the Male did or said wrong.

    7. If Rule #6 applies, the Male must apologize immediately for causing the misunderstanding.

    8. The Female can change her mind at any given time.

    9. The Male must never change his mind without the express, written consent of The Female.

    10. The Female has every right to be angry or upset at any time.

    11. The Male must remain calm at all times, unless the Female wants him to be angry or upset.

    12. The Female must, under no circumstances, let the Male know whether she wants him to be angry or upset.

    13. The Male is expected to read the mind of the Female at all times.

    14. At all times, what is important is what the Female meant, not what she said.

    15. If the Male doesn’t abide by THE RULES, it is because he can’t take the heat, lacks backbone, and is a wimp.

    16. If the Female has PMS, all THE RULES are null and void and the Male must cater to her every whim.

    17. Any attempt to document THE RULES could result in bodily harm.

    18. If the Male, at any time, believes he is right, he must refer to Rule #5

    That this joke has been around for as long I can remember is the best evidence I can cite to claim that the blue-pill is willful ignorance and denial of reality. That the above is treated as a joke by women suggests the perfect example of men “just not getting it.” When men laugh,in agreement with the women, at this they enslave themselves.

  • livingtree2013

    Rollo,

    Perhaps this is startlingly obvious to you already, but I maintain that relationship failure occurs 99/100 times because of unstated/unheard expectations, which leads to disappointment, then resentment, and then disrespect which overtakes every transaction. The eventual trigger for the final implosion might be cheating, or whatever… but what started the whole messy terrible process of getting to that point was a history of unmet expectations.

    I wonder if you could better illustrate what the “rules” are that you guys want to believe that women are playing by (perhaps you’ve already written an article or ten on this?). I’m curious because I can’t help think that these “rules” are rules that men made, that men keep, and that men assume that women are following, without us even having agreed to them, or in some cases without even knowing what they are. And to be sure, women have their own set of expectations that they may or may not share with men, which men may not actually agree to.

    I am not asking what a man’s ideal is. which I’ve already read about in several of your articles. I am asking about these specific, ambiguous “rules of conduct” for the marriage transaction, from a man’s point of view.

    I’m certain that if the rules of engagement were made clear, and agreement was obtained in advance, marital relationships would rarely fail. This is why (in part) arranged marriages have such a low divorce rate – the rules of conduct are usually pre-established by the parties doing the arranging. Modern marriages based on “feeeeeeelings” do not exercise such caution.

  • D-Man

    “Inflating girls sense of themselves through these rigged games… offers a sense of accomplishment and the enjoyment of winning with none of the actual work. Or accomplishment. Or winning.”

    Considering that testosterone levels in men (and probably women, doubt there’s a study on that) spike measurably in the wake of a competitive win and decline after a loss, we’re looking here at how the Second Set of Books is grinding our gears to change our very physiology, or at least hamstring it. It’s a self-reinforcing feedback loop.

    This social engineering, applied on a culture-wide scale, is the leading candidate, in my eyes, for the cause of the incipient manjawification of women, and corresponding manboobification of men.

  • earl

    Even in Fight Club…the first two rules were broken and Bob wore a shirt.

  • Doh-San

    “Game-awareness has completely destroyed a guy’s world view”

    Of course, there’s nothing wrong with destroying a false world view.

  • DeNihilist

    I see how some would go the suicide route. My brother had to be talked “down from the ledge”. But as Rollo states, the awareness of the truth can AND SHOULD be freeing.

    As the old Jew said, about 2,000 years ago, “the Truth shall set you Free!”

  • earl

    All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

  • LostSailor

    @Glenn’s story makes perfect sense because most of us here have gone through the same process.

    I found the red pill years ago now, and have long since moved beyond the dismay and anger that the process engenders at the start. Like Glenn, I came to it later in life after the collapse of what I’d thought had been a happy near-20-year marriage. Fortunately, I came out relatively unscathed as we had no children and my ex proved to be actually sane after she pulled the plug.

    I don’t necessarily think that the Red Pill is nihilistic, though I can certainly see that it might look that way at the start. Nor do I think it is necessarily hedonistic, though it can be if that’s the direction one wants to go. Rollo rightly points out the difference between hedonism and enlightened self-interest, and it’s at that latter point I find myself these days. I’m not out to “get” anyone else, but I put my interests first these days.

    Most of my friends and family are still firmly thinking they’re playing but the first set of rule books for men, which I sum up as self-sacrifice for the benefit of family and society and you will rewarded with love and respect. The second set of books keeps the first part as not just an option, but an obligation, and removes the rewards. A man will self-sacrifice because society (and often law) says he must without any reciprocal obligations from women or society. Most of my friends and family would likely be appalled at some of the relationships I’ve constructed with women since taking the red pill, so I simply don’t discuss it with them at all. But approaching my life with an eye toward enlightened self-interest has brought many material and emotional/mental benefits.

    Frankly, since the second set of books abjures any reciprocal obligation for my participation in society, I feel I have little obligation to sacrifice for that society.

    Have I been able to rebuild myself in ways I might have if I were younger? No. That ship has sailed. But I have been able to rebuild a better version of me than before and intend to enjoy being that person without apology, bitterness, or regret.

  • livingtree2013

    Exactly Doh-San. That world view was based on a system of rules founded upon a delusion, it deserved to be broken a long time ago.

    http://vault.hanover.edu/~altermattw/research/assets/AltermattDissertation.pdf

  • Glenn

    @ Rollo – Exactly, “enlightened self interest” isn’t a bad way of describing it. But to me it’s so important for me to see how utterly un-self interested I was. I was in denial and also in a double bind because I held myself up to standards that the most important women in my life didn’t hold themselves to, and also in denial about how screwed up it all was. I still HAD TO see myself as a “good father” and a “good brother’ – no matter what. I could not accept failure, and also realized that I was still holding on to my ex in a bizarre way, a woman who truly abused me as she is covert NPD.

    Even after my marriage ends at age 30 All my gentlemanly, romantic, chivalric crap was tied around some alphaness as I did pull women pretty well during my younger years – but my frame was utterly effed up. It was never about me and my life. I kicked every woman to curb who played games with me = all of them. I had hard and fast boundaries and promised myself i would never be “trapped” again, but that was all in reaction to “one-itis”. And I always lost myself in “love” and never saw how that whole game was about them, not me. Now I know is was some kind of alpha that hot girls were riding in their hypergamy, but was utterly incompetent.

    So for me, the enlightened bit is huge. Seeing the layers of it and how it permeated my identity and ruined me. Despite having maybe 7-8 gfs who were “dimes” (all for 4-5 months until the shit started to get deep) I had no idea what was going on with women. The truth is I was scared of falling in love and scared but had no way to frame it all and to actually value myself properly. Blue Pill indeed.

    So now I’m not up for servitude. I’m not up for the games where I always lose. I now see my value and my worth as central to me. And everything looks different, but I’m still a good person. I still will help someone in need, still will give back to my community, still be generous to people who are actual friends and good, reciprocal family members. But the rest? They can go suck it.

  • livingtree2013

    **** angels singing in background ****

  • Glenn

    @ LivingTree – So according to you, the “rules” were essentially imposed by the male defined patriarchy? The females in no way exercised any agency in the development of our culture? Chivalric codes were first given by the church to knights to tame their brutal ways and were a way of making sacred their service. Romantic love and courtly love emerge around the same time as large cultural phenomena, and in fact, courtly love codes were introduced by women in royalty in the middle ages. See Peter Wright’s excellent site, gynocentrism.com for in depth treatment of these ideas – no need to read PhD theses.

    The problem with seeing any of this in a model of one sex imposing these norms on the other is that it ignores so many other factors that affect culture, such as institutions, biology, economics, geography etc. Many of these cultural practices can be seen as imposed norms by governing institutions and adaptive strategies by agents in the societies who have their own goal seeking behaviors.

    Complexity science has the best lens for all of this in my thinking, and through that lens what men are going through today can be seen as gynnocentrism, gynarchy and feminism aided and abetted by biological imperatives. These cultural phenomena are relatively recent, emerging over the past 800 years or so but are better understood when we see how the institutions of society – church, state, arts, education etc internalize and transmit these ideas.

    So, to reduce it all to a chivalric code created by men, based on men’s biased views of women is nothing short of laughable. Go read Peter Wright if you haven’t already, I think you’ll find it revelatory.

  • Anonymous Reader

    LyingTree2013
    [bats eyes]
    “But, gosh, Rollo, I just don’t understay-and, what do you mean by “second set of books”? I’m just a gurl, I can’t figure it out, so how about if you burn up a lot of time and effort trying to explain it to me, me, me, me, me, rather than doing anything else you might think is important?”

    Careful readers should note this particular game, as it can appear to the casual observer as something rational. It isn’t, it’s merely another attempt at a reframe, courtesy of the Female Imperative.

  • D-Man

    This is the main fallacy of the imaginary victim-oppressor schema that so many subscribe to.

    If you remove the agency of one group by classifying them as unqualified victims, you essentially dehumanize them in a worse way than the temporary kind they experienced by coming up short in direct competition.

    “Righting the scales in their favour” teaches them deep down that they are inherently, intractably inferior, while giving their ids free reign over their actions. Essentially, it infantilizes them.

    Feminism is not the only imaginary victim/oppressor paradigm in which this process is backfiring.

    We cannot Harrison Bergeron this world.

  • livingtree2013

    Glenn, please. I never said anything of the sort. I’m not engaging in a “who started it” argument here, please lets not be petty. I’m saying that chivalry is a deeply ingrained cultural script that men and women alike have, for much of our history, let rule us.

    I’m not in any way saying that women haven’t upheld the cultural script just as much as men have, throughout history, and they unwittingly still do – including many feminists – and so do most men (this is what a beta male is, from my reading of it).

    For the cultural script to work, chivalrous (beta) men need honorable women to conduct themselves in a manner that exhibits “low agency” and “high virtue”. Women who meet this standard will be bestowed with preferential treatment (protection and provisioning). Women who do not, won’t. Simple enough. It is an important role for women to play, because it bestows men with a sense of worth in the world, which women have most definitely learned to glean benefits from.

    But also throughout history you see a string of “high agency” women who refused to conform to the traditions that were bestowed to them because they KNOW that it does more harm than good. Those women were, and still frequently are, cast out socially (by purveyors of the chivalrous code) and condemned as being “low virtue” (because that fault is certainly more unforgivable than being independent), or for being “difficult,” (translation: unmarriageable), which in medieval times was a fate worse than death for a woman. Even now, unmarried women are viewed with contempt. Slut and spinster would not be words that carried so much weight if it weren’t for that cultural framework.

    Who created the code? I don’t actually give a shit. What I do care about is that it is still being upheld so ardently. As much as you think its ridiculous, I see much of those same chivalrous values upheld on this forum in nearly every post. I see it written by SSM. I see it written by much of the manosphere. Its evident even in your own writing Glenn, you actually just did it, right in your last post.

    Almost every sentence I see written on this forum is like a direct transcript from the chivalry handbook, the handbook which, as much as you hate it and rail against it and mock men who still uphold it, it is so deeply ingrained in you that you will most certainly go to your death defending it.
    You recognize the problem with it, but its become part of you, so letting it go is like a form of death.

    I feel bad for you guys, in a way. Your entire life seems to have had no purpose if you abandon all the generations of training you’ve received to defend it. Women were just using it to their advantage. For men, it is a way of life. You have a much harder struggle than we do.

  • jf12

    @Glenn “I thought that was part of being a man, being unappreciated.” I still think so, that women automatically disappreciate most men and that it will never change no matter what. However, I do think it is possible for individual men’s women to change from unappreciating him to being … well, less unappreciative anyway, by him doing fewer things for them to appreciate. I’m reasonably certain the vast majority of men will never be actually correctly appreciated by any woman ever.

  • jf12

    @earl “Eat, drink, and be merry” is the dinner bell for nihilists.

  • livingtree2013

    Besides, Glenn. I’d be much more inclined to attribute scientific merit the perspective of a PhD, who’s spent eight years dedicated to academic study of the topic of dissertation, than a very biased, random uneducated dude who writes a blog on topics that have very little objective basis to it.

    I hope that you haven’t been bitten by the conspiracy bug so badly that you think empirical evidence is tainted by the “feminine imperative” too. Egads.

  • Grim

    Well said, Glenn.

  • jf12

    @Laguna Beach Fogey “Now, I’m under no delusions about them. I’m not sure I could love one the way I did when I was a younger man, which, upon reflection, I think is a good thing overall.” I’m certain that wife goggles is the same as “I haven’t fallen out of love with her.” I had been in love for roughly forty of my fifty adultish years (I’m in my md 60s), and although there have been times I thought I would never be in love again, I am certain of it now.

  • Super Bowl Dave

    Much wisdom in Andy’s post:

    “In rare circumstances when you hold a girl to account for her actions, she usually expresses shock or anger – “why are you being so mean?”. Holding a girl to account for anything makes YOU the one with the problem. Didn’t you get the message?”

    For me, these circumstances have not been rare. I have a habit of being brutally honest with women, and it’s never productive for me. I call them out. I never put up with their b.s.

    And it amazes me that even in the ones who are Republicans, or *seem* more awake and aware, or *say* they aren’t feminists, The Rules are still the same for them, completely malleable to their whims. It’s only Her Feelings that matter, “forgiveness” means she never forgets and will remind you of that and hold it against you, she is SHOCKED when YOU have an emotional reaction to what *she does* (and she will keep a debit and credit ledger of it in her Slights and Offenses handbook), and in the end, you’re always a “jerk”.

  • Kenneth L

    My thoughts after reading this article are “What a load of crap”. Awwww poor men .. we’ve had to deal with viewpoints that may not work in our favor for gasp 50 years.

    Whereas women have been persecuted, raped, murdered, executed for crimes that men wouldn’t be executed for (and still are executed for them today), held as property, forced into societal positions they didn’t want, and in general just fucked by men for thousands upon thousands of years. (In substantially higher numbers than men)

    I’m a 40 year old alpha male, divorced because my ex and I grew apart, and I’m still fucking man enough to realize the complete stupidity in having a pity party because women want to have some rights in society as well.

    What cowards you all are, Rolo most of all. You only see the man’s side, and then completely downplay the woman’s side. Isn’t this exactly what men have been doing to women for centuries? To put it bluntly, in the words of my 6 year old son and 8 year old daughter, “It ain’t fair!”

    When will this sect of boys in our society realize that being a man is more than the pussy you fuck and how women around you react to you? Whether or not you are a man has nothing to do with women. It has to do with the way we are. We don’t need to diss women and their completely rational need to be treated right and correctly in order to be masculine ourselves. To be a man means to protect the rights that we all deserve. I am worried just as much about the way my daughter’s life is going to be effected by these idiotic viewpoints that women shouldn’t be allowed to get fair treatment the same as I’m worried that my son will be effected by the ‘crazy feminism’ that’s going around.

    Hopefully the next generations figures this shit out because so far, all I see here are a bunch of whiny ass babies, who are pissed because women want the same treatment as men, and in the end aren’t focused on all of this as what it really is: the fight for human rights for all humans, regardless of sex, age, race, and anything else. (My apologies to those commenting who are not saying this. I’m too irritated to make a rational comment.)

  • jf12

    @Doh-San, the deluded world view of patriarchial culture of the West, in which women were honored as the weaker vessels, with its characteristic chivalry being the normative male role, was revealed to be false only after women were freed to be feral and unappreciative of chivalry. In the feral world, for example in the Yanamano world as linked approvingly (gloatingly!) by livingtree, “wives are obtained through raids, and it is prestigious for a man to beat and even stab his wife in public.” THIS is the correct world view, if chivalry is not.

  • Glenn

    @ LivingTree – Utterly uninteresting and please, don’t feel bad for me, I’m actually happier than I’ve ever been in my life. You clearly have some axe to grind, some ideas about what’s going on, some secret insight that the rest of us haven’t figured out that you are hellbent on imposing. I don’t care, none of what you said is revelatory or of any real value to me – I was already aware of chivalry, but you have made it this global thing and seem to dismiss so many other aspects of the sexual dynamics of men and women.

    Even more to the point. This is not an intellectual exercise for me. I’m not interested in debating abstruse points about models and culture. I get that I’ve been fucked by a system that sees men, boys and fathers as disposable. I get that masculinity, whether alpha or beta versions of it, are a free fire zone for denigration and hate and diminution on today’s feminine dominated society. I also get that men’s suffering is irrelevant and uninteresting to most women and many men, and the larger institutions of our society.

    You seem to think that I’m here to discuss the color the water that I was drowning in. I’m here to be heard and to hear other men speak their truth. I’m here for support and to help me be freer. This isn’t politics or activism for me, it’s my fucking life. And your entire commentary is zero contribution to me – unlike most other commentary here. You are so desperate to be right, you reek of it. So, keep it up, but don’t think I’m going to engage you or even take you seriously. There is absolutely no reason for me to do so that serves me.

  • Lion

    Fellow Men, I’m grateful and thankful for all of you since this world would be a very lonely place without red pill brethren. Imagine how dark it would be if we didn’t have this online meeting place. Without your words to remind me about the truth, there’s no telling what new messes with women I would stumble into stupidly. You’ve all helped me in so many ways. Thank you.

  • Jeremy

    Thomas Ball did not set himself on fire only because of his wife. He set himself on fire at least partly because of the absolute disaster that child-protective services and law enforcement turned his life into from one simple accusation. It is women who have demanded this entire structure of child protective law exist in place of actual, you know, mothering. They have substituted government and law enforcement for their own natural responsibility to society. What needs to happen, is the disgusting and immoral bureaucracy that our nations divorce law and child protective services has turned into needs to be literally dismantled. I realize this means that broken homes will lead to hordes of orphans. That’s too bad, but the failure is not in government, it is in the individual parents.

    Women don’t just operate by a different set of rules, women operate under essentially no rules. The reason this is so relates to the inherent conflict in her own self interests. Women seek the greatest DNA available to procreate with, but know almost instinctively that the greatest DNA for procreation is terrible at protector/provider. The inherent conflict in goals means that no consistent ruleset is acceptable. Any solidified parameters only cripple her ability to achieve the fabled AFBB. Any method of achieving this scenario with-or-without blowing up her own family is acceptable as long as her children are not put at terrible risk. With a child-protective-services industry in this nation that all but guarantees any woman’s children will never be at serious risk of starvation, she can pretty much do anything she wants.

    If you want to blow up the unhinged AFBB ruleset, just destroy the divorce and child protective services industries in the developed world.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    LT, it’s getting to the point where your presumptuousness is belying your commitment to your ego-investments in a feminized head-space.

    And as such you have zero intellectual curiosity, once again evidenced by your ignoring my suggestion that you actually read the articles on this blog before you make your uninformed presumptions. You want to believe that my commenters haven’t already considered the ideas that your ego-investment insulates you from wanting to think they might have.

    But your intellectual laziness only makes you look stupid to my readers.

    Now, go read these essays and come back here when you have some better information upon which to base your assumptions about me, my readers and the manosphere in general:

    http://therationalmale.com/2012/01/24/chivalry-vs-altruism/

    http://therationalmale.com/2013/03/27/hail-to-the-v/

    http://therationalmale.com/2013/01/02/the-feminine-imperative-circa-1300/

    http://therationalmale.com/2011/10/18/the-honor-system/

    And since you insisted:

    http://therationalmale.com/2012/03/13/the-hypergamy-conspiracy/

    Go educate yourself before you make a bigger fool of yourself.

  • Glenn

    @ Lion – Amen, brother (and I’m an atheist). We might not stumble into more messes, but rather just withdraw from the world in a self-protective recoiling reflex, taking refuge in a solitude that while soul crushing, at least feels like a respite from this mad world. But with the Red Pill, I can be in the world with clear eyes and self-respect and dignity. Pretty cool for something that I’ve been given by other men out of simple compassion and love. Thanks to all of you out there!!

  • Rollo Tomassi

    @Kenneth, thanks for proving the example:

    The Blue Bill Alpha

    However, there exist more Alpha Men also conditioned to be servants of the Feminine Imperative. These men make for some of the most self-evincing White Knights you’ll ever meet and are usually the first men to “defend the honor” of the feminine and women for whom they lack a real awareness of. Binary absolutism and an upbringing steeped in feminization makes for a potent sense of self-righteousness. Blue pill Alphas live for the opportunity to defend everything their conditioning has taught them. To the blue pill Alpha all women are victims by default, all women share a common historic suffrage and any man (his sexual competitors) critical of the feminine are simply an opportunity to prove his worth to any woman in earshot who might at all find his zealousness attractive.

  • Jude

    @glen, I’m not entirely sure your experience is all that dis-simliar to a woman’s in your position. I was also abused, and it was expected that I just go on … and women are always under pressure to ‘keep the peace’, to make sure the family is intact… In other words, I think you are placing your blame on only one factor, when in reality there are many to consider.

    I’m sorry you had the experience you did. But, please don’t become lost in hate for only women. There are those of us out here who are going through much of what you have, if not worse, who feel just as stepped upon and abused as you do.

    Truth is that noone, man or woman, should have to give anything to someone they hate just to (in my life) ‘keep the peace’ or (in your life) ‘being a good son’.

    Keep on not being anyone’s mule. And please remember that it’s not just women, but human’s that are crappy. <:)

  • Lion

    @jf12 “A man in love is automatically beta.”

    Love between a man and a woman as I understand it, or feel it, or have been conditioned to believe it to be, must be a total myth and simply impossible. Believe in strong emotions, believe in attachment, believe in attraction, believe in loyalty, but don’t call it love, and don’t let yourself go and be lost in the bliss of it all. To allow yourself to believe it’s real or forever is beta. That’s what I think about “love” now, so I am in agreement with your statement. I wish for my inner voice Ice-T alter ego would jump in and punch me in the face every time I use the word love in what feels like a natural context, but is the most dangerous context. It’s like the venus flytrap… sweet death.

  • Super Bowl Dave

    @ Kenneth L

    “We don’t need to diss women and their completely rational need to be treated right and correctly in order to be masculine ourselves.”

    But no one is “dissing” that. At all. Your statement is a complete and utter misrepresentation.

    Past wrongs also don’t justify current wrongs. “Blacks were enslaved for centuries, so what if they go out and carry out some White retribution killings? Stop whining and get over it!” You really want to make this absurd argument?

    I would love to live in a world where women were consistent, logical, congruent, humble, held to the same standards as they profess or the same standards as men, but they’re not. So we have to deal with that reality as it is. It’s wonderful we’ve had so much progress toward equality, but at this point we’re clearly way off course and it needs to be addressed and corrected; bringing these truths into the light benefits men and women.

  • Kenneth L

    @rolo Are you kidding me here? Because I disagree with your viewpoint, I’m a conditioned servant? That’s pretty egotistical of you, if not completely unintelligent. Funny thing about the term white knight, it implies that the person ‘needs’ to protect women, when in reality they’re usually people who just simply think rationally.

    I find your opinion not rational. I find it to be both blind and also harmful. I sincerely hope your daughter isn’t ruined by your complete and utter bias against women. Unfortunately, she probably will be. I don’t see how she can’t be harmed by a father who believes that women are not deserving of equal treatment.

    My daughter on the other hand, will grow up to respect the good in both men and women. She will be taught that there are wrong things that women do and that there are wrong things that men do, and that the opinions of those who are too blind to see their own bias are opinions which don’t matter.

    My son will be brought up to know that women are simply people who are different, and that they have their own set of rules and guidelines and culture, like any other different human on this earth. He will know that his manhood does not rely on a woman or anything else but himself.

    And both of my children will be brought up to see the good and bad in both sides of an issue. Based on that alone, I think they’ll be much smarter than you.

    This is my last comment here. I will never grace this site again, because it is full of the most deliberate ignorance I’ve seen in quite a while.

  • Jeremy

    @Kenneth L

    (My apologies to those commenting who are not saying this. I’m too irritated to make a rational comment.)

    That’s pretty obvious, though it remains to be seen if you can make a rational comment when you’re not irritated.

  • Jeremy

    @Kenneth

    This is my last comment here. I will never grace this site again, because it is full of the most deliberate ignorance I’ve seen in quite a while.

    Translation: I have neither the intellectual fortitude nor curiosity to engage in any sane manner with those that may disagree with me. Instead I will do a drive-by shooting and screech away to my favorite echo chambers of the internet.

  • jf12

    With a bluepill disclaimer that NAWALT, I wonder if there is room here for a synopsis of the activities involving Jameis Winston’s accuser on that fateful night. The redpill is possibly the only antidote to the nauseatingly sordid account which tackles (pun intended) women’s “rules” (the lack thereof), hypergamy, and harsh realities.

  • anotheronetakesthepill

    @Laguna

    “The cross-over, once you make it, gives you an inner peace, calm, and confidence.
    The only possible downside to being a thought criminal is that, for me, women have lost some of their “feminine magic”. Now, I’m under no delusions about them. I’m not sure I could love one the way I did when I was a younger man, which, upon reflection, I think is a good thing overall.”

    That is so true. They have lost their magic while we lost our innocence in the way. Lately I’ve thought a lot about that, if I will be able to love someone as I did before (having taken the red pill at early 30′s). I truly doubt it. Maybe I am still in my way out of the anger and resentment stage.

    Regarding taking the red pill and becoming enlighted there is a notorious difference after digesting it. The 2nd set of books, written in feminine language, can be understood quite easily after taking a crash course in Red Pill Language. That makes you see women for what they are. But, being able to speak that language, adapt to what woman are and how they work (aka PUAing them) is something completely different as it someone who passively understands a language but cannot actively use it.

    Most of us get stuck there and take the path of becoming better just for ourselves, becoming nihilistic and hedonistic in doing so.

    In my opinion few men truly transition to master Red Pill language.

  • livingtree2013

    Rollo, your linkbacked articles have illustrated nothing to contradict, or even to relate to, my point. My point is not of the existence of chivalry, or that chivalry is little more than cow-towing to women, or that chivalry is a defective system, or that men made it or that women use it.

    My point is, as always, that your readers are simultaneously fighting against and protecting the same cause. As always, they blame women and hold themselves up as victims (Aww poor men, all we did was sacrifice for you. We’re so valuable, and so unappreciated! Why wont you love us in exchange for protecting you??), while completely avoid addressing the fact that this very practice illustrates everything that the whole damn system is predicated on!

    Whether or not you see it, Rollo, I haven’t quite gathered. I’m no longer sure about your intentions. However unwittingly, your articles (and especially the comments that follow them) always prove my point. This last spate of articles you linked to me is no different. You write endlessly about many interesting topics, but in the end it always comes down to the same old story: men are amazing, and women don’t appreciate it. I get it, ok? Its only the same old story that every generation of males has told their sons since the beginning of civilization.

    I know you have to back your bros up Rollo, its your solemn duty, but I expected more from you.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    @rolo Are you kidding me here? Because I disagree with your viewpoint, I’m a conditioned servant?

    No, you’re a conditioned servant when you reveal it in comments like this:

    Whereas women have been persecuted, raped, murdered, executed for crimes that men wouldn’t be executed for (and still are executed for them today), held as property, forced into societal positions they didn’t want, and in general just fucked by men for thousands upon thousands of years. (In substantially higher numbers than men)

    I’m a 40 year old alpha male, divorced because my ex and I grew apart, and I’m still fucking man enough to realize the complete stupidity in having a pity party because women want to have some rights in society as well.

    You’re right about the not wallowing in self-pity part, and I addressed this at the end of the article, but you most definitely subscribe to a feminine-primary ideal.

  • Glenn

    @ Jude – I’m not angry at women at all any more. I used to be but seeing the world for what it is relieved me of the rage as it used to be like this riddle I could never solve. I’m also not angry when the lion eat’s the wildebeast -it’s just the way of the world. But here’s the other part, I no longer “respect” women for being women and I don’t give a shit what they think about how I behave or what I think or what positive masculinity should look like.

    I’ll tell you what I tell every sympathetic female I find in mrm/manosphere/whatevs. If you really care about the suffering of men, if you’ve dared to actually open your heart and mind to what’s really going on and how badly men have been screwed by all this, show me. Go out and find some Beta male who is riddled with insecurity and frustration and hasn’t been touched in a kind way by a woman in years or maybe even decades. You know, they kind of guy you and your girlfriends laughed at in school or in the bars or at work, the “pathetic” guy or the “creepy” guy or the “loser”. Get to know him and actually see how much pain he’s in, how frustrated and scared and lonely he is, and then fuck him like he’s the last guy on earth. Not me, btw, I’ve had more pussy than most guys could ever dream of having, no, I’m talking about that guy who you know hasn’t had a woman actually be nice to him for years. That hasn’t felt the touch and soft kiss of a woman who wants to actually be with him maybe ever.

    Do that maybe like 5 times and then come back here and tell us about it. Then maybe, just maybe, I’ll give a flying shit about what you think.

  • Badpainter

    Lion- “Love between a man and a woman as I understand it, or feel it, or have been conditioned to believe it to be, must be a total myth and simply impossible. Believe in strong emotions, believe in attachment, believe in attraction, believe in loyalty, but don’t call it love, and don’t let yourself go and be lost in the bliss of it all. To allow yourself to believe it’s real or forever is beta.”

    That is most most disappointing part of redpill reality. I can live with the odious nature of the rules. I can accept my own limitations. I can admit my failings. I can accept the challenging nature of women. But finding out the only thing in life I really truly ever wanted never existed in the first place is difficult to reconcile, mostly because the closest existing alternative doesn’t seem to offer any benefit. I would have been off flapping my arms believing I could fly.

  • Jeremy

    —> Rollo Tomassi posts links to six of his blog articles:
    January 14th, 2014 at 4:11 pm

    —> livingtree2013 supposedly read and digested all of them by:
    January 14th, 2014 at 4:56 pm

    Fourty five minutes is apparently all it takes see a reply prompting you to read, and to then go read and digest 6 blog articles, AND reply back saying “none of those apply to my point.”

    @Livingtree…

    Your intellectual dishonesty is as rank as a cat litter box.

  • jf12

    @Badpainter Hope flaps eternal.

  • livingtree2013

    Jeremy, would you stop being an asshole, please. I’ve actually read several of them previously. Despite what Rollo seems to want to believe.

  • Badpainter

    jf12, I say hope is just one more way to be disappointed, but I appreciate the sentiment none the less.

  • LostSailor

    @SuperBowlDave:

    Of course no one is “dissing” women as in disrespecting women as women (disrespect to specific women who have earned it is a different story), but to men like Kenneth L (as with most feminists and White Knights) simply disagreeing with them let along just setting out factual truths is seen a disrespect.

    I literally laughed when he proved Rollo’s point about the Blue Pill Alpha. What Kenneth doesn’t and won’t realize is that Red Pill has nothing to do with women gaining rights but about women exercising rights without accepting any responsibilities.

    It’s on display in a “report” that came out the other day called THE SHRIVER REPORT: A Woman’s Nation Pushes Back from the Brink. Note that the U.S. is now a “woman’s” nation. The report is a celebration of single motherhood, and also a lament that single mothers are often struggling on the brink of poverty. Delving into the report, we are not surprised to find that when women ditch men and fathers they have trouble with the whole being responsible for raising their children. Nor is it a surprise to find that the suggested solution is for society, especially business, to conform to the needs of single mothers, and for government to give them stuff. Free child care! The phrase “income support” (Free Money!) is used generously throughout.

    Some people, like Kenneth, are not, as the saying goes, ready to be unplugged from the system. They’re too invested in it…

  • earl

    “@Kenneth, thanks for proving the example:”

    You keep saying commenters keep proving your points. Not having the ban hammer is a good thing.

  • Kate

    Nando Parrado says that once he and the other Andes survivors gave up hope they would be rescued, they began to work on rescuing themselves. He just started walking. He said he didn’t want to be a hero; he just wanted to get our of there to tell his father he was alive.

    So often, we think of hope as a good thing. Most of the time, the myth of hope lets us down again and again. If we are hoping, we aren’t doing. If we are hoping, we are waiting. We are thinking something or someone will make things better. When we give up hope, we can finally begin to help ourselves.

  • Jeremy

    @livingtree2013

    Jeremy, would you stop being an asshole, please. I’ve actually read several of them previously. Despite what Rollo seems to want to believe.

    Would you stop pretending to be intellectually curious when it’s clear you aren’t, please? Most of your comments are blog pollution.

  • Jeremy

    Nice comment Kate,

    In some ways your comment touches on the general dearth of masculine virtues taught to everyone (men and women). Instead of being taught to take some control over life’s direction, people are told to “just keep putting yourself out there and hope things turn out.”

    This is completely contrary to actual survival behavior, which demands action/agency. Those who do not become involved in their own lives merely hasten their own demise.

  • Anonymous Reader

    Kenneth L.
    I’m too irritated to make a rational comment.

    Nah, you’re too much of a White Knight to make a rational comment. You’re just another momma’s boy trying to curry favor with teh wimmenz by running down men.

    A friend of mine had his 15+ year marriage blown up last year. Another man I know of a couple of years back ate his .45 when he found out his “loving” wife was cheating on him.

    Real men are suffering real harm, and all you can do is huff and puff and pretend to be a Great Big Man. Run along, boy, the adults are discussing reality.

  • Anonymous Reader

    Kenneth L

    This is my last comment here. I will never grace this site again, because it is full of the most deliberate ignorance I’ve seen in quite a while.

    Well, maybe. Women and their White Knight enablers generally just have to get the last word. So my bet is, Kenneth will be back.

    Maybe he and LyingTree can have some quality time together?

  • Glenn

    @LivingTree – I know feeding you is a bad idea but I just can’t help myself.

    LT says – “My point is, as always, that your readers are simultaneously fighting against and protecting the same cause. As always, they blame women and hold themselves up as victims (Aww poor men, all we did was sacrifice for you. We’re so valuable, and so unappreciated! Why wont you love us in exchange for protecting you??), while completely avoid addressing the fact that this very practice illustrates everything that the whole damn system is predicated on!”

    No, that’s your absurdly reductionist and shaming caricature of what’s going on. We feel betrayed because we’re brainwashed to accept romantic love, but didn’t have it returned. We feel bereft because we gladly became fathers only to see over 80% of all divorces with young children initiated by women, and learned that we can just be swept aside and replaced by the next chump – but still have to carry the load (I paid every penny of cost to raise my daughter). We feel our liberty violated by the Duluth Models of domestic violence which presumes male aggression when study after study for 30 years has shown women initiate domestic violence just as frequently as men. We are horrified that family court will issue ex parte orders of protection against men with no evidence and no finding of fact other than a woman’s testimony, and that so many women have used these against their soon be ex-husbands who have never harmed a fly.

    We are saddened beyond words that “mothers” often systematically alienate children from their fathers. We are stunned and scared that our sons are treated like potential rapists on college campuses and lose all legal protection from accusations of rape under Title IX. We’ve had it with constantly being told that women are oppressed by men in western countries and that every govt dept needs a special women’s division, when the mere mention of men having specific issues gets laughed at and dismissed. We are sick and tired of having our suffering treated as pathetic by the likes of Kenneth and you simply because we are men.

    I don’t want chivalry back. What you don’t seem to understand is that most of us here are doing cartwheels after spitting the bit out of our mouths. We are upset because we entered into a social contract that is broken with us at will and women don’t even want to acknowledge it.

    Let me narrow this for you, LT. What do you make of the 80%+ of divorces with young children being initiated by women? Are you angered by the destruction of families and children that is an epidemic in our society and directly the responsibility of women, not men? How do you explain it? What wisdom do you have share with those of us here about that? Or is that me begging for something back? What, did all those women not freely enter into those marriages? Where is their agency, their responsibility for this disaster for our society? Is my complaining about that just me longing for chivalry? Wake up.

  • Tam the Bam

    “Rollo, your linkbacked articles have illustrated nothing to contradict, or even to relate to, my point.”
    Hamsterlation => tl;dr

    Victim? Moi?? No way. Not now, not ever. Even when I graduate to being a corpse.
    Ignoring the bullshit now? You betcha.

  • Laguna Beach Fogey

    Let’s hope LT has a daughter(s) I can smash.

  • Kate

    Thank you, Jeremy. I wrote that in 2010.

    Nando Parrado is still one of my personal heroes. At the time of the crash, he was the shy, quiet friend of the popular guy who was good with girls. Sadly, his friend died in the crash. So did Nando’s mother and sister. As a result of this hardship and those over the next months on the mountain, he became one of the saviors of the rest of the survivors and went on to became a television producer, a race car driver, and he married a supermodel.

    One of my prized possessions is an email from him. It said essentially nothing, but still!

  • Jeremy

    Kate

    …he became one of the saviors of the rest of the survivors and went on to became a television producer, a race car driver, and he married a supermodel.
    One of my prized possessions is an email from him. It said essentially nothing, but still!

    LOL… alpha pining. Kate, that is not an insult.

  • jf12

    NAWALT.
    A sordid tale w/ multiple books. On December 5 of 2013, Florida State Attorney Willie Meggs announced that no prosecution would be forthcoming against Jameis Winston, who was accused of raping a girl at his place a year earlier on December 7, and the announcement was accompanied by the release of books of police reports and interviews and transcripts. The accuser’s attorney Patricia Carroll stood by Meggs and complimented him even as cracked jokes about it all. As soon as they released the documents my first thought was that there must be video and that is why Meggs was so comfortable dropping the case. The following narrative is pieced together from that released information and little else.

    Only one or two of the incidents of what transpired back at Winston’s place are factually disputed, and none of the rest of this narrative. I will not dwell on police actions or nonactions, in part because some of those are disputed. Winston’s place was a no-questions-asked party dorm with holes in the walls and doors kicked through, off campus, for football players. Cops had been called by neighbors there to the Legacy Suites repeatedly that fall, and specifically Winston and his roommate Chris Casher three times in the prior few of weeks for 1) a loud big party in the building past midnight 2) those two being drunk and disorderly with two women outside in the parking lot in a separate incident 3) those two among others running around the neighborhood shooting BB guns, trespassing across fences and yards, and breaking windows.

    The evening of December 6, the multiple phone calls and physical evidence show that the party-hardy accuser first hooked up, with unsafe sex, with Jamal Roberts, at 5’9 and 185 lbs an old boyfriend who was in town just that night, passing through to spend the weekend in their mutual hometown. Multiple semen spatters of his on the inside of her skinny pink pants probably indicate that he pulled out in time. Shortly thereafter, after dressing without showering or anything she ditched him (he was still in town) to go out underage drinking with several other friends, including Marcus Jordan, eventually landing at PotBelly’s on College Avenue.

    Once there, she soon recognized Casher from school and ditched her friends to drink and flirt with him, but once she was with his football group the hunky Winston immediately caught all of her attentions. Casher and Ronald Darby, who also lived at Legacy Suites, were used to scraping girls off the 6’4” 240 lb (he bulked up that fall) Winston. He had ordered them to keep girls off, so as not to upset one of his favorite girlfriends. But this one wouldn’t stop stroking him and climbing into his lap, despite Casher and Darby’s efforts to return her to her friends. After midnight, as Casher and Darby and Winston prepared to leave, she pleaded with a girlfriend to go with her and them, having misinterpreted Casher’s interferences as possessiveness and hoping he would be satisfied to make it a “double date”. But the other girl wouldn’t go with her, so she hurried out and climbed into their cab to go back to their place, and she paid for the cab ride.

    Everyone agrees Winston and the girl were complete strangers and that there were two other witnesses to the sexual activity in his room. The girl claims that after lots of consensual activity that Winston got too aggressive and Casher, her friend, broke into the room to try to pull Winston off her but Winston was too strong so Casher took pictures of her being sexually assaulted to help her for evidence. Casher and Darby claim that Casher was in the torn-up room (the door had been kicked in months earlier) the whole time videoing in closeups the activity on the soiled bed with a bright light and pleasuring himself, but the girl got annoyed when Casher tried to physically join in. Everyone agrees that Darby stood at the doorway perving, and that Winston did not pull out, and that there were pictures and/or video.

    Anyway, soon afterwards, everyone agrees she rode back to sort of near her place on the back of his cute little scooter, holding onto him tightly, and he basically dumped her off on a rather random street corner at Stadium Drive and Call Street at 2:00 AM and he sped away leaving her there alone. She walked up to her place on campus a few minutes later, bedraggled to say the least, and her friend Jenna Weisberg partially cleans her up and partially gets some story or other out of her (Jenna’s version of what she heard doesn’t match the girl’s story). Jenna is the outcry witness who called the cops. The campus and Tallahassee city police sorted out jurisdiction, and by 4:00 they are at the police station giving physical evidence, including photographing her many visible bruises, some brand new some quite old, and testimony, with the help of the victim advocate.

    Later that morning the news circulates semiprivately on twitter until her friend Bria Henry blasts it everywhere and calls the girl’s mother. Her friends all commiserate but nobody tells her who her accused attacker obviously was (being Casher’s roommate narrows it down, for example). On the night of January 9 the accuser recognizes Winston at yet another underage drinking party, and after making inquiries and learning his name, tells the police on January 10.

    I personally feel like retching myself, even with the red pill, regardless of the one (at most two) facts in dispute. I held back the punchline. The accuser provided a physical description of her attacker, precise enough to accurately fit … drum roll … Jamal Roberts. I think that fact is a clue to her frame of mind, at least, if not perhaps her framing of the story.

  • Different T

    @ Glenn

    Thank you for expanding on your comment. The comment was referring to the part which said…

    It’s time for me to get mine and everyone else can get in line behind me.

    And anyone who doesn’t like it can kiss my ass. Daughter, sisters, lovers, father – I’m not anyone’s mule anymore.

    Especially the last line. Upon further review, it’s more clear that you probably meant those people as specific to your situation.

    “Enlightened self-interest” may sound like a good phrase, but the concepts to which it refers make it confusing, if not useless or even harmful. The process of learning what is valuable for yourself is to study the reality outside of yourself. Today, “enlightenment” almost always refers to some sort of self-help, “look within” ideology.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    No comment on my picture selection? I thought it was brilliant.

  • jf12

    Re: picture caption suggestion “What should be tell our sons?”

  • Glenn

    @ Different T – I’m sorry, but just who the fuck is it that you think you are, and to whom do you think you are addressing with your pablum? It’s of no value to me. You deign to lecture me but emit elliptical nonsense that’s supposed to pass for wisdom. I dare say I know more about philosophy than you and am in no need of your counsel. You seem to take offense at me putting myself first, and I have no idea why. And yes, you know nothing of my circumstances and the people I’m speaking of. I’ve been the guy people could count on for decades and I found out that didn’t buy me an ounce of respect or compassion or gratitude. So I feel no obligation to any of them anymore. I’ll still volunteer at the local food bank and am good to my friends and family members who are actually worth a shit. There is one silver lining. I know who actually cares about me now and who does not. And only men have stayed by my side during my hour of need. Not a single women was there to be found. In fact, they ganged up in a sadistic denigration of me, kicking me when I was down without regret. They don’t deserve my support, my love or my respect.

    It’s new day in Glennville. And I don’t take shit from anyone – least of all poseurs on the web who think they need to sort me out.

  • Different T

    It’s interesting that the only comment on the topic of the actual “first set of books” (the concepts) has been “The Second Set of Books can only be maintained if many are brainwashed to follow the First Set of Books.”

    Again, Was that first set of books created by emotional whim or as a response to the realities of human life?

    Have those realities fundamentally changed or has an enormous amount of energy been spent creating and maintaining the illusion that those realities have changed?

    If you have no answer to those questions, you really are “a bunch of whiny ass babies.”

  • Different T

    @ Glenn

    I’m sorry, but just who the fuck is it that you think you are, and to whom do you think you are addressing with your pablum?

    Wow. That was the shortest lecture given to illicit such a response. Though it is humorous that the very childish, female, anti-authoritarian scripts activated in yourself were the same ones that likely drove you to capitulate to the very people you so despise.

  • Glenn

    @ Different T – You are setting yourself up as some kind of lecturer here, advising me and trying to straighten me out – and it’s not welcome. How ’bout you keep your commenting to your life and your views and stop playing around with dime store, pop psychology and nonsense? Just a thought…

  • Different T

    @ Glenn

    While it’s still uncertain and the old programs do try and run themselves in my head, I have stepped out of them.

    It was stated because you may be able to understand.

    How ’bout you keep your commenting to your life and your views and stop playing around with dime store, pop psychology and nonsense?

    Fortunately, your opinion does not matter.

  • livingtree2013

    Glenn, you misunderstand me. I don’t think men’s sufferings are pathetic. If you’d paid any attention to even a single thing I’ve said you would know that. I’m sure that Kenneth doesn’t think that either.

    I can’t speak for Kenneth, but I certainly think its long overdue that men started demanding that their needs get better met by this extremely fucked system (even though your needs are still largely ambiguous, and generally are stated in an overtly hostile and defensive manner). If you think that women are satisfied with it, you’d be dead wrong. None of us are getting our real needs met, you know, and that is largely because we are NOT being honest with ourselves. We fantasize that we are better than we are, and that is a defense mechanism we use to keep ourselves from facing the ugly truth, that life is a lot more meaningless than we want to believe it is.

    Anyway… “We are upset because we entered into a social contract that is broken with us at will and women don’t even want to acknowledge it.” WHAT social contract??? All of Rollo’s linkbacks failed to answer this question. That you didn’t receive the profound, undying, unconditional love that you expected in exchange for a lifetime of sacrifice, that you were conditioned to believe you were entitled to expect just because you “did the right thing,” fathered a child, and paid for stuff? Is that what you mean?

    Because I’m pretty sure that was never, ever part of any bargain that any woman ever made. Even in medieval times. THAT is the fantasy that I’m talking about. Men just duped themselves into thinking it was their entitlement because it gave their lives meaning and allowed them to put their energies into something they thought was valuable. And yes, women have exploited that in more ways than I can count.

    But as Rollo’s article on 14c chivalry points out, in the medieval period, no-one married for love. Love was extramarital, and generally not for people who weren’t nobility. Where things went weird is expecting it to be about love for everyone, even us peasant folk. You can blame those stupid enlightenment poets for that. We were all duped you know.

    Glenn, everyone wants to believe in love. Women too. And everyone is disappointed by its failure to magically appear when we want it. Women very unfortunately will give up hope on it much sooner than men do. Its that adaptive quality that women have, which Rollo kindly pointed out in… oh shit I cant remember which article it was. We just get on with the self-interest, while you guys keep fantasizing like teenage girls reading romance novels. No offence meant by that, I think its cute. But impractical.

    Love cannot be manufactured, or negotiated, or contracted. It is spontaneous, and fleeting, and cannot be captured. I always say, if you knew real love even for an instant, you are one of the lucky few.

  • Glenn

    @ Different T – I’ve got it now, you are one of those pseudo-intellectuals who has no sense of how vapid his commentary and “insights” actually are, but somehow gets away with passing off vaporous puffs of nonsense without being challenged most of the time. Sorry I hurt your feelings, but you haven’t said a thing to me that is worth the time it took to read it. There hasn’t been a bit of it that is insightful or clever or even interesting. In fact, what becomes clearer and clearer with each tedious word-parsing snark belch you burp up is that you are trying way too hard to appear smart for some reason. I have no idea why, but I do know that guys like you cannot stand being challenged. So I’ll stop, you can even have the last word, but don’t kid yourself. All you’ve done here is reveal your own pathology, not mine. Enjoy. I’m moving on now.

  • Eris

    An important article. For me, discovering “the red pill” was more a relief than anything else. I think for a long long time I had felt that somehow the world was playing by rules which were at odds with the kind of values that were preached to us when I was growing up. The more I looked around, the more it felt that there was a undeniably unpleasant side to reality that no one wanted to talk about and discovering the red pill for me meant discovering people that noticed the same things, who weren’t afraid to talk about it and who very often had ideas far more developed than my own. Many times I have imagined what would have happened had I not lived in the age of the internet and how I would have dealt with that feeling of “it’s all b*llsh*t, but only you can see it” in the long term.
    I sometimes see written that the the red pill can lead to depression and a feeling of emptiness, however, in my experience, taking the red pill and living with that new perspective is no more likely to cause those things than losing one’s faith. The idea that a human is unable to cope living as a human without telling oneself reassuring falsehoods makes little sense.
    I read a book many years ago that talked about the nature of happiness from a pop-psych perspective and I remember it said that, surprisingly, those who have suffered trauma and lost the use of certain parts of the body, in the long term were, on average, were not less unhappy than those to whom this had not happened (there are, undoubtedly many exceptions – and with no intention to belittle). The reason given was that following an event that limits one’s possibilities, our expectations and focus changes and we instinctively begin to search for fulfilment in other areas.
    In this sense, when faced with a post-red pill reality of the way things really work, what matters to us, what we want from life and how we go about attaining it will change, but we will nevertheless continue living and trying to live a life we can be happy with – with or without romantic untruths. In short, we still strive the same only this time for ourselves and perhaps with a slightly firmer footing than before.
    From what I can tell, the photo is of a boy sitting amid the ruins of a bookshop bombed during the an air raid in London. The thing is to try to rid oneself of that set of books before the air raid actually comes.

  • Super Bowl Dave

    @ livingtree2013

    “Anyway… “We are upset because we entered into a social contract that is broken with us at will and women don’t even want to acknowledge it.” WHAT social contract??? All of Rollo’s linkbacks failed to answer this question. That you didn’t receive the profound, undying, unconditional love that you expected in exchange for a lifetime of sacrifice, that you were conditioned to believe you were entitled to expect just because you “did the right thing,” fathered a child, and paid for stuff? Is that what you mean?

    Because I’m pretty sure that was never, ever part of any bargain that any woman ever made. Even in medieval times. THAT is the fantasy that I’m talking about. Men just duped themselves into thinking it was their entitlement because it gave their lives meaning and allowed them to put their energies into something they thought was valuable. And yes, women have exploited that in more ways than I can count. ”

    Oh my.

    I’ll let Glenn and others have the fun with this magnificent display.

  • Different T

    “I think for a long long time I had felt that somehow the world was playing by rules which were at odds with the kind of values that were preached to us when I was growing up.”

    and

    “The idea that a human is unable to cope living as a human without telling oneself reassuring falsehoods makes little sense.”

    Is your main regret that you did not disregard those values sooner than the people who took advantage of the values you possessed?

  • Water Cannon Boy

    Almost every sentence I see written on this forum is like a direct transcript from the chivalry handbook, the handbook which, as much as you hate it and rail against it and mock men who still uphold it, it is so deeply ingrained in you that you will most certainly go to your death defending it.
    You recognize the problem with it, but its become part of you, so letting it go is like a form of death.

    I feel bad for you guys, in a way. Your entire life seems to have had no purpose if you abandon all the generations of training you’ve received to defend it. Women were just using it to their advantage. For men, it is a way of life. You have a much harder struggle than we do.

    I’m not annoyed by LivingTree as others are, but this part does sound like a reframe, as it’s called. To me, it’s sounds like the unwanted “nice guy” that tried asking women’s advice, got the “just be yourself” advice, was astute enough to see “bad boy” be successful, and when about to try the advice from a guy who was successful(and would actually work), then got an “intervention” of more women’s advice saying “oh no nice guy, you’re trying to be a player. Women don’t like player’s, and you don’t want to be a player nice guy, do you? Noooo you don’t.”
    I’ll agree that most of the self reflecting personal histories that have been posted detail instances of the very things that people are fighting against. But those are done in how they used to be, and their efforts to change at the least, or some who have broken the habit.
    So I’m not seeing where the blatantly obvious perpetuations are of people fighting the outdated chivalry, but simultaneously in present tense, continuing it. Maybe that’s something that can be cleared up.

    Did Kenneth L subliminally say that his daughter could beat up Rollo’s daughter?

  • Different T

    @ Water Cannon Boy

    I’m not annoyed by LivingTree as others are, but this part does sound like a reframe, as it’s called. To me, it’s sounds like the unwanted “nice guy” that tried asking women’s advice, got the “just be yourself” advice, was astute enough to see “bad boy” be successful, and when about to try the advice from a guy who was successful(and would actually work), then got an “intervention” of more women’s advice saying “oh no nice guy, you’re trying to be a player. Women don’t like player’s, and you don’t want to be a player nice guy, do you? Noooo you don’t.”

    and

    http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/SB10001424052702303997604579240022857012920-lMyQjAxMTAzMDIwNzEyNDcyWj

    It is far simpler than any manosphere analogy.

    They are scared.

  • BlackPoisonSoul

    It ate my comment, let’s see if I can reconstruct it from memory.

    @deti -

    This seems particularly appropriate here:
    http://redpillpushers.wordpress.com/2013/12/29/shocked-bitter-angry-men/
    ” *** men hate, with an unbridled passion, not knowing the rules of the game that they’re playing. We are so goal, rule, structure, and boundary oriented, that to be competing in a contest where the rules are unclear is anathema to the male spirit. For men, realizing that the world you knew was a complete lie, and you were a fool working against his own best interests is akin to a blazing dagger being plunged into the masculine brain, and the pain may never fully go away.”
    ——————-
    We men do expect the rules and boundaries to be respected, because that gives a structure to dealing with reality. We expect the laws and such that we’ve become used to to remain invariant and unchanging. Otherwise we could never have created things like sewage pipes, steam, electricity, rockets, iPads, etc.

    Women glorify in changing the rules as and when they desire – something which pisses us men off, yet we are foolish enough to not take that overt behaviour to heart. It is a strange disconnect or blindness in our minds that we allow this behaviour, take no heed of it, even when our noses are repeatedly rubbed in it.

    Of course, collectively men are far too indulgent to sort this behaviour out. Thus we have trained women that it’s perfectly fine to do pretty-much anything, and taught men to ignore any implications of that training and process that we are complicit in.

    But then, that’s why we’re all here, isn’t it.

    Solution? Forget it, there is no solution. Eventually society as a whole will deal with the problem – possibly when it collapses under its own weight of disinterested males. Or not. It doesn’t really matter, any attempt to try some overarching solution will fail simply because we cannot plan cohesively as a group. There are too many Blue-pill males sabotaging us.

    All that we can do is our own individual rebellions to keep ourselves from being taken advantage of.

    So in the meantime, the con-men have the advantage. They will laugh as they go on down the road, leaving ashes in their wake. Eventually the ashes get together and have a talk, and post up their experiences with the con-men, in the hopes that others will take heed. Perhaps a tipping-point will someday be reached.

    I think that much of the anger comes from embarrassment at our own stupidity. We were shown all our lives, yet we didn’t take the warnings to heart. So we swear at the con-man as he walks away with our savings, yet we are too ashamed to accept responsibility for our own blind behaviour which enabled the con-man.

  • Badpainter

    The first set of books, the social contract, or pre-whipping are all based upon a strictly one sided teaching of the “Golden Rule.” The betrayal is in perverting, and intentionally misunderstanding the notion of turning the other cheek. The lie is obscuring the reality that the meek absolutely inherit the earth but in standard size grave plots.

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 3,608 other followers

%d bloggers like this: