Build a Better Beta

For women, nothing is both as frightening and arousing than a Man aware of his own value.

[In light of Aunt Giggles recently going off her meds and clamoring for her weekend bender of attention, I’ve decided to re-post this from December of 2011. Considering the hostility lobbed at the manosphere lately I thought it was quite prophetic.]

________________________________________________

I got a metric ton of feedback with regards to my Mrs. Doubtfire post and the notion of Game being co-opted to serve the feminine imperative. This sparked an interesting exchange on more than a few blogs and forums. All of this led me to do a bit of research into how Game principles, not necessarily Game in practice, is being subverted to address feminine-centric mandates. Even the idea of ‘false flag‘ blogging in the manosphere has been suggested as a means to more effectively establish a male-specific popular perspective that might be considered more legitimate.

The problem intrinsic to all of that is that masculinity is now so ridiculed and delegitimized in our feminine-centric reality that any (lame) attempts at subterfuge only make the manosphere look even more like the boys club in the treehouse shooting spitwads at the “mature” girls below. It’s going to come off as game-playing and juvenile, and only serve to make any legitimate point or appeals to logic appear self-serving. That said, I do understand the necessity to be covert in expressing the principles behind Game from a pro-masculine perspective. Men blogging in the manosphere, whether it’s Game theory, PUA, MRA or MGTOW, all assume a horrible risk for publicly expressing their views that a proponent of feminism would rarely need to consider. Professionally, personally, and to an extent, even physically, manosphere bloggers paint a big target on themselves that very few people would sympathize with their being damaged for their outspokenness. If it looks like patriarchy, it’s OK to set their home on fire, and a feminized world of angry women and their identifier mangina sycophants will line up with torches to do so.

Building a Better Beta

None of this is really even a concern for the proponents of a fem-centric culture; they can rest comfortably in a self-affirming, social echo chamber without any real fear of persecution or risk to their career or reputations. However, the utility of exploiting Game in theory (not in practice) to better serve that female centrism hasn’t gone unnoticed. This has given rise to what might be called “sanitized Game” – take the primary elements of Game to build a better Beta. With such an overwhelming social undercurrent for men to ‘Man-Up’ today it’s really simple pragmatism to reinterpret Game to serve the expectations and entitlements inherent in fem-centrism. Thus we see Game concepts being co-opted by social conservatives, so-called female manosphere sympathizers and christo-religious revisionists all blogging in disclaimered agreement with Game principles insofar as it serves their particular delusion. What they fail to recognize is that, for all of their efforts to contort Game into their personal agenda’s boxes, they’re still living in and fostering a feminine-centric imperative. If there’s a definition of the Matrix, this is it.

I would argue that most, if not all, are unaware that this is the latent purpose they’re serving. The overarching  point is to create a more acceptable man for a female defined goal, NOT to truly empower any man. There is no feminine opposite to this; there is no counter effort to make women more acceptable to men – in fact this is actively resisted and cast as a form of slavish subservience. This is the extent of the feminine reality; it’s so instaurating that men, with the aid of  “concerned women”, will spend lifetimes seeking ways to better qualify themselves for feminine approval. That’s the better Beta they hope to create. One who will Man-Up and be the Alpha as situations and use would warrant, but Beta enough to be subservient to the feminine imperative. They seek a man to be proud of, one who’s association reflects a statement of their own quality, yet one they still have implicit control over.

Whether the reasonings are moral, entitlement or ‘honor bound’ in nature the end result is still feminine primacy. The sales pitch is one of manning up to benefit yourself, but the latent purpose is one of better qualifying for normalized feminine acceptance. What they cannot reconcile is that the same benefits that are inherent in becoming more Alpha (however you choose to define that) are the same traits that threaten his necessary position of subservience as a Beta. This is precisely why ‘real’ Game, and truly unplugging, cannot be sanitized. This social element wants to keep you plugged in; more Alpha, more confidence, more awareness, is a threat to fem-centrism. It’s great that all this Game stuff has finally got you standing up for yourself, but remember who’s got the vagina.

The Evolution of Game

In the beginning, Game was about little more than racking up lay-counts. For some guys this will never change; you can’t ignore the purely seductionist intent of the origins of Game. Game was (is) for getting laid, and along with that now comes a sort of stigma of the Player. It’s against the interests of the feminine imperative that a man might conceivably have some kind of secret, learned system that bypasses her (mythological) feminine intuitions and natural reservations. That’s a power that men have sought for millennia. Some might realize it to a degree through power, fame or fortune, but to distribute this figurative ability en masse would be a power shift that would put women at men’s mercy. With great power, should come great responsibility. This is the fear that Game represents to the feminine – even the concept of men ‘understanding’ women’s natures must necessarily be ridiculed and shamed even in the attempt. When women are knowable they lose the power of their only actionable agency over men.

Game has evolved into much more than just a set of replicable behaviors for PUAs to ply their craft and get laid. Somewhere along the way a man wondered why these behavior provoked the responses they do in women. What were the core elements that these behaviors and attitudes were operating on in women? Game is still about getting laid, but it’s progressed beyond just the practical. Game is really a catch-all term now for lack of a better one. It’s moved on to the theory, the principle and the psychology that makes us better Men, and makes women knowable. It’s very important that the vision you have of being a “better Man” originates with YOU, not with the idealisms of a plugged in moralist or women so fearful of your new awareness that they’ll make concerted efforts to supplant it with what makes you a better servant of their insecure imperative. Resist the idea of becoming a better Beta in girl-world and focus on being that Alpha Man as you define it.

76 comments

  1. This post is truly eye-opening and revealing of the culture we are living in today in America. This post has opened my eyes to my state as a man as I make a diligent effort to transition from greater beta to lower-mid alpha. In any event, I have a question Rollo, I noticed that I am always challenged by others when my ‘alpha side’ is displayed; usually people will try to be nice to me to try to get me to be beta or they become outright rude and disrespectful. Do you have any advice on how to handle this?

  2. Alpha has no meaning, context or relevance without women. By self-defining Alpha, men would merely switch the object of worship from women to men. Designing a better cart will not change the fact that it’s still behind the horse.

    “Thus we see Game concepts being co-opted by social conservatives, so-called female manosphere sympathizers and christo-religious revisionists all blogging in disclaimered agreement with Game principles insofar as it serves their particular delusion.”

    Why do you persist with this notion that the elders of the Manosphere – i.e. you, Roissy et all – invented the process that we’re now calling ‘Game’?

    The bible is, among other things, a manual for the loving application of Game. What else are the biblical concepts of husbandly headship and wifely submission and the process of learning how to be effective in those roles, if they are not that?

    The co-opting going on by “christo-religious revisionists” is use of Game terminology, not the concepts. The concepts weren’t invented last Tuesday by bloggers working in a moral vacuum, as you seem to be suggesting.

  3. Maybe she finally drove that beta son of hers to eat a twelve gauge and is having guilt pangs. It must be tough growing up with a woman who birthed you that considers you a lower order lifeform compared to the guys your sister is servicing on weekends.

    Then consider what her husband must think having to read his wife creaming over her past “alphas” and driving his daughter to service them, while disrespecting your son and heir.

    That’s some devastating micro-aggression right there.

  4. @Rollo

    You may also want to address game concepts being used as scapegoats, ways to generate plausible deniability, and a basis for cost externalization.

    Though with your devout “amorality,” I am not sure you are able.

    Have you considered how your definitions of “alpha” and “hypergamy” influence you?

  5. @Rollo

    “I would argue that most, if not all, are unaware that this is the latent purpose they’re serving. The overarching point is to create a more acceptable man for a female defined goal, even if their goal is to truly empower any man.”

  6. I think Aunt Giggles is in a difficult spot as I think she was sincerely hoping that she could become the sanitized face of game and cash in on her work in the media (as we know, women love fame).

    But she has clearly lost all credibility in the manosphere and has been bypassed by the media which is going directly to the source.

    3rd MM’s appearance seems to have pissed her off as she has realized that her little project has become irrelevant (obviously the media reads the blogs and can see the writing on the wall) and will not become the MSMs portal to game.

    Given that George is a relative novice and not a heavy hitter (no offense intended) seeing him up there and blacked out no less must have driven her over the edge.

  7. “There is no feminine opposite to this; there is no counter effort to make women more acceptable to men – in fact this is actively resisted and cast as a form of slavish subservience.”

    Could you please tell me how in the heaven could PUA create better women? The only kind of women PUA create is senseless WHORE. All the power woman has is nothing but a willingness of MEN to recognize and fuck her. Without this she is powerless. Again – her power depends on MEN willing to recognize and fuck her. Knowledge about women is necessary and in this respect manosphere does a very, very good job. But I see a big failure in the answer to the question of: what to do with this knowledge?, offered by PUA.

    We cannot expect from majority of men to be free, to master women and not be ruled by their dicks. This is impossible, men are not created this way. So we have to give them some modus opperandi, some solution how to behave so that there is a chance that they would not turn into complete slaves of women. I prefer freedom, but this is impossible for majority. But If I HAVE to choose between MGTOW and PUA, I would choose MGTOW every time. Their motto – “either behave like I want or go fuck yourself” – THIS can actually create a better woman, this can condition woman to behave. If all men went MGTOW, women will obey and serve in a week. They panic if they are not recognized by men and they would do EVERYTHING to have men at their disposal. Of course the message of MGTOW is ridiculed and not effective, cos there is many PUAs and white knights – fueling the hamster and empowering women, recognizing them, clowning for them, fucking them no matter how they behave, loosing themselves in the process and finally like the biggest slaves and loosers IMPREGNATING THEM and MARRYING them no matter how they behave. They are many so called ehm, master – PUAs burdened with, married to, or having children with unattractive harridans I would not have slept with even after 10 shots of jack daniels.

    Ridiculing values like truth, freedom, justice, goodness – inherently manly values (calling them, “beta”) and becoming WOMEN aka OMEGA men, themselves. Fucking married women, LYING, spining plates – aka producing and sleeping with whores, siring illegitimate bastards, ridiculing responsibility, truth, sincerity, honour….turning into amoral, inherently sexual being. TURNING INTO WOMAN! No, this is not answer for the MAN. Guys that wrote bible or any oldschool law book you could imagine were ALL red pill. They KNEW women, we are only re-discovering their knowledge about chicks now. But they were STRONG and MANLY, they ruled women how women have to be ruled. OBEY or go fuck yourself. PUA message – I will do WHATEVER necessary to FUCK and be worthy of PUSSY? Could ever existed a BIGGER slave to the feminine imperative?

  8. I’ve seen MGTOW compared to radical lesbian feminist separatists…

    however, it seems like with the feminist separatist’s everyone was all, “don’t let the door hit your ass on the way out.”

    MGTOW seems the most hated by all the Futrelle types and much of the manosphere….

    obviously with the continued atomization of society and such, MGTOW is more an opting out and not giving two shits about being called a loser…

    So, just by walking out of a bad situation why are these guys hated so much???

  9. “So, just by walking out of a bad situation why are these guys hated so much???”

    Because those guys, not PUAs, pose a real THREAT to the system. They are hated by women, PUAs, white knights aka every slave working for women. If men opt out of feminine game, if they stop fueling feminine imperative – recognizing women unless women behave, all the femi-system collapses. Women are helpless without men, they need them.

  10. Gregg

    MGTOW might be fine for the cerebral low T types but not all men are cut from the same cloth.

    Rollo is doing some serious good.

    Rollo has been at the coal face (Sosauve and personal tragedy) and witnessed the emotional anguish good young men endure in the face of liberalized women.

    I am certain his advice has saved lives.

    His advice is amoral and while I may not agree with everything he writes he has helped countless men gain control of their personal lives.

  11. @Gregg: Being the kind of man women want to sleep with is not a threat to the system, ipso facto. However, women have been sold the lie that they can be happy on the carousel forever, or marry whenever they want. The fact that men with options are no longer constrained, by both social convention and personal mores, to man up and marry those sluts is a decent-sized shock to the system.

    While I’m sympathetic to the men who simply choose to walk away, I think you ignore the fact that the feminine imperative will have its effect on you, too. By removing yourself from the pool of potential partners, you narrow the search problem for women, making it easier for them to find their alphas. Never mind about those beta providers, Big Sister Government will pick up the tab.

  12. “MGTOW might be fine for the cerebral low T types but not all men are cut from the same cloth.”

    This is not the issue. The current basis of the majority of the “manosphere” can, has, and likely will be used to perpetuate the foundations of “the cathedral.”

  13. @Adam

    These are comments from the “It’s their game” post…

    Framed question: “So you lie to women and manipulate their emotions to take advantage of them?”

    Response: “No, unless you consider makeup, push-up bras, and high heels manipulation of men. We simply show men how to demonstrate their most attractive traits. A lot of guys don’t get a chance to show what great people they are because they’re too shy to express themselves and they try to become what they think women want. How many girls have run into guys who just nod their head and agree with everything they say? It’s bland and boring. We teach men to be themselves and confidently show women who they are, so women like them for themselves, and women know what kind of man they’re getting.”

    Framed statement: “women want respect”

    Response: “Then why did women start lusting after me only after I stopped respecting them? If I’m so awful, they why have I slept with three hundred women and the men who side with you are lucky to have slept with three? If I’m everything you don’t want in a man, they why do I get you wet?”

    When they call you mysoginistic, you tell them that you give women what they want.

    When they accuse you of being bad, you tell them women like bad boys.

    When they say you want women home cleaning the kitchen, you tell them also that women want men home cleaning the kitchen.

    When they say you are manipulative, you tell them so are makeup and high-heels.

    Are the above responses reframes?

  14. I’d like to see some sort of Male Declaration of Independence. Then it might finally be clear what in the world you men want! 🙂 If you’re holding marriage hostage until your demands are met, what are your conditions? What are your ninety-five theses?

  15. So, Rollo, you don’t want an echo chamber like “Miss Giggles” runs over at HUS, right? Then, hear a dissenting voice. Why would HUS want to create PUAs or Alpha manwhores? If “building a better Beta” reduces divorce and keeps women happy, it will improve society. Tell me again how loving and leaving tons of women does that.

    It’s good info to have, and I appreciate the insights you provide, but I want to be a good father and husband foremost. If you have no offspring, you are a genetic failure. Most likely these days your caddy ONS spawn gets aborted.

    On a personal level, I’m tall, attractive, successful, credentialed, and feel like pretty much every woman I’ve ever dated (except for one 17 year old) was dying to marry me. However, I have strong Beta instincts, so I just couldn’t understand why my wife (after chasing me for so long) seemed to be getting so frustrated when I did everything I could to appease her. An HUS post on $h*t testing may have helped save my marriage (and if my wife leaves later for whatever reason, your posts will probably help me enjoy life a lot after that).

    Anyway, I just think your central attack on HUS doesn’t make any sense at all. What would you expect Susan to do? She’s writing from a woman’s perspective. If women never get in on this movement, it won’t go anywhere. Oh, and resorting to name calling? That’s just painfully immature. if you believe women are more immature than men, fine (I’ve seen some of that at HUS), but why sink to their level?

  16. @Jacob, I think the problem evangelicals have with the manosphere identifying the FI is that it steals the biblical thunder they used to be able to claim about it and want back now that people outside the church have seen the effects of the FI and feminization in the church that they themselves have been blind to for several generations.

    It’s like the message is “don’t tell us churchians about the FI, we’ve been on top of that shit since the garden of eden”, but the thorn in their side is that it’s the manosphere who’s graphically been showing them the error of their ways.

    Trust me, men of various cultures, worldwide, were well aware of the feminine imperative and hypergamy long before the tribes of Judah committed their oral histories to paper. While I’m reverent of the Word, the Bible doesn’t have a monopoly on how best to Man Up.

    Evangelicals don’t like being called pussies by secualrs because they ought to know better about the FI given their divine wisdom which they’ve ignored or been conditioned away from, apparently. So feminism and liberal ideologies, their favorite foils, become their go-to excuses of convenience. That is until they read an excellent article explaining that feminism cannot exist apart from the FI:

    http://veritaslounge.com/2013/02/09/the-super-norm-and-feminism-is-there-a-difference/

    This is long, but well worth the read. By the end of it you’ll change your mind about conflating the FI with feminism. Don’t make the mistake of thinking it’s an apologetic article, it’s an excellent deconstruction of exactly your reasonings above.

    And for the record, while I don’t consider myself an evangelical or churchian by any measure, I do consider myself a Christ follower. I don’t go into issues of religion unless they are part of the broader scope of gender issues. I get a lot of grief for being some backslidden heretic, but I do so in my best attempt to preserve the neutrality of my analysis:

    https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/03/23/moral-to-the-manosphere/

  17. @biff

    “If ‘building a better Beta’ reduces divorce and keeps women happy, it will improve society.”

    FACEPALM

    “I want to be a good father and husband foremost.”

    As defined by whom? That was rhetorical, you gave your answer in the first quote.

    @gregg

    Do you see the extent of the rot and understand why Rollo compares this with triage?

  18. The root of the problem at HUS is her unwillingness to accept that there is no female “dad or cad” filter. “Cad” is a retrospective definition applied to an Alpha boyfriend who wouldn’t commit. If she accepted that philosphy she might actually do some good. As it stands she’s basically giving out tickets to the Carousel.

    I suspect that some of her poster-girls for taking the pink pill are beginning to realize this. I was perusing the comments on a post of hers a couple of weeks ago and one of her favored female comments confessed to breaking up with her “better beta” boyfriend.

  19. Different T, yeah I see the rot. Even though I have Beta tendencies, I know what I want. Sex before marriage used to make a woman a whore, unmarriagable–all across different societies for millenia. I wouldn’t use that language (whore) directly to a woman who slept with a couple of guys (not very helpful), but, at the same time, I wouldn’t marry one and think everything was OK (and I didn’t–I confirmed virginity before my marriage–and I deal with the fact that my wife thinks BJs are disgusting–I”m actually OK with that). I found most American women to be hopeless, so I turned my attention elsewhere. I wouldn’t have married someone like Susan, to be clear.

    Facepalm all you want, T. My point is that women getting unhaaaaapy and causing divorce messes up society quite a bit. Over 40% of kids born out of wedlock and nearly half of marriages ending in divorce.. you do the math… most kids growing without fathers. That’s a huge problem. If we can fix marriages, that will actually do some good. Good father and husband is my definition.. but if my wife is unhaaaaapy–not a good marriage (by my definition).

    And no, I don’t see screwing lots of women as triage.. sorry. Maybe inciting mass riots would be more effective in just overthrowing this so called “civilization” if you’ve given up.. I may raise my kids (2 sons so far) outside of the U.S., but I still might want to send them them to the U.S. for schooling at some point and I can still hope for the best for my country….

  20. “The root of the problem at HUS is her unwillingness to accept that there is no female “dad or cad” filter. “Cad” is a retrospective definition applied to an Alpha boyfriend who wouldn’t commit.” –By the way, I don’t really buy this. Women in many parts of the world are still trained to go for successful providers rather than sexy jerks. In those societies, women might screw a sexy jerk, but they would never marry them if they couldn’t show off their providing ability to their family (I’ve seen it happen many times–shifty boys relegating to f-buddy status–no tears for them though). The fact that they don’t in the U.S. is to me just a sign of cultural depravity… most of the “alpha” guys I know from HS are like paving roads… maybe this goes to defintions, but I’ve never been comfortable saying a bouncer (passes all alpha tests) does better than a successful lawyer (who maybe fails a lot of them) in marrying a desirable girl, all things being equal…

  21. @johnycome lately

    Rollo does a great job in spreading knowledge, no doubts about that. But this post was about manosphere going mainstream/having some influence on society. To enable this, you have to offer some value. Value that can not be easily swayed or ridiculed. Without real values manosphere does not change anything and remains underground forever. It is no miracle that guys are worried to post under their own names. They will be recognized and ridiculed/shamed -it is very easy, even teenage chick can do that – “ok, bro, you are doing all those things just to ehm..get LAID? Fucking married women, lying, learning tricks? Must be kidding me, you have to learn tricks and read books to be recognized by women? Posting videos about you approching chicks? Poooor litle lonely boy, maybe some bar chick will give you a chance. But the women of quality (ME, ME young american princess) would NEVER sleep with you, poor looser.” lol

    Franky I do not see any value offered in this message but I do see an offered chance to ridicule the whole manosphere with its great insights into female psyche. REFRAME!

    I definitely agree with your message – “help guys to TAKE control over their personal lives” Now, this is manly message. Improve the quality of women, ´cos they are not worthy. Improve the quality of relationship. Lead to positive outcome, to values, to inner strenght. This IS manly message. This is not “beta”. This is ALPHA to the core. Do not let the women decide of what is acceptable. YOU decide! We are here to educate those poor little chicks how they have to behave. If a succesful, attractive man says “I want the women with value and you ARE not – behave if you want to be worthy of ME!”, this resonates. MGTOW is an extreme reaction. So is PUA. I am not the fan of either of them. According to my opinion, it is the time for more mature and manly approach. But from those two extremes, if I have to choose one, MGTOW seems more manly to me. Strong determinantion – either you behave or go fuck yourself. That is all. My two cents.

  22. Gregg,

    The beginnings of game were rooted in reversing female rejection of male value, the most raw form of this is in the world of ONS pump&dump. The final expression of this re-valuing of men cannot be so frivolous or we would have to believe that we as men are worthless to begin with. I, personally, do not believe we are worthless as men. I believe men want to build a society and want to be major players in building society. History has shown this to be the case anyway, so belief is unnecessary. Men recognize, even through their constant and instinctive desire for sex, that pleasure doesn’t build a house, desire doesn’t mow a lawn, manipulation doesn’t run a family, seeking orgasm doesn’t build wealth. Men are capable, easily capable, of recognizing their own value to society. If this were not so, game would have never started to begin with.

    Since men are capable of recognizing their own value to civilization, I have to believe that the end-use of game will not be for a world-wide ONS-ranking system. If that were the end-of-game, it would mean a total perversion of the very roots of the PUA culture. It would mean that men simply used elements of game to further debase themselves as slaves of their own instincts, rather than learning and internalizing a defense of their own value. I think it is much more plausible that the ultimate expression will be to re-form the family unit into something strong.

  23. “However, I have strong Beta instincts, so I just couldn’t understand why my wife (after chasing me for so long) seemed to be getting so frustrated when I did everything I could to appease her.”

    “My point is that women getting unhaaaaapy and causing divorce messes up society quite a bit. Over 40% of kids born out of wedlock and nearly half of marriages ending in divorce.. you do the math… most kids growing without fathers.”

    “An HUS post on $h*t testing may have helped save my marriage”

    “Good father and husband is my definition.. but if my wife is unhaaaaapy–not a good marriage (by my definition).”

    “(and if my wife leaves later for whatever reason, your posts will probably help me enjoy life a lot after that). ”

    FACEPALM

  24. @ jeremy

    hope so. I fought countless times in divorce courts, defended many brothers of ours. I´ve witnessed what are women capable of doing to loving husbands even to their children in the name of love, hypergamy, whatever. However, it is painful for me to watch mature men willingly embrace amorality as the solution. This is not the answer. Once we do that, we perish.

  25. There is no meaning here. No meaning to Game. There is no grand finish line. This is about power and will to power.

    We have pointed out the fraudulent nature of cultural conditioning that society has imposed on you. And provided observations from other men on how to discard that conditioning and act in manners that decrease the limitations that culture has imposed on you to allow you to act with power and to have a will to power. You accept what we say here or you don’t.

    And personally, I could give a fuck if someone or some group does or doesn’t. It took a rather quick sample of the various Manosphere topics before this one settled in to me as that which gives men the best option for men in both offensive and defensive strategies to minimize personal pain, maximize contentment through a lack of pain, and manifest cultural and social power in the form of personal choices.

    A thing, a value, or an ethic is either directly beneficial to you or it isn’t. If you subscribe to it being beneficial to “us”, yet it is not directly beneficial to you, then someone has imposed some conditioning on you to convince you to act in manners other than that which is directly beneficial to you.

    Game has a cultural relevance because it is a social act. It has political context in that “all social acts are political”. And the sum of men’s personal actions, the social and economic choices that they make will have social, and hence, political consequences.

    But mostly it is a personal action and a personal choice. There is no “macro” in it; it is entirely “micro”. The value of the Game community is that in acting as an “us” we collectively benefit the “me”. The only collective power it will ever have will be manifested entirely through the sum of individual choices that men make based on the collective knowledge we provide.

    Yes, there is an emotional desire for validation that “we” as a group can obtain societal approval, yet the nature of what we are, what we propose, is veritable seizure of a major power over which the one group and its proxies have controlled and imposed cultural conditioning via morality. And that group will not let that happen.

    And the actions of this weekend are indicative that group will do anything, to smear, malign, expose, shame anything that threatens that power.

    Our group needs no external credibility other than the credibility among itself that it empowers individuals to act in empowering manners. That power is derived exactly by understanding the cultural, social, economic, and biological factors that create obstacles to your personal realization of your power.

    There will be no grand macro solution that changes everything or even changes anything. “We” win a collective victory by winning 100,000,000 individual victories.

    I say that at this moment, rather than seek to expand into the external, that rather we close in upon ourselves. We need no one but us. The growth of it, the acceptance of it by those that accept it is entirely based on the rationality and logicality of it, but mostly due to the success of it.

    Life has no meaning, in and of itself. We surged up from the void of consciousness to give it meaning. It is useless to attempt to ascribe any greater meaning to what we do here other than to recognize it as means to power and a will to power.

    And the answer to the question as to “Who should speak for the Manosphere?” is “we shall speak for it” through our collective action in pursuit of our individual will to power.

  26. @Mr. T, you’re killing it, there, bro. Facepalms up the wazoo, substantive issues are for looosers.

    Anyway, like I actually agree with Rollo that Susan totally fails to grasp that to “come out” as a man in favor of men’s rights to any extent makes you a social pariah and basically unemployable, which is a killing blow to most men. T, you prove it’s even unwise to show any hint of personality/weakness here, lest you be Facepalmed. In any case, I didn’t find anything to really rebut my central point, which is that HUS is likely to do more good than harm, all things considered. All this warring in the sphere makes us all look like childish asses… wish you could just understand Susan is a woman who reacts like a woman to perceived insults. Hence her blowing up about some things… what would you expect? but, like I said, you are stooping to that level with the framing of this response.. I thought you would learn more from your study of women. VD still links to HUS and firmly, but politely, dissents when he disagrees with something there. That is the correct adult response.

  27. “Could you please tell me how in the heaven could PUA create better women?”

    you are asking the wrong questions.

    you can’t “create better women”. such a thing never existed and never will.

    pua exposes men to the primal forces that drive female behavior. once you’ve seen those forces at work, there is no going back.

    you either play the Game or remove yourself from it. just because a guy sleeps with a lot of women, it doesn’t mean those women aren’t suffering for it.

    I always do my best to leave my sexual conquests worse off than before they met me. they always pay for it in the long run.

  28. Man, Mark Minter. I can’t logically disagree with anything you wrote. That’s a true talent you have for zeroing in on a concept and making a case for it that seems impossible to refute. It seems you’ve covered all bases. These kinds of posts are the epitome of “The Rational Male.”

  29. @biff

    Nothing has been said about “Susan.” and your point was “that women getting unhaaaaapy and causing divorce messes up society quite a bit.”

    Maybe this will help:

    “However, I have strong Beta instincts, so I just couldn’t understand why my wife (after chasing me for so long) seemed to be getting so frustrated when I did everything I could to appease her.”

    So you were logically trying to figure out how to make your wife haaaapy, correct?

    “My point is that women getting unhaaaaapy and causing divorce messes up society quite a bit. Over 40% of kids born out of wedlock and nearly half of marriages ending in divorce.. you do the math… most kids growing without fathers.”

    You say women’s unhaaaapiness is bad for society.

    “An HUS post on $h*t testing may have helped save my marriage”

    You find out your wife is likely manufacturing bullshit drama “unhaaaaapiness” to “shit-test” you and apparently you passed the “shit-test” and saved the marriage.

    “Good father and husband is my definition.. but if my wife is unhaaaaapy–not a good marriage (by my definition).”

    You state your definition of a good marriage is making your wife haaaapy. According to the prior quote, you realize your wife will manufacture bullshit drama “unhaaaappiness” to “shit-test” you. Thus, your “good marriage” is dependent on passing these manufactured fits of “unhaaaappiness.”

    Is that really included in your definition of “good father and husband.”

    “(and if my wife leaves later for whatever reason, your posts will probably help me enjoy life a lot after that). ”

    This indicates you recognize the legal and social powerlessness of your position in the contract you made, and apparently recognized it prior to your signing. This does not bode well for jeremy’s assertion that:

    “Men are capable, easily capable, of recognizing their own value to society.”

    Did that help?

  30. @biff

    …In any case, I didn’t find anything to really rebut my central point, which is that HUS is likely to do more good than harm, all things considered.

    HUS is doing more harm than good.

    She is re-framing a perspective that is perfectly allowable to be a perspective that only “undesireables” would have. Her choice of subject and language is entirely geared to say that game is only good insofar as it helps women find men of value. It fundamentally fails to recognize the existing value in all men. If freedom & responsibility are to exist, they must exist for all. HUS would have men remain slaves to feminine approval.

    VD still links to HUS and firmly, but politely, dissents when he disagrees with something there. That is the correct adult response.

    Can you demonstrate any impoliteness on the part of other manosphere writers? Unfortunately that will be difficult, since free speech isn’t allowed to remain on HUS. An interesting question to ask yourself might be, “Why is that?”

  31. @rollo,

    The Veritas Lounge essay is a very good explanation of FI and its relationship to Feminism, that Feminism was a mechanism for the FI to increase its power yet the FI isn’t feminism. Actually his term Female Leaning Super Norm would probably sit better with the general public and especially women then our Feminine Imperative. Our term is antagonistic and his isn’t.

    I think many men have this belief that women want to get married and that the FI is all about enforcing monogamy on men and restrict male sexual prerogatives. I had that thought when I first got here. I still somewhat do.

    But this essay does a good job of explaining that monogamy existed only because it was a balance between what women wanted and what men wanted, from a personal and social standpoint. I know longer think that women are about marriage and hard monogamy. They are truly about hypergamy.

    This essay points out that the Female Leaning Super Norm, which is what we call FI, is not just women; men are part of it also. And this comment thread is indicative of that, and so is Dalrock. It seems to me that possibly more men are more distraught over the state of marriage and monogamy than women.

    And I guess that it really what Rational Male has sort of been saying.

    The Veritas Lounge essay says that women want serial monogamy with attractive men far more than they want marriage.

    And Rational Male has said that in a round about way by concentrating on hypergamy and the psychology of women in making hypergamous choices. And the costs that has on men.

    And that is the rub. Men have a loaded gun pointed at their head, biologically and women don’t.

    This is an essay from Scientific American from Dr Larry Young, a neuroscientist who I guess is probably the number 1 authority on the nueroscience of bonding.

    “Love Hurts: Brain Chemistry Explains the Pangs of Separation”

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=young-alexander-excerpt-chemistry-between-us

    It is not a long article, maybe a page and a half. The first part describes depression that male rats and prairie voles undergo upon separation. (I guess they are prairie dogs. They are monogamous and the “mountain” version of the vole isn’t. So the prairie version is studied for bonding brain chemistry)

    Then the second part, really a few paragraphs, describe the chemistry that is happening. It appears that when males enter into a bonding relationship, then stress chemicals, corticosterone, (CRF) begins to build up in the male.

    Yet as long as the male remains with the female then the painful depressive behavior doesn’t occur until separation.

    “Bonding itself produces high CRF,” Bosch says. “But this does not mean the system is also firing.” There is something fundamental about living with a mate that results in more CRF stress hormone in the brain, but that also prevents the engagement of the HPA (hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal) stress axis as long as the mates stay together. Using an interesting metaphor for bonding, Bosch says “I compare it to a rifle. As soon as they form a pair-bond, the rifle is loaded with a bullet. But the trigger isn’t pulled unless there is separation.”

    So she gets hypergamy driven serial monogamy and he gets a “loaded gun” to his head.

    Now if any of you think Game is any more than learning to take the bullet out of that gun, if there some grand social meaning, some roundabout way of making you the man that women want, some way of repairing what “was” between men and women ….

    Then you better think again.

  32. @T –still failing on substantive issues. I can’t return your personal attacks since I know nothing about you. that’s fine. I don’t really care to. My mistake re: divulging personal information on here.

    @Jeremy, that’s a fair response, but I disagree. One of the tenets of the manosphere is that in the long run the feminist system hurts women. I would expect women to look out for their own interests the same way I would men to. If women can be persuaded that something more traditional is in their best interests, great. If the result is better than the current feminist miasma it’s still an improvement. Not in any way saying that HUS is perfect–neither are the PUA related sites–or the MRA sites–just information from different perspectives that is not generally in the MSM and can be useful reads. Ways to learn more.

  33. If women can be persuaded that something more traditional is in their best interests

    biff,

    You said if and that is a very good choice of words. It is a big if. Many women are getting away with riding the carousel, marry a good beta man, thinking that they are happy in their security, when in fact they are not. Only, they can’t figure out why they’re unhappy. Not only that, but picture someone suggesting that giving up control and letting the man dominate will bring them real happiness. This is anathema. Women grip control as if their lives depend on it because they literally know nothing else. Couple that with the fear that women have that giving up this control might well mean that a man could take advantage and make her subservient or do any manner of horrible things to her (as most girls are regularly taught) and your if is stunningly large. You would expect women to look out for their best interests, but seeing all of this, seeing past what girls have been taught since birth and the accepting it . . . well I don’t see it happening without something pushing them to it. MGTOW, the insane divorce rate, men refusing to marry, the economic downturn and strong men refusing to speak nothing but the truth are what is going to change women’s minds. These things women can see. For many, it will be too late, but the younger generations eventually will see the difference.

  34. Beta males want to throw themselves under a bus for the good of society. They need a cause to serve and take pride in the sacrifice. They don’t have a will to power, so resent it in others.

    The manosphere doesn’t need mainstream approval. We are Atlas, who only needs shrug. The FI are the moochers and looters who require us. I personally don’t much care for MGTOW but at least its consistent with not feeding the beast. WGTOW is impossible because parasites cannot live without the host.

    I adore women, but economically and logistically they are parasites.

    The only use of mainstream attention for the manosphere is to get the word out to potential unplugees. That’s it.

  35. I know longer think that women are about marriage and hard monogamy. They are truly about hypergamy.

    This is one of the biggest lies ever perpetrated on men. That women are the ones who want commitment, faithfulness and monogamy.

    It seems to me that possibly more men are more distraught over the state of marriage and monogamy than women.

    Of course they are. They get to have their cake and eat it too. Bang it out with a couple dozen dudes in their 20’s before they hit their 30’s and “mature” enough to allow the guys they wouldn’t give the time of day in their 20’s the leftovers. They lack the foresight to realize that this ultimately leads to less happiness and in the long term everyone loses.

    The Veritas Lounge essay says that women want serial monogamy with attractive men far more than they want marriage.

    Yep, and in a liberal society such as ours they have free rein to practice serial monogamy and soft polygamy.

    So she gets hypergamy driven serial monogamy and he gets a “loaded gun” to his head.

    Your insight and analogies are uncanny. You really should start a blog man. There aren’t too many guys who have the right combination of traits that would allow them to be successful teaching this message, but you are definitely one of them.

  36. I gave away the last of my daughter’s baby clothes today. Its taken me over a year to part with them all because there was always the hope/thought that there might be more children. But, I don’t have much inducement to marry as I’m not that interested in taking on someone else’s “baggage.” I found myself laughing when I realized what a great catch I should be to an older man. I have a fairly secure job and good health insurance. If a man without health insurance married me, he’d have a very comfortable last twenty years of his life! 🙂

  37. I’m beginning to think this is all occuring because of modern technology (agriculture, industry, etc.).

    It created a vacuum that needed filling.

    Our lives became too easy, Nature doesn’t like easy.

    People don’t cooperate simply because of some moral belief system. The belief system itself arose to facilitate survival. Women are going to be a constant pressure for men to adapt since we’ve overcome our natural environment.

    As much as things change they stay the same.

  38. @biff

    ” I found most American women to be hopeless, so I turned my attention elsewhere.”

    “–and I deal with the fact that my wife thinks BJs are disgusting–I”m actually OK with that).”

    lol’ed.

    How would it make you feel to know that your wife would happily give head to a guy with high enough value to her?

  39. “This is about power and the will to power” MM
    100% balls on accurate. Same for your statement that we win collectively when 100,000 individual men win

    This society is not worth the sacrifice of a single “beta” male.

    To get me to consider remarrying

    She/ her family has to pay the husband a large sum of money as a surety to her good behavior and to offset the added expense of having a wife (say 3X my yearly salary in cash. )
    No legal obligation for her previous lack of responsibility in any form
    legally remove a husbands responsibly for the debt a woman racks up during the marriage
    No alimony
    No child support
    Default joint 50/ 50 custody
    Mandatory DNA test for all children
    Chastity belt required when unsupervised by her husband
    Assets split in ratio to income. Ex, If the income is a 60/ 40 split, who ever made the 60 gets 60% of the assets.
    All assets forfeited by her to the husband if she is unfaithful
    The legal right to divorce if she denies sex more then 3 times without major medical issues, with all assets etc going to the man or the legal right to seek sex elsewhere with no legal repercussions
    Same as above if she gains weight
    Ending the VAWA and any other domestic violence law

    That’s the short list I came up with in a few minutes

    I know way to much about women to come up with a list acceptable to women

  40. @biff

    One of the tenets of the manosphere is that in the long run the feminist system hurts women.

    No, that is not correct. It’s not correct because you need to define what “feminist system” is. A belief in the manosphere as I understand it is that hypergamy with no counteracting force is harmful to women because it destroys the dating market as women suffer dating market value inflation. This is very different, and clearer, than your claim there.

    …If the result is better than the current feminist miasma it’s still an improvement.

    Feminism lies about its purpose. As a movement it fails to own and police it’s extremes, and it is entirely deceitful to women about what benefits they currently receive from it. You seem to be arguing that women have a well-informed choice and between feminism and red-pill, I would argue they don’t. That means that what HUS is doing by essentially re-framing game to a feminist perspective is doing more harm than good to women who might need to understand red-pill knowledge.

    Men were supposed to listen and understand what feminism was about. And they did for 50 years as feminism re-invented itself 3-4 times to maintain crisis and membership. Now women should listen and learn the un-sweetened truth of game theory, without interrupting and reframing. That is fair.

  41. bwahaha… I just saw this on the captains site and had to share..

    So… there you have it, children are part of a community over which men have all responsibility and limited control. And forget about them being your children, no, they belong to the community. But keep paying those taxes/alimony!

  42. I don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with the “Build a Better Beta” concept. Game can be used to make marriage worthy betas more attractive to women, and that would be a good thing for both sexes. The problem is when anything that isn’t “build a better beta” is criticized because of feminine imperative.

    Susan’s ideal SMP is one where women are able to “sample” different men through serial monogamy (which usually includes learning experiences with hot but not very nice douchebags), while getting Ivy League degrees and advancing their high powered careers. Eventually in their late 20s before the fertility window starts closing, Susan wants these women to be able to settle down with the perfect attractive beta.

    Anything that goes contrary to this goal gets heavy pushback and personal insults from Susan. She expects men to adopt strategies that are not beneficial to them, but rather beneficial to women.

  43. Another blogger named Sock asked Susan if she felt that civil rights activists should have had to “change their message” back in the day, and she responded the same way she responded to me by implying that he receives threats because his massage might be hate speech. He responded with a laundry list of things he has said that got him threatened and cost him friends, and all she could say is “Ohmygoodness! I can’t imagine who would possibly threaten you for saying that. Is it men or women? Who are you hanging out with?”

    You gotta be pretty dense not to see how full of shit she is.

  44. So Rollo, I was reading more on that Veritas Lounge blog and found this old gem, the Tomassi definition of the Feminine Imperative.

    “Everything a man experiences, every social conditioning he receives from the earliest age, every accepted social norm and every expectation of him to qualify as the definition of a mature adult Man in contemporary society is designed to serve the female imperative. Moralist wallow in it, absolutists and defeated white knights existentially depend upon it, and even the better part of relativists still (often unwittingly) feed and serve the feminine purpose. In fact, so all encompassing is this reality that we define our masculinity in the terms of how well we can accommodate that feminine influence.

    For one gender to realize their sexual imperative the other must sacrifice their own. This is the root source of power the feminine imperative uses to establish its own reality as the normative one. From this flows the rules of engagement for dating / mating, operative social conventions used to maintain cognitive dominance, and laws and legalities that bind society to the benefit of the feminine. From this is derived men’s default status as the ‘disposable’ sex, while women are the protected sex.”

    I liked his writing on the “Female Leaning Super Norm” in the “bipartisan” manner that he explained it.

    But the radical in me, the motherfucker in me, the shit disturber in me, still prefers yours. It is so much more incendiary, inflammatory, and provocative. They wouldn’t have dragged Marie Antoinette up to the guillotine if political writers of the time were saying “Well, cake is good sometimes too”. Maybe the next time you revise your definition maybe put a few more “bitches” and “hoes” in there like

    “For bitches to realize their sexual imperative, motherfuckers must sacrifice their own”

    and

    “From this is derived motherfuckers’ default status as the ‘disposable’ sex, while hoes are the protected sex.”

    Ok. Maybe not.

  45. “The problem intrinsic to all of that is that masculinity is now so ridiculed and delegitimized in our feminine-centric reality that any (lame) attempts at subterfuge only make the manosphere look even more like the boys club in the treehouse shooting spitwads at the “mature” girls below.”

    See, gems like this are some of the many reasons why I visit blogs like Rollo, Dalrock, Chateau Heartiste, etc.- that the people at these blogs are able to better articulate than I could much of what I’ve seen, thought, and experienced with women. Just brilliantly fantastic stuff.

    It also helps articulate something I was trying to explain on CH’s post, ‘Female Beauty From 5 To 7’ where CH was trying to explain that men’s reactions to female beauty were not subjective, but quite universal. He did this by comparing a real woman with a transsexual. In addition to the more salient point about female beauty, what really puzzled me was an issue another poster brought up, ‘Why are we in the West seeing so many transsexuals in the public eye in the past few years?’ It was a question I really couldn’t explain.

    That question and the quote above brought me to this thesis; The reason why we are seeing increasingly more and more male to female transsexuals is that in our feminine-centric reality some males are not only identifying with the feminine-centric reality, they’re trying to become a part of it. Consider it a extreme form of ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ where instead of merely identifying with women, these guys(the MTF’s/’Lambda Males’?) try to become them.

    Obviously, that’s impossible, Those pussies and tits aren’t just there for sucking and fucking, they’re there for a functional biological reason-that is for the male to impregnate the female using his genitalia, for her to gestate that fetus until birth, and then nurture that birthed child with those breasts. Yes, folks, that uterus matters too.

    However for the males who try to change their gender, those biological realities are ignored(conveniently, due to outright denial?) because these males perceive that the benefits gained from being at the center of a Feminine-Centric Society & Culture by “becoming”(at least the appearance) a woman are better than remaining a male. For these males, they see an entire society catering to the whims of women-educationally, legally, socially, in music, books, movies, tv, etc. They are bombarded with Affirmative Action, Female Victim-hood, Lilly Ledbetter, S&TC, Lena Dunham’s Girls, 50 Shades of Grey, Sandra Fluke, Slutwalks, Dancing With the Stars, American Idol, Manolo Blahnik, shoes, shopping, Katy Perry, Kim Kardashian, lunch with the girlfriends, etc.(pretty shallow materialistic stuff, no?) and they internalize all of that(to the point of brainwashing). They consciously(and subconsciously) view the Fem-Centric society as more dominant and thus, the better one to be a part of. In essence, we all live in ‘Chick-World’ and a few guys want to be full participants.

    Thus, they abandon their ‘maleness’ in the most extreme form of Stockholm Syndrome because instead of merely sympathizing with the bank robbers or even defending them, they try to become the bank robbers. Like Patty Hearst became a member of the Symbionese Liberation Army.

    So, these males start the process of hormones, surgery, etc, delusionally believing they can become something they can never truly be because they’ve confused two very different things-‘Femininity’ and ‘Woman-hood’. ‘Femininity’ is mere affectation and behavior which even some men can mimic(to some degree) as CH’s post mentioned. However, woman-hood is impossible to mimic for these males because womanhood is bio-mechanically and traditionally linked to childbirth and motherhood. That’s the degree of delusion these males have reached. It should be noted that real women in today’s society reject womanhood is damning, but that increasing numbers of men are subjecting themselves to the consequences of hormones and mutilation of their bodies so as to mimic Femininity is equally telling about the degree which the Female Imperative has permeated our society. Clearly, it’s become the dominant social-psychological culture of the West so I guess it shouldn’t be surprising that some males, foolishly believe they can fully participate in that dominant culture.

    Anyway, thanks Rollo for letting me ramble.

  46. The best definition I heard of this was from a RadFem blog, Cherry Blossoms. (Yes, not one of them had a photo for an avatar in comments. The owner of the blog is extremely fucking ugly. I’m the sure whole crowd was real special).

    Anyway she had a post about a restaurant that wouldn’t allow this support group of transsexuals to meet in the back room of his restaurant anymore. It seems they were going in the women’s bathroom and pissing all over the seats. So the actual female patrons were raising hell.

    And so I guess RadFems get even more pissed off about men pissing on the toilet seats then typical women, so they fucking despise t-girls. I think the blog post headline was “Of course, Transsexual men piss on the toilet seats.” (I am sure that is major plank in the RadFem platform “The Patriarchy exploits women and also pisses on the toilet seats”)

    And Ms Cherry Blossom went on the say that “Women are the object of desire and these transsexuals were not women trapped in the body of men, but creeps that also want to be the object of desire.”

    At first I thought, “Jeez, pretty hard from a bunch of ugly RadFems.” I thought they were all about embracing the GBLT thing. I figured they hated the idea of competition. But they were most serious about the “Women having the genius of creating life” with their magic vaginas and a TS just doesn”t get to be in the fucking club.

    But after reading that, every time I see some photo of some TS on a match site, I think, “Yeah, that ugly RadFem makes sense here. Sure looks like what this TS is doing”. Their photos go over the top in slutty attire and attention whoring poses.

    There was an interesting situation in Barranquilla. There is some hooker street that has TS hookers on one side of the road and the female hookers on the other. And they fight about every two weeks. The TS hookers claim the female hookers are pissed because the men prefer the TS hookers. They got implants. They are taller and look more statuesque than the female ones.

    I’ve seen some in Colombia. And I am sure they look better than hookers that work on the street in Colombia. Remember that prostitution is legal there and most hookers have clients or ads in classifieds, maybe work in bar that you pay a bar fine to take her out. So a street hooker in Colombia is pretty much the lower echelon. But maybe a TS is more of an “impulse” buy. Or maybe a TS hooker tries harder than a street hooker. Whatever.

    Once I was riding in cab and we were rolling down the boulevard and we passed a doorway and there was this very tall blond standing in the doorway talking to somebody. I am partial to tall girls and also seeing a blond in Medellin, a city full of dark haired women, was rare. So I snapped my head and caught a quick glimpse and I said to the driver “Man, that’s a big girl” and he said “Es un hombre”. I said “No shit?” I couldn’t tell passing by at 35 mph. He had a grin on his face like “Silly gringo can’t tell a man from a woman”.

    Once I was walking on the street by my house and this great looking girl came right up and asked me for a cigarette. I mean she had an almost perfect body. I mean girls that look like that do not walk up to men on the street and ask for cigarettes. So that was my first clue. When “she” took the cigarette, “she” had a hand that could almost palm a basketball, with real defined tendons, like mine. I’m sure my expression changed to this smirk like “Hey, you’re a fucking drag queen”. It was pretty subtle but I had this creepy feeling like maybe what girls get when a beta approaches them. Something is amiss. If girls get that same feeling when the beta comes than I can understand why they blow men out.

    The newspaper story said that what happens on the hooker street is the straight hookers go over the TS side of the street. When a car stops and a female hooker goes to talk to the driver by leaning in the passenger window, the TS bumps her ass out of the way with a hip check, then leans in and flashes those big implants at him. And then all hell breaks loose.

    I’m sure it’s a sight to see, hookers and t-girls getting it on, MMA style right there on the street. The newspaper article said that usually some the t-girls who “made her night” which is about $250, hangs around and when the straight girls get desperate for clients later at night, the t-girl sort of runs interference for the others. $250 a might is big money for Colombia. Tax free. Many shop girls make $500 a month.

  47. “but creeps that also want to be the object of desire.”

    Thanks for mentioning that. That seems to be another perceived benefit of the Fem-centric Reality & Society that these males want to embrace; the narcissistic Fem-Centric need to the focus of attention, especially from males.

  48. The inherent flaw with build a better beta is… the idea does not give value to the man as a sovereign individual but only adds value to him as his value to a woman increases. It’s about building HER kind of better man, and not building himself into HIS concept of better man.

  49. @Rol: Exactly. When life is too easy, we make up problems.

    @Ton: You summed it up pretty well there ^. Where do you think the idea of what a “better man” consists of breaks down along gender lines?

  50. @Ton: What’s the use of a slave bettering himself for himself instead of for his master? The farmerette doesn’t need the ox to learn how to jump fences; she needs it to pull the plow. The inherent flaw of which you speak (and I agree) is a flaw only from the man’s perspective. From the viewpoint of the Female Imperative, it’s a feature.

  51. “Game can be used to make marriage worthy betas more attractive to women, and that would be a good thing for both sexes.”

    Why? Specifically, fulfilling which female desires would be a “good thing?”

  52. @Mark Minter

    And so I guess RadFems get even more pissed off about men pissing on the toilet seats then typical women, so they fucking despise t-girls.

    RadFems hate T-girls because T-girls are removing themselves from the influence of the feminine imperative and switching teams. To them, it’s like watching players from the team you’re routing on the field suddenly run across the field, switch jerseys in the process, and be forced to cheer on these new recruits as if they were part of you all along. The radfems are essentially being asked to essentially call these t-girls beautiful or seem cruel for their insensitivity. It’s a violation of the power they wish to consolidate, and they hate it for that.

  53. “but creeps that also want to be the object of desire.”

    Hmmm, sounds a lot like competition anxiety and/or dread if you ask me. Women get the men they deserve, and since 1966, literally and figuratively, by order of degree that’s made men who are better women than women.

    TS’s are the perfect storm – better looking, more in tune with the male sex response and more willing to embrace it for the sake of embracing it and not resource transferral, competition anxiety, slut shaming, indignation, female objectification, ridicule through imitation, dread of feminine incompetence, shall I go on? And the frosting on the cake is that the feminine imperative can’t deny them all this because they’ve embraced gender identity as a social construct for so long that going back on it would require a fundamental restructuring of itself.

    TS’s are the logical extreme of MGTOW, no wonder women hate them. Quite diabolical, I must give a tip of the hat to all my TS readers.

  54. Rollo, when you explain it in those terms, I have to admit, it is a brilliant strategy. Utterly ruthless but crystalline in its logic. More ‘Woman’ than ‘Woman’…

  55. Did not expect the comments on this thread to top the last one but they did. I am in agreement with Biff that HUS does her best for team Gal and does recognize the harm feminism and the cock carosel does to women. She only crosses the line occasionally like last week dissing 3MM George for not coming out of the shadows. Usual Minter wisdom. But any comments that have Krauser going all Ayn Rand is special.

  56. If girls get that same feeling when the beta comes than I can understand why they blow men out.

    That reminds me. There have been three times in my life that I have made the “mistake” of having sex with women who fall below my threshold of attractiveness, and in each and every case I couldn’t wait to get as far away from them as I possibly could after the deed was done. It was a completely unconscious response. I actually felt “dirty” for having subjected myself to that. And none of them were total beasts- they were probably in the 3-4 range. But that is far enough from what I knew I could attract that once my horniness wore off it felt like a huge mistake.

    I can only imagine that this is how women feel when they no longer deem their partner worthy of access to their vagina.

  57. Other Jim
    Top post, insightful observations.

    FreeNortherner has a post on the Madonna/Whore complex:

    https://freenortherner.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/the-two-male-sexual-appetites/

    “Hot elicits a purely consumptive sexual desire. Cute is the type of attractiveness that elicits the protective desire.”

    I think Transexuals play the whore card more extrovertly than women (they don’t have a protective desire, they’re men after all) and women find it threatening.

    I’d love to know why the lady boy phenomenon is so prevalent in Patriarchal societies (Thailand, Philippines, Turkey etc).

  58. Thank you kindly Kate.

    Were’ s the break down?…BC has it right, the female imperative gets in the way. Much of what a woman calls masculine improvement is nothing like making a man more masculine, or a better version of himself.

    Typically a woman wants a man to improve in ways that benefit her, regardless if it will benefit him, or those around him, or if the change is a net positive or worth the overall effort. And often those bit of self improvement are illusions. One of my key tenets in dealing with women is y’all cannot tell the difference between an illusion of something and the reality of that something. Ex, if you have a lot of high end stuff your wealthy vs the reality of living a modest life with money in the bank. It also breaks down because women want the man to apply his improved self when and where and in ways she agreed a with. Ex, she want him to make more decisions but only decisions she agrees with and only when she wants him to. It’s part of her eternal quest for fried ice and becomes another shit test.

    It seems to me, when a man improves anything about himself, it tends to improve his life in general and benefit those around him. I see this all the time at work and in powerlifting.

    That’s how I reckon it at any rate. I’ve only had one woman want to help me improve in an area I wanted to become better in. All other attempts to help me improve were shit tests/ trying to build me into a beta.

  59. How can you complain about building a better beta? Much of game is about building a better beta. Training a beta to jump through the necessary hoops to pretend to be an alpha, in order to accommodate insane, destructive female preferences.

    Skill at game does not make a beta into an alpha. It just makes him a trained animal, skilled at mimicry.

    The only way to make a beta into an alpha is to give him structural alpha. That requires reasserting control over our women at a societal level.

    Until then, it is either PUA (assuming it remains underground and women don’t deploy countermeasures) or MGTOW. PUA is beta, MGTOW is omega.

    The exception would be for natural alphas, but only a tiny percentage of people fall into that category. More people used to be naturally alpha in some respects, but today virtually all historical alpha behaviour is illegal. Many of history’s greatest warriors would be betas today, unless they were also born with a glib tongue and a sociopathic character.

    Game is a personal solution to a societal problem. Dancing around like a trained seal so you can get some pussy. It’s not really a solution at all, it is a coping mechanism. Like staying inside at certain times of day because the air is so polluted.

    The important thing is to spread the truth about hypergamy far and wide, to awaken as many men as possible. That way control can be reasserted over females in the future and this insanity can finally be put to rest.

  60. @Ton: Thanks for the reply!

    This interested me very much: “I’ve only had one woman want to help me improve in an area I wanted to become better in.” I’m really curious what this area was. I’ve encouraged men in artistic, business, educational, and fitness goals, none of which did I ever expect to benefit from directly. I just wanted to be supportive of what they were interested in. While some I suppose could have been unconsciously ulterior, they were mostly altruistic motives.

  61. @ Different T

    Why? Specifically, fulfilling which female desires would be a “good thing?”

    The ones that will get the betas laid, obviously.., For example, if a beta learns to fulfill the female desire for dominance, he and the female are both better off.

  62. Your welcome Kate.

    She knew a lot about nutrition and helped me eat better to drop a weight class and maintain my strength. She also decided to start fucking other men in the 1st 30 days of a deployment so we’re no longer close.

  63. @Kate:

    [blockquote}@Rol: Exactly. When life is too easy, we make up problems.[/blockquote}

    Well, rather than “make up problems,” I think we inevitably encounter problems because we’ve eliminated activities that were crucial to survival for hundreds of thousands of years.

    Women are said to be amoral, I believe this is true for the most part and necessary. They provide a unique set of checks and balances to the male gender, but of course it’s a very unpleasant thing right now because we’ve never been in this position before. Game is required to balance these “tests” because our natural environment is no longer the struggle it used to be.

    Is it any wonder that feminism took root as the work environment changed?

    It’s hard to reconcile this in day-to-day living because some of them can truly piss you off, but if you think about it rationally, you have to accept it on some level as being the natural order of things.

  64. Yes, we think we’ve improved things when whether we are or not is debatable. Each change brings a host of new issues with problems to be solved. Its like medication that will cure you with a hundred side effects.

  65. Pingback: Remove the Man |

Speak your mind

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s