What a lot of feminists hate about red pill theory is that it simply does a better job of predicting social behavior than feminism ever has. I’d like to think that red pill awareness has fundamentally altered (or enlightened if you’d like) intergender interpretations and understanding in a relatively short time, but that would be a mistake.
There’s a distinct group of self-evincing red pill guys who like to remind us in various comment threads that it hasn’t always been thus. Their story is our forbearers “knew better” with regard to how men and women ought to interact with one another, and essentially spelled this out for future generations in the religious and philosophical texts of antiquity.
While I can’t deny the merit of this, I also know that the men of those bygone eras didn’t have anything approaching the mass of information and the connectivity men possess today. It’s easy to get caught up in the romanticism of the idea that back in some Golden Age of manhood, men knew about the dangers of allowing women’s hypergamous natures to run amok. I’m sure those men knew of the consequences of allowing women to control their fates. I’m sure there were Beta men and cuckolded men as well, but even the most wise Alpha among them could never, for instance, understand the impact that a unilaterally feminine-controlled form of birth control would effect upon a globalized society.
The sages of manhood-past may still have many relevant lessons for the men of today, but they simply lack the compounded experiences and understanding men possess now. Though they undoubtedly were keen observers of human behavior, the greatest thinkers of antiquity simply didn’t have an inkling as to the evolved, biological motivators of the sexual strategies our psyches developed in our hunter-gatherer human past.
What frustrates the advocates of this bygone manhood wisdom is that for all of our collective experience and knowledge, for the past sixty or so years, men struggle to come to terms with what that masculinity should mean to them. For all of the accumulated male experience and relation of it that’s led to red pill awareness, men still grapple with ‘what being a man means to them’.
Undoing of a Man
When I do consults with men of all ages I have to begin from a presumption that what these men’s concept of masculinity is usually is the result of a deliberate attempt by the Feminine Imperative to confuse men about what being a man should be for him.
Even the men who tell me they were raised by the most dominant, positively masculine fathers still suffer the internalized effects from this feminized effort to cast doubt on men’s masculinity.
Recently NPR began a series of articles attempting to suss out what it means to be a man in the 21st century. I do listen to NPR, and while I know bias will always be an inevitable part of news stories, I couldn’t help but assess what a morass attempting to define masculinity has become for contemporary men. Each story, each attempt to redefine masculinity, relied on the same tired tropes the Feminine Imperative has been using for men since the start of the sexual revolution.
Weakness, vulnerability, is sold as strength. Submissiveness and compromise to the feminine is sold as “support” and deserving of praise and a reciprocal appreciation (which never manifests in women). Beta is Alpha and Alpha is insecurity, bluster and compensation.
Those are the main premises, and, to a large degree, most red pill aware men realize that behavior is the only true determinant of motivation, and reject the feminized, egalitarian equalist messaging. However, what still surprises me is that this same, deliberate effort to cast doubt on what masculinity should be for a man hasn’t changed its message or methods of conditioning men to accept this masculine confusion for almost 40 years now.
Through the late 80’s and up to now, the idea of anything positively masculine is either ridiculed, cast as misogynistic, or implies a man might be gay if he’s too celebratory of his maleness. Since the start of the sexual revolution, any definition of what masculinity truly should mean has been subject to the approval of the Feminine Imperative.
In the absence of a clear definition of what masculinity is for men, the Feminine Imperative is free to create as grotesque a straw man of ugly masculinity, or as beatific a feminized model of masculinity as it needs to serve its purpose. With the aid of the Male Catch 22, blurring and distorting masculinity, raising and conditioning men to accept ambiguity and doubt about the security of a ‘manhood’ they’re encouraged not to define for themselves, are all the methodologies employed to ensure a feminine-primary social order.
Equalism vs. Complementarity
Agreeableness and humility in men has been associated with a negative predictor of sex partners.
The problem inherent in applying reciprocal solutions to gender relations is the belief that those relations are in any way improved by an equilibrium between both sexes interests.
The Cardinal Rule of sexual strategies:
For one gender’s sexual strategy to succeed the other gender must compromise or abandon their own.
The mistake is applying a humanistic, egalitarian equalist ideal to human sexual strategies that evolved over millennia to be complementary to each other, not an equitable exchange of resources to be negotiated over. This is one reason genuine desire cannot be negotiated – this fundamental is rooted in our most primal, complemetary understanding of sex.
The point at which egalitarian equalism (the religion of feminism) fundamentally fails is presuming that intergender relations should ideally exist in a goal-state of egalitarian equalism and / or a reciprocally equal state of mutually supportive interests.
Hypergamy doesn’t care about equalism and reciprocity.
The sexes evolved to be complementary to each other for the betterment of the species. Why do you think women form the most secure emotional attachments to men 1-2 SMV steps above themselves? Why is masculine dominance such an attractive male aspect for even the most feminist of women who’d otherwise plead for equality among the sexes?
I have a bit of a weird relationship with “traditional masculinity”. I’ve looked critically at it enough to know how much damage it does as a paradigm. I’ve seen the harm it can do to both men and women on an individual level. I’ve been subject to the violence it encourages. But despite all that, holy shit does it ever turn me on.
[…]
There’s just something about assertiveness (let’s be real, sometimes flat out arrogance) that does it for me. No matter how much I can be attracted to someone emotionally and intellectually, my swoons only happen when confronted by a powerful, competent man.
This has lead to some issues in my personal life. Who knew being attracted almost exclusively to men that inherently make bad partners wouldn’t work out well for me?
What we’re observing here is a rudimentary conflict between an internalized humanist idealism (the way equalism teaches thing’s should be) versus evolved, impulsive realism (the way things are).
The doctrine of equalism presumes a socialized expectation of being turned-on or attracted to men exemplifying a ‘gender equitable’, equalist-correct, mindset and the evolved, visceral arousal / attraction to a man exhibiting the dominant characteristic traits of masculine complementarity.
Another example of this conflict can be found in my essay on Choreplay.
In 2008 the transactional nature of sex-for-equitable-services was an over blown meme. The message then was that men needed to do more feminine-typical chores around the house, and the equitable exchange would be his wife reciprocating with more frequent and more intense sex as a result of his “equitable” participation in that negotiation.
Fast forward to 2013 and now (by the same author mind you):
Hey, fellas, put down those vacuum cleaners and pull out the lawn mowers.
Married men may think helping around the house may up their hotness quotient in the bedroom, but what really matters is the type of chore. Heterosexual married men who spend their time doing yard work, paying bills and changing the oil have more sex than husbands who spend their time cooking, cleaning and shopping, according to a new study on the subject of housework and sex.
“Households with a more traditional gender division of labor report higher sexual frequency than households with less traditional gender divisions of labor,”…
So what you see illustrated here, in just the space of 5 years, is the frustration and conflict between an equalist idealized model vs. the evolved complementary model of gender relations. It’s not about the equitability of like for like exchanges or like for like reward/benefit, but rather the way that equitability is expressed and how it grates against instinctually human expectations of behavior.
Sex differences, biologically and psychologically, didn’t evolve for hundreds of thousands of years to be co-equal partnerships based on humanistic (or moralistic) idealism. They evolved into a complementary form of support where the aspects of one sex’s strengths compensated for the other’s weaknesses and vice versa.
For every behavioral manifestation of one sex’s sexual strategy (hypergamy in females), the other sex evolves psychological, sociological and behavioral contingencies to counter it (mate guarding in males). The ideal state of gender parity isn’t a negotiation of acceptable terms for some Pollyanna ideal of gender equilibrium, it’s a state of complementarity between the sexes that accepts our evolved differences – and by each individual gender’s conditions, sometimes that’s going to mean accepting unequal circumstances.
Feminists (and anti-feminist women), humanists, moral absolutists, and even red pill men still obliviously clinging to the vestiges of their egalitarian blue pill conditioning, will all end up having their ideologies challenged, frustrated and confounded by the root presumption that egalitarian equalism can ever, or should ever, trump an innate and evolved operative state of gender complementarity.
And thus we come full circle, back to a new model of masculinity that is found upon the evolved complementary order and aided by red pill awareness. I have no doubt that it will be an arduous process of acceptance for blue pill, masculine-confused men vainly attempting to define their own masculinity under the deliberately ambiguous contexts laid out for them by the Feminine Imperative, but I do (hopefully) believe that red pill awareness is already making a positive impact on countering a presumption of equalism that only truly serves feminine primacy.
It’ll take time, but with every aware man utilizing red pill awareness to realign his masculine identity and benefit from it, other men will begin to come to the same awareness or else fall off into their own ambiguity.
Evenin’ Rollo I’ve been following your blog for over two years now (my brother sent me your link whilst I was over in the sandpit). The writings here, both from you and the other commentators, have had a massive impact on not just the way I perceive the “fairer” sex, but also how I perceive myself – and I thank you all for that. I do have a bone to pick with this article though. You state that you see the the behaviors between the sexes coming full circle and returning to a complementary as opposed to an egalitarian model.… Read more »
Another thought provoking article Rollo. Might respond to it later with a follow-up post. @ Kaptain I don’t think a male pill will radically change things. I know some men argue otherwise, but given how many women are already on the pill, and the availability of condoms, it won’t have the huge impact that the first wave of contraceptives had. It will shift some power over to men, but only some. The major effects of contraception weren’t to shift power to women, but to greatly open up the availability of “sexual liberation” to the masses. Of course, some “benefited” more… Read more »
Agreeableness and humility is only viable and useful in a man when his SMV and/or overall value (money, power, status) is extremely high and even then, should be used sparingly.
This, I believe is the essence of old time chivalry.
“Why do you think women form the most secure emotional attachments to men 1-2 SMV steps above themselves?” C’mon Rollo. I notice you drop these little crumbs of red pill in your posts but why don’t you just come out and say the real truth? Game is negotiated desire. You and I both know this. A man’s inherent SMV is based off his genetic stock and everything else is superfluous. There’s a reason why Alpha Fucks (i.e. good genes) illicits a visceral response in women for quick sex and Beta Bucks drags (negotiated) sex on. Game is no different than… Read more »
I think the best idea I’ve seen regarding masculinity had the three aspects, warrior, mage, and lover. Being a warrior is the ability to endure in order to reach a specific goal. Being a mage has to do with having the knowledge to understand and deal with the world, and being a lover has to do with creativity, connectedness of the world. Using these three criteria, you can easily measure what a man is missing to be complete. and further you can imagine the dysfunction caused by missing one or the other artribute. A viscious dictator maybe extremely disciplines and… Read more »
Rollo, the pope predicted all that has happened when he first wrote against birth control. Some men knew what would happen, and they were ignored.
Kaptain, if you want to see a change, wait until an incurable sexual infection mutates–or is designed. That will shake it up. Until then, not much will change the behaviors other than men withdrawing from commitment.
The Shadowed Knight
Hello, I have trouble understanding how these two claims could possibly not contradict each other: “For one gender’s sexual strategy to succeed the other gender must compromise or abandon their own.” “[…] human sexual strategies that evolved over millennia to be complementary to each other […]” The first sentence claims sexual strategy to be antagonistic (win-lose), whereas the second one claims it to be complementary (win-win). The attribute “complementary” carries positive connotations*, similar to “synergistic”, so in a truly complementary relationship, no side would have to compromise. * http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/complementary [ The ideal state of gender parity isn’t a negotiation of… Read more »
I’ve read an article yesterday about how the the cost of sex has declined during the last decades because it is so readily available, at least for some men. The article then concluded that men were delaying commitment due to the missing incentives. So refusing to commitment seems seems to be an effect of the unleashed hypergamy and women’s sexual options but to me it doesn’t indicate that it’s going to be the solution. I rather believe as soon as the promiscuity of women will end again due to economic circumstances perhaps, the rate of commitment willing men will rise… Read more »
“Feminists (and anti-feminist women), humanists, moral absolutists, and even red pill men still obliviously clinging to the vestiges of their egalitarian blue pill conditioning, will all end up having their ideologies challenged, frustrated and confounded by the root presumption that egalitarian equalism can ever, or should ever, trump an innate and evolved operative state of gender complementarity.” Concepts of justice, freedom, morals, GOODNESS…are not formed due to “blue pill conditioning”. These are the expressions of our innermost soul. Great men always knew it. The sacrified their very lives for it. MAN determines what he wants and how he has to… Read more »
@Darkpill I agree that Game (if it exists) is seriously overrated in its powers of persuasion. Being tall dark and handsome one does not need to try too hard whereas those born short, prone to putting on weight and not symmetrical of feature have an uphill battle, which to some extent can be overcome by wit and of course money. Equally, a winning hand can be wrecked by the wrong approach – I knew one guy with movie-star looks who women drooled over but who never scored because, psychologically, he was Mister Angry. That is not to say however that… Read more »
freudentrane “For one gender’s sexual strategy to succeed the other gender must compromise or abandon their own.” There are winners and there are loosers in the sexual marketplace. In every time. Please note that we are talking about sex, so the biggest “win” is the number of hot, young vaginas on your cock. This is all that matters. Winners in this are clearly atrractive men, particulary attractive sociopaths and psychopaths. Man with soul is not able to spin plates for years, he has compassion. He does not want to harm others/women more than is sometimes necessary. It is veyr painfull… Read more »
I also see this dichotomy, generally, in “egalitarian equalism” manifesting as Marxism, while “evolved complementary order” shows up as Austrian School economics — each are the same mindset applied respectively to reproduction and survival. We really are on the cusp of some civilization-changing understandings here, by which I mean understood not by a few elite, but rather most everyone.
@Kaptain, @donalgraeme – we might find that the only change is a lessening of unplanned pregnancies and whoopsies entrapping a man.
It would be beneficial for paternity testing to become the norm also, so that a man is not forced to support children that are not his. A further erosion of the female sexual strategy.
This is a nice piece, but you do not come close to proving that the modern man has some sort of evolved consciousness–only that his circumstances are different. Not only that, you rely on what men today understand *subjectively* about their situation. An old Enlightenment trope if there ever was one. Nope, you could have said what you said without the overlay of evolutionary biology and the rest. As a matter of fact, you assert that we are both improved *and* primitive. Or, we are improved b/c we know how primitive we are. I like the Red Pill stuff as… Read more »
“men struggle to come to terms with what that masculinity should mean to them.”
Yes, society is not set up to help make “ought” into “is” for men.
@Darkpill, you may have noticed that nobody actually cares about a “leader” who only ever advises to give up.
@Freudenträne, I think you misunderstand “succeed”. A complemtarity resulting from a pseudoequilibrium of competition has *neither* side succeeding. Imagine two sumo wrestlers grappling and grunting and sweating, but currently immobile: *neither* is succeeding.
The thing is, in my mind equalism leads people to assume other people are intelligent rational actors, which is not always a bad thing. It allows for the building of markets and societies where free people can trust each other to work together spontaneously toward a larger goals like indoor plumbing, automation, the internet. Unfortunately it turns out that not everyone is a rational actor, perhaps increasingly so given our more multicultural reality In this way equalism sows the seeds of it’s own destruction, I have the feeling that the same forces that allow people to have social trust enough… Read more »
Rollo, the context in which you place the gender models is the relationship between lovers. Of all the people of the opposite sex you’ll have some relationship with, most won’t be your lovers, but co-workers, neighbours, politicians, even dwellers of the same city. The lack of equalism in the scale of society will just mean some people will be treated better than the other. And guess which gender will that be. I don’t care a single bit if some female stranger that I pass by on the street considers me a man, what I care is if she will receive… Read more »
“C’mon Rollo. I notice you drop these little crumbs of red pill in your posts but why don’t you just come out and say the real truth?Game is negotiated desire.You and I both know this. A man’s inherent SMV is based off his genetic stock and everything else is superfluous. There’s a reason why Alpha Fucks (i.e. good genes) illicits a visceral response in women for quick sex and Beta Bucks drags (negotiated) sex on. Game is no different than the Beta Bucks side of this. ”
I agree. I’m coming around to the idea – Looks are everything.
Looks are a tiny subset of behavior, both genetically and external effort.
Having been a “Born Again” red pill guy I think I have a different view on this than most. I had a damn good marriage for 24 years that imploded over the space of six months, making me revisit at age 56 what I’d already figured out at 32, but figured I must have been wrong after I met “The One” and buried what I knew. I’ve come to the conclusion that women are creatures of the moment and have the ability to convince themselves that just about anyone is attractive if it suits her immediate needs. You could be… Read more »
If I hit the gym religiously for a solid year, eat clean, put on 10 lbs. of muscle and drop my body fat down to 7% with the result being women finding me sexually irresistible, have I negotiated for their desire or have I simply aligned myself with a context under which their genuine desire is more likely to occur?
Maybe a few of the guys here who answer to
hyenasfemale bosses on a daily basis would care to opine about this?I’d say looks get you in the door but you see good looking betas all the time. You need to have a solid attitude and awareness about women that is game. If you don’t then you are subject to a women wishing you would just get it. Without having her to tell you. It’s easy to say looks is everything just as it is to say game is everything. To have both down is more likely to have women fighting to be your top girl and to be exclusive with you. While hypergamy is always available as long as women… Read more »
Re: the boss of me. I know this isn’t exactly what you are talking about, but I do have a female boss, younger than my daughter, and she adores me, or acts like it. She’s married with kids and an excellent manager in a motherly way. The good female bosses I’ve had were all that way, and I’ve never had a power struggle from a female boss, i.e. as if they thought I was after their job, the way that many male bosses do to me. And I get along well with many women colleagues outside of any chain of… Read more »
Looks, again 🙂 I have yet to meet a good looking dude who is not pursued by women. Of course, there are good looking men that have not much success with women. But it is only due to theese fellas not knowing how to take woman and fuck her when she is willing to do this with you. I think that this is the case when game can really do a miracle and transform a guy from beta to mesmerizing cassanova. Employ good looking dude with game..and he can score 200-300 women like Janka, if he put a lot of… Read more »
RM, I think I have come to agree with you: there was no “golden age” where men knew the score and were experts at picking marriageable women, etc. Why do you think jokes about marriage have been a staple since Shakespeare? No, I have come to the conclusion that marriage was always a raw deal for most men, basically forever. But I will tell you was *has* changed. In the past there used to be many benefits conferred by society onto men in recognition of their extraordinary sacrifice: respect, laws friendly to husbands and fathers, male-only venues, etc. What has… Read more »
Rollo,
What do you think of the study referenced here:
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2014/08/15/relationshipstrategies/why-egalitarian-marriages-are-more-sexual/
While I agree with the overall point about the Left’s view of masculinity being wrong, there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that marriages where men do some beta chores are healthier marriages with more sex. Athol Kay talks about this all the time. He doesn’t preach gender equalism, but he also doesn’t preach alpha only behaviors and chore divisions. IOW, its more complicated than that.
While totally agreeing with you about the problems that equalism poses, I’m not sure about the reasons for the current situation. I think there is another explanation next to the contraception that might account for the rise of equalism and feminized men: the way a society organizes its productive forces. We can observe in western societies since decades a rise of service jobs and a decline of industrial/manufacturing jobs. Whereas manufacturing jobs were associated with classical male virtues like toughness and resilience, the service jobs ask for other virtues like communication skills and flexibility. So these kind of new jobs… Read more »
No one’s saying the red pill is the single shining master key to poosy paradise.
It’s more like a big ol ring of jailer’s keys, thrown through the bars to the inmate.
@s.r., What Giggles conveniently ignores (I know because she scrubbed the pre-rebranded HUS 1.0 posts) are the studies I set forth in Choreplay: http://therationalmale.com/2013/01/30/choreplay/ Diane Mapes, 2008: http://www.today.com/id/23015839/?GT1=10856#.U_TdW7xdXhF Versus Diane Mapes, 2013: http://www.today.com/health/husbands-who-do-her-chores-have-less-sex-study-finds-1B8172520?franchiseSlug=todayhealthmain If you compare these two articles, separated by only 5 years, you begin to understand the ‘realization’ women come to with regard to what really arouses them – conventionally male complementary gender roles. Five years younger, Mapes’ message is the same tired tropes Aunt Sue is presently using to entertain her HuffPo owned readership; “do more dishes guys and you’ll get laid more often and with more… Read more »
I didn’t mention this earlier but English is not my first language so bear with me. @jf12 Do you disagree that looks are the primary factor that women consider when finding a mate? If so, why? @Rollo “If I hit the gym religiously for a solid year, eat clean, put on 10 lbs. of muscle and drop my body fat down to 7% with the result being women finding me sexually irresistible, have I negotiated for their desire or have I simply aligned myself with a context under which their genuine desire is more likely to occur?” You’re making the… Read more »
@DarkPill, yes I disagree. The primary, and essentially ONLY thing that matters is how she feels. To the extent that looks is all one man has going for him, he had better hope his looks make a strange woman feel like having sex. To the extent that others of us can easily, *easily* I say, make a strange woman feel like having sex by sexualized behaviors, we can make a strange woman feel like having sex. Q.E.D. ipso facto. It matters not to me that you want to be lazy.
” . . .even the most wise Alpha among them could never, for instance, understand the impact that a unilaterally feminine-controlled form of birth control would effect upon a globalized society.” Are you sure you are up on the history of birth control, or, for that matter, post birth control? I’d also note in the context of the ancients “global” meant as widely as it was possbile for them to travel in their lifetimes, not literally the globe. The Mediterranean Basin, for instance. Mind you that I am not denigrating what has been learned in more recent times, nor holding… Read more »
Sorokin (1964) “there is a permanent recruitment of beautiful women into the upper social stratum”
@jf12:
A man can best assess a woman’s looks when she is asleep, but . . .
a woman can best assess a man’s looks when he is chopping wood.
@kfg, a useful maxim. For the life of me, I don’t see why a man would want to segue from the empirical observation that better looking men have an easier time with women, to the nonempirical and totally feewing-based whining “My looks are all that matter to you sexist men,I mean women, and I’m running out of moisturizer. Waah!” I mean, besides his being nuts, Elliot Rodger’s entire problem with women was his emphasis on his looks: HE wanted to look good so women would approach HIM. It is such a girly way of looking at the world I’m surprised… Read more »
Beautiful. Aristophanes. Assemblywomen.
Achievement is correlated with mesomorphic (i.e. Muscularity) in boys (Cortes and Gatti, 1966)
Looks (to be clear looks = muscularity) predict success.
Mr.C
August 20th, 2014 at 3:10 am
Old time chivalry only works if you are her protector. Too much time spent washing dishes will ruin a relationship.
Rollo, I’m glad you wrote this article. I know we’ve been going around on this topic. I don’t know whether I’m not communicating my position clearly, or you disagree based on something I’m not understanding yet. You state… Sex differences, biologically and psychologically, didn’t evolve for hundreds of thousands of years to be co-equal partnerships based on humanistic (or moralistic) idealism. They evolved into a complementary form of support where the aspects of one sex’s strengths compensated for the other’s weaknesses and vice versa. While I agree that men and women are not identical and indistinguishable (as the feminist sense… Read more »
@DrJ, it is not snarky of me to point out that such a scenario can ONLY be win-win if women want the same thing as men. The current social climate is changing towards *requiring* men to want the same thing as women “Does this purse match my shoes?”, away from letting men want what they want. Which is clearly a recognition of the adversarial nature of the *differences* between the sexes’ wants.
” They evolved into a complementary form of support where the aspects of one sex’s strengths compensated for the other’s weaknesses and vice versa.” I do not believe that they evolved into any such thing. There is a reason we frolicked around on the savannah whithout much going on for tens if not hundreds of millenia until we stumbled unto a system that worked, male and female instincts are antagonistic by nature. Problem is, with that state of nature one can run a troop of baboons and not anything more advanced. Patriarchy worked, it demanded that both set of instincts… Read more »
Rollo is correct: “If I hit the gym religiously for a solid year, eat clean, put on 10 lbs. of muscle and drop my body fat down to 7% with the result being women finding me sexually irresistible, have I negotiated for their desire or have I simply aligned myself with a context under which their genuine desire is more likely to occur?” I highly recommend intense weight lifting, some aerobics and proper nutrition for any of you who have not experienced these (I do not recommend the use of steroids). The results over time will dispel difficulties you may… Read more »
Why would mowing the lawn, doing taxes, etc. be more attractive than cooking and the like? Is there some masculine, evolutionary analogue to mowing the lawn or is it just because society deems it a masculine task? Or rather that a man who mows the lawn instead of cleaning probably has a masculine vibe in general, and which chores he chooses to do are another outcome of that vibe?
@Chris, re: “which chores he chooses to do”
I think it’s all a lot lot simpler. If she chooses to exert herself on his behalf, then she will like him better. Not vice versa.
Since the only reason some work is divided into women’s work and men’s work is because the women’s work is easier, if he takes away from his busy lawnmowing schedule to “help” out with the dishes, it simply means she serves him less.
re: women and libido and looks.
When a woman really gets in the mood, then a guy could look cross-eyed at her and she would think it sexy.
@jf12
That makes sense, thanks.
I think we’re missing the point of my “hit the gym” comment. The idea is this, Game (applying red pill awareness) is also aligning oneself within a context under which genuine desire is more likely to occur.
@Chris, I did provide a link:
http://www.today.com/health/husbands-who-do-her-chores-have-less-sex-study-finds-1B8172520?franchiseSlug=todayhealthmain
@Chris: “Why would mowing the lawn, doing taxes, etc. be more attractive than cooking and the like?”
Its probably dependent on sweat, the smell of which creates attraction in women.
Rollo, I don’t quite understand what you are saying that the DeadBedrooms forum represents. Good thinking? Bad thinking? Please explain.
A couple days ago my 15 year old daughter was riding in my truck with me and local pop music was playing on the radio. A very “beta-in-heat” song came on (later I looked it up so I could explain it here) called “All of Me” by “John Legend” (pathetically stupid and not very original stage name). My daughter asked me to change the channel and said the hated the song. Teasing her, I turned up the volume and asked her, “You hate this?” Her response was a frustrated, “Daddy!!” as she reached for the radio controls and changed the… Read more »
“And thus we come full circle, back to a new model of masculinity that is found upon the evolved complementary order and aided by red pill awareness.” [Rollo] When the complementary new model of femininity comes full circle, it may well turn out to have been a circle in a spiral. For the past fifty years, women have been incredibly diligent and energetic in demonstrating that everything limiting or negative that had been said about them for the past 5,000 years was absolutely true. Over the past millennia, understanding of the true nature of women was sporadic and weak, because… Read more »
@George, re: All of Me.
I literally have difficulty getting up to Legend’s lowest notes in my falsetto. His high notes are two or more octaves higher (he skips into his falsetto).
All o the sappiest love songs, especially the ones sung by women, were written by men, who meant every word.
@ sam, Sisyphean Excellent comments! . . @ DarkPill “Game is negotiated desire. You and I both know this. A man’s inherent SMV is based off his genetic stock and everything else is superfluous.” . This is not entirely true. Physical attractiveness is the most immediate factor, but it is not the only factor. Fundamental strength and power is also a significant factor, but it must be real in order to be effective, which is why “Game is negotiated desire” can be true. As I said (on an earlier thread): “If, however, you are trying to use Game, after the… Read more »
[…] Article original ici. […]
As my inner and external game improves, I’m starting to be able to predict female reactions and behavior with uncanny accuracy. The hardest part is ridding myself of “projection”—deluding myself by thinking a girl will react a certain way because that’s what I would do. But what posts like this help to do is offer a framework for better understanding the male/female dynamic. The whole abundance mentality and Plate Spinning Theory has helped. One area that interferes with this is that we are surrounded by movies, books and even commercials that echo the female imperative. I found this commercial on… Read more »
“f I hit the gym religiously for a solid year, eat clean, put on 10 lbs. of muscle and drop my body fat down to 7% with the result being women finding me sexually irresistible, have I negotiated for their desire or have I simply aligned myself with a context under which their genuine desire is more likely to occur?” Rollo, I think even though one cannot see it from the outside what matters most is your motive. No you haven’t negotiated to answer your rhetorical question, but if you’re doing it solely to please women than you are nothing… Read more »
Ah, now we’re getting somewhere.
Crisis of Motive:
http://therationalmale.com/2013/07/18/crisis-of-motive/
Been there, blogged that.
re: boogeymen of negotiating of desire, authenticity of motive, genuwine feewings, etc.
Bluntly, none of it matters in terms of results.To try to think otherwise is to try to think like a girl.
In other words, you do not get to stamp your pretty little foot and whine “But you’re violating like a rule or something any time you do any thing for the purpose of evoking desire in a woman. You’re not supposed to do that, even if it works! You shouldn’t toy with a woman’s desires in that way!!”
You tell me where all this is coming from. I’ll tell you, but you tell me too.
“My looks mean everything. That’s why I spend a half hour every morning looking in the mirror getting my face ready to show the world.”
“Women have great pickers for the best genes. The handsomest boys have the bestest, most wonderful genes. They are soooo good looking, giggle!”
“It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature. Just be yourself!”
Just sayin your attitude and your values do matter as they are more important to me than getting girls. Sure you can pretend but for me working on myself is the ultimate reason I’m here 🙂
All this purity-of-motive stuff is giving me a headache. Especially when the purest of motives that come up in these discussions are the F.I. itself. Impulsive realism vs. internalized idealism indeed.
The guys who say Game is desire-haggling are probably not into aspects of self-improvement or social promotion. Rather, they see it as a means to an obvious, singular end. Let’s just say I’ve seen Game work in boardrooms more often than in bars. Men are as susceptible to Game as women are and if they recognize it, sometimes even moreso.
@Rollo re: motive tar pits.
It is easy to get stuck in that morass. However, after circling one of the (many) tar pits there, it seemed obvious to me that they all resulted from the visceral repulsion of manipulating a woman. Obviously a dark triad person would not get stuck there.
Getting tired of all those “Looks Matter” posts. I was a fairly good looking nice guy and I didn’t get shit. Only when I started approaching, playing the numbers game, spinning plates and adopting other game principles did I start to see results. Saying looks are all that matter, or what it all comes down to, just isn’t true. Secondly, even IF looks are the most important deciding factor, you owe it to yourself as a man to still go out and approach. Even if you’re Asian or small or have an acné face. So what if takes you 100… Read more »
Have you read George Gilder, ‘Men and Marriage’? It opened my eyes and started my journey towards gender realism.
WWADTD?
What would a dark triad do? C’mon B/el, I know you want to spat my knuckles with a ruler for that, but it’s simply not true that my being able to imagine what a bad person would do is evidence that I am bad.
@Chris: ” . . . Is there some masculine, evolutionary analogue to mowing the lawn . . .” Yes, it is possessing a lawn, which must be mowed. You don’t seem to understand what a lawn is. Don’t worry about it, few seem to these days, but it still underlies the whole lawn thang. A lawn is: a) Conspicuous consumption of a high order. It denotes that you can afford to turn that chunk of land into what is, economically, a desert, as well as support its upkeep, which is considerable, with no profit from it. b) It forms a… Read more »
re: “Hypergamy doesn’t care about equalism and reciprocity.” I’ll also tie Looks into this for my fans, heh. I’ll also use online dating as the platform for this discussion. Upfront, the authors of “Freakonomics” discovered that 56% of men that create an online dating profile do not even get one single message (compared with 21% of females) while Jupiter Research found that 97 %( of men) quit within 3 months (draw your own conclusions). The mating ‘leagues’ are symmetrical(as evidenced in studies, like the OK Cupid one that showed women are rating 80% of males below average – rendering a… Read more »
@sirtyrion, hard to believe this post is almost 3 years old now: http://therationalmale.com/2011/09/15/womens-physical-standards/ You see, men will very readily cater their physical sexual “preferences” in accordance with what has proven sexually successful for them in past experiences. In other words, men tend to return to the same watering hole they found to be plentiful in the past. These preferences of convenience manifest themselves as ‘fetishes’ for men. And you don’t even need all that extensive research to prove this. All one need do is search the vast variety of porn available catering to the physical attributes that men will fetishize.… Read more »
what it means to be a man in the 21st century. The same thing it meant to be a man in the 1st century – the only thing that has changed is the tools you have to do it. They used clubs and sticks – today you can use a computer, an AK-47, or any of a thousand specific tools for the task. But being a MAN is the same as it ever was – at least if you are a successful one. You have a lot more ways to excuse NOT being a man, but if you are true… Read more »
Alpha Fucks – Beta Bucks, a series:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/19/cheating-women-sex_n_5691166.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
Another great, deep post, Rollo, wow. A couple of things jump out, one from the article and another from the comments. 1. I have learned that the more I simplify my Red Pill awareness, the more useful it is to me. Your article lays out clearly how complementarity is the nature of our intersexual relations, and that is dominant, and how current cultural/social practices interact and affect things in that setting. But some basics do not change. One of the most transforming moments of my Red Pill awakening was when I just got that “women choose”.I somehow or another had… Read more »
Somehow Justin Beiber, One Direction, and all the other copy cats do very well without any substance. Other factors are at play for the 15 year old not liking a particular love song.
“do very well” with what? The same thing George Michael, Michael Jackson, Elton John, and Freddie Mercury did “very well” with?
Most girls will only say, “That’s sweet”….while they are banging their brains out with non sissy males.
My wife would never want to fuck Justin Beiber but there are a lot of gay men who would love to.
I’ll accept you listing 3 gay singers, who at the time before girls knew they were gay, they would have loved getting with them.
Steve McQueen probably had male admirers also.
Since you went back to Elton John, I won’t bother going into who might have lust for Beiber.
For some reason I am having trouble copy and pasting from this page, so I can put down the exact comments I am referring to… Sirrtyrion, Are women being more judgmental of male attractiveness, or, faced with MUCH MORE attention and choices, can be, MUST BE, more selective? As you point out, and others have as well, women get many more inquiries on dating sites than men. Even if she wanted to fuck/date them all, any women with decent attractiveness would have a hard time keeping up. Not enough hours in the day. She must sort those responses somehow, and… Read more »
@Dr. J I do not see how a complementary and compensatory exchange cannot reach equilibrium. How is a complementary model not a “win-win” scenario for both men and women? The secret is that pussy is an easily had commodity and it’s up to a woman to convince a man that her intimacy is in someway unique among all others. The hard truth, that women are subconsciously aware of, is that no amount of sex will ever be an equitable trade for a man’s complacency and/or compromising of his identity. A complementary model is a ‘win-win’ from a cooperative survival prospect,… Read more »
George:
“The results over time will dispel difficulties you may be experiencing in many areas of your life including and especially women.”
I do lift weights for quite some time now, however I didn’t get to experience any improvements with women through it. On the other hand I love doing it and just feeling good eating clean as well. For me it’s not a miracle thing though, is it for you?
heyjay It absolutely was not and is not a miracle thing. It required A LOT of consistent effort and dedication (and still does). When I graduated from high school I weighed 130 lbs at a height of 5′-11″ and barely managed to bench 85 lbs. When I graduated from college, I weighed 185 lbs squatted 405, benched 315, body fat 7%. I’ve NEVER used drugs and many around me who did developed serious health problems as a result. My changes were not immediate. They were gradual but the effect was very dramatic over time. Girls who I went to high… Read more »
Rollo,
“The hard truth, that women are subconsciously aware of, is that no amount of sex will ever be an equitable trade for a man’s complacency and/or compromising of his identity.”
I think you were born to write! (among other things)
water cannon boy ” I’ll accept you listing 3 gay singers, who at the time before girls knew they were gay, they would have loved getting with them.” Who are these girls that “would have loved getting with them”? Your girl friends, your mother, your sister? Specifically who? Justin Beiber is recently maturing into more of a “man”. So what I’m referring to here is his younger past that predominately exemplifies the genera of music we are discussing. My “point of view” is based on my experience with women including past frustrations, misunderstandings and fruitless expectations. They simply are NOT… Read more »
Note: I tried using the quote code for this comment, so we’ll see if it works. @ Glenn “2. Looks – I listen to some other folks, scientists, on attraction and how women work. It seems quite out of step with what’s known to say that women operate solely on attraction.” Women operate solely on physical attraction as a pre-requisite for short-term mating. For long-term mating (i.e a relationship) she’ll require much more and personality does play a role here. “I do agree, it’s a threshold issue for all humans – nobody, male or female want to fuck people they… Read more »
Rollo,
Do you agree (at least to significant extent) women subconsciously think that unlimited sex may be an equitable trade for intimacy with a man who is not complacent and will not compromise his identity?
[No, but only because biologically no woman is ever motivated to “unlimited” sex. That’s the difference between men’s sexual strategy (unlimited access to unlimited sexuality) and women’s strategy (hypergamy, AF/BB). Equitable trade with regard to sex isn’t a concept for women because hypergamy is their directive]
@sirtyrion, in wordpress it’s “blockquote” between greater-than and less-than characters
Siirtyrion, “True, all things being equal, women will favor wealthy/high status males – but only in very exceptional cases (often involving very high profile individuals in the public eye, tending to skew perceptions of normal) will a female make significant concessions in terms of the physical attractiveness of her mate (unless she is not, herself, attractive enough to warrant the attentions of physically attractive males).” Your comment above coincides with my experience. Many of my clients are quite wealthy. For example: One neighborhood I’ve worked in continuously during the past few years consists of residential properties valued at $2 million… Read more »
This will interest you:
http://therationalmale.com/2012/06/11/case-study-creative-intelligence/
What Every Skinny Guy Should Know:
http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=60002
A classic.
@George: Does Rollo think unlimited sex is an equitable trade for male intimacy? Let me answer for the master both because I know what it is and because I partially disagree. Rollo doesn’t think “good” sex can ever be negotiated. If she is thinking quid-pro-quo and transactionally she is not tingling or thinking about the raw act itself (i.e. getting pounded by a hard cock with a naked, raw, sweaty man above her). While this arrangement is precisely what most Red Pill guys would be more than happy to accommodate, it can (WILL) destroy the passion. The trick is to… Read more »
Rollo,
Just read: http://therationalmale.com/2012/06/11/case-study-creative-intelligence/
I did find it interesting but not surprising.
Does “M” stand for “Mother Fucker” ?
LOL
Blueplillprofessor
The feminine imperative is victorious over those who concede to it.
She either wants to fuck you or she doesn’t.
I just cannot see it, have not experienced it any other way.
“transfer of power” ??
What’s up with that?
@Rollo Thanks for the clean up, much appreciated. I’ll be sure to keep “blockquote” in mind for the next time I use it. @George True. Unattractive men who compensate with money never get their girlfriend’s or wive’s true sexual desire in the first place. The man simply negotiates it via money but it isn’t genuine. The primal desire is absent, which will lead her to stray eventually. Women are very much aware about desire and it’s been shown in studies, covering conception, that their bodies know (at least subconsciously) what they’re doing. For example, when a woman has a symmetrical… Read more »
@Sirtyrion, “Some parts of your comment towards me were a bit redundant, so I’ll only argue the key points you make.” Hmm, well, you could have just responded to my “key points” without this comment, so I find it a bit superfluous. See? Anyone can be snarky! If you are looking for a reason why some commentators here find it hard to take you seriously, it’s because of behavior like the above. Someone who was as secure in their intellectual prowess as you believe yourself to be would hold back the snark for occasions where it warranted it. I asked… Read more »
Equalism?
http://thelibertydoll.com/2014/08/22/meet-woman-reduce-male-population-90-for-peace/
hahahahhahahahaaaaaa
This girl is about as dumb and deluded as the IS guy who promised to fly their flag over the white house.
Very interesting….I wonder why she is studying criminology and what her father is like….
If the male population were reduced as such, can you imagine the cat fights that would erupt….it would be a nasty scene.
“That transfer of power IS transactional. However, that very transfer of power and submission creates sexual desire in women almost by magic. Who knew?” Blueplillprofessor (August 22nd, 2014 at 5:00 pm) sounds like he might be on the right track, but the terminology is not completely clear. . “Transfer of power” sounds a bit like the “Power Exchange” that refers to aspects of the BDSM lifestyle [en.wikipedia[]org/wiki/Power_exchange_%28BDSM%29]. BDSM, which comes in several varieties, tends to be highly stylized, with central emphasis on “safe, sane and consensual”, and is quite different from what people who are not familiar with it usually… Read more »