The True Romantics

When watching this video, or any similar to it, notice how you feel physically before you hit play and then compare it to how you feel after viewing it. Is your heart rate elevated? Did you get a little fight-or-flight adrenal rush? We laugh to relieve the visceral anxiety we feel for this chump, but think of seeing this in terms of transferring this guy’s stress level to yourself. We know the ship is going to sink before we watch, but we feel, by order of degrees, what this guy is feeling by association to the point that it prompts a chemical response in us. Why?

Is it that through some psychologically evolved mechanism we’ve learned to protect ourselves in similar situations in our primal past? Think about what a man would have to believe in order to overcome that mechanism and place himself in a position of public ridicule that ALL depended on the woman’s response. This woman is mediocre at best – I’d rate her about an HB 5 – and this guy proposes to her in what he undoubtedly believes is a grand chivalric gesture. I’m sure he genuinely believed she’d appreciate his ‘vulnerability’ and create a cherished memory for them both as they gracefully age in their marriage. I doubt either of them will ever forget it now.

In some of the comments they were saying it was a set up, but what’s the point of that? Who’s benefiting from it?

And even if it was contrived, the real lesson being taught is from the ‘audience’ around them. People still want to believe that it was authentic. It’s still a pretty useful illustration of a beta mindset. How many guys like this want to believe that a woman will appreciate his romanticism? It is men who are the real romantics. It’s men who are the imaginative ones when it comes to romance, and all in an effort to provide a woman with the romantic experiences she says she wants. Romance is what Men perceive it to be for women.

Women do not appreciate planned, romantic gestures. I’m sure this guy thought he was being brilliant by noticing how she cuts a cupcake – “girls like it when guys pay attention to the little things, ‘other guys’ don’t listen to women, I’ll show her I’m unique,..” What most men and all women don’t understand is that the things a woman finds romantic are rarely ever planned. Your sweaty t-shirt is more romantic to her than any candlelit evening. It’s the things you don’t think would ever be romantic that stick with her. In the same way you cannot negotiate genuine desire, likewise you cannot engineer genuine romance.

The problem with planned romanticism is that it’s pregnant with an obligation to be appreciated. Men can be romantic, just not the way women say how they expect it. Like pretty much anything else women say, it’s not what they really want, but a man can’t be told what that is, he has to figure it out for himself, otherwise it isn’t genuine. For the high value Man, romance is an effortless and unthinking gesture.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

53 comments on “The True Romantics

  1. The way you provided a concrete example and then explained it in theoretical terms made for good reading.

  2. Karma proposed with taco sauce as his gesture of promise. Very simple, very spontaneous, very effective. I have no doubt his speech was less than 10 words. This reminds me a quote: “A wise woman never yields by appointment. It should always be an unforeseen happiness.”

  3. Rollo you are right. I never understood why i was one of those women who were not all giddy over the whole outwardly gestures of romanticism like flowers, overly dramatic clichéd gestures of affection, etc. There is no accounting for spontaneity or a man who simply does something unique as his own gesture towards you to show his affections or that he cares. A lot of women would even be content and internally excited with heavy kino (like back rubbing while we’re out) or placing his hand on your leg/thigh while driving something like that. Those simple yet affectionate romantic gestures are soo much better (and less embarrassing) than the pony shows (like in the above video). lol

  4. Good to see that the world is starting to catch up.

    I’ve been saying this for a long time now- men are the TRUE romantic suckers. Women only respond favorably to “costly” gestures from men who have a high enough SMV to afford them.

  5. Agree fully.

    And this post presents the flip side of why the first few dates should be as little investment as possible. If she’s meh about you, you have lost little because you have not invested much time, money, effort or emotion.

    And immediate, out-of-the-gate high investment makes a woman (other than an entitlement princess) uncomfortable because she feels obligated to respond — emotion, sex, another date. .

  6. rollo go back and read the top comments on youtube. the reason she said no was because she was cheating on him with another dude behind his back and felt guilty. haha.. hopefully one day he’ll find your blog and wise up.

  7. Pingback: Kill the Beta «
  8. Pingback: Kill the Beta «
  9. I think the blogger is falling into the really common trap of saying “Men are….” “Women are…” as if all men act the same and and women act the same.

    There is a bell-curve of romance within both genders and indeed the entire world’s population.

    My dad writes love poems to my mom, who’s never written one to him. I dated one girl who would write love notes to me. I then dated another girl who would write notes telling me to pick my shit up off the floor or she would rip my nuts off. The two girls were very different.

    The only time I ever wrote anything romantic for a girl was when she found out I was screwing another chick.

    Everyone’s different.

  10. Pingback: The Rush «
  11. Pingback: Three Strikes «
  12. Pingback: Men in Love «
  13. Fardo. n.
    A sniglet. From the French, fardeoux.
    Of or relating to the feeling of embarassment one experiences on behalf of one who is either too stupid or too ignorant to feel embarassed for himself.

  14. The sweaty T-shirt is not more romantic than a candlelit evening, it is more sexually raw. Two entirely different, but equally powerful, feelings.

    Here’s a romantic video that a guy made for now wife. Notice how good looking they both are. Perhaps it only works when the couples are 8s and assortively matched.

  15. I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said, but I think there’s something more fundamental at work when explaining why this was a failure.

    Honestly, he comes off as pathetic the whole time. The soliloquy about them meeting in front of that place a year ago, feeling dizzy, the cupcake thing, etc., etc…it’s just irksome. But what makes it unattractive, isn’t because women don’t respond to sentimentality, it’s just that, in this case, you so obviously read FAKE through everything he says. You “can feel” that he’s just taking advice from romantic comedies to try to feign an internal substance and depth he himself lacks. And at the root of a woman’s attraction to men is POWER. If you’re incapable of expressing authentic sentiment, that is weak (just as women would also regard a tough, unsentimental man as weak when it’s clear he’s only assumed an angry, brutish demeanor because he’s insecure…(e.g. a Napoleon complex)).

    But if your toughness “reads” genuine and if your sentimental gesture “reads” authentic…it isn’t unattractive because then these things reflect an underlying strength. Not weakness.

    As a class, humans despise inauthenticity in others, doubtless because it reflects various inathenticities of our own. We tend to respect and admire deeply secure, and unapologetic people. And they’re quite rare.

    The same mechanism is at work when a husband cleans the house hoping for sex…and it just pisses his wife off. The gesture was inauthentic, because the “begging” for sex energy behind it “reads” through. Most men would start to get a better response if they unapologetically stated their demands, and then really ‘made them genuine’ by refusing to live in a sexless marriage (by giving a serious ultimatum). Instead, many pout, give half-hearted threats, complain and stay in their unsatisfying union.. And again, what this all really distills down to is a dishonesty between the man’s thought,word and deed.

    The common thought is that men are simple and women are complex. Not true. We’re all quite simple, it’s just many have difficulty in realizing this.

  16. Pingback: A New Hope |
  17. Pingback: Alpha Tells |
  18. Pingback: Vulnerability |
  19. Pingback: Idealism |
  20. Pingback: The Quick Fix |
  21. It’s exactly this: The problem with planned romanticism is that it’s pregnant with an obligation to be appreciated.
    It feels manipulative.

  22. @Rollo

    Exactly one year ago I was unplugged from the Matrix. A raw, brutal, painful rejection was the path to find your blog. I am commenting here, because this was the very first post I read from you. I have read most of your posts, I have your first two books and I am waiting for the copy of the third one. It is amazing what you do and the nobleness of your work helping men.

    I know that to kill my inner Beta will still take a long time, but at least now I can live with the dignity that I lacked during my Blue Pill days. I hope someday I could meet you in person just to say Thanks Rollo!!!

  23. Yeah, these kinds of experiences, while painful, are pretty deep learning lessons, it really takes some time though depending on the level of awareness the guy is at to overcome the tendency to do this trash…solid post, wish I found this shit years ago instead of learning the hard way – as a side note I find interesting the girls in the comments on this page are all claiming he seems ‘manipulative’ – which I would imagine is just code speak for them realizing the hamster in their brain is rationalizing and thinking through it too much and thinking the guy is ‘using’ them – they have no other word to use besides ‘manipulative’…???

    Like give me a break, the chump in the video is the least manipulative guy on earth – women use doublespeak and their inability to describe emotional reactions accurately – the guy in the video is the last guy on earth that would manipulate a girl (at that time) – he would probably literally bend over backwards and do ANYTHING the girl asked of him – he’s the furtherst thing from manipulative around – the girls responses claiming he’s ‘manipulative’ is imo code for “we clearly SEE literally that your GAMING us RIGHT here RIGHT now and its TOO obvious” they suddenly SEE a guy gaming them, its way too much for her – the reason ‘game’ works is cuse girls are constantly uncertain as to if the guy has ‘real’ interest or if shes getting ‘gamed’ and it becomes a cat and mouse chase for her….

    Girls like covert game – half the time girls don’t even know they are being gamed – they’d love to lie and say they ALWAYS notice when a guy is ‘gaming’ them – but I completely disagree – they only rarely notice game – THATS WHY IT WORKS in the first place. Certaintly being direct and forward is skillful as well, but what makes her coming back is uncertainty. Girls think ‘every guy’ (literally) every guy wants to do them – whether or not they believe this to be genuinely true is another matter altogether – but the point is she always thinks shes being ‘seduced’ and that ‘every guy wants her’ – when the game becomes obvious she doesn’t know how to perceive whats happening (its similar to ‘having the talk’) – that’s why all these girls on here claim the guy is being ‘manipulative’ – he’s the furthest thing possible from manipulating the girl – in terms of actual manipulation – manipulation is actually what normal game is – this guys ‘game’ was the opposite of manipulation – he actually was being painfully honest – girls don’t SEE the underlying nature of a man – that at his core he may have poetic visions of ‘romance’ or whatever – this is all obscured to her, when she sees this kind of HUGE over the top display she doesn’t know how to rationalize it because shes been in seduction ‘game’ mode almost the whole time already – there’s no need to do over the top ‘gaming’ like this – this is the mans perceived idea of romance, not hers, as we can all tell.

    Game is also part seduction but mostly part covert – the malleable nature of women will go where ever dominance is persevered and if they are being led skillfully (using game) this can be done with most girls – point is this kind of ‘game’ this chump boy was dishing out by knelling and the guitar and all that shit in public is the opposite of being covert – the girl has to already be receptive of you in that way to embrace something like that and even then its way way too much for her brain to process – its like this ‘big’ thing she has to take in and process and rationalize – her brain can’t do it – too many emotional spikes – even as a guy this is brutal to watch – as the girl its got to be mind numbing – all I’m sayin is girls respond to covert game and also direct game if used correctly – generally speaking though girls rationalize fucking EVERYTHING – thats the reason they don’t change the world the same way men do – men are able to step out of their solipsism and observe – women are trapped in themselves constantly rationalizing –

    The real game advice I would’ve given this chump (which would be real manipulation*) if he had asked for my help is I would’ve told him,”how about instead of proposing, the next time when you two walk through a mall together and walk by a jewelry store say to her jokingly ‘hey when are you going buy me a diamond ring and propose to me?? you can even do it right here in the mall, make sure you bring a guitarists along too, that shit would be awesome’ – something THAT SIMPLE would be 1000% more effective than this chump ass shit – but hey we all gotta live and learn.

  24. Girls are in constant ‘aware-ness’ mode – i.e. they are solipsistic and live in their heads – to ‘come outside’ of herself (outside of her bubble world and head) in such a forward way via a public proposal is too much too fast – it could be done but the girl would have to be up to it somehow – she would have to be already sort of a ‘red-pill’ girl basically – most girls are constantly analyzing and judging the dude socially – so on one hand girls are extremely existential, but on the other hand this existential nature makes a fragile reality – if that bubble gets questioned or ‘threatened’ in some way she’ll freak out and as you can see literally she will run away.

    I think its worth noting that men need to realize the existential reality of girls – what this basically means is girls have to craft a blue-pill reality because their natures are naturally more existential than mens – when I say existential I mean something along the lines of realizing that there is a reality ‘outside’ of you – humans fear the unknown in general – throw a city slicker kid into the woods alone by himself for the night and see how he copes – normally men cope with existentialism via ‘conquering’ and the cliche term of ‘overcoming’ – girls cope via blue pill ‘truths’ – tell a girl she’s a slut or some other hyper offensive word and watch her reality crumble – when girls have to question reality and nature and life they do it via ‘bluepill-truthism’; they don’t use ‘logic’ (rarely, if ever or at all) but a series of thoughts and ‘doublespeak’ to make it easier to accept hard truths. Take a girl out of her reality bubble and she will literally run away. Long story short is while direct game has its time and place and varied uses, indirect is easier for girls to naturally digest – esp girls today who are so hopelessly tied to the blue pill system. Like being ‘normal’ and casual with a direct approach is 100x more effective than any over the top game you think you need to do for some romantic reason.

    Women don’t really want the blue pill reality men make them – they only use it as their means of coping with reality and nature – women actually want to embrace their existential nature and men (men who are naturally more redpill and existential) – women want the existential reality but they are literally too scared of it – but they want men to basically ‘guide’ them into it – I don’t know how else to put it – basically think of a spartan man and a modern girl – two polar extremes – the spartan man knows nothing of modern society – he is inextricably linked to nature – nature which frightens women – the spartan is almost way way too much of a ‘caveman’ for her – he’s TOO badass, TOO gunhoe – TOO overbearing – women needed guided out of the blue pill bubble of society into mens existential reality – both men and women are aware of their existential natures – maybe you’ve gone camping or driven cross country at some point and just had a ‘mind opening’ existential moment where suddenyl you felt small and the world felt big – thats basically the real differance between men and women which I think is really encapsabled into this proposal clip.

    The girl DOESNT need MORE blue pill shit from the man – man’s idea of ‘romance’ is art and poetry and crafting society and ALL of the great things men have done throughout human history – some of it is blue pill ish and some of it is red pill – thats a whole nuther discussion – the point is LAYERING more blue pill shit onto a girl IS NOT what women want – this guy in the video seems ‘manipulative’ because he seems to be ‘presenting’ a new blue pill reality for her – she doesn’t want his chump ass blue pill contrived reality – she already has ALL of society to give her that shit on a CONSTANT basis – what she fuckin wants is for men to lead her out of the blue pill society and let her know ‘its going to be ok’ – but the spartan caveman will have a tough time doing that – OF COURSE she wants the spartan badass – obviously her nature demands HIM – but girls like guys who are funny and can poke fun at the bubble of society and slowing lead her out of the bubble.

    Guys have been brainwashed into thinking they need to give the girl ‘everything’ in the bubble that she could ever want – this is obviously impossible – but the fact is that men are meant to guide a girl through the existential woods at night when you two are alone and you both have to survive – sure girls ‘like’ hypergamy in nature also, but hypergamy is mostly a blue pill manifestation of a girl thinking she can finally ‘have it all’; and that her blue pill reality will be ‘complete’ that her rationalization of nature will finally ‘come true’ that she finally got the ‘top dog’ – at the end of the day though almost any girl can be gamed if she’s slightly brought out of her bubble and if its done correctly – if ALL girls cared about was hypergamy game wouldn’t work – but just look at the fools over at RSD making it happen left and right – sure it could be claimed they are ‘mimicking’ ‘alpha’ traits or whatever – but I simply don’t buy it – hypergamy is the girls blue pill version of the holy grail; its the one thing every girl wants but can’t have because they think subconsciously a ‘protector’ ‘alpha’ male will ‘perfectly’ and permanently keep them at bay from their dreaded existential crisis of having to cope with nature. Girls like the ‘alpha’ or alpha because he shields her from her existential crisis of having to actually fucking THINK OUTSIDE of her solipsistic reality

  25. I think when girls say he looks ‘manipulative’ it means that his blue pill idea of romance was simply ‘fake’ looking and noticeably artificial ; the cheesy guitarist, the shopping mall, the cheesy comments he makes, the not tailored suit – what does ‘REAL’ romance ‘LOOK LIKE’? Well – its normally expensive shit – ‘real’ romance (as defined by society) is something like candlelit inner in Italy overlooking wine country and imagine some fuckin Spanish guitarist serenading the fuck out of you and her – THAT’S REAL FUCKING ‘romance’ – NOT this dollar store shit with the guy in a cheapass suit kneelin in the middle of the shopping mall – one makes the man look like a cheap stripper the other makes him look like a supermodel.

    There’s nothing ‘wrong’ with romance. The problem is when it becomes the end all be all and when it TAKES AWAY from the man, rather than simply being a nice addition. The ‘truly romantic’ experience would be like I said, some expensive dinner date in Italy overlooking wine country and there’s some Spanish guitar serenading you two – the point isn’t that it would be MORE expensive – the point is that the man is CRAFTING a blue pill reality for a girl – this guy maybe actually put some actual honest thought into this, but girls today almost all expect the ‘best’, because they’re fed the lie that they all deserve the best – something NOT amazing will literally LOOK cheap and under-amazing – it doesn’t have to be the most expensive shit ever to be ‘romantic’ – it has to be something that the man truly crafted in his head to appease the girl – and maybe he did truly put some effort into that proposal, to an Amish red pill girl maybe she would be more appreciative though – but again, this all sort of takes away the underlying premise, which is that the ma SHOULD be more concerned with getting her OUT of the blue pill factory and having her embrace red pill truths and spend less time fantasizing about manufacturing a whole blue pill world for her.

  26. I understand that the vast majority of this site and ‘manosphere’ in general it seems like is built on the notion of girls hypergamy – and while there’s some red pill truths there, I simply don’t buy it all the way. Certainly from a biological pov there’s a bit of merit there; she wants her offspring to survive etc etc. But on a whole the ultimate reality of girls is one of a scared nature.

    Why don’t women craft the blue pill ‘romances’ the way men do? It’s because they are already existential – they are already keenly aware of the very imperfect fabric of the bubble and society – they embrace blue pills like candy because it settles the nerves of the looming unknown which is reality and nature etc. Girls aren’t more ‘rationale’ – they are simply more existential – unfortunately their coping mechanism is blue pills and crafting solipsistic realities.

    Why do girls like the ‘top dog’? Because its the holy grail of the blue pill factory – not of nature. The holy grail of nature is God. What man WOULDN’T want to meet God and have 100% certainty, every man would be clamoring if they saw him,”hey tell me this, hey tell me that, hey explain THIS shit to me, hey hey hey hey!” – its similar with girls and hypergamy – think of girls and pop stars like the Beatles back in the day and shit, girls screaming and crying their eyes out – to a girl the ‘top dog’ in society is basically like a ‘God’ to them – it’s their only ‘truth’ and their only certainty – but why is that? Because if girls think OUTSIDE of their solipsistic reality they become scared and frightened – its the same thing with men and God – when man goes into nature alone in the wilderness he will probably become somewhat nervous if he wasn’t raised in the woods, the man wants certainty, if some ‘God’ popped out of the woods and told the man ‘Hey its gunna be ok, don’t be afraid’ that man would be incredibly grateful. If the God of ALL of reality showed up you’de be screaming like the girls did for the Beatles too, especially if he had the answer to your existential crisis. Which is the crisis of every-man. What man wouldn’t want to know the ultimate 100% truth of reality? What man is so certain of EVERYTHING? No man is. And so if given the chance to talk with (let alone be with) God Himself and have Him explain everything to you, would imo be the same thing as a girl getting the ‘top alpha’ in society. Men acting ‘alpha’ to appear like the ‘top dog’ is like a preacher giving an iggnorant man a sermon – he’s telling him what he wants to hear to calm his existential crisis which is reality.

    End of story. You can thank me later.

  27. Simple thought experiment:

    Put a girl alone in the woods and have her fend for herself, she will either die, or she will cling to the first person or guy who comes her way and claim him a ‘savior’….her thoughts are colored with the run of ideas of “I need saved, someone save me, someone please save me!”

    Put a man in the woods and have him fend for himself, he will build himself a home, find that lost girl in the woods, make a family, build a town, make a city…if he never finds the girl he builds a home for himself, lives there and starts to question reality and starts thinking about the divine and needing a savior. Or maybe he does both.

    Regardless the point is the man’s true existential crisis is on the ultimate nature of reality. The girls existential crisis is on herself and her own personal survival. One is inward the other is outward.

    When a girl is raised in a town with tons of guys to pick from its basically the same thing as how men pick philosophical doctrines. “Which one do I choose, they are all so appealing.” If your a guy who was not raised religious thats like being a girl who was not told that sleeping with every guy is a bad thing. She will have no shame and do whatever she wants, similar with the man. Men who are raised in unreligious backgrounds end up basically like your cult leaders and typical strung out psycho loser gangbanger – they become self serving. Why? Is it because human nature is naturally self serving? Nah, I’d say it’s because they have no other way of dealing with the existential nature of reality except via their own personal subject (i.e. themselves) – they are self serving because they don’t understand the nature of reality. Like a little girl lost in the woods she does everything for herself, like a baby at birth they do everything for themselves, they are tied to the self because they are simply ignorant of their literal outter environment. It’s really that simple. They simply don’t understand everything outside of them and so they seek self gratification. Nonreligious people are almost always hedonists, they almost always think ONLY they are ‘right’ too (i.e. subjectivists, egotists, etc…). This childness is basically like a really unevolved human, I would say theres a lot of better animals which are literally better than alot of people simply for this reason.

    Point in case is simply that women seek their ‘savior’ in men – hypergamy ‘looks’ like the ‘ultimate out’, like winning the reality lottery – to the ignorant girl the ‘top dog’ the ‘alpha’ looks like the guy that just understands EVERYTHING and will make all of her blue pill fantasies come true and she will NO LONGER have to live in the real world (i.e. objective reality) – she can FINALLY live in her world of illusions and subjectivity.

    To men we think, “Oh, shit, girls ONLY like the ‘top dog’, the ‘ALPHA’s, this must be because of in Nature blah blah blah blah says this and that, or because of mating, oh it ALL makes sense…” – no, no sorry to disappoint you all, the real end story has less to do with hypergamy, and more to do with the guarantee of her blue pill fantasy wish becoming fulfilled. Every girl will gladly date up, why? Because its no different than if a man found out his religion was WRONG. Imagine you’ve been learning some religion for a couple years, and suddenly something ‘better’ comes along, “Oh Shit! I guess I’ve been wrong all alone! THIS shit is the real nature of reality.”

    What men don’t seem to understand is how girls (of today) are so incredibly willing to BUY into almost anything. A guy asking a girl out is equal to a man (with no religion) be told about a new life philosophy he’s never heard about. She’s gunna either like that shit, or she aint. Your gunna either buy what he’s selling or you won’t.

    If you seem so overconfident, and like an expert on the religion than you will probably catch the guys attention, you might even win him over. Talk about a guy who never learned for himself what was the nature of reality. All men arrive at the quesiton of ‘what is the nature of reality?’ at some point or another, and every man deals with it differently, some men simply rationalize that shit and DONT think about it. THAT is precisly what every girl does, or at least 99% – most girls don’t want to think about that shit (the nature of reality) and the same is true with when you ask them out. When asking a girl out it should be like your selling her a fucking religion, she is either married for 20 years and will never convert or shes a young nubile ignoramus who will gladly listen to you (for now).

    Men need to understand that to girls guys are their coping mechanism for their personal reality control. Girls need guys to cope with reality. The spartan warlord (who is an alpha badass) can’t go around fucking every girl he wants cuse he’s TOO REDPILL, hes TOO existential, HEs TOO badass – at the end of the day the girl KNOWS DEEP DOWN SHE WANTS HIM (the spartan badass warlord) – not because of DATING UP, but because that fucker is tied to nature 100% – BUT every fucking girl (almost every) girl is blue pill zombie. You can’ just SHAKE HER out of her blue pill little world and think she’s not gunna run the fuck away from you scared as shit.

    Just act like your religion is the best one when your asking a girl out and you’ll be good. Better yet, believe a REAL religion and get her to believe it. I’m sure some guys will be saying religion is ‘blue pill’ – I guess they haven’t been thrown to the wolves yet or lost and alone in the woods wondering about what existence is than yet. You need a real existential crises to make you want to believe something is greater than yourself. Its great to believe a religion if you’ve never had an existential crisis, but as a man its all the more imperative you question reality and seek your own hypergamy.

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: