Backwards to Zero

Roissy has some definitive gems about Game deniers and haters in general in The Unbearable Triteness of Hating. These articles have to do with the most common forms of hate with regards to Game, but in that hate is an almost universal misinterpretation (or subjective redefinition) of what should be Alpha to the critic making the challenge (i.e. hate). Roissy is a bit flippant with a lot of his responses here – an attitude I can understand considering his standing in the manosphere – but there are the germs of some very important truths in his responses:

6. Unironic Internet Smear Hate

Hater: Alphas don’t blog. They’re too busy meeting women.

Because, you know, alphas don’t have hobbies. *alpha eye roll*

ps feel free to log off the internet any time.

Whenever I write an article with the topic of ‘Alpha’ anywhere in the title I’ve come to assume that all the resulting commentary will be contentions about what is or isn’t Alpha.

One of the most frequent and contentious responses I read is some variation of “No ‘True Alpha™’ would be blogging about, concerned about, or be peripherally aware of his Alpha status. Only losers spend their time so preoccupied with varying shades of Alpha-ness.” Ironically this is exactly the case I make for the Alpha Buddahs of the world – they are blissfully unaware of the latent Alpha ambience they broadcast. It’s just how they are, and you’ll never see a blog, read some ‘how-to’ article, nor ever see an objective opinion about his Alpha mojo. He just is.

What’s funny is it’s just this lack of Alpha self-awareness that infuriates ‘aware’ men – aware men have to work at being aware. If you’re reading this blog, if you’ve delved into the manosphere to any depth, hell, if you read AskMen or use online dating just out of curiosity, you’re not a Natural Alpha. The Corey Worthingtons of the world don’t write books on how to pick up chicks, he’s too busy fucking them (and dealing with the consequences) to have time for insight about himself, much less anyone else.

The Tao of the Natural Alpha may be a satisfying, if shortsighted, way to live, but it’s hardly sustainable. Eventually that Zen Alpha-ness creates circumstances that will create long term consequences. For the rest of us who must mentally work our way back to that feral Alpha mindset there is a lot of understanding and critical thought that goes into it. Personally I think appeals to “log off and get out and sarge” are exactly what most guys need. For all the PUA ‘charm’ readers like YaReally bring to my blog comments, he enthusiastically advocates for more time in the field and less time in the lab (i.e. the manosphere). KrauserPUA is also another favorite of mine since he actively combines Game theory with PUA applications.

The short version is Natural Alphas probably don’t blog or even have the awareness to consider the source, much less the applicability of their being Alpha, but the Learned Alpha, he does consider it, and that guy probably does blog – whether it’s out of vanity or altruism is for the reader to decide.

12. Fallacy of Misdirected Obsession Hate

Hater: A guy who spends his life obsessing over how to get women is a loser.

A guy who spends his life obsessing over climbing the corporate ladder to get more attention from women is a loser.
A guy who spends his life obsessing over mastering guitar and playing in a rock band to get more attention from women is a loser.
A guy who spends his life obsessing over pursuing financial rewards and acquiring resources to get more attention from women is a loser.
A guy who….. ah, you get the point.

The feminine imperative has used shaming tactics on men for more than half a century now, so it comes as no surprise that the feminine purpose for shaming would filter into men’s own narratives for shaming. When used by women, shaming has a different contextual quality than when used by men. For men, the root of shaming another man based on gender expectations are just as equally manipulative, but the appeal is to a man’s sense of pride and/or the way he’s chosen to live his life. In this context, the shame is used to disqualify a sexual competitor, while providing an ego affirmation for the accuser.

When women use shaming it’s generally used to force some compliance to their imperative. In other words “you should be ashamed for not embodying women’s (and by proxy, fem-centric society’s) expectations.” When men practice shame, either intentionally or unaware, even with the best of intentions, they are enforcing the feminine imperative from the standpoint that it is the societal normative. It “sounds right” for men to shame and discourage other men from learning how to better understand women. Remember, the most successful social conventions are those in which your target becomes an active, unaware, participant in his own exploitation.

By using shame, men dissuading other men from better understanding women serve the feminine imperative’s purpose in limiting The Threat of him becoming aware of his own sexual market value or potential value. Additionally, the shaming man protects the utility of the feminine mystique by perpetuating the myth that women are intrinsically unknowable creatures. “You’ll never figure women out, so don’t bother. Go back to Just Being Yourself and eventually you’ll meet the right ONE.” This is the mantra we’ve come to expect from White Knights, but it’s particularly damning for the Plugged-In when it comes from a Man they respect as an authority.

16. Dancing Monkey Hate

Hater: Men who run game are just doing the bidding of women. Alphas don’t entertain women.

If you want success with women, you are going to have to entertain them… one way or the other. The same is true of women. Once a woman stops entertaining men with her body, her femininity, and her commitment worthiness by getting fat, old, ugly, bitchy, or single mom-y, she stops having success with men. We are all doing the bidding of our biomechanical overlord, and on our knees to his will we surrender, by force or by choice. You fool yourself if you believe you have some plenary indulgence from this stark reality.
Or: If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.

For all of Men’s best intentions, for all our (dubious) aspirations of ‘higher-self’, what we do, what we are, what we achieve, will always be interpreted through the hypergamous filter of a woman’s perception of us. For all of our attempts to remove ourselves from the Game, Men cannot avoid this. By both biological impulse and social motivators, like it or not we are the performers, we are the approachers, we are the doers, even when (especially when) we think our purpose is not intended to be what we think it is. Abdicating from the Game does not excuse you from participating in the Game.

Whether you believe yourself the princely master of your own destiny or the pitiful victim of circumstance, on some level of consciousness you’re aware of the Game, and it’s a game of perceptions. Alpha’s, betas, Nice Guys, Bad Boys, and every guy in between, they ALL entertain women, even when they think they’ve gone their own way, even when they think they’re exempt from the Game, even when they’ve been married for 50 years.

It is a grave crime to tacitly or implicitly dissuade men from learning how better to master the Game. I can see how this misdirection might be used to disqualify a sexual competitor, but the same guys relying on rationalizations of higher-self-importance only better serve the feminine imperative they would otherwise rage against. Ironically it’s the feminine that’s arrogantly demanded every advantage in expecting society and reality itself to change for them in order better suit their gender’s drawbacks. They want to change the Game to better suit their ability to play it. They want to cheat the Game by playing in ‘God Mode’ and then wonder why it’s not fun to play any more.

I think we make the same mistake as men in our rationalizing expectations of the Game to accommodate us rather than learning to play it better.

Don’t wish it were easier, wish you were better.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

76 comments on “Backwards to Zero

  1. My qualm and beef with Roissy is that he has no Game.

    He has zero real-world experience in seducing women.He’s like a theorist with Game.He talks a good one but can’t or don’t do shit.Dudes like that I can’t respect.Why the F is Roissy anonymous?Where’s his in-field videos?

    Although I consider myself Manosphere,my prob’ with dudes in the manosphere is that they talk the talk but don’t demo shit in the form of field/lay reports.

    1. Krauser is awesome!!

      In fact,a few weeks ago,I posted an article on my blog entitled “Top 10 PUA coaches on 2012(first half)”,Krauser made my list.

      My only prob’ with Krauser’s Game is that he seems too low-energied in set(as far as his in-field vids’ show).He seems to come off as too bland for chics who are high-energied.

      Apart from that,I rated him in the top 10 of PUA/coaches of 2012.

    2. Why is Roissy anonymous? I don’t know, ask Roosh about how awesome it is to have your real identity open to attack from the enemy.

      1. @Koevoet-As much as I can’t stand Roosh nowadays(for blacklisting me from posting on his blog and Twitter),I respect that he isn’t anonymous.

        And the real reason I believe that 95% of the Manosphere bloggers/Gamer are anonymous is that they’re actually fat slobs/couch-potatoes and very unsightly.But it still comes down to a Beta mentality where one would have to hide himself because he doesn’t look like Brad Pitt.

        1. I personally know a few guys who went out with Roissy in DC back in the late 90s/early 2000s. They said he’s a tall, good-looking guy who runs that style of game, and he pulls nicely. He doesn’t care what you think of him, nor does he need approval from anyone like you. Why is it on him to put up infield?

          1. @And Balls-I know how Roissy looks.

            In the post I wrote about him,I had a pic of him in the article.He’s tall as hell.He doesn’t have to be in hiding because he’s unsightly(which he’s not).

            I’m just saying that most of the Manopshere hides because they’re unsightly:which is a Beta male trait of being self-conscious of looks.

        2. One of the inherent dangers of becoming the go-to guy on Game or anything that rubs the feminine defined reality the wrong way is that you paint a pretty big target on yourself. Literally and figuratively.

          I’m not a proponent of Roissy’s politics, but I definitively co-sign with his perspective on intergender relations. Now, which of these stances earns him the most vitriol? His writings about gender; that’s how important it is to defend the feminine imperative for the masses of online feminists and manginas. They can ignore his political screeds as just some right-wing crank, but they become so irate with his perspective on intergender dynamics that they seek to do him personal and professional harm.

          If you’ve noticed a change in Roissy’s writing style, it’s primarily due to having had to deal with ‘real life’ threats intended to destroy him personally to the point he’s had to change his online monicker (Heartiste). You are only as anonymous online as your opinions make you nondescript. Piss off the wrong aspergers troll or Jezebel fanatic and they will hunt you down digitally. I’m becoming more aware of this as my own blog becomes more popular.

          Few people understand the risks associated with Men writing and disseminating ideas that even marginally challenge the fem-centric social norm.

          No writer at Jezebel is worried about losing her job, damaging her reputation, or threats to her wellbeing for writing feminist propaganda. Guy’s writing in the manosphere put their lives, careers and reputations at risk to do so.

          1. That’s true. That’s also why I give my middle finger to it. More of us need to come out of the closet and live in the open.

          2. I was under the impression that Roissy and Heartiste are two different people. Their style is very different. Am I mistaken?

        3. I think Rollo’s reason has a lot more to do with it than 95% of them being fat slobs. As for no-true-scotsman…I mean alpha…would hide what he looks like…I think logical fallacies have been covered pretty well between this post and the one it quotes.

          1. Well how many of us are RooshV’s and Heartistes?

            So what about the little man blogger like us?Why are we anonymous?We have nothing to fear,right?

          2. Roosh himself says as much at the end of the blogpost linked by Rollo above:

            “If I knew years ago that blogging about getting laid and travel would put me on a hate list by a civil rights organization, I would have stayed anonymous. Too late now. I will be silenced at some point, but until then I will go on with my big head held high. I’m far from done.”

    3. I learn very little from videos. Krauser is only demonstrating what he has explained and it will look different for everyone anyway. I would rather read because that is how intelligent people learn. Roissy is not a guttersnipe without a reputation in life.

      1. @Obstinance-Reason why field-report videos are crucial(although may not be for learning purposes),is that it tells ppl that you can actually apply what’s being taught.

        Nothing more validating(to yourself and your followers) than being able to prove that you can chat up an HB10.

    4. Forgive me for stating the obvious but Roissy and Rationalmale would be considered high order macro, as opposed to micro, inter gender relations (pick up and relationship) ideas, thought provoking core concepts etc – the why not so much the exact how to. A step further up the chain?
      PUA blogs with in field lay reports are mainly one person’s blow by blow pony tricks, effective as they may be – you can’t directly compare them and criticize them for supposed lack of hard examples. (Some people learn best by watching – I can understand that.)
      Surely this is just a form of shaming the man as indicated in the above article? And if the response is – what’s your level of game – well you would have missed the point entirely.

  2. The hate is usually just adhominem and denial.

    On one hand they reject the whole alpha-beta ladder, and on the other they affirm it by saying that real [alphas] dont do this or dont do that.

    If you deny the ladder, then no one can be a “loser”, because that would push someone down, thus pushing someone up, with the one on top being more attractive = there’s your ladder again.

    Haters are dumb.

  3. We don’t use game because we are losers, or betas, or dancing monkeys.

    We do it because it’s FUN!

    Game = fun.

    Everyone likes to have fun. But… haters gonna hate.

  4. Good point.

    Ever have a hunch or nagging feeling when someone’s full of shit?That’s the sensation I get when I think of Heartiste.That intuitive feeling which is almost always right.

    I’ve said it before:I love his writing!I love reading his stuff.And I agree with his seduction philosophy 95% of the times lol!

    But something tells me he can’t put it into action.And when last has he written a field report?

  5. @Rollo-BTW check your comment spam folder and approve my messages which were sent to spam(IDK why).After approving once,I’d then be able to comment as logged in directly.

  6. The best medium is a guy who can apply what he teaches and also teach it.

    I know of few top PUA coaches who can apply Game theory and techniques,but shitty at teaching it.

    1. Mickey Mantle had the first modern day baseball swing. He was a natural. It tool years to systematise that in a very popular sport. Of course PUAs are often all over the place. We are still in the latent stages. 50 years from now it will be different.

  7. I really don’t get why this article seems to be equating blogging to inactivity.

    Naturals may not blog(for many reasons:poor diction,non writers,unaware of Game),but they damn sure do other in-activities;be it TV surf,etc.

    Alphas do blog.But I give more respect to a guy who can walk the walk and also could relate steps of courtship.

  8. Hey Rollo,

    This is off topic but I’ve recently started checking out some of the links on your blogroll and have come across one in particular that I just can’t wrap my mind around – “Koanic Soul”. Does this site really have your stamp of approval, or are you just linking to it because it has some discussion of game?

    From what I’ve gathered, It seems to be mostly about some fringe theory that latent neanderthal genes are randomly expressed in the human population and that they bestow certain superior intellectual and physical characteristics (of which it is claimed almost every great individual in history possessed).

    I tried to learn more about this but I really can’t find much in the way of a cohesive scientific foundation for this, aside from some crude phrenology examples. Looking around the site I also found things like “A mathematical proof that Christianity exists” and “Koanic meditations” meant to be used for game, but only applicable to “neanderthal introverts”. Wtf?!

    Please tell me I’m missing something here, because I’ve seen this pop up on a couple of other game related sites and there hasn’t been much skepticism.


  9. Haters hate Game for the same reason WKs hate MRAs. It challenges deeply held beliefs, makes a man feel foolish (and usually inadequate), and in the main leads to a frightfully low opinion of the women in this society.

    It’s waking up at 40 and realizing you belong with the kids in the beginners class. While finally understanding the rewards real value is quite a bit less than you thought.

    It’s like taking away the last delusional hope that keeps some guys going.

    Oh, that and a lot of PUAs are both gratingly self-promoting, and utterly lacking in insight. Anyone can make a great 3 minute video if he’s willing to put in the time suffering defeat as well. Very few PUAs understand the mechanics of the whole thing, fewer still are good writers.

    Roissy has earned his place.

  10. Hater: Alphas don’t blog. They’re too busy meeting women.

    Roissy put out a tweet the other day stating that he can pick out the Alphas in his comments just from their handles. I believe him. What one doesn’t garner from their handle, it is quite easy to distinguish men’s rankings after reading a comment or two. Same with bloggers. Whether they are beta turned Alpha or a natural making sure he stays that way is irrelevant. One has respect for both for different reasons.

    Beta men and alpha men are going to find this whole manosphere conversation tedious for different reasons just as both beta and alpha men are going to find it incredibly interesting. I would argue that those who decide to immerse themselves and not deny it have a definite leg up in the market place.

    1. What have you seen regarding this ?

      Me, I think there is overcompensation going on in their monikers.

      They tend to appropriate names hinting at the grandiose, or the barbaric, or the disagreeable.

      Anything that hijacks attention.

      The best commenters are seducers, so there will be a bit of the tongue-in-the-cheek in their monikers, a bit of the vague, and a hint amusement.

      1. I haven’t seen anything. It’s much the same way one can tell a dominant man from a nondominant man in just a few moments of watching them.

        I agree that many of the monikers are a product of overcompensation or how can I get the biggest laugh. But many are simply straight forward, clever names. It is not the attention seekers who are Alpha. It will be the most straight forward monikers or the tongue-in-cheek hinted amusement ones you speak of in your comment.

        1. It’s much the same way one can tell a dominant man from a nondominant man in just a few moments of watching them.

          Ahem, didn’t think I’d see that line, did you ?

          Sorry my darling, you’ll just have to explain this a bit further, because if you don’t …

          … I’m gonna voodoo you into selling monstrous ice-creams, to yamerring little kiddies in Disney Land …

          … wearing nothing but a stinking hot Mickey Mouse costume.

  11. Roisy as a right-winger? We really need a definition of what “Right” and “Left” mean far more than we need a definition of what “Alpha-male” means. Roissy is a white nationalist or at least has WN sympathies. He’s a racial conservative with a materialist philosophical foundation. He uses ev-psych and socio-biology to support Social/Paleo Conservatism. Right Winger? I don’t know but Roissy has more in common with Jared Taylor than with Ludwig Von Mises or Adam Smith.

    Roissy understands inter-gender dynamics (although his nihilism is a turn off) but what aggravates me about him is that on his own terms he’s a man of no integrity. He rails against modern “equalist” culture (his silly term for the Left) and the destruction that it has done. But then he advocates drowning oneself in pussy. He’s a hedonist. If he had integrity he would advocate finding a high self-esteem woman and using your game skills to build a meaningful relationship ala Athol Kay.

    I’m not a Christian but I have more respect for guys like Dalroc and similar types that advocate using game to build stable families. Roissy could have done this. But he comments on the burning of Rome while setting a few buildings on fire himself.

    In the end, the way I see Roissy is that he is smart but his nihilism renders him almost unreadable. And he’s a hypocrite. More could be said about him but that’s enough for now.

    1. “If he had integrity he would advocate finding a high self-esteem woman and using your game skills to build a meaningful relationship”


      Integrity can take other shapes, and the high self-esteem woman makes no sense – at all, no matter how much integrity you have. Unless you mean making all of us a favor by taking a fatty out of the market.

      Other than that, I dont like Roissy for these same reasons.

    2. I would agree with you completely except for one thing I think you may have overlooked or disagree with. You seem to be of the assumption that we can immediately improve society, that we haven’t fallen off the cliff yet. From what I’ve seen things are going to need to get worse before they can get better. You can’t get society directly back into prosperity, it has to bottom out. The reason for this is that people are resistant to change and will only do so when they are pushed into a corner. Only by making the pain as acute and overwhelming as possible will enough people wake up enough to not just scratch at it but make the difficult changes necessary to destroy the root problems, because destroying those root problems will cause enormous pain that people would like to avoid. Discovering solutions is easy, implementing solutions is hard. You can’t put force society into rehab, society has to hit bottom and choose to put itself into rehab. I agree that roissy is making it worse but that’s what’s necessary to make things better in the long term.

  12. another thing “game-haters” say is that when a chick is attracted to you physically, anything you say next won’t matter because she already wants to fuck you. which of ocurse makes no sense.

    1. Anyone who says that clearly has very little experience arousing women. I’ve blown it more times than I care to remember by saying/doing the wrong thing with a girl who was clearly aroused by my presence.

      Shit, if it was easy, anyone could do it.

  13. why do you even have to bother with the haters?
    it is you (us) that matters. because it is you (us) who understands.
    the hierarchy is the hierarchy and the hierarchy says only a small portion of you (us) will ever understand. accept it and nurture your (our) gifts.

    notice the recurring themes in asian martial arts movies.
    the master is always some aloof, cool, old man of very few words
    students come to him to learn, but he constantly taunts them
    only those who perseveres beyond his taunts gets rewarded with his wisdom
    he wouldn’t bat an eyelash to care for the weak ones that present themselves to him. they don’t matter. it’s that special kid who bloodies his knuckles day in and day out doing the tough routines he asks that matters. it’s only him that matters.

    teach? yes. but only those who comes wearing the right character.

    game represents a subset of a forgotten understanding. this understanding is not just about poon. its broad. it encompasses an entire collection of truths about life itself. don’t ever wonder why nature chooses only but a few to make sense of it all.

    like roissy believes, it’s something in your (our) genes. for some (the naturals) that is enough. for you (us), the gene lies latent and external stimuli is required for it’s full expression. for the rest of them, that gene is switched off. that’s how the hierarchy is. it was meant by nature to be that way.

  14. Roissy and Roosh, for all their faults, are publishing material that is ultimately essential to red pill initiates – to those who know absolutely nothing about game, but must begin somewhere I, for one, remember the damnable female blowout that depressed me so badly that it led me to scour the internet for a solution as to why everything fell apart, only to find Roissy and Roosh. Sure, you don’t swallow everything they write… after awhile you separate the wheat from the chaffe… you discern. And if you’re sophisticated (read older) enough and already established in an LTR, you move on to Rollo and Athol.

    But everyone has to start somewhere. And I will always applaud Roissy and Roosh for giving me a rough-hewn window into a world that I was heretofore unaware of. To go all zen about it, a famous martial artist once said “Starting out I knew that a punch was a punch and a kick was a kick, but then I learned the mechanics and science, and realized that a punch was so much more than a punch, and a kick was so much more than a kick. Now that I have some measure of wisdom and mastery, I know that a punch is just a punch, and a kick is just a kick.”

    I think all of you are splitting fine hairs because you’re in the ‘mechanics and science stage,’ and have the knowledge and luxury to discern game writers and players. You are informed critics, and that’s all well and good. Just remember those who haven’t unplugged at all yet… Roissy and Roosh are still a fine starting point for those unfortunate fellows.

  15. A better analogy might be to think drill instructor on induction day breaking you down and building you up instead of the niceties of officer candidate school. One must necessarily follow the other as a matter of course.

  16. I agree with a lot said here, but there is no such thing as a “natural alpha,” “natural player,” or just plain “natural.” All are “Learned Alphas” when it comes to what works and what doesn’t with women.

    The “Natural” wasn’t born with the tools other men had to learn online or in books to get women. The man people consider a natural went through the same process of trial and error, moving the needle, approaching, etc. as any recovering AFC. True, he probably didn’t blog or keep a personal diary about it. But the fact is that he learned from his mistakes just like all of us.

    The key difference is that he probably learned and adjusted at a much earlier age. What we think of as a “natural” probably tried what works and stuck with it in his early teens. He most likely accepted his results as the right way and was less likely to be inculcated by the fem-centric Hollywood indoctrination that has inflicted so many AFCs. And that’s not to say he didn’t make mistakes. He just made them earlier, and more often, and learned from them more quickly.

    So if you think that because you sought out the knowledge to make adjustments in your game will only ever make you a pseudo-natural, remember that the “natural” you see who’s always been so smooth with women just learned quicker and earlier than you. And even the best can improve; even Michael Jordan in his prime needed a coach. They’re all “learned.”

    To give credit where due I borrowed some of this from –

    1. the argument “there is no such thing as a natural” has a flavor of equalism sprinkled all over it — a complete denial of the existence of a biologically-determined social hierarchy.

      look around the animal kingdom, especially among social animals. the roles are very well defined.

      why do you think most of us in the manosphere bends towards the right-wing of the political spectrum? because by character we are individualists who welcome the challenge of clawing our way to the top through our own efforts (the selfish class). compare us to our mangina friends who are predominantly leftist, member-of-the-herd types, social collectivist yes-men. the demarcation line is very clear.

      the genes controlling the formation of these mental schemas have varying degrees of expression. some are born with these genes fully expressed. some are born with genes partially expressed. and most are born with these genes completely switched off.

      we are here. we all see the light in varying degrees. but we struggle to completely express into our character what we know and what we read about because our mental schemas — our very own biological bodies — resist the abrupt change. it’s hard to totally unwrap those partially expressed genes.

      all the while we see our friend bob, scratch his head over discussions, shrug his shoulders, fist-bumps us, leave and slay another new pussy just like that.

      i can go into the the biochemical process of how this happens but then it will be a waste of my time because i know the biochemical soup that controls all your “rational thoughts” inside your heads is stronger than any sentnece i could come up with.

      1. I’d never deny the existence of biologically-determined social hierarchy – and I’m embarrassed that you thought I sounded equalist.

        The hierarchy exists but it’s not 100% fixed from birth. Maybe learned game is “cheating” but the bottom line is the learning and executing of it happens, and the former chump doing it successfully has hopefully moved himself up a few notches. I don’t think he’s screwing up the biological plan because he had to have the manhood to admit failure, implement change, and get laid.

        Anyway a natural could have just as easily tripped up at 13 or 14 and gone down a wrong path. But I’m with you that some guys are naturally predisposed not to.

    2. to clarify, “nurture” is important. “nurture” is the stimuli that creates a positive feedback biochemical loop that expresses these genes.

      but “nurture” will only help a certain subset of people (and it is small) who have the genes partially activated anyway (evident via classic right-wing mental schema, i propose).

      you are here. you are one of them. enjoy that. work on yourselves.

      the rest of male kind, forget about them. worker ants don’t get laid.

    3. Holy Shit, I’m an idiot. I didn’t realize Rollo already broke down the Roosh post and did a great job besides. Well, never mind….LOL

  17. I actually don’t care if someone goes out as long as what they’re saying aligns with what guys who go out regularly have experienced.

    ie – I imagine Roissy and Rollo don’t go out trying to pick up poon these days, I know Rollo is married and all that. But the things they describe/teach other men on their blogs like 95% line up with the combined experiences of tens of thousands of PUAs. So I like their blogs and appreciate what they’re doing for men. And when occasionally they hit that other 5% it’s usually not due to ignorant beliefs but just misunderstanding something or not being aware of some nuances that are explained in PUA literature and that’s where I like to clear things up or elaborate on them in the comments.

    Then you have certain commenters who are obsessed with espousing their own limited world view as if it was the truth. They’ve been around the sphere for a while, they have a following of Jockeys who are more beta than them, they have a reputation and an ego, and they speak very authoritatively and are used to the poor betas reading sphere blogs and not going out listening to them. These guys don’t go out regularly, they just spout their theories that are tainted and twisted around their limiting beliefs.

    How do I know those guys don’t go out regularly? Because if they did they would end up coming to the same conclusions the guys who go out regularly do. It’s that simple. If you still think money matters, you haven’t gone out enough and pushed yourself enough (be poor for a while and pick up, pick up while telling girls you work at McDonald’s, go out dressed like a slob and pick up, etc) and you haven’t met enough people (make friends with people in poor social circles and hang with the alphas in those groups) because if you did all that you’d come to the same conclusion the thousands of PUAs who HAVE done all that have come to.

    If everyone else says the sky is blue and you’ve been living in a cave all your life and are running around demanding everyone accept your belief that the sky is green, that’s the indication you don’t leave your cave. Because if you left your cave you’d see, like everyone else outside, that the sky is blue.

    It really is this simple, and I think it’s a shame that there are comment readers in the manosphere legitimately looking for help to improve their lives and they’re forced to risk getting sidetracked by authoritative Keyboard Jockey commenters. You are wasting their time and actually ruining other men’s life and keeping them from reaching their potential. That is sad and annoying to me because the rest of society already filled these guys with bullshit beliefs to hold them back, the manosphere isn’t a place where that should keep happening.

    To paraphrase Tyler: PUAs encourage going out because we know the field fixes you. If you dress like shit the bouncer won’t let you in so you’re forced to look at the scene and learn a bit about fashion and social awareness. If you stutter, girls walk away, and you learn to start snuffing out the stuttering and sound more confident. If you’re quiet, girls will walk away when they can’t hear you over the music so you learn to make your voice carry. When you’re too shy to touch a girl she loses interest so you learn to kino properly. When you fuck a chick and you’re out of breath in 30 seconds because you’re a fat fuck you learn to work out and be healthier so you can enjoy sex more.

    And down the road when you have some relationships, if you haven’t internalized alpha traits and become alpha you’ll lose girlfriends because they’ll see the incongruence/faking so you learn to internalize traits. You’ll lose girlfriends because you’ll play too many games and learn that there are points where you can tone down all the game playing. You’ll lose girlfriends because you looked at them as sex objects instead of people and learn to build comfort and get to know and love them as human beings. You’ll lose social circles because you shat where you eat and had no self control and fucked a buddy’s girlfriend and you’ll learn to control your impulses and create your own set of rules you live by. You’ll lose buddies because you got into fights over girls and you’ll learn to chill out and not look at guys as competion especially your friends. You’ll realize you have a bunch of shallow relationships because the guys only know you as a “bar buddy” and not a real friend and you’ll learn to make an effort to see them outside of the bars and develop real friendships.

    So ya, we encourage guys, ESPECIALLY newbies, but old-timers as well, to go out regularly. The field is merciless and will shove all your shortcomings in your face over and over until you fix them.

    And when you fix them? You end up agreeing with the stuff thousands of PUAs have been saying. When you haven’t fixed them and don’t go out so your sticking points and limiting beliefs aren’t shoved in your face to see? Well, you become a “vet” on these comment sections espousing bullshit advice to newbies who don’t have the experience to know better yet. How’s that for charm lol

    1. Also as you get older new sticking points and limited beliefs surface, especially if you only had some success back in your youth and it’s been years since you’ve legit been “in the field” seducing women and cold approaching etc. and that’s fine as long as you’re aware that that happens to you. But most of the old time “vets” I’ve seen around here don’t realize that. They’re the former high school jock still talking about the winning touchdown they once threw and think they can just hop out on the field for a professional game of football despite now having beer guts and can’t get out of their armchair without effort.

      If you stop working out and eating right your body won’t keep it’s 6-pack giant muscled physique you had at your prime. Social/seduction skills work the same way. And just like working out and eating healthy, you learn to enjoy it and it’s not a struggle or chore or work anymore.

  18. NIc Krauser might be the best PUA in terms of backing his writing up with in-field videos. His day-game videos are very helpful. The guys from are legitimate, as well.

    When it comes to manosphere blogs I read them for two reasons.

    One: Absorbing a steady stream of pro-man, alpha-endorsing text is like therapy for the male psyche. Constantly reminding myself that their is a large community of people sharing my views and feeling the same frustrations I experience puts me at ease. Even though Roosh, Chateu Heartiste, and other kindred blogs do not help my game directly, they help indirectly by boosting my confidence and making me feel apart of something bigger than myself.

    Christ, I sound like a fag.

    Two: It’s entertainment, plain and simple. Reading a Rational Male post about male/female sexual politics is infinitely more interesting that 98% of content offered on TV.

    Bye –



    I’m in the process of writing a new handle. TerraCottaCobra is going to have to go, I think.

  19. I´m sure in the beginning it wasn`t like that but if you look at a site like fastseduction (and the new fasterseduction) nowadays you will find a fairly large proportion of naturals that hear about game, found it to match their experience and found that reading PUA theory and exchanging experiences with guys was a good way to enhance their game even further. Also more game teachers(gurus than people think are in fact naturals. Zan is a natural, FrancoPUA who invented the term betaization and have contributed massively to the understanding of shit tests and other aspects of game is a natural, Carlos Xuma is a natural, Cory sky is a natural, James Marshal is a natural, David X is a natural. There are others as well. Zan, and I think also David X, where mentioned in the game and have been part of the community since very early on.

    1. It must be said that James Marshall of Melbourne (Australia) is somewhat of a Natural yet is also a shameless self-promoter and self aggrandising salesman of PUA.

  20. An older friend of mine who I have known for some 30 years was a natural Alpha from his teens and literally had girls from school follow him home before he knew what to do with them.

    Yet ask him about how me managed to bang his way through his 20’s and 30’s and his response would be; “Just talk to them”.
    May “Alphas” have just enough smarts to meet and bang a pile of women but often lack the capability to analyse the hows and whys.

    This particular guy spent so much time and energy chasing hot women it was to the detriment of any decent career or job prospects.
    All he really has now is a bunch of memories of all the women he fucked and a wife and three kids that live a fairly mediocre lifestyle.

    Game is about bettering yourself AND improving your chances of success with women. Over analysis and inane debate to akin to arguing about how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. Pointless and unproductive.

    Actions and results count.

    Words and talk are cheap.

  21. The reason I roll my eyes every time I see the word Alpha used anywhere in the Manosphere is precisely because no one seems to be able to agree on what it means. Sure, “Alpha” has a proper definition in the English language, but you can almost guarantee that when the term is being used in the Manosphere, the “proper” definition is probably NOT the one that the author intended. And a word that doesn’t have a well defined and commonly understood meaning is just useless when it comes to effective and precise communication. 

    So many commentors and bloggers seem to focus on being Alpha, or they imply that others are not Alpha as an insult, and I bet in the vast majority of those cases the various people involved in those exchanges have completely different ideas of what the others mean. Some people think it refers to social rank or dominance (the English language definition), some think it refers solely to success in attracting women (the Roissy definition), and some think it can be applied to selfish, self involved “naturals” with no self control or sense of responsibility (the “Corey Worthington” definition). Yet others seem to define it as having qualities of peak masculinity (problematic because then the definition of masculinity itself becomes an issue.) 

    So is making your primary focus in life becoming “Alpha” an admirable thing? Is someone implying that you are not “Alpha” an insult? It depends. But as soon as you try and have any serious discussion using the term, it invariably devolves into semantics. I long ago reached the point where I don’t really care what someone thinks is, or is not, Alpha, because all of the time spent arguing over the definition is unproductive.  I’m much more interested in framing discussions about which behaviors/strategies or tactics will produce which results/outcomes, rather than which behaviors are “Alpha”, because at least when things are phrased the first way I’ll understand what the other participants are on about. I’ll leave the semantics for those with the time/patience for it.

    1. “I’m much more interested in framing discussions about which behaviors/strategies or tactics will produce which results/outcomes, rather than which behaviors are “Alpha””

      I read on that “Individuals with an intrinsic religious orientation (i.e., religion as an end) tend to be sociosexually restricted, while those with an extrinsic religious orientation (i.e., religion as a means to achieve non-religious goals) tend to be unrestricted”

      Unrestricted in the context of that page about socio-sexual orientation means more open to sex outside of relationships. So guys who like to fuck around are more likely to see religion as a tool to do something with, a means towards a different end, and guys who prefer monogamy tend to view religion as the end in itself.

      I see the same orientations regarding game. I’ve had discussions over and over with people who really can’t see game as a means to an end, and who fight the very idea of knowing what you want and going after it. Really. I now it’s hard to believe, but I could name names of people on this forum who have told me that deliberately gaming a girl will get in the way of getting the girl, and instead you should focus on not even wanting her and becoming a great man and let the girls fall into your lap. To deliberately not know what you want, because knowing what you want will get obstruct you in achieving your goal.

      What is happening is that some people have huge resistance to viewing game as a pragmatic means to an end. They really, really, REALLY want to see it as an end, in itself. A be all you can be project.

      1. Interesting. There’s some real issues with that perspective though, of which you’re probably aware. Namely, there’s got to be a reason behind the drive to be all you can be – a better man. No one commits the energy required for effective self improvement without sufficient motivation. It’s basic human nature that we act only to gain pleasure or avoid pain, so there’s got to be some reward being gained or some punishment being avoided for self improvement to happen. So, they self improve to become better men so that they will then get women, at least in part? In the end they are still doing what they do so that they get access to the women they want. Why engage in the mental gymnastics to try and obscure that?

        Is it because they think that game = manipulation, and that’s bad? Well, some of what is taught as game does use some of the tactics used by high pressure salesmen, and probably could correctly be thought of as manipulative, but within game there are certainly alternatives to that approach. Some techniques simply involve acting in ways that women find attractive so that they will want to be with you. And deliberately acting in a way that women find attractive when around women so you can get sex is no more manipulative than acting qualified and professional during a job interview so you can get a job. The idea that men are tricking those poor defenseless women into sex by acting in a way that women find sexy is just another example of the feminist tactic of painting women as victims. And don’t forget the always lurking notion that sex with a woman has to be paid for somehow by a man (with dinner/concert tickets/a committed relationship or what have you). I’m betting most men that think of game as manipulation don’t even realize that this belief rests upon those outdated modes of thinking.

        The days when our society regarded feminine virtue as something valuable to be carefully guarded and unlocked only after a man demonstrates deep commitment are long gone guys, and it’s about time you accepted that. Feminism has taught us that women are sexual free agents with the right to have sex when, where and with whom they choose, just like men (apparently) are. Why feel guilty about charming women into willingly sharing their feminine bounty with you when society at large sends them the message that it’s just no big deal if they give it away for free to multiple men.

      2. Oh yeah, and before I went off on my rant above, I meant to state that anyone who uses the ideal of “Alpha” as a shield so that they don’t have to face what they really desire is just weak. (I assume that’s what you were saying these guys were doing, yes?)

        Shit, there’s nothing wrong with a man learning game to get laid, and if any man is embarrassed enough about that idea that he can’t even admit it to himself, then perhaps he needs to engage in some self examination and a reassessment of his priorities in life. (Note that I’m not implying here that getting laid necessarily SHOULD be one of those priorities, just that he should understand what his priorities are and not be ashamed of them.)

        Or should I say “Saying you’re learning game to be Alpha, just so you don’t have to admit you’re doing it just to get laid, is so not Alpha dude.”

    2. Alpha and beta are easy references for superior and inferior. There really isn’t going to be a solid way of verifying it, and I honestly don’t think there needs to be a firm definition. When dealing with canines and apes you can specify which animal is “the” alpha and which ones are beta, gamma, omega, etc. In humans you can roughly point these out but it will be very subjective. It is an interesting mental exercise to try and define alpha and beta but as you said, which traits help you succeed are the most important thing to concern yourself with.

      1. An easy reference for superior? That’s yet another definition for Alpha distinct from the ones I already mentioned. And yet another way for someone to misinterpret you if you tell them something or someone is Alpha. They’re superior? Superior in what way? Or do you actually mean that they are good at attracting women? Or maybe you mean that they are masculine? Or socially dominant?

        Call me pedantic if you like, but the primary means of our communication here in the Manosphere is via written (sometimes spoken) English, and when communicating in that fashion the meaning of words actually matters. There’s enough room for misinterpretation there already without one of our most commonly used key terms having umpteen different possible meanings. Plus, if it really didn’t matter how we define Alpha, there wouldn’t be so damn many attempts in the Manosphere to do so. And no where near as many arguments over the results.

        And is there a way of verifying which definition of a particular word is the “correct” one – you come to a consensus on exactly what that meaning is and thereafter maintain consistent usage. This is essentially the same way we define all of the other words in the constantly evolving English language. I think that many people are far too attached (sometimes emotionally so) to their own divergent definitions of Alpha however, so I’m not expecting “the one” definition to appear any time soon. So for now, I just continue to roll my eyes when people spout off on the topic of “Alpha”, and instead try and concentrate on the real stuff.

        1. Apollo, we are pretty much in agreement. What I mean by “superior” is in the situations discussed (getting laid) the alpha traits are the ones that are generally aspired to whereas the beta traits are to be avoided, i.e. they are “inferior”. Perhaps I am just adding another definition, but this one allows me to get my head around the info, it is a placeholder for me. On this site there are a number of traits that are to be desired, effective tactics (like plate-spinning), and things to be avoided (buffers, allowing an LJBF, being an emotional tampon, etc.). When I read ‘alpha’ on this blog (and on several others) I just insert the superior traits in my head and keep reading. When I read ‘beta’ I insert the negative traits. I could probably philosophize ad nauseum about what I consider to be ‘alpha’ and ‘beta’ and would probably add in gammas, etc. But that would be pointless. I don’t really see any purpose in splitting hairs over what is alpha and what is beta, I just use the words as best I can and focus on the traits, like you said. At the same time, I see no need to throw out the terms because they are useful placeholders.

  22. According to my opinion, man should pursue freedom and truth. When you talk about roissy, why there si SO MUCH HATE, and passive aggresiveness in this guy? Look at his responses in the discussion? Pure hate, aggresivity, fragile ego – this is the result of tons of knowledge about women in his blog? Look at mystery – case for a shrink. Hmm?

    I do not like the word “game” I call it knowledge. And knowledge about women, about their very bodies and emotions, is one of the most importatnt things in life of every man. In this aspect – “game” is useful and IMPORTANT. interaction with women and analyzing it can not only learn a thing or two about women, but what is more important, it could teach us a thing or two about ourselves. And that one is simply priceless. But is UP to us how we use this knowledge – and one of the mistakes of “game” is that it is not going past sex. I does not have meaning, soul, ultimate purpose.

    Other problem I see with game is that is that there is a bunch of pretty noble lies successfuly marketing this approach – as the “looks” are not important all it matters is “game”, genes are not important – aka size of your tool does not matter, your status is not important, game trumps all, you could become “alpha” just be observing, etc. But this one is maybe necessary to market it.

    To cut is short – for former weak and ignorant man, I think that game could be a glass of clean water that could open his eyes. After this he has to learn to see and live with it. And there is much more to learn if you want to see clearly, MUCH MORE. So – is the game helpful to success with women? I do not know, it depends on person applying it – attractive man, that has been deceived by women, may find himself drowning in pussy like never before, weak ugo may find himself tormentned to tears – pua hate forums, sodini, etc, emotional guy may become negative, dark man without goal and meaning, etc. But game – as all experimentaly tested knowledge, is definitely helpful in pursuing truth and freedom. That is its meaning, I think.

    1. He has heard it all, and besides having lost patience, knows the best way to shut up morons is to brutally skull fuck them, leaving the crowd in gape-jawed astonishment.

  23. The discussions and dialogue on Rational Male vis the commentariat has been incredible over the past few weeks.

    To all the newbies getting unplugged and reading this, realize that the manosphere is engaging in something special. Scour the comments on Rollos site recently.

    All good stuff.


    1. Heard a definition of alpha recently that it’s whoever is most dominant in a given situation. It depends on context. E.g. at an art opening, it might be the art critic in a motorcycle gang, it’s the gang leader. But put the art critic in the m. gang and the g. leader at the art opening and they’re fish out of water. Of course if you’re used to being dominant in one area that tends to bleed into other areas of your life. So getting better with women (more alpha) may lead you to being more dominant in other areas. But the idea of defining yourself as an alpha all the time doesn’t seem that important to me. Just improving is enough for me.

  24. It’s late so I didn’t read the whole post, but I suspect you’re missing the forest for the trees. Arguments over what is/isn’t beta is little more than misdirected anger by those who aren’t articulate/introspective enough to air their true grievances.

    The real reason alpha/beta rubs a lot of guys the wrong way is because this dichotomy implies dominance over other men. I never thought I would employ the term “loaded language”, but it seems to fit the bill quite right here.

    Never forget that real power (which is ultimately at the heart of everything we discuss in this corner of the internet) is little more than a monopoly on violence. And I don’t know about you guys, but I can assure you that any man who’s success with women would have him attempt to assert his dominance over me would face the prospect of having to back up his “alpha creds” with his fists. Are you sure you want to go down that road, Alpha Male?

    For most of our history, one’s access to women was indeed a close proxy for one’s actual power. But this isn’t the case anymore, which is why the alpha/beta dichotomy as used here is fucking retarded. One’s ability to court-jester his way into a woman’s bed does not an Alpha Male make. Not in 2012. Sorry fellas.

    Isn’t it ironic that the poseur “alpha males” of today are every bit the beneficiaries of the state’s protection as the “independent single mothers” they (rightfully) deride?

    1. “And I don’t know about you guys, but I can assure you that any man who’s success with women would have him attempt to assert his dominance over me would face the prospect of having to back up his “alpha creds” with his fists. Are you sure you want to go down that road, Alpha Male?”

      “One’s ability to court-jester his way into a woman’s bed does not an Alpha Male make. Not in 2012.”

      You have to decide whether you live in XXI century and take advantage of social skills (or learn some) or would fight for dominance like muskox.

  25. “A guy who spends his life obsessing over climbing the corporate ladder to get more attention from women is a loser.
    A guy who spends his life obsessing over mastering guitar and playing in a rock band to get more attention from women is a loser.
    A guy who spends his life obsessing over pursuing financial rewards and acquiring resources to get more attention from women is a loser.
    A guy who….. ah, you get the point.”

    Yes, guys that do those things for those reasons are losers, just like guys who obsess over getting girls and write all about it on the internet. Many guys climb the corporate ladder because they enjoy it, or learn guitar because they enjoy it, or want finances so they can travel and enjoy it. The fact that you framed it like this shows that you are obsessed with women lol.

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: