The Rational Male – Kindle Update

Just a brief announcement, I’ve had the Kindle version of The Rational Male professionally formatted and the new edition is now available from Amazon.

I have to apologize for the first version. I’m a designer by trade and my initial effort was intended for a well laid out print version that could be loaned to, or bought for men who readers felt might benefit most from it. Unfortunately my freshmen effort never really converted from the PDF to an ePub the way I had intended.

I understand now that readers primarily wanted Kindle / eReader versions for themselves so I took the time and committed the money to have the text professionally formatted. The eBook is now ready for primetime. It’s essentially the same book, just everything is now in place, with links embedded.

I’ve also expanded the distribution to Kindle Select now, so readers in Mexico, Brazil and Japan have direct sales access.

Also, I’m currently having the book translated into Spanish, and have a couple of irons in the fire to convert the book into an Audible format.

Something to Look Forward to

The good news is that I’ll be taking all of this learning and applying it to the next book I began last week. I’d already begun The Rational Male: Volume II in February, however, as a result from the most recent Preventative Medicine series I’ve put this on hold while I flesh out an expanded version of this series into the new book. Furthermore, since my essays and graphs detailing contemporary SMV seem to generate so much interest (and rage, and general distortion) both inside and outside the manosphere, I’ve decided to expand this new book with SMV / SMP specific material to support the expanded  Preventative Medicine detailing.

After sifting through my past SMV related material I’ve found I have more than enough for a ‘real’ book – so, yes there will be both a (well formatted) Kindle and a printed version. While I will be using some prior posts, as well as detailing the Preventative Medicine timeline more expansively, I’ll also be including new related writing that I haven’t published on Rational Male. So the answer to the obvious question is, no, it wont all be just reprints of past essays – and even the ones I choose to will be expanded.

The purpose of this effort, like anything I write really, will be along the same intent as the Preventative Medicine series – a work to better help men prepare for, and become SMV / SMP and Game aware.

Once this book is completed I’ll be back to Rational Male: Volume II. My hope was to publish by October 1st, but that may get pushed back a month depending on the Preventative Medicine (working title) book’s publication.

And finally, amongst all of this, my stupid-hectic work schedule/travel, publishing for the blog and trying to be a husband and a father, I’ve also begun copy edits for a new edition of the printed book. I’ll be hiring a pro copy editor to help out and make corrections, but this new edition will address the formatting and copy issues in the first printed edition. The material will not change.

Thanks for all your support. I write for my readership, so if there’s a suggestion you have for any of these upcoming projects or some topic or inclusion you’d like to see, please feel free to let me know about them in the comments or with an email (address on the About page).


Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

58 comments on “The Rational Male – Kindle Update

  1. Rollo, I have seen that modern women and “old farts” alike show a lot of hypocrisy when criticizing the often pedestalizing, subservient, if not codependent behavior of the the so called and stigmatized Nice Guys.

    I mean, they often claim being for equal relationships and dating rights, denouncing the purported manipulation tactics of the so called “nice guys”.

    However, I question myself: isn’t there something very hypocritical about claiming that they are egalitarian when in fact most of them, directly and or indirectly, support or supported feminist ideals and “rights”, and by doing so, many women even got involved in the abhorrent feminist shaming of innocent boys who later on turn out to be subservient, gullible and co-dependent “nice guys”?

    Aren’t they hypocritical when claiming to be egalitarian, when in fact, biologically and psychologically women do not know or own the sexual pressure and tension boys/men are subject to?

    Aren’t they hypocritical when they claim their right for sexual freedom, if not the right for outright assassination of innocent babies, claiming “my body my choice”, whereas simultaneously supporting misandrist double standards such as claiming over-protective and very expensive and risky (on the male side) divorce laws, and also denying the male freedom and right, for a clear conscience, free of any feminist induced guilt which drives them to make often insane and expensive relationship decisions (such as subjecting themselves to emotional, psychological and financial abuse, just because they were taught that women were so much historically oppressed and so every woman is a victim, etc.)?

    Perhaps you might shed light on the psychological damage inflicted on generations of boys and men by the abhorrent, unethical and oppressive feminist shaming and the hypocritical double-standards of millennial and “old farts” feminist alike when claiming egalitarian relationship rights and indulging as usual on “nice guys” shaming. Are women psychopaths and biologically programmed to incite male anger?

    Moreover, I find it funny the double standard about common and accepted beliefs such as that men are sexually depraved or just sexually orientated, whereas women are always driven by noble goals in relationships. But, if their motivation is not of sexual nature,there seems to be room for a lot or not so lofty motivations (which of course is conveniently kept hidden by the “femenists”). I think that you wrote something about this…

  2. Rollo, I have very recently purchased your (older version) book via kindle. Excellent book. Is there any way for those who previously purchased the book to update to the new properly formatted version?

  3. Your work has helped me more than I can say. I look forward reading all of your new writing. Please keep up the good work!

  4. ‘Nice guy’ is not something that was deliberately inflicted on us. It’s our default reproductive strategy, as automatic and unconscious as female hypergamy.

    Think about the behaviors we define as as ‘Alpha’. How would evolution, which does not think, come to make the correlation between those behaviors and superior genes?

    In the EEA, superior men don’t obey the rules, because they make the rules. They are dominant because others defer to them. they are the center of attention because everyone knows they are the leader. They don’t pursue females because females pursue them.

    “True” Alphas are not born, they are socially constructed. The male strategy is *conditional*, “If you’re not the leader, you’re a Beta.” Or more precisely, you’re a Beta unless people treat you like an Alpha.

  5. @Rollo: I’ve read at least 80% of your archives, including all of those. Consider the reproductive problem of an EEA male that is *not* Alpha; He has to get females to accept him as their second choice. Trying to be Alpha if he doesn’t have the ability to back it up is dangerous. Force is an option, but can lead to social ostracization. But most of the women who try to pair-bond with the Alpha are going to fail….

    Being “Nice”, non-threatening, pliable, these would be a strategy for being the “First Loser”. Maybe you have to expend resources raising an Alpha’s child, but you’ll get a few of your own for your trouble, which is better than killing yourself challenging the Alpha.

    Move those attributes into the modern setting, where competing with the recognized Alphas is virtually impossible, and you get a “Nicer than him” arms race.


    1. @Dave, exactly. The original intent (or false hope if you like) is an effort in poaching amenable females (ones an Alpha loses interest in) from an Alpha’s ‘harem’, but under modern circumstances where a woman believes she is the primary sexual selector that intent really becomes one of poaching amenable women from lesser Betas.

  6. @Rollo: It can’t have been too false of a hope, or it wouldn’t have been selected. It was an alternative to the ‘all or nothing’ of the Alpha strategy. If your chances of supplanting the Alpha are low, you have few options, and the selection pressure was immense (as you’ve pointed out elsewhere, 60% of all the males that have ever lived had no children).

    ‘First loser’ is better than ‘Total loser’.

    1. Not sure if you’ve read this one yet:

      According to strategic pluralism theory (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000), men have evolved to pursue reproductive strategies that are contingent on their value on the mating market. More attractive men accrue reproductive benefits from spending more time seeking multiple mating partners and relatively less time investing in offspring. In contrast, the reproductive effort of less attractive men, who do not have the same mating opportunities, is better allocated to investing heavily in their mates and offspring and spending relatively less time seeking additional mates.

      From a woman’s perspective, the ideal is to attract a partner who confers both long-term investment benefits and genetic benefits. Not all women, however, will be able to attract long-term investing mates who also display heritable fitness cues. Consequently, women face trade-offs in choosing mates because they may be forced to choose between males displaying fitness indicators or those who will assist in offspring care and be good long-term mates (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000). The most straightforward prediction that follows is that women seeking short-term mates, when the man’s only contribution to offspring is genetic, should prefer muscularity more than women seeking long-term mates.

  7. @Rollo: I see what you’re getting at, but I don’t think women are as self-aware in their pursuit of their strategy as is commonly assumed. They aren’t lying when they say they want a ‘nice guy’, or engaging in strategic disqualification at the behest of some Gynocentric/Feminist hive mind. They really believe that is what they *should* want, as surely as any AFC believes that taking them at their word and being a ‘nice guy’ will win over The One. They really are mystified and confounded by how their bodies won’t cooperate, that they can’t just will themselves into being happy with their mates.

    It’s not like we are any less controlled by our hormones or genetically-derived mating strategy. But at least our hormones are screaming the same thing at us all the time. We aren’t getting whipsawed by them on a monthly basis, they don’t scream one thing at us in our 20’s, a different thing in our 30’s, and then completely abandon us in our 40’s.

    It’s the difference between leaning into a strong wind, and trying to keep your feet on a boat in heavy seas.

  8. Rollo, I have seen your links. You make some interesting quotes. Some of them are related to my previous questions:

    You see, behavioristically, what women mischaracterize as ‘nice‘ is usually the male-methodology they misinterpreted when they couldn’t find a way to reject a guy in an efficient fashion. So yeah, Nice Guys, you’re the real Jerks and Alpha Jerks, you’re the truly nice guy’s because you “act the same with everyone.”

    Ladies, stop complaining about the sheep when you’re looking for a wolf.

    That’s it. Many of these “old fart” and millennial “femenists” are a complete fraud themselves. I am quite sure many if not of most of them are the ones in need of a lot of “self-awareness”. But…

    The feminine influence naturally loves the beta dystopia between guys they’d never want to fuck otherwise because it primes their need for indignation while simultaneously satisfying a woman’s need for attention and affirmation of her own imperative.

    They get into these discussions for fun. I do not doubt they might even get some multiple orgasms out of that. Now this is really “shocking” but it should not be, if we had a good understanding of female motivations in a societal level: if a “nice guy” suicides himself out of his obsession, this might well indicate her ultimate victory and sexual value to him. They just don’t want, of course, be taken with him or be physically abused. But what can be more pleasurable to the feminine than the male suffering, for them!

    The real extreme Jerk is as rare as the real extreme Nice Guy, so it’s necessary to look at things in order of degrees in this respect. Most men are betas. They opt for the nice, accommodating, supplicating side of this spectrum – for the majority, they’ve been socially conditioned to supress any masculine impulse in favor of accommodating and identifying with women’s imperatives (or at least what they’re led to understand as their imperatives) at the risk of intimate rejection. It’s exactly this mindset, this beta male default to the ‘nice’ end of the spectrum that 85% of guys subscribe to, that makes the guy who leans into the ‘jerk’ end of the spectrum attractive.

    I would just add that you have to take into consideration the nature of feminine desire, which is essentially passive:

    “Female desire, according to Meana, is activated when a woman feels overwhelmingly desired, not rationally considered. Female erotic literature, including all those shades of gray, is built on this fantasy. Sexual desire in this view does not work according to our expectations and social values. […] Meana argues that female sexuality is more self-centered than male’s. […] Being desired is the real female orgasm, Meena says…”

    Being desired is the real female orgasm, Meena says… by a powerful male, of course, even if the “jerk” outstanding on the crowd of average, nice males… these the “true jerks”, of course.

    Anyway I think it would be nice if you could expose further the effects of societal conditioning on males and women’s sexual preferences, and the hypocrisy of these “old fart” and young “femenists” alike amusing themselves with “nice guys” (the “true jerks”) dystopia. What can be more glorious to them than, for instance, than having a “nice guy” doing the whole job for them and publicly admitting that, yes, he’s always been the “true jerk”.

    But I was also referring to male guilty (much of it is induced, I think). I think that men have the right to making choices in good conscience, free of any female or feminist induced guilty. Also, pretending that men and women can be equals is a complete joke, because they are not, biologically and psychologically. That’s another great “femenist” fallacy and fraud. Thanks!

  9. @Chokmah: This is why I’ve settled on the term “Moral Equals”. We’re not equivalent, interchangeable. But we are equal at a moral level. My freedom should not be greater or lesser than their freedom, my happiness neither more nor less important than theirs. We are not the same, but we are deserving of being treated with the same dignity.

    At some point, we have to stop pulling each other back into the lobster pot. The Battle of the Sexes is not, can not, be winner takes all.

  10. @RickRolls: True equality between the genders could only theoretically be achieved by taking into account all the differences, as men and women are essentially different. Only then there might be the conditions for treating both with dignity.

  11. @Rollo:

    The feminine influence naturally loves the beta dystopia between guys they’d never want to fuck otherwise because it primes their need for indignation while simultaneously satisfying a woman’s need for attention and affirmation of her own imperative.

    I would just add that being a wannabe “alpha” for the sake of getting more pussy is ultimately a genuine kind of “beta” dystopia. What can be more affirmative of the “feminine imperative” than having legions of “betas” wanting to become an “alpha”, or being more “self-aware” and developing themselves further to finally having the chance to get into their pants (with no questions asked or demands, of course), as the “ultimate prize” for their life long efforts? Utterly subservient and submissive. Looks like, instead, as the ultimate “beta” or “zeta” or “omega”.

  12. @RickRolls
    I’m trying to understand what point you are attempting to make. Are you trying to suggest that “just being a nice guy” is a potentially fulfilling sexual strategy in modern society?

    Sure, I think we can all agree that the beta strategy has been sexually selected as an alternative to pursuing harems, as Rollo highlighted with his quote above.But let’s take a second to think about what it means to have your genes selected – it just means that you had a child who survived to reproduce him/herself. It says nothing about the quality of life after said reproduction has occurred.

    In many insects, and at least one spider that I’m aware of, the males are literally disposable after insemination. Male bees literally just died of their own accord after mating, and female Praying Mantis’s eat the male post coitus.

    In today’s sexual marketplace, a beta’s genes have been “selected for survival” when he wifes up, has a kid, and gets frivorced for cash and prizes.

    I agree that the battle of the sexes should level out to a more satisfying plane. I also agree that both sexes are deserving of being treated with dignity. The problem currently, however, is not with the male end of the spectrum. The vast majority of men in (American) society treats women with dignity and respect. The vast majority of women in (American) society, in turn, ignores and debases said segment of male society, and panders after the minority of men who do whatever the fuck they want. I believe that Rollo’s blog is an excellent start to evening the scales back.

    Excellent news! I’ll be looking forward to the new book.

  13. Treating women with dignity is not a winning sexual strategy. They don’t want to be treated equally. We have been over this a thousand times (sigh).

  14. @Rick

    “It’s not like we are any less controlled by our hormones or genetically-derived mating strategy. But at least our hormones are screaming the same thing at us all the time. We aren’t getting whipsawed by them on a monthly basis, they don’t scream one thing at us in our 20′s, a different thing in our 30′s, and then completely abandon us in our 40′s.

    It’s the difference between leaning into a strong wind, and trying to keep your feet on a boat in heavy seas.”

    Well-stated! +1

  15. Hi Rollo,
    After RMvol2 and the 4 part navigating womens maturation process, a book with the other posts would be a great idea.

    Like Blaise Pascal’s Penses. One of my most favorite books

  16. @Chokmah: “True Equality” might not be possible, in the sense that any given relationship is going to have various inequalities incorporated into it. But “Moral Equals” is a more abstract statement. We are intelligent, somewhat self-aware animals. As animals, we have drives that compromise our self-awareness and influence our intelligence, but unlike other animals we are *moral* creatures, who have the potential to transcend our natures.

    The more self-aware we are, the more we understand how our animal nature works, the more we have the capacity to take control and responsibility. AFC’s and hypergamous women are not morally inferior to those who have “taken the red pill”, they are simply less self-aware. It may be that the only way to foster self-awareness is to act on our self-awareness, to their potential disadvantage.

    Evolution in general, and hypergamy or Beta game, doesn’t care about the happiness of its vehicles, their self-fulfillment, or anything else. But I do care.

    @Pallaeon: Human dignity or happiness is not a consideration for evolution. Rape has been an integral part of evolution, because genes don’t care about consent. That doesn’t make rape an acceptable thing, excused from moral judgement just because it works. The Beta strategy doesn’t work from a viewpoint of making the evolutionary players happy in a modern environment, but a guy who gets divorced and spends the next 18 years paying for children he never gets to see still “won” from an evolutionary viewpoint.

    Just because something is a winning evolutionary strategy doesn’t mean it makes the winner happy. Women that spend their 20’s chasing Alpha on the club scene may or may not be happy, may or may not feel that their lives were wasted, but without self-awareness, they can’t take control or make a real choice.

    Taking the “Red Pill” means gaining a higher self-awareness, taking more control. That means you face a variety of moral questions. You can use your knowledge to get laid more, but is that the right thing to do? You can use it to have more fulfilling monogamous relationships, but are you just manipulating your partner into being happy in servitude?

    If someone is a “child playing with dynamite”, every explosion after the first one is still their moral fault.

  17. Dang, I need to get my demo reel (as the old term goes) in order. It would be fantastic to be the voice of the Rational Male audio book!

  18. @RickRolls:

    AFC’s and hypergamous women are not morally inferior to those who have “taken the red pill”, they are simply less self-aware. It may be that the only way to foster self-awareness is to act on our self-awareness, to their potential disadvantage. […] Just because something is a winning evolutionary strategy doesn’t mean it makes the winner happy. Women that spend their 20′s chasing Alpha on the club scene may or may not be happy, may or may not feel that their lives were wasted, but without self-awareness, they can’t take control or make a real choice. […] Taking the “Red Pill” means gaining a higher self-awareness, taking more control.

    OK. That’s the positive aspect of the “manosphere”, but it seems that women by far and large are quite unable to digest the “red pill” which is being handed back to them for their own self-awareness. A society which supports and promotes “self-awareness” only of men/boys, nice guys, players, etc. for the benefit of women while rejecting any kind of self-awareness being handed back to them by the “manosphere”, “angrysphere”, whatever, is hugely biased. That’s what I am trying to state here: women who support and supported feminism have no moral authority or legitimacy to complain about “nice guys”, “jerks”, “true jerks”, “manosphere”, “angryphere”, etc. because feminist shaming and biased policies are the root of the problem at a great part. Women should develop more self-awareness to first make better choices and take more control of their lives, instead of on a first moment shaming men for being jerks and then afterwards shaming the byproduct of such shaming for being the “true jerks”. All in all, it’s all about misandry.

    That said, I am OK with your line of reasoning.

  19. @Chokmah: It’s not like many males take the red pill entirely willingly. Maybe you’ve got to have your nose rubbed in it before you can reject a lifetime of evolution’s seditious whispering in your ear.

  20. Red pill or not, women are still women, and basing any relationship you have with them on appealing to their reason…

    It’s not about making them appeal to their reason… because they never will. It’s about making my own decisions irrespective of what they think or say.

    It may be that it comes as a result of introspection, or a new awareness brought to them from an outside influence (the manosphere), but the answer to the question of who do you do it for is both yourself and the outside motivator.

    “Alpha” game players: the clowns who provide women with entertainment in the SMP. It doesn’t matter how you view it, if you’re “manosphere” blog writer or whatever. If you’re taking into consideration what women think of you, and you adapt to it, they’re still on the command, and you’re just providing entertainment value. PUA are all a bunch o clowns.

    Moreover I do not read Roissy or Mystery because as far as I know they are big losers, much like hypergamic or promiscous women. Let’s face it: the manosphere is populated with total losers, much like feminism is populated with big losers (I am not referring to the betas).

    The only guys I consider are in the top of the “alpha” hierarchy is defined by the manosphere are the street pimps and some porn producers (which are pimps also). PUA game learners who try to mimic all those routines are clowns who provide entertainment value for women.

    In such a sense, let’s face it: most betas are way ahead of most PUA clown “alphas”, such like most “beta” women are way ahead of most feminists.

    Think for yourself, not for women, following their script.

    1. @Chokmah, I get what you’re saying. In fact, I’ve read sentiments identical to your own from the most hardcore of MGTOWs and I honestly can relate with them. Hell, even Roosh pretty much concurs with you here:

      I could almost get on board with the MGTOW ideology, except for the fact that I don’t believe that there is ever really any separation from men ‘entertaining’ women and self-motivated self-improvement.

      Guys don’t seek out the Red Pill and the manosphere because they’re looking to “be better men”, they’re looking for a solution to their lack of success with women, or they’re looking for a better understanding about the nature of women after having everything they’ve ever been conditioned to believe about women graphically contradicted for them.

      Self-improvement and a new self-respect and self-importance is (or should be) a very significant result of that Red Pill transformation for a guy, but why not be a better version of you (Alpha or otherwise) AND attract women?

  21. Yeah, the thing is, the Red Pill is a real thing, an awareness of this unspoken context completely changes how you interact with the opposite sex. I find “Conquest Tales” distasteful, and I suspect most are pure fiction. But I’ll share one by way of establishing my bona fides:

    I’m visiting my ex for the holidays, so I can spend time with my daughter, when I happen to run across the phrase “Red Pill” in an unrelated forum. I google it, I wind up reading through several sites, including this one. While I’m reading, my ex asks “Where are you sleeping tonight?” (I’d been in the guest room so far).

    Instantly it hit me: This is a “Shit Test”. If I say “In the guest room”, that’s where I’ll be. If I say anything to the effect of wanting to sleep with her, if she’ll be so gracious as to allow it, we’ll have un-inspired missionary and I’ll still wind up actually doing my sleeping in the guest room. The same pattern as the last 6 months or so of the marriage. This all goes through my mind in a fraction of a second, no more than a slightly long pause in the conversation.

    “8 inches up your ass,” comes out of my mouth, completely un-bidden. She locks eyes with me, and I can hear the hamster spinning up like a jet engine preparing for takeoff. I’m already committed, so I just look back at her with a slight grin and wait for her reaction. She breaks eye contact, smiles, says “You’d probably just love that.”

    What happened from there is none of your damned business. All I will say was that it was proof enough for me that the Red Pill insight was real. I probably could have used it to re-ignite the relationship, and I definitely have a much less combative relationship with her now than for the first year of the divorce (or the last 3 years of the marriage, for that matter). We were always committed to being cordial “for the children”, but now we’re actually friendly.

    I’ve tested it out on other women since then, and there’s no real need to go into details. I’m convinced, women actually *don’t* know what they really want, and this context gives me the framework for actually, finally, having productive relationships with them. So I’m wrestling with the ethics of the Red Pill, trying to figure out just how much the One Eyed Man should be allowed to get away with in the Country of the Blind.

    Just being *capable* of something doesn’t grant the moral right to do it. It may be that the only way that women in general can come to the Red Pill is in a mirror image of how most men do: By being used and exploited by RP men until they really *have* to ask themselves “What am I doing wrong?” But I don’t feel any desire to take that role.

  22. @RickRolls. Although a bluepill man’s own ignorance is not an ultimately legitimate excuse for his failure with women, you allude to the fact that women’s ignorance is THE reason for his redpill success. I like that your ethical uncertainty hasn’t immobilized you but motivated you.

  23. @Rollo: Seriously, I had never read Rosh and I think it’s a funny and interesting coincidence that many of worldviews converge. I read the article you linked and he’s indeed a good and funny writer:

    For the next girl I meet, I’m not going to ask her if she needs a man, because I know she doesn’t. Instead I will simply ask her if she wants a man, and if the answer leans yes, I will perform like the good clown I am so that she is entertained enough to have sex with me. Either she or I will eventually get bored and the relationship will end. Then I will simply repeat my performance on a someone new, because I’m a skilled clown, and that’s exactly what women today want.

    😀 ROFL

    …I don’t believe that there is ever really any separation from men ‘entertaining’ women and self-motivated self-improvement. Guys don’t seek out the Red Pill and the manosphere because they’re looking to “be better men”, they’re looking for a solution to their lack of success with women, or they’re looking for a better understanding about the nature of women after having everything they’ve ever been conditioned to believe about women graphically contradicted for them…. Self-improvement and a new self-respect and self-importance is (or should be) a very significant result of that Red Pill transformation for a guy, but why not be a better version of you (Alpha or otherwise) AND attract women?

    Rollo, I have thought a lot about your question and, seriously, I have a hard time answering it. And to be really honest I have little motivation at all to do anything to attract women. I only value and support traditional “beta” women. There are actually a few of these and it’s almost like a lottery nowadays to be lucky enough to pair up with one of them. I am not either attracted to lesbian-like, and entitled, modern feminist women. So why do any investment or effort at all to attract them?

    But indeed there is one aspect of the “manosphere” I value the most: it’s about the potential to free up the minds of men of so much misandrist induced shame and guilt they have unwittingly absorbed and are often unconscious of. In this regard I see great potential for the “manosphere”. Out of this genuine freedom a new and I would say “true man” can emerge… and very likely a happier one as well.

  24. I got the Kindle edition of RM and when I’m starting to feel a panic attack coming on, breathing into a paper bag and then just sitting down and reading through it is helping me immensely. Having things put into perspective when I’m just freaking out and feeling lost at sea is a godsend.

    As far as MGTOW goes, I’ve been tempted to go MGTOW, and I can understand why guys do, but deep down I’ve never been able to buy into it. Wanting to be with women is natural, and just admitting that you want to be a better man *both* for yourself and to increase your success with women has much, much less resistance in it than trying to deny your natural urges.

    What I really want is to lighten up and have fun. That is my ultimate goal with studying all of this material.

    Funnily enough, when I’ve coped with ONE-itis / blue pill panic attacks alone, and made a serious effort to keep those emotions private, and made an equally serious effort to primarily/exclusively show my confident, lighthearted, fun side to other people, women and men alike, things go much better for me socially. I end up getting much more of what I want, or at the very least, much, much closer to getting what I want.

    What really is helping me is realizing that I’m NOT repressing my emotions. The panic attacks and desperation and loneliness don’t need to be understood by other people all the time every time, not because bonding and empathy aren’t important, but because the reason I’m having the panic attacks, desperation and loneliness is because I’m not having fun with other people. I’m anxious because I’m spending all my time alone and isolated wallowing in depression and anxiety, when what I really want to do is get out and enjoy my life.

    I’m sure I’m going to have a lot of ups and downs. The transition to red pill reality is not easy. But I’m getting little glimpses of light. And from what I’ve gathered up to now, what the Red Pill is really about is all summed up in this song. Look at Jimi’s face in the picture. Whenever I start getting really upset and discouraged with all of this I remind myself that ultimately, that’s what this is all about.

    “Find yourself first, and then your tool
    Find yourself first, don’t you be no fool”

  25. I think that Roosh is a good, honest guy: If “femenists” get angry at him it’s just because he’s exposing open and wide, and in a very straightforward and honest way, very inconvenient truths about them:

    I also understand men who prefer to “go with the flow”. But what if we might break up the seemingly all powerful, omnipotent feminist system? What if there were innumerable exploitable “cracks” in the oppressive system built up by them? Every man is born a warrior.

  26. Rollo,
    I’ve been reading your blog for a while now (as well as other in the “manosphere”). I think I could call myself red pill, except I’m female…Is that possible? I agree with some basic things, like a man should lead sexually, and in other ways. I’m not sure what else I really agree with, because I’m religiously Christian, and a lot of the hooking up and ONS behavior doesn’t fly with me. What red pill advice do you have for women? Or what do you think is a red pill aware woman?
    By the way your blog has been very insightful, and it’s especially interesting to analyze my own relationship dynamics (i.e. past relationships). Please keep it up!

  27. Jugding by the preview the updated version looks great. Thanks a lot for that, Rollo! But when redownloading I’m still getting the old version. Does anybody have the same problem?

  28. “Here’s a cosmic secret revealed for you: Real Power is the degree to which a person has control over their own circumstances.

    Real Power is the degree to which we actually control the directions of our lives.”~Rollo Tomassi from his Kindle “The Rational Male” – For the few men that intend to spend life in a happy, traditional marriage, “The Rational Male” is the only book that can make it possible in this world at this time. If you didn’t grab the Kindle last October, it’s ok. It’s a question of knowledge or ignorance (willfully choosing to ignore reality). To put your head in the sand, you need to be on your knees with your a– in the air. It’s time to purchase “The Rational Male” for yourself and to treat it like it’s a pair of glasses from Warby Parker, a great silicon valley investment… you get elite value at an unusually low price. Like with Warby Parker, buy “The Rational Male” for yourself, then make sure another copy gets into the hands of someone else that needs it. Learning from “The Rational Male” opens your field of vision like a pair of prescribed lenses given to a person that’s only seen blurry since birth. Open your eyes, catch the vision, get your copy of “The Rational Male” by Rollo Tomassi.

  29. @femalereader: I hope Rollo gives you a looooong answer as I think it would be very interesting; but, in the meantime, you will find “On the Rock” under Rollo’s blogroll, which is written by a female author. It has discussed many of the red pill topics.

    In my opinion, a red pill woman is one who understands the mayhem she is capable of creating and actively works to limit that damage on a daily basis.

  30. So I’m a bit confused here… It makes sense that women’s SMV peaks at the age of ~23. Men of all ages would agree with this, but men are consistent… the qualities they desire don’t change much.

    Men’s SMV peaks at 38, but is this the consensus from women of all ages? Or does this only apply to women who are also around that age (~38)? Rollo’s articles also assert that women are more aesthetically-focused until their mid/late 20′s, but then begin the transition into wanting a provider.

    Does the 38 year old man attract mainly the women who want providers? Or does he attract women of all ages? I guess I am just trying to reconcile the SMV chart with the Women’s Phase chart.

    Thoughts anyone?

  31. Love the Warby Parker reference! That’s totally on-point.

    If I had paid double for my copy of Rational Male 1, it would still be a bargain. When I think of all the $ I wasted on my last GF – from theater tickets and expensive dinners and V-Day garbage to my time, skills and best intentions – in addition to 2 years of expensive therapy (my review – don’t do it), I would have been better served by a look at this site a year before I did.

    Getting played and losing hard can make a man bitter, but the best investment of his time afterward is in his own improvement.And being armed with the behavior science behind women’s motivations – the shit tests, shaming and rampant hypergamy – has made me finally understand how much the deck is stacked against a well-meaning, lifelong fem-conditioned beta shlub who doesn’t know the score.

    Like the saying goes, “Don’t wish it was easier, but wish you were better.” Forget the PUA stuff; while scoring women is a great past time, it’s ultimately hollow because you’re never fully investing in yourself. If you internalize the truths and data on this website, and spend the time becoming the man you were always intended to be, you’ll find that your own confidence and power (and male actualization) will do the work for you.

    Best $10 I ever spent, full stop.

  32. @deepdish re:SMV. The phase chart is intended, I believe, to portray the sociosexual event sequence in a typical woman’s SMP trajectory. Rollo’s SMV curves were a courageous stab at putting down numbers reflecting typical observed behaviors. The ages of the men that women are attracted to in different phases are not as important as most other attributes of the men: looks, health, money, steadiness, etc.

  33. @deepdishpizza, I’m going to presume you’ve read the full 4 part post, as well as the SMV series. If not go back and read the links I’ll post at the bottom.

    The reason men tend to ‘peak’ around 38 is because this is, or should be, the phase in which he has the most potential for making himself into the best man he can be. It is generally the phase in which a man has “the full package” or is expected to:

    Of course a man may be able to be a better “package” earlier (or later) in his life due to talent, (contextual) celebrity, affluence or simple hard work and determination, but these are the outliers – these are the men women fixate upon when they latch onto the Apex Fallacy.

    The general truth is that women largely consider men older than themselves to be more attractive for their long term personal investment than men younger than themselves. Some of my critics like to point out exactly this same fact – women want a guy somewhere between 5 to 7 years older than themselves, why do you suppose that is?

    Because an older man represents success, accomplishment and security in the now, not in an undetermined future. I’d like to think that this sexual investment immediacy may be the result of contemporary women’s solipsism and a desire to optimize hypergamy (which certainly play a part), but it’s also due to evolved, psychological schemas which predispose women to investing themselves in a proven commodity, or a commodity that has certain potential.

    It’s fascinating to me to listen to women completely agree with the notion of an inborn predisposition to be attracted to taller men, yet become hostile at the idea that women provenly have a psychological predilection to desire men older and more accomplished than themselves.

  34. @Kate I think that’s a really great definition and thanks for the suggestion to on the rock. I also found a “red pill women” subreddit so will prob find good info there. it’s interesting, as a woman, for me to consider that I may be capable of so much destruction though I may not have no intention to do so. I hope Rollo answers me as well 🙂
    @jf12 I appreciate being linked to a Christian woman’s blog, it should surely be easy to relate to her. She seems like a good role model for women.

  35. Hi Rollo, as I am sure you are aware Sam Botta has an excellent voice and has already done about an hour’s worth of your book. Link:

    Are you possibly looking into having him complete the audio for an audiobook?

  36. Hey Rollo not to beat the dead horse but any updates on the audiobook? I’m really looking forward to it.

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: