The Red Pill Balance

Before you move on to reading today’s post, please take 14 minutes and listen to Niko Choski’s latest here Man:the being made of stone, it’ll be relevant in the second half of this post.

Niko is MGTOW, and from what I know is fairly highly regarded in that sphere. I did an interview with him back in August and since then have become a semi-regular listener of his youtube channel. We’ve occasionally bounced ideas off one another since the interview and I hold Niko in the highest respect for his intellectual approach and insights.

So it’s with that in mind that I’m going to use his latest offering here as a contrast to what I’m going into today.

Reader Divided Line stopped me in my writing tracks on another post with this comment from the last post thread. Not the least of which because I’d just finished listening to Niko’s audio here, but also because it was an interesting juxtaposition to what I’d planned to go into today. I’m going to quote Divided Line here and riff a bit as I go (emphasis mine):


A lot of what you’ve said here echos my own thinking to such a degree that it’s as if you read my mind. I agree 100%.

What you’re talking about here, I think, is the inherent value of goodness or justice. I think Plato took up this question in the Republic and nailed it better than most.

In the beginning of the dialogue the question is “what is justice?” But it quickly transforms into “what is the value of justice?” In other words, if goodness wins us no reward, then what value does it have? Is it valuable in its own right? Would it have value even if it cost us something, or indeed cost us everything?

Glaucon puts the question like this (paraphrasing): “What if the perfectly just man is seen by everyone as perfectly unjust, while the perfectly unjust man is seen as perfectly just?” He then puts it on Socrates to effectively prove that, even in this scenario, justice would be worth it.

We could gender this question and simply ask “what if the perfectly good man is seen as perfectly unattractive to women, while the perfectly evil man is seen as perfectly attractive?”

Is goodness worth it even if it isn’t profitable sexually or socially? It’s the same question.

Why be a ‘good’ man when what we consider good by both personal and social measures isn’t rewarded (or only grudgingly rewarded), while what we consider ‘bad’ is what is enthusiastically rewarded with women’s genuine desire and intimacy? In other words, Hypergamy doesn’t care about what men consider good or bad.

It seems like this is the predicament red pill awareness puts us in when we have to consider the value of our formerly beta self. What makes the beta the beta is his weakness, of course, but it is simultaneously his civility. We’re not defective people for wanting or even needing the possibility love, empathy, truth, friendship, kindness, and – above all else – trust in our lives. It just makes us human. If we project our deeply rooted desires for these things and treat others the way we want to be treated, wouldn’t society be better off for it? And isn’t this what the supplicating, loyal beta does when latches on to a woman he believes to the “the One?”

No Quarter Given

In my post (and book chapter) Of Love and War I quote a reader who summed up this want for relief from men’s inherent Burden of Performance:

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

When I consider Niko’s perspective alongside this I begin to see a stark paradox; mens’ want for a relief or a respite from that performance burden tends to be their undoing. I wont get too deep into this, but one reason I see the MGTOW sphere being so seductive is the hopeful promise of that same relief. Simply give up. Refuse to play along and reject the burden altogether. Japan’s herbivorous men crisis is a graphic example of the long term effects of this.

However, this is the same mistake men make in their Blue Pill, Beta conditioning. They believe that if they meet the right girl, if they align correctly with that special ONE, then they too can give up and not worry about their performance burden – or relax and only make the base effort necessary to keep his ONE happy.

The Beta buys the advertising that his Blue Pill conditioning has presented to him for a lifetime. Find the right girl who accepts you independent of your performance, and you can let down your guard, be vulnerable, forget any notion of Red Pill truths because your girl is a special specimen who places no conditions on her love, empathy, intimate acceptance or genuine desire for you.

And this is also very seductive and inuring for the Beta who’s been conditioned to believe there can realistically be a respite from his burden.

That’s how it seemed to work in my own life. Looking back on it, I was so grateful to my ex, who was easily the most attractive girl I’d ever been with, that I would have taken a bullet for her. I didn’t want anybody else. I didn’t even think about other girls – the first time that had ever happened to me in a relationship. I can remember thinking that even if she gained weight, lost her looks, and got old, I’d still want her. I would have “loved” her forever. I was good and ready to cash in my chips, exit the SMV, and retire. I would have arranged my whole life around making her happy and would have felt lucky to have had the privilege.

At the time, all of that felt noble and brave, but looking back on it, it just seems pathetic and pathological, the result of my neediness. But the thing is, what if she had reciprocated it? Wouldn’t it have been a relationship worth having? Had she reciprocated it – if any woman was capable of reciprocating that – it wouldn’t have been Disney movie bullshit, but the real thing. We’re supposed to think such a thing is possible and that’s what keeps us playing along. The Red Pill is really about recognizing its impossibility, I think. There is no possible equity. To be sure, a woman can be loyal and dedicated to you, in theory, but she’ll only give that loyalty to the guy who needs it least. It’s like a cruel, cosmic joke.

Such as it is, that girl lied to me, ran for the hills the moment I showed weakness and needed her the most, and cheated on me. Big surprise, right? With a red pill awareness now I can see how predictable that result was, but at the time I was blindsided by it. I never saw it coming. I couldn’t understand how she could do such a thing when I’d invested so much in her, when I was so willing to give her all the things I’d always wanted most. I assumed she wanted the same things – men and women are the same, right? That’s what the egalitarians tell us. I couldn’t understand how those things could be so valueless to her that she would just throw it all away like that. She didn’t value them at all.

On occasion I’ve suggested that men watch the movie Blue Valentine. You can check out the plot summary on the IMDB link there, but you really need to watch the movie (on Netflix) to appreciate what I’m going to relate here. The main character suffers from the same romantic idealism and want for a perfected, mutually shared concept of love between himself and the single mother he eventually marries.

It follows along the same familiar theme of Alpha while single / Beta after marriage that most men experience in what they believe is their lot. More often than not the Alpha they believed their wives or LTR girlfriends perceived they were was really just a guy who’d do for their needs of whatever phase of maturity she found herself in.

By itself this would be enough for me to endorse the movie, but the story teaches a much more valuable lesson. What Dean (Ryan Gosling) represents is a man who idealistically buys the Blue Pill promise that men and women share a mutual love concept, independent of what their sexual strategies and innate dispositions prompt them to. Because of this misbelief Dean gives up on the burden of his performance. He drops his ambitions and relaxes with his ONE girl, contenting himself in mediocrity, low ambitions and his idealistic belief in a woman sharing and sustaining his romanticized Blue Pill love ideal – performancelessness.

He relaxes, lets his guard down and becomes the vulnerable man he was taught since birth that women would not only desire, but require for their false, performanceless notions of mutual intimacy. The men of this sphere who don’t find themselves divorced from their progressively bored wives are often the ones who trade their ambitions and passions for a life of mediocrity and routine,…so long as the security blanket of what they believe is a sustainable, passable semblance of that love (but not desire) exists in their wives or girlfriends.

Their burden of performance is sedated so long as their women are reasonably comfortable or sedate themselves. That false sense of contentment is only temporary and leads to their own ruin or decay.

No Quarter Expected

I’ve since watched something similar happen to a friend not once but twice. It’s textbook, standard shit. AWALT.

Cultivating these unrequited beta aspects of somebody’s character, if we did it on a mass scale, creates a society worth living in. It’s a civilized society where these things are most possible and it’s a truly worthwhile relationship where both parties regard each other this way and can full expect it to be reciprocated. It requires faith and trust, but we all know better. Our survival depends on knowing better, post sexual revolution. Women were never worthy of such trust and they’re entirely incapable of it. They were never capable of it. We were just supposed to think they were and cultivate the better aspects of our natures in order to be worthy of them.

The ugly truth of it is that women were never worthy of us.

Women’s sexuality doesn’t reward justice or goodness – if it did, reciprocity would be the norm and none of us would be confused about relational equity. Women reward not goodness, but strength. And strength is amoral, meaning it can be either just or unjust, good or bad. The guy with strength can either be the villain or the hero – it makes no difference to women. They can’t tell the difference and in truth don’t care anyway.

There is a set of the Red Pill that subscribe to what I’d call a ‘scorched earth‘ policy. It’s very difficult to reconcile the opportunistic basis of women’s Hypergamous natures with men’s hopeful, idealistic want for a love that’s independent from their performance burden. So the idea is again one of giving up. They say fuck it, women only respond to the most base selfishly individualistic, socio or psychopathic of men, so the personality they adopt is one that hammers his idealism flat and exaggerates his ‘Dark Triad‘ traits beyond all believability.

It’s almost a vengeful embrace of the most painful truths Red Pill awareness presents to us, and again I see why the scorched earth PUA attitude would seem attractive. Women do in fact observably and predictably reward assholes and excessively dominant Alpha men with genuine desire and sexual enthusiasm.

Agreeableness and humility in men has been associated with a negative predictor of sex partners.

The problem inherent in applying reciprocal solutions to gender relations is the belief that those relations are in any way improved by an equilibrium between both sexes interests. Solution: turn hard toward the asshole energy. Men understand the rules of engagement with women and they know Game well enough to capitalize on it so why not capitalize on that mastery of it?

The dangers of this are twofold. First, it lacks real sustainability and eventually becomes a more sexualized version of MGTOW. Secondly, “accidents” happen. MGTOWs will warn us that any interaction with a woman bears a risk of sexual harassment or false rape claims, but for the scorched earth guy a planned unplanned pregnancy on the part of a woman attempting to lock down her Alpha is far more likely to be his long term downfall. Emotional and provisioning liabilities for a child tends to pour cold water on the scorched earth guy.

It wouldn’t be inaccurate to say that women are philosophically, spiritually, and morally stunted. They have a limited capacity for adherence to higher ideals and this is why they don’t know or care what actual justice or goodness is. Like Schopenhauer said, they “mistake knowledge for its appearance.”

It took me a long time to be able to accept this. That is women’s true inferiority – and women are profoundly inferior. And I take no pleasure in recognizing that, as if I’m somehow touting the superiority of team men. It’s awful, in fact. Dealing with it is the ultimate burden of performance for us as individual men, but also as a society. At some point we’re simply going to have to confront women’s moral inferiority. If we look at our institutions, the very same that are crumbling now all around us, we can see that previous generations of men already figured this out. We just forgot what they knew.

So what’s the answer? Is justice valuable for its own sake? All of us would probably on some level want to be able to say yes and argue the case, but I don’t know if I can do so convincingly.

I’m with you on this, part of me thinks “Fuck this. It can’t be like this.” But it is. I wish I had the answer.

Niko attempts to redress the assumption that men feel some necessity to be someone they really aren’t. In Vulnerability I go into how the Feminine Imperative is only too willing to exploit this self-doubt by labeling men as existential posers and their conventional masculinity is a ‘mask’ – a false charade – they put on to hide the real vulnerability that lies beneath.

Unfortunately many men accept this as gospel. It’s part of their Blue Pill upbringing and is an essential aspect of their feminine ‘sensitivity training’ and gender loathing conditioning. When masculinity is only ever a mask men wear the only thing real about them is what real women tell them it should be.

What we don’t consider is the legitimacy of our need for strength, independence, stoicism, and yes, emotional restraint. That need to be bulwark against women’s emotionality, that need to wear psychological armor against the Red Pill realities of women’s visceral natures is legitimate and necessary. If a man’s vulnerability is ever it’s because his display of it is so uncharacteristic of his normal impenetrability. The woman’s demeanor, and the narrator’s voice, in the last post’s Campbell’s soup commercial is an example of the weak, vulnerability women expect from lesser child-men – and a commensurate expectation of him to just get that he needs to be strong.

That’s the inconsistency in women’s Hypergamous nature and the narrative of the Feminine Imperative’s messaging. Be sweet, open, vulnerable; it’s OK to cry, ask for help, be sick and weakened, we’re all equal and empathetic – but, Man Up, “what, you need your mommy?”, assert yourself, the asshole is sexier than you, where’s your self-discipline? – but, your masculine identity is a mask you wear to hide the real you,……

I play many roles in the male life I lead today, and I’ve played many others in my past. I’m Rollo Tomassi in the manosphere, I’m a father to my daughter, a husband and lover to my wife, a brilliant artist and pragmatic builder of brands in my job, an adventure seeker when I’m on my snowmobile and a quiet contemplator of life and God when I’m fishing. All of those roles and more are as legitimate as I choose to make them. Do I have moments of uncertainty? Do I waiver in my resolve sometimes? Of course, but I don’t let that define me because I know there is no real strength in relating that.

The Red Pill Balance

Red Pill awareness is both a blessing and a curse. The trick is balancing your Red Pill expectations with your previous Blue Pill idealism. It’s not a sin for you to want for an idealistic reality – that’s what sets us apart from women’s opportunism. You do yourself no favors in killing you idealistic, creative sense of wonderment of what could be. The trick is acknowledging that aspect of your male self.

KFG had a comment to this point:

If men did not hold heroism as a higher ideal, we wouldn’t be here.
If women did not hold survival as a higher ideal, we wouldn’t be here.

This was precisely the dynamic I was referring to when I wrote Idealism.

Men’s idealism and idealistic concepts of love are the natural counterbalance to women’s pragmatic, Hypergamously rooted opportunism and opportunistic concepts of love and vice versa. Those differing concepts can be applied very unjustly and very cruelly, or very judiciously and honorably, but they are the reality of our existence.

Red Pill awareness isn’t just about understanding women’s innate natures and behaviors, it’s also understanding your own male nature and learning how it fits in to that new awareness and living in a new paradigm. Is something like justice valuable for its own sake? I’d say so, but that concept of justice must be tempered (or enforced) in a Red Pill understanding of what to expect from women and men. Red Pill awareness doesn’t mean we should abandon our idealism or higher order aspirations, and it certainly doesn’t mean we should just accept our lot in women’s social frame because of it. It does mean we need to balance that idealism in as pragmatic a way with the realities of what the Red Pill shows us.


Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

807 comments on “The Red Pill Balance

  1. Women’s desire for men capable of and all too ready for doing evil puts civil society in danger in its very foundation. The problem here is a by far more basic issue and can’t be resolved by just resorting to the individual psychological settings of particular men called BP or by confining to the topic of perfomance burden or any other concept on “gender relations”. It has massive social impacts as is strenghtens men that are basically anti-social and weakens those capable of and willing to attaching and bonding in various dimensions of social life.

  2. A very timely post Rollo. I’ve been lurking on TRM for about a year now, reading as many posts and comments as I can. I’ve learnt a lot from all of you, thanks.

  3. “They don’t want to have to actually deal with us and how we are and how we see things. If they don’t like it, they feel like they can just run and take our kids. And you excuse her.

    It’s terroristic. Really. Get that.” (scribblerg 6/jan 9:46)

    Most women like Kitten don’t really get this selfish aspect of women’s cruelty. I’m not an MRA, but I am getting involved in Father’s Rights groups and in groups against parental alienation.

  4. The problem with hyperagamy is that in its natural context it is not enduring, it has a very finite shelf life, with procreation being the natural outcome.

    In its unnatural perpetual state (artificial contraception) it is a monstrous hydra that throws the natural order on its head, low birth rates, promiscuity, alienates children from fathers, punishes the just, hardens women’s hearts, destroys families and communities, destroys young males, generates abulia in young men, destroys women’s lives, punishes innocent women etc.

    There’s not a man alive that isn’t enthralled by the beauty of the feminine essence. In its natural state hyperagamy is a beautiful thing, it binds and channels the awesome feminine essence and energy towards goodness.

    In its unnatural state it becomes a vile and detestable thing, so much so that some men who are naturally enchanted by the feminine become repulsed and would rather walk away. It’s an awful state to hate the very thing you love.

    I think Rollo’s answer is to engage in a Herculean task of force of will, subliminal mental Judo and cunning and guile to conquer the wayward feminine energy. Basically Odysseus on roids.

    To the victor go the spoils.

    Some will win, some are up for for the challenge, some will claim a temporary victory, some will fail and some will not come to the fight.

  5. Ever since I internalized the MGTOW mindset, every day I wake up relieved to not be tethered to a woman financially, psychologically or legally. I’m 6′ 3″, well educated, am in the top 15% in terms of accumulated wealth and income, own property, etc. My life is filled with interesting things to do and a peace unlike any other to be found.

    Once the blue pill brainwashing and social conditioning was undone by studying the MGTOW mindset, all of what used to be life’s gynocentric anomalies became crystal clear. Now I have zero interest in pursuing women and am greatly relieved by not having a woman in my life. When I look back on my skirt chasing days, it’s as though I’m looking at a totally different person – one for whom I have zero respect. My former self was an idiot – a pussy puppet.

    The very worst thing I can imagine happening to me is ever again becoming attached to a woman. I cherish my singledom and hope to remain this way for the remainder of my days. Except for sex – I no longer understand why any man would waste his time or money chasing women. There is so much more to life. I regret the time and money I wasted on women in my past and am forever grateful to have discovered the MGTOW mindset.

    It’s a wonderful thing to be freed of social conditioning and brainwashing.

  6. @Wild Man: “I’ve invested some time and energy on this stuff and expected more rigor . . .”

    “egalitarian-complimentarian . . . procreation-supersession-wise , , ,”

    Metaphysician, heal theyself.

    @Johny Come Lately: Mastering Judo is an arduous and painful task, the point of which it to be able to engage in it “instinctively” with as little pain as possible.

  7. “It’s not a sin for you to want for an idealistic reality…”

    Yes, it is. It’s called a delusional mindset. It leads you to engage in an endless quest for the mythical NAWALT. Instead, give up the BS fantasy of finding the perfect Disney Princess who will love you forever for just being yourself, and accept that no woman gives a damn who you are inside, they just want you to be the man that gives them the tingles or the guy with the money – – preferably both. Accept this reality and live a self-fulfilling life. MGTOW

  8. @NBTM,

    I keep reading what you say, and its funny that you “discredit” MGTOW, but you literally embrace all their ideals. You are like that child, and them, “I’m taking my ball and going home.”…You are that man who claims he’s “above it” or “over it” because of your age (52), low T levels, whatever. In essence, you are calling us all “slaves to it all” for “wanting something” better. As Rollo stated, go look at what men’s idealism has created, its fucking wonderful. The Red Pill is about understanding reality versus what is our ideal, and living within those confines. It’s not a bunch of bitter men throwing darts at pictures of women. And yes, some of us are or have been in that anger phase, but that’s part of the healing. I’ve met many men like you, life gave you a curve ball, it became tough, so rather that challenge yourself, grow, learn, instead you folded up shop and “quit”, then pretend, “he huh, you silly boys guided by your desires, suckers!”. LIke the Book of Pook said, “Unite Dream and Day”…But you are above it, so stay in your basement, close yourself off, and laugh at us poor fools who actually want to live a better life, and understand what happens around us. When men lose that desire, that idealism, that “dream” what is the point of even living life? I’m sure you cats appreciate you, but other than that, nobody can respect a man who “gives up”, and pretends he’s above it all, at least not this man.

    Ok, off to slave away to my desires!

  9. This post is MGTOW bait, wow. I love the guys who are like, “this is just romantic idealism” – lol. Any man who believes that’s what we are up to here, all I can say is go up to the top of the page and begin reading the Best of Year 1 and 2. After an hour, come back and tell us Rollo is peddling “idealism” of any sort. In fact, dickheads, what he’s peddling is “praxeology” – the same approach as the Austrian economists take to economics which underlies many of the Anarchic ideas you also push but don’t understand (but why weren’t Menger, Mises, von Bomboverik or Hakek anarchists then?). What is here is anti-ideology. It’s point is to destroy an ideology men have been sold. It could be said that Rollo is here to destroy the conventions of romantic love, courtly love and chivalry in favor of a complementary mindset which starts with understanding our basic natures that have evolved over millions of years. Let me just point out a few things about MGTOW:

    – They are at war with themselves. Even Stardusk has been distancing himself from “the movement”. They can’t even agree on what the term means. Many men who claim to be MGTOW are not any such thing. MGTOW actually means disengaging from women and abnegating one’s sexual desire and consciously ignoring one’s sexual desire. Many MGTOW are also half-assed anarchists who drop out of mainstream society in many ways and eschew traditional “work” and live a bare subsistence. They claim to do this to deny “the system” their money to support women, fyi.

    You are not a MGTOW if you see the sexual politics at work in our society and are angered by it. Many men who claim to be MGTOW are just Red Pillers like us, but have not digested it to the point where they actually get the reality of our world and the lot of men. They shirk “the burden of performance”, hence they find themselves angry at us.

    – MGTOW abuses evo pysch extremely. Rollo is quite careful in his reliance on evo psych. They have stopped their Red Pill journey in the anger phase and use fanciful evo psych ideas as a buffer to justify their rage.

    – MGTOW is a buffer to protect the egos of men who are personally confronted by the Red Pill. I can definitely understand this. My cheesy little ego had many buffers to justify how I gave up on life and myself. But that doesn’t make it admirable nor a worthwhile place to stand.

    – MGTOW is the land of pseudo-intellects. Truly. What keyed me into this was when I started to listen to their ideas about politics, history and economics. Since I possess deep, hard won, real knowledge of these topics I was like, hmmm, can these guys be this superficial? Maybe their ideas about intersexual relations are too? So I started to access real science and place like TRM etc and started to see how badly these guys were skewing and misusing the data they “cited”. Guys like “Sandman”, a Youtuber are emblematic of this phenomena. And he gets over 10k views on the vids he produces regularly and has a few with over 200k views.

    I recently encountered a MGTOW on a Youtube channel who told me that male sexual interest in women was largely a result of “brainwashing” and he was prattling on and on about it. I responded, “So, you can’t get laid, right?” He revealed he was a 25 yr old virgin – who also apparently has all the answers to how to relate to women and be an effective, happy man, lol. All you MGTOWs, answer this question. That 25 yr old virgin/incel has undoubtedly spent thousands of hours online and on Youtube channels and 4chan and Reddit – would his life not be better if he had spent that time on self-improvement and on learning Game? Would he not have gotten laid by this point? Would he not have accomplished much more with his life?

    And now I’m out until the next post, taking a leaf out of the book of SJF. I have to be careful of falling into a virtual world vs. my real life too. I have a busy day and evening planned. Killing it for my clients, a good work out and then some music. I’ll catch you guys when the next post comes out.

  10. Thanks for this article Rollo.

    I do not believe we disagree on the essence of things. I believe the burden of performance can crash men, or certain men because they want to continuously perform against what they really want to do, that’s why is essential to find something to do that you enjoy doing. But of course as you say: in life you have many roles and some of which you can be a bit more open than others.

    Nothing that I said in my video should have a link on how men interact with women. I mean realistically speaking I believe mostly on inner game, in how you behave as you. Whether you speak about your emotions or not, show them, display them, hold on to them; a man’s doing and undoing would be how he eventually deals with them.

    This video was directed as you can imagine to a subsection in the MGTOW scene who seem to have forgotten that we are all human beings with emotions. In their rejection of women, they seem to be rejecting anything that’s feminine and in that, emotion goes along with it. They do not see that that’s exactly what they are doing but they are.

    I think what I am focused on is appreciating that for a man to truly be himself, is that he has to come to terms with the emotional vulnerability inside of him. The fact that he is not made of stone. The fact that if he interacts with women, such as I do, no matter how he is inside, emotions do creep in, and it will be unwise to assume that they won’t. By accepting your emotional world, removing the outside and cultural influences about how you should be, you can be who you want to be. Whether that is in relationships or not. Like you said in an earlier post, you don’t game your wife, you have come to terms with they hypergamy of women, and I believe if that hypergamy takes your wife away, then you will feel the betrayal and hurt. But invariably you will move on. It will not change your world view.

    That is a very important aspect for every man to understand. If you are going to play. And I believe people need to play, and interact with the opposite sex and with people of the same sex to get their human needs met, then they are going to run into heartache, problems, arguments etc. Their world view will invariably get challenged from time to time. And in the midst of this, you need to be able to see why you have made your decisions, why the way you think is as it is. And you need to appreciate your emotional world first and foremost, to be able to survive through it if you are hyperemotional, control it, or come to terms with it.

    I lean more along the side of coming to terms with your nature. With your emotions and owning them. Accepting them and being that man that you were meant to be. There is extreme strength that can come of that. But as you understand my logic does take over when things are getting frigid. This is a hard thing to balance.

    What I want no-one to do, is look inside and understand that his emotions have no value, reject them, and then they take hold of him, take the reigns and when the time is right take over his life, throw him down the path of depression and suicide as life will hit some of us harder than others. A man needs to know his inner world. A man needs to be his own psychologist in this day and age. And a man needs to have real friends, a gang of sorts to roam the world with. It is as much as a man could ask for.
    Vaginas shake things up, but I am talking about the foundation of a man.

  11. @Scribblerg

    MGTOW videos are a work in progress. Whatever video you find you will not find the answers you are looking for. It is an idea in development. I have distanced myself from it for the reason that they are attacking men and not seeing the essence: which to me is helping men understand themselves better and let them move on with a red pill reality while simultaneously questioning everything.

    I started seeing it a long time ago as: each man’s point of view with a rejection of marriage as a standard.

  12. “I respected and trusted your opinion at one time buddy – no more.”

    lol, to your own detriment. Jesus. There’s no reason to throw Rollo under the bus. When did he ever say women are good for fucks only? You not getting it is the problem. Not everybody else.

  13. “Men require functioning institutions in order to qualify for women in a way that is socially advantageous for everyone.”


    I kind of disagree with you there. If you enter a relationship from the Alpha side of things you can turn it into an LTR fairly easily. Now I would agree that it won’t be sustainable for marriage or kids unless you can step up to the plate and provide better than she can. But if you don’t want kids…

    ” It’s like you just have to stop expecting things from women and resign yourself to the sad reality.”

    Watch that video @Scribblerg posted about feminine energy. You just have to enjoy what they offer and game can bring out the best of that.

    “I honestly read this shit and I almost always have the thought “why don’t men just burn this society to the ground and be done with it?”

    I think that if as guys we start acting in our best interest and boycott marriage and there ends up being this huge glut of unhappy single 40yr old career women with no kids they will start getting the message and maybe things will change. If that doesn’t work you might be right.

  14. WaPo on fixing women’s sexual desire:

    Middle-age moms get a bad rap when it comes to sex. They’ve either lost their sex drive because of hormones, or they’re too consumed with their kids, exhausted from trying to have it all, having body-image issues, or they’re not spending enough “quality” time with their husbands. (Or perhaps they’re too preoccupied being mad at them.)

    Those reasons might be true for some wives. But give those mid-life women divorce papers and a new lover or two, and just watch what happens.

  15. @Rollo: a very good, very dense article. It bears reading aloud.
    I’d suggest the failure of man’s idealism is in the flesh. That is, attempting to manifest an ideal vision in stone or wood has the potential for success; flesh cannot hold the ideal but for a moment – roughly your myth of the quality woman.
    What I’ve lost is my understanding of the art of husbandry: knowing what needs to be pruned, what needs to be cleared, what needs to be grafted, what needs to be bred, etc. There was the sense of wonderment—all these living things could be guided. The only living being subject to a man’s idealism is the man himself.
    Thank you.

  16. @redlight… The bored wife syndrome.

    This is just more confirmation for married red pill approach. A little (or lot) of dread, some competition anxiety and she is yours, if you still want her.

  17. Rollo is a reporter, you read his views, investigations, and comments. He is the finger pointing, he is not the place to where that finger points. You either get past the fear of moving your gaze away from the finger and look into the void it is pointing too, or eventually, you will come to hate the finger, cuz it is not giving you the answers.

    There are many people on this planet that give you the finger, learn from their observations of life, but always look beyond and discover FOR YOURSELF what the void is trying to teach you. We will all come to different conclusions, based upon our own personal experiences, but will have travelled at some times on the same paths as others, these times we can share.

    But ultimately, as RH so eloquently explains, none of this matters, BP/RP, Alphalpa/Betamax, whorehole/Madonna, etc.

    Starting @ 1:48 of the clip, if you understand this small part of life, you will have had a glimpse of the truth.

  18. I’ll echo the 1st comment and say that this is exactly what I needed to read, and puts together several threads I’d been trying to reconcile for a while. Brilliant stuff.

  19. @Forge the Sky

    I’m starting to feel that girls are as lost and confused about how to attract a man as most men are confused about how to attract a woman these days

    This is accurate. What is often lost in discussions like this is that there is a burden of performance on women as well, but this too has been swept away by modern culture. Obviously, maintaining a pleasant physical appearance is critically important, but the older I get, the more I see that cultivating a gracious and grateful spirit is the number one thing woman have to do in order to sustain a marriage. In other words, just was women are not attracted to displays of anti-masculine behavior from men, men aren’t interested in maintaining relationships with anti-feminine women. Once your looks go, that’s all you have left.

    However, while these are female traits, they must be cultivated, and cultivation of any personal virtue is hard work, sometimes inconvenient, and often at odds with the Leftist view that we should be able to make ourselves anything we wish without negative consequence. While men are shamed into believing the best parts of themselves are the worst, women are told the worst parts are the most moral and encouraged to indulge it. A lack of self-control is a desirable, even moral way to behave. We should all be governed at all times by our emotions. And it’s no wonder girls listen; it’s much easier to be a bitch than it is to be kind.

    However, just like with men, most women wouldn’t so fully buy into this if it wasn’t accompanied by the message that men prefer their women “strong” or “sassy.” I am sure most men would like a woman who is strong, but the strength they’re likely thinking of is more along the lines of Penelope’s loyalty than Buffy’s ball-cutting attitude. We’re told to behave like the latter while the former (if she’s taught at all in schools anymore) is an archaic, repressed stereotype who no girl should emulate. Every man in Sunnydale loves Buffy though, and the more psychodrama she puts them all through, the more they love her.

    Combine this with modern attitudes towards obesity, facial piercings, hideous tattoos, clothing designed by gay men with a love of aethestics but no interest in female sensuality, and a series of lies about we want sex just as much as men do, and for the same reasons, and it’s no wonder girls don’t know what to do.

    We’re told to unmake everything about ourselves that encourages love and dedication from men, and then wonder why we can’t secure it.

    On a personal note, I believe that there must be an analog for red pill awareness with women. We aren’t all happy with the current state of things, and I would guess that our feminist world is making many of us downright miserable. However, female virtue is mostly based on what she holds in reserve. Men can regain what they have lost to this culture, but we largely cannot. (You can surgically reconstruct your hymen but you can’t fix the emotional damage of casual sex). Women, with their pragmatic survivor outlook, don’t want to understand their own mistakes because there is no way to undo the effects. Better to cling to a fantasy. Our greatest sin, however, is continuing to repeat the lies. We’ve been selling each successive generation down the river since the 1960s.

    It makes me very sad for little girls. If I’m lucky enough to have children someday, I want to make sure they understand this. And I want to be close enough with my niece so she doesn’t repeat the mistakes both myself and her mother have made.

  20. I really think this post ties together a lot of the points of your writing. Men need to understand that it is pointless to look for a definable solution because there is non. The best you can do is work inside this evolutionary framework.

    And for those of you men hurting with these truths, while you will never be able to find a woman with whom you will be able to fully let down your guard; this was never women’s role. This is other men’s role. You will only ever truly be able to be yourself around other men. So my suggestion is to find like minded men or create them yourself.

  21. @Ergo & Tim,

    Ever since I internalized the MGTOW mindset, every day I wake up relieved to not be tethered to a woman financially, psychologically or legally. I’m 6′ 3″, well educated, am in the top 15% in terms of accumulated wealth and income, own property, etc. My life is filled with interesting things to do and a peace unlike any other to be found.

    Did either of you get up this morning and hit the gym like I do every day before work? I’m certainly in the top 10% of men my age in terms of physique, but whenever I look in the mirror, no matter how satisfied I am with the guy looking back at me, I think ‘I can do better’.

    I’ve made a very good living doing what I do for some time now, well into 6 figures. It took a while and I needed to come back from some deficits more than once, but even though I live well off enough to put my daughter through college and enjoy my toys, I still think ‘I can do better’ and I devise ways to make more money so I can help myself, my extended family, my friends in need and the causes I think are worthwhile.

    Do either of you believe that men ‘can do better’ and live a better life – one filled with interesting things to do and a peace unlike any other to be found, untethered to a woman financially, psychologically or legally – by adopting and enacting a MGTOW defined life?

    Congratulations, you’ve just engaged in exactly the male idealism I’ve outlined in this post.

    In fact I’d go so far as to say that most MGTOWs are some of the most romantically idealistic men you’ll ever meet. What guy wouldn’t think a carefree life, cut loose from dealing with women and filled with opportunity and fun motorcycle rides across the country would be ideal? Kind of romantic don’t you think?

    I listened to Karen Straughn interview Roosh this week and like many of the scorched earther guys in the sphere he still clings to the idealistic desire to watch the whole world go critical so we can all rebuild a better society from what’s left of the ashes.

    I don’t happen to share in that apocalyptic cynicism, but for sake of argument, what do you suppose will be the most crucial element in that romanticized rebuilding of a better social order?

    Men’s innate idealism and the drive to see something better, something more efficient, something more creative, innovative, pragmatic and beneficial.

    Tim may be living the romanticized MGTOW life of leisure, but what do you tell the guy who’s adopted that life and is not growing, not livin’ the dream. You may be at the top of your game, but is that the result of having ‘gone’ MGTOW or is that the result of the same idealism for wanting something better that I’m describing here?

    Yes, men need to Kill the Beta, but men need to understand that it’s their idealism that has been romantically exploited (via a lifetime of Blue Pill conditioning) by the Feminine Imperative to serve its ends.

    Look at the picture here:

    Men’s focus is on the outward world. Women’s is on the inward self. We wonder if we can do better, we seek out ideal states, and the FI has known this since the time of our hunter/gatherer origins.

    That idealism is a feature of our male existence, it only becomes a bug when it’s exploited to meet the ends of outside influences. This is why idealistic Disney fantasies and romanticized notions of a soul mate are so damaging for men. In an informed Red Pill aware existence these, and many other contrivances can be seen for what they are – a means for control via men’s innate idealism.

  22. Scribbler wrote:

    “The entire idea that we are somehow different on the inside from the outside, that there is this emotional being hidden inside of us is a feminine constructed myth. Sure, we have emotions and we know that being run by our emotions rarely helps us. Men can express their emotions, but wallowing in them is useless – this is childish behavior. Women live in their emotions – does any man really want to ”
    Nicely put!

    The longer I live, eat and breath the RP the less childish emotions, tantrums and other wasteful energy is exhibited in my behavior. It feels great to analyze those emotions as they come up but then apply the RP and determine what to do with them. Without the RP and TRM I would still be having pity parties.

  23. @Wild Man, the Red Pill box is one of your own devising. As has been mentioned already, TRP is praxeology. What YOU seek to do is make it a box into which your moonbeam new-agey concepts of egalitarianism will fit into.

    You know that egalitarianism is incompatible with biological, evolutionary and sociological Red Pill truths, but your ego-investment in some Zen-like redefinition of egalitarianism can’t accept that.

    Your ego is invested in that misbelief, thus my or anyone else attempting to deconstruct it or criticize it or otherwise empirically show you that it’s false is an attack on your ego and yourself.

    I get it. It hurts to have a cherished belief destroyed, particularly when it’s been a foundational truth around which you build your identity.

    Ego Investments and Denial

    The psychological term for this is called ‘ego-investment’. I use this term a lot on my blog so I thought it deserved a bit of explanation.

    When a person internalizes a mental schema (see belief) so thouroughly and has become conditioned to it for so long, it becomes an integral part of their personality. So to attack the belief is to, literally, attack the person. This is why we see such polarization and violent reaction to people’s political, religious, inter-social/inter-sexual, etc. beliefs – they perceive it as a personal attack, even when presented with irrefutable evidence that challenges the assertions of their belief.

    One common frustration that the Game-aware express is how dificult it is to open an AFCs eyes as to why he’s not hooking up, why he’s not getting dates (or 2nd dates if he is), why he’s constantly getting LJBF rejections, etc., and the flaws in what is really ego-investments and conditioned internalizations. As I’m fond of saying, unplugging chumps from the Matrix is dirty work, and this is made all the more difficult when a person is in a catagorical state of denial.

    People resort to denial when recognizing that the truth would destroy something they hold dear. In the case of a cheating partner, denial lets you avoid acknowledging evidence of your own humiliation. Short of catching a spouse in bed with your best friend, evidence of infidelity is usually ambiguous. It’s motivated skepticism. You’re more skeptical of things you don’t want to believe and demand a higher level of proof.

    Denial is unconscious, or it wouldn’t work: if you know you’re closing your eyes to the truth, some part of you knows what the truth is and denial can’t perform its protective function.

    One thing we all struggle to protect is a positive self-image. The more important the aspect of your self-image that’s challenged by the truth, the more likely you are to go into a state of denial. If you have a strong sense of self-worth and competence your self-image can take hits but remain largely intact; if you’re beset by self-doubt (a hallmark of self-righteous AFC thinking), however, any acknowledgment of failure can be devastating and any admission of error painful to the point of being unthinkable. Self-justification and denial arise from the dissonance between believing you’re competent, and making a mistake, which clashes with that image.

    Solution: deny the mistake.

    Therefore we see AFCs tenaciously cling to a moralistic sense of purpose in their methods which is only reinforced by popular culture in our media, our music, eHarmony, our religion, etc. What they fail to realized, and what becomes cemented for them in denial, is that what they believe are their own, indigenous, self-righteously correct beliefs were designed for them by a fem-centric influence.

    Your solution in this case has been, since your first comment, to rejigger the praxeology of TRP to accommodate your ego-investment in your ideology of a metaphysical possibility of egalitarianism.

    In your head there are two conflicting truths; that of Red Pill awareness and your ego-investment in what you believe is true about egalitarianism. TRP invalidates egalitarianism.

    Solution: redefine TRP to force fit egalitarianism into it.

  24. A man’s got to know his limitations.

    All men have limitations, it’s part of being a man. We’re the experiments. So most men have a range of things where they excel to where they have absolutely no talent. Now as a man you want to make the best decisions, put yourself into situations where you win most of the time. YaReally gets into this a bit. He hates dancing, won’t do it, but goes to clubs, so if dancing comes up he just tries to minimize it. If a man genuinely is bad at something, just minimize or avoid encounters that feature it.

    So idealism, men surely need it. Men need creeds more than women do, they need direction. But a man’s idealism needs to be worth it. If a new war comes up, I want to know if it’s going to be WWI, WWII, or Vietnam. Or maybe something new entirely, or a combination thereof. Also, I don’t think I’m going to be alphaing my way through all of those bullets and bombs. Protect yourself. Apply that to Marriage 2.0 however you like.

  25. Ever watch “Dr Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog” Rollo? An amusing but apt illustration of all that’s written in this post. You could probably mine the red pill / blue pill and alpha vs. beta dynamics in it all day.

  26. I have no idea where the idea that men suppress their more tender (i.e. feminine) emotions comes from, other than from women. All I have seen for 50 years is men being told to suppress their masculine emotions. If they’re emotionally all fucked up, there is your reason. If they are torn up over their inability to cry, it’s because they have been told they should cry, but, being men, do not do so as naturally (i.e., at the literal drop of a hat) as women.

    Carl Jung may get credit for the idea of men getting in touch with their “feminine side,” but it was already in the air with the feminization of men well under way. The locus, so far as I can tell at the moment, was Sister White, a woman, and through her doctor, Kellogg, into the wider culture.

    The next time you sit down to breakfast, gentleman, ponder the fact that Kellogg’s idea of what cornflakes are for is to emasculate you. Really. Eat a goddam steak and some eggs. Then go punch a heavy bag for a while. You’ll find your emotions much settled afterward.

    “. . . I see that cultivating a gracious and grateful spirit is the number one thing woman have to do in order to sustain a marriage.”

    Gee willikers, who woulda thunk it?

    “Roosh . . . like many of the scorched earther guys in the sphere he still clings to the idealistic desire to watch the whole world go critical so we can all rebuild a better society from what’s left of the ashes.”

    Never mind the fact that the ashes will be soaked in the blood of billions, with the incel fake MGTOWs and the Roosh followers among the first to die.

  27. Softek,

    Glad you could take a break from slayin poon to drop by. Keep on rockin in the New Year!

  28. @kfg

    “‘Roosh . . . like many of the scorched earther guys in the sphere he still clings to the idealistic desire to watch the whole world go critical so we can all rebuild a better society from what’s left of the ashes.’

    Never mind the fact that the ashes will be soaked in the blood of billions, with the incel fake MGTOWs and the Roosh followers among the first to die.”

    This shit always makes me laugh, even if they don’t have any children to worry about, it’s like “dude don’t you have cousins, nieces and nephews, parents, people you went to high school with, etc. that you don’t want to see die”? lol

  29. “I have no idea where the idea that men suppress their more tender (i.e. feminine) emotions comes from, other than from women.”

    Yeah… haha. Thank You. I thought I was some defective unfeeling robot for a while there. Not “letting your guard down” in front of women is not the same as not “being yourself.” At least in my case. I also don’t have some deep need to get together with my guy friends so we can cuddle and have a good cry. lol. Okay I guess I’m part of the problem. Sorry…

    1. Man I think this emotional management stuff is key. My dad had it; I only ever saw him break down twice, once at his dad’s funeral, and once when my little brother was trying to destroy his own life.

      In fact seems like to me that that is alpha and beta at its core: whether life destroys you or you just keep moving on.

      I’d give my right arm to be able to manage my emotions better; struggled with it all my life. TRP has helped some, especially with what Rollo says about being your own mental point of origin.

      Serving the feminine imperative is emotional poison if you are raised in it. There’s got to be a way through it without mgtow thothough.

  30. With respect to idealism: men perform best when they are serving a purpose outside of themselves. That could be raising a family, running a business, religion, defending the country or tribe, being an artist or musician, etc. Some men term any form of idealism to be blue pill and try to tell us we should eschew it entirely, but it does not have to be that way. A man can use his red pill perspective to inform his actions in serving that purpose. So idealism can still very much exist in a red pill perspective even when the predominant culture doesn’t support the red pill.

  31. Off topic, but I’m watching Law & Order SVU. A gangrape victim just confessed to experiencing multiple (involuntary) orgasms. Two female detectives tried to explain it away as a ‘physiological response’.

    Then victim asks why she’d never experienced that with her ‘sweet’ boyfriend. That shut the detectives up.

  32. Comment on idealism, My point is that Rollo and the Red Pill seek to destroy Romantic Idealism, not idealism in general. Men are idealistic and strivers and seek to perfect and create and improve as a way of competing in our society for it’s own aesthetic joy. We also have been collectively been in the business of elevating the human moral condition, and in fact, it’s not too strong to say the Western civilization has the been by far the most successful at doing this. In a sense, it provides a moral ladder for men to climb, which many of us do enthusiastically.

    The problem is we put women up on a moral pedestal – and hey, they told us to. I cosign the rest of what Rollo said about idealism utterly.

  33. @Rollo – I had the thought after reading this post that you are now “done”, that you have explicated all of this to the degree that it can be. This piece was truly a synthesis and culmination of all the wisdom you’ve accumulated. I won’t waste my breath being more effusive, let me close by saying it touched my mind and my soul profoundly.

    Back to work!

  34. Kitten’s comment on the IL blog is very good. The part redlight quoted looks at shit tests in a different way than I’ve seen it before.

    Not sure if it’s always the case, but it gives good resolution to the circumstance. Sometimes she might be testing to see if you’re the origin of her issue or its solution.

    I usually just view women venting issues as her throwing her emotions out there to see how you react to them – in part it’s a way of her pinging off you to see if it’s something she should be worried about at all, trusting that your judgement is more objective than hers.

  35. I think one of the biggest problems people will probably have about this whole notion of a red pill balance is confusing idealism with quixotism, which is a form of cognitive dissonance where person reinterprets everything around him according to an irrationally romanticized vision of things.

    Recall that early in the novel Don Quixote rides to an inn and comes across prostitutes but through his “lens” they are seen as fair maidens and he treats them as such according to the code of chivalry, an idea even they find ridiculous.

    Idealism isn’t the same as being irrational, either, nor it is the same as being impractical.

    When asked why he wanted to climb Everest, George Mallory replied “because it’s there.” That’s idealism in a nutshell. His idealism didn’t demand he go up alone and without the necessary equipment.

  36. This is something everyone should know. I started reading this blog only recently after going through pretty much the same ordeal as in the movie blue valentine.

    Its depressing really that this is how life really looks after a lifetime of Disney conditioning. At the same time I’m glad that I came to this realization. I hope that more people come to this conclusion before ruining their lives.

    Keep spreading the word!

  37. @Forge – I pulled something in my hip doing cardio, so no lift tonight and here I am. WildMan’s problems are more fundamental. Here’s my take.

    Yes, he displays solipsism but really, he’s worse than that in the sense that he poses as someone who wants to discuss/argue/interact. He has no interest in learning, he’s interested in teaching. He’s actually a supreme narcissist. You see, not only are we not real to him, but he see’s himself as a towering intellect, swooping over our heads, laughing at our petty mewling (meanwhile, either your mind or mine can run circles around him any time we choose, without even doing to much thinking – that’s the narcissist part at work).

    But his fundamental problem is the kind of intellectual mistake many people make when first exposed to philosophical ideas – he’s deontological. He’s fallen for the false social “scientism” (as Hayek coined it) of the 20th century in which people believed top down ideologies can be imposed on society to make them “work” better. He’s seeking and “applying” first principles as though some exist that are actually solutions to the problems of the world as he sees them. In order for him to back out of this intellectual cul de sac, he’d have to disentangle his mind from so many givens it’s pretty much impossible for him. He would have to realize his perception of the “problem” is wrong, and that his method of analysis is wrong and that his “solution” is merely an idea, not something is actually implementable.

    He’s also incredibly ego invested in seeing himself as knowing more than us dummies, and in this he’s no different from the average conspiracy theorist who thrives on ‘secret knowledge’ and insights only he and some special people grasp.

    Given the above his engagement here can be seen as serving two needs for him. One is preening as if he can’t share his ideas with an audience, he doesn’t get the ego gratification he craves. You can bet that he expends a huge effort writing his comments, and edits them like crazy and then after they are published he gleefully rereads his own commentary. He also comes here because it feeds his need to see himself as engaging in some grand heroic struggle and it’s easy to do here. The payoff is so easy for him.

    Unfortumately this kind of thing is as common as peas in the internet age. He’s no different from an Illuminait type, or a 9/11 Truther or some Radfem engaging in “the good fight” online, lol. Fuck him and everyone like him. I’m sick to death of it, really. What really galls me most is the incessant demand that we be “open” – I’m not here to listen to every fucknutz who spews nonsense or to be nice to them.

  38. Laxun:

    “He’s in a band and has a girlfriend. She works a lot and is not currently dating (and is also 57 now.)

    Sounds well played by him. Look, if you can swing a chick that will financially support you, go for it.

  39. There is an element that’s left out of this discussion and that missing piece combines with a confusion as to the proper relationship frame to produce the problem being discussed. MGTOW is thus a reasoned response based on a faulty and inadequate analysis of the problem. The question is not how to fix the problems with women’s behavior, because that’s impossible. The question is how to arrange incentives within the relationship such that women solve their own problems, don’t behave badly and are motivated to give the man what he wants from them.

    Observe the disconnect:

    “I can remember thinking that even if she gained weight, lost her looks, and got old, I’d still want her. I would have “loved” her forever. I was good and ready to cash in my chips, exit the SMV, and retire. I would have arranged my whole life around making her happy and would have felt lucky to have had the privilege.

    But the thing is, what if she had reciprocated it… it wouldn’t have been Disney movie bullshit, but the real thing. We’re supposed to think such a thing is possible and that’s what keeps us playing along. The Red Pill is really about recognizing its impossibility, I think. There is no possible equity. To be sure, a woman can be loyal and dedicated to you, in theory, but she’ll only give that loyalty to the guy who needs it least. It’s like a cruel, cosmic joke.”

    This analysis is incorrect. It isn’t that Red Pill wisdom teaches us the impossibility of women responding to men and giving them what they desire in the relationship as a matter of reciprocity, the problem is Red Pill wisdom fails to explain that the structure of monogamy arranges the incentives in such a way that women have no motivation (incentive) to reciprocate in ways men desire, but instead rewards them for engaging in undesirable behavior. Red Pill wisdom should be teaching men that because men and women are wired so differently, men should forget about women naturally fulfilling their expectations and concentrate on creating a relationship structure in which the incentives will motivate the women to desire to behave in a manner that the men desire.

    The missing piece in this discussion (as evidenced by the comments) is the failure to recognize that incentives matter. This failure, when combined with the culturally driven frame of monogamy being the only natural and proper form of long-term relationships and marriage produces the disaster we see before us. Ironically, the claim monogamy is the only acceptable standard for relationships is an artificial social construct that is harmful to both men and women because it not only denies the reality that polygyny is an equally valid and beneficial relationship, it refuses to recognize the importance of properly arranging the incentives within a relationship to garner the desired outcome. In fact, contrary to common belief, it is the presence and acceptability of polygyny within a culture that helps control the hypergamous impulses of women in monogamous relationships. Thus, the societal rejection of polygyny (caused by the church) has created and exacerbated problems in monogamy by conferring upon women power they should not have.

    Non-Christians can skip this paragraph. For Christians who think polygyny is somehow wrong or sinful (because of teachings by the church), consider this. God does not regulate, condone, command or participate in sin because He cannot: He is Holy. Thus when we see that God regulated the practice of polygyny in His Law, that God took credit for giving King David multiple wives (2nd Samuel 12:8), that God commanded the levirate marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5-10) and that God stated He had two wives, Israel and Judah (Jeremiah 31:31-32), we should recognize there is NO moral issue over the legitimacy of polygyny. It doesn’t matter what the church teaches, to say that polygyny is somehow sinful is to claim that God regulates, condones, commands and participates in sin. The technical term for that is blasphemy.

    The idea that polygyny is somehow illegal is ridiculous, because it all hinges on what the definition of marriage actually is. The State defines a marriage as a licensed contract to which the State is a party, a monogamous union (now either heterosexual or homosexual) that the State regulates and controls. But, is that really the definition of what a marriage is? The answer depends on your source of authority. The simple answer is that God created marriage, God regulated marriage and marriage (as an institution) belongs to God, not the State. Therefore, if the marriage is in line with God’s design and regulations, it is a valid marriage regardless of what the current social and cultural norms are with respect to how a marriage is initiated, the authority structure within marriage or even under which circumstances a marriage may or may not be dissolved. Simply put, an unlicensed menage of people cohabitating and sharing a sexual relationship can be a valid marriage for God, but to the State, the lack of monogamy and a license means it will not be recognized as a marriage (that’s of critical importance).

    Monogamy is a frame women automatically default to because the structure of monogamy gives power to the wife/GF at the expense of her husband/BF. Everyone here should recognize the power of the man’s ability to say “next” and the effect that has on women, which is why making a commitment generally causes the woman to lose some attraction toward the man: He has surrendered to her a large portion of his freedom and the woman is no longer under any pressure to compete with other women for his attention and affections. Guys who claim they’ve drawn the woman into their frame but define LTR’s in terms of monogamy have actually placed their frame within the woman’s frame that claims monogamy is the standard and in doing so they unwittingly confer the power in the relationship to her. Claiming she’s entered his frame is merely an illusion when monogamy is assumed.

    Then, when it finally blows up (and it probably will) the men complain about the problems the women caused, claim there is no solution and offer MGTOW as the alternative. Bollocks. Game works, but gaming the wife within the confines of socially imposed monogamy is a case of swimming against the tide.

    Within a polygynous marriage the husband has not given up his ability to say “next” within the bounds of his marriage and thus his wives are competing within the marriage for his attention. The competition makes him more attractive, but more importantly, with polygyny the incentives are arranged to reward the wives for their loyalty, fidelity, femininity, submissiveness and sexual availability. Likewise, the structure penalizes the wives if they choose to play the games that are so common in monogamous marriage such as refusing sex, nagging, being bitchy and engaging in passive-aggressive behavior. Within the polygynous marriage the husband is always the prize and the reward for the wives’ good behavior is his attention.

    Consider women’s Anti-Slut Defense (ASD) and think about how that applies within the competitive environment among wives in a polygynous marriage. Women’s ASD is a reflection of the fact that they care very much about the opinion of others, especially other women. While women in monogamous marriages can and do cheat, they do so with the support and even assistance of other women, even if the other women don’t approve of what they’re doing (Go Team Woman!). In fact, among women it’s more acceptable for a married woman to cheat than it is for a single woman to have an ONS. Within a polygynous marriage the competitive dynamic between the wives means they cannot afford to be unfaithful to their husband for fear the other wives would find out (and unfaithfulness is practically impossible to hide from other women).

    The competitive dynamic within a polygynous marriage motivates wives to be as attractive as possible (look better than the other wives) and this is especially true if the husband requires group playtime on a regular basis. When they’re all naked in bed together there’s no place to hide and all the flaws are on display for everyone to see. The husband might not tell her she has a flabby ass but the other wives won’t be so reticent. The competition doesn’t stop with appearance and when they’re all together in bed it extends to sexual performance. While wives in a monogamous marriage have no motivation (other than their own desire) to give their husband anything other than occasional starfish sex, wives in a polygynous marriage are motivated to give their husband porn-star sex whenever he wants it because if they don’t one of the other wives. When everyone is together, they get competitive.

    I could go on and on, but in the end it’s simple. Polygyny is a structure in which the incentives are properly structured (rewarding good behavior and punishing bad) and the wives are competing for their husband’s attention and thus motivated to give him what he desires because that’s the only way to win his attention. What do husbands want? I think most would agree husbands want an attractive, sweet, feminine, submissive and sexually available wife that desires to please him. There is no point to expecting women to give this to their husband on their own because experience proves that other than the exceptionally rare woman, they won’t, so it’s far better to create a situation in which they’re motivated to do so to fulfill their own desires.

    The structure of polygyny also impacts the husband, putting him in a position of dominance (which makes him more attractive) that allows the wives to get their emotional needs met with each other so he can avoid exposing himself to them emotionally (that’s what male friends are for), thereby killing his wives attraction. While any form of marriage will penalize the husband for becoming beta, the need to treat the wives equally requires firm management and helps him to avoid turning beta. The magnitude of the problems multiple wives can and will generate if he slips will provide significant negative feedback much faster than in a monogamous relationship.

    The need to actively manage the wives relationships with each other also places the husband in a more dominant position, but women will always be cursed and they can’t help it: they will never stop shit-testing their husband. Within a polygynous marriage this often manifests itself by bickering and fighting between the wives and there is only one way to deal with that in an effective manner: Rule #1: “Disagreements are normal but they must be resolved in a peaceful manner. If you can’t resolve your problems I will, so if you fight, I spank.” (Wives that want to be spanked is a separate problem I won’t discuss here)

    Every relationship is at least somewhat unique but polygynous relationships are even more so. I know women who are naturally very submissive (a result of personality and upbringing) as well as women who are naturally combative (again, personality and upbringing). In both cases, but especially in the latter case, what they really want is masculine dominance that has a gentle side to provide comfort. While polygyny is a structure that facilitates domination, monogamy is a structure that prevents it and the power monogamy grants to a combative woman tends to doom the relationship to disaster. That’s a tragedy because a high-spirited woman is usually a lot of fun to be around.

    All the misandrist laws associated with no-fault divorce, spouse abuse and child custody were written in or derived from a frame that assumes monogamy, but for the most part these laws are negated by polygyny. Because the state cannot recognize such a relationship as a marriage, there can be no divorce, so the first thing that’s off the table is alimony. As far as the assets are concerned, there can be no “splitting” of prior-owned assets brought into the relationship and any “community property” within the relationship is property that *all* the wives have an interest in, some perhaps more so than others.

    This removes the option of frivorce for cash and prizes. If the husband has children by each of his wives (very wise on his part) it is unlikely a departing wife would get custody of her children. That’s because she would be leaving to be a single mother while the father would remain in the home (that the court can’t give her) with the other wife/wives and the brothers and sisters of her children. Giving her custody would mean a major step down in standard of living and require the separation of siblings, which courts are loathe to do. Not getting custody means she would be required to pay child support. Even if she got custody of her children (unlikely), any child support order could only be based on the father’s income or imputed income and could not include the income of the other wives. The standard tactic of lying to the court, claiming some form of abuse can be rebutted by the other women in the household to far greater effect than just the husband’s testimony. In fact, the testimony of the other wives can paint an accurate picture of her in ways that the testimony of the husband never could.

    All these points represent incentives to stay within the relationship and very real penalties/disincentives for leaving the relationship. Imagine a polygynous marriage with 3 wives. If one wife is the full-time ‘house mom’ and the other two wives work outside the home, with three wage-earners the household income will be significant and the standard of living much higher than any of the women could realistically expect on their own. Because one wife worked in the home the cleaning, laundry and cooking would not be the responsibility of those working outside the home and any cleanup in the evening would be very fast with three working on it, resulting in more leisure time for everyone. Choosing to leave such a relationship would thus mean a significant decline in the standard of living and having to earn a living and take care of all the household chores would result in a lower quality of life.

    Last, the real societal impact of an acceptance of polygyny is an acceptance of the right of a husband to have more than one wife, which means he has the right to add a wife if his current wife no longer pleases him. This situation is the one most often reflected in the references to polygyny found in the Bible. It is a threat to women that hangs over their heads in the same way that the threat of frivorce and divorce-rape hangs over the heads of husbands in modern monogamous marriages because it restores the word “next” to the husband. In other words, the mere presence of polygyny and the acceptance that it’s a legitimate form of marriage is a threat to the power of women in monogamous marriage. THAT is why there is such tremendous resistance to it. Check your assumptions, guys, because that’s the truth. The unconscious desire for monogamy is rooted in romance and it’s a stealth play by Team Woman and the FI.

    If you’re still reading, you probably understand, as Rollo puts it, “Women would rather share a high-value man than have a monogamous relationship with a faithful but low-value man.” That’s true, but only a minority of men are of sufficiently high value to obtain a polygynous marriage. The answer is simple: Become that man. If you’re young, think of it as a 5-year plan in which you’ll develop an attractive and masculine physique, develop your own style, learn and practice game until your frame is rock solid and your game is really tight, pursue your education and career pathway to a position that generates a high income, and last but not least, grow a bigger dick. With the exception of education, career and income, all of the above is obtainable in 2 years if you push it.

    If a guy can put good looks/style, solid assets and tight game on the table, polygyny is there for the taking. However, a guy that can spin plates with HB8’s and HB9’s may discover that he has to step down to HB7’s in order to get willing buy-in to a polygynous marriage. If it happens it’s because while he’s high-value enough to lock in the hotties in for monogamy, they know their value and know they can get monogamy with another guy as good or better than him, so why share? The HB7’s, OTOH, would be looking at a choice between polygyny with a really high-value guy or monogamy with a lower value guy.

    I guess it depends on a guy’s standards, but unlike monogamy, wives in a polygynous marriage are motivated to *improve* their appearance and over time they’ll all hit the wall at some point. Which is better? The beautiful HB9 wife who rarely and only grudgingly gives blowjobs after the honeymoon and specializes in starfish sex, or the enthusiastic blowjobs by a pair of HB7’s that happen at least on a weekly basis without asking, followed by porn-star quality sex?

    Yes, monogamy sucks because of the power it confers to women, but there’s no need to go MGTOW because polygyny is a valid (and much better) alternative to monogamy and any guy that can effectively spin plates is already at least half the way there. Oh- and the guys who only have experience with women in monogamous relationships and think polygyny would be even worse because of all the problems women cause in monogamy, guess again. The structure of polygyny *eliminates* almost all of the bad behavior women inflict on men in monogamous relationships and while the problems they create within polygynous relationships are different, they are actually easier to deal with than you’d think, but only for a man capable of herding cats. Want it? Become that man.

  40. @scribblerg
    Brilliant comment regarding Niko. I felt rather sorry for the lad, as his words recalled my own mother’s about developing ” a rich inner life” centred around one’s own feelings.
    I’m acquainted with a MGTOW, and that man is definitely “his own woman”.

  41. @scribbler

    What really galls me most is the incessant demand that we be “open”

    Funny thing about about 99% of the people that tell me to keep an “open mind” these days: they’re just presenting ideas I once had an open mind, listened to, and dismissed as horseshit for some reason I perceived as legitimate long ago. If their idea now had merit, it would already have occurred to me as I reviewed it in light of genuinely new ideas I’ve heard.

    Truly new ideas to me on the other hand I readily keep an open mind to and chew on. Some I disagree with, some I embrace. If someone had told me just 5 years ago I’d throw out almost all my equalist views on the sexes, I’d have laughed at them but I might have listened if they had something other than dogma to recite. Now, with people giving me logically sound ideas to question that long-held believe, my mind has changed considerably. The difference was that the idea of a logical framework discounting equalist views had never been presented. It was always just people demanding my validation of their viewpoint, rather than people giving me tools to help me perceive my world more clearly.

    Most people demanding you “keep an open mind” are just frustrated that you’re not validating their views, regardless of how many times other people have tried to cram the exact same way of thinking down your throat in the past. I’ll keep my own counsel on what constitutes an “open mind” on my part, ya know?

  42. I didn’t have Romantic Idealism for my ex. I expected her to be an equal partner, to love as I loved. Plus the fact that we had three kids together, it’s just common courtesy that you’ll make every effort to make things work. She made no effort whatsoever to make things work.

    That’s Equalist Idealism. I think most of us would settle for that. Apparently it isn’t true. I’m not sure what idealism would replace that. Men having dominion over women, having the legal power that you’d have over a child or pet, that would fix it. Is that idealistic?

    Game idealism I guess. Your wife left you, your Game wasn’t tight enough. I think it would get old real fast, but maybe that’s just me. The man doing all the work of the relationship and the woman just brings her vag. Maybe it’s Vag Idealism.

  43. @Gorilla – And Niko is probably as good as it gets in MGTOWland. I found it almost impossible to listen to his lifeless droning. He also tried to engage me on this thread and while I’m sure he’s not a bad guy, I find myself repulsed by men who are not embracing their masculinity and the real world these days. It’s as though I know there is something wrong with them and that they need to be excised from the gang before they infect it with their stupid ideas.

    My war is with myself now. As I’ve noted, I’ve only just recently come to grips with how dishonest I’ve been being with myself. I encountered the Red Pill close to three years ago now and am now 53. This world had ground the energy and fight out of me and I hadn’t been able to even see it. In fact, I think the world is just fine with men playing small and dying in place.

    I remember when I was younger and had so much optimism. Married young, a Dad by 26 – all on purpose, a gorgeous wife, a career on the upswing, it all looked like I was going to grab the ring. And then – poof. I never realized how much it destroyed me, but now in retrospect it’s so clear. If i’d had the red pill 25 years ago? My life would be utterly different.

    I didn’t even understand what happened so I couldn’t “fix” it. My ex and I split when I was 30 and the only thing I knew was that I was never going to be trapped again. so when every relationship went awry after a few months, I would bail. It was like clockwork, I’ve had 9 serious GFs since then and every time by 4-5 months they all showed up as batshit mad. But then again, I was not gaming them, and was filled with lots of Blue PIll thinking.

    But I always thought I was just going to “meet the right person” and it would all work out. I also thought there would be an endless stream of women – I was luckly like that when I was younger. I had no strategy or gameplan. It also undermined my motivation over time, I’ve always been a traditional guy and I found being married quite inspiring and motivating. I liked being about more then myself. I think there is something very unnatural about being a single, grown man. It just feels empty.

    Now I see the “balance” Rollo writes of here. The idea of seeing the reality of intersexual dynamics but not being alienated by them or angry by it. I only wish we taught boys from a young age how to play “the game” of life with the real rules, we’d all be so much better off.

  44. Makes me think of “shitting dicknipples”. I leave it as an exercise to the reader to Google that term for images if they’re feeling particularly brave and in need of a shock/laugh.

  45. ” However, female virtue is mostly based on what she holds in reserve. Men can regain what they have lost to this culture, but we largely cannot. (You can surgically reconstruct your hymen but you can’t fix the emotional damage of casual sex). Women, with their pragmatic survivor outlook, don’t want to understand their own mistakes because there is no way to undo the effects. Better to cling to a fantasy. Our greatest sin, however, is continuing to repeat the lies.”

    @Cynthia, what does this mean emotional damage of casual sex. How can casual sex be damaging (assuming no STDs).

  46. @Pinelero

    There have been studies correlating high N count in women with reduced tendencies toward long term pair bonding. The exact mechanism is unknown, nor is the causal relation. However, there exists a strong possibility that this mechanism is partly responsible for the steep decline in marriage coinciding with the rise of hook-up culture.

  47. @Rollo,

    Even if you are frustrated, that’s no reason to tell NTBM to go fuck himself. That’s very uncalled for to say the least.

    This place’s commentary has degenerated over the years. There is a stark contrast between the quality of the comment of Year One and that of today.

    And you, Rollo, your writing has become more convoluted. I see a lot of posturing and many people using expensive words to say nothing of substance or people commenting in a pattern that is not unlike brain farts.

    Whenever there is questioning or diverging views, a group of fanboys attack dogs just jumps on the person, vilifying them and resorting to shaming just high school girls. It’s truly pathetic coming from adult men.

    It’s funny to see people referring to blog post as “teachings”. Is this place now handled by Gurus?

    All the labels that people use here to categorize others are only proof of their ignorance. Your high IQ or Mensa membership means nothing if you can’t apply your intelligence to solve practical problems or at least gain insight.

    Only blue pill idealism can’t get you to sign a marriage contract because it seems like the right thing to do at the time because, from a logical, rational perspective, it makes no sense; especially when you understand what it entails.
    You don’t need to be married to have a family.

    You can marry for stupid reasons like making your parents happy or whatever. At least it’s understandable even though ridiculous.

    You forge that expression burden of performance because you are married and it’s your burden to perform. If you don’t she will probably leave you and take at least 50% of your assets. That’s why it’s a burden for you.

    Somebody who is in a relationship or dating still has to perform but it’s not a burden insofar as he can pick up his stuff an leave when things are not working out for him anymore. But for the married man, it’s not that easy. He has to much to loose – to somebody who doesn’t even have the mental and intellectual abilities to accomplish 1/10 th of the things he did.

    Masculine and feminine energies are needed for some sort of equilibrium or balance. That’s why when I hear somebody “swear off women”, it makes me laugh and think, whatever works for you.

    But Rollo can’t help but tell those people that they NEED sex. They can’t get out of the game. Why is that? He is stuck in the game with a cost of getting out that is too high.

    NTBM, through his questioning, held in front of a mirror that reflects back to you, your ego investments. Those are questions that you can’t even begin to consider because if you do, the only logical conclusion will be to tear your marriage down. So, to protect yourself, you resort to shaming, insults and more importantly, DENIAL.

    I credit you for shining a light on a lot of intersexual dynamics. Your early posts helped me understand a great deal but your situation limits the depths to which you can go in uncovering the truth and this is something you are not willing to admit. Well, whatever mate.

    This is the end of the journey for me here. Ciao

  48. Okami is a strange bird.

    Rollo is too ego invested in his marriage to see past it and what it requires of him. Except for those like 6 posts about spinning plates. And all that stuff he wrote about how men shouldn’t get married in 2011-16. And….just random crap like that which confuses my focus.

    Clearly Rollo’s the one with the ego investment here.

  49. @artisinal toad

    That’s probably the most comprehensive essay of yours I’ve read in defense of polygyny. As usual, it doesn’t sound absurd to me except for the simple fact that


    no man

    will succeed at attaining this arrangement.

    So it’s for an elite few. Fine. I’ll sign up. Sounds good to me, and hell, if I look to girls from poorer backgrounds it may be very achievable for me.

    But if society accepts this as the norm?

    Better plan some pretty huge wars to cull the male population a bit. Or the patriarchs may just find themselves the victims of various ‘mysterious circumstances’ in short order.

  50. @Okami – Are you a MGTOW? Guess what, this ain’t a site where MGTOW ideas and values are considered a good way for a man to go. Why should they be tolerated? Why should Rollo have to endlessly deal with people repeating the same daft crap endlessly and be polite and welcoming to such manginas? Answer: He doesn’t. Men play rough, stop clutching your pearls and try winning an argument with better reasoning and evidence. Ooops — wait, MGTOW doesn’t have any of that…

    @SJB – The dolphin-tit thing was from a rock video. It’s just one of those things ya can’t unsee, lol.

  51. @Okami,

    Well, not to split hairs, but I told Wild Man to fuck off, not NBTM. And looking at my records you’ve only been commenting since March of last year.

    Any time I include the letters M-G-T-O-W in a post I’m guaranteed to get exactly the same mantra repeated back from that sphere:

    • Women will take 50% of what you own.

    • Rollo’s trapped in “cheaper-to-keep-her”.

    • Don’t talk to women, don’t even make eye contact because ‘false rape’

    • I wish there was some medical way to remove my libido so I could get on with a more enlightened life.

    • You guys think sex is all there is.

    Did I miss any?

    And just like Wild Man you don’t read very well so I’ll hold your hand and link you the entire post I wrote to address NBTM:

    Did you even bother to read these?

  52. @ scribblerg

    It’s the inter-generational manipulation that disinformed and disorientated me for so many years. I should have paid more attention to the actions of others, not their words.
    Women that sabotaged their own marriage. Forging their husband’s signature on cheques, running up debts. I couldn’t get over the disloyalty shown. Now I realise it may have been tactic to avoiding losing the breadwinner, playing on his sense of duty toward debt.
    ‘Every woman for herself.’

  53. Okami is perfectly right. It’s starting to become a Cult with fanboyz hermetically locking out the heretics.

  54. 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

    Goodnight sensei

  55. @zip

    Is it? Because last I checked, “fanboys” can’t physically force anyone to no longer post here. In fact, the times I’ve seen them threaten it, I’ve called out the impotence of their threats.

    You need thick skin here. If you don’t have it, find somebody else to coddle you. That’s not what I come here for and neither should you.

  56. @Rugby:

    “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.”

    And you define that someone, a priori, to be a woman. Why do you do that?

    1. @kfg
      “And you define that someone, a priori, to be a woman. Why do you do that?”
      In a way I was tired. But that’s so much of what hurt as far as growing was concerned. Because I didn’t lead I didn’t have safety and security and I never had a place to rest. Just a place to sleep.

  57. Personal idealism is simply maintaining whatever level of dignity you thing you deserve. Some have more internal dignity, most have less.

    Moralistic mumbo jumbo, any feelings you may have, weird emotionally connective rants, and all the blah blah are extemporaneous regardless of how deeply one of theses autists’ ponders.

    The emotion centers of our brains evolved to discern risk. Read a bit on that, get to where your observation of the process changes it, and you get to chose as much or little emotion as you need for the situation.

    Very very simple things.

  58. kfg: Men turn to women because they sometimes view other men as competitors and don’t want to show weakness. Men compete with other men and for women so intimacy can be an issue with either gender.

    As far as Burden Of Performance goes, Rollo probably does touch on that more because of his married with kids situation. I agree that pre or post marriage with kids, it wouldn’t come up nearly as much. Screw something up with some chick you’re banging? Who cares, get another. Unless you have kids with a chick, you should AVOID gifting her, performing for her. Don’t actually give her things, if you want to get laid, put on the act… PUA blah blah blah.

    I kind of bristle at the issue because I have internal performance pressures. I relate more to the Spock character or someone like Martin Luther, internal torture, than most men probably do. To the point that I avoid external performance pressures and have often sought a passive existence. I wanted to be Mr. Perfect in my marriage with a no fuss life. Not sure the ex related to that…

    Didn’t get along well with mom growing up. She’s somewhat critical and harsh and she probably wanted a girl instead of another boy. Yeah, that explains a lot. Occam’s Razor and all that. Been chewing on that issue all night. I’m trying to do other things post marriage now, feel other things. Don’t really want a burden of performance other than what it takes to survive. I have enough of that inside my own head.

  59. “Men turn to women because they sometimes view other men as competitors and don’t want to show weakness.”

    Whereas, as we all know, women are kind, gentle, nurturing and are particularly empathetic to the lived, weak male experience.

    No, they turn to women because they have been conditioned to believe, against all the historical and empirical evidence, that without a woman they are alone and that male bonding is gay. Just ask any woman.

    And though I am loath to admit it, at some level they probably also miss their mommies.

    And if you don’t have a single male friend you can share empathy with, the problem is that you have crappy friends. Get new ones.

  60. I find the whining of MGTOW here intolerable because all of you refuse to engage in real argumentation and debate. Fyi, repeating the same argument over and over again isn’t argument, in fact, that’s how women argue. Reasoned debate and argument implies that one is affected by the counter arguments and deals with them in response. Yet I hear the same arguments Rollo presented above presented over and over again. Same thing with Wild Man’s egalitarian gibberish – go back and look and you’ll find that initially, ideas that conflict with Rollo’s and a deep understanding of the Red Pill are argued against with facts and reason initially. Rollo actually went to great pains on this thread, after midnight, to lay out how he’s dealt with Wild Man’s ideas in the past.

    Yet you manchildren ignore all that and complain that nobody will take you seriously. Of course we don’t take you seriously, as we’ve moved beyond your silly ideas. Many of us – including me – were initially interested in MGTOW and tried to take it seriously but found they were not sufficient and appealing. It’s not as though most here are not aware of MGTOW and the confused hash of nonsense, pseudo-science, anger and sophistry on offer in the MGTOW world. We reject it. We see through it. We are beyond it.

    And this is what angers you most of all, you see. By rejecting that which you hold dearly and stepping up to shouldering the burden of performance which no man can actually ever shirk (there is only shouldering it or not shouldering it) we reveal and highlight how you’ve given up on yourselves. We shine a spotlight on how pathetic you are. We unabashedly claim that you’ve been weighed, counted and measured – and have been found wanting and proceed along to at least attempt to become great men in our own lives. Not on stupid Youtube channels, not by spending half our lives LARPing in the manosphere, but by actually becoming better men. By going out there and making our relationships, businesses, social lives and other endeavors successful.

    And yes, I react emotionally. MGTOW is an argument for your own smallness. It’s patting yourself on the back for giving up. It’s making a virtue of necessity and embracing withdrawing from the game – which is just another term for conceding defeat without a fight. Any man engaged in the way we are here cannot respect that or admire it. As I said earlier, such a POV brings up a visceral revulsion in me, and I simply want to excise such thinking from my world.

    Instead of whipping monkey dung at us, you should get that there is a lot available for you and your lives were you to embrace the lot of men in life happily and get in “the game” the way we are doing. It isn’t easy, and you aren’t even guaranteed to “win” at anything. But striving with the correct POV is not agony, it’s natural for men. And not surprisingly, anything you want to achieve in life eventually yields to effort. Over time you will get better at it. You can actually have a life where you are successful with women and don’t feel beset by society all the time, and aren’t angry and filled with fear and hatred of women. It’s possible, and as I said, I believe it is this reality which is so confronting for you here, and why you react like 13 yr old girls.

  61. @ Sun W. This is probably a topic already covered or could be (i.e high N count impacts on mating behavior). I’ve been trying to understand this topic to provide advice to my girls. Women seem to be very covert and tight lipped on the subject; there is something they just get that I don’t. Getting advice on women from guys may be problematic in of itself. Is the issue more of a social construct or an actual emotional change as other sites have suggested. Some of the MGTOW vids (Sandman) suggest that women will never really be happy either way, so if that it the case then what path would led to the most desirable outcome for my goals and society in general. I have no sons to carry on my family name, so my goal is switched to simply heredity with healthy well adjust young women that will give me equally successful grandchildren.

  62. @Scribble, big props on your MGTOW takedown.

    How ironic is it that Men Going “Their Own Way” would complain that we men here at TRM choose to go our own way too?

    If you are already own your own way MGTOWs, you should not be concerned with any of our ways here.

  63. ” . . . Sandman . . .”

    . . . makes up bullshit to fill time as he goes along.

    Protip: Never trust anyone imitating Fred McFeely Rogers.

    ” . . . women will never really be happy either way . . .”

    On the other hand, even a stopped clock is right twice a day and blind squirrels find nuts.

  64. @scribblerg

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but all the crap we despise about modern women like Radical Feminism, slutty behavior, the rabid focus on imaginary injustices (i.e. rape culture and wage gaps etc.) are simply shit tests on a macro scale, aren’t they?

    Macro Shit tests that Blue Pill Men have consistently failed since the 60’s by abdicating their historically dominant role in society.

    Am I wrong?

  65. Big fight with my wife yesterday. We were in the kitchen talking when the kids was yelling in the living room about something. I yelled out that he needed to be quiet because the baby was sleeping (or something along those lines. I can’t remember) and my wife started talking while I was yelling at the kids (during, like, a brief pause) and when I resumed talking to the kids, she got all mad at me for “interrupting” her. I was super incredulous about it and we ended up having a fight.

    A few minutes into the fight, she asked me why I thought it was okay to be nasty to her (which I don’t think I was doing lol) and I said “Because I’m not going to take everything in stride when you’re being a bitch.”

    Her: “So you think it’s okay for you to just call me a bitch?”

    Me: “You’re acting like a jerk, so what am I supposed to say?”

    Her: “I don’t call you names, why are you doing things that are specifically designed to hurt me?”

    Me: “I’m sorry I called you a bitch. I shouldn’t have done that. Let’s just let this conversation go because it’s obviously unproductive.”

    Her: “Of course you want to stop talking about it because you don’t want to have to actually discuss anything you’ve done wrong.”

    Me: “Like I said, this is very unproductive and we should just drop it.”

    Her: “Why should I have to drop it when I’m upset and you said hurtful things to me? Why won’t you address what I asked?”

    Me: “What specifically did you ask? I can’t remember.”

    Her: “Why do you say things that are intended to hurt me?”

    Me: “I didn’t intend to hurt you.”

    Her: “How can calling your wife a bitch and making fun of me be ANYTHING but hurtful? You’re being so disingenuous right now.”

    Me: “This really is going nowhere, we should just let it go. I should not have called you a bitch.”

    That was the end of it. Several hours later I start talking to her about it again (big mistake).

    Me: “I’d like to talk to you.”

    Her: “About?”

    Me: “I feel badly about saying you were being a bitch and I wanted to apologize.”

    Her: “I’m so sick of having this conversation.”

    Me: “What do you mean?”

    Her: “Where you are mean to me and then apologize.”

    Me: “That’s how the air is cleared and we move on from conflicts we’ve had. I don’t see what more there is to it than that.”

    Her: “I want you to say you’re not going to call me names anymore!”

    Me: “Okay, I won’t. Like I said, I apologize and feel bad about that.”

    Me: (a few minutes later) “I am going to bed.”

    Just reading that it comes off like I was completely supplicating and in her frame but in my head I wasn’t trying to qualify myself to her, just to be reasonable and kind (after the part where I said she was being a bitch, anyway). I didn’t *emotionally* fall into her frame.

  66. MGTOW seems to me like it shouldn’t need a big “community” or a bunch of explanations. I mean, “How do I NOT date women?????” doesn’t seem like a very hard question to answer lol.

  67. @Dutchman

    I think maybe your first problem was emotionally reacting to the kids. I try not to yell at my kids. Falling into *their* frame. I seem to get better results if I just get in their faces, calm them down, shut them up, and tell them to look me right in the eyes. Then I tell them what they are doing wrong in calm/assertive tone and perhaps punish, perhaps not. But yeah, I still do yell still sometimes. lol. So then you get whipped up emotionally, and that whips the wife up emotionally. Then you accidentally fall into her frame. Seems like you know where you screwed up with her, but as a whole I would say your problems started with the kid.

  68. @ Andy

    I wasn’t emotional with the kids. They were playing video games and it was basically like “Hey you guys need to stop being loud because the baby is asleep and if you wake her up, you’re not going to be allowed to play video games for the rest of the day.”

    I only had to yell so they would hear me across the house and over the TV.

  69. @Dutchman: “Just reading that it comes off like I was completely supplicating and in her frame . . .”

    At least you can see it in retrospect. If you aren’t going to do something any more, don’t do that.

    “That’s how the air is cleared and we move on from conflicts we’ve had.”

    Wrong. That’s how you think you ought to do so. In retrospect you should also be able to see that that’s not how it works.

  70. @kfg,

    Yeah. I didn’t actually believe it at the time, I was just trying to lead her/pull her into my frame of “this is over now and we move on.”

  71. “I only had to yell so they would hear me across the house and over the TV.”

    lol, so you’re yelling over the other noises to be quiet because the baby is sleeping? I wasn’t there, so I can’t say for sure but yelling can be misconstrued as an emotional reaction anyway. All it takes is just that little twinge of annoyance. Then the wife pings off of that. That’s my take.

  72. LOL I’m probably not remembering the whole thing properly, but I think the kids were jumping around and it reverberated through the house, rather than they were making too much noise by yelling. Baby was asleep upstairs.

    I hear you on the wife pinging off that as an emotional reaction. It just didn’t occur to me at the time at all that that’s what she was doing.

  73. @Stultus – I’m not sure, tbh. I’ve heard that argument made, and yes, the denigration of masculinity, men, boys and fathers has been institutionalized and it feels like a nonstop shit test, but I don’t think we can anthropomorphize society on a large scale. The psychology of a shit test isn’t the same, at least in my experience.

    @Dutch – Let’s pull you into this because it’s related. Reading your account was like time travel for me – I’ve had those kind of arguments with women before where you get in the middle of them and realize there is no solution. I handled them wrong for years, with similar results.

    I’m finding (and always have known but struggled to do so) that escalating emotions in the face of a shit test is to guarantee a bad social outcome. There are a lot of ways to demonstrate dominance, and imperturbability is perhaps the best tool in the box when dealing with women (not men). CaveClown has given some masteful advice on this count, so I hope he weighs in, but another technique that is effective is escalating consequences, not emotions as you would do with a child having a tantrum. Chaos begins to unfold? Instead of calling her a bitch, “Listen, I’m not going to participate in yelling and talking over each other, so I’m going to go into the other other room. When you can calmly and respectfully speak to me, I’m all ears. Come get me when you’ve simmered down, Princess”, kiss on the cheek, a smirk and go do something important to you.

    I’ve only accidentally done such things with women from a “natural” frame at times in my life. It would happen when I saw women’s manipulations for what they are, and didn’t take their emotions seriously anymore. Having a daughter and watching her do this to me and her mom, and then having her stop doing it to me cuz it didn’t work anymore, while continuing to do so with her mom was instructive.

    On societal and political level, I think what’s going on is much more pernicious. I believe that the anti-masculine/anti-complementarity theme serves the radical egalitarian/collectivists among us (Prog-Marxists). I think not escalating amounts to capitulation. I think revolution is called for. I think radical action is called for. Just consider Title lX and the modern university? How could any man actually send his son to a modern university and pay for it with his own money? How could any sentient man tolerate the idea that Hillary Clinton may be president without checking on his ammo supply and cleaning his AR-15 in preparation for that dark day?

    In fact, what I think has been happening for 50 years in earnest is a “boiling frog” phenomena. They just keep pushing and pushing and pushing and what we consider unacceptable becomes the norm. We grow tired of the nonstop antagonism, so we give in and go see Star Wars TFA, cuz hey, it’s a bit of fun, right? Alternately, imagine every man in the West decided to not see TFA? I gave in and went, so I’m not coasting above any of this.

    The left never gives in. They only have temporary setbacks and then charge again on a different front. We compromise and make allowances and tolerate and attempt to be stoic – this all plays into their hands. We don’t fight back effectively. Bringing it back to shit tests, the reason you don’t escalate with a woman is that it won’t work unless (like Kesyer) you are willing to use physical force. I am not. A woman will keep escalating right to that brink because they know if you raise a hand, you are toast and that you also will not because you are civilized. So you have to take their weapon of escalation away from them by not escalating emotionally, rather you de-escalate and remove yourself. Alternately, with a child, you lock them in their room until they behave civilly and increase the punishment without hitting and once they realize that their emotional escalations don’t work, they simply stop.

    I think a shit test in a bar in pickup is different in a sense of how you handle it and is also a fitness test, whereas in an LTR it’s more a struggle for dominance – I’m convinced that some women are so deranged from our radfem society that they will not submit, ever. In the bar, you amplify and exaggerate. A woman calls you gay, you reply, “Yeah, and honey, do you know what the problem with dating men is? We are all such assholes”, giggling ensues, you move in close to her as you say this, putting a hand on her shoulder or arm etc.. Don’t try that in argument with your wife. It may still be a fitness test,, but you don’t win the fitness test the same way.

    On the political front, it’s about the power of coercive force via the govt and the other institutions of society the left controls. It’s coercive to shame an aggressive boy pushing some other kids around in class when he’s 7, and to evaluate him, and bring his parents in and put him on meds – this is the use of force by leftists. Not escalating? Stepping back yourself? Nope, you pluck that kid out of the school AND MOVE SO THEY DON’T GET YOUR TAX DOLLARS ANYMORE. On that level, you can say that these are all shit tests but I’m not sure it’s useful to see them that way.

  74. “She told me she doesn’t respect me as a man and she is moving back home across the country. Quite a shame. My hands are tied.”

    I can’t help but sense a duplicitous failure on her part to say that you’re the father. And if she could just up-and-go like that, then maybe you invested more time and energy in the relationship than she did.

    Sounds to me like they’ve just been untied.

  75. Glenn, I agree, great take down on the fallacy of MGTOW. Reminds me of Teddy Roosevelt’s ‘Man in the Arena’ speech…

    “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, and comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”

  76. Worse than a sign of weakness, apologizing is a confession of guilt.
    All that’s left after that is the sentencing and punishment.

  77. CH Commandment #16

    VIII. Say you’re sorry only when absolutely necessary

    Do not say you’re sorry for every wrong thing you do. It is a posture of submission that no man should reflexively adopt, no matter how alpha he is. Apologizing increases the demand for more apologies. She will come to expect your contrition, like a cat expects its meal at a set time each day. And then your value will lower in her eyes. Instead, if you have done something wrong, you should acknowledge your guilt in a glancing way without resorting to the actual words “I’m sorry.” Pull the Bill Clinton maneuver and say “Mistakes were made” or tell her you “feel bad” about what you did. You are granted two freebie “I’m sorry”s for the life of your relationship; use them wisely

  78. “I hear you on the wife pinging off that as an emotional reaction. It just didn’t occur to me at the time at all that that’s what she was doing.”

    I wasn’t there, but maybe look back at past arguments and see if you notice that pattern. Or if she gets snippy with you when the kids piss her off. That’s another possibility. My wife does this shit all the time. Kids get crazy, she goes nuts, then I have to go and calm everyone down.

  79. @scrib

    “I’m finding (and always have known but struggled to do so) that escalating emotions in the face of a shit test is to guarantee a bad social outcome. There are a lot of ways to demonstrate dominance, and imperturbability is perhaps the best tool in the box when dealing with women (not men). CaveClown has given some masteful advice on this count, so I hope he weighs in, but another technique that is effective is escalating consequences, not emotions as you would do with a child having a tantrum. Chaos begins to unfold? Instead of calling her a bitch, “Listen, I’m not going to participate in yelling and talking over each other, so I’m going to go into the other other room. When you can calmly and respectfully speak to me, I’m all ears. Come get me when you’ve simmered down, Princess”, kiss on the cheek, a smirk and go do something important to you.”

    Yeah, I see what you’re saying. I didn’t even realize it until now but the instant I fell into her frame was when I was incredulous about her claiming I “interrupted” her. I should have just brushed it off but it made me ANGRY that she was being so ridiculous.

  80. @ScribblerG

    Of course, shit tests are an abstraction we use to categorize complex behaviors in a workable way. The abstraction works well wrt interacting with women, and there are some interesting parallels and possibly some of the same psychological mechanisms operating in the background wrt society at large that allows us to make an interesting comparison, but ultimately we need to devise optimal strategies for both circumstances differently.

    Not to be pedantic, I just think it’s good to define the use and utility of terms occasionally 😉


    Your error was to react with any emotion except amusement or zfg. You’d ‘failed’ the test the moment you reacted with frustration, and no good outcome was possible.

    Well, except for maybe this: you can de-escalate your emotions and begin to make fun of how you reacted to her, and how she’s still reacting to you. Just rise above it all and find it amusing how shit flared up. Not as good as ‘passing’ in the first place but better than nothing.

    Gotta run but I’ll put up a little story that just happened to me demonstrating this in a bit.

  81. I felt like I had to say something because it would be weak for me to let her get away with such blatant bullshit, I guess.

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: