Recently Marellus from Just Four Guys brought this to my attention:
Did you see how the womyn tore apart a commenter, by the name of Redlum, on Jezebel ?
Just because he said this :
Why does feminism have to antagonize and mock men all the time? Men are expected to have no vulnerabilities, this is an oppressive gender role. When men’s vulnerabilities are exposed, such as feeling emasculated or being insecure about women making them “obsolete”, that is a human emotion and gloating over it and mocking it is not only terrible, but also one of the big things giving feminism a bad name.
The top reply was this :
If being in a relationship with a woman who makes more money than you and/or has a higher position than you makes you feel that you are becoming obsolete, maybe you should be mocked for being silly, immature, and sexist. So now, on top of everything else that women have to deal with, we have to comfort men for freaking out whenever a woman surpasses them at something? I’m sorry – if you are in a group that has been privileged over/oppressive of other groups, you don’t get an apology and a reassuring hug every time we get a millimeter closer to some semblance of fairness and equality. Men need to suck it up and deal with life on more equitable terms like adults, without those who do just that expecting a medal for it.
Write a post on what this guy did wrong, if possible.
Redlum’s mistake was twofold. His first error was to ever overtly look for sympathy from a woman (women). We already know women lack the capacity for empathizing with the male experience, but sympathy is another side of the equation. One grave error most blue pill plug-ins make in this respect is a presumption that women owe them sympathy or that women are predisposed to sympathizing with them.
This is usually due to having been conditioned by the feminine for so long to believe that “Open Communication®”, sharing his feelings and being vulnerable will make him the ideal man. This is an unfortunate outcome of the ‘get in touch with your feminine side’ curse of Jung: in a similar respect to the myth of Relational Equity where a man expects his sacrifices and investment in a relationship will be a buffer against women’s Hypergamy, the expectation is that women will appreciate his openness and vulnerabilities. He believes the feminine identity lie that “vulnerability is strength.”
It’s a very seductive fallacy for a dyed-in-the-wool plug-in to make. I’ve read Redlum’s comments before and he doesn’t impress me as a chump, so I believe his comment on Jezebel was really more of a symbolic appeal to feminine reason. What he illustrates here is a common misgiving most Beta blue pill men subscribe to – that they will be perceived as unique, “not like other guys” in his embracing feminine vulnerability. And as you can see from the top Jezebel reply he was met with the same hostility women have for “vulnerable” men.
Hypergamy psychologically predisposes women to hold either contempt or pity for male vulnerability on a limbic level. Even in the most ’emotionally evolved’ women, by order of degree, Hypergamy is always testing for male fitness in order to assess whom she will pair with either in short term breeding availability or long term provisioning availability. When a man overtly expresses an openness to vulnerability, on a subconscious level it telegraphs his insecurity to her Hypergamous nature. Thus, she filters him out, or if she’s paired with him prior to this expression she initiates the mental protocol to leave him for a better match.
The contempt expressed by the Jezebel authoress is a good example of this.
So now, on top of everything else that women have to deal with, we have to comfort men for freaking out whenever a woman surpasses them at something?
You’re a man, suck it up, you shouldn’t be vulnerable by virtue of your maleness. It’s a conflicting message in light of the touchy-feely feminine conditioning men endure in their upbringing, but it is an honest reaction, and one that men need to understand when sorting out the reality of women and their need to unplug.
I’m not gonna write you a love song, cause you asked for one,..
The second (symbolic?) mistake Redlum makes is making an appeal for sympathy. In Empathy I outlined women’s gut-level, evolutionarily selected-for, lack of empathizing with the male experience. I defined the difference between empathy and sympathy, and while women might lack the means for that empathy, they have a very strong sense of sympathy. However that sympathy comes with conditions.
Women involved with high SMV Alpha Men can be some of the most genuinely, organically sympathetic women you’ll ever encounter. Granted, that sympathy may facilitate her own Hypergamous interests, but more so because that Alpha never petitions her for her sympathy.
Women give their sympathies of their own accord, never as the result of a man petitioning it from her. A woman must be inspired to sympathy for a man, asking for it is negotiating for her desire to be sympathetic.
A man who is intentionally vulnerable smacks of a guy who is so in an effort to qualify for her intimacy. It’s similar to the dynamic found in Play Nice, that niceness, that vulnerability that’s supposed to be strength, is perceived as a ruse to better identify with the feminine and thus be more acceptable to it. If feminine Hypergamy is fine tuned for anything it’s genuineness. That’s not to say women wont turn it to their social and biological advantages, but Hypergamy is always testing for certainty and authenticity. I’ve stated before that there is nothing more satisfying for a woman than to believe she’s figured a guy out using her mythical feminine intuition, this is a direct satisfaction of Hypergamy’s need for certainty, but I should also add that there is nothing more mortifying, rage inducing and produces more bitter tears than a woman who’s had her Hypergamy fooled by an imposter. Not only does this deception involve a loss of investment and resources to her, but it’s also an insult to her ego that her capacity to filter for authenticity isn’t as effective as she believes her ‘intuition’ actually is.
Suck It Up
The bigger picture in this Jezebel exchange is really about one of the most basic and useful social conventions ever devised by the Feminine Imperative – The Male Catch 22:
Man Up or Shut Up – The Male Catch 22
One of the primary way’s Honor is used against men is in the feminized perpetuation of traditionally masculine expectations when it’s convenient, while simultaneously expecting egalitarian gender parity when it’s convenient.
For the past 60 years feminization has built in the perfect Catch 22 social convention for anything masculine; The expectation to assume the responsibilities of being a man (Man Up) while at the same time denigrating asserting masculinity as a positive (Shut Up). What ever aspect of maleness that serves the feminine purpose is a man’s masculine responsibility, yet any aspect that disagrees with feminine primacy is labeled Patriarchy and Misogyny.
Essentially, this convention keeps beta males in a perpetual state of chasing their own tails. Over the course of a lifetime they’re conditioned to believe that they’re cursed with masculinity (Patriarchy) yet are still responsible to ‘Man Up’ when it suits a feminine imperative. So it’s therefore unsurprising to see that half the men in western society believe women dominate the world (male powerlessness) while at the same time women complain of a lingering Patriarchy (female powerlessness) or at least sentiments of it. This is the Catch 22 writ large. The guy who does in fact Man Up is a chauvinist, misogynist, patriarch, but he still needs to man up when it’s convenient to meet the needs of a female imperative.
This dualistic, conveniently conflicting, social convention is what defines a condition of ‘equality’ for today’s New Woman:
Men need to suck it up and deal with life on more equitable terms like adults, without those who do just that expecting a medal for it.
In other words suck it up when convenient and sack up when necessary. In a sense she’s not wrong– an intrinsic part of the male experience is not to complain about adversity, not to complain about pain and not to complain about suffering – in other words, Man Up, be strong and don’t let on to any vulnerability. If that sounds contradictory to a lifetime of feminine sensitivity training for men it should, but only because it’s half of the usefulness of the Male Catch 22. Where our Jezebeler drops the ball is the other half of the con – Man up and be useful, to women, to the Feminine Imperative. The problem is that equality only applies to what benefits the feminine, anything else that constitutes a man, constitutes masculinity, is a liability.
If being in a relationship with a woman who makes more money than you and/or has a higher position than you makes you feel that you are becoming obsolete, maybe you should be mocked for being silly, immature, and sexist.
There is also the option that Men may simply opt out of involving themselves in a relationship with said woman. In this case the Male Catch 22 is used to shame him for his insecurities not only by women for not participating in their potential provisioning, but also by a chorus of plugged in men ready to mock him for his lack of manhood (also in order to convince the feminine of their unique dedication to the imperative and hopefully get laid as a result of it). It’s at this point he’s derided for his ‘fragile ego’ and his ‘being threatened by strong independent women®.”
By virtue of his maleness, he literally cannot win, and any expression of this condition, even the questioning of this situation is then perceived as his complaining about it – and overt confession of vulnerability. What I’m describing here is the core issue blue pill, plugged in men have with Game and the red pill – just asking a question or making a critical observation about the feminine with regard to the male condition is always conflated with men complaining – something men aren’t allowed to do. It comes off as “poor men”, just as our Jezebeler recounts, but it distracts and discourages real discourse about those conditions.
That is how effective the Male Catch 22 is, it kills all critical inquiry before the questions can even be asked.
January 25th, 2014 at 12:10 pm
Why is the fact that Deti and Rollo have never been divorced a mark against their advice? I think it demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of what the manosphere is to say/imply something like that.
The fact that at least two prominent manospherian residents have managed to keep their women “happy” enough to not blow up the marriage is actually a stamp of approval on their advice. It is perhaps the highest compliment. Any fool can keep asking women for sex, eventually get more positive responses, and mark some notches on his belt. It takes an actual man to keep one woman happy enough to not push that oh-so-easy-divorce button for 10-20 years in this fem-centric society.
The contrast between what women think they want, and what they actually respond to, couldn’t be more clear with nearly every comment by Kate in this thread.
Kate must think we’re all wanna-be PUA’s, complete with glittered hats and huge money clips, she can’t understand that the primary result of the manosphere and game is one where she actually benefits.
January 25th, 2014 at 1:53 pm
“Why is the fact that Deti and Rollo have never been divorced a mark against their advice?”
The discussion was about empathy. Rollo contends that one cannot empathize with something they have’t experienced. By his own logic, he cannot empathize with a divorced man because he hasn’t experienced it.
January 25th, 2014 at 2:23 pm
Do you share your stories, deti, to be some sort of “martyred married man”? I’ll give you the credit of saying no.
January 25th, 2014 at 3:01 pm
“This is part of the reason why Game works: by directly communicating that you are resistant to manipulation and you’re aware of power dynamics, you instantly gain the respect of these women.”
Well put.
Also, Rollo the tact and sophistication to bring to the manosphere (must admit I hate that term) is much appreciated.
January 25th, 2014 at 5:18 pm
Kate:
No. I’m not a martyr. I’m an observer.
And it’s not about me.
January 26th, 2014 at 1:42 am
Diff T sometimes you sound like a busted AI but I appreciate the effort
January 26th, 2014 at 8:38 am
The second you make a comment, you are no longer an observer. You are a participant and open to attack. It has been about you and what you were able to achieve enough times that I can remember Susan Walsh making some derogatory remark to you about the telling of your story. And I only read there once! But I’m sure you didn’t let that stop you.
Sharing real and intricate stories helps people more than any one-dimensional rule could. The tricky parts are in the nuances, which is why I assume there is a Bible and not just a list of commandments. As much as I give you credit for saving your marriage, I think other stories are valuable too, especially here (as opposed to MMSL where participants are more likely to be married).
Whether anybody is likely to share anything, when doing so creates this kind of hate hole, is dubious. Honest examination is one thing. Descending to the level of feminist tactics is another.
January 26th, 2014 at 8:45 am
Re: observer vs participant. 1000 Ways To Die. We don’t have to undergo all of them, or ANY of ’em, to catalog them. In fact, not undergoing any of them is a prerequisite to being able to catalog them.
January 26th, 2014 at 9:35 am
Diff T sometimes you sound like a busted AI
From feminist to robot, the effects of projection and rationalization are astounding.
but I appreciate the effort
Thank you. The evidenced lack of this capacity has been noted and appropriately depreciated.
January 26th, 2014 at 9:49 am
oh no.
The beta males are qualifying themselves to Kate and company again.
January 26th, 2014 at 1:26 pm
Having lived nearly three score years on this earth and this once-good country, I can tell you that in the last 20 years or more, most men not in the oligarchy are given a huge crap sandwich to eat. however since we are told that it is caviar most of us believe it. It comes not only from feminism and the state, but ironically even from mainstream conservatives and churches. I think more and more men are beginning to recognize it for what it is and trying to find ways to ingest less of it. I am now immune to the shaming tactics that were effective on me even just a few years ago. Hopefully more and more decent, hardworking guys wake up.
January 27th, 2014 at 2:41 am
Rollo: I have a peculiar feeling that LT and DT are either the same or related. Though that might simply be because I’m seeing a similar female-mindset. It could be blinding me to more subtle differences.
Glen: May your life continue to improve as you grow and prosper. I know you won’t see these well-wishes, however I felt that they are worth writing.
GeishaKate: “Top that motherfuckers.” Angry much?
Seriously Kate, why do you bother coming in here for a bruising? You have Mark Minter, he is your Red Pill Alpha Man. There is no need to come into these spaces of men any more – yet here you are, arguing and being condescending to all and sundry.
In fact it seems as though you are even more condescending than you used to be. Is this the arrogance of getting what you wanted, coupled with a mentality of: “nyah nyah you-all are second-rate losers who couldn’t get and don’t deserve me so there!” A serious dose of self-centered narcissism appears to be going on in your head.
“Hypergamy doesn’t care.” Are you looking to trade up already?
January 27th, 2014 at 6:50 am
@BlackPoisonSoul: You forgot to say I made a typo!
My purpose has always been to learn and to help. If I am not being of help, the best thing to do is to remain silent.
January 27th, 2014 at 7:10 am
Women in the know and appear to accept red pill ideas, far from being the unplugged man’s ideal woman, present no fewer problems than your average blue pill woman.
Red pill understanding or not, women will never understand or empathise with men’s experience – althought she may seem to – right up until a conflict of interests arises.
From one of Rollo’s other articles: “I reject your reality and replace it with my own…” and how could she not? – She answers to something that sees him as merely as a stepping stone to its own end goal..
January 27th, 2014 at 7:37 am
There is a situation I’ve encountered and I don’t have a name for it but can call it “Fuck off Game” or “Moral High-Ground Game”.
A number of years ago (pre-game understanding) I was seeing a girl who was constantly shit-testing etc etc. We broke up but she was still hanging out and I couldn’t really get rid of her.
She kept on me about chatting other girls and then one day I found out she was seeing some guy while at the same time blasting me.
I told her she was a fucking liar and hypocrite, blew up and that was my time to get my balls back.
This happened again 2 years ago with my ex girlfriend who was also hanging around in my life but shit-testing and preventing me from meeting other girls. She showed up somewhere with some guy after telling me she was sick or busy.
I also held her accountable called her every name there was, liar, manipulative and said “Fuck off”.
Interestingly, in both cases those girls not only drifted back. Accepted the break up and that now I was seeing other girls and they had no moral authority to have a say in this but they also both banged me.
I don’t understand what you would call this situation.
The break up occurs, there’s like this wishy-washy situation where the girl is hanging around not fucking you but cramping your style. You catch them in a lie, blow up, tell them to fuck off. They apologize profusely, make it up to you and from that point on are forever submissive while you move on.
Is this a thing? It seems to be the only thing that has ever worked when the script has been flipped and I’m on the back foot through excessive shit-testing.
January 27th, 2014 at 8:22 am
@ BlackPoisonSoul
Have you followed up on Rollo’s stated influential source, BF Skinner.
Are any of the commenters even interested in learning about the “medicine” Rollo is adding a spoonful of sugar to and repackaging?
January 27th, 2014 at 9:59 am
This post outlines the reasons that game is not just a set of tactics but an attitude of knowing your boundaries and sticking to them.
Shit-testing and this whole feminist imperative or “Male Catch 22″ is one big shit test that requires an “I’m mad as hell and not going to take it anymore” attitude to break out of.
But one perhaps unhealthy behavior that comes with the “red pill” is over-compensating to make up for that feeling of being duped when you were an AFC.
This over-compensating and being a jerk is not dealing with the co-dependence that fueled the “nice guy”.
Game requires not only a knowledge of the dynamics of women, but a clear set of boundaries.
It’s too easy to cave in when you start seeing success.
January 27th, 2014 at 10:43 am
Excuse my thumbsucking in this comment. The topic of this article is that to WOMEN, No True Man has weakness and vulnerability. Hence, inexorably, what WOMEN mean by a true man is brute strength and brute insensitivities. Restated, to WOMEN, the measure of any man’s true masculinity is his capacity for brutality.
But upon reaching that particular thought, I find myself at a dead end in trying to imagine an operational definition of women’s ascertaining a man’s capacity for brutality. I think shit tests are part of it, and masculine faces, and large muscles, and dark triad traits. All of it is in there. But I’m sucking up my thumb and twirling my hair vigorously while staring at this big rock wall. At what point should a man introduce his brass knuckles into a relationship?
January 27th, 2014 at 11:14 am
@jf12
“But I think I know enough to confidently state that her respect for you is negatively correlated with the sacrifices you make for her. Negatively.”
Experience has proven this to me; thanks for bringing it to my attention. Perhaps this is also demonstrated in the “bad-boy” dynamic: the more she does for him, while he does little for her, the more attracted & attached she becomes. Good lesson to remember.
January 27th, 2014 at 11:23 am
@DT, you could add Steven Pinker to that reading list too if you’d like.
January 27th, 2014 at 1:02 pm
@Sao Fang
Typical NAWALT and temper tantrums.
Not even popcorn can make the pointless back and forth any less uninteresting.
The thought of manosphere groupies never even crossed my mind and yet here we are, what a mindfuck.
Although part of me believes the influx of women is out of fear. Men are starting to wake up.
January 27th, 2014 at 1:55 pm
http://therationalmale.com/2012/04/10/the-bitter-taste-of-the-red-pill/
January 27th, 2014 at 2:32 pm
^^^Figured you had it covered and it doesn’t make it any less amusing to see it unfold before your eyes.
January 27th, 2014 at 4:47 pm
Hypergamy, Game, “Dark Arts”, old Uncle Burr Skinner and all, and all.
Girls, if you don’t want it to be true, as you plainly do, then ..
.. stop making it true, by what you do. As everyone can see.
Or else it stands.
January 27th, 2014 at 6:11 pm
In the same way that Nice Guys Are The Real Jerks, an unattractive man that sucks it up must be just doing it to impress the chicks. The chicks know, see, because they aren’t impressed by him sucking it up, the way they’d be impressed by an attractive man sucking it up. Actually, they’re kind of hoping the attractive man lets a little real teardrop form so they can kiss it away for him, unlike the fake crying of the unattractive man.
January 27th, 2014 at 8:30 pm
This thread is blowing up with personal drama, so allow me to interject with some more Nietzschean wank. Women (and other slaves) wield power of great magnitude, but it is negative power. Even though slaves wield great power it has the tendency to be invisible. E.g. in the argument between spouses the crying woman is seen as powerless in spite of the fact that her tears get real results and will frequently prevail! Unfortunately, tears can only negate. Nothing new ever gets created by crying. Nowadays you can see this slavish attitude infecting entire crafts, with much enthusiasm over “rights” and “equality” and little dedication to the field itself. Previously this attitude had been reserved for trade-unionized slave work, but feminists have successfully imported it into the professional fields.
This negating, appropriating nature is the common trait between activism for homosexuals, transexuals, women and unsuccessful races. All of these people are ultimately ashamed of the group that they belong to. Transexuals are heard to say that they are a “real woman”, because what they really are – a dude with some strange modifications – makes them feel ashamed. Homosexuals are incapable of starting their own civilisation (which would be affirmation) so their sole recourse is to convince heterosexuals that they are equivalent. Woman is incapable of getting anything for herself, so she turns men against one another, and convinces man that he should be ashamed of his active, affirming power that is the source of everything she has while secretly and indirectly wielding it herself. What you see *uniformly* with these groups is their insistence that everyone else should change the way they judge people so that they rank more favorably. Exactly the sort of matrix you see RP men talk about.
January 28th, 2014 at 8:39 am
http://therationalmale.com/2012/04/10/the-bitter-taste-of-the-red-pill/ is the male equivalent of “he’s just threatened by a strong, independent woman”
January 28th, 2014 at 10:44 am
Re: “He’s just threatened by an ankle-biting Chihuahua.” The bitterness of the red pill is realizing that it doesn’t cure the ill the way it “should” because reality is not the way it should be. As much as it pains a man to realize that all of his attempts to placate with treats, to entertain with toys, or to ignore that Chihuahua by limping around with it hanging off his leg, the only real way to deal with it is to be more brutal towards it. And despite the apex fallacy of women, most men are bitter at discovering they must be more brutal.
January 28th, 2014 at 11:01 am
@Rol
Every year, there’s a new batch of 18 year olds. Why worry about washed up LyingTree and Kate?
I’ve been saying strange stuff like getting other men to take care of my babies’ bills. Aka alpha fucks beta bucks. The recipients of my rants, who are all married women (!!!), shake their heads upon hearing that because it’s wronggggggggggg. Oddly, they treat me better the next time we meet up.
And all the above may be independently verified by anyone talking to women face to face.
January 28th, 2014 at 11:12 am
@Rollo
I’m a big fan of the Pirates movies by Walt Disney Pictures. Thought dear old captain Jack is a great example of an attractive asshole.
“But I will not be going back to the Locker, mate. Count on that.”
January 28th, 2014 at 11:38 am
@Kate, if there were a parallel effort on the part of men to cast strong independent women® into good and bad camps,..you might have a point.
If there were a similar social effort on the part of men to cast strong independent women® as Dark Triad sociopaths unwilling to conform themselves to men’s better liking and male imperative,..you might have a point.
If there were for the past 60+ years a similar effort on the part of men to systematically, politically and legally remove every inference of femininity from the very language we speak, and erase and obscure all notion of feminine gender character for 4 generations,..you might have a point.
If there were similar social conventions that shamed and demonized a woman for even a passing question critical of the primacy of the masculine imperative, you might have a point.
The point is you don’t have a point, but I will point out that it’s just like a woman to make simplistic, dismissive, false equivalencies when she in fact feels threatened by a truth that exposes the Feminine Imperative.
Nothing is more threatening yet simultaneously attractive to a woman than a man who is aware of his own value to women.
Admit it, the Threat gives you tingles. I mean, why else would you find Mark attractive?
January 28th, 2014 at 11:58 am
Re: the threat of The Threat. The conundrum facing nice men is not only that of
“Women don’t want a man to cheat, but they love a Man who could cheat.”
but more generally
“Women don’t want a man to be brutal, but they love Man who could be brutal.”
For example, his insouciance about her feelings about his cheating is part of his emotional brutality.
For her behavior to improve it’s not sufficient for him to threaten “I’m going to threaten you with harm!” She has to believe that actual harm, actual cheating, actual brutality is imminent unless she does something.
January 28th, 2014 at 4:12 pm
“Top that Motherfuckers” @Kate
We all have stories, all have demons and angels. But I’m going to coop your closing.
January 28th, 2014 at 4:31 pm
First of all, I appreciate the tone and thought of your response.
Second, your blog and others on the Manosphere (including those written by women) are the very social/political effort you say doesn’t exist. Almost every single article is about the evils of women. I understand the purpose of the hyperbole, but it is near impossible not to eventually reject it as the propaganda technique it is. As you have seen previously, female readers can only tolerate this for so long before breaking up with and then denouncing association with the Manosphere.
I do have a point; you just don’t “get it.” I don’t expect you to anymore.
January 28th, 2014 at 6:48 pm
@Kate
The gist of your message is that the articles should be made more palatable to women, regardless of how male readers may view this.
Understand that the blogosphere is effectively the free market of ideas and thus you don’t get to tell people what they can and can’t write, simply vote with your readership – or, more actively, if you so should choose, critique Rollo’s articles in the comment section or in your own work.
Even if you don’t agree with a free market of ideas and, like many women, seek to limit free speech for all to protect your own sensibilities, given today’s climate in which males grow up, the bias in the manosphere is more than justifiable. The worst of the manosphere is TAME compared to the depravity of some of the writings in the radfem corner of the internet.
As always, if you don’t agree with something make and defend your point, rather than taking to sulking.
January 28th, 2014 at 7:37 pm
I wonder if you’d think it propaganda if I were to build a blog around gratuitous praise and flattery all the aspects of femininity I admire? Would you tell me to STFU or be more balanced and objective in my analysis of all the various aspects that make women the loving, vivacious, nurturing and mystical creatures men could never hope to figure out?
Would that be propaganda?
January 28th, 2014 at 7:42 pm
“Almost every single article is about the evils of women.” -kate
We don’t denounce all woman are evils, individually, everyone is different. We are looking at the other way, the psychology mind of woman. Look at it in a scientific way, how our human mind work.
January 28th, 2014 at 7:51 pm
“As you have seen previously, female readers can only tolerate this for so long before breaking up with and then denouncing association with the Manosphere.”
If only ..
So. Here till next Christmas at least, I take it?
January 28th, 2014 at 8:01 pm
I’m in the business of unplugging chumps from the Matrix, not making women feel better about the truths the manosphere reveals. If you’re looking for a compromised truth that affirms your ego-investments, well, maybe you should discuss that with Mark the next time you see him.
January 28th, 2014 at 8:47 pm
“The gist of your message is that the articles should be made more palatable to women, regardless of how male readers may view this.”
No, it isn’t. I’m just telling you why women get sick of the discussion.
“Would that be propaganda?”
Of course.
“We don’t denounce all woman are evils, individually, everyone is different. We are looking at the other way, the psychology mind of woman. Look at it in a scientific way, how our human mind work.”
A very rational comment.
“Hey, I want to believe, you know I do.”
Hope you will one day.
January 28th, 2014 at 8:55 pm
It has become predictable.
Washed up cougar posts wall of texts.
Betas reply with walls of text.
In real life, these bitches pull nothing. Zero attention.
January 28th, 2014 at 9:00 pm
This is why I’m glad I followed Rollo from way back at Sosuave. I knew he was on to something greater. His steadfastness on this subject is very important to the well being of men who value his insight.
It’s a sad state of affairs when things have gotten so bad that coming here feels like a reprieve. I deal with women at home, work, gym, etc. Who wants to the see the emotional drama unfold here as well…
I can’t really talk about any of this stuff with even close male friends because the life-long indoctrination is too strong. I’ve tossed little nuggets out there but I have to be careful because I know hearing certain truths can bring out serious defensiveness.
January 28th, 2014 at 9:14 pm
@Sao Feng
I’ve come to realize that sites like this are just another form of facebook for them. We try to relate our experiences to women wanting to believe they possess the same intellectual curiosity, but it just isn’t there.
Its down right embarrassing to see how guys act on PUA sites. Actively trying to game these chicks in the most obvious, cringe worthy ways and in the same breath describe themselves as alpha males.
I understand the need though. The average man is desperate by design.
January 28th, 2014 at 9:55 pm
@Kate, perhaps HUS or Love, Ashley are the sand you’d prefer to stick your head into?
Don’t expect any sugar in the medicine here.
If you want ‘red pill light’ I’m sure Aunt Giggles would love another sycophant.
January 28th, 2014 at 10:08 pm
If you want ‘red pill light’ I’m sure Aunt Giggles would love another sycophant.
Rollo,
Red pill light??? Giggles is firmly plugged back into the matrix. She doesn’t remember anything.
“Ignorance is bliss”
January 28th, 2014 at 10:12 pm
There’s a reason I use quotation marks Morpheus.
Heh,..
January 29th, 2014 at 12:16 am
Re: tossing little nuggets. Like the breadcrumb trail of Hansel and Gretel?
I recently found that Agree and Amplify was a better strategy, any time a topic related to the feminine imperative came up.
January 29th, 2014 at 5:50 am
I used to really like auntie giggles back in the day, for a woman she was dishing out female gender truths hardcore. In many ways she was behaving like the matriarchs of old that knew and understood that young women had to be taught what the risks of unrestricted female sexuality were.
The only ever present downside to auntie was that while she always presented a very eloquent and elegant analysis of female gender truths (that were palatable to women), she always mixed this with some very poor advice. It was always from the pov of trying to convince men to behave in a sort of a weird hybrid purple-pill way so that the young women that took the red pill can filter out all these “angry” manosphere guys that, *gasp; have realised they’re not getting even close to 50-50 moral and sexual reciprocity. Now I doubt this is the place where I have to explain how ass-backwards this is, but you got the good with the bad with auntie.
But somewhere along the line she has suddenly done a near 180 and is whining non-stop that lo and behold: most men actually won’t play the game if some important rules are not dictated by us. She’s on a mission now to basically convince her followers that in fact we men are the problem and women are getting the short end of the bargain!
Now part of what triggered this I would say is the fact that men like me tried, in the comments section, to correct aunties solutions and advice which were from a purely female (and self-serving) angle. Her solution was really nothing more than trying to convince guys to take the blue pill again because some women were now magically going to play the SMP game they said they would. She was of course quite intimidated by the fact I and many other guys indirectly stated through all the comments sections that it wouldn’t work and the only solution is to start adhering to some important moral and sexual rules and entitlements (for once) to balance out todays very skewed SMP.
Of course this has to be quite a significant factor in the turn of events, but I have to ask: is this it? This is the one factor that has scared auntie shitless? That women, to fix the SMP, have to actually start behaving fairly by imposing restrictions on their sexuality and moral entitlements? That they have to dig up an open and empathetic view on men? That they have to accept they’re winning all the battles but losing the war? Is that so terrible in spite of all the losses that are mounting on their side?
January 29th, 2014 at 6:48 am
Now to relate my previous thoughts to Kates “interesting” interjection on the posts topic, which is actually a rather common occurance when women join in on a manosphere post.
Most women are not feminists (leaders) and not followers (angry cunts like Marcotte and whoever writes for Jezebel): they are just casual supporters of whatever improves their lot on a socioeconomic and sociosexual plane. I’d stick my neck out and say that 80% of most regular women are like this.
Nowadays gals like this, including auntie and Kate and so forth: have realised how much feminisms victories that they casually supported/enjoyed has actually led to an SMP and MMP that seeks in no way to supplicate and support them and their blue-pill life. Now this was just stage 1 and auntie and Kate thought they if they would change their allegiance and casually support the manosphere with hollow agreement and feigned empathy: they would get the SMP back on track with absolutely no effort or change required of them. Yay!
However we are now in stage 2 where they realise that the manospheres only interest is in itself. It is not seeking to change the prevailing system but to either replace it with their own (game, pua, whatnot) or simply reject it all (mgtow). Now this is obviously very scary stuff to auntie and Kate because this is not what they really wanted, no no. What they really wanted is to convince men that there are now women out there that took the red pill and will now play to the rules of the blue pill because they agree women sure have too much sexual and moral power: the purple pill.
But the purple pill wasn’t accepted and it’s becoming more and more obvious that we’re tuning them all out en masse. Worst of all is that more and more men enter the manosphere and gain a genuine understanding that women will not be convinced to change. The only person that can change is, you got it it’s the time person of the year 2006: YOU!
Now what is scaring women like auntie and Kate about this movement? The convinction in gender truths and total unspoken ultimatum that we no longer demand they change. What this means is there is no more game to be played: they’re losing their blue and purple pill. Instead of convincing men the bold new future is presenting two very unpalatable options and only two.
One is to stick to what I call “90-10 is 50-50″ in terms of womens view on sociosexual entitlement and fairness and have absolutely no suitors, in others words the very path we are on. Or two: to actually deal with their genders hypergamous tendencies and establish an SMP and MMP which rules and official entitlements are dictated in equal parts to, for and by both genders.
In other words: this is the end of talking and the time for action for women. The manosphere sticking to its guns and gathering more and more followers which furthers and speeds up that impending doom. It does not need or even require female participation or support. Women like auntie and Kate had/have a naive hope that slowing it down and limiting its destruction of the blue pill S/MMP could be done and when it hits them that it can’t be: classic tactics like shaming through false equivalence above. This on top of aunties recently patented crusade that the red pill is too bitter and harsh and the blue pill S/MMP is not as prevalent so we all need to play along again and this time, this time damn it: it will all work out for us if we once again believe women play fair!
January 29th, 2014 at 9:33 am
” it will all work out for us if we once again believe women play fair!”
January 29th, 2014 at 10:58 am
@Valentin
TL:DR summary: Kate and LyingTree are washed up has-beens. Whatever attention they used to get in their fertile years are now being monopolised by the new batch of 18 year olds. Comes online and pulls beta males into writing walls of text.
(count: 3 sentences)
January 29th, 2014 at 11:02 am
@Valentin
There is no SMP hydrostatic equilibrium, period. What goes around comes around has not been true historically, either. Moreover there is, more generally, no restoring force in Le Chatelier’s Principle. And finally, we do not have any semblance of equilibrium anyway. We are men in a canoe that has already gone over the waterfall, and our focus should change from concerns about buoyancy.
But since people like to compartmentalize things, there are a finite number of types of organizing sociosexual interactions that seem to make some kind of semi-stable pattern states, such as practically universal monogamy for life, blatant polygamy with many lost boys, rampant prostitution, war brides, etc. Hence when we change from one organizing principle to another, it can LOOK like “history is repeating itself” via a compartmentalized version of the Poincaré recurrence theorem. But the successive sequences of states do NOT repeat, even though the states do repeat. As an illustration, your being dealt a Queen has no bearing on what card you will receive next, even though last time you got a Queen you got a Nine next.
Any questions, ask away. This lesson is far enough down here that only the truly studious will read it anyway.
January 29th, 2014 at 2:18 pm
@Sao Feng
Well you’re right. But I rarely find I actually have anything to say when I read posts by guys like Rollo, Deti, Dalrock and so forth: I really just nod. Even in the cases where I don’t agree with the conclusions made I can still see where they come from and agree on the underlying analysis or truth. But women always manage to spark some critical thoughts that I find is fun to write about.
@jf12
I gotta say most of the time I agree with both your truths and your conclusions. There is a distinct difference between you and I however, whereas you only adhere to strict analysis and hard rationality I tend to infuse some personal idealism basically. It is though often mistaken for a naive idealisation of my view on gender relations and truths. Like I said: I’m with all you guys there and I don’t feel I have anything to add there.
When it comes to someone like Kate participating in the manosphere it almost always inspires and motivates me to post my conclusions. I don’t expect them to change much, but I do kind of hope that some minor percentage of women even willing to listen get my point: even though I know it’s not really likely.
The only thing I really wish women like Kate and auntie giggles to understand is that it’s too obvious how they feel threatened that men tune them out and only judge them by their actions on a moral and sexual level. Like I have stated they had very high hopes on the purple pill, but now is the time for action not for women as a whole but for the individual ones that finally “get it”. Being obvious that they’re taking all of this ugly truth personal isn’t going to help and I repeat: the manosphere does not require womens participation or approval over the red pill gospel we share and expand.
Every woman is more than welcome to join in on the discussion, but trying to alter the truths and conclusions that are being put into words because they do not find them palatable is futile to say the least. Comparing a post like this to the misandry crusade of feminists is just silly: they seek to change the behaviour and views of the other gender for their own benefit. We are only seeking an awakening and change for ourselves.
January 29th, 2014 at 7:41 pm
Kate v MM = classical tragedy.
January 30th, 2014 at 7:06 am
Jay, I don’t even think Kate wanted anything else than attention through stirring up some dust. While the underlying motivation was probably taking this post personally, I doubt she or any other women truly cares we know how lacking in empathy they are.
But what was really enticing and pushed her over the edge was the potential for drama, meaning attention guaranteed. Doesn’t matter that most of it is guys rolling their eyes or just using her little storm in a glass for musing on the topic at hand. She is still the center of it and that feels so good.
The only true red pill woman I have ever encountered is girlwriteswhat on youtube. There’s false prophets and false followers like auntie and Kate, there’s also submissive followers that mostly seek to improve their chance of getting with an alpha rather than actually balancing out the S/MMP of today. But actual red pill women? As rare as unicorns.
January 31st, 2014 at 7:13 am
@Different T.
Are you and our old friend – LivingTree, one and the same?
February 1st, 2014 at 9:56 pm
HOF post.
February 21st, 2014 at 4:37 pm
[…] Originally Posted by wilderness I hadn't realized that claiming that you don't care about money factored into trying to shame men into not expressing themselves. Suck It Up | […]
March 25th, 2014 at 12:31 am
[…] for. From there I was introduced to the RedPill by wonderfully written articles called, “Suck It Up” and “What is the Red Pill” by Rollo Tomassi […]
September 10th, 2014 at 12:18 am
[…] Suck It Up […]
September 14th, 2014 at 9:13 pm
“That’s some catch, that catch-22.”
I was fully in that mindset up until a couple of years ago when I discovered sites like this. Even now it is a constant struggle to overcome a life time of conditioning in the feminine imperative. It is very subtle – it doesn’t come so much from individual females as much as society at large: movies, TV, school, etc.