As of this post there are now 400 essays on Rational Male. And if there’s one thing that writing for as long as I have in what’s now known as the manosphere has taught me is the difficulty of having to initiate new readers to old concepts. When we get down and dirty in the commentary on a particular topic I tend to assume most commenters are familiar with at least the core concepts I’ve presented over the years and those who aren’t usually ask me for a link they probably could’ve found just by perusing the sidebar links, categories or a quick term search to see what I’ve post about a particular topic.
Still, this doesn’t seem to placate the disease of attention deficit disorder common to people who want to find whatever fault they can to defend the narrative they’ve invested themselves in. The problem then becomes one not unlike playing whack-a-mole where I’ve got to post links in comments or tweets I can only hope the critic will actually have the temerity and patience to read. Usually it comes back to TL;DR and they never really consider a rebuttal to their ‘Gotcha’ that I covered, in some cases, a decade ago.
As the manosphere and Red Pill awareness go more mainstream I expect this intellectual lethargy to increase on the part of those who are ego-invested in the continuance of a feminine-primary social order. As I’ve posted before,…ahem, the Red Pill is a Threat to the comfort and certainty of men and women conditioned to be dependent on its continuance:
Nothing is more threatening yet simultaneously attractive to a woman than a man who is aware of his own value to women.
I’m proud to say that the comments in the last post reached a record high of over 700. And while I’m appreciative of that it does have the unfortunate effect of burying some really interesting commentary deep in the thread. Towards the 5th page of comments I got the following post from a commenter going by the handle ‘Alpha Female’. The consequent posts were a screed of what even the newest of Red Pill men can recognize as standard Gender Studies Major boilerplate.
I can’t say as I was surprised to see ‘Alpha Female’s’ comment on this week’s post since I was already aware of her previous foaming rant on the Women in Love post under the telling monicker of ‘The Best Thing You’ll Never Have’.
Against my better judgement I’m going to pick her comment apart here for this week’s discussion. Just so you know, I’m fully aware this is feeding a blatant troll. I also understand that Ms. Alpha lacks the critical thinking skills and curiosity to make even a cursory attempt to search for any of the 399 prior posts (a third of which I wrote for SoSuave over a decade ago) that might actually give her pause to think I’d covered them before.
Try not to think of this as a courtesy to Alpha Female, her argumentative style is one of presuming personal truths that fit her ego centered reality are the universally accepted ones. Think of this as more of a remedial lesson in Red Pill theory/ideology/practice and background for those new to Red Pill awareness.
Feel free to pick apart any or all of her initial list below in the comment thread. You can pick up the old thread to see where her rabbit hole goes here, but as you’ll probably expect most of the conversation revolves her own personal experiences and veers off into “ooh ooh, men do it too” and “people are all different, society sucks” tangents. Like most bad debaters, she flits from one issue to another when a snare she wasn’t expecting to conflict with her ‘correct’ reality holds her on that challenge for too long.
1. Equalitarian and “female-primary” social orders are not synonymous nor interchangeable. I assume you know the definition of equalitarian, yet you are using the term interchangeably to mean a female dominant social order. First example of flawed reasoning in this article.
Actually the only error is in AF not having searched the term “equalism” here, but keep that in mind, it’s going to come up often in this post. I’ve covered egalitarian equalism both here and here.
She is correct though, they shouldn’t be synonymous or interchangeable, but unfortunately the Feminine Imperative, and its predominant social arm of feminism, has conflated them both to serve a purpose for going on 70 years now. Universalism and Equalism have been the cover story to sell a feminine-primary social order since the late 60s.
It would be very simple if, as she constantly parrots, the definition of equalitarianism was only limited to a belief in ‘equal rights’ for all. Very few people are going to argue against that ideology, but the fact is that her ego-preferred definition has been contorted to be a useful tool of the Feminine Imperative.
The social veneer of ‘equalism’ was a necessary social convention in recruiting men to disavow their conventional masculinity (which later would be redefined by the feminine for them in later generations to better fit women’s dualistic sexual strategy) as well as their self-interests and adopt the idea that a nebulous ‘society’, and more specifically a Patriarchal one, was the source of gender roles they were told they should find oppressing.
Thus the synonymous association of a ‘faux equalist’ equalitarianism was paired with feminine social primacy. Equalism is simply the religion of feminism because it can hide the more egregious aspects of its agenda (unfettered Hypergamy for instance) behind a social convention that very few people would want to ‘be against’ – those who are are easily ostracized as “backwards” anachronisms by way of that definition. So the “flawed reasoning” really comes down to the semantics of the fluid definition the Feminine Imperative has prepared for women like AF to use and the observable facts of the utility it serves the Feminine Imperative.
Feminism has never been concerned with true egalitarian equality. Feminism has only ever been an effort in retribution and restitution. Our present social state of Open Hypergamy and feminist triumphalism is an indictment of that fact.
2. “The most popular trope is that ideas of gender are a social construct and that women and men are comparative equals and only their physical plumbing makes them different in form only.” There is evidence that exactly this is true.
This is interesting, because she cites no evidence. That’s because there is exactly zero evidence this is the case and increasingly science is proving exactly the opposite, much to the ideological discomfort of “equalists”. Men and women’s brains are literally wired differently (if she’d had the curiosity to look at this link I provided in the post she found so offensive she’d know this).
But we don’t even need those studies to grasp this most basic of human truths – we already know that men and women’s biochemistry and endocrinology work and affect their respective sex’s bodies and minds differently. Whether it’s the dominant presence of estrogen, progesterone and oxytocin in women or the dominant presence of testosterone in men, the body state – behavioral effects and emotional stimulus of those hormones make us fundamentally different beings – and that’s a good thing.
Complementarianism benefits women and men.
Furthermore, each sex evolved into different gender roles according to these biological predilections. We can split hairs as to which sex should be more suited for higher order vocations based on intellect and personal merit, but the obvious fact that men are more physically suited to certain tasks, and women are also similarly suited to other tasks – yet both complement the other – is inescapable.
Part of the evolved male neurological firmware is a natural aptitude to accurately and forcefully throw an object from a very early age – an evolved behavior necessary for survival and hunting. Yes, girls can be taught to throw as or more effectively than a boy with the right training, but it’s the natural unlearned aptitude boys have that puts the lie to the “we’re all born the same” blank slate trope.
So the question then becomes one of determining which sex’s strategy stands to benefit most from advocating for a belief that all humans are a blank slate, biology is meaningless and all gender is a social construct. Which sex has their interests served in lowering the bar and “leveling the playing field” to become more like the other?
Examine how being transgender impacts someone’s gender. You believe in a heteronormative gender binary which clouds your judgment and makes you incapable of understanding how gender relates to power dynamics in society. Until you can grasp that gender is defined by more than genitals, you will continue to write this complete and utter tripe that disparages women for the sake of helping you feel superior (which a truly superior person would not do).
Transgenderism is a mental disorder:
In the vast majority of cases, children who say they’re transgender and act that way change their minds about being the opposite sex—if you just leave them alone.According to a recent Hastings Center report, gender dysphoria does not persist into adulthood in up to 73 to 94 percent of cases (citing the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, which noted dysphoria continuing in only 6 to 23 percent of boys and 12 to 27 percent of girls.)
[…] Heyer’s blog cites a national survey of more than 6,500 transgenders that asked the question, “Have you tried to commit suicide?” Forty-one percent answered, “Yes.” That’s astonishingly more than the national average of less than 2 percent. Virtually all people who attempt suicide are suffering from some form of mental disorder or depression. So it should seem clear that blaming society for that depression will not address the dysphoria and depression an individual feels.
The term “heteronormative” is a common trope taught by Gender Studies academia with the latent purpose of canonizing a new definition of the term by demonizing and marginalizing the fundamental truth that gender finds its ‘normative’ condition in an evolved ‘hetero’sexual biology – and yes, that is a binary, one from which you cannot escape. Just ask the 41 precent of depressed and suicidal transgendered people about their attempts to escape it.
The roots of gender are written into your DNA.That hetero normative state is responsible for producing you. Try as you may to convince yourself socially or psychologically it’s otherwise, you will never escape the biomechanic foundation that influences your motivations as a man or a woman.
With regard to how gender influences social dynamics, the Red Pill is the direct result of, and logical contingency to the feminine-primary social engineering the Feminine Imperative has instated into society over the last 70 years. If it weren’t for that foundational recognition of feminine-primary social power by the Red Pill you wouldn’t be reading this blog.
I do agree on this, gender is far more than genitals. Once an ideologically ‘correct’ form androgyny and egalitarian equalism enter the public sphere, the biological influences on gender determines who will play the perpetual victim and who must play the role of victimizer.
3. “It fundamentally denies the separation, from an evolved biological / psychological perspective, that men and women experience life in different ways.” All people experience life in different ways. You are overvaluing the common experiences that you have with men and undervaluing the common experiences you have with women. The binary that you use to define your superiority is again hampering your ability to understand that you are not defined by gender and your experiences will never perfectly align with any other human being’s experiences and that you share lots of common experiences with BOTH men and women.
AF’s out of context quote only makes my preceding point for me:
I’ve written countless posts on the evidential and logical fallacies that make up gender equalism, but the important thing to be aware of is the conflict inherent within that belief – equalism expects men and women’s existential experiences to be the same, while also pleading that we embrace the differences it purports we don’t actually have.
I found this interesting considering that it entirely contradicts point 2 – if gender is self or socially assigned and we’re all alike (blank slate) independent of biology this then precludes independent differences since we’re all supposed to have some ‘enlightened’ higher-self capacity to rise above them. In other words all people should be inherently bisexual and born with the capacity to fluidly transition from one set of arousal cues to the opposite in any given environment. Androgyny should be the normative in that model. Yet we find that in nature androgyny and homogeny lead to evolutionary dead ends
But if that’s true then homosexuals, and heterosexuals aren’t born the way they are, they’re behaviorally conditioned into their sexual alignments and gender roles by “society“, right?
Individuals do experience life in different ways, but each of those individuals are still subject to their biologically determined physical influences and the environments they find themselves in.
4. Hypergamy is conflated in your mind with gender, when it is absolutely normal for people in both genders (and not all people in either gender) to branch swing from one mate to the next based on perceived value or sexual attraction. Males engage in this behavior all the time. Not withstanding the obvious mountain of evidence you have at your disposal to verify the fact that I’m stating, it is indisputable that the incidence of infidelity in males is higher than in females, yet you claim women cannot “love” a man in the same way that a man “loves” a woman.
Hypergamy is the biologically influenced normative state of females to prefer men of a sexual market value above their own perceived sexual market value.
This metric is determined (again) by the inescapable biological realities of the influence women’s hormonal and menstrual cycles, and the evident behavioral effects play on their sexual selection strategies. The influences of women’s innate ovulatory shift behaviors and preferences define the Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks sexual strategy on both the personal and societal level.
Remember the usefulness of the “equalitarian” term as defined by the Feminine Imperative we discussed above? Women’s innate, biologically determined and sex-specific Hypergamy is where that conflation finds its purpose. AF makes the same comparison to men’s sexual selectivity being itself a form of hypergamy because she fundamentally clings to her ego-investment that ‘all are equal’ and men’s sexual strategy serves the same purpose as women’s. It is not and it does not, and any basic knowledge of parental investment theory as well as the biological realities of men’s reproductive methods once again put the lie to her assertions. Men quantity, women quality, and no one’s ugly after 2am.
Women cannot sell Open Hypergamy and the love-conquers-all ethereal ideal love at the same time. Neither can they sell Open Hypergamy and the premise of egalitarian equalism – particularly when AF’s feminine-primary boilerplate is refuted by statistics taken after the advent of unilaterally feminine controlled hormonal birth-control.
You see, it’s was a useful trope that men cheat more than women when Hypergamy was more socially concealed, but in an age of unrestricted, socially mandated Open Hypergamy the only question that remains is whether a man will choose to be cuckolded before or after he’s invested himself personally, emotionally and financially in monogamy with a woman who’s looking for an “equal partnership” (now that she’s less able to arouse the Alpha bad boys she’s happy to tell him about).
But, wait, if we’re all ‘equal’ and the plumbing doesn’t matter, wouldn’t men and women cheat equally?
5. ‘“I can’t believe men can live in a state like this” were her exact words. She was just beginning to get a taste of what men experience and control in their own skins 24 hours a day and it was unsettling for her.’ And yet asexual men exist, which directly contradicts the anecdotal evidence you use to support your non-fact based argument that men are simply horny all the time and are therefore experiencing a condition that women cannot even begin to fathom. I mean when you write this tripe, you are well aware of the many logical fallacies that you use to justify your beliefs, are you not? I hope you are. And if your response is “Well those asexual men are just exceptions to the rule” or “hyper sexual women are the exception to the rule” is simply to say that “I know my theory has been disproved but I would rather ignore the facts and evidence that do not support my claim in favor of plowing on so that I can continue to demean females with my outdated 15th century mindset.”
Put an ‘asexual’ man in the private room at the Spearmint Rhino in Vegas and we’ll see how ‘asexual’ he really is. Again, ‘asexuality’ is an evolutionary dead-end. Only in our present social state of enlightenment do we entertain the “equalist” notion that an ‘asexual’ person in anyway represents anything significant to human development.
However AF still doesn’t grasp that the ‘anecdotal’ example I give here has been repeated in every woman who’s taken anabolic steroids, and every woman ever proscribed hormone therapy to aid her flagging libido and mood swings after menopause. It’s a good thing gynecologists and endocrinologists don’t share her opinion that we’re all the same except for the plumbing. It’s interesting that we’ll prescribe hormone therapy for menopausal women and transexuals, but we’re expected to accept that ‘asexuality’ is normative and not an ill.
I should also add that AF has very poor debate skills.
6. “So it should be an easy follow to deduce that how a woman experiences love, as based on her Hypergamic opportunistic impulses, is a fundamentally different experience than that of a man’s.” Your logic is inherently flawed, [presuming the condition] and then you make an assertion that there should be a logical conclusion that the assumptions you have not and cannot prove [already present in the post] should mean that all women experience relationships in exactly the same way [what part of individuated experience did I lose you on?] .
Let me make a correlation. [I reject your reality and replace it with my own] I am reading misogynistic psychobabble from overly emotional men [projecting bias] that demeans women and places them in a position beneath men [implied nowhere in the essay, and in fact I concede that women do love deeply based on their opportunistic criteria] based solely on their genital composition [“equalist’ binary presumption and again not implied in the post] , so I conclude based on this evidence (and my evidence is actually supported so it is very different from your flawed premise [support that is never supplied and expected to be presumed as valid] ) that all men view women as inferior beings that are not worthy of equal treatment. [presuming a truth. treatment is not to be conflated with expectations of stimulus to predicted behavior]
That is the logic you use, and it is absolutely worthless. [straw men always nod their heads in agreement with your reality] The saddest thing about it is that people with this mindset purport to be pseudo-intellectuals and use junk science to support their claims [still waiting on your non-junk science] while men of lower intellect just eat it up because it makes them feel all rough and tough and superior for a while. [yes, because spending hours a day reading a blog is a better high than getting drunk or going out to do something productive]
Group think is a terrible and scary thing, [you’re right about that] as this blog proves time and time again.
Final note: I realized in the time it took to compile this that Alpha Female is really an comment thread attention whore who’s need for catharsis over her sadly Hyena-like marriage motivates her to write stream-of-consciousness diatribes to support truths she needs to support her ego-investments and self-image.
“Your blather about how ‘most men’ can support the dictionary definition of ‘equalitariainism’ is a prime example of someone who believes themselves to be in a superior class, then dictating the ‘rights’ they grant the people of what they perceive to be an inferior class. So essentially, as long as women only have the right to vote, access to education, and other very basic human ‘rights,’ you are fine, but when that freedom extends to things like freedom from patriarchal dominance in the workplace or freedom from gender roles in the home, well you can’t abide that. Here’s a tip:… Read more »
@Jeremy: A masculine primary social order, where polyamory is openly practiced and encouraged This is pretty much the society that feminists have created – although they scream and yell about it. The fact is that as an alpha male, I have as many young women as I want, on MY terms without promising anything other than a good hard f**king. The only difference is that I do it from the back-ground, enjoying young pu**y on my terms and letting women spout their non-sense while I laugh. It’s just that we (men that know how to play the system) don’t talk… Read more »
@Rollo
This was for my reader’s benefit, not hers.
Exactly.
All of us appreciate this.
You’ve got quite the vocabulary, Rollo.
You’ve taken on these complicated concepts, then added your signature Clarity® to simplify them so that anyone can understand them.
This is another master work filled with insights that debunk the lies of lifetime indoctrination.
The blue pill causes the eternal scarcity mindset in men and the ephemeral abundance behavior (carousel) in women. This drastically lowers both the SMV of men and the MMV of women. It is lose/lose. Hence the antidote to the blue pill is the abundance mentality in men and scarcity *behavior* in women.
The abundance mentality, from which flows sexual confidence, causes sexually confident behavior, thereby greatly increasing the SMV of men. Scarcity behavior promotes, at least, the appearance of chastity, dramatically increasing the MMV of women.
I just wanted to insert here that it’s interesting that a Feminist who is steeped in the transgender/gay narrative that certain behaviors are biological only. aka ‘born that way’ Those Feminists are also the same Feminists who will completely disregard ANY biological underpinnings of Male Accomplishment vs Female Accomplishment, Biological underpinnings of IQ, Biological implications to Male/Female reasoning… etc This is why I have given up talking to women about most issues. The very idea that Biology drive Gay behavior is accepted as settled fact. But… if it’s all human behavior is biology then… it can’t be Male Patriarchal Order… Read more »
@Ang Absolutely true. The entire reason I don’t hate gays or transgenders is because I think nature does play a role in gender identity just as nurture does. The convenient exclusion of one or the other as it is convenient to support someone’s chosen bigotry is disingenuous to say the least. I find it ironic how many feminists tell me they share my agnostic atheist evidence-based beliefs, then recoil the moment I suggest men and women are inherently very different creatures due to the underlying biology. To profess acceptance of scientific views of evolution then reject those very same views… Read more »
Very useful posting, the URL should be preserved in a sidebar under “remedial / necessary reading”.
Softek January 11th, 2015 at 10:20 am It’s very funny to me how just about any woman who read this stuff would be INFURIATED. Beyond measure. Was having that very discussion with the fm. She: “I want more romance” Me: “When I give you romance you lose interest in me” She: “That is because I had a lousy childhood” Me: “Nope – AWALT” Me: “Didn’t I prove it to you last night? I was very unromantic and it made you white hot for me.” (I was playing extreme dread game. She loves it.) She: crickets And note – my extreme… Read more »
I find it ironic how many feminists tell me they share my agnostic atheist evidence-based beliefs, then recoil the moment I suggest men and women are inherently very different creatures due to the underlying biology. Quoting commenter TFH: women aren’t very good at cause and effect. To profess acceptance of scientific views of evolution then reject those very same views if they suggest you might be inferior at some things and superior at others is the height of self-deceptive duplicity. As a rule, such people are merely parroting back what they have been taught. It is de regure in the… Read more »
theasdgamer
January 11th, 2015 at 2:33 pm
You might want to look up the blog “Anonymous Conservative”. Lots of discussion of the amygdala and r/K theory. He is a little light on endocannabinoids and cannabinoids when it comes to the amygdala but unlike most high K/Right/Conservative sites he is open to learning.
Alex January 11th, 2015 at 4:10 pm Re: Steven Pinker – I had an interaction with him roughly 15 years back about cannabis/addiction and he was vehement about his position. I stopped the conversation. Some years later I find he adopted my position which says he can learn (unusual), But AFAIK he never gave me credit. Ah. Well. And my position? “There is no such thing as addiction. People in chronic pain chronically take pain relievers. When the pain goes away so does the ‘addiction’. ” I went on to discuss how most of that pain was PTSD. I won’t… Read more »
@ Anonymous Reader
it is quite common to encounter those who believe in evolution, but reject any logical implications.
Sadly many of these people work in the field of science.
@ Alex I’ve known enough asexual people that I agree that Rollo is being overly dismissive here of their existence. That said, he’s absolutely right that asexuality is an evolutionary dead end. Asexuality isn’t an evolutionary dead end. It’s an indication that a disease process had damaged some important component necessary for sexual attraction. Like Schizophrenia around 1% of the population is Asexual. This is far too large of a group to be the result of heredity or random mutation. It’s the result of damage. Until someone discovers and explains the mechanics that’s the easiest, safest bet anyone can make.… Read more »
meanwhile on an awards show tonight the two male hosts compared who they would sleep with, to much laughter
oh wait, I forgot, Open Hypergamy, it was two female hosts, my bad
Beneath all of AF’s inchoate ramblings is the radical feminist boilerplate that any man who doesn’t comply with the feminist narrative necessarily doesn’t comply the equalist narrative feminism has co-opted. Thus, if a man is even marginally critical, marginally analytical or simply calls outright bullshit regarding anything that’s part of the Feminine Imperative’s doctrine, he’s necessarily against the ‘equalism’ that feminism has defined for him to agree with. This is why AF and all rad-fems begin their interpretation of all men, not just Red Pill men, with a suspicion of wanting to dominate, oppress and control women by default. This… Read more »
Asexuality: prevalence and associated factors in a national probability sample. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15497056 A number of factors were related to asexuality, including gender (i.e., more women than men), short stature, low education, low socioeconomic status, and poor health. Asexual women also had a later onset of menarche relative to sexual women. The results suggest that a number of pathways, both biological and psychosocial, contribute to the development of asexuality. Short stature, low education, low socioeconomic status, poor health are all associated with Asexuality. That’s bad. Not mentioned in the abstract is that Asexuals are more likely to be left handed. This suggests… Read more »
Rollo – “…the crux of the ‘equalist’ horse shit…” Is actually a dogmatic focus on fairness as opposed to justice. The equality sought isn’t the right to compete on a level and objective playing field were rules are equally enforced but a “right” instead to equal outcomes regardless of the results of individual effort, or the objective value of that effort. The only model ever described of this perfect equalism was in Harrison Bergeron where equality was enforced by tyrannical handicapping of the capable to ensure the equality of the incapable. So, yes, I for one reject this version of… Read more »
@BP, reminded me of this post:
http://therationalmale.com/2013/03/25/hypergamy-synthesis/
@ Rollo I am guessing I don’t quite grok something in your Hypergamy Synthesis piece. Regardless of that I was struck by this bit: “Men given to moral absolute ideals, like blue pill men still plugged in, do something similar in their own mindset, and just like the feminine imperative, find themselves equally disappointed when the Rules don’t change to meet their capacity to play the game.” That probably describes me. The only distinction I would make for myself vs. the masses (I too am a special snowflake) is I now realize that in this game the only Rule is… Read more »
AF=alpha widow if there ever was one
@Badpainter re: “I am guessing I don’t quite grok something in your Hypergamy Synthesis piece.”
Something like this?: “The conceptual awareness of hypergamy was so disturbing to the human condition that, in our evolved past, humanity literally selected-for people with the ability to psychologically repress the awareness of it.”
This is the matrix of the feminine imperative. An example being females who self-describe as alphas, i.e. better than beta males. “It isn’t hypergamy to think 80% of men are below average; that’s just reality.”
@Rollo What I’m against is men being expected to make concessions for the decisions women make for their lives, personally and socially. What I am against is men being conditioned for the better part of their lives to buy a bill of goods crafted to absolve women of the consequences of their choices (right around women’s Epiphany Phase) that only serves the furtherance of the Feminine Imperative and debilitates men’s ability to make their own decisions independent of women. Agreed. I’m all for equal rights so long as we’re not trying to guarantee equal outcomes. Even on a level playing… Read more »
zdr01dz
January 11th, 2015 at 9:38 pm
About 10% of people are left handed. Heck of a disease you got there.
==============
BTW IQ follows a bell curve. Why not sexuality? And why not genetic? IQ is genetic.Or hormones in the womb. At least some aspects of sexuality depend on hormones in the womb. Homosexuality fer instance.
I should add that IQ is not only genetic. It depends on proper childhood nutrition.
Lots of factors involved. Why not also sexuality?
@Louise, re: “Do men still marry for money nowadays?” Which men? I’m tempted to call apex fallacy on the question itself. I’m certain that an extremely small percentage of (far less than 1%) very attractive men who want money would consider being a male golddigger, but I’m also certain that rich women tend go after even richer men. I’m even more certain that there are far fewer *hetero* male golddiggers than there are *hetero* male prostitutes, i.e. far fewer than two orders of magnitude less than female golddiggers. FWIW my first wife, whom I married in about 1970, was quite… Read more »
We all know the Golden Rule – treat people how you want to be treated. And as men we know it doesn’t work it getting women to treat men well, although that wasn’t it’s stated purpose anyway. And given women’s ubiquitous solipsism, projection, and Freudian envies, we know that the reason women treat men so poorly is that the women are showing the men how to do it to them.
So what should we call the red pill rule of “Treat her meaner to keep her keener”? The Brass Rule?
@jf12 I think what put the biggest dread in to one of the plates I’ve been spinning recently is when I let her know her status as a lawyer and the money it makes actually play no part in my attraction to her. She was pretty much incredulous. Chick’s a real type-A personality that pushes hard, plans everything meticulously, and panics when things don’t go according to plan. I never tell her my plans or even if I have any, specifically to drive her nuts. She goes from barracuda at work to timid highschool girl around me, constantly trying to… Read more »
Equality I’d a fairy tale grown ass men should put behind them. Sort of like the fairy tale that some chick can really kick a dude’s ass in a bar brawl.
I like the Brass Rule.
It’s best for society and for women as well if women are held as property but folks around here are pretty liberal so that won’t float but I am not sure how anyone can believe in evolution and equality. Evolution pretty much means winners and losers in the genetics arm race.
Ps, BP just summed up the morality of reality.
“Not withstanding the obvious mountain of evidence you have at your disposal to verify the fact that I’m stating, it is indisputable that the incidence of infidelity in males is higher than in females”
Nice one. In my extended circle of family, friends, colleagues and acquaintances, I know more women than men of whom I am 100 % sure they cheated, either because they told me so (unbelievable hamster spins as a byproduct btw), or I was a witness to the affair or was exposed to the fallout in various degrees once it came to light.
Re: cheating men
Amongst my friends half of those married 5 years ago are divorced. Every single case involved infidelity on the part of the wife. I know of no men, personally who have cheated though all have been tempted.
re: “I know of no men, personally who have cheated though all have been tempted.”
I know too many men who have cheated, but they stay married even after the wife finds out. It has always seemed to me that women cheat specifically to get divorced, like my first wife did.
@Sun Wukong re: “constantly trying to earn my approval in realizing that what she does during the day doesn’t keep me around.”
Besides what you’ve already said, the girlishness and “think of you” checking-in, I’m curious to know what specifically you count from her as earning your approval. “Is this sandwich how you like it?” “Is this dress what you wanted me to wear?” “I can go even faster if you want.”
Rollo, I liked your comment Jan. 11/9:01 Fairness is such a difficult concept for people to grasp, because one’s view of what is fair depends on perspective. For example, the most recent Pew study on division of household chores indicated that women still do much more housework and childcare work, on average, than men. So many articles and blogs were written, decrying the unfairness of the current state of affairs. Yet, when viewed in the greater context of total hours worked (paid, unpaid, childcare), men and women worked about the same number (men slightly higher). In spite of the fact… Read more »
@jeremy,
Oh, but it gets so much more interesting when women devise social conventions to convince men that doing more chores (traditionally feminine chores in specific) will get them laid more often.
‘Rape Culture’ mavens love the indignation that comes from men thinking they’re owed sex, but can’t deny the usefulness of the sex carrot to get men to pull her cart:
http://therationalmale.com/2013/01/30/choreplay/
My take on “Alpha Female”: a) AF comes across as a haughty, righteous, bigoted, bitter femcunt; she probably is PHAT too on top of all that. She could not possibly be an Alpha Female as an AF is by definition self-respecting as demure and sexually aggressive (among other trats), i.e. she’d have a fulfilling relation with a high-value man, have her shit together and be able to keep a family together; an AF would have no interest in crazy shit like feminism as she’d know instinctively that such a dumb ideology is counter her innate interest. “Alpha Female” is probably… Read more »
@ jf12
It has always seemed to me that women cheat specifically to get divorced, like my first wife did.
I think that women decide that they want to leave a relationship, then find a convenient place to land, then actually leave the relationship.
@zdr01dz
Keep in mind, when Freud wrote that, most of hypergamy was well concealed. Yeah, he was an idiot, but it’s kind of like saying Isaac Newton was an idiot for not seeing quantum mechanics.
@ M Simon IQ follows a bell curve. Why not sexuality? And why not genetic? IQ is genetic.Or hormones in the womb. At least some aspects of sexuality depend on hormones in the womb. Homosexuality fer instance. Good question and there is a simple answer. Male sexual orientation doesn’t exist on a bell curve because as far as nature is concerned there is only one correct answer. Attraction to females, especially fertile females is the only plan that gets DNA into the next generation. Natural selection doesn’t predict that healthy men would be attracted to anything else. So you might… Read more »
@Jeremy re: Freud
Related: when asked what he does all day, trapped in his own body in his wheelchair for many decades, the brilliant Stephen Hawking said he spends most of his time thinking about women.
What women want, Part 1.
For some, possibly Freudian reason, I forgot to comb my hair this morning and I guess my wife didn’t notice. Granted it’s like an inch long, inch and a half max, so it’s kind of hard to tell, maybe. But already so far two women have mentioned that it looks good. What women want to see is a little difference, a little rebellion.
What women want, Part 2.
Although women notice everything, I’m certain that the only body part that my women have been definitely specifically focused on has been my penis. It’s the only thing they ever look at, the only thing they ever reach for.
What women want, Part 3.
In Freud’s case, what women wanted was to babble endlessly about themselves while making up sexual stories to tell to a weird dude who always wanted to hear more.
What women want, Part 4.
Women want to be thought of as alpha females by other women. Women want to be copied by other women.
“and she shows a decided lack of understanding what is said as compared to what she understands”
It is like that with most women. One thing I learned from this blog and others is that there is no point in debating. So I no longer debate anything with my wife, I just do or don’t do an action on my part and do or don’t accept an action on her part. As a result I no longer have endless pointless debates and arguments and feel a LOT better
What women want, Part 5.
Women want to be men; specifically women consider a greater beta’s life to be the authentically lived life. I don’t think that fact is just due to media influence, i.e. just because almost all good stories are written by betas. I think all women not-so-secretly want to be a nice guy beta male who magically succeeds with women, in order to show beta males how to do it right.
What women want, Part 6.
Although women *want* an alpha male, they don’t want to want him.
What women want, Part 7.
Women hate the fact that they have so many choices, especially so many sexual choices, so much sexual freedom, and so women want to feel forced, to feel constrained, to feel bound.
What women want, Part 8.
The blue pill is currently investing extremely heavily in falsely promoting men’s looks and men’s “prosocial” (nice guy beta provider) behaviors as being more important to sexual success than men’s dominance. Women wish dominant men were nicer and better looking.
@jf12
lol, be careful what you wish for ladies.
What women want, Part 9. After the Great Influx of women into Tinder the past couple of years, which was done by deliberately limiting which active men the women see, i.e. the false pretense that the handsome guys are more numerous by not letting the women see so many unattractive guys, Tinder is just now trying to get beta males to up their ante. Despite over-showing the better-looking men by more than a factor of two, women were still swiping right on less than 1/7 of the men. Swiping left is what the women were enjoying doing, but it isn’t… Read more »
What women want, Part 10.
Women want beta males to be deceived about dominance.
Shorter red pill: dominance works with women.
Since the only men on Tinder that swipe left are handsome men, no man is ever going to pay for the service of Undo. Only women will pay for the humiliation of admitting she can’t hookup with any of the handsome guys she swiped right on, and so NOW, finally, she wants to give the lesser men a chance with her.
An attractive woman dangling the potential for sex with her is the exact (symplectic) analogy of a dominant man dangling the potential for niceness from him. Having read that, you can’t unread it, so do with it what you will.
What women want, Part 11.
Women want a “bookstore”, in quotes, that sells almost no books, where they can sit and look books and magazines with no intention of buying, and drink expensive coffee and cocoa and nibble on expensive biscotti, while using the “free” internet.
What women want, Part 12.
Women want to think they would look better in more expensive shoes.
That previous sentence is the Key To Everything, to the man seeking wisdom in this area. An interesting corollary: women wish they could wear slutty shoes regally.
RE: What women want. This is the single best comment I think Dalrock has ever made on my blog: I think there is another side to the same coin. These women don’t just want to build a better beta, they want to tame the alpha. In fact, I think the former is just another way they are trying to approach the latter. They want to take an inherently unsafe activity and make it safe. They want to submit to a man without having to submit; they want a man who can tame their feral self. They want him to trip… Read more »
Best red pill advice for women: Wise woman warns “act under the mentality that 20 is the new 30”.
http://thoughtcatalog.com/janet-ong-zimmerman/2015/01/sorry-but-30-is-not-the-new-20-when-it-comes-to-love/
re: Freud and Hawking. What a pair of pussies. Understandable but still pathetic. I used to be a mangina myself, though, so I don’t hold it against them. Although secretly in my mind I do. Ha. re: Tinder. Got over 40 matches. All the girls I messaged either completely ignored me or unmatched me soon afterwards. My guess is for every match I’d get, the girl I matched with was getting 30-40 matches — or she would, if she was indiscriminately swiping right like I was doing. If not more. I just ended up being completely bored with it. A… Read more »
Stephen Hawking, Beta.
@Rollo, it isn’t just about household chores. It speaks to the different ways that boys and girls are raised. I’ve written it before, but I’ll say it again: Boys are raised to believe that their education and income is their gateway to sex, intimacy, and family. They are taught from childhood that if they want a wife (sex, family), they will need to get a job – the higher-income/prestige, the better. Their job will be their conduit to family – it will be what women find attractive in them. And women encourage this line of thinking – it is responsible… Read more »
Boys are raised to believe that their education and income is their gateway to sex, intimacy, and family. They are taught from childhood that if they want a wife (sex, family), they will need to get a job – the higher-income/prestige, the better. Their job will be their conduit to family – it will be what women find attractive in them. And women encourage this line of thinking – it is responsible for new generations of “good husbands.” Of course, what is important to women is that these men BE good husbands. What is important to the men is what… Read more »
@Softek, re: messaging.
The women feel they are doing their part by choosing you as attractive enough to have sex with. After matching, they feel it is your part to exhibit sexual dominance. And more sexual dominance.
“Katherine waited an hour to respond. Then: “Ha.” And then, one minute later, “I will.” And: “I kinda do.””
http://www.gq.com/life/relationships/201402/tinder-online-dating-sex-app
@ jf12 Point taken. I’ll have to do some experimenting. I say that I don’t give a fuck — now it’s time to start acting like it. I’m teetering on the edge of MGTOW. Probably a normal phase for recovering Betas, especially ones who were prone to extreme ONE-itis like me that’re transitioning to spinning plates. New Year’s was a good lesson for me with that girl telling me to “grow a pair.” Time for the gloves to come off. They did that night. It wasn’t too long after she dropped that line that she was saying “That’s definitely not… Read more »
Rollo and all,
Excellent comment thread. Thanks for so much for the useful information. One item comes to mind for me; “pay attention to actions not words” has gotten little attention as it relates to AF. I get more info about her and the FI from the frequency of her replies and the walls of words than from the content. Consequently I have no interest in responding to her. Also, thanks to whoever it was that put TL;DR in a comment. I was doing that but didn’t know it had a name.
women fundamentally lack the capacity to appreciate the sacrifices men make to facilitate the feminine reality.
To which the likely feminine reply is, “That’s reality. Suck it up.”
Women have no sense of gratitude; they feel entitled to the sacrifices of men.
zdr01dz
January 12th, 2015 at 10:23 am
Nature gives lots of incorrect answers for lots of things. Those genes are constantly “looking” for new niches. Mistakes are made in mutation, transcription, association, and many other places.
Fer instance – gayness has been found to be useful in propagating a brother’s or sisters genes.
Life is very complex and the best understanding is not reductionist.
@jf12 re: wise woman.
I honestly didn’t know what to do, and unintentionally found myself with men I shouldn’t have been with, and in relationships that didn’t progress [where I wanted].
If that was wise, I’m curious what you regard as unwise.
jf12 January 12th, 2015 at 10:50 am When playing dread game with the fm I can feel her knotting up as I get more and more into the other. And then I tell her she can win me back by wanting me more than any other woman does. She totally relaxes because she knows she can do that. In fact she likes doing that so much that sometimes she gets hot just from me telling her how she will help me with the other. So yeah. The real AFs like beating the competition for a dominant guy. FM likes dominating… Read more »
jf12
January 12th, 2015 at 10:56 am
What women want, Part 6.
Although women *want* an alpha male, they don’t want to want him.
The fm likes to be “made” to want me. I always ask her after a dread session, “Now don’t you feel better.” And the answer is always, “Yes.”
@Exfernal, her wisdom was in telling women she was wrong to think and to do the things she did.
Rollo Tomassi
January 12th, 2015 at 12:40 pm
Yep. That is what they want.
This exchange with AF confirms a realization I had pretty early in my Red Pill journey. I decided to avoid arguing with women about anything, especially Red Pill principles. Because: 1) Their “facts” are their emotions. As long as they continue to feel the same way, they believe they are winning the argument. 2) They change topics, get personal, dredge up every piece of garbage they can think of & become hysterically emotional to evade conceding a point. 3) They lean so heavily on NAWALT, isolated anecdotes that “disprove” general observations, a subjectivism that makes any assertions invalid, shaming, out-grouping… Read more »
@ M Simon
Life is very complex and the best understanding is not reductionist.
I’m afraid we’re going to have to agree to disagree on this one. The rules of the universe are really simple once you know what they are.
Mass and energy are the same thing.
E=mc^2
Female attraction model
Self+1=Profit
😎
@funoldguy One item comes to mind for me; “pay attention to actions not words” has gotten little attention as it relates to AF. At what point would totally ignoring people like AF look like acceptance? At what point would it look like she’s being ignored? I can’t answer those questions. I do, however, think you have made the single most important point w.r.t. most blue-pill women commenting here… and that is that their very action of posting here betrays their need for hypergamy-aware male attention. Do we give them the attention they seek, for their feelz? Or do we ignore… Read more »
@jf12 And we all know how well “Do as I say, not as I do” will go over with the younger women. I predict it will fly like a concrete kite when weighed against the hedonistic joy of the Carousel. As to your earlier questions about qualifying, when we crash together I always wake up to breakfast prepared. I’m pretty much begged for more of my time with promise of sexual favors. I rarely initiate texting with a woman who initially told me on a first date that she “Doesn’t do the whole texting thing.” When she asked “Wait you’re… Read more »
@Hosswire This exchange with AF confirms a realization I had pretty early in my Red Pill journey. I decided to avoid arguing with women about anything, especially Red Pill principles… Yep. I have/had similar thoughts/feelings/actions on this myself. There are women that in the past I might have discussed anything related to the attraction of women. Now? I wouldn’t dare bring it up. It’s not worth it. Almost all of them would feign disgust and some might even go SJW on me. There was one that I brought the topic up to when I was initially reading through Rollo and… Read more »
Rollo, Do you have an article the correlates women’s happiness with male leadership/family headship i.e. women of the 1950s being more happy than women today? And how that might play into hypergamy, red pill, etc? I enjoy reading your blogs because of the logic and use of statics/science to back up the assertion. At some point I read a study that 70% of women marry a man who is a higher social class, 70% marry a man who makes more money, 60% marry a man taller than them. 60% marry some one smarter than them, etc. These stats if true… Read more »
@Jeremy +1 It’s pushing water uphill to debate it past about the 8th word in my experience. As Rollo and many others have pointed out, shining light on the meta-strategy really makes them run for the shadows or screech a lot. For my part I have had varying results. Case one. About a year ago I revealed slowly the RP to my wife, mostly by showing it in action in the field and illustrating why her parents marriage was so dysfunctional. The model fit perfectly. Wife is smart, she had an epiphany and was actually able to swallow the pill… Read more »
A special congratulations to AF for her / it’s efforts in making it though who knows how many posts without mentioning the word “Patriarchy”. I am impressed with that level of self control, bravo.
Demonstrate, never explicate the Red Pill.
http://therationalmale.com/2013/12/30/secret-of-the-red-pill/
@rollo.
Ahh, I know you’re right,however sometimes I just love to be reckless and toss grenades just to see what happens.
to your point, I never discuss it with the wife anymore, it was a one shot deal
Oxytocin does not seem to drive nurturing behavior in men the way it does in women …, whereas women appear to have evolved to have a “brain-hormone-behavior constellation” that’s automatically primed for mothering”
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/01/what-happens-to-a-womans-brain-when-she-becomes-a-mother/384179/
AF’s parenting style explained:
Explained the female Self+1 attraction model to my wife
Her response: Maybe, but I don’t think so.
My response: Which one of your romance novels doesn’t follow Self+1?
Her response: Hmmm…. you’re right.
My wife has a fairly high IQ so after some thought it made sense. She’s reasonable. By contrast I shudder to think how my mother would respond to this line of reasoning. Her hamster is the size of a badger and equally vicious.
@Rollo
It takes a lot to offend me. That commercial offends me. Not because they had little kids curse, mind you. Because they lied through their goddamn teeth and reinforced the stereotype of shitty, angry female as appropriate to little girls. I feel for the young men that run in to the vitriolic cunts those girls eventually become. Wish I could tell them “No, you did nothing to deserve that girl’s hate. A bunch of terrible old women did, and then told them to take it out on you.”
So, after a full semester of Yes Means Yes! Yes! Yes! at the flagship YMY campus, the results are mixed. A slight uptick in girls feeling they must have been drugged “because I don’t think I drank all that much more than usual”, and a slight uptick in cougar sightings.
http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealerts/2014/index.html
@ Rollo
At the 2:19 mark they ruined a young boy’s life. Someday that child will grow up, go to college, land a good job and then get replaced by a robot. Then his wife will leave him for the robot. So many surprises in store for this kid. I’m sure he’ll have a good chuckle when he figures out that everything he was taught was a lie.
@AF re: “I’ll come back and check periodically”
So, in about a month, then? It’s a date!
^^^^^
jf12, perfect response 😎
This is how most women believe they can win a debate:
What’s shameful is seeing self-declared intellectually competent women try to win debates that way. I’d guess that the need to keep the dualist strategy covert likely makes it impossible for most women to be truly honest with themselves on this topic.
zdr01dz January 12th, 2015 at 3:54 pm DNA is not as simple as E=MC^2. Add it hormones and it gets more complex. Add in nutrition and you have more complications. To give you a simpler analogy – you can’t determine climate from F=ma. You can’t even determine it from Navier-Stokes and F=ma. When there are enough interactions a system becomes mathematically indeterminate. And that is especially true when the factors are unknown with sufficient degree of precision. And when there are unknown unknowns in the system. Reductionism is inadequate for complex systems. But you believe in reductionism. So where is… Read more »
And note:
“E=mc^2” can not be violated. “Self+1=Profit” can be violated.
One is the law of the universe the other is a heuristic.
Rollo Tomassi
January 12th, 2015 at 5:19 pm
Demonstrate, never explicate the Red Pill.
My strategy is to demonstrate then explicate. NLP. You want to trigger the amygdala and then bring the cortex in line while the experience is fresh and irrefutable. It reduces resistance. Eventually.
What do women want? Reckon I don’t give a damn what they want
We’re lazy because we want this bullshit to crash? Never been called lazy before but I don’t believe lawyers so once again, don’t give a damn
Return of one answer to “What do women want?”
Women think that they are better at being beta males than beta males are, because beta males don’t “get” that they are supposed to think alpha males are so great, like women do. Hence, a woman wants an alpha male to think *she* would be a better choice of buddy, or companion, or wingman or whatever, than some guy.
Remedial: alpha males are alpha over women. Period. Beta males are beta under women. Period.
Clearly, beta males are concerned with “What do women want?”, while females are concerned with “What do alpha males want?”
And you may ask yourself
How do I work this?
Where is that [female who concerns herself with my wants]?
@ Simon
There will always be outliers in any type of distribution. But that doesn’t mean very much.
re: AF poor debate skillz.
Presumably the major reason she was unable to engage in meaningful debate is because we didn’t bother to make her feel like it. Assuming she is, as self-described, an alpha female, then she is used to having the female herd, as well as beta males, suck up to her.
This is how she gets things done: she is Stroked until she Feelz, and then and only then will she perform.
Here is where a woman’s social dynamics power begins and ends: ALL she knows how to do is stroke or be stroked. She knows nothing else.
@ jf12
Beta males are beta under women. Period.
Oddly enough many beta males are actually proud that they are under their women’s control. They say so publicly.
@zdr01dz Oddly enough many beta males are actually proud that they are under their women’s control. They say so publicly. And the higher profile they believe they are the more they do: https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2015/01/10/stantons-wakeup-call/ Again, I would have never imagined that I get to do the things that I get to do today. Written a number of books, things like that. But I am who I am because Jackie said not you can do it, you will do it. And every man here knows that that’s true. So the bargaining chip for the man is, t’s going to work out better… Read more »
re: DNA and dominance.
It turns out that it is nurture, not nature, that does the heavy lifting in sociogenomics. For example, nobody does better when dominated, nobody is “naturally” predisposed to be submissive in a social hierarchy. Dominated nondominants are vigilant against dominants’ displeasure, for example, and the stress always negatively affects gene expression. One reference
Tung et al. 2012. Social environment is associated with gene regulatory variation in the rhesus macaque immune system. PNAS, 109(17), 6490–6495.
http://www.pnas.org/content/109/17/6490.full