In last week’s post my intent was to shed some light on how an idealized state of egalitarian equalism and gender parity is always at odds with our ‘feral’ natures which evolved not due to co-equal partnership between the sexes, but from a complementarity between the sexes that fostered the then mutually beneficial imperatives of both.
Any time I suggest the ‘nature’ of how human beings’ evolved psyches influence our personal and social interaction in the now, I’m always going to get resistance from the “rise above our natures” faction of humanistic (and moralistic) hopefuls that insist the instinctual natures which made us such a successful species can (or should) be sublimated by our higher rational (or spiritual) selves.
I can fully relate with those who see the red pill as cynical or pessimistic.
When egalitarian equalism has been the model you’ve been conditioned to believe from birth is the only viable model to base a society and personal relation on, anything different, especially brutal observable realities, is going to smack of cynicism and defeatism.
One reason I believe most guys, either reject the concept of Alpha or want Alpha to fit into a super-heroic ‘leader-of-men’ archetypal definition is because it agrees better with an egalitarian mindset. Most women like to cast Alpha in this way because it serves the public relations aspect of their hypergamy better – Beta men make better, more dedicated resource providers when the only message they hear is what they’re doing is ‘the real Alpha’.
It’s not until men are confronted with the cruel realities in real time that they have an opportunity to learn from experience that, for as much as they want to cling to the ‘open communication / rise above our programming’ memes of egalitarianism, the observable (often painful) reality is one where women’s instinctual natures dictate their behaviors. And, as might be expected of an equalist mindset, those behaviors are then excused and rationalized as forgivable “human vulnerabilities” – and if you don’t forgive them, you risk being judgmental and further fail to live up to the egalitarian equalist/humanist ideal.
The Feral Woman
As loathe as I am to give the HuffPo any link love, I read with interest Why Great Husbands Are Being Abandoned. I’m going to quote some of it here, but I do so because it seems to me that even the bastions of equalist thought are finally, begrudgingly, coming to terms with the inherent failings of reconciling equalism with evolved, conventional, complementarity among the sexes.
In the last few decades women have slowly driven their point home. The millennial men, who are their current counterparts, are freer thinkers and they have responded in kind in their relationships as well. These men like their women strong and feisty, and have willingly accepted the responsibility to connect in a more vulnerable way. They get it that it’s sexy to help make a meal or take the kids away on a Sunday morning so their wives can sleep in. They are the androgynous guys that their women have asked them to become.
You would think that the women in these new relationships would be ecstatic. They’ve got a guy who wants to work out together, share parenting, support their parallel dreams, and make their family collective central to both of their lives. They’ve established an equal relationship of coordinated teamwork, and the guys don’t seem to miss their old need to posture for power over intimate connections.
Well, guess again. Fifty percent of marriages are still ending in divorce, and women continue to be the gender that initiates those endings. In the past, their reasons for leaving most often had to do with infidelity, neglect, or abuse. Now they’re dumping men who are faithful, attentive, and respectful, the very men they said they have always wanted. Why would women who have accomplished the female dream suddenly not be satisfied with it? Why are they leaving these ideal guys, and for what reasons?
I am currently dealing with several of these great husbands. They are, across the board, respectful, quality, caring, devoted, cherishing, authentic, and supportive guys whose wives have left them for a different kind of man. These once-beloved men make a living, love their kids, help with chores, support aging parents, and support their mate’s desires and interests. They believe they’ve done everything right. They are devastated, confused, disoriented, and heartsick. In a tragic way, they startlingly resemble the disheartened women of the past who were left behind by men who “just wanted something new.”
You may think that these women are ruthless and inconsiderate. Those I know are far from that. More often, they still love their husbands as much as they ever did, but in a different way. They tell me how wonderful their men are and how much they respect them. They just don’t want to be married to them anymore.
I read this article after I’d read the plea for Traditional Masculinity in the Jezebel groupthink article I linked in last week’s post and it struck me that along with the societal emphasis on a more overt and open hypergamy comes a need to reconcile it with equalism. This is proving to be a tall order as articles of this nature illustrate.
It’s important to understand that this internal conflict isn’t coming from men trying to square their sexual impulses with their higher-self aspiration of honor, duty and integrity. This conflict is coming from women who’ve been raised with expectations of gender parity, equalism and ‘open communication’ to resolve differences.
These women are now observing their own behavior and trying to reconcile the base feral motivators (hypergamy) with “how things ought to be” in an idealized state of egalitarian equalism.
These women cannot help but see the very observable consequences of open hypergamy now. I don’t necessarily disagree with the conclusions Randi Gunther comes to at the end of this article, I just disagree with how he comes to them.
Then things started to go awry. Perhaps these androgynous couples over-valued adopting the same behaviors in their relationship. Maybe the men got too nice and the women a little too challenging. Oddly, the androgynous men seemed to like their new-found emotional availability, while the women began to feel more unfulfilled. Her “perfect” partner, in the process of reclaiming his full emotional expressiveness, somehow ended up paying an unfair price; he was no longer able to command the hierarchical respect from her that was once his inalienable right.
What Randi doesn’t consider is the natural complementary states men and women’s psychological firmware descended from since our hunter-gatherer tribal beginnings. He can’t consider it because it disagrees with the ‘higher-selves overcoming our natural state’ aspect of egalitarian humanism.
But the observable truth is right there in front of him, with his head in his hands, so he can’t ignore it. Naturally the first recourse is to force fit this truth into a more palatable egalitarian framework, but even this falls flat (as evidenced by the predictably dismissive comments). What he and the commenters can’t reconcile is the truth of the androgynous men directly created by egalitarian equalism and the natural and instinctual predisposition of feminine hypergamy.
Red pill aware men see this for what it is because we’re accepting of the truth of women’s feral natures and what it prompts them to, but this is an excellent illustration of the primary differences between a red and blue pill mindset.
There is a primal need women have for natural masculine dominance. Whether this dominance is physical (looks and sexual prowess), psychological (Game) or provisional, women are seeking a dominance that an androgynous man is incapable of providing. As I’ve stated in prior posts, androgyny is homogeny, and nature stagnates (and often dies out) in conditions of homogeny. Androgynous men, by definition aren’t men – they are neither masculine or feminine – so is it any surprise that women’s innate, heteronormative, subliminal and tingle inducing need for a traditionally masculine man is frustrated by the same egalitarian mindset they’ve fostered in compliant men for so long?
Primal femininity is confused and frustrated by blank-slate equalism.
The Blue Pill Painted Red
As open hypergamy and the conflict between equalism and complementarity becomes more evident the advocates for that ‘touchy-feely’ “men need to be more balanced with Beta” sentimentalism will find it increasingly more difficult to sell that brand of equalism.
I’m aware of many a former (nominally) red pill blogger who’s dropped their previous advocacy for masculine (Alpha) attributes being arousing/attractive in favor of a diluted blue pill ‘new age sensitive guy’ message that better resonates with his increasingly female readership. While spinning just enough red pill into what accounts for a blue pill ideology might make for better, temporary, revenue, it only aggravates the same conflict between equalism and complementarity that Gunther here is exposing.
The DeadBedrooms subreddit is an excellent example of this conflict. I’ll warn you now, this forum will depress you, but virtually every personal admission here is a testament to what men were conditioned to believe women would want in a man, in a relationship, and the empirical results of the imbalance between a blue pill mindset and a red pill reality.
The popular message, the socially acceptable one, is that what makes a man an ideal long term partner will necessarily make him a tingle inducing sexual prospect. It sounds right, and it lifts women on whole up to a more idealized, humanist, higher-self.
Prior to the push for a more open hypergamy, what woman wanted to cop to love fucking the bad boys and “best sex ever” short term partners? No dutiful Beta wants to hear that truth, so the praises of the “respectful, quality, caring, devoted, cherishing, authentic, and supportive” guys are sung.
It may sell books and increase click-thru traffic, but ultimately hypergamy doesn’t care about higher-self aspirations or the conditioned delusions of men who believe that what makes men an attractive prospect for Beta Bucks will necessarily turn women on for Alpha Fucks. Your proof is in the DeadBedrooms subred.
Before I end here, I feel I have to address that I do in fact believe that men and women can, and regularly do, rise above our innate instinctual natures. Obviously civilization didn’t reach the point we have by not controlling our base natures. The problem I see now is the social order established to effect that control is failing to account for the conflict between equalism and complementarity.
If there’s a take away lesson to be learned from Gunther’s article it’s not that men are lacking in Beta attributes or sensitivity training to balance their asshole Alpha egos. If anything the vast majority of men have too much invested in that Beta equalism and sentimentality.
Whether it’s openly or covert, the message we get from those men’s consequences is that women are overwhelmingly conveying the want for traditional masculine dominance, prowess, control and even a bit of the cocky ego that legitimately comes along with it.
It’s been mentioned in many a manosphere comment thread that, the medium is the message, and women’s medium has been proving that their interests lean much more openly towards Alpha Fucks, even after marriage, even after consolidation on Beta Bucks provisioning.
“But it is precisely such a conclusion about biology and human nature that is the most galling of all possible irritants to our egalitarians.” – Murray Rothbard in “Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature” http://www.lewrockwell.com/1970/01/murray-n-rothbard/were-not-equal/ In their attempts to bring about equality for the sexes, egalitarians have cursed both sexes to a life of unhappiness. The same is true of forced diversity/multiculturalism (diversity+proximity=war). We can conclude a law of nature, that forced or coerced equality is amoral and will always result in hostile conflict. Each person is inherently unique, inherently unequal. This is a fact that should be celebrated, not… Read more »
I’m curious, Rollo, what you think the next move by the Egalitarians/Feminists will be. My suspicion will be “spiking” the Blue Pill with just enough masculinity to make women happier, creating a sort of “Purple Pill.” But of course not to give enough RP truth to allow men to reassert themselves and regain control of the inter-sexual competition. It seems like the next logical step in “build a better Beta.”
Sanitizing the red pill to fit the purpose of the imperative. Building better Betas only works so long as those Betas are ignorant of the underlying hypergamy they play a part in.
Once they become aware, the Feminine Imperative will either realign itself with conventional masculinity (and make men believe that was its purpose from the start) and / or it will expect Beta men to accept their normalized cuckoldry
It may get talked about in that deadbedrooms blog, but if the topic of the divorces that the women are initializing in the ‘got what she asked for marriages’ ever gets more attention in the main stream, the fact that the men are completely blind sided will probably either get ignored, or spun into men now need to meet a new definition of masculinity.
Or another way of saying he should’ve known or just gotten it.
Ha! Love the comment above
The myth – thanks for the link above, it is an excellent read
Siirtyrion – “In that case, academic works only re-affirm real truth” Unfortunately academic endeavors are not always motivated by non-bias desire for real truth that harsh reality of experience exposes.
Thanks Rollo. Matches up with my expectations as well.
The first mate always gives me a ration about my arrogance. We are still together after 40+ years. It amuses me. She wants to know if I’m ever going to change. No.
They get it that it’s sexy to help make a meal or take the kids away I call BS… Women want what women have always wanted, and are attracted to the same thing – and a wuss, androgynous type of guy that will take care of the kids isn’t it. I was at a grocery store on Saturday and saw a family – the woman (20’s) was kinda hot with tattoos on the upper part of one arm. Now I’ve always figured that a woman has tattoos to advertise that she wants to be ridden like a pony, so I… Read more »
man, i know i’m a growly shithead between here and a few other spots but if you EVER need a silent partner to fund a massive expansion…drop me a note.
this is perfunctory sublimis.
Rollo–is “Androgynous” really the correct way to describe “blue pill” men? Androgynous implies sexual ambiguity (“gender-neutral”, “genderqueer”, etc), yet the average guy is not part-male, part-female. He still sees himself as a man.
I’d argue that millennial men have become submissive men, especially after being born to a generation of “strong and independent” mothers. I’d take this a step further and argue today’s men have deep “Mommy Issues.” They want the woman to lead and be in charge. They are even turned on by this. They want to submit to the Feminine Imperative.
@ Rollo, Donal Sanitizing the red pill to fit the purpose of the imperative. Building better Betas only works so long as those Betas are ignorant of the underlying hypergamy they play a part in. Once they become aware, the Feminine Imperative will either realign itself with conventional masculinity (and make men believe that was its purpose from the start) and / or it will expect Beta men to accept their normalized cuckoldry As the country is only “nominally” Christian, the former is more likely, especially as: 1. Middle class is eroding into rich vs poor. Poor communities will become… Read more »
Given the 80/20 rule it stands that the bulk of women marry betas one way or another, whether it’s equalism or complementary. What we are seeing is simply another feminine imperative distortion coming to light, the mid life crisis. Except the reality is that it is a feminine convention. I’ve never seen the male version of the midlife crisis (the ones that left their wives were invariably ‘forced’ out by their wives’ behaviour) but I’ve literally seen hundreds of the female version. Once they reach a stage of material security that can be independently sustained they eject for some fun.… Read more »
There are people, names you know, that have created music and other forms of art known worldwide. Interviewing them has convinced me that there is a power from another dimension that’s enhancing the genius of their talent. The body of work created by these individuals is usually vast… and it changes the course of global events. I’ve never officially interviewed Rollo Tomassi, but passages like this tell me that he’s tapped into that kind of inexplicable power from another dimension: Whether this dominance is physical (looks and sexual prowess), psychological (Game) or provisional, women are seeking a dominance that an… Read more »
The cynic in me says that men and women can, and sometimes do (if temporarily), rise above our innate instinctual natures; if they have to or are forced to. Rarely does it happen just because. In a nutshell, most men and women; but moreso women, due to the lesser likelyhood of negative social feedback on their behaviour, do what they are used to “getting away with” or what they think they can “get away with”. Most of the time they are in this, head up their own asshole “default mode”. Hypergamy, being opportunistic in nature, knows no bounds. Increasingly, marriage… Read more »
Rollo, what are your thoughts on this?
http://www.ted.com/talks/esther_perel_the_secret_to_desire_in_a_long_term_relationship
Finally; I will offer this trainwreck as Exhibit A:
http://www.dailylife.com.au/life-and-love/love,-sex-and-relationships/the-three-little-words-that-ended-a-marriage-20140810-3dg37.html
The Rational Male (site) ranks in the top 1/10,000, or 0.01% of websites. Perhaps the scientists that believe they are more intelligent than Rollo Tomassi should write their own blogs and see if their lofty explanations bring them Alexa (an Amazon company) ranking that’s in top 1/10,000 of websites. About the time of the original “Altitude” program by Eben Pagan, Eben wrote this: Book #1: “A Thinking Person’s Step by Step Guide to Weight Loss & Exercise Program” Book #2: “Skinny Bitch” A Thinking Person’s Step by Step Guide to Weight Loss & Exercise Program was written by two Ph.D.s… Read more »
Rollo, you make some very good points in this post, but I don’t agree with everything. Women have remained feral and men have not. Basically what has happened is that with all the focus (intense pressure from all sides) for men to become “better men” over the last 30 years, it has in fact caused men to indeed become more balanced and to have refined their feral natures. This does not equal “androgyny”. (There are of course many feminised men, but they are in the minority – there has always been effeminate men – just consider history for a few… Read more »
I saw a comment above asking what’s next and while those steps are likely to happen,I’ll let you guys in on the big picture. The following is my take on how we got here and where everything is headed. You’ll begin to see that not only have things always been this way, but that the very embracement of the Feminine Imperative will ultimately be civilization’s undoing: Taken together, empirical studies suggest that any theoretical evolutionary perspective completely captures the dynamics for human mate selection. Parental investment-based evolutionary theories and social context theories are structured based on to a mixture of… Read more »
“Once they become aware, the Feminine Imperative will either realign itself with conventional masculinity (and make men believe that was its purpose from the start) and / or it will expect Beta men to accept their normalized cuckoldry” We’re already seeing both of these — the first from the “red pill women”, and the second from the Sandberg types and their mangina cheerleaders like GMP. It will be interesting to see which one dominates the mainstream discourse on the issue when red pill awareness becomes the norm for men (my guess is the latter, with the former being pushed more… Read more »
@ Promethean “In a nutshell, most men and women; but moreso women, due to the lesser likelyhood of negative social feedback on their behaviour, do what they are used to “getting away with” or what they think they can “get away with”. Most of the time they are in this, head up their own asshole “default mode”. ** negative social feedback ** Completely nailed it! This is why they are the way they are these days compared to the past. (Of course the alphas would keep on insisting that nothing has changed). In the past they used to get negative… Read more »
“Now they have freedom to do whatever they want. No negative feedback.”
They have an army of blue pill pussy polishers and beta chumps to enable them.
The modern “feminist” woman wants all the benefits of equality along with all the traditional entitlements/privileges but as few of the responsibilities as possible. Whenever anything goes wrong or her plans go awry, it’s men’s fault! and the “evil patriarchy” is to blame.
“And since females can receive genetic benefits outside of marriage(i.e. through casual sexual encounters), and no longer need rely upon mates for the survival of their offspring, there is no pressure for them to compromise on holding out for an unlikely (long-term)fantasy partner.”
Seems logical but there’s something you neglect. The resources females get from the state are not as valuable to them as if they come from an individual male. The’yre programmed to seek security from a male not from the state and I think that’s why attractiveness is not only a factor of looks.
@ Promethean: It has always been like that I suppose. Women are beings of the present, just like animals and I think Rollo has written about that as well, they are empty vessels operating on feelings, instincts to be precise. They need to be filled with male values, hobbies, money. I like to compare them to a mirror because sometimes I get in touch with them they seem to be blank or empty at first and try to mirror your feelings to gauge your state of mind. As soon as they have done so, they will react to you on… Read more »
LiveFearless, that’s an unreasonable demand. Discovering some truth has different demands than popularizing it. There is an inherent tradeoff involved. The purpose of science isn’t a popularity contest. Otherwise, we might end with the result resembling the Indiana Pi Bill.
@ Promethean “Hypergamy, being opportunistic in nature, knows no bounds.” Many years ago (but not THAT long ago), if a women fell pregnant outside of “wedlock” she would have been ostracised by the community and by her family – she would have brought “shame” on the family for an entire generation. That in itself was a very strong curtailment of hypergamy. Besides, a non-virgin could not get a husband… So things have changed DRAMATICALLY in society. No-one is expecting for such conservative times to return, but a no-holds-barred, no morals, no virtues, no values and no expectations (on/from women whatsoever)… Read more »
@ LiveFearless Unfortunately, particularly with these topics, I think Scientists often give science a bad name. Particularly, social science research and data are often less concrete and objective, making it easy for confirmation bias to creep into experiment design, interpretation, and dissemination of findings. This is often made worse by aspects of journalism, which twist findings almost to the breaking-point, to fit dominant ideology and propaganda goals. So, we’re left with something that appears utterly useless. Having said that, it is possible to dig beneath the bias and find applicable wisdom within scientific findings. Often, it takes going to the… Read more »
@ Rollo I have still been considering this topic on my end too. In my style, I have been digging down into the actual results of social science studies on the topic. I hope to summarize what I’ve found in a future article. From that scientific angle though, I’m coming to some similar conclusion as what you are describing above. Briefly, the study results often show that the key to satisfying long-term relationships is in the outcomes of those interactions, not the process by which they are obtained. Specifically, relationship satisfaction and maintenance requires win-win outcomes, which meet the needs… Read more »
Livefearless, “The body of work created by these individuals is usually vast… and it changes the course of global events.” Respectfully, I disagree with your statement above if you are referring to creativity in the arts exclusively. From my perspective the course of global events change due to tangible, physiological, “real” phenomena, not ideology. Mechanical, technological, pharmaceutical inventions, weather and geophysical phenomena are some examples that initiate change. Art is an expression of, a manifested reaction of, the changes, not the genesis of the changes. Sometimes we get so focused on hope and ideology, or change occurs around us so… Read more »
The pessimist complains about the wind. The optimist pretends the wind will change. The realist adjusts the sails.
In respect of ‘open hypergamy’ and its discontents — which include open hypergamy’s practitioners, as the HuffPo piece summarizes — I think we’re witnessing a social cognitive dissonance with the women. We may be underestimating the confusion the women feel because we underestimate the power of habit and their social groupings. One, women have been full-throttle hypergamists (with feminist justifications) for a solid 20-25 years now. Sex pozzie feminism fed the “I can have it all!” feminism 1.0 impulse. These women are not swimming in the kiddie pool, and the charming naiveté of lane changing (“I can turn myself into… Read more »
On topic: What do you tell a guy in this situation? http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2ehvav/so_i_met_the_other_man_today/ I realize he’s posting on TRP forum, but his last statements reek of Beta rationalization. “He’s the real Beta after all” is the Beta hamster whirring away because his only frame of reality is in the context of what his egalitarian equalist conditioning has raised him to believe. Even when presented with the glaring duplicity of his wife’s hypergamy, after 15 years of marriage, his ego protection is still about how much better he fulfills the gender equal role the Feminine Imperative has established for him than his… Read more »
@Buena Vista, excellent analysis. I may have to convert your comment to a post.
Gee, wonder which “previously red pill blogger” is being referred to hahah. I’ve always called that cat the Purple Pill Bloggah.
Given his traffic fortunately he’s a gateway to the true red pill world now, for those poor slobs on his site.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGsjgO32B1c&list=UUKoYrCh8bOYuqAnkXx9Uakw
http://therationalmale.com/2012/05/16/hypergamy-doesnt-care/
“So I’m the other man today” reddit thingy. I really, as a closet literary man, distrust stories in which there is no ambiguity or simple stupidity. Our cuckolded dude tells a perfect story and has a perfect punch line. This is like reading the “my husband was so abusive-like and emotionally-distant” crap on The Frisky. He’s creating, or repeating a talking point. This is how groups of women relate: via received wisdom, talking points, what Kundera described as kitsch. I’m not above it; I’ve done it; the manosphere is cheaper than a shrink. However, he probably should have just fucked… Read more »
Rollo, thanks for the compliment on my overlong post. It’s open source, have a ball. One of my sons and several of my friends have your book, and your book is important.
@BV- of course he should have but he did not discover the Pill until it was to late. He worked through this on other posts. This was his victory lap and I thought it was well played and his rationalizations are healthy. I really hope the next time he introduces his new young, hot GF to his used up ex-wife and her quickly betafying new lover. @Dr. Jeremy and other Science Lovers- The manosphere is not “science” but I agree with the good doctor. It is solid information shared in real time on the internet that should be understood and… Read more »
BPP: I think all rationalizations are diversions, and lazy. I would say that ‘rationalizing’ is lying. So that is where we diverge.
Or, I learned more about this dude from his rationalization than I might have from observation.
Agreeableness and humility in men has been associated with a negative predictor of sex partners.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi/10.1371/journal.pone.0029265
I got the message and have changed my behavior to the degree that I can accordingly. But even better, when I do act reflexively in a beta manner, I catch myself. The real problem for us is male disposability, yet we make ourselves disposable. The whole equalism thing is really a recipe for male disposability in that it will never keep a women attracted. There is only one frame for a stable relationship between a man and a woman and that is a frame where the man is dominant. Period. All other framing is misery for all involved. @ BuenaVista… Read more »
Well, the guy in the redpill reddit should’ve asked his ex why her hair was so messed up. The answer may have told him if he or Dave were the real beta.
Did BuenaVista just describe Jennifer Aniston?
And, the idea that unchecked and ever financially prosperous women will go after a smaller and smaller selection of men, resulting in less marriages because more men will say it’s not worth it, and the replacement birth rate and population will start to decline has been has been agreed upon before.
I’m always happy when a new Rollo or Dalrock post is up – it’s not just the post itself, it’s also the comment section which is simply better than most other RP blogs. Now THIS comment section today – absolutely mindboggling. Highest quality comments I have ever read on blogs regarding these issues. Thanks, and greetings from Germany.
I think Randi is a “she.”
So, as long as we’re back to basics, here’s a curveball that went by me the other day. It seems that gay men also wrestle with questions of high-n and hypergamy (?)… though gay culture is such that “high-n” has a very different origin set-point.
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/aug/23/the-one-that-got-away-david-sedaris
I found the open acknowledgement of the Alpha-widow problem interesting. And I LOLd at the way he ended the article.
“I’m the Other Man Today”: The author feels RP because he’s realized that he’s won the prize. Most RP put the pussy as the prize. This man, this father, knows that the true prize is his children. Reading his posting history, he did well in the divorce, now it sounds like he has his children 5 days out of the week and was able to invade his wife’s space at will and with no repercussions. The conventional RP prize: the wife (pussy) has shown itself to be tainted. He now knows that he’s much, much better off without her. The… Read more »
@ Dr. Jeremy – Great points. Having been (and being in them currently in my life) in leadership roles, one of the things that doesn’t get talked about often is the selflessness that real leadership requires. As a man, I spent my entire young life being socialized to put my needs second and the needs of my family, work, community, nation etc. first, before my needs. So, when I was a husband with a stay at home wife and a child depending on me I knew how to make decisions that served them, and also made decisions for them. Women… Read more »
Jake:
Regarding Sedaris and relationships between gay men: Sure, there’s hypergamy there, but usually with the man who plays the “bottom” or the female role. And, the sex component and prominence of sex in the relationship is magnified in gay male relationships because both participants are men. These men, being men, put a premium on the sex– more, hotter, better. So the hypergamous aspect in a gay male relationship is going to be magnified quite a bit.
correction – second to last sentence of my last post should read “…hash of nonsense.”
Here, let me sum up life as we know it… Someone is going to get screwed – that can be either in a “good” way (as in “I screwed that little filly”) or not (as in, “Man, I’m screwed”). Your choice is to decide which side you want to be on… If you want to be the one that enjoys life, you’ll be the proactive one that is taking the action of doing the screwing – both literally and figuratively. It is as simple as that… And if you don’t believe me – just wait… You’ll be the one on… Read more »
“Randi Ginther” begins her ridiculous article with: “Not so many years ago, married men had the freedom to live by one set of rules away from home, and a different set at the hearth.” This first sentence immediately and blatantly reveals her obvious intent is to shame and threaten the entire male gender. Later in the article she writes: “Men are from Mars” and other media presentations became the cry for holding on to the differences between men and women and to keep them from blending.” Here she clearly communicates “gender blending” (castration) is her moral utopia. Then she writes:… Read more »
It is probably wiser to fuck a blender than allow a “gender blender” to control you.
Sorry all, I thought she was a dude.
In my defense it was an easy mistake.
Sont worry, we have all been there…
Right !?!
Right?
Nevermind then….
“women’s medium has been proving that their interests lean much more openly towards Alpha Fucks, even after marriage, even after consolidation on Beta Bucks provisioning.” That guys thought “beta buck” was ever a winning strategy is ridiculous. These patterns show up EARLY. If “Beta Bucks” was every going to work you’d see the high school cheerleaders drooling over the Champion of the Math Team. That does not happen. Math Team Champs get their teeth knocked out by the Football Quarterback/Basketball Point Guard and from that time ON to the end of the human female life cycle, its Alpha Fucks or… Read more »
Great Post Rollo… really thought provoking
You guys should also read the comments on the Huffpo story… they are a hoot!
Then when one’s parents told you, its okay do good in school and the girls will like you.
Or, go to college and the girls love guys with a college degree.
That was all b.s. rationalization for you failing to be the football quarterback/sports captain.
Girls like the Apex Alpha.
There is only one of those in each environment.
No College Degree prospects will make you an Apex Alpha, but they sure will put you into Beta Debt with all of the accompanying gnashing of teeth.
Just for shits I just read another couple articles by Gunther. I find the adrenaline rush of getting really pissed enjoyable and motivating before working out. What a crock of shit she is. It should be illegal for someone with such a destructive agenda to provide “counseling” services. Apparently everything she writes is centered around making men into pathetic impotent imbeciles subjugated to women. This is apparently her universal solution to all marital strife. She should address the primary problem in our culture that women generally think men are nothing more than slot machines with dicks.
@Nathan The BB side of AF/BB begins early also. Both sides of this plurality are entrenched early and I hazard an assumption that the BB side begins even earlier than the AF side. In fact BB begins shortly after birth. The AF side does not begin until intersexual awareness begins around the age of 5 or 6. Sex is hidden from children and lied about. I played “butts” with a neighbor girl at about the age of 5, it was initially her idea and it was NOT in any of the fairy tales we had already been read numerous times.… Read more »
” . . .the Walt Disney story Cindrella. ” The story was first published in the 1600s. The template of the tale was ancient even then. “…doesn’t even fuck her once…..” Within the context of the story he’s lucky he even got meet her before their wedding. “…..and then runs around the entire kingdom the next day . . .” In the original published story and in the Disney treatment of it, he does not. He can only marry by arrangement and it is his father who makes the decision and has the search conducted. ” . . .we do… Read more »
“They tell me how wonderful their men are and how much they respect them. They just don’t want to be married to them anymore.”
That’s some serious hamsterbation revealed right there from them all.
@George
Hitler followed a simple set of principles outlined by French social psychologist Gustave Le Bon. “Psychologie des Foules” – In English, it was translated into “The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind”
In 1895, Le Bon wrote what would happen if those principles were followed to the letter.
The rest… is history.
I have to salute any man who is able to somehow preserve his dignity in marriage. Just let me mention some real life examples: 1. Last week my married friend came to my office with infomations that his wife stealed his child, returned to mother and wanted to divorce him. This poor fella confessed that they had sex 3 TIMES A YEAR!!!! 2. One of my advocates – great looks, personality and income. Built a house for his family, has two daughters. He hasn´t have sex for a half year, his wife is cold, calculating. He is like working machine… Read more »
@Exfernal “The purpose of science isn’t a popularity contest” I agree with that statement. Here’s what I’m saying: Why is “The Rational Male” (blog) in the top 1/10,000 of one percent among all websites? It’s because Rollo Tomassi has mastery of the stuff he writes about AND because he writes with clarity and brevity in a language that’s easy for his audience to understand. The way he simplifies complex truths resonates with millions of people each week. There are no wasted words in his posts, and most of his sentences are quotable. This draws one of the largest audiences of… Read more »
@Rollo Great link: http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2ehvav/so_i_met_the_other_man_today/ What do you tell a guy like this? He measures himself against the other guy. His whole motivation is to get even, to show that 40 year old bitch of an ex wife of his that’s he’s still the better choice. He rationalizes it by saying the “David”-alpha dude is the beta who’s stuck with a 40 year old divorce with 3 kids. But if that’s the case…why is he still stuck on how they are together? This is a very insightful post. I for one came into the Red Pill to try to show up… Read more »
An “Alpha” that ends up with a woman (who sounds half batshit crazy) with THREE kids is not an alpha, he is a Chump. A damn fool on borrowed time.
I find that HuffPost story because earlier this summer, Candace Cameron said to a reporter that she’s submissive to her husband. Not in a BDSM way, which I think the HuffPost universe would have loved, but while they are a team and she’s not his property, he is the decision maker. She let’s him be the man. Oh did that set the comments on fire. She wasn’t saying that she’s his bitch. They complement each other, but his is the dominant role and that drove everyone crazy.
@livefearless Thanks for your response, and I agree with your perspective. Correct my reference to WWI, should have been WWII. Germany’s dire economic condition among other “real” motivators prior to WWII created opportunity for Hitler to apply the principals in “A Study of The Popular Mind”. Without those dire conditions, Hitler would not have had the opportunity. We may be negotiating a “which came first the chicken or the egg” concept here. However, I agree with your perspective and that ideology certainly influences behavior. My message is that we should never let ideology obscure our awareness and respect for the… Read more »
We will never have – nor have we ever had – a nation full of Alphas. That’s because Alpha is a comparative assessment, and constantly shifts. It’s absurd to give every kid a trophy. If we’re all good, then we’re all the same, and no one’s good. There are huge, multigenerational forces at work here. The pendulum has always crushed people. Right now, earnest guys who toed the line society trained them to are stuck to its face like bugs on a windshield. So, does this mean we should give up, if we self-assess as out of the running? Absolutely… Read more »
A relationship is sustainable when both partners have symmetric perceived value. Trying to digest all info presented in last week’s post I arrived to this: woman look (X) + game factor (hipergamy, let’s name it H) = man look (Y) + game factor (G) Hipergamic “(…) women form the most secure emotional attachments to men 1-2 SMV steps above themselves (…)” We could make the assumption that a male with no game needs to have looks 2 points higher than the female. So feminine game factor (hipergamy) is, on average, H=2, so: RELATIONSHIP SYMMETRY EQUATION: X + 2 = Y… Read more »
As an aside, I was thinking about women pushing for state-funded birth control. My first reaction was bullshit, why should I pay women to be sluts? But now, way I see it, if we fund birth control, we place the responsibility for pregnancy completely in the hands of women and the state. So wouldn’t it then follow that legally, no man sould be held in debtor’s prison over a pregnancy that he didn’t want? She gets pregnant, all options were available to her for free so she obviously decided to… so if she wants to have it but he doesn’t,… Read more »
“To this value we should also add beta bucks factor (BB), but this factor to the average guy is irrelevant.”
Bingo!
Unless you clear 100,000 + after taxes, debt payments, etc. you have no “beta bucks”
Guys, nobody had money here. We are all in 30+ year morgatages student loan debt. Beta bycks HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Let’s just say it. Providership game is DEAD. Unless you are making TONS of money all of your effort should go to Alpha Fucks (muscularity) To deny this is to put your head in the sand and fade away
@Dr. Jeremy Nevertheless, I do conduct myself a bit differently than many of my academic counterparts. I also listen and read the experiences of millions, to better understand the practical experience of these issues. I also immerse myself in them too. Unless they are writing anonymously, I also believe I am one of the few “doctors” actively engaging on sites like this as well… The kicker is that everything I do is what I was taught that scientists are supposed to do. Many other scientists are also attempting to follow similar protocols, to the best of their ability and understanding.… Read more »
[ open on interior, courtroom, the Judge banging her gavel ] Judge: Mr. Cirroc, are you ready to give your summation? Cirroc: [ stepping out] It’s just “Cirroc”, your Honor.. and, yes, I’m ready. [ approaches the jury box ] Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I’m just a caveman. I fell on some ice and later got thawed out by some of your scientists. Your world frightens and confuses me! Sometimes the honking horns of your traffic make me want to get out of my BMW.. and run off into the hills, or wherever.. Sometimes when I get a… Read more »
Rollo,
You made mention of “mutually beneficial imperatives.” We know the definition of the female imperative what is the definition for the male?
I am trying to devise a list of terms.
Thank you.
@D-Man
She gets pregnant, all options were available to her for free so she obviously decided to… so if she wants to have it but he doesn’t, he should have the option to bail, no?
You assume women would be held accountable for anything. Remember – take a man then remove reason and accountability. They’ll no more be to blame in your hypothetical universe than they are to blame in today’s universe when they do a bad job at work and yet are promoted up the ladder by cackling corporate-witches.
“But now, way I see it, if we fund birth control, we place the responsibility for pregnancy completely in the hands of women and the state. So wouldn’t it then follow that legally, no man sould be held in debtor’s prison over a pregnancy that he didn’t want? She gets pregnant, all options were available to her for free so she obviously decided to… so if she wants to have it but he doesn’t, he should have the option to bail, no?” Unfortunately…no. The Feminine Imperative or modern liberalism, whatever you want to blame, would never allow it. Take abortion.… Read more »
Yeah I know. Far be it for a solution that makes sense to actually apply. It seems that both women and the state feel entitled to pinch us for our utility, doesn’t it?
I’ve never really been drawn to the trend of applying facials, but they’re not leaving us much choice.
Practically perfect: I’m not Rollo, but I think that men have a sexual imperative and a social imperative. Rollo has defined the male sexual imperative as unlimited sexual access to unlimited women. (Most men will usually compromise this to unlimited sexual access to one woman, mostly because they must.) I define the male social imperative as: dominion and victory. The man wants to win. He wants to subdue and take dominion: over himself, his mind, his body, his work, his money, his possessions, his land, his woman, and his family, He will also want dominion or a sphere of influence… Read more »
More on topic, in regards to rising above our feral natures, it depends on whether we are rewarded for doing so or not. If I engage in feral behavior and society punishes me for it in the interest of promoting civilized behavior, you will see less of it. You won’t quash it completely because it IS part of our natures, but it will be discouraged. If, on the other hand, punishments are not handed out for it, or better yet, if there are rewards for it… You get the idea. Interesting case study… In my church, there was a woman… Read more »
“Yeah I know. Far be it for a solution that makes sense to actually apply. It seems that both women and the state feel entitled to pinch us for our utility, doesn’t it?” To be fair, I think there is a broader human impulse to try and get others to do your work, to support you. There was a quote I heard from I believe Lincoln that summed it up nicely, but I have not been able to find it again. I won’t do it justice, but the gist of it was that throughout history there have always been people… Read more »
Magnet, Interesting account of the church group members. Their behavior is not uncommon and I don’t think it ever has been. One of my uncles retired as minister of a Presbyterian parish a few years ago. His father (my grandfather) was the preceding minister. My uncle is in his late 70s. After retirement and being put on pension he wrote a paper entitled “How I lost my religion”. Over the years he “ministered” many people who behaved like and experienced similar events such as those you described above. His father also did and often referred to women in general as… Read more »
If guilt is feeling bad about what you have done, shame is feeling bad about what you ARE… it’s one of the most crippling, insidious, and powerful ways of controlling people and their behaviour.
There are more than a few parallels between the methods honed by organized religion and those employed by the thought police today.
@heyjay Seems logical but there’s something you neglect. The resources females get from the state are not as valuable to them as if they come from an individual male. They’re programmed to seek security from a male not from the state and I think that’s why attractiveness is not only a factor of looks. You’re correct, for the most part, in that women will much rather PREFER an individual male to invest resources in her because not only does he provide material depositions, but he will also give her emotional and psychological support just by being present. After all, women… Read more »
@ BuenaVista, August 25th, 2014 at 11:30 am . “Second, and I have no citations for this, but it conforms with most guys’ observations, I think we’re underestimating the influence of the modern femme’s social cohort.” I think that this is absolutely correct, and extends to the power of other external influences on women, as well. . ” … That social status is voided — destroyed — with the femme cohort if her man and the abstraction that is their relationship become a woman’s primary objective.” Hypergamy, in the sense of the instinct to secure and bond with a man… Read more »
@buenavista Great comment and you have put into words very elegantly, something that I have been experiencing and perceiving but unable to conceptualize in a useful way. Your description/explanation is brilliant and I thank you for your comment- on of the most lucid comments I’ve read in the manosphere. This is why I come here even though I rarely go to other RP sites anymore- just the facts and no bullshit. Great comments and Rollo just gets to it.. no window dressing. Thanks again BV. I hope Rollo picks up the ball and rolls with it, I’d love to hear… Read more »
Reading the book; The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition into the Forces of History by Howard Bloom was one of the early steps I took into the matrix of Red Pill thinking and is well worth a read.
[…] Some basic red pill. […]
I was at a party this weekend and observed the following: Exhibit A: Male out of shape. Getting married next August to gf that controls the finances, house and is primary breadwinner. Gf rode the carousel (pulled a guy every weekend for 5 years). Gf aged 24 Guy: 31. She flirts with guys in front him. It’s painful to watch. So silly me filled with red pill knowledge noticed that their fridge had the writings : “Susan and Lee kitchen” and re-arranged it to read “Lee and Susan kitchen” suffice to say I got loads of stares. I don’t think… Read more »
Magent comments on Deti’s description of male sovereignty: “’He wants to subdue and take dominion: over himself, his mind, his body, his work, his money, his possessions, his land, his woman, and his family” And what does both the state and women seem intent on doing? Removing his dominion over every aspect of his life by encroaching steadily into every aspect of it.’ “He is not allowed his own spaces or organizations, to speak his own mind freely, to express his sexuality, to keep the profits of his labor, how he wishes to run his business, how much wealth he… Read more »
George, on the only problem with religion being the congregants: I have a somewhat odd life, alternating between the urban east and rural upper midwest. In the rural part, 100 miles from the nearest wine bar or interstate, I belong to a sola scriptura church. Or I have belonged. Though the pastor is a personal friend (sailboats, motorcycles) as well as significant spiritual guide (he’s a true pastor) I cannot stand church attendance any longer. This is a little country church, with a little country Sunday school and nursery — yet half a dozen mommies insist on bringing their little… Read more »
@ LiveFearless IMO, I think the problem results when anyone (scientist or otherwise) takes things to extreme without balance and forethought of the larger implications. Essentially, they get stuck in their emotions and selfish needs, and confuse what is good and true for them, for what is good and true universally for everyone. As a result, they make emotionally-driven choices that benefit them in the short-run, but create disequilibrium for themselves and others in the long run. Such is the motivation of a scientist thawing out the fictitious SNL caveman. He is not concerned with the larger social implications…or even… Read more »
“Now the challenge is one of insight, negotiation, a balancing of pleasure and need, a redefinition of masculine purpose and legacy. It’s infuriating that this has happened, but we don’t make the rules, we’re just playing the game; while we were playing by *the* old rules the world changed. I don’t think that the feminist cohort is quite ready to live by their own rules, if men bring Epictetus’ philosophical impulse (to reason, to understand, to achieve enlightened detachment, to command one’s own senses) to the party they started. But we’ll find out.” Yeah, to flesh this out a little… Read more »
I’ve got a more than a few irons in the post fire already this week, but I may use Buena’s first comment as the basis for another very soon.
BuenaVista, Thank you for the response. Appreciating all your insights. My last remark was meant to be sarcastic, but does not indicate a defeatist attitude per say. It was just meant to highlight what the end might look like if there is not sufficient pushback. And I agree with you that as men, it is necessary to take personal stock, and then personal action in order to right things, or at least have any chance to do so. The inner challenge is first and most important. As you and I both can agree, though, there has been a lot of… Read more »
Deti, “In my “definition” I was deliberate about the order, in terms of timing and influence. It happens in linear fashion temporally and in concentric circles spatially. First he achieves dominion over the self (mind and body). This should be accomplished by age 17. Then over his work (early-mid 20s) then material things (20s), then other people (late 20s, early 30s).” Funny, but more than once I have thought to myself, and remarked to some others, that I have always felt ‘behind’ for lack of better term. My friends and family consider me bright, creative, socially aware, yet…I always felt… Read more »
Magent, sorry about that, I have a tin ear for online irony. We first started batting around the Sovereign Man concept at J4G’s last year, and I wrote out what I considered the ten principles of masculine sovereignty in the present context. A guy named Bastiat Blogger precipitated the discussion, and I am attempting to write a piece on sovereignty, in a kind of (literary) user manual fashion, drawing heavily on Epictetus’ concise manual, for BB’s blog. He’s getting a little impatient with me, however. The Encheiridion begins abruptly and simply: “Some things are up to us and some are… Read more »
Dr. J: “IMO, I think the problem results when anyone (scientist or otherwise) takes things to extreme without balance and forethought of the larger implications. Essentially, they get stuck in their emotions and selfish needs, and confuse what is good and true for them, for what is good and true universally for everyone. As a result, they make emotionally-driven choices that benefit them in the short-run, but create disequilibrium for themselves and others in the long run.” This post begins oddly and disappears in confusion and “I feel your pain” ambiguities. Science has nothing to do with “balance and forethought”… Read more »
@ BV That comment was in response to a series of questions and statements by LiveFearless. From my understanding, he was specifically asking me where scientists and the application of science seem to go off course, become biased, and cause problems. That was my long-winded two cents reply. Now, if you’re asking me how the practice of science should ideally operate, then I’m inclined to agree with you. It should be objective. It should simply reveal “what is” in a reproducible and falsifiable way. It should not simply be selling what others wish to hear or pandering to popular opinion.… Read more »
@kfg
Concerning your response to my comments about Cinderella, Snow White, etc…
Thank you for referring to the original versions written in the 1600s and early 1800s.
But…this year is 2014….and the stories have been rewritten…several times since the originals….they have “evolved” to accommodate new propaganda imperatives. Review the most recent versions. The latest Rapunzel Disney video production I’m familiar with is very different than anything remotely like the original version or the version I was exposed to in the 60s, it is not even the same story line. It depicts Rapunzel as a very masculine acting hero figure.
Description of the latest “Rapunzel” can be reviewed here:
http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Rapunzel