When Neil Strauss was writing The Game there was an interesting side topic he explored towards the end of the book. He became concerned that the guys who were learning PUA skills and experiencing such success with women of a calibre they’d never experienced before would turn into what he called “Social Robots.” The idea was one that these formerly Game-less guys would become Game automatons; mouthing the scripts, acting out the behaviors and meeting any countermanding behaviors or scripts from women with calculated and planned “if then” contingencies.

The fear was that these Social Robots “weren’t themselves”, they were what Mystery Method, Real Social Dynamics, etc. were programing them to be and the relative success they experienced only reinforces that “robot-ness”. My experience with guys from this blog, SoSuave and other forums has been entirely different. If anything most men transitioning to a Red Pill mindset tenaciously cling to the ‘Just Be Yourself and the right girl will come along’ mentality.

A strong resistance guys have to Red Pill awareness will always be the “faking it” and keeping it up effort they believe is necessary to perpetuate some nominal success with women. They don’t want to indefinitely be someone they’re not. It’s not genuine to them and either they feel slighted for having to be an acceptable character for women’s intimate attention or they come to the conclusion that it’s impossible to maintain ‘the act’ indefinitely. Either way there’s a resentment that stems from needing to change themselves for a woman’s acceptance – who they truly are should be enough for the right woman.

I’ve written more than a few essays about this dynamic and the process of internalizing Red Pill awareness and Game, but what I want to explore here is the root idealism men retain and rely on when it comes to their unconditioned Game. In truth this Game is very much the result of the conditioning of the Feminine Imperative, but the idealistic concept of love that men hold fast to is what makes that conditioning so effective.

What’s Your Game?

I’ve written before that every man has a Game. No matter who the guy is, no matter what his culture or background, every guy has some concept of what he believes is the best, most appropriate, most effective way to approach, interact with and progress to intimacy with a woman. How effective that “Game” really is is subjective, but if you asked any guy you know how best to go about getting a girlfriend he’ll explain his Game to you.

Men in a Blue Pill mindset will likely parrot back what their feminine-primary conditioning had him internalize. Just Be Yourself, treat her with respect, don’t objectify her, don’t try to be someone you’re not, are just a few of the conventions you’ll get from a Blue Pill guy who is oblivious to the influence the Feminine Imperative has had on what he believes are his own ideas about how best to come to intimacy with a woman.

For the most part his beliefs in his methodology are really the deductive conclusions he’s made by listening to the advice women have told him about how best to “treat a woman” if he wants to get with her. A Blue Pill mindset is characterized by identifying with the feminine, so being false is equated with anything counter to that identification.

When you dissect it, that conditioned Blue Pill / Beta Game is dictated by the need for accurate evaluation of men’s Hypergamous potential for women. Anything that aids in women’s evaluating a man’s hypergamous potential to her is a tool for optimizing Hypergamy. The dynamics of social proof and pre-selection are essentially shortcuts women’s subconscious uses to consider men’s value to her. Likewise the emphasis Blue Pill Game places on men’s ‘genuineness’ is a feminine conditioning that serves much the same purpose – better hypergamous evaluation. If men can be conditioned to be up front about who they are and what they are, if they internalize a mental point of origin that defers by default to feminine primacy, and if they can be socially expected to default to full and honest disclosure with women by just being themselves, this then makes a woman’s hypergamous evaluation of him that much more efficient.

This is where most Blue Pill men fail in their Game; who they are is no mystery, their deference and respect is worthless because it’s common and unmerited, and just who he is isn’t the character she wants him to play with her.

So even in the best of Blue Pill circumstances, a man is still playing at who he believes will be acceptable to the feminine. His genuineness is what best identifies with the feminine. Blue Pill / Beta Game is really an even more insidious version of social robotics; the script is internalized, the act is who he is. However, it’s important to consider that this genuineness is still rooted in his idealistic concept of a mutual and reciprocal love.

From Of Love and War:

We want to relax. We want to be open and honest. We want to have a safe haven in which struggle has no place, where we gain strength and rest instead of having it pulled from us. We want to stop being on guard all the time, and have a chance to simply be with someone who can understand our basic humanity without begrudging it. To stop fighting, to stop playing the game, just for a while.

We want to, so badly.

If we do, we soon are no longer able to.

In The Burden of  Performance I made the case for men’s need to perform for feminine acceptance and how men’s idealistic concept of love centers not on a want for unconditional love, but rather a love free from the performance requirements women’s opportunistic, Hypergamous, concept of love demands of him. This quote sums up that idealistic want for rest from having to perform to earn a woman’s love and acceptance.

The problem of course is the supposition that a performanceless love would ever really be love, but men’s idealistic nature still believes that the state is realizable. On a social scale the Feminine Imperative sees the resource utility in this and so encourages the idea that both men and women mutually share his concept of idealized love. Thus men, unaware of the respective differences in concepts both sexes hold with regard to love, enter into a perpetual state of qualifying for a love they believe women should be capable of. Men will work hard, build empires and amass fortunes to come to that state of performanceless rest they idealize should be possible with a woman.

The Marriage of Idealism and Opportunism

About two weeks ago I was called to the carpet in the commentary by George Weeks (a.k.a. Not Born This Morning, one of many aliases) for what he believes was an inconsistency in my assessment of men’s idealistic concept of love and how that idealism is really symbiotic with women’s opportunistic concept of love. I’ll spare you his autistic attention trolling, but he did raise a few points I do need to clarify about how men and women’s separate, but purpose driven, concepts of love developed.

From Intersexual Hierarchies:

In the beginning of this series I stated that men and women’s approach to love was ultimately complementary to one another and in this last model we can really see how the two dovetail together. That may seem a bit strange at this point, but when social influences imbalance this conventional complement we see how well the two come together.

When a woman’s opportunistic approach to love is cast into the primary, dominant love paradigm for a couple, and a family, that pairing and family is now at the mercy of an opportunism necessitated by that woman’s hypergamy and the drive to optimize it. Conversely, when a man’s idealistic approach to love is in the dominant frame (as in the conventional model) it acts as a buffer to women’s loving opportunism that would otherwise imbalance and threaten the endurance of that family and relationship.

From Heartiste’s post:

7. Arguments about chores, money, sex life, and romance were highest in couples where the woman made all or most of the decisions. Female decision-making status was an even stronger determinant of relationship dissatisfaction than female breadwinner status. Women can handle making more money in a relationship, but they despise being the leader in a relationship.

8. Argument frequency decreased among female breadwinners if they were not the primary decision-makers. Lesson for men: You can have a happy relationship with a woman who makes more than you as long as you remain the dominant force in her non-work life. Or: GAME SAVES MARRIAGES.

When a woman’s love concept is the dominant one, that relationship will be governed by her opportunism and the quest for her hypergamic optimization. The ultimate desired end of that optimization is a conventional love hierarchy where a dominant Man is the driving, decisive member of that sexual pairing.

This was the meat of George’s confusion. As with the opportunism that Hypergamy predisposes women to, men’s idealistic concept of love stems from his want for genuineness and a want for what could be. I’d suggest that men’s idealism is the natural extension of the burden of performance. From a Beta perspective, one where women are his mental point of origin, that burden is an unfair yoke; one to be borne out of necessity and ideally cast off if he could change the game. To the Alpha who makes himself his mental point of origin, that burden is a challenge to be overcome and to strengthen oneself by. In either respect, both seek an idealistically better outcome than what that burden represents to them.

In and of itself, a man’s idealism can be a source of strength or his greatest weakness. And while unfettered Hypergamic opportunism has been responsible for many of women’s worst atrocities to men, in and of itself Hypergamy is the framework in which the human species has evolved. Neither is good nor bad, but become so in how they are considered and how they are applied.

Men’s idealistic concept of love is a buffer against women’s opportunistic concept of love. When that idealism is expressed from a Beta mindset women’s opportunism dominates him and it’s debilitating. When it’s expressed from an Alpha mindset it supersedes her opportunism to the relationship’s benefit.

Conditioned Idealism

If you want to use Blue Valentine (the movie) as an example, the guy in the relationship abdicates all authority and ambition over to his wife’s opportunism. He idealistically believes “love is all that matters” and has no greater ambition than to please her and ‘just be himself’, because his conditioning has taught him that should be enough. His Beta conditioning convinced his idealism that his wife would shared in that idealistic concept of love in spite of his absence of performance. Consequently she despises him for it. She’s the de facto authority in the relationship and he slips into the subdominant (another child to care for) role.

Now if a man’s Alpha, willful, idealism propels him to greater ambition, and to prioritize his concept of love as the dominant, and places himself as his mental point of origin for which a woman accepts you can see how this leads to the conventional model. His idealism is enforced by how he considers it and how he applies it.

Men’s idealistic concept of love can be the worst debilitation in a man’s life when that idealistic nature is expressed from a supplicating Beta mentality. It will crush him when that idealism is all about a bill of goods he idealistically hopes a woman shares and will reciprocate with. This is predominantly how we experience idealism in our present cultural environment of feminized social primacy.

From an Alpha perspective that idealism is a necessary buffer against that same feminine opportunistic concept of love that would otherwise tear a Beta apart.

There was a time when men’s idealistic concept of love was respected above the opportunistic (Hypergamy based) concept of love. I explored this social control of Hypergamy in Women Behaving Badly.

Under the old set of books, when men’s attractiveness (if not arousal) was based on his primary provisioning role his love-idealism defined the intergender relationship. Thus, we still have notions of chivalry, traditional romance, conventional models of a love hierarchy, etc. These are old books ideals, and the main reason I’ve always asserted that men are the True Romantics is due exactly to this love-idealism.

There was a time when men’s idealistic love concept pushed him to achievements that had social merit and were appreciated. Ovid, Shakespeare and the Beatles would not be the human icons they are if that idealism weren’t a driving force in men and society. Likewise, women’s opportunistic, hypergamy-based concept of love, while cruel in its extreme, has nonetheless been a driving motivation for men’s idealistic love as well as a filter for sexual selection.

Under the new set of books, in a feminine-centric social order, the strengths of that male idealism, love honor and integrity are made to serve the purpose of the Feminine Imperative. Men’s idealistic love becomes a liability when he’s conditioned to believe that women share that same idealism, rather than hold to an opportunistic standard. This is what we have today with generations of men conditioned and feminized for identifying with the feminine. These are the generations of men who were conditioned to internalize the equalist lie that men and women are the same and all is relative. From that perspective it should follow that both sexes would share a mutual concept of love – this is the misunderstanding that leads men to expect their idealism to be reciprocated and thus leads to their exploitation and self-abuse.

A man’s idealism becomes his liability when he enters a woman’s opportunistic frame still believing they both share a mutual concept of love.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

244 comments on “Idealism

  1. Great article as always.

    ” If anything most men transitioning to a Red Pill mindset tenaciously cling to the ‘Just Be Yourself and the right girl will come along’ mentality.”

    I didn’t cling to it, but it sure was unpleasant to let go of. I can certainly understand why people want to keep believing it, to their own detriment.

    Found a little thing for you to fix.

    “However, it’s important consider that this genuineness is still rooted in his idealistic concept of a mutual and reciprocal love.”

    Missing a *to* between important and consider.

  2. Great one as always.

    We cannot change nature of women, but we can work on ourselves. Also current society is based on primal drives- advertisement everywhere is bombarding us (men) with sex and content related to it. Women themselves got much more options (males) to choose from. Yet, as usually with any kind of abundance they became over-satiated instead of appreciative…

    Datson H.

  3. Rollo, you are so far out ahead I now can appreciate the generosity it trekkers for you to turn around and spell this out.

    it must be like a virtuoso musician teaching someone that’s never held a violin

  4. The irony that those that dread what they perceive being red pill as a constant exertion and faking it, are probably the ones who most tried the just tell me what you want and I’ll do it, but ended up dreading the frustration that it led to. To them red pillness is not being them, but resorting to the just tell me appeal is asking a woman to tell them to be something that they’re not.
    Another part of it is men having more of a general liking for women that goes against so much media messaging that they here of women so desiring such a simple setup of just wanting somebody to love me. In real life men are the ones who are looking for the simple setup of someone nice looking and enjoyable to be with, come what may. When the what can he do for her as utility equation usurps the come what may, many men don’t want to feel like they’ve given in to too much cynicism. And there’s so many actions and choices that they witness that go against so much messaging and attempts at indoctrination that I bet they even get to the point of feeling a little embarrassed about thinking it’s a gigantic, coordinated effort at a false advertisement campaign.

    A thought about less arguments when women don’t make the decisions. To me that comes from women always wanting an out, or a scapegoat, to deflect blame away from them. I read in either Roosh’s blog or another that gets quoted here about women loving mid level management positions. I’ve felt that way when things are going right, they can claim it’s their supervising things. If things are going wrong, they’re low enough to not be looked upon for being on the line for too much, but high enough that things going wrong are because of the people under them not keeping up. Women like to start from a place of not wanting things to go bad so lets not do this. Men start from a place of this can be good so lets find a way to make it happen.
    So if they don’t have to make most of the decisions, they’re safe from blame if things go bad. So they relax. If the man takes on that task, if things go good, then she can still relax and say isn’t this great for us (me)

  5. “treat her with respect, don’t objectify her,” I would say this is where I went wrong with every woman I have ever been with. I’ve seen other guys pull hot chicks doing the opposite of that quote enough times to know it is complete bullshit.

  6. Also, since there’s so much discussion on society being feminized I wanted to ask you Rollo about when you started letting your kid go around the neighborhood on her own.
    Came across an article about parents in Maryland that had CPS charge them with neglect because they let their 6yr old daughter, together with their 10yr old son, walk by themselves back and forth from a local park to their home. The father’s name sounds like he’s Russian or Ukrainian, don’t know about the mother.
    The article made me think about all the blog posts I’ve come across about eastern Europe still being a masculine part of the world and recent articles about more women in the workplace or in leadership positions and how it’s better because they make less riskier decisions. Well that can be another way of saying you make decisions based out of fear. Or as I said before, starting from a place of what can go wrong.
    So in a nut shell, restrictive fear based thinking that winds up getting parents charged with neglect for letting their kids go to the park.
    This is one article on it that contains a Wash Post link to another article about it.

  7. And now I just clicked on the link to the Daily Mail article about the married woman jailer who got caught banging the inmate in jail for attempted rape in a supply closet and claims that it wasn’t her fault. He seduced her.

    1. I read that article Water Canon Boy. A man convicted of rape pulled a married prison guard as a plate. I bet the husband’s idealism about marriage is gone now.

      There is an opportunity for him to recover however. Hopefully he get tested for STD’s and then divorces her cheating ass. She put herself in a position of legal weakness; he simply needs to pull the trigger and win that divorce.

      Exactly what Rollo has been saying; you can’t relax, stop game, or let your frame slip in marriage.

  8. “We want to relax. We want to be open and honest. We want to have a safe haven in which struggle has no place, where we gain strength and rest instead of having it pulled from us. We want to stop being on guard all the time, and have a chance to simply be with someone who can understand our basic humanity without begrudging it. To stop fighting, to stop playing the game, just for a while. We want to, so badly. If we do, we soon are no longer able to.”

    I have found that I must be on constant guard even with certain friends, in time they will chip away at my being. Even family is guilty of this. I expect it at work but still shocked at times when I must project myself because others are will to take a piece of me.

  9. I think it’s simpler than that.

    Men search for the unconditional love they thought they were getting from their mother, and must internalize that its not any more possible to get there with his own mother much less a partner.

    Brain chemistry goes into protect mode and psychology kicks in with some form of Madonna/whore.

    The reality is that very few of us men are strong enough to live essentially alone and independent. Women know this and skillfully exploit it, thats all. No need to let it frustrate you.

  10. In a recent zoological scientific study (I don’t have the link) showed that most donkeys believed they were being idealistically loved for who they are rather than what they do.

    Another great post.

  11. Good stuff here as always.

    I found another example of a movie for you to use for discussion on Beta behavior. It’s called The Shipping News with Kevin Spacey.

    It, like Blue Valentine, shows how Beta behavior (and the concept he holds as love) can tear him apart by “just being himself”, not having ambition and only existing to please her.

    It is a must watch movie for all of those men transitioning over from blue to red.

  12. I contend that as long as the FI is the dominant social schema in the West, that the “transition” from blue pill to red is NEVER over. It’s a constant process, even if–as Rollo posits–it becomes an effortless mindset. Any intentional mindset requires perpetual maintenance in the face of the never ending stream of stimuli and random circumstance that life presents. I really don’t believe the “effortless” part. Maybe less work over time, but the job is never over. That’s a conceit that causes so many marrieds to slip into BP hell.

    Maybe a topic for the next RM essay: “A Man’s Work Is Never Done.”

  13. Now I’m just waiting for Rollo or someone else to post 3 links saying, “already covered that topic.”

  14. Instead of gaming the “wife” (in quotes because the designation is a joke with the legions of whores today), why not go the other way and ignore her completely. I mean, if you’re actually going to get married, knock her up a couple of times, but why put any effort into the marriage after that.

    I don’t think gaming can really eliminate frivorce, so why spend the time? Be idealistic about something else.

    Read a bio on John Wayne recently. Wayne was an alpha, but did not really have game. Had three marriages and they didn’t work out. First one seemed like a decent woman, but seemed to cut off the sex a lot after she had four children, he cheated a bunch, and she got fed up. Now she was an actual Catholic who even after divorce didn’t remarry until Wayne died, which was decades later. Other two were women he had just a little in common with, Mexicans, and those drifted apart after a few years. He never formally divorced the third and took up with his personal assistant in his final few years.

    Wayne did not have game. He was smart but not shrewd. He was an idealist. Over time he fomulated the idea to change from Marion “Duke” Morrison to John Wayne. That was his life’s work. No one cares about his wives. He had seven kids I believe, the kids seemed to like him well enough. Wound up with less money at the end because of the divorces.

    FI causes pussy to be venerated above its value. That’s a problem. Now not everyone is an alpha, some research in what works with women is a good idea for men. But there’s got to be a walking away point as well.

    Wouldn’t a counterstrategy to frivorce be actually being a bad husband? Neglecting her, cheating on her? I’m getting firvorced, I may as well have had an affair or been an actual bad husband. So why not beat the women to the punch?

  15. I’m not seeing the nihilism in idealism. An idealist should shoot for being two standard of deviations beyond the mean. Or at the minimum one. Don’t be the the average in the ideocracy. Average=AFC. I see the fallacy all the time. If you can’t shoot for the two standard deviations above the mean on the bell curve, then all you efforts won’t be satisfactory as far as idealism goes.

    I’ve mentioned once or twice too often the MBTI. It isn’t valid in a world where people are average. It only is valid when people are polar in their ways of being. Sure Jung was a schmuck that was short sighted in the way of the “normal distribution” of humans. (He was the asshole who gave fuel to the fire of feminism.)

    Some of this red pill philosophy and guidelines for being only work if you speak in terms of bell curve out-liers. One and two standard deviations above the mean. Average sucks. And doesn’t define excellence. Alpha is two standard deviations above the mean. You got to get your mindset there. Polar personality traits are valid, but neutral ones are not.

    I’m having trouble seeing those that come from a beta mindset and think that beta traits are the devil.

    Some of us can survive the conventional model.

    I still think in the Breaking Bad series, that Skylar had no business in seeing Walter badly. But it is the perception of the female that needs to be influenced. Walter White was Alpha, descended into betatude for inexplicable reasons with the Grey Matter sellout with Gretchen. Then he regained his alpha when he ascended in his dealings with Gus, blew up Gus and then proceeded to be more alpha. And then it blew up in his face. Blew him up for good. Walter White was idealistic in terms of generating wealth for his “family” without regard for his eventual sacrificial death. The fact that his family wasn’ t on board with his plans didn’t deter his alpha mindset. He was outcome independent. The outcome was his death, but that doesn’t mean he didn’t have the right male hindbrain imprinted goal.

    I see it all the time in the Doctor treating Female patient realm. It is not how skilled as an operator how good the doctor is in treating the female patient. The only single is if the female patient thought the doctor “cared about her feelings” is how she judges the doctor.

    An analogy to the empathetic caring about how a doctor cares about the patient would be parallel to how a auto technician takes care of your car. Do you want the auto mechanic to “care about your perceptions” or just fix the damn car as perfectly as possible. You can have one or the other. Women care to deal about things emotionally. Knowing that it is better to push their right buttons than not. Don’t complain. Understand. And perform

    Like Rollo’s essay Dream Girls and Children With Dynamite, don’t let things blow up in your face.

    Once a man enters into a long term relationship or becomes married (esp. old school) he enters into a realm that must be Beta. At that point he must not give up his Alpha frame.

    My experience is that if it is not a LTR and the guy goes alpha in six months after originally being beta he is a Child with dDynamite and blows up the relationship. Same with long term relationship where the guy goes all Alpha (but all 100% asshole) and the comfort test Beta from the spouse–Dynamite city.

    Hey LTR, Marriage= must give Beta with an Alpha Frame.

    Of course that depends on how you are defining your current relationship and defining your goals.

    We all recognize that game and manosphere goals are all over the map in regards to age, ONS, STR, LTR, Married, etc. and you take it as you relate to it. But The Rational Male kind of applies across the board.

  16. Striver

    “Instead of gaming the “wife” (in quotes because the designation is a joke with the legions of whores today), why not go the other way and ignore her completely. I mean, if you’re actually going to get married, knock her up a couple of times, but why put any effort into the marriage after that.
    I don’t think gaming can really eliminate frivorce, so why spend the time? Be idealistic about something else.”

    It’s not a joke where I live in a community where 1 out of 18 marriages end in divorce, 1 out of 50 houses ended up in foreclosure and men don’t give their wives a reason to leave because of loss of job, vices or stupid decisions (because none of the three come into play). Granted this is an outlier community. But hey it is happening.

    Gaming the wife: Some of us got married in the 90’s. Me, Rollo, and Ian Ironwood. Not a travesty.

    Define yourself. Know your strengths and weakness. Maximize the former and minimize the latter. Be your best actualized self without fear of your weaknesses.

    Be a man that other man would perceive as good at being a man. Then women would take more interest as you become a better man. Game is not about tricking others. It is about being a better man, father to your sons, husband to your wife, boyfriend to your girlfriend, etc.

  17. “Gaming the wife: Some of us got married in the 90’s. Me, Rollo, and Ian Ironwood. Not a travesty.

    Define yourself. Know your strengths and weakness. Maximize the former and minimize the latter. Be your best actualized self without fear of your weaknesses.

    Be a man that other man would perceive as good at being a man. Then women would take more interest as you become a better man. Game is not about tricking others. It is about being a better man, father to your sons, husband to your wife, boyfriend to your girlfriend, etc.”

    –> I have difficulties understanding that:
    Start massive, life-changing work-project on yourself, just to make a completly irrational and dangerous state (marriage) workable?
    Eehhhm, lol? 🙂

    What about this:
    Start massive, life-changing work-project on yourself, trick women (and yes, that IS what game is- the moment you employ even one concious game trick…well, you trick because that is not your normal, socialized and organically grown self – which is ok, because hypergamy makes women whores) and DONT marry, ending LTRs when they get too bothersome.

    Sounds much, much less work-intensive and much more focussed on oneself than doing all this to appease a never ending shit test machine that wil just escalate the tests even further over time.

  18. Rollo, have you ever written anything on how society treats men who undergo say a hair transplant surgery vs. women who get breast implants. Basically, it appears that a man is vilified for trying to alter his natural, genetic state, while women are pretty much given a free pass when it comes to cosmetic improvement. I guess it just comes down to the fact that hypergamy hates to be tricked.

  19. He has written about that. At least in some degree. Men must stand by their word, while a woman has a right to change her mind. It’s still part of women’s desire to optimize their choice and sexual urgency and one way to do that is to minimize a man’s choice. Shame men from doing things that can be seen as artificial so that she can be sure that what she gets as her most optimized choice really is her most optimized.
    So the specific topic of hair transplant may not be there, but the principle and concepts are.
    He’s even written about the criticism of game being tricks also. If you learn what works and what doesn’t, it’s not tricking to throw out what doesn’t work and only apply what does.
    That home improvement show that used to be on had a woman hire a fake contractor who tore up enough of her house to make her think they were doing something and then skipped town with her money. A legit contractor trying to line up the same kind of customer would do much of the same kind of soliciting that the con would do. Else risk people not feeling confident that they know what they’re doing and they don’t get hired anywhere. That would be using game. Only the con uses tricks.

  20. I just had an epiphany. Rollo is peddling nothing more than traditionalist horseshit wrapped up in high falutin’ manospheric language. This article? It’s essentially “man the fuck up or shut up and continue to be a pussy loser”.

    I mean, what is it you are really saying here, Rollo? What is the formula for a good life for a man?

    Marry a virgin in her early 20s.
    Become very successful financially so you can play provider well
    Find a woman who will agree at some level to play a traditional female role
    Don’t ever have any setbacks in life
    Don’t ever get discouraged
    Be buff and big and strong
    Wake up every day and step into the blocks to run yet another race as hard as you can
    Never be vulnerable
    Never be weak
    Never let you guard down with women
    Maintain the “frame” of your relationship and impose traditional idealistic ideas about love on your wife – constantly and without fail. Sure, you might have to overcome all of our culture and society, little things like the educational system, entertainment, news media – but hey, just man the fuck up, right Rollo?

    Etc – please, I could go on forever about all the things men are apparently supposed to be up to be good “Alphas” (and oh yeah, actual biologists laugh hysterically at how the term Alpha is misused by manospherians nonstop).

    After all that, what, should I go hunting for fucking unicorns too?

    When are the “Alphas” here going to get it? You just got lucky – genetically and in the circumstances of life and are now retroactively justifying it, and cherry picking data to aggrandize yourselves and your fucking retrograde, reactionary ideas about human society (mostly fundo Christian horseshit). It’s a solution that only a subset of lucky men can deploy, and I guarantee that many, many men fail after adopting the traditional model implied by all Rollo says. Hint, women are independent actors. Bigger hint, all of the cultural/societal support for traditional values is gone – but hey, Rollo says that we need to do is to chomp down harder on the bit that’s been put in our mouths, and to just accept that this approach means many, many men will be losers in life. Horseshit, and really, not “rational” at all, Rollo. (All this while he tells us women’s hypergamous nature will continue to raise the bar on men to levels impossible for most men to achieve – this is a direct implication of your own logic, Rollo).

    If, according to you. my best choice is to retreat to some kind of separatist radical Christian community and pay obeisance to a debunked mythology, well I guess I just have to stop taking you and all of this seriously.

    There is always a “better man” for todya’s woman (directly implied by hypergamous behavior) Rollo – how could you miss that? The treadmill Rollo suggests men jump on has already exploded and very few men successfully make such an approach to life work anymore. But I guess if you see yourself as one of the exceptions, you really don’t give a shit about those who haven’t lucked out.

  21. Great post. There is a side of me that sometimes thinks…”I wish I didn’t “need” game to get girls.”

    But that’s like saying I wish I didn’t need to speak to communicate. No one is a natural communicator, it takes years of practice to be a good public speaker, or a musician or good at languages.

    The understanding of game is really re-programming your way of thinking and how you perceive the world. Do you perceive if from the woman’s point of view and pedestalize? Or do you take it from the “Masculine imperative” and take charge? It’s a choice.

  22. Glenn @ anger stage of accepting Red Pill

    don’t wish it was easier wish you were better

  23. Legalize and regulate prostitution. Abolish marriage and child support. Gender war ends. Men win. It’s just time to drop the pretense and bullshit.

    There just isn’t any point in doing all this. Women are not capable of empathy, genuine intimacy, or love. So even if you successfully game her and her desire is genuine, what is it really worth? She’s a sociopathic overgrown child, one who will rationalize reasons to destroy your life on a whim should she get bored, so why does her opinion of you even matter? There’s no real connection between the two of you, so what did you even do all this for?

    She’s not capable of connecting with anybody except an idealization that is rooted in her knuckle dragging, pathetic 13 year old girl’s sexual psychology. You will never be free of the burden of having to conform to that idealization. It never even occurs to women to care about who you really are. They’re not even curious. You’re not even there. It’s identical to what serial killers and sociopaths do. Real men are just props in their internal psycho sexual fantasy world. Should you go off script and fail to conform to that prefabricated and sexualized schema and become an actual person, you don’t even exist. That’s why women can’t tolerate the basic humanity of the men in their lives and will lose sexual interest and respect for you when you show weakness. That’s what the shit test really is – it’s her never ending desire to make sure you’re not a human being.

    Think about how utterly fucking inhuman, ghastly, and fundamentally pathetic that is. And this is the prize you’re doing all this for?

    Our entire culture has been designed to romanticize and idealize women precisely because the truth is this ugly. When men are revealed to women for who they really are, they simply become human beings who want affection, support, and some measure of peace. When women are revealed for who they really are, this is what you find. It’s fucking disgusting. How can you not just feel total revulsion and resentment doing the tired song and dance while trying to get in their pants? Who cares anymore?

    Without the carrot of the idealized wife who would fill the void and love her husband unconditionally, men simply have no incentive to engage with institutions, work themselves to death to make a ruling class even more wealthy, die in wars and so on. The prize that the battle was supposed to win has been revealed to be a sham, so it’s really just time to walk away, isn’t it? Let the damsels fend for themselves. Who gives a flying fuck?

  24. Hi Rollo.

    Can you post your thoughts on the sexual double standard… the ‘master key is a good key, but a lock that is opened by many keys is just a shitty lock’.

    My friend yesterday said that, it is the same thing for men and women. That the fact that i have a few girls at once is just as bad a woman sleeping around/being a slut. (spin plates)
    He basically said that woman should be able to act like men sexually and that is acceptable. Do you agree?

    Is a man to accept that his eventual partner may have 25 partners and marry/girlfriend her anyway? Saying that I realise men are hopelessly naive in thinking they might meet a partner with a low sexual notch count. And even then the girl may lie.

    So the girl is more likely to cheat, i made the argument that women are irrational and more emotional therefore more likely to cheat and feel no guilt. I have personally found girls who sleep with more men get bored in monogamy more, they crave the ‘Honeymoon period’ and they believe in the ‘MR RIGHT’ lie, so many of them sabotage their relationships due to this, or boredom.

    He said it’s the same for men in cheating that if they have more partners they will still cheat. of course men cheat but aren’t we more rational about it? In my last LTR I had the wanton urge to do it, but I did not pursue it.

    The more i learn the more i realise how we are purely not meant for monogamy.

    PS: I have decided to give up on influencing my friends. they can stay the same ‘mr nice guy who idealises women’ thinking it will work and that ultimate respect of woman is crucial (even though they know it is a broken model.) It is simply not worth my time to be disliked for truisms that they choose to ignore.


  25. @Glenn,

    I don’t see Rollo as advocating for Traditionalism. It may look a bit like it, but to me there is one big difference. What I get out of this is to drop the idealism. Steel your heart, because you know that every woman you are ever with is going to eventually cut your heart out if something goes wrong. A traditional guy will be destroyed by that because he hung on to his idealism. A red pill guy will simply understand it is the nature of what we face.

    Like it or not, men are born with a hardwired desire for sex. How do we as individuals achieve that? How to we propogate the species if we so choose? You have to play the game, that’s how.

    Rollo is teaching us realistic expectations as well or more than just how to play the game. Traditionalism advocates for the illusion.

  26. @Divided Line @8:39:

    I second that comment. Damn straight.

    To all men, what exactly do you think is the “prize” that you oh, so desire and work so hard for (game)?

    I have promiscuous guy friends and quite often they regale me of their dalliances and all of their associated problems that these women always bring. Dealing with these women can be legally, financially and emotionally lethal to a man, much more so than you think. Men improve and build themselves up for what? To be a prop in a womans’ life? Well, that’s what you really are. Improve yourself for you.

    If it wasn’t for the sex, what other possible reason is there to associate with them knowing their true nature? Living in Europe, I can have a different young, attractive and eager escort every night of the week if I wanted.

  27. This is very interesting. Alpha Fux Beta Bux dichotomy and other issues touched on in Rollo’s work –

    1. Porn star Kortney Kane:

    2. The ” real life” Kortney Kane, age 29, looking to cash in for a Beta Hubby (Porn stars can’t last much past age 30):

    In the second, skim through and read some of the quotes. You will see every woman’s rationalizations about who she was, who she wants to be and the type of man she is suddenly now entitled to…

    I wish her luck

  28. “Hold your horses pardner.” No one is advocating to wait to find a unicorn and marry her or have a LTR. Life and society has changed. Look at a wikipedia syopsis of the movie “Idiocracy” if you haven’t seen the movie (not worth watching except for the first 15 minutes) or read Aaron Cleary’s “Enjoy the Decline”. Society got fat and complacent and is in decline. 25 years ago it was still worth marrying and sure maybe some of us found a unicorn. Or maybe we kept frame and have skills to hold someone we still find better than another mate and going forward will make an in-flight decision to keep her or ditch her.

    Idealism is not inherently a negative attribute when dealing with intersexual relationships. It is not an core trait of men like strength, courage, mastery or honor. But it doesn’t have to be a liability when kept in perspective with a red pill frame.

    Take what resources, intellect and ambition you have and go forth and be the best you can be for yourself. Jeeesh. No one said get married or do what I did.

  29. @ GWDT

    You might appreciate this zen koan, “The Giver Should Be Thankful.”

    While Seisetsu was the master of Engaku in Kamakura he required larger quarters, since those in which he was teaching were overcrowded. Umezu Seibei, a merchant of Edo, decided to donate five hundred pieces of gold, called ryo, toward the construction of a more commodious school. This money he brought to the teacher.

    Seisetsu said: “All right. I will take it.”

    Umezu gave Seisetsu the sack of gold, but he was dissatisfied with the attitude of the teacher. One might live a whole year on three ryo, and the merchant had not even been thanked for five hundred.

    “In that sack are five hundred ryo,” hinted Umezu.

    “You told me that before,” replied Seisetsu.

    “Even if I am a wealthy merchant, five hundred ryo is a lot of money,” said Umezu.

    “Do you want me to thank you for it?” asked Seisetsu.

    “You ought to,” replied Uzemu.

    “Why should I?” inquired Seisetsu. “The giver should be thankful.”

  30. @ Glenn,

    Who would NOT want to do this?:

    The formula for a good life for a man
    Marry a virgin in her early 20s.
    Become very successful financially
    Find a woman who will agree to play a traditional female role
    Don’t ever have any setbacks in life
    Don’t ever get discouraged
    Be buff and big and strong
    Wake up every day and step into the blocks to run yet another race as hard as you can
    Never be vulnerable
    Never be weak
    Never let you guard down with women
    Maintain the “frame” of your relationship and impose traditional idealistic ideas– constantly and without fail.
    Sure, you might have to overcome all of our culture and society, little things like the educational system, entertainment, news media – but hey, just man the fuck up
    Be good “Alphas”
    Go hunting
    Get lucky –
    Retreat to a Christian community (Get thee to a Red State)

  31. @ Softek

    If the giver should be thankful the recipient shoud be what? Grateful? Resentful? Minimally appreciative?

    This is problem of BetaBux. The provider should be thankful he has the means to provide, but is he allowed any expectations of the recipient? The current order suggests an obligation to provide to give with nothing to be expected in return. There is no reason for the giver to be thankful for existence of the recipient. The recipient is not a positive contribution to the givers life unless giving something of value in return either to the giver or in the name and spirit of the giver.

    Perhaps the problem is seeing it as giving and therefore charity. When really it is better seen as a patron client relationship where the client is known and acknowledged as dependent on the patron.

  32. @ GWDT

    Yes, precisely. Although the abundance he’s blessed with isn’t his money. The story could be about a poor man who finds some money on the street and donates it to someone else, and the meaning behind the koan would be the same.

    The main idea is that, in the very act of giving itself, the giver and the receiver are rewarded equally.

    If you go out of your way to do something for someone else on the premise of expecting a reward, any reward you get will never be enough.

    If you go out of your way to do something for someone else with no expectation at all of a reward, you immediately have your reward, and it’s a greater reward than anything anyone else could give to you.

    IMO, the solution to the problem of not being appreciated or understood by other people is to not base our actions on the hope that other people will appreciate or understand them.

    @ Badpainter

    The problem with Beta Bucks is negotiated desire.

    In the case of the koan I shared: it’s about the spirit of giving itself. The idea that we should martyr ourselves or sacrifice ourselves is something else entirely, and has nothing to do with the meaning of the koan.

    In short: if you give, give honestly without any expectations of getting something in return. There is nothing wrong with charging money for services or expecting something in return in a business transaction or any similar thing —

    — the main idea here is that if you CHOOSE to give, choose to do so out of your own abundance, not in order to get something in return.

    I’ve done a lot of things for people, and a lot of times never got any thanks — but I was okay with it, because I knew going in that I was doing it because I wanted to help them.

    If you take that attitude, then you don’t feel taken advantage of or cheated when you get no reward, or even a thank you. If you do something solely to help someone, and you help them, that’s the reward itself.

    When that’s your intent from the beginning, you have your reward immediately. I’ve had plenty of times that I felt good after helping someone even though they didn’t thank me, or sometimes even treated me poorly — because I was prepared for it going into it.

    Putting up with abuse or being taken advantage of is one thing. Making the decision to help someone of your own free will while expecting nothing from them in return is another.

    Put another way: did the guy who donated all that money really want to help the person out? Or was getting recognition and praise closer to his real intention?

  33. @ Softek

    I agree, such is the nature of charity. Personal relationships are not charitable enterprises. In personal relationships everyone gives and takes and obvious disparities in the give and take end up breaking those relationships.

    As regards the BetaBux giving the entire arrangement is understood to be a quid pro quo. Even the blue pill sells it that way. Provide her material upkeep get rewarded. Of course the bait and switch is to change the terms to the reward to only being allowed to give, and thus the con.

    This : “Put another way: did the guy who donated all that money really want to help the person out? Or was getting recognition and praise closer to his real intention?”

    Does it matter? If the recipient really needed help than a little gratitude in return is not much to expect. The recipient’s lack of gratitude should indicate the value of giving to that person. The giver chose poorly in that he only fed the recipients entitlement complex.

  34. For all the non-idealists, there is also the flip side of GWDT’s statement theme that no one cares about what you did do. And that is seen in some cute song lyrics by The Tragically Hip:

    “Sundown in the Paris of the prairies wheat kings have all their treasures buried
    And all you hear are the rusty breezes pushing
    Around the weather vane Jesus

    In his Zippo lighter, he sees the killer’s face maybe
    It’s someone standing in a killer’s place twenty years for nothing, well that’s
    Nothing new, besides, no one’s interested in something you didn’t do
    Wheat kings and pretty things, let’s just see what the morning brings”
    (It was about a man falsely accused of murder and imprisoned for 20 years, but that is not how I interpret the line below)

    “No one is interested in something you didn’t do…..”

    And that goes to the former essay in which Rollo wrote that rejection is better than regret twenty years down the line.

  35. A thank you is nothing. Not saying thanks is less than nothing. If you give to someone who doesn’t even have the social grace to say thank you then it is normal to feel slighted. It is a reasonable expectation to at least be treated with reciprical courtasy. Now if you expect the person to gush all over you and laud your generousity in public, then you are not giving for the right reasons. People who do not at least treat you courtiously should be dropped from your circle.

  36. @Glenn

    The list of stuff you talk about doing though… let’s be honest here: nobody gives a fuck who you are, they care only what you can do for them. Everybody will view you that way. Whether you’re doing it for something external or something internal, you have to do all those things to have what you want in this world. That’s a simple fact. Nobody will ever give a fuck who you are, they will only care what you can do for them.

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with doing none of that, finding some way to move to Tahiti, and lay in a hammock all day strumming a guitar and eating bananas if you can manage it. But to achieve anything in the first world (and you know this already from your own life experiences) as a man you do have to buckle down and get shit done. I have a real hard time saying you’re not holding frame in doing all that shit if your motivation to do so comes from “I’ve decided these are the goals I have and things I want out of life” instead of “Somebody told me had to do this.” So long as you’re doing those things as a conscious choice as steps to achieving your goals, it IS holding your frame.

    Where I come from is having read The Now Habit a while back. Great book for coping with procrastination, but the first point Fiore makes is that all of us go through life with the attitude “I have to do this. They’re making me do it. I don’t have a choice,” with almost everything we do at work and in life. The ability to actually get shit done comes from choosing to do those things as a result of the goals you have in life. They’re no longer things foisted on you by outside forces. They are simply consequences of your own choices, and to me my ideal of a Man is someone who faces all the consequences of his choices with determination and happiness. He owns those consequences both good and bad.

    Some people would say this is rationalizing after the fact, but realize you could always say “No, I don’t want this goal because I don’t like the consequences.” That is ALWAYS a choice. Feeling like you “must” follow your exact goals then complaining about the consequences of setting that goal comes across as whiny to me specifically because you’re acting like you don’t have a choice. You do. You always do. You could always walk away, build a cabin somewhere and live in subsistence.

    But if you want to be in society and have goals that involve taking from that society, then nobody cares who you are. All they care about is what you can do for them. That’s a consequence of having goals that involve society.

  37. BTW, I shared the koan because I felt like it pertained to the more general idea that GWDT wrote about in her article, about hard work and achievements not being appreciated by other people, and how to cope with that.

    And I think that dovetails nicely with the concept of general idealism: if you want to do something for the betterment of humanity, believe in it, and follow that goal, and work towards what you believe in — but don’t expect that people will recognize what you do in this lifetime. They might, or they might not. If you base your motivation on something as nebulous and temporary as that, IMO you’ve lost before you’ve even started.

    Animals and young children are good models for how to give selflessly, since they’re basically incapable of showing appreciation for anything you do for them, especially compared to an adult.

    But I’ve given ‘selflessly’ a lot in my life and it caused me a lot of destruction. I think you have to understand how to be selfish first, and prioritize yourself, in order to truly be selfless, and do it out of pure good intentions to help someone out, not self-sacrifice.

    There’s an old Taoist story about a man who said he wouldn’t sacrifice one single strand of hair on his head to save an entire kingdom. It’s a metaphor, obviously, but he was making the point that your body is made up of all these individual parts. If you think it’s okay to throw even the smallest of them away, what’s stopping you from sacrificing more than that? At what point does a hair on your head form your scalp? And sometimes we think by sacrificing ourselves we’re doing something ‘righteous’ when in reality it might be better if we did nothing at all.

    So IMO it’s just as important to prioritize yourself and not let yourself be taken advantage of. But the point about giving still stands: for your own benefit too, give selflessly. It’s normal to expect a thank you as a common courtesy, but for me, if I feel like I’m doing something because I want something in return, even if it’s the simple gratification of a ‘thank you’ from the person, or their appreciation, I’m usually better off doing nothing at all.

    I rely on my intuition for doing favors for people, generally speaking. If the time and place feels right and I want to help, then I’ll help. If I’m pissed off and irritable I basically don’t want to have anything to do with anyone.

    As for intergender dynamics, I see that as a whole nother deal.

    I agree that personal relationships are not charitable enterprises.

  38. With Keith Ferrazzi right now, he just repeated something from a prior book he wrote:

    “50 percent of americans say that no one has their back,
    and of those 60 percent are married”

  39. @Nathan

    Retreat to a Christian community (Get thee to a Red State)

    Having lived my entire life in the South and been raised by Bible thumpers, you lost me there. That’s the very definition of hell to me, hence the reason I’m attempting to get out of the South ASAP.

  40. Once the idealism is gone and you start to evaluate women in a conditional sense then how do you find the motivation to actually want to spend time with one of them? They make poor friends, poor conversation, and poor co-workers. The only reason to spend time with them is for sex. Eventually sex just became meaningless to me. I can’t remember the faces, much less the names, of all the women I screwed over the first year after I became red pill aware.

    All women have become the same to me. None of them, no vag, no hole for my dick, can motivate me to continue to risk additional false charges or crazed attacks when one of them doesn’t get their way. The damage women can willfully cause and the complete lack of consequences combined with their overall poor character only leaves their holes as something of interest. And access to the various holes on a woman’s body hardly seems worth the risk anymore.

    I’ve read all of Rollo’s articles about this. I read this one several times. He continues to assert that idealism from an “alpha” perspective is beneficial. I have idealism in only one thing. Me. How have you all retained some form of idealism with women? How have you been able to relate to them as more then just poorly operated life support systems for a vagina?

    I’m very frustrated with women as a whole and see very little reason to do associate with them at all anymore.

  41. No ideal actually exists. Idealism cannot be realism.

    In reality there is only game.

    Each idealism is only a tool used in the game.

  42. Are Women Implicitly Sexist?

    Rollo and regulars, correct me if I’m wrong but at 13.32 minutes into the clip below, Karen Straughan touches upon a phenomenon that has far-reaching implications regarding the underlying forces that shape inter-gender relations. A phenomenon which has been largely neglected elsewhere in the Manosphere.

    The “Own Gender-Group Bias” research she refers to, revealed that the female brain has an extremely strong “Automatic Own Gender Group Bias Mechanism”, which the male brain simply does not have. In fact, the male brain tends to have a “Automatic Anti-Own Gender Group Bias Mechanism“.

    If true, this would indicate that the current one-sided gender war was inevitable the moment women gained any sort of political power.

    It would also explain the well documented blind spot women seem to have when it comes to male suffering. And the relentless push for “Passive Aggressive Anti-Male Legislation” (which has seen men systematically stripped of their Marital, Parental, Sexual, prenatal and Judicial rights) as soon as women gained the means to do so. More importantly, it explains why most men have allowed and even encouraged this to happen without so much as a whimper of protest.

    Here are two female “academics” struggling to explain the reasons behind this “surprising” phenomenon, without criticising female behaviour (of course) and avoiding addressing it’s far-reaching consequences for society as a whole…

  43. “The giver should be thankful” in this case, that someone with more talent/brains and prestige than him was able to make better use of his cash than he could, by furthering the development of an outcome he presumably desired. In this case an educated, civilized public
    Otherwise why not spend the 500 big ones on having the snooty fucker ninja’d to death?
    I dread to think what Diogenes would have replied.

    500 big ones he couldn’t have acquired in the first place if he was surrounded by starving halfwitted bandits and marauding tribes, instead of an orderly society which gave respect and status to those who reinforced its values by such gestures of charity. Beta values?
    How long would Wall Street last if America went all Mad Max?
    They should be very, very grateful, on their bended fucking knees, that they are able to fund mass education to a high level, even if it’s a tax dodge.

  44. @Nathan

    Anyone that judges me for the thought crime of believing in the wrong (or no) invisible man isn’t endearing. They’re clinically insane.

  45. @Sun,

    I appreciate the morality immensely but the culture is the same traditional “man up and marry that slut” nonsense I have read people complaining about here. Anyway religion or not all women are still women. Rather then find families trying to contain and guide their hypergamous daughters and sisters instead they are trying to shame men (me) into taking these useless sluts off of their hands.

    No thanks.

    Overall I am enjoying the experience. Only one man that I have met so far seems to have any red pill awareness and isn’t just another agent of the FI. Funny enough his mother taught him his red pill awareness. Patents are still happily married after 35 years now. And she’s still thin after seven babies.

  46. Stringsofcoins – “How have you all retained some form of idealism with women? How have you been able to relate to them as more then just poorly operated life support systems for a vagina?”

    I share this problem. If the interaction is purely business there are no problems. Women are differently competent/incompetent from men in that sense and actually a pleasant change from dealing with men. Really I can only muster up temporary observational amusement. Nothing that rises much above cynicism.

    In social settings I feel like the terminator except instead of scrolling data about guns or whatever I am scrolling and annotating dialogue in real time noting everything and simultaneously cross referencing with my new found knowledge.

    I find women in mixed settings have three basic things to say:

    1. Me too…

    2. I feel…

    3. I want…

    Everything said is an elaborate variation on those three things.

    I also have been noticing eye movement, and subtle changes in expression around the eyes. The degrees of squint and degrees of frown are more telling than any words. What I see most often is on a spectrum from disgust to wonderment with confusion being the midpoint. Little in the way of understanding is visible but agreement with sentiment seems the closest proxy. The further a discussion drifts from feels to cold facts the more confusion I see.

    I think this why some women get into sports because there is plenty of emotion to go along with stats. The same cannot be said about discussions of politics, guns, cars, or power tools.

    A friend and I were onetime very excited about the possibilities and coolness of 3d printing and the relevant software. His girl friend was both excited by our display of emotion and totally baffled by it. Only when she was shown a appropriately touchy feely video about medical applications of the technology did she seem to understand. Even then the abstract eluded her.

  47. Rollo, I clicked on a link you posted on one of this comment sections. The link led me to a video about your book on Youtube. After watching the video I couldn’t help but see one of those suggested videos on the side. One of them was one of a woman who posted a video “o.m.g., I found out my husband was cheating on me”.

    I watched the whole video and the woman generally sounded genuinely hurt, reflective and talks about all this little details of her husband, that I think is irrelevant as the focus should be “he cheated on me and I’m hurt”.

    Anyway, the video raised a question for me. I know this isn’t directly related to this blog but I’ve e-mailed you before and got no response. So, I figured I’d ask you here and maybe you can make a blog about it later. If you’ve already written a blog about it I guess you can direct me to it.

    My question are these. What are your thoughts on married men who cheat on their wives? I understand with single men, they can have sex with anyone they want. I also understand how in the old script it’s accepted for men to have multiple partners but not women but what of married men? I observe in your posts here it pretty much focuses on women’s hypergamy and its evils against men. So, what of men? Do we not have a responsibility to keep our ends of the bargain or why even get into a marriage if that isn’t something a man is concerned with?

    Now seeing how that woman was venting and crying. If women’s hypergamy and the feminine imperative is what is ruling today’s Western society why do these women whose husbands cheat on them appear genuinely hurt? Why aren’t they more like “Gotcha, I’m divorcing you, taking your stuff and the kids” What’s with the tears, and rants of all the details of he was my best friend…he missed the kids’ games to be with his mistress…I wasn’t good enough for him? Especially, given that even if the cheating husband is a beta he still comes home to her and is still providing, protecting and even trying to hide it from her. Isn’t confronting the husband and forcing an end to the marriage equally her sabotaging her source of provisioning?

    If the feminine imperative is all about what men can do for women (reference to “the invisibles” post). What does it matter if she was good enough for him when she can just go pick the next beta who’s blue pill and already conditioned to serve her. You don’t see the Alpha fucks crying about their plate who’s moved on. If it’s cut an dry for the FI as your posts make it out to be. Why the tears, reflection and long lists of things he could’ve or couldn’t have done. That’s the most annoying part for me. As if if he checked 99/100 list and cheated on her like she still wouldn’t have the same reaction. Then they make dumb moves like asking the man to leave the house that night or she leaves with the kids as if that would change the fact that the cheating already happened? No offense but sometimes America sounds like such a whinny place where everything is exaggerated.

    Lol, forgive me if my post seems all over the place and confusing. I am confused about the whole situation myself.

  48. Rational Male
    Irrational Female

    We laugh at these trite sayings but men from the beginning of time have noticed the differences between the sexes.

    The ultimate implications of GAME is that Human Female mating strategy not a conscious rational exercise.
    If game’s success is reality. Then we have to ultimately reevaluate the female mind in terms of logical thought. We all have seen female friends make huge mistakes in mate selection but we never would take these events as an indication of female mental deficiency.
    But yet WE DO discuss game openly and never consider the full implications of a human being that can be so “easily” played.

    I have a few thoughts to posit for others to run with:
    1) Women are not conscious actors in mating.
    – This explains the great divergence of female and male thinking on “agency” or “consent” when male and females mate.
    – This explains why females perceive no cognitive dissonance about females openly engaging in dangerous mating behavior (slutty-ness) and then being oblivious to the consequences of such behavior.
    – This explains why legal (rational) venues are becoming not the venue of choice for women to see redress of perceived wrongs during mating (aka college disciplinary hearings where the accused rapist is not allowed to state his version of the incident).

    2) Female thought (like feminism) has always raised the importance of the subjective unconscious feelings in debate, to the point of giving equal weight to feelings and facts.
    – This explains why arguing with females is usually a fools errand.
    – This explains why Boolean, “law of excluded middle” logic is sometimes difficult for females to master.

    3) In western societies the loss of Rational Male influence in female mate selection (arranged marriage, fathers choosing suitors etc) has allowed for the greater subjective unconscious female mating activity.
    – This explains Frivorce
    – This explains the rise of welfare programs to bandaid poor mate selection
    – This explains liberal politics in western democracies actively playing the role of provider to women and children without male support.

    If Game is Truth (and let’s face it we would not be on this forum if we thought otherwise). We need to face that reality with it’s full implications.

    Game has revealed that a human woman is actually a mating Chinese Room –
    There is no human consciousness back there. There is only hardwired responses. (responses that Game exposes)

    Men in their romanticism desire there to be more. For there to be an “emotional” connection. And for what it’s worth I believe there is an emotional connection between male and females in a relationship sense but not in a mating sense.

    We all have witnessed the harsh reality of female mating strategies when a Beta Male sees his marriage end and his wife take up with some D-bag low life. Logic does not explain this… only facing the true awful implications of a heartless unconscious female mating strategy (Hypergamy) does explain what men are experiencing every day.

  49. There is a bit of a problem with this idealism and wanted to think about it a bit before I posted anything. A while ago, I think it was is Rollos “burden of performance” post, it caused in me a wonderful epiphany that has lasted to this day. I finally got it, and I look back at it as the day I finally became more red pill than not. So ever since I have had o issues with understanding and accepting the burden of performance and if anything, I have come to feel excited about rising up to the challenge, even at this late stage of 45 yrs of age. So as I write the following keep that i mind.
    I can not see how to reconcile RP knowledge of women, hypergamy, opportunism in love etc, and retaining any form of idealism, alpha or otherwise. Acceptance? yes. Idealism? I’m sorry, that comes across as pure rationalization and post-hoc reasoning. It’s like knowing a friend is a coward and a backstabber who will not have your back, and then being idealistic about the friendship. Impossible.
    I understand what Rollo is saying about idealism being a natural complimentary balancer to womens cynical opportunism, if alpha frame is maintained. But basically that would entail being a blue pill alpha. That is the only way that works, unless you are compartmentalizing and rationalizing. We all know BP alphas exist, just as RP betas exist. I think what Rollo is describing can only be achieved by a BP alpha. And as we all know, we can be RP and still have BP concepts and behaviors deeply ingrained in us, and I think this is what is happening here.
    Many of the people who are defending the “idealist alpha” in the responses, as well as Rollo himself, are married.. most have been married in the 90s. With all the respect in the world to Rollo and company, I think this is a bit of rationalization necessary to maintain their marriages and love for their wives. A man who learns the nature of women yet is still married and in love will have to confront the tension and anxiety of that dichotomy.. and several choices will have to be the belief that something special keeps them in their marriages- be it a special form of idealism, or that they are just so alpha etc. And in truth it probably does ply a part, but the part can only be played because one finds oneself already in that situation. In Rollos terminology, his idealistic alpha concept is a buffer to an otherwise harsh reality, just like many of the other types of buffers he has written about.
    To me this seems a much more rational explanation than maintaining any idealism, alpha or otherwise, about women once one understands the nature of hyprgamy, opportunism and the selfishness of the FI.

    To Rollo and others: ;please to not take what I have written as a personal attack or insult, it is not my desire or intention. People have posted some incredibly rude remarks here towards you lately concerning this Idealism idea. I am not in league with that. I am just voicing what seems to be going on from my perspective and the issues I have with it. In many ways I consider you a friend and a teacher, so what I have written is with the utmost respect.

  50. @StringsofCoins

    the culture is the same traditional “man up and marry that slut” nonsense I have read people complaining about here. Anyway religion or not all women are still women.

    This was exactly the experience I was talking about in my younger years. We live in a culture that’s 75% Christian (or some variation thereof), and yet it still exists as the femcentric mess we all observe here. If that doesn’t drive home how ultimately ineffectual religion is at the societal scale, nothing will. Hypergamy doesn’t care about your religion or your piety.

  51. @Hobbes

    Many of the people who are defending the “idealist alpha” in the responses, as well as Rollo himself, are married.

    I’m not married, but I can see a possible tack to take that results in Alpha idealism and RP views. Living up to your own ideals first and requiring a woman entering your frame to accept those ideals as truth could feasibly work. I might very well be wrong, but I can at least see it as a possibility.

    It would require absolutely rock solid frame that I don’t think most men are capable of once they’re in a relationship, and I think that’s where a lot of guys reject the idea. We intrinsically sense that we have not internalized the things required to make it work. It will be difficult to kill enough of the Beta or cultivate enough Alpha to make things work. But then again, that kind of plays in to a view I came in to long before finding TRP: most people should never get married.

    Most people, both men and women, lack what it takes to make a marriage work. It’s another one of those exceptional things that many people shouldn’t expect that they’ll be able to do. If you don’t think you can hold rock solid frame like that, if you don’t think you can assert your idealistic view of things in a way that a partner will be forced to follow your lead, you should be planning a life that doesn’t include marriage.

    College isn’t for everybody. Being a a rock star isn’t for everybody. Winning at sports isn’t for everybody. Marriage isn’t for everybody. In modern society we encourage every person to have the narcissistic belief that all those things are for us even if they aren’t for other people (we’re all such exceptional snowflakes), but when everybody believes that it stands to reason that a lot of folks are going to be disappointed.

    Maybe Rollo is off in the weeds here preaching something that doesn’t make sense, or maybe this is such a hard piece to swallow because it’s something a lot of people aren’t capable of. I’m not certain, but this definitely merits more consideration.

    Perhaps we could get some guys who aren’t married but really have solid Game and think they might get married one day to chime in. What do they think of Idealism? I’m not convinced either way. I can see the possibility of Alpha Idealism being a different beast from Beta Idealism because of the different mental point of origin, but I can also see the concerns about the pitfalls idealism can lead a person in to.

    I think this is a debate worth continuing, as I’m deriving a lot of useful thoughts on my own personal growth from it.

  52. “His Beta conditioning convinced his idealism that his wife would shared in that idealistic concept of love in spite of his absence of performance. Consequently she despises him for it. She’s the de facto authority in the relationship and he slips into the subdominant (another child to care for) role.”

    Interesting comparison. The tendency of women to bitch incessantly about the difficulty of raising children does seem disturbingly similar to the bitterness they hold towards a male who can not dominate in the relationship.

  53. @Sun- my problem is that what you are describing is the how, not the why. I you are going in with rock solid frame knowing female nature etc.. then that is, but no human definition, idealism. There has to be a part of you that believes in idealistic notion of love for it to qualify as idealism. If all we are talking about is frame, then there is no reason to bring idealism into the mix. Hell it simply becomes superfluous.
    Simply put, to be idealistic about your love with a woman, you have to believe in some way that she can love unopportunisticaly and unhypergamously. The moment you acknowledge that she can’t then idealism, by definition, goes out the window.
    If you say she can, then you are saying NAWALT, or that you found a unicorn. BP by any other definition.
    It’s better to just omit the notion of idealism and simply say “maintain frame”
    Now what is more likely, wrapping your mind around a dichotomy that is self exclusionary, or the need of a person to rationalize and buffer their love for their wives in the face of immense red pill knowledge?

  54. @ Hobbes

    Maybe the process of unplugging permanently damages the ability suspend disbelief when it comes to being idealistic about women. When so much of the process involves abandoning long held ideals a tenacious clinging to reality may be the substitute for BP idealism. Coupled with having been a fool and made a fool by the FI the new RP man is not in good position to take anything on faith.

    I see little hope for such men, myself included, to ever be able put aside their knowledge of reality long enough to embrace and act on an idealistic love that isn’t very heavily caveated and qualified to prevent slipping back into BP silliness.

  55. OP: ” I’d suggest that men’s idealism is the natural extension of the burden of performance.”

    Perhaps the male idealism is better stated as the idea she will be content with a basic minimum of resources just as men are content with a basic minimum of sexual attractiveness. The idealism leads him to believe she will appreciate his current, sufficient resources instead of hypergamously blowing up what she has for a chance at grabbing more.

    “Men’s idealistic love becomes a liability when he’s conditioned to believe that women share that same idealism, rather than hold to an opportunistic standard.”

    This liability would then come from the fact that the welfare state makes it impossible for the man to be “resourceful enough”. Instead, he must be entertaining/sexy enough compared to the other guys she sees. I think this is what trips up the newcomers who think Game is all about “faking it”. No doubt they’re hardworking, responsible guys who are proud of their achievements and resent the need to reinvent themselves as, well, porn actors. They want to be rewarded for their accomplishments, not their inflated SMV.

    It’s very hard to fault them because the skills and talents needed to excel at work are rarely the same skills and talents needed to excel at seduction. This explains why celebrities do so well these days, because for them the two are the same. It also explains why civilization is crashing, because men aren’t going to be scientists and engineers if the opportunity cost is sex and stable family.

    1. Interesting points gunnerq. Those hard-working men who want to be rewarded for their accomplishments will never find gratitude in this narcissistic selfie culture. It is what Rollo talks about with the “old set of rulebooks”.

      Biology will eventually take care of civilization; the more feminist nations are going extinct due to below replacement fertility. Many will be wiped out by Muslim immigrants as they age and grey.

  56. @badpainter- yes, I agree. We all come at this from our own unique perspectives. But it makes my point. A single guy who goes red pill can more easily burn it all down, take it in and redesign himself and his life accordingly. In contrast a man who is married- even if alpha- and grows more red pill, or is suddenly thrust into confronting it, will have a hard time reconciling it all- much more than the single man. He can not simply “burn it all down” without hellish consequences, he is most definitely still in love, has a family to protect etc. He needs buffers, rationalizations and ways of convincing himself to stay where he is and avoid the hell of tearing apart a family.
    It’s different depending on your situation. You can call it being damaged but I think a single guy is just in a position to change everything, whereas a married person can not.
    Knowing what we know about the FI, frivorce, hypergamy, opportunism etc.. who is more consistent with those truths, the guy who gets married and speaks of idealism or the guy who decides to remain single and games many plates?
    Anyway, we’re all in a compromised position here due to the current political and social climate, The most probable truth is all of us are simply just doing our best to make the most of our current situations

  57. While men strive for the ideal, women -being the weak sex – strive for survival .

    The truth is women DO want men to believe in the idealistic love (and they mischievously loves it and deep inside they know it is NOT sexy) it serves their survival+needs.

  58. Game = trying to keep your girlfriend/wife from putting a bullet in your skull. How long before the stalling tactics run out? Place your bets gentlemen.

  59. @Hobbes,

    Very good post. I’m not sure what you, badpainter, glen, or I am supposed to do. Since my personal red pill awakening the only way I’ve been able to relate to women is fully with the knowledge that they can not love me. It’s not very fulfilling. Perhaps women will start to bring back the lost art of charm so they can better fake love and snag themselves a tool through marriage.

    Otherwise it’s a failing economy and socialist state as men focus more and more on the art of seduction and women just bask in the romp.

    Maybe a unicorn is just a woman who is a courtesan. A male fantasy. A very good liar. One who lies to herself as well.

    I have taken note while spinning plates that I am simply a fantasy to them. Often they have no idea who I am at all. Like they don’t know my last name or anything about me. I’m simply presenting myself in such a way that allows them to fill in most of the blanks.

    One night after fucking one girl with a fiance, who spun for around ten months, she said to me, “I love you”. It was a very good learning moment as I observed what happened when I said nothing and ignored her for a week. Then started fucking her again. When I heard it though all I could think was you know almost nothing about me and I’ve met your fiance. Fiance.

    It’s a good idea to portray a few select traits and amplify them, Rollo’s new age sign, mysteries ridiculous costume, the cowboy hat I’ll sometimes wear, whatever. Just something to get the fantasy hamster spinning.

    How can a girls husband/fiance/boyfriend/orbiter compete with a fantasy? Because that’s what was going on. Those guys could not compete with me because I wasn’t even a real person.

    They love how you make them feel. They hamster in so much.

    I do wonder if Rollo’s wife knows about and reads this website.

    I guess this is as good as it gets. View marriage as an economic contract to raise children and try to meet a courtesan. Perhaps full on experience escorts will become a bigger thing.

  60. HA! Timely post Rollo! Know what I learned after re-reading the rational male and getting to Preventive medicine 2?

    I learned that my WHOLE self-hood had been hamstrung into promoting what basically amount to convenient social constructs that basically took the legs off of any horse I tried to put in the race. Even working out and getting a six-pack amounted to jack-shit because I still believed I was the unpopular little stuttering emotional wreck on the inside.

    This book is essentially a re-frame. But in my case it was an antidote.

    In relation to this post, my idealism has been revealed to have always existed, yet always taking cues from women trying to realize their own “paths” (Hypergamy).

    I never was allowed to be very social because I was poor and had a speech impediment. Yet I was also apparently considered “unique” and “interesting” because i was pretty good-looking(they say) and I was a twin. Back in high-school. But I was blue pill. Big time.

    That being said. My current take away is that, blue pill guys and people choking on the red pill can’t really appreciate how their “idealism” can take simple knowledge of women’s timeline and use it to imply BOTH alpha fucks AND beta bucks “provisioning” while talking to new women. Which means we guys can imply BOTH and trigger the “Jackpot” response in women.

    Holy SHIT power in MY corner for once. But honestly? I’ve been using it to troll women and I’m planning to use it to go and inflict emotional damage and cause regression reactions and forced introspection while twirling my middle finger in the air……..

    Or at least now I KNOW that I can! Finally I can look forward to having strength on MY side when I SELECT a woman to talk to.

    There was never much to me. But now……now that I know what I’m really supposed to be doing with myself…….its like finding an ember in a pile of ashes that never died.

    It might not be much yet, but it’s still hot and it’s MINE!

    I finally have the answers to cure the vicious self-doubt I have had all this time…….and I also know who did this to me. I know how this all happened. And now at last I can take control of my life and live it on my own God-damned terms!

    It’s payback time….

  61. Man after reading the comments I can only imagine going out and doing some physical activity with all of you. Holy hell how I can relate.

  62. I think Badpainter put it beautifully:

    “Maybe the process of unplugging permanently damages the ability to suspend disbelief when it comes to being idealistic about women. When so much of the process involves abandoning long held ideals a tenacious clinging to reality may be the substitute for BP idealism. Coupled with having been a fool and made a fool by the FI the new RP man is not in good position to take anything on faith.”

    It’s an adjustment, to be sure, to live and thrive in an inhospitable desert. To choose to stay alive by any means necessary in an arid wasteland is daunting to most people. There is no room for idealism if you want to survive. This is what completely unplugging does to a man, and so far I’ve seen too many angry men here get stuck in between. Like Cypher in the Matrix film: consciously choosing the known lie because the truth is just too desolate and unpalatable to contemplate.

    But it’s entirely possible to thrive in a desert if you change the way you live and think and acknowledge the harsh and unbending rules of the new landscape. Embrace the terrain as it is and not as you wish it was. Hypergamy (or even nature at large—which is what we’re really talking about) doesn’t care about your religion, your politics, your complaints, your excuses, your ideals, or your outrage. Better to spend that precious energy figuring out how to best make your peace with where you live now: in a harsh desert.

    Become a better Bedouin.

  63. Ok, I’m going to back this up just one step. A common theme that I witness throughout almost all of the comments on this blog is about society’s relationship to the person posting the comment. Great, that is a very real and true thing. We are social creatures, after all.

    However, to the extent that one chooses to remain in that place, AFTER READING THIS BLOG, then one is choosing, in my humble observation, to ignore the subtext of Rollo’s teachings.

    Look, I’m not going to mince words. Western “society” as we know it, is completely FUBAR. I can’t put my fingers on it at the moment, but there is a quote by some Indian “guru” that goes something like this: “When society is FUBAR, then the goal of being accepted by that society, is also FUBAR.” Again, paraphrasing from memory. If someone is aware of the quote, please post it, because it’s on point.

    I watch all of these comments and it is so glaringly obvious that folks are railing against the fact that the FUBAR culture in which we are living inexplicably doesn’t jive with the internal worldview of the commenters. Of course it doesn’t. That’s the point. This was done intentionally with the wicked intent of making you question your own sanity.

    Listen, you are sane. The world around you has gone insane, intentionally. Consider not trying to reconcile the two. It will only give you a massive headache.

    You were born into this world with the genetic blueprint of “right and wrong,” which is biological, but it also heavily correlates to the spiritual, and just plain everyday commonsense human concepts. Listen to that. Stop listening to the exterior, which only wants to eat you whole. Listen to what you were born with… it will never lie to you. “Society,” on the other hand, will lie to you, always. Such is the nature of the human species.

    Consider stopping being so frustrated by it. In this time and space, we live in a world where .00001% of the human population prints money out of nothing, and then gets you to beg them for that “money” created from thin air, so that you might have sufficient status to mate with a worthy counterpart, and pass on your genes. Do you see how diabolical this is?

    For the love of Pete, STOP PLAYING THEIR GAME. Their game ONLY works when you WILLFULLY play it. So stop. Just stop playing it. To be clear, that does NOT mean to GYOW, vis a vis females. It simply means to stop trying to cram a square peg into a round hole.

    You are encouraged to study biology (outside of the fiat money system), which doesn’t lie. Stop railing against this FUBAR culture (on a personal, rather than political level), which lies to you, every single second, of every single day. Ignore society, and study biology, and you will begin to see clearly, and your angst will lift off of your shoulders like nothing at all.

    Furthermore, bring that newfound understanding here to Rollo’s site, and watch it rub off on your peers. And then, holy shit, watch the avalanche ensue. Stay mired in what “society” thinks, and remain frustrated by it all, advancing neither yourself nor your peers, one single square on the board.

    Accept the ugly fact that you were lied to. We all were. And then let it go. Once you let it go, it no longer holds any power over you. Then you can come here, post your comments, and liberate your fellows.

    Consider your options… all of them.

    Peace, all.

  64. ““idealism” can take simple knowledge of women’s timeline and use it to imply BOTH alpha fucks AND beta bucks “provisioning” while talking to new women. Which means we guys can imply BOTH and trigger the “Jackpot” response in women.”

    tip of the hat to Yollo Commanche. Your quote is profound. And that is also true of whichever timeline your woman partner is.

    I still sense a lot of nihilism going on in today’s comments. In the manosphere, 25 year old single men, 30 to 45 year old divorced men, and 53 year old married men are not disparate. Neither is one better than another. It is not a zero sum game. Either of these groups can make themselves better an be more a a prize in inter-sexual relationships. Use game, red pill awareness and self actualization to achieve your goals.

    In regards to idealism. I’m Idealistic that I can still remain married and draw my wife to me. I have no illusions that depending on how things go she won’t die, flake on me, or give me up for dead if I have a debilitating illness or lose my job, leave me if I become a loser alcoholic. I don’t have faith that she will stay with me. But I am idealistic that I have the talent and the skills and the resources to maintain what I want my relationship to be with her. You see what I did there? I am idealistic that I can draw her to me. Not idealistic that she will love me unconditionally and stick with me if I stop performing.

    And talking of always be performing. If one has mastery, the effort to perform is less. It’s easy.

    And talking of being idealistic when the goal is unobtainable. Well guess what? All my life I have set lofty goals. And one after the other I obtained those goals. One right after another. Do you think I am going to stop being an idealist when I can set a lofty goal and achieve it time and time again.

    I’m not bragging. I just want to say there is hope out there for a positive outcome for any of you. I have plenty of faults and I am not always happy with the billions of figurative taxes I’ve had to pay and the lack of sex I should have been getting and the insulting number hurdles I have to jump. But I’ll be damned if I will ever give up on being idealistic. Meaning shoot for lofty goals and expect to attain them. My current lofty goal is to not have my current wife walk away with cash and prizes in a frivorce. It is going as well as I expected. And I see no pain whatsoever in red pill awareness. But then again I never had a crisis that made me red pill. It was a simple opportunity I was able to embark on that resonated with my critical view of people and society.

    Apologies to Rollo once again for invoking Jung. I know the validity of Meyers Briggsl is called into question because of the fact that humans don’t often have polar traits (introversion,extroversion, how we see the world by intuition or sensing, whether we are thinking or feeling individuals, or whether our tactics and our approach are Judging or Prospecting). People are more of a bell curve when it comes to Jungian traits (which kind of negates MBTI validity).

    But I personally am set in my ways and polar in my traits so it resonates with me.

    Just like in the original post by Rollo today. What is your game? Is it a true reflection of who you are? And is it a valid strategy.

    Below is some more Meyer’s Briggs description of my INTJ type. This is how I come to be a self idealist. Not an idealist in regards to my wife ever remaining with me if I fuck up. I lived my life in my twenties as a doctor in training with a little voice in my head constantly telling me: “Whatever you do, don’t fuck up. If you do you won’t be what you want to be.”


    “INTJs radiate self-confidence and an aura of mystery, and their insightful observations, original ideas and formidable logic enable them to push change through with sheer willpower and force of personality. At times it will seem that INTJs are bent on deconstructing and rebuilding every idea and system they come into contact with, employing a sense of perfectionism and even morality to this work. Anyone who doesn’t have the talent to keep up with INTJs’ processes, or worse yet, doesn’t see the point of them, is likely to immediately and permanently lose their respect.

    Rules, limitations and traditions are anathema to the INTJ personality type – everything should be open to questioning and reevaluation, and if they see a way, INTJs will often act unilaterally to enact their technically superior, sometimes insensitive, and almost always unorthodox methods and ideas.
    This isn’t to be misunderstood as impulsiveness – INTJs will strive to remain rational no matter how attractive the end goal may be, and every idea, whether generated internally or soaked in from the outside world, must pass the ruthless and ever-present “Is this going to work?” filter. This mechanism is applied at all times, to all things and all people, and this is often where INTJ personality types run into trouble.”

    Make no mistake in what I say about myself. I have at times been tortured by my personality type. But now I can have insight into who I am and how I’m hardwired to behave and use this knowledge to maximize my strengths and minimize my weaknesses with red pill game.

    I don’t feel idealistic that females will come my way for my sake. I feel idealistic that I can keep my frame, DHV, have social proof, have amused mastery with my children, have resources, enjoy my pursuits, have enlightened self interest, go through only about a half a day going through all five of Kubler Ross stages of grief if my wife leaves, dies or checks out on me. ETC.

  65. “Like Cypher in the Matrix film: consciously choosing the known lie because the truth is just too desolate and unpalatable to contemplate.”

    Was Glenn imitating Cypher earlier today? Intentionally or unintentionally?

  66. @‘c’h’okmah

    “For the love of Pete, STOP PLAYING THEIR GAME. Their game ONLY works when you WILLFULLY play it. So stop. Just stop playing it. To be clear, that does NOT mean to GYOW, vis a vis females. It simply means to stop trying to cram a square peg into a round hole.”

    I never did think that Atlas Shrugged was workable. It lacked a further spiritual dimenson. Ayn Rand was just a bit too much like Hillary Clinton in a non-feminine way. (Both of the two being un-feminine INTJ bitches,the 0.8% of the female population).

    I had unique study-group trip to Europe in 1977 at the ripe old age of 16. Throughout a month-long trip I visited London for 2 1/2 days, Amsterdam for 2 days, drove through Cologne, Germany on the bus, Frankfort, Heidelberg, and then spent 5 days in Boppard Germany. Went to East Berlin and stayed in the Hotel Stadt Berlin am Alexaderplatz for 5 days. (Saw the facade of downtown two square mile of new concrete and good buildings vs. the outside bullet riddled facades of the outer east Berlin). Then on to 5 days in Vienna and 5 days in Constance with a short walk to Kreutzlingen in Austria. A half a day back in Paris and a tour of the Louvre and then back home.

    I came home and realized how socialist Europe, Germany and esp. East Berlin was. I resolved that the U.S. was more “wide open for opportunity” and non- socialist back then. (And a lot less feminist-equalist back then).
    I resolve to myself, that if life in this grand world is but a game, then, I’m going to damn well learn the rules and play it well. 20 years from now I’m not going to apologize for either not knowing the rules to the game, or for not having played it well. One of the primal motivating forces in my life back then was: Learn Game. Do well.

    The Rational Male is hinting at the rules to the game of inter-sexual relationships. It is a game. Do you want to drop out, or play it well?

  67. “I came home and realized how socialist Europe, Germany and esp. East Berlin was. I resolved that the U.S. was more “wide open for opportunity” and non- socialist back then. (And a lot less feminist-equalist back then).
    I resolve to myself, that if life in this grand world is but a game, then, I’m going to damn well learn the rules and play it well. 20 years from now I’m not going to apologize for either not knowing the rules to the game, or for not having played it well. One of the primal motivating forces in my life back then was: Learn Game. Do well.”

    The grand irony is that I parlayed that into a essay to trick my way into getting accepted into the University of Notre Dame in the spring of my senior year of high school.

    I got into the college that in 1979 accepted about 17% of the males that applied. My two best friends in high school applied early in senior year and were denied. I applied in May and was swiftly accepted.

    At the time it was 75% men, 25% women. 99% of the men were lean, smart and alpha. 50% of the females were either overweight or unattractive.
    Haha what doesn’t kill you makes you try harder. Raw truth. I never got laid PIV until after college.

    Years later NO Big Deal.

    That school gave me the intellectual skill to learn how to learn that lesser institutions could never have done. I went on to medical school and my colleagues from state educated institutions were not quite the talent. A springboard to the best I had within me.

    Intellectualism (only endorsed by 25% of society) is a boon to red pill awareness. Rollo endorses back to intellectualism with his college learning.

  68. Oooool,Choose an item.

    Just showed upon here, all of a sudden like, similar to fungi sprouting after a rain. So non-obvious. Jeez.

    Atlas Shrugged comes from an agenda.

    You are correct. It’s not workable, and never will be. “Pipe dream,” comes to mind. The ‘spiritual dimension’ of which you speak is a very real thing. No one wants to acknowledge that, but, of course, it’s true, as we all know.

    The “further spiritual dimension” of which you speak is otherwise known by plain folk as the banal term called “commonsense.” Widely understood, rarely articulated as such.

    “I resolve to myself, that if life in this grand world is but a game, then, I’m going to damn well learn the rules and play it well.”

    –How have you fared thus far?

    –Your definition of “do well” is…. ? Does the Golden Rule factor into that, boss?

    “The Rational Male is hinting at the rules to the game of inter-sexual relationships.”

    –“Hinting?” I’m pretty sure that he’s laying it out there in plain English. How do you interpret that as “hinting,” exactly?

    “It is a game. Do you want to drop out, or play it well?”

    –A very profound question indeed (for chumps).

    — Tell us, @sjfrellc, what exactly is your game? Your cryptic comments make me wonder: are you here to help improve the lives of this site’s readers, or rather to sow seeds of doubt in their minds? Funny how subtle that is, correct? I would be willing to bet that you could easily go toy with some other community… and not be noticed… but you are noticed here.

    — Kind of hard to cloak your disdain for other human beings, but good luck with that.

    –btw, loved your loquacious comment. Totally not genuine with re the context of all the other commenters. Thanks for playing. You entertain us to no end.


    re your most recent comment, what are you talking about? Do any other readers understand what it is that you’re ‘ostensibly’ trying to convey? Seems formulaic, almost as it you are being paid to post. Seems very random to me. But, hey, to each their own. For me, personally, I don’t fall for any kind of bullshit, but good luck with that, for the simple-minded who do fall for it.

  69. What you call idealistic love – I assume you mean courtly love – wasn’t even true in earlier times, at least not in a sexual sense. I remember Kenneth Clark going on about the absurdity of putting a woman on a pedestal earlier to the age of Romanticism in his documentary Civilization.

    We are not only being spoon-fed a lie, we are also spoon-fed false history. I don’t assume that women were ever different. Look at films like Jules et Jim, 50 years old. Nothing different. I don’t believe that there was any big change – albeit men may have gotten women simply out of womens’ financial needs in historic times.

  70. Re:the giver being thankful.
    I get from it if you knew ahead of time that the receiver wasn’t going to say thank you, would you still give to them? And if you wouldn’t, then I guess your reason for giving wasn’t just out of trying to help. It was partly an attempt to facilitate getting something back. Maybe just a thank you. Or maybe to give so that others can see you giving.
    I reminded of a time I was visiting two girls once. When the time came around that they were going to eat dinner I was going to leave, trying to polite. So a back and forth of stay, no that’s okay, flows into them thinking me leaving means I don’t want to eat their food. So now trying to be polite means staying. So within a week later, they show up at my place out of the blue saying that since I ate at their place, they’re at my place to eat since I owe them. Found it really annoying and permanently changed my view of them.
    Sounds like Glenn has concluded all the talk of frame, red pill knowledge, and seeing with new eyes is good for 1940 but futile today and that everything has not reached a point of no return, but passed it with a roster tail blast trailing behind.
    Could’ve also read about the student getting banned from the discussion session of his college class at Reed because he questioned the 1 in 5 sexual assault thing. Knowing some of his comments, I can see that setting him off.

  71. I suppose I personally am at a point where I still wind up finding women I wouldn’t keep even if I had a device that could 100% remove hypergamy from them, so whether I can have idealistic love in an LTR doesn’t even matter to me right now. It is currently nothing more than an academic discussion for me, being of absolutely no personal consequence until I’ve established far better Game and moved to somewhere with better male:female and female:fewhale ratios.

    For the moment I’ve clamped down hard on oneitis, have a plan that includes no steady woman, and have focused 100% of my effort and concern on me. I know that until a lot more changes about me and my situation, I simply won’t meet women worth more than getting the need for sex out of my system.

    I think once I’ve made those changes perhaps I’ll be in a better place to understand whether idealistic love is even possible. I still feel that if it is possible, it’s likely a thing that most men (myself included) will never achieve a level of mastery in relationships to allow for it.

  72. @Tom Arrow,

    False history.

    Imagine, just for one millisecond, that you were spoonfed a lie your entire life. What cause of action would you have in our legal system? Fraud is a no-bullshit cause of action… the entire façade depends upon it. What if you, and everyone situated like you, pressed on that nerve, simultaneously? It would crash the system, overnight, despite their fraud.

    Think about that. Just think about it. For 15 seconds. Think about it.

    Now, per Tom Arrow, let’s talk about idealistic love. Courtly love? Come on. Can we please be serious about this for 5 seconds? Of course, goes without saying, no female deserves to be on a pedestal. Romanticism? Well, that is all about males being romantic. Gentlemen, that is our nature. WE LOVE. That is what we are… exposed raw nerves.

    Do you disagree? Post your lame comments below.

  73. Sun, think you could ever be with somebody knowing that a together come what may won’t ever be there completely? That there is always a scenario that if it happens, she’ll go feral (Rollo’s post) but because you’re living your life as you want it for you, chances are it won’t happen?

  74. @WCB

    Sun, think you could ever be with somebody knowing that a together come what may won’t ever be there completely?

    This depends entirely on if I ever decide I want children. It’s pretty much agreed upon by all parties in modern society that two loving parents are the best thing for a child. Currently I’m not interested in kids, but if I ever am I don’t think I could go the surrogate route or anything like that. They’d need a mother. That being said, if human beings did evolve to be complementary in relationships (and a child’s need for both parents suggests this is true), then there is a role for both types of love in the process of continuing our species.

    I have held the belief for a very long time now that no human on the planet will ever truly know and understand any other human being. This includes your parents, siblings, and the best friends you’ve ever had. So for a long time I’ve accepted that no human relationship will live up to an ideal of both people fully understanding and therefore caring for the other person in the same way. This goes doubly so for men and women with our different biologies and roles in the continuation and evolution of the species. It’s not hard to accept that it won’t be there completely when I view it in that light.

    Even if a man’s idealistic love does serve as the glue that holds a relationship together, I don’t expect a woman to ever 100% get it. I only expect that at best she would feel an intense desire to try and get it. It would always be a process, never an end state.

    That there is always a scenario that if it happens, she’ll go feral (Rollo’s post) but because you’re living your life as you want it for you, chances are it won’t happen?

    If how much a woman loves me in her own way is proportionate to how well I perform in taking care of myself and my goals, I’m doing well at those things and pleased with myself, and she displays genuine desire and affection for me without prompting then it’s in every way a better life than every single relationship I’ve ever had in a Blue Pill context. I’ve already had them go feral on me. I’ve already had them bail for other men. I’ve already had the worst happen over and over again. Knowing the nature of the beast just makes it easier to handle and prepare for.

    With sufficiently internalized behaviors and attitudes, while maintaining frame and performing won’t be “effortless”, I liken what I suppose the ease is to driving standard transmission. It’s something that requires tremendous concentration and a lot of mistakes to learn, but once you’ve got it down you just kind of do it as habit. It still requires effort, but you no longer think about it. You just do it.

    If I were at that point of mastery within myself, I’d be hard pressed to worry about the feral animal lurking in the background. Particularly if I found keeping it suppressed to just be a natural behavior I developed.

  75. @StringsofCoins

    You wrote:

    “I do wonder if Rollo’s wife knows about and reads this website.”

    Rollo answered that three years ago:

    My wife trusts me implicitly; in fact she’s been the inspiration of, or planted the germ of an idea in me about a lot of post topics most of my readers would find surprising.

    Find those powerful words and a longer elaboration that will surprise you in the same paragraph here:

    With your question in mind, there are a lot of discussions here in the comment section circling around questions that have been answered in one of the two books by Rollo Tomassi.

    Now that you’ve reminded us of another question, there’s a surprising amount of personal information about Rollo Tomassi and his real life that does not exist anywhere on this blog. FRESH information. The formatting in the new book is perfect.

    “The Rational Male – Preventive Medicine” has set a record. It hit #8 on the top 10 best seller list in its first 24 hours on Amazon. I see people mentioning other male writers, but NONE of them have made the top 3,000, much certainly not #8 like the new Rollo Tomassi has.

    The latest Rollo Tomassi at $10.74 in paperback, it’s just too easy buy it and give it away again and again… Every powerful man I know can learn from this book. Have you bought your copies?

    My only concern is that, doing the math, I don’t see how Rollo makes a profit from his book sales. Printing isn’t free, and with the free two-day shipping (for me the purchaser) with Amazon Prime, is he breaking even?

    It feels good to gift Rollo’s books to friends, and every time I purchase another one, it’s another sale that puts the truths in “The Rational Male” books ahead of the deceptive books in the “self-help” section.

    ~Sam Botta

  76. Let me be clear about something. What I said doesn’t mean I don’t get or understand “game”, and in fact my rejection of what Rollo is proposing in this post is based on Red Pill awareness. And I’ll reiterate my personal quals for those who want to dismiss me as being a loser. I have an N of over 100. I’ve fucked more dimes than most of the guys on this blog will in 10 lifetimes. I made more money by the time I was 40 than 5 of you will make in your entire lives. I’ve written books, traveled the world, played my original music to cheering fans (and yes, got single men dancing alone with my bluesy Texax Girl), climbed mountains, sailed the oceans and have been told I should be a model. And many, many other things. I’ve had hot women just throw themselves at me and have turned down women most guys on this blog would cut their right hands off to have a chance to fuck. I’ve provided and protected and cared for women and have been a traditional man in ways most men never do. And I’ve always been dominant and aggressive. Okay guys? Consider the source here.

    My Red Pill epiphany came when women I’d provided for and protected for a good chunk of my life – my daughter and two sisters (my dad was an abusive loser) – turned on me in a way that I couldn’t comprehend. I won’t reiterate it all, but it was just like how my ex-wife turned on me 20 yrs earlier (as per the post Rollo titled after my stating that) when I was married. In this case, it came when I was facing both serious health challenges and serious financial setbacks for the first time in my life that all the women in my life ran for the hills and felt free to denigrate me and treat me with no respect at all. I was the traditional guy and was a great provider and protector and have always been a guy women call sexy. In my marriage, my ex turned on me within a year of my daughter being born. I didn’t change in my marriage, my hot (homecoming queen and the prom queen – how many of you “alphas” here ready to tell me what’s what have ever even dated the prom queen, let alone fucked her or married her?) wife simply turned on me. My ex wouldn’t have given most guys here the time of day, btw.

    Hypergamy and how the FI shapes society to permit much greater female sexual agency explained this to me. Women seeing me as a utility explained this to me. Women being solipsistic explained this to me. Me being idealistic explained this to me. My internalization of romantic love and chivalric values explained this to me. Me vassalizing myself to women explained this to me. My valuing myself based on how well I served women explained this to e. And when I broke free of all this garbage is when my suffering lessened.

    But Rollo’s answer is to just do a better job of creating and maintaining that traditional, FI-informed frame with women? Nah, what’s really happening here is this. You married self-anointed “alphas” here are merely just projecting your own fears because you are living in denial about this crap. Many of you assume you can do “better” than me – when I’ve been lapping most men for most of my life. In this way many of you are just like fighter pilots in the Air Force. Whenever a fighter pilot (or really any pilot) crashes an airplane, pilots will always tell you what the pilot did wrong. The movie The Right Stuff was about this mentality. It’s always pilot error – not the inherent danger of flying Mach 2 upside down 1000 feet of the deck, lol. Same here. Anyone who loses (divorce/cuckolded etc) is fuckup to you guys and just needs to “man up”. That’s idiocy guys, and in fact is in complete opposition to actually dealing with Red Pill truths.

    I get it. You married guys are stuck. You’ve got to make lemons of your lemonade and somehow or the other make yourselves okay with being unappreciated plow-horses with a gun to your head 24/7. I know, your “success” is due to your throbbing, glistening, massively amazing alpha-ness – but consider that you are just rationalizing away all the Red Pill truths you supposedly subscribe to. It’s a big NAWALT – and you should know that guys like me see through you. You don’t see through me, it’s you guys who are in denial.

    What’s really true is that the old social contract between men and women is gone now. There is no going back anymore than you can turn a pickle back into a cucumber.

    @ Stringofcoins and SunWukong – I’m with you guys. Perhaps the married guys don’t get the experiences we single guys get. I’m fucking this 26 yr old spinner the other night, we have a purely casual sexual relationship (I make her cum like no other man ever has – yet another benefit of being an older guy, I’m a sexual svengali), but I keep seeing my desire to want to escalate the relationship with her come up. I want to turn it into a love affair – she doesn’t. I’m a cock she’s riding while she’s young and hot and can have most any man she wants. That’s it. The other night I jokingly whispered to her while we were rolling around in the sack, “I’m surprised you haven’t fallen in love with me yet” and she just giggled, as I did.

    You see, as I encounter and game women with Red Pill awareness what I really find is that there is no “there” there with women. There is no real love or devotion or loyalty innate in women when it comes to men. In fact, game works so well that it’s beaten the idealism out of me. And without all that traditional idealism about love that Rollo claims I should strive to impose on a woman (and the world, for that matter), my life works so much better.

    Do you see the inherent conflict here guys? On the one hand, idealistic love is an FI imposed construct that promotes female sexual agency while retarding male sexual agency – but according to Rollow the answer is to just do a better job of imposing that frame on your wife/family/world? That is so illogical for a man not trapped in marriage that I’m shocked I have to point it out.

    The only formula for happiness for a man today is being a selfish prick and keeping women to the role of entertainment and sex in his life. Like Rollo says, women have a gun to your head in marriage – and sure, perhaps if you already have a gun to your head your best bet is to double down on the idiocy that put the gun in her hand to begin with as you have to keep her at bay somehow. But me?Single now? Lol, you’ve got to be fucking kidding.

  77. @ SunWukong – Your last comment concerned me. Keep this in mind, the more you try to win a women over, the less interested she will be in you. And the dynamic Rollo suggests is implicitly you trying to win her over. You keep her interest by being a mystery, by being a fantasy, by being less accessible than her. You be the most accomplished man on earth but if you vassalize yourself to her, she will fuck the pool boy who “just doesn’t give any fucks”. I’d rather be the pool boy…

    As for children, you are correct. But you cannot fix this problem. If you have a child with a woman, realize that you have at least a 50% chance of being kicked the curb as a father but will be saddled with the bills anyway. NO MATTER HOW FUCKING ALPHA YOU ARE. And if not, your role and authority as a father and a man in your family will be a mere fraction your wife and children’s mother has. That’s the reality of the western world today – there is no escaping it.

    If what was going on was about men just “manning up”, this would be an easy problem to solve. But what we’re dealing with is more like children playing with guns without any supervision – women trying to run their and our lives without male leadership. Nietzsche laid out clearly how nonsensical society and all our institutions and culture would become once women attempted to masculinize themselves – really. He predicted exactly how ridiculous all this would become.

    Women’s ideas about how to organize society have lead to our birth rates declining below replacement rates – species death in other words. The politics that inform all this and generate it are like a virus which our system has no innoculation against. And in today’s connected globe, memes that have no value other than political can spread like wildfire – they don’t have to spread after generating success for the groups adopting them.

    Ooops, I talked about politics again, sorry, I realize Rollo is way to meta for all that silliness…

  78. sjfrellc “realized how socialist Europe, Germany and esp. East Berlin was. I resolved that the U.S. was more “wide open for opportunity” and non- socialist back then. (And a lot less feminist-equalist back then).”

    Aha. There’s a reason for that. There are two Janus faces to “socialism”.
    It’s not all beer and skittles, you know.
    Exactly one hundred years ago the states of Europe decided to indulge in on/off bouts of Total War, separated by about a generation.
    Even in the ensuing “Peace” the populations needed bribing and cajoling to prevent wholesale defection to one side of the Iron Curtain or the other.

    You can’t run a jolly game of Total War, and mass mobilization of everybody regardless of gender who can walk, limp or crawl to the fields, mines, munitions factories and combat arms, without some kind of backstop guarantee that the incapacitated, old or young aren’t going to die of neglect. Thus negating the efforts, expense and sheer carnage in the front line (which eventually became, well, everywhere, including remote cities).
    Game over, no family left to fight for. Never had any land in the first place. Sod the State.

    Then the initially sceptical and hard-nosed, capitalism-red-in tooth-and-claw-born Victorians who were persuaded to adopt these schemes post-Bismarck (that bleeding-heart librul who kicked it all off) saw exactly how much power over the lives of the scum the all-seeing and intrusive bureaucracy of welfarism provided. Lightbulb moment! Talk about bribing people with their own money …

    And of course the Owners were mindful of Tsar Nicky’s example. Hard to turn the tap off now, without some quiet way of disposing of all us useless eaters first.
    When, eventually, they are finally forced to pull the swill bucket away, all bets are off. I wonder how all our “New Europeans” that people over the pond seem so afraid of will cope with mass conscription, severe rationing, “Papieren bitte!” and/or internment?
    Somalia or Pakistan should perhaps prepare themselves for a deluge of refugees and “asylum seekers”.
    Like my old man always says: “If yer can’t take a joke, y’shouldn’t have joined up”.

    Socialism is a way of militarizing an entire society to survive industrialized warfare.

  79. Here’s the deal. Like I’ve elaborated on my blog, the social order has inverted. It used to be the men who were socially empowered to pick mates and run society. It is now women, and we men are the gender to be plucked like flowers in a garden by women.

    Face it guys-we don’t have a choice anymore. THEY do.

    We can game until we’re blue in the face, and shell just walk away if it suits her. Conversely if she wants you-whether its for a roll in the hay or because of your resources -all you need do is show up.

    The moment we men don’t serve her purposes, we are discarded . Even low SMV women have multiple options, if the numbers of fat women married to stud guys are any indication. In an environment when an overweight 3 can juggle guys, its a damn crapshoot. All we can do is run the best game we can and hope our ‘audition’ is good enough for her to pick us for sex.

    There it is.

  80. @ Glenn

    I’m an experienced guitarist and have been doing building and repairs for years.

    I laugh when people say “A poor musician blames the instrument.”

    A lot of times the problem really is the instrument.

    Anyone want idealism? Here you go:

    Hendrix never got married. Died at 27. The greatest and most influential rock guitarist in history.

    In “Stone Free” one of the verses goes:

    “A woman here a woman there try to keep me in a plastic cage
    But they don’t realize it’s so easy to break
    But sometimes I can feel my heart kinda running hot
    That’s when I got to move, before I get caught”

    “Foxey Lady” too, “Crosstown Traffic,” “Fire” — Hendrix obviously had Game.

    And as “Beta” as the lyrics in “Little Wing” come off as, Hendrix was probably about as close to an Apex Alpha as anyone could ever get.

    “One Rainy Wish” is another song COMPLETELY about idealistic love. “Angel” too. The list goes on.

    As far as MBTI goes, I always got INFP.

    I’m very sensitive. It’s my nature. I’ve always been very powerfully emotionally affected by things. It’s just how I am. I don’t think it was conditioned into me.

    What was conditioned into me was to think that my nature being sensitive would give me an edge with women — it did just the opposite.

    I think really any traits a guy has can work in his favor, as long as he’s aware of the reality of hypergamy. Being extremely sensitive doesn’t mean that you have to show that to other people. It’s only an internal, private experience until you decide to do something to make it externally visible.

    There’s a Zen saying, “My heart burns like fire, but my eyes are as cold as dead ashes.”

    To protect myself, I’m much more guarded these days. I still feel things as strongly as I ever did; I just learned not to wear my heart on my sleeve.

    I look at male idealism, romantic or otherwise, as something we ourselves as men should appreciate and cherish WITHIN OURSELVES.

    And I think the first step in that is understanding hypergamy. As the saying goes, don’t cast your pearls before swine, or give to dogs what is holy, or they’ll trample them and then turn on you and tear you to pieces.

    A lot of my struggle has been against my true nature. I’ve ALWAYS been sensitive and experienced very strong emotions, even since I was a very young child. I can remember clear examples of this as far back as when I was 3 or 4 years old.

    I’ve been mistaken in thinking that that’s “Beta.” It’s only “Beta” when it comes off as qualifying, and putting yourself in a position of inferiority to other people by doing so.

    Changing who I am isn’t going to happen. Changing my BEHAVIOR, however, is completely possible.

    There’s another Zen saying, “A man may look like a fool, but he might not be one. He might only be guarding his wisdom carefully.”

    As men, we’re idealists. Suppose you come to a woman with idealistic love. Hypergamy dictates that this idealism means nothing to her on a limbic level — it won’t register.

    There’s yet another Zen saying from a koan:

    “If you come to someone with a gift, and they don’t accept it, who does the gift belong to?”

    So when we share our idealism and it’s rejected or not respected, who does it belong to? Us. Just as it always has.

    I still believe in idealism about making life better for humanity. The progression of medicine being a huge one. Increasing our quality of life by learning how to keep our bodies and minds healthier and stronger for longer periods of time.

    Idealism is a good thing to have. But it needs to be balanced out by realism.

    As far as women go, I have no idealism. I deeply enjoy women’s company, probably because it’s so rare for me to experience any. But as far as getting married goes — no way.

    At the end of the day, it sucks. Yet another zen koan:

    A student achieves enlightenment. His friends ask him what it’s like, and how he feels. His response? “As miserable as ever.”

    Seeing things clearly doesn’t mean that we’re going to automatically be happy and at peace. And it doesn’t mean that we’ll even be able to do anything differently when we see things clearly. There’re no guarantees about that.

    I don’t see how idealizing love and TRP are compatible. I’m not in love with anyone and at this point in my life can’t imagine ever feeling that way again knowing what I know now, and that being the way it is, I don’t see how idealism could possibly co-exist with a mindset like that.

    What’s left to idealize when you’re fully aware of hypergamy and the nuts and bolts of how women work? What room is there for “magic” when you understand the way things work, and it’s impossible for you to fall in love with anyone?

    Again….I don’t see how idealism and TRP are compatible. When you can’t fall in love, i.e. you’re incapable of seeing any one woman as inherently different from any other woman — how can you idealize anything? What is there to idealize?

    All relationships become the same – nothing’s inherently different. What’s left to idealize in a relationship when you understand that relationships are all the same whether they’re with this woman or that woman?

  81. @Glenn- I agree with you as my last few posts show. I find this idealism with RP to be non-compatible But I think I get where Rollo is coming from to a degree.In our natural state- in the wild, so to speak- primitive mans idealism would have been complementary with womans hypergamy. A man needed to defend, feed and want to stay around with a woman, so his idealization of her would have increased the chances of his genes surviving. Her hypergamy would have ensured that she found the best mate to do these things for her. In the natural, primitive state of the wild, these two things work together to ensure successful reproduction. And being that in this primitive state, where mans higher physical power and the environment kept him naturally in a controlling alpha state as well as forcing her into checked hyergamy and dependence.. they were complimentary.
    But, as you point out, that is just not possible or desirable today. Women are unhinged and feral with hypergamy on the loose. This leads to men seeing the game for what it is, and reveals womens nature to him. Idealism is IMPOSSIBLE once man perceives and learns of womens hypergamous, opportunistic nature. The only way to do so is as a form of rationalization or compartmentalization- a buffer in Rollo’s terms- against reality.
    You just cannot put that genie back in the bottle. In todays world any idealism is not a sign of complimentary natures, but a denial of reality. The complimentary benefit of mans idealism in primitive times was based on an ignorance of reality- he just did not know any better.. but once one does, it’s like trying to go back to believing the world is flat.

  82. Back in the wild, men may have been less idealistic. After agriculture took hold, prosperity spread, men may have become idealistic. As societies were built, women benefited but couldn’t be how things are today because life was still very harsh for men and women. So men could still be idealistic. Idealism can be liability now because things are so easy. Especially relative to how it used to be for women.
    Buying a new phone every time a new version comes out. Grocery stores are always stock. Turn a knob for instant water.
    How easy are things when you can even bring “The End Of Men” and not be called crazy? You might as well say you really have to put oil in your car.
    There’s an article discussing around the time of the start of agriculture that it was 1 man breeding with 17 women ratio.

  83. “There just isn’t any point in doing all this. Women are not capable of empathy, genuine intimacy, or love. So even if you successfully game her and her desire is genuine, what is it really worth?”

    It is worth nothing – except some objectivly measurable, real-life-rewards. Like mind-blowing sex etc.pp.

    The moment you fully realize (not just know, but realize) that it is worth nothing, this reward is freely given.

    Because Hypergamy has no real dangers to fight (–>coddled western society, feamles free to do anything) and is out of control, the rewards of hypergamy are given only to those who still break it.

    What is the ultimate counter move? Not caring at all – because real world pressure is gone, hypergamy inflates itself to encounter resistance – and the ultimate restiance is considering females worth nothing (but, socially savy, not explicitly saying so).

    That’s why all inner game development that devalues females WHILE still being superfically sociable(!) gives you instant, massive amounts of options.

  84. @ Hobbes – Good observations, and the truth is I actually don’t really know the history of this idealized view of love. My belief was that it’s quite recent actually, and arises during medieval time as “romance” and “courtly love” and “chivalry”. It makes sense that these were memes first developed in court, by elites who’s wealth and relative security made more practical considerations less pressing.

    But it turns out that romantic love occurs across cultures. I’m tempted to think of it as connected to women’s advantage in sexual selection, but as I’ve said many times, I don’t play amateur scientist. As an aside I am reading voraciously on evolutionary biology and sociology and cultural history – currently reading some Jared Diamond, The World Until Yesterday and also The Social Order of the Underworld – both absolutely fascinating.

    I’m finding that in order get any perspective on this at all one needs to think about the society as a whole. Just think about what tribal/clan societies went through with divorce – men and women have long broken up. The clan of the husband who came up with the dowry want their money back, and the clan of the women who received the dowry have to pay it. There may also have been politics of territory or clan/tribe/band that were dealt with via the marriage. In other words there was a ton of social pressure to not divorce.

    It wasn’t handled quietly – everyone with a stake weighed in and argued it out. A man’s family and business associates, to whom this could mean, for example that your tribe lost travel rights over another tribe’s land, would all have their say.

    That is also because most everyone in a band/clan knew each other and within tribes knew of each other or had common connections to each other. The divorce would effect many people. But today? We live in weird, voluntary, often fairly narrow social constructs with each other and the idea that our family or peers/friends would argue about this with me or my ex or her family about our divorce before it occurred in an open way seems impossible.

    It is worth noting that when my marriage started circling the bowl due to my wife going full-metal-cunt, one person in our family did speak up to her, it was her sister. She read her the riot act for how badly my ex would treat me in public – but that was it and that was well before the divorce. Fyi, this was new treatment by my ex – I didn’t marry a woman who got her kicks by treating me like shit. This began in like year 6 of a 9 year relationship – 1 yr after the child, when she knew she had the gun cocked and locked. I hadn’t changed a bit, and perhaps had only gotten better as my career was rocketing upward at that time and also had demonstrated what a committed and loving Dad I was by that time.

    But I remember thinking many times how fucked up it was that this whole thing wasn’t more of a family and community issue. I also wish there was some shame associated with it. But that isn’t the point. My point is that when thinking about how all this changes, one has to look at the complete social context and there are so many factors which contribute to how sex and marriage and courtship and families and divorce and infidelity etc occur.

    I think right now we are seeing a “Perfect Storm” of politics, culture and hypergamy on ‘roids in a fit of runaway selection due to the feedbacks, and it’s throwing our whole society out of whack. It’s bound to burn itself out, but wow, does it suck to be dealing with. I also realize that I’m just a grain of sand on a beach, and am being whipped around by all this. I can change exactly nothing about it, all I can really do is try to deal with it.

    I just want to be happy, I don’t need to be a hero. Really. I’ve written two songs about it so far, one called Heroes Game and another called The Very Start. Making art about my Red Pill journey is quite revealing. In Heroes Game, “Looking back on the road I’m on, at the things I’ve left behind. What have I been playing where have I been aiming this life of mine? Heroes Game, Heroes Game, Heroes Game is what I’m playing. It’s all I know and who I am.” I didn’t really get how huge the heroic journey was in my view of masculinity until I wrote this song.

    The heroic journey cultural meme is so overarching for male identity that many men don’t realize how controlling it is of their worldview. I’ve had it beaten out of me, and my Red Pill journey is really about seeing how that entire meme serves everyone but me. The thought of picking all that weight up again, only to be kicked in the balls again when I have a vulnerable moment by some ungrateful bitch seems ridiculous.

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: