Women ‘Improving’ Men


Improving_men

“I’d honestly love if the manosphere would actually focus on helping men in relationships and self-improvement.”

I had this comment offered in a recent thread. It’s a common gripe from women who believe they’re in some way Red Pill and want to divert their new acceptance of Red Pill truths to serve the same tired ends of the Feminine Imperative. The operative, of course, is always whose definition do we base the measure of ‘improvement’ on? For most women the term ‘improvement’ always aligns with whatever best serves a female sexual strategy – because from a feminine-solipsistic perspective whatever serve women should necessarily serve men.

As with most uneducated women’s concerns I’d already addressed this long ago in The Bitter Taste of the Red Pill:

A lot gets made of the Dark Triad or the Dark Side of Game where a skillful player can sadistically use his newly learned red-pill super powers for evil instead of for the greater good of mankind. Game-aware women – the ones who have been forcibly exhausted of all pretense of maintaing the illusion that Game is a lie – feel as though it’s owed to them, in their concession of Game’s reality, that Men should use Game to women’s benefit. Even to the last effort women still cling to the tools of a feminized acculturation;

“Yeah, OK, you got us, Game is really what women want, Hypergamy is the law of womankind, but now it’s your responsibility that you use it for the better benefit of society by molding a new breed of improved Betas to accommodate fem-centric monogamy. You owe us our security for having admitted to the grand illusion that’s kept you in thrall for so long.”

It’s an indictment of Game-aware women, and sympathizing men, that they should feel a need to delineate some aspects of Game into good camps (pro woman, pro feminized monogamy) and bad camps (manipulative, polygynous, male-centered). Even in the admission of the truth that Game has enlightened Men of, the feminine imperative still seeks to categorize the application of Game to its own end. That Men might have some means of access to their own sexual strategy is too terrible a Threat; Game must be colored good or bad as it concerns the imperatives of women and a fem-centric societal norm.

As the default, socially correct and virtuous concern, women have an easier time of this. As Game becomes increasingly more difficult to deny or misdirect for the feminine, the natural next step in accepting it becomes qualifying its acceptable uses. While hypergamy is an ugly truth, the characterization of it becomes “just how women are” –an unfortunate legacy of their evolution. However for Men, the characterizations of the harsher aspects of Game in its rawest form  (contingencies for hypergamy) are dubbed “the dark arts”.

In her trolling ignorance she fails to understand that she and many “Red Pill Women” before her all want a better Beta. They want a Beta with a side of Alpha – in essence a better slave; one that’s just ignorant enough of female nature and the consequences that ignorance represents, but one who also Just Gets It and satisfies their need for amused mastery, masculine dominance (when it’s convenient and affirming), and ‘just gets women’ so well he never needs to be made aware of women’s nature.

The difference in this case is that the ostensibly “Red Pill” woman now looks to the manosphere’s best and brightest to provide them with such men via some distortion of Red Pill social proof. Not only that, but, in their entitled hubris, they are all too willing to pander to exactly the male idealistic nature I described in the last post. Their appeal is to Red Pill aware men’s sense of duty, honor or integrity in mentoring other Blue Pill Beta men (the ones they hope to improve) in an acceptable Purple Pill fashion – just enough ‘self-improvement’ to serve women’s sexual strategies, but just enough watered down ignorance of women’s feral nature to serve as what they believe would be their ‘right guy’.

You’re just not a “Man” if you don’t promote a feminine reviewed and approved version of the Red Pill to other men.

Many of the wives and women that participate in formerly Red Pill married forums follow this invasion into that previously male space and then turn it to similar ends.

The worst part of this bastardization of course is that they only need to encourage the parts of Red Pill awareness that serves their ends. They feel entitled to Red Pill men educating the plugged-in in how to become the ‘improved’ men they believe they deserve. Thus it’s an easy bandwagon to get aboard so long as their redefinition of what actually is Red Pill jives with what they feel is their due in men.

Nothing is more threatening yet simultaneously attractive to a woman than a man who is aware of his own value to women.

The ideal situation for Red Pill women here is to have a group of respected Red Pill men educate the next generation of plugged-in men to provide the attractive aspects of this awareness while stifling the uncomfortable threatening aspects that might require women to actually prove their own worthiness of those men.

Sexy Psychopaths

My good friend Dagonet had a bit of a misguided hope in this tweet today:

Once again, male idealism gets the better of one of our own. I wish it were in fact the case that women’s innate, evolved Hypergamy could be overridden so they would find men’s higher-order virtues and ideals to be arousing and attractive. This, however, is not the reality we are dealing with.

Reader Gregg brought up an interesting, and as you’ll read timely, comment about why Dag is in error:

Men think that women want “confident, strong” men. Why do we think that way? Because women told us so, or we have read it in some “wise” 500 pages psychology book. Our old provider needs to believe this, so that he has some “noble” manly goal he can pursue. Of course it is very beneficial for women to have STRONG, CONFIDENT slave that protect her. Put aside our male ego, our goals and aspirationas when we want to understand women. They know that our male ego will side with them, will help them in their game. Unhampered by ego, woman can easily enslave man like that.

Male ego tells us – we have to be strong and confident..cos it is “manly”, it’s “respectable” and women SHOULD respect that! So it is a given that they respect that! While in reality…nothing is further from the truth. She wants strong and confident men as her protecting slaves but she tingles and craves for emotionally unstable man. Like attracts the like. Is Tyler Durden a strong, confident man? He is unstable, knows weak spot of women, he can live in a moment, is more unpredictable than woman. He is emotionally intelligent, more so than typical women. He behaves more like a woman than like a man. Therefore he HAS POWER over them! Is Mystery a strong, confident man? Anyone who’s read “the Game” knows how he was driven mad by one, single chick.

What are the traits of men, women are madly enslaved to? Is it confidence, is it strenght? NOPE. It is unpredictability, unstability, emotional COLDNESS, psychopathy! In this case he is more unstable than her, so SHE is trying to fix the relationship, she is trying to give them some rules, some stability, some “security”. She must do all the work, otherwise there is nothing. She fills the void. He who cares less…..

We still do not want to confess hard, dark truth about women and about ourselves. We still talk about this burden of performance, confidence, strenght, emh..POSITIVE masculinity. We still discuss with women, try to persuade them with logic, try to impress them with our “performance”, knowledge, experience. So can our man with innate need to perform rule/care less about, the realtionship? How? He is enslaved by his very need to perform which performance will be judged by women!

Ultimate lotharios are neither strong, nor confident. They behave more like women than like men. They do not feel the need to perform, to protect, to build, to be confident, to answer, to be responsible. Take Charlie Sheen as an example. This man is emotionally damaged, unstable, irresponsible, weak. Majority of women are much more stable than him. Yet he has fucked more then 5000 of them. You think it is due to his fame? I am sure each of us know weak men, psychopatic men with no fame, yet with harems of women.

It is still the same…discussion of slaves how to be worthy of women. Maybe mentality, maybe genetics, do not know which one more. And new generations of lambs arises…primed for slaughter as the last. We are loosing my friends, big time.

There’s a lot to unpack here, but I’ll drop a two of the responding comments before I do. YaReally provides some counterbalance here:

YaReally:

And here we come to two different results because Gregg isn’t entirely inaccurate that a lot of fucked up damaged dudes are catnip for girls (and not just damaged fucked up girls, hi madonna/whore complex). Whenever we get two different results we have to drill deeper to find the commonality.

It comes down to the guy having an emotional impact on the girl. It doesn’t matter whether you make her feel good or bad emotions (ideally you make her feel both at various times), all that matters is that you have emotional impact on her. The damaged basketcase hot & cold guy who treats her like a princess one minute then tells her to fuck off because his life is falling apart the next is giving her a full range of emotions. So is the super confident guy with his shit together who’s running push/pull on her.

The biggest thing no one will talk about because it sets guys on a bad path is how fucked up and falling apart your life can really BE and you can still attract and keep hot poon around. Ideally we want men to go the TRP route where they build their careers and hit the gym and don’t booze it up etc. But the reality is you can be a fucking MESS and still get hot girls, as long as you have emotional impact on them. It’s why chicks will whore themselves out for ugly pimps and go back to abusive relationships, and on the flip side it’s why they’ll leave dependable boring guys who give them an emotional flatline day to day.

Personally I think that in the old days a chick had a baby at an early enough age to fulfill her need for crazy emotional impact drama to keep her happy and not craving it, but these days since they don’t want kids till they’re 30+ they fill that voice with the cock carousel, cats, Eat Pray Love adventures, hundreds of hours of Netflix (shows/movies full of emotional ups and downs), fucking guys like me, etc.

And finally I’m going to paraphrase SJF’s comment here for another perspective:

What makes you think “lothario” is the kind of man some of us want to be? (although I’m not sure if you are advocating being one or not.) A lothario is an unscrupulous seducer of woman. Unscrupulous means having or showing no moral principles; not honest or fair.

Just because a man has an innate desire (not need) to perform, doesn’t mean he is enslaved. The Rational Male certainly confesses/explicates/describes truths about women and ourselves. Some of us aren’t shackled by knowledge of the burden of performance and having confidence, strength and positive masculinity. Some of us have found that not to be a burden. To be a low hurdle to real power. With low downside and potentially huge upside.

As an aside here I would also point out that Gregg’s focus on men’s Burden of Performance is entirely on serving women’s interests rather than a natural order of male idealism. This is a common mindset among Blue Pill, plugged-in men, they can’t imagine an existence where their finding of an idealistically male purpose or passion in life is set in a context that doesn’t relate to how women perceive it. It’s a logical trap that most MGTOWs find themselves in – they want a world where their performance burden is removed with regard to women, but still refuse to accept that this burden exists independent from women’s perceptions.

In other words they can’t exit the Game, the fundamental rules persist; whether they choose to play or not the Game proceeds in spite of their involvement.

That being what it is, I’ve set these two concepts together here for a reason. First we have a set of Red Pill women seemingly desirous of Red Pill aware men that serve their imperatives within their acceptable frame of what “Red Pill” ought to be for them. Second we have a parallel between Gregg’s take and YaReally’s take on what women are honestly seeking in an ‘improved’ man – a more perfected slave; one who can embody the worst contradiction to positive masculinity (from Gregg’s perspective), and one who despite his performance burden is really only required to provide emotional polarity to generate tingles and genuine desire.

Toxic Masculinity

Liz’s comment from the last thread (emphasis mine):

Masculinity is not bad, it is good.

The poster responded that toxic masculinity refers to behaviors that cause distress (telling a son not to cry and so forth). I didn’t go further into the argument with her, we didn’t see eye to eye enough to really engage anyway […]

Juxtapose this with the feminine way of going things. He is told everyone has his or her own unique specialness and he just needs some encouragement.

Sometimes I think our idea of “bad” and “good” are skewed, and that’s just feminist poisoning.

Toxic masculinity is yet another narrative buzz word the Feminine Imperative has made endemic in the same way it repeats the “rape culture’ meme. By adding the term ‘culture’ to any article you find offensive you make that article an endemic phenomenon – Rape ‘culture’, Bro ‘culture’, a ‘Culture’ of Corruption, etc.

‘Toxic’ Masculinity is another such exercise. It presumes a universally agreed upon definition of what exactly is toxic – very similar again to the good and bad uses of Game in the Dark Art / Dark Triad associations I made at the beginning of this article. And in Liz’s exchange that definition is whatever male-specific behaviors women find “distressing”.

However as we see in Gregg’s example of ideal masculinity, those distressing attributes are in fact the most arousing attributes of men. I’ve used this example before, but the most pussy I’ve ever enjoyed, the most freely given and most genuinely sought after of myself by women was when I was virtually penniless. I didn’t need to signal parental investment and provisioning cues to get women’s sexual interest, I just need to fit the bill for what YaReally defines as the “fun guy” – or as Sheryl Sandberg agrees, “the bad boy, the crazy boy, the cool boy, and the commitment-phobic boy in order to prompt a woman’s genuinely inspired sexual best.

Women & Altruism:

Altruism plays a role in mate choice, particularly in women’s preferences and in long-term (LT) relationships. The current study analyzed how these preferences interacted with another important mate choice variable, physical attractiveness. Here, female participants were presented with photographs of men of varying levels of physical attractiveness, alongside descriptions of them behaving either altruistically or not in different scenarios. The results showed women preferred altruistic men, particularly in LT relationships and that this interacted with physical attractiveness such that being both attractive and altruistic made a man more desirable than just the sum of the two desirable parts. Also, being altruistic made low attractive men more desirable but only for LT relationships. Finally, men who were just altruistic were rated more desirable than men who were just attractive, especially for LT relationships. Overall, these findings are discussed in terms of the role of altruism in mate choice, particularly in LT relationships and directions of future research.

There’s subsection of Red Pill thought (Athol Kay in particular) that believes that Beta attributes align with the effects oxytocin has on men and women. I’m adding this here to provide a balance to that misguided idea:

It has been suggested that the degree of compassion—the feeling of warmth, understanding and kindness that motivates the desire to help others, is modulated by observers’ views regarding the target’s vulnerability and suffering. This study tested the hypothesis that as compassion developed to protect vulnerable kinships, hormones such as oxytocin, which have been suggested as playing a key role in ‘tend-and-befriend’ behaviors among women, will enhance compassion toward women but not toward men. Thirty subjects participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, within-subject study. Following administration of oxytocin/placebo, participants listened to recordings of different female/male protagonists describing distressful emotional conflicts and were then asked to provide compassionate advice to the protagonist. The participants’ responses were coded according to various components of compassion by two clinical psychologists who were blind to the treatment. The results showed that in women and men participants oxytocin enhanced compassion toward women, but did not affect compassion toward men. These findings indicate that the oxytocinergic system differentially mediates compassion toward women and toward men, emphasizing an evolutionary perspective that views compassion as a caregiving behavior designed to help vulnerable individuals.

Those example might seem a bit abstract, but I’m putting them up here to make the point that women’s sexual selection filtering is a two-fold prospect rooted in the dual nature of women’s Hypergamy. What best serves Alpha Fucks is contradicted by Beta Bucks.

Thus we have notions like the attributes that make up “Toxic Masculinity” being arbitrarily whatever aspects of the male nature women find themselves most lacking in men. And by way of that we get a definition that fluctuates according to the Feminine Imperative’s needs. Because of this women, Red Pill or otherwise will never be honest arbiter of ‘improving’ men’s states of masculinity.

About Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine View all posts by Rollo Tomassi

400 responses to “Women ‘Improving’ Men

  • peregrinejohn

    How bizarre. It’s a small slice of the manosphere that isn’t about self-improvement, and the majority of the thing is specifically in the context of relationships. What the heck does she think she’s been seeing?

  • LeeLee

    You know what I’ve been thinking about lately? Neoteny and how women have basically been engineered through evolution to look and maybe interally be child-like, and just looking at how child-like I really am and trying to understand myself and other women that way.

    And if I try to think through this with that focus, I think women are like children in that consciously we think we want to be in control and we have really great ideas for what we’d do and change if we were in control, but just like little kids we’d hate our reality and be miserable if that wish came true.

    Subconsciously, I think what we really want – like children – is not to be in control. So the cool wild bad boy fulfills that because we’re not in control, his wild craziness is, or the career driven man because his career comes before us and we can’t mess with that. I think strong and confident just signals that he’ll be in control, not us, and that’s what we’re responding to.

    The problem with children is that they don’t understand the adult world or the consequences of getting what they want. Some of what women want seems really morally right (Men should talk about their feelings more!) and some of it seems really perverse (50 Shades of Gray!), but whatever it looks like it likely stems from not understanding and reacting to impulses, ignorantly.

    The male world is so different from the female world, and so inscrutable even to a woman who is trying so hard to understand.

  • The Question

    @peregrinejohn

    “Self-improvement” is code for how they want men to improve in ways that will make them better (beta) men according to the FI, not in a way that will empower a man to operate outside the control of the FI to his own personal benefit and jeopardize a woman’s sexual strategy, especially when they are entering their epiphany phase. Any “self-improvement” has to benefit women, then the man. Lifting weights and dressing more attractively is fine; learning how to abandon Blue Pill concepts about love without rejecting one’s idealism, and killing the inner beta outright, is not what they’re thinking of when they talk about “self-improvement.”

    What she’s seeing is a process being exposed for what it is and most likely trying to mitigate the harm this exposure is causing because it’s more effective trying to influence as a perceived ally than opposing it outright.

  • rugby11

    “The worst part of this bastardization of course is that they only need to encourage the parts of Red Pill awareness that serves their ends. They feel entitled to Red Pill men educating the plugged-in in how to become the ‘improved’ men they believe they deserve. Thus it’s an easy bandwagon to get aboard so long as their redefinition of what actually is Red Pill jives with what they feel is their due in men.”
    Rollo work up this morning and realized how much I’ve grown and regressed.
    I appreciate this place reverently.

  • nastynate

    Rollo, you have been hitting nothing but grand-slams on these articles since Preventative Medicine came out. If 2016 continues like this, I can’t help but think Rational Male Vol.3 is inevitable sooner than later.

  • Big-Al

    I think fried ice is “toxic”

  • The Question

    “Because of this women, Red Pill or otherwise will never be honest arbiter of ‘improving’ men’s states of masculinity.”

    This will become more and more important for men to grasp as the “Red Pill” picks up momentum or gains traction. Some will cling to the FI narrative, open hypergamy/cuckoldry, come hell or high water. However, many will jump onto the “Red Pill” bandwagon as a strategic move to convince men they are the “quality girl” he’s been looking for.

  • kfg

    ” . . . the ostensibly “Red Pill” woman now looks to the manosphere’s best and brightest to provide them with such men . . . ”

    No.

  • PartyTimeMentats! (@PartyTimeMentat)

    Yep. Not going to bother with women. If I’m going to be miserable, I’m going to be miserable without a branch swinger.

  • bnon

    This post seems to imply a contradiction between being „strong and confident“ and the traits women find attractive. The quote cites „unpredictability, unstability, emotional COLDNESS, psychopathy“. A cold and/or psychopatic person can sure be strong and confident. The negative aspect of „strong and confident“ seem to be an implied stability that is boring, but a guy can keep mysterious (interesting) while being that as well. I can be secure about myself, being strong doesn’t mean I must be a provider.

    Let me frase this as a question, one I need an answer to:

    -What do we speak about here if was say a man is „strong“?

    -What aspect of a Charlie Sheen like character that comes with „strong“ would make him less attractive?

  • quixotic

    “Nothing is more threatening yet simultaneously attractive to a woman than a man who is aware of his own value to women.”

    So succinct, well said Rollo!

    Its crazy watching how they treat guys they smell “beta” on vs. guys that smell “alpha”, going from a bossy bitch to a cooing girly girl. Thank you for helping men like myself realize my value, find avenues to improve it (and not judging the morality, just pointing out the different roads like dark triad vs. alpha family man provider like yourself).

    I wish there was a way to keep broads out of the comments section but they can’t help themselves. They detest male only spaces where men gather and don’t need women, even momentarily (as a fellow musician, I am sure you recall from your rockstar days when girls would just “appear” in the rehearsal room and need an opinion, offer food, ask trivial questions, basically just want attention lol. Its funny cuz it will never change). I am all for them seeking understanding but goddamm it gets old having to cater to their confused, misdirected and often completely wrong “feelings.”

    Anyways, thank you Rollo! You are at the top of the heap with CH and YaReally. We just need YaReally to start a blog (check out his freaking goldmine of archived comments at http://yareallyarchive.com/

  • Jeremy

    Re: Women & Altruism:

    Altruism plays a role in mate choice, particularly in women’s preferences and in long-term (LT) relationships….Also, being altruistic made low attractive men more desirable but only for LT relationships. Finally, men who were just altruistic were rated more desirable than men who were just attractive, especially for LT relationships.

    But altruism is an arguably bad thing for humanity. It is entirely contrary to the natural animal order of the world in which evolution operates. Individuals who do not care for themselves just don’t live as long as individual who do. Since society depends on the survival of many individuals, altruism really has no place in a voluntarily cooperative society.

    This seems to say that women have their own form of in-bred idealism that is just as destructive to society as male idealism.

  • Yollo "Detritus" Comanche

    Welp. I think I’ll just learn game, so I’ll be an asshole when convenient, and a “has his shit together” guy when convenient.

    Let a woman try and dominate my perspective.

    I already got rid of my own sister. What chance do any of these other broads have?

  • Bob

    Hey Rollo, could you add a tab on the top for the fourth year volume?

  • scribblerg

    Fuck. Now I know why I got the most and best and wildest ass ever during the three years where I was drinking and working and crazy like a madman, after my divorce. Men’s room sex was not rare, ass sex was regular, as were multiple orgasms and swallowing etc. I could never really understand it at some level because I knew I was a “mess”. I remember this hot, 28 yr old, Ivy grad, Miss Stable just throwing herself at me in frustration after hanging out with her in a group all day long.

    We were in Barcelona at the end of a big business trip, a huge derivatives trading conference, 12 of us from my company there. There were events every night and massive drinking all week. The saturday after many of us stayed, rented a 30 something foot sailboat I co-captained with another guy, and this chick was along the whole time. She always played too good for me, and I just didn’t give a fuck. She would needle me and or roll her eyes at me and I just didn’t give a shit. I’d already thrown a married woman out of my room one night that week, as I had last minute guilt and had pussy waiting for me back home, so I just didn’t give a fuck about her. As day turned into night, the crowd slimmed down until at maybe midnight it was just her and me going from club to club dancing, eating Tapas. I’d been drinking since 10 am, but I was not legless, I had that kind of long-term drunk thing that only a heavy drinker can relate to and manage.

    But I’m a mess, for sure. I’m 15 lbs overweight, sloppy and just don’t give a fuck about anything, I’m an emotional wreck, 2.5 yrs past my divorce. She knows I’ve fucked 2 other girls in headquarters and that I’m pretty much completely out of control. But there we are dancing, I’m kind of in my own world, loving Barcelona, probably more like 2 am now – and she just grabs me and starts making out with me furiously. I take her back to her room and fuck her like an animal for several hours, I miss my flight the next morning and whatever, it’s just wild.

    I was not relationship material. I was suicidal half the time. Drunk a lot of the time. Unstable, chubby – what the fuck? She was an 8, had plenty of chances. She invited me to stay on and join her on the vacation she was doing in Spain for the following week, but I demurred. Even more bizarre? I stumble onto the plane, didn’t even have time to shower, stinking of pussy and booze and God knows what else, and end up sitting down next to the VP of a competitor and he’s offered me a job by the time we land in NYC.

    What the fuck? Since then, trying to be a “good guy” has been all uphill, both fucking ways. Fuck it, I’m heading out for a drink…Lol. Jesus, the world really is upside down. What a mindfuck. Truly.

  • Jeremy

    @bnon

    This post seems to imply a contradiction between being „strong and confident“ and the traits women find attractive.

    Not so much a contradiction, not really. What Rollo is saying is that the presumption of what women find attractive is many times a female-influenced meme, and as such is often a half-truth at best, outright manipulation at worst. Since women have the power of choice (when it comes to sex with men), allowing them to control the narrative on what it is they want is just asking to be deceived. Further, extrapolating from historically comfortable memes of what attracts women is almost always self-deceptive.

    The take-away there should be that whenever you see a “culturally comfortable” notion of what women want repeated, you should hide your wallet and find someone else to talk to because you’re being lied to (consciously or not).

  • Jeremy

    @LeeLee

    The male world is so different from the female world, and so inscrutable even to a woman who is trying so hard to understand.

    That’s because female-world is dualistic in nature (it has to be, biology dictates this), whereas men are relatively uncomplicated and their world is uncomplicated.

    It’s very much like trying to explain Newton-Einstein mechanics in the quantum world, it only really meets well at a black hole.

  • ShanksNes (@ShanksNes)

    As an aside here I would also point out that Gregg’s focus on men’s Burden of Performance is entirely on serving women’s interests rather than a natural order of male idealism.

    Can someone explain me what this male idealism is? This is something i don’t understand. When you are unplugged, there is no social contract which you uphold anymore with regards to women, which doesn’t benefit you. There is no moral obligation, no sense of duty, no honor, nothing that is real and makes you feel good about yourself. It’s just predator prey.

    The Cardinal Rule of Sexual Strategies:
    For one gender’s sexual strategy to succeed the other gender must compromise or abandon their own.

    In short it resembles zero sum. Now if we look closely at any aspect of male idealism, most of them are feminine conditions or social conditions to get them laid. Want to marry me? Open doors for me (chivalry -> beta bucks ->hypergamy P2). Want to date that hot model? You better buy your tesla fast (expensive car -> beta bucks -> society + hypergamy P2).

    I hope i’m not repeating myself, but every attribute of an “ideal” male is a customized property of a man subservient to the feminine imperative. Rollo has in the past written that women don’t expect the best of both alpha and beta in a single man; I think part of the reason this is true is that, it is really impossible for men to be both. And if that’s the case, and given what you know about feminine imperative, do you seriously as a man want to keep doing the same things that you aspired to do, only with your alpha glasses on? Still aspire to the same idealism, which you you thought were the prerequisites for genuine desire? I don’t know if that’s even possible.

    There is no escape from this purgatory. And when you were alone and wanted to be touched, there wasn’t a girl to pity you for the sake of your goodness. Remember this the next time, someone tries to moralize you during your daygame set (or whatever way you game). You will have a happy smirk on your face and realize how worthless her words are. And you’ll keep playing.

    It’s all a game. Know the rules and play, especially since you can’t exit.

  • Blaximus

    Guys are still listening to women concerning what they want? In 2016?

    We never see dogs asking cats how to be a better canine.

    ” Not so much a contradiction, not really. What Rollo is saying is that the presumption of what women find attractive is many times a female-influenced meme, and as such is often a half-truth at best, outright manipulation at worst. Since women have the power of choice (when it comes to sex with men), allowing them to control the narrative on what it is they want is just asking to be deceived. Further, extrapolating from historically comfortable memes of what attracts women is almost always self-deceptive. ”

    Precisely.

    I submit that women’s power of choice itself is highly susceptible to good old fashioned male manipulation. Women do not actually have any power of choice aside from that which men have granted and capitulated to. We created a monster.

    Break out the torches and pitchforks…. lol

    If one considers looking to a woman for answers on self improvement, please do the following: 1) Locate nearest brick wall. 2) bash head against it repeatedly. 3) After regaining consciousness, vow to never do it again.

  • Blaximus

    Oh, yeah….Great post Rollo!

  • Blaximus

    ” In short it resembles zero sum. Now if we look closely at any aspect of male idealism, most of them are feminine conditions or social conditions to get them laid. Want to marry me? Open doors for me (chivalry -> beta bucks ->hypergamy P2). Want to date that hot model? You better buy your tesla fast (expensive car -> beta bucks -> society + hypergamy P2).”

    You have a funny description of ” Idealism “. True Male idealism is not femcentric in a pure form. You are more accurately describing Blue Pill Idealism.

  • PartyTimeMentats! (@PartyTimeMentat)

    “It’s all a game. Know the rules and play, especially since you can’t exit.”

    Sure I can. I don’t have to do shit.

  • kfg

    “. . . do you seriously as a man want to keep doing the same things that you aspired to do, only with your alpha glasses on? Still aspire to the same idealism, which you you thought were the prerequisites for genuine desire?”

    In the long run my ideals are shaped by my biology and my biology is babies all the way down.

    But in the short run my aspirations have had fuck all to do with generating genuine desire in women. I genuinely aspire lead by my own ideals, and I am able to do so because they have fuck all to do with generating desire in women.

    Women, for their part, seem to aspire to that, as I often look up from what I’m working on to find a woman sitting there trying to shoehorn herself in to what I’m doing.

  • kfg

    “I don’t have to do shit.”

    Indeed. And in that case it’s just a question of whether it’s exposure or starvation that gets you.

  • walawala

    One thing I’m now doing for self-improvement is stopping myself whenever I start to feel like I’m pandering, pedestalizing, over-compensating and let the feeling pass. Is this a ‘reaction’ to some ‘need’? If it is, I stop. If the behavior is a genuine proactive gesture then I proceed.

    The mental discipline required for this exercise is at times exhausting. It’s like being in a car accident and learning how to walk again.

    Also, the one side-effect of the manosphere is the over-compensation for past beta behaviours which leads to uncalibrated responses which can be plain off-putting. So it’s a process of building that inner confidence again to a point where I’m clear in every action: why I’m doing this, what I feel it means and how I can learn from it.

  • PartyTimeMentats! (@PartyTimeMentat)

    I don’t see the point in gaming women. Not worth any effort, no matter how small. Bragging about having sex with women is like bragging about beating a five year in a foot race. So what?

  • Blaximus

    I hear you PartyTimeMantits.

    I don’t see the point in working and earning a living. Not worth any effort.

    Oh, and this eating and breathing thing is highly overrated.

    Yes, I will strive to be a man that does nothing that men do. I will become quasi-man!!!

  • jorxster

    Rollo, excellent writing as always.

    Though, threw me off when Sheryl Sandberg’s quote didn’t end, I think you missed a ” here.

    …commitment-phobic boy” in…

    keep up the insightful writing, I read every post.

  • PartyTimeMentats! (@PartyTimeMentat)

    What does any of that have to do with gaming women, Blaximus?

  • periklees

    just pay for quality pussy, variety is the spice of life. if they are not sucking your dick, you are wasting your time cuz all they are dong is gaming your services and resources.

    “I normally don’t talk to women unless I fornicate with them” –Mike Tyson

  • Softek

    @ scribblerg

    Had some mindblowing sex a couple days after a big falling out, in which I yelled really loudly and swore a lot (going back and forth with her), threw a chair across the room and punched a hole in a door.

    (I made it clear that I wasn’t going to do anything to her, and never intended to, after I realized how terrified she was after I exploded, but I was still pissed off)

    It was fucking horrible. Huge upheaval, huge argument, and I thought everything was over at that point. It was a wreck. But here we are. She actually said she feels closer to me after going through that together. Go figure.

  • kfg

    @PTM: It has to do with the Burden of Performance. If you stop, you die. You may not do it directly for women, but you will do it.

    And you will be watched and judged on how well you do it.

  • kfg

    @Softek: “She actually said she feels closer to me after going through that together. Go figure.”

    Go watch Speed, then see if it makes any more sense to you.

  • PartyTimeMentats! (@PartyTimeMentat)

    So? I still don’t have to bother with women. What difference does it make?

  • kfg

    Just because you are not interested in war does not mean that war is not interested in you.

    The very air of the culture you breath has the scent of women bothering with you.

  • Softek

    @ kfg

    Makes perfect sense to me why she would feel that way. But it does throw me having spent so much time invested in the idea that I had to “fix” myself.

    I thought if I worked through my issues and stopped having reactions like that, my life would get better. What’s more, I thought all those unresolved emotions and my extreme inner conflicts and instabilities were the main thing keeping me from being able to have women in my life.

    Now they seem like a glue that’s holding my associations with women together. I can get that too, but I’m still trying to wrap my head around it. Complete 180 from what I thought back in the day.

    Much like the girl I’ve been seeing pushing for a relationship, and it seems like my ambiguity about it is the main thing keeping her around, despite the fact that she would deny that into the ground.

    She really believes that she wants me to be her boyfriend, but as it stands, the emotions are intense. Very wide range. Everything’s in there. Her BF that she was with at the time, who she cheated on with me (which is how this started), well, she said that it was the same thing day in and day out and she just couldn’t take it anymore. She said she felt like she was dead.

    It’s a lot to take in. Women SAY they want commitment, but competition anxiety and women cheating in boring relationships with faithful, devoted Beta men says a lot about the reality of things.

    I’ve been accused of wanting to have my cake and eat it too, by maintaining our relationship without me making a commitment, but that’s how I see it from her end — wanting me to commit to her is her wanting to have her cake and eat it too.

    How am I supposed to believe that I won’t end up like her ex BF that she cheated on with me if I commit to her? Things go great for a while and then she gets bored, and now I’m the guy finding out she’s banging some other guy she got hot for after a monogamous relationship caused things to dwindle down between us?

    Sometimes it really feels like a no-win situation. “For one gender’s strategy to succeed, the other’s must be compromised” — THAT is a very hard pill to swallow. I’m still new to this though and am probably a lot more overwhelmed at the moment than I will be in the future. At least I hope so, lol.

  • kfg

    @Softek: Mama always said, “Life is like a scrolling game. You can’t win, you can only keep it going as long as you can.”

  • LeeLee

    @Softek — you already know. It’s not that complicated when you already know that she is going to cheat on you if you give her what she says she wants. You’re not wrong.

    She’s addicted to drama and demanding commitment is probably a game more than a desire. But it’s not necessarily a women’s issue. It’s a cluster B issue.

  • Pinelero

    Wow! Mind expanded… it’s not the burden of performance anymore but the gift of performance. No longer the caged lion, but now the ring-master of the circus.

  • kfg

    “No longer the caged lion, but now the ring-master of the circus.”

    Now yer gettin’ it. The problem for some, however, is that they are lions who were captured as cubs and have spent most of their lives in a cage, and now someone has carelessly left the door open – and they don’t know what to do.

  • Water Cannon Boy

    @ Lee Lee
    Women like to be in control, but they hate the toil it takes to build something up and be in control of it.
    Like has been said in Rollo’s post of women wanting ready made men. Or the man in the garage.
    Women love to come in after something has been built, be in a position to control or manipulate, and claim look what I can do. Sheryl Sanderberg, she didn’t build facebook, yet she’s the poster icon for women running something. In Rollo’s post “the man in the garage” women love to have the beta either buy the house, or buy the house partially so she doesn’t have to spend her money, and then take over what the house is going to be. The beta pays to for house that in many ways isn’t his.
    Your children example. Children would love the world to be like they want it, But it takes building that world and maintaining it. Better for the children to have the world built, and play like you want to play.
    It’s part of why women are so interested in being involved and having an influence over football.
    I’m going to have to go back to see where the quote at the start of this post about showing men how to be better for relationships came from, but I want to see if my feeling of who it came from is right.

  • stuffinbox

    Women ‘Improving’ men
    We see the results of this in young men every day,thanks but no thankyou! Haven’t you done enough already?
    Just another dose of do as I say not as I do.Shit go teach girls how to be women and leave the boys to the men.Women invented game not men we just learn it to improve our chances to be her next fixer upper.Then he’s fixed, boom of to the next one.Women like this need to fix their own expectations into line with reality and let the man grow at his pace in his own reality.Every head is a different world and nobody is perfect.Ad infinitum.

  • Always Discerning

    “They want a Beta with a side of Alpha – in essence a better slave; one that’s just ignorant enough of female nature and the consequences that ignorance represents, but one who also Just Gets It and satisfies their need for amused mastery, masculine dominance (when it’s convenient and affirming), and ‘just gets women’ so well he never needs to be made aware of women’s nature.”

    In turn, consider one submissive wife’s comment:

    “I know for me, when I spent all those years nagging my husband, telling him what to do, criticizing him often, being negative to him, and had a hateful tone of voice and a scowl on my face – I repelled him. But now that he has felt honored and respected for years in our marriage and he feels welcome with me and safe with me – all I have to do is ask him to do something once. Most of the time he will do it and do it pretty quickly. Not all the time. And that is okay. I don’t want to be a dictator anymore. But if he can help me, he will. He does SO MUCH MORE for me now than he ever did when I was condescending and demanding and resentful that he didn’t meet all of my spoken and unspoken expectations.”

    Submission and being respectful for men has the end game of getting what she wants. With nagging, you might get what you want after the 10th hissy fit, but with being respectful you get it on the first try–much more efficient! No, she doesn’t want to be a hard dictator, but a soft dictator is okay. Its all about ME, what he can do for me! Does that sound like a helpmate? Its not about what she can do for him, but how she can treat him to get more for her. Submission gets men to comply and do what she asks, and pretty quickly too.

  • Softek

    They have the hot, exciting sex with the Alpha, but he won’t commit, so forget him. They have the love and devotion and commitment from the Beta, but he can’t excite her sexually, so forget him too.

    The love and affection and comfort are all great until the tingles come into the picture and she starts getting horny.

    The ridiculously hot, satisfying primal sex is all great until the nagging desire for providership and stability comes into the picture and she starts feeling insecure, and wants commitment.

    If you commit, you become less sexually exciting and end up getting cucked. If you don’t commit, she’ll leave.

    Is it really this bleak? Is staying single and having one night stands and month-long flings with girls and cutting the cord when they push for commitment as good as it gets? Really?

    And inevitably having to deal with drama with every girl pushing for commitment and having to repeat the same process over and over again?

    Did I really come out of 13+ years of incel to find that this is all there is?

    I’m just amazed that a girl would want to end something that’s been going great and has been very satisfying on multiple levels simply for the lack of a boyfriend/girlfriend title. A TITLE.

    That is completely foreign to me. I don’t get the convention of it. Like how is that supposed to change anything. Throw it all away because there’s no title? Huh?

    More Blue Pill conditioning and thought processes to uproot. No rest for the weary, lol. For the time being though, between the relationship issues being nonstop and dealing with a complete nightmare client, I’m burned out.

  • Softek

    2nd Unplugging status: confirmed

  • Forge the Sky

    From the OP: “What are the traits of men, women are madly enslaved to? Is it confidence, is it strenght? NOPE. It is unpredictability, unstability, emotional COLDNESS, psychopathy! In this case he is more unstable than her, so SHE is trying to fix the relationship, she is trying to give them some rules, some stability, some “security”. She must do all the work, otherwise there is nothing. She fills the void. He who cares less…..”

    I’ve seen this happen. Hell, in a slightly less dark example – one of the strongest attractions I’ve seen a wife hold for a long-term husband was a case where the husband had severe ADD. Functioned well as an engineer but she needed to figure out and enforce the logistics of things for him on a day-to-day basis. And, of course, his mind was too flighty to rest on her for too long.

    Women LOVE that kind of chasing. Also the sense that the guy is RIGHT THERE, fully engaged, with the thing that happens to have his attention that second – no guile can be in his eyes.

    So ya that type Gregg describes works. If you want to be a productive man, being VERY productive in something you love can work too – so she chases for your time out of necessity.

    That last one works very well for my parents. Probably it’s part of Rollo’s success as well.

  • bookooball

    Just another layer of make-up.

  • Forge the Sky

    Reading comments now and LeeLee hit what I was talking about quite well, in a different way.

    Also her bit about neoteny reminded me of a thought I had.

    A realization I had lately was how much I was still being manipulated by woman, even now. However, I don’t feel too bad about it. Women are designed to manipulate men. It’s just the biology acting as intended. Everything from the big eyes and high voice to the predisposition to Machiavellianism. That’s what a lot of women’s biology is designed to DO. Boobs? For manipulation. Trying to tell them not to be manipulative is not unlike telling a man to MGTOW and get rid of his sexual urges.

    All of this is fine, and balance. The problem comes when woman’s ability to manipulate men far outweighs men’s ability to choose their own path, to express their own idealism. That’s the triumph of the FI over the MI.

    Part of the struggle of being male is learning how to regulate your own autonomous desires with the (sometimes appropriate) ways that woman attempt to manipulate you. Being manipulated can be fun. Just think of when a girl uses her eyes and skin and boobs to ‘manipulate’ you into fucking her. Lol.

  • benfromtexas

    I’ll never forget the first girl I pulled from a boyfriend in a business social circle. After we had a good time, she would tell me she liked being with me because I didn’t have a conscious effort of thinking & I was immoral. She said she loved the depravity she would experience with me.

    I remember secretly being severely offended by it. The girl, at that time, didn’t know me enough to say that. If she did know me, then she would know of my volunteer charity work & how I’m a well established mentor in my field. I was shocked that the woman or others in the future would react to my interactions with them, and how they perceived me. It’s what led me to the Internet and search out why a woman would have an interest in someone she perceives in that way.

    I viewed it as her insulting me, because I make an effort in life to be a positive person for family, coworkers, and/or friends. Now years later of trial and error, I’ve come to accept that reality. It’s weird to have that epiphany and it really fucks with your head.

  • Forge the Sky

    @Jeremy

    “This seems to say that women have their own form of in-bred idealism that is just as destructive to society as male idealism.”

    Men are altruistic as well. Just not so much to other men. So it’s not female-unique.

    Also, your assertion that altruism opposes evolutionary process assumes a non-cooperative species. Cooperative species benefit, in aggregate, from altruistic behavior and even self-sacrificial behavior – if done on behalf of genetic relatives.

    Evolution gets complicated once you realize species evolve en masse.

  • SJF

    @Softek

    Is it really this bleak?

    No it is not.

    Softek, you are in the fog of war and you are hoping for a “completion in life”. Stop doing that. Women are not going to stop wanting commitment anymore than you want to stop having sex. It is who they are and how they will behave.

    So you better stop hoping for a completion and invest in the here and now . Love her for who she is and how she behaves. Or don’t

    Assume she is going to be how she is forever. If your woman’s mood is truly intolerable to you, then you should leave her and don’t look back. If you find her current mood is merely a hassle, realize that she will always seem that way to you. She is not going to all of the sudden not be emotionally chaotic and complicated.

    Be nice and hug her, or spar with her, or perhaps punch walls and doors in front of her. But give her love instead of trying to bring and end to her desire for commitment. Find humor in the maelstrom of emotional drama she exhibits and seems to enjoy throwing your way. If you show her some love you might realign her behavior, but your effort to fix her desire for commitment and your frustration never will. (Newsflash: showing love is not synonymous with being a blue pill beta. Being frustrating and not knowing how to proceed and calling that red pill alpha is just a misnomer.)

    Stop living for tomorrow when everything will be complete and fine instead of living in the moment now.

    Let me fix your statement for you.

    I’m just amazed that a man would want to end something that’s been going great and has been very satisfying on multiple levels simply because the girl wants to slap on a boyfriend/girlfriend title. A TITLE.
    That is completely foreign to me. I don’t get the convention of it. Like how is that supposed to change anything. Throw it all away because there is a title? Go back to being an incel? Huh?

    You’re an idiot if you think that being called a boyfriend to her as a girlfriend is going to kill you. Or maybe you don’t have enough experience.

    Spinning plates means you have options in your mindset and in her mindset. I don’t think Rollo has written in stone that it means fucking more than one woman during every week of the year. And I’m on record as saying it can be done figuratively, no matter what anyone else may say.

    You have to write your own script on how to proceed. You seem stuck on a rail. You have infinite possibilities. Serial monogamy won’t kill you. One-itis certainly will. You have options. Use them wisely. I’m not telling you what you should do. You’re a grown man. I’m just pointing out the fact that you are making shit up in your head.

  • Forge the Sky

    @Softek

    It gets better. You learn how to create better frames.

    You’ve done fucking baller for a first relationship though.

    Hard to tell from over here whether your frame has flaws or whether she’s just not suited for the frame you’re trying to create.

    I kinda put this to you last thread, but it’s important: you’ll have a much easier time establishing a non-exclusive frame if you have more girls going, and she can enter your reality with that going on. From that continued circumstance of having multiple women, you can upgrade your favorite(s) as being a ‘girlfriend’ if it makes them feel better, and it works for you to start giving her more non-sexual time/family contact etc. just do long as she implicitly knows that doesn’t mean the other girls are gone.

    Or hell, just shoot for overt polygyny like Artisinal Toad suggests. You just need to find some girls who get get along.

    It’s always hard but it gets better. You can feel less powerless.

  • SJF

    Hey Forge,

    I just realized what I just commented on parallels what you said @ 10:50 without me having read yours. How’d that happen?

  • Forge the Sky

    Incidentally, how the hell does one fuck a girl in the bathroom at a bar/nightclub? YaReally and Glenn have both mentioned doing so recently and I still don’t see it. Bathrooms are crowded in all the clubs I’ve been, you’d get busted before you walked thru the door.

    The only exception is really fancy restaurants where the bathrooms are individual lockable rooms, but even then there’s often a line to stand in awkwardly for 5 minutes. Hardly conducive to a reckless crazy impulse like fucking her in the bathroom.

    I’d like to have this in the repertoire tho. Info appreciated.

  • Forge the Sky

    @SJF

    I was gonna say something like ’cause it’s true; we tend to converge on truth here!’

    But then I realized the obvious answer.

    Aliens.

  • zip

    Gravitational Law #3

    Womem always bring the WORST out of men.

  • ShanksNes (@ShanksNes)

    @SJF

    Assume she is going to be how she is forever. If your woman’s mood is truly intolerable to you, then you should leave her and don’t look back. If you find her current mood is merely a hassle, realize that she will always seem that way to you. She is not going to all of the sudden not be emotionally chaotic and complicated.

    Reminds me of the way of the superior man. A lot of word seem familiar. But yeah, trying to control women is useless.

  • SJF

    Well I did plagiarize paraphrase.

    I try, but I’m less than an authentic writer. And I’m getting remedial help.

    Good catch and props for reading his book.

  • ShanksNes (@ShanksNes)

    @SJF hehe.. no worries dude. We can only look far if we stand on the shoulders of giants.

  • scribblerg

    @Forge: Here’s the “repertoire” lol.

    – Get really drunk.
    – Start mawling some chick and get really horny.
    – Drag her into the bathroom, telling her you want to fuck her.
    – Fuck her

    Seriously though, it’s all about escalation. In one case, the chick was taking my dick out of my pants while we were sitting at a table with another couple across from us. Another time, I took the girl downstairs to near the bathrooms and began making out intensely and kind of dragged her into the bathroom. Yet another we went in to do some lines, several times like that actually.

    I was a “natural” or just call it an “unconscious competent” back then. I escalated sexually very aggressively and the women were gagging for it, it wasn’t hard, I had not technique, I just got them lathered up and went for it – they were all eager. I cannot pull that off now. I’m trying to remember if I’ve ever done it sober – I don’t think so. In fact, sober, any kind of public sexual risk freaks me out.

    The key was during that period of time that I just didn’t give a shit. After my divorce, I felt like I had no obligation to any woman to be any particular way and that I could just do whatever I wanted. Call it revenge, whatever. I remember the first time I cheated on a girlfriend after my marriage, I was like, “Shit, this isn’t cheating, I’m not married.” Did a bit of that sober too. But still, during the crazy three years, I was pretty out of control. I’d run out in traffic at high speed and show people how you could dodge cars on a busy street (the key is to run really fast and you can weave, it’s kind of easy actually – of course you have to be very drunk). I was always popping off at someone, I was “Glenn all over the place” as my sister coined it when I was younger.

    Women found it irresistible. Being a mess and a bit of a success and brokenhearted and volatile. I never realized until I read this piece what girls were getting out of it. They like the thrill, the volatility, not knowing what was coming next. Miss Ive League Stable – she didn’t hang out with guys like me who didn’t take her seriously and acted in appropriately in business settings and other places. She also liked that I was smart, so I might just pop off with some genius too – it was a ride for her. But I also know that I was never a long term thing for any of those women. I was just an adventure for them.

    Writing about this gets me in touch with the ZFG thing in a profound way, and also has me recall the manic energy I would use on these girls to froth them up. Hmmm, tomorrow night, perhaps I’ll just go out and be “Glenn all over the place” for the evening and see what that’s like. Mr. Good guy is a fucking bore.

  • Striver

    The women choosing Charlie Sheen, the fuckup, over a John Wayne type is a tough thing for most men to grasp.

    Nature wants men to be idealistic. Nothing wrong with that. Nature spits out men, they all go off in their own directions. Whatever’s needed at that particular time wins. Could be strong guys, tough guys, social guys, conniving guys, smart guys.

    Now what’s confounding is that women are so ruthless in choosing the best men, then will actually choose the fuckup over the best man. I’m not really sure why nature has women do this, there must be a reason. I suspect it’s balancing. If women just chose the best men, if strong or tall or smart or whatever was dominant in that generation wins, there wouldn’t be enough variety in the gene pool for when conditions change. So women swing wildly in one direction, then bounce back another way. So the guys that can intentionally or unintentionally manipulate the process do the best.

    I’ve seen it already in my post divorce dating. I have various women in various states in my life, screwing, making out, just friends for now. One I was screwing wanted to do something on a holiday. I had my kids so I declined, then some time freed up. But I didn’t change my plans because she lives a ways away and it just wasn’t convenient enough. So she texts me, asks me what I’m doing with the kids, I say well I don’t really have the kids, but the day you wanted wouldn’t have worked.

    And sure enough, the next time we were together she put out a ton.

    As a guy I’m just going to try and be conscious of their nature and deal with it as easily as I can without it driving me insane, I guess. Men need to be idealistic, and if Game becomes too predominant (and I consider Game a concession to FI) it’s not good for men in the long run.

  • scribblerg

    @Striver – The idealist versus the cad – I feel like they are both within me and are at war with each other. Ever since I pulled myself back from the brink, 20 years ago with the crazy drinking and downward spiral emotionally, it’s like I’ve been running from the cad. A guy I worked with during those years told me there were “two Glenns”, Good Glenn and Evil Glenn. I wasn’t a Simpsons fan back then but this guy was and he would do a little dance in the office, singing, “I am evil Gle ehn.” On the Simpsons it was “Evil Homer” who would dance on Homer’s shoulder and sing that little song “I am Evil Homer”. Women liked to fuck Evil Glenn. Evil Glenn made them come good because I treated them like all-port sex toys who existed purely for my pleasure. I was rough and dirty – I was the kind of guy who would call at 12:30 and come over and fuck a girl, after a night of drinking.

    But I always felt ashamed of that guy. I always felt that was bad and wrong, man, does the FI/Blue Pill fuck you up. The “idealist” within me has tried to live up to something greater and frankly, it’s mostly delivered me misery.

    I am Evil Gle ehn! Have to access that selfish, maniacal prick without 9 scotches…

  • Edelweiss

    @ “always discerning” Your comments remind me of some videos I’ve seen on youtube, articles, and numerous comments on the two over the past year. They consisted of arguments and counter arguments between feminists, and anti-feminists. Example? The “why i’m not a feminist” responses. All of them women, or feminized men commenting. The debates never centered on whether men should provide resources, advantage, emotional support, etc. to women, but how it should be extracted from them. Feminists prefer legislative action, coercion, “re-educating” the masses, shaming, et. al, whereas “anti-feminists” prefer the softer approach of reinforcing traditional provider/white knight roles.

    With a little searching, it’s not difficult to find a “reformed feminist” who has held both positions. Two strategies for achieving the same goals, firmly anchored in a feminine perspective, usually with a “that was the old me” attitude. Sure it was sweetie, and yet it’s still all about you.

  • tickletik

    Too mich theorizing. Real science is needed.

  • Jimmy B

    As those truly in the know, know…”if it flies, floats or fucks, rent it!”😉

  • bo jangles

    Im a bit of a 1 percenter in that I’ve always been able to have sex for a 3-4 hours per session, and enough skill to make those hours unique. This seems to have an interesting effect on women. I almost never have to deal with jealousy, women dont even seem to see any infidelity. And women are generally about 85% happy(it was interesting when I learned game and started pushing my luck hard). Im wondering if sex quality is a strong alpha characteristic because it shows preselection(had to have lots of sex to get the skills), health and possibly fidelity (if hes fucking you that much he couldnt be fucking someone else).

  • zip

    Only slightly offtopic.

    http://www.people.com/article/ashley-olsen-artist-man-charged-murder-florence

    “Olsen’s boyfriend found her naked body …”

  • Divided Line

    @Jeremy “But altruism is an arguably bad thing for humanity. It is entirely contrary to the natural animal order of the world in which evolution operates. Individuals who do not care for themselves just don’t live as long as individual who do. Since society depends on the survival of many individuals, altruism really has no place in a voluntarily cooperative society.”

    A voluntarily cooperative society is already an altruistic one. Why not just enslave people and force them to give over their resources and labor if you’re the stronger one?

  • Garnet

    @bo jangles

    ‘Im wondering if sex quality is a strong alpha characteristic because it shows preselection(had to have lots of sex to get the skills), health and possibly fidelity (if hes fucking you that much he couldnt be fucking someone else).’

    It could be the other way round i.e. an alpha mindset leading to great sex. Are you familiar with ‘The Sex God Method’? It places more emphasis on creating strong emotions through dominance etc. and considers technique only as an afterthought.

    So you probably experience a positive feedback loop in which dominance breeds success and success breeds dominance ad infinitum.

  • Niko Choski (@nikochoski)

    Speaking from personal experience here to what the article seems to quote. I mean I am relatively younger so I don’t know how much this will apply. However, in my early 20s till about ages of 25 I was emotionally unstable as fuck. The sex was easy, it would come easy and it was dirty and weird as fuck. Back then I had a concept of game and I would game my targets and women would respond to it positively, though it seemed to be that my emotional instability would provide for excitement for women. When I was happy the whole world was happy along with her who was strapping on for the ride. When I was unhappy the whole world sucked and the woman would hide away from me, but just couldn’t shake me off; although they invariably did.

    At present time: I am what I would call a lot more emotionally secure. Though as with the previous video of mine that Rollo used I express emotion a lot more confidently than before; there are no inner straggles for me to face there. I enjoy myself and love who I have become and I follow my own set of morals. I stick with the reality that I want to live and I never allow any room for anyone else’s to play into my life.

    The difference is that the way I have been over the past 3 years. Women just don’t want to let go. The attraction is that strong and they take whatever I want to give them. Strength and confidence does not come necessarily with predictability and stability in a relationship with a woman. ON the contrary as I see it, you are more unpredictable. What we fail to see is that strength and confidence is an inner quality of a man. And man and woman differ drastically. As long as that man does not see his strength and confidence as a tool to serve the feminine; those qualities will by definition make him a lot more attractive and unpredictable to the opposite sex. And just to clarify: when it comes to sex, it is a lot more depraved, nasty and sick to the point I have had nightmares because of it. That is to say, over the past 3 years… I have not heard the word No once in the bedroom.

  • Divided Line

    Could women have possibly made sex, relationships, and dating more incoherent and miserable? Sometimes I’ll be reading blogs and thinking about this shit and I’m struck with how needlessly difficult all this is. Think about it. All women would have to do is actually want the shit they say they want, and we could all fuck, have kids and successful marriages, and think about something else, like fixing problems, building things, and generally making the world a less shitty place to live in.

    It’s like a black comedy, a dystopian satire. Our entire existence is predicated upon and subservient to women’s hunter gatherer sexuality. I don’t know if I should laugh or cry.

  • zip

    @Jeremy

    “But altruism is an arguably bad thing for humanity. It is entirely contrary to the natural animal order of the world in which evolution operates.”

    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=chimpanzees+altruism

  • Garnet

    @ Rollo

    Great article outlining the parallels between positive masculinity and emotional polarity but it raises some questions for me. I accept ‘alpha’ is a state of mind and not a demographic (even though it does form a small percentage of men), but are there degrees of alpha? Or are all alphas situational/contextual on a fundamental level and they have to continually expand their frames to avoid becoming domain dependent?

    I ask because true positive masculinity seems to imply a stronger frame than the ‘lothario’ approach of generating emotional polarity. Have you observed these two approaches clashing and if so what results have you seen?

    Would appreciate if others can weigh in on this as well.

  • Divided Line

    It’s a shame that embittered omega game isn’t possible. Or is it?

  • zip

    @ divided

    not at this planet.

  • c1hvh

    “They want a Beta with a side of Alpha – in essence a better slave; one that’s just ignorant enough of female nature and the consequences that ignorance represents, but one who also Just Gets It and satisfies their need for amused mastery, masculine dominance (when it’s convenient and affirming), and ‘just gets women’ so well he never needs to be made aware of women’s nature.”

    Can’t you do that WITHOUT being a slave? Can’t you give comfort and security in your own terms, and also “Just Get It and satisfy her need for amused mastery and dominance”?

  • c1hvh

    “Toxic” is a trigger word for me. Fuck this noise. Masculinity (and anything receiving that label recently) is not “toxic”, i.e. it’s not chemically poisoning your body. In their point of view, it is “bothersome”, at most.

  • fleezer

    “She said she loved the depravity she would experience with me.”

    so it’s not just indifference that’s attractive, but depraved indifference. see state crimimal statutes for further info on making pussies wet.

    this post made me think of the sexy sons hypothesis.

    when a woman gives birth to a girl she knows what that girl will be like. awalt.

    but when it comes to her son it could go lots of different ways. it makes sense that she would want her son to be an unstable depraved sex maniac because that kind of son gives her genes the best chance of continuing.

    and since women ARE their bodies and seek only to serve their primary biological function of continuing the species, depraved alpha fucks makes perfect sense.

    looking back, my mother never gave me a single piece of advice when it came to girls. what she did give me was the freedom to bring them home and experiment. it was always my dad trying to cock block me. never mom.

    and when it came to the requirements for “bring her home to mom”, there was only one. the girl had to be hot. that was all that mattered. bitchy, stupid, vapid, annoying… none of that mattered if she looked right. I’d bring her home, show her off and then get to business with mom’s unspoken approval.

  • Andy

    “One thing I’m now doing for self-improvement is stopping myself whenever I start to feel like I’m pandering, pedestalizing, over-compensating and let the feeling pass. Is this a ‘reaction’ to some ‘need’? If it is, I stop. If the behavior is a genuine proactive gesture then I proceed. ”

    “Also, the one side-effect of the manosphere is the over-compensation for past beta behaviours which leads to uncalibrated responses which can be plain off-putting.”

    @walawala

    Working on that myself. I think we all should. 🙂

    “This seems to say that women have their own form of in-bred idealism that is just as destructive to society as male idealism.”

    @Jeremy

    I don’t get it. Can you explain what female idealism would be? Also, male idealism is only destructive when misplaced IMO.

  • Robert What?

    Looking through the lense of Evolutionary Psychology, what is/was the evolutionary benefit to women to be turned on by (ie, want to mate with) emotionally unstable men?

  • Tim

    “It’s a logical trap that most MGTOWs find themselves in – they want a world where their performance burden is removed with regard to women, but still refuse to accept that this burden exists independent from women’s perceptions.”

    I’m a MGTOW and suffer no such performance burden. As far as women go, I can take them or leave them – and I mostly leave them. As a result of internalizing and practicing the MGTOW mindset, I no longer suffer any performance burden – other than what’s stolen from me by women and their white knight boot lickers through taxes to pay for their shit decisions – like having kids with multiple baby daddies (SNAP, WIC, publicly funded housing), the higher state and federal funding for their healthcare, the higher state and federal funding for their educations (Title IX, women only programs), the higher funding of their retirement through social security through men’s earlier deaths, their preferential treatment in employment (Affirmative Action) – I could go on and on and on. If you mean I suffer a burden from things such as this, you’re most certainly correct.

    Passing off costs to those least responsible for paying those costs is how the parasites in our world get by so well – and women are apex parasites. Short of the aforementioned – if a woman’s mouth were on fire, I wouldn’t piss in it to put it out. I could give a rat’s ass what women think of my performance. I’ve had women try to manipulate me into relationships and doing their bidding and they’ve all found themselves on the curb. To date, I’m up roughly 550K financially (that’s money from their pockets to mine) due to their failed attempts at screwing me psychologically, legally and/or financially.

    I’m so deprogrammed, de-brainwashed and free from anything to do with female psychobabble that if certain women found out what I really think of them – they’d do their level best to destroy my life. The above is why you rarely hear men discuss their MGTOW status in the open. It would be like discussing your double agent status in the open – very unwise and possibly life ending. What’s hilarious is people saying things like – “I never hear about this MGTOW thing in public.”

    Here’s all you really need to know about female psychology where it relates to men’s roles in women’s lives:

  • SJF

    What?

    That is a leading the witness question.

    “…..emotionally unstable men?”

    Women aren’t turned on because a man is emotionally unstable. They can be turned on despite a man being emotionally unstable. I’m sure you grasp the concept of AF/BB and the desire woman have is contextual depending on timing in her life, her environment (primitive vs.socialized, provisioning for her and children, etc.) Women are turned on by perceived alpha contextual clues as part of their evolutionary firmware.

  • scribblerg

    @Jeremy & Zip – With respect to altruism, this idea is well covered in evolutionary theory, referred to as “eusociality”. I’m a complete neophyte on this stuff, and my knowledge of it has come mainly from reading E. O. Wilson’s The Social Conquest of Earth. But it is a fascinating topic. Worker ants engage in eusociality, in ant colonies.

    One could say, at a meta level, that since 50% or so of men will not get to pass on their genetic material, that they are usocial. Another surprising angle on “altruism” comes from Adam Smith in his Theory of Moral Sentiments (a much deeper work than Wealth of Nations) in which he explores the complexity of human motivations – of course, in the context of his times. Altruism as such has a huge effect on the success of societies as it’s group interested versus self-interested, but since we benefit individually from group benefits as well, it’s all not so cut and dried.

    What is clear is that seeing things simply as either self-interested or not doesn’t really get at what’s going on. As Smith said, ‘we seek to be loved and lovely’ as part of our “self interest”. And yes, I insert Smith into this dialog to enrage the leftists among us who seek to reduce the beautiful, holistic elegance of free markets to grubby greed and capitalism…:-)

  • kfg

    “If women just chose the best men, if strong or tall or smart or whatever was dominant in that generation wins, there wouldn’t be enough variety in the gene pool for when conditions change.”

    Right. Although actually there will be a dominant trait, other traits cannot fall below a certain percentage without risk of damaging group survival ability. 5% seems to be the magic number for maintaining a useful trait in useful numbers.

    Why are there “night people?” Because having some people around who will see the goblins coming over the hill while the majority are sleeping can save the tribes collective ass. Too many of them and there is never enough group cohesion to form a functional social majority.

    Why are there psychopaths? Because when the goblins come over the hill it’s going to be the psychopaths who are largely responsible for saving the tribes collective ass. Their antisocial behaviour is exactly what’s needed, at that moment, to preserve society. Too many of them around in times of peace and it’s their antisocial behaviour directed inwardly to other members of the tribe that destroys society.

    The difference between a psychopath and a war hero is often simply contextual.

    When the environment changes, the traits that promote group survival will be accentuated.

    re altruism: I do not mean to discount Ayn Rand in entirety, but the problem I have always had with Objectivist Philosophy is that it never seemed to me to be a good idea to found society on the philosophy of a person who clearly suffered from an antisocial personality disorder.

  • lh

    Looking through the lense of Evolutionary Psychology, what is/was the evolutionary benefit to women to be turned on by (ie, want to mate with) emotionally unstable men?

    You can understand that from a machiavellian perspective: If someone is totally predictable, you can go right to his limits and be save. If someone isn’t predictable you have to keep some distance to the limits out of caution. Therefor being unpredictable will give you more “space” without having to defend your actual limits. This is strength and women love strength.

    Ronald Reagan btw. used such tactics to defeat the USSR. He intentionally played the madman so the Russians had to be more careful when dealing with the US.

  • mersonia

    @SJF @Scribbleberg @kfg

    I still can’t fathom how you interact with actual humans in society.

    “Fuck what you know. You need to forget about what you know, that’s your problem. Forget about what you think you know about life”

    ^ that would probably save you.

  • lh

    I’m a MGTOW and suffer no such performance burden. As far as women go, I can take them or leave them

    This is a typical misconception of “performance”. A man doesn’t perform by doing what women like. A man does perform by doing what he likes and what is good for him – living and thinking from his own mental point of origin.
    And therefor you actually perform. MGTOW’s are people still learning & practicing this performance. It is more difficult if you let women come closer for longer time, but the principle is the same.

  • Tim

    “This is a typical misconception of “performance”. A man doesn’t perform by doing what women like. A man does perform by doing what he likes and what is good for him – living and thinking from his own mental point of origin.

    And therefor you actually perform. MGTOW’s are people still learning & practicing this performance. It is more difficult if you let women come closer for longer time, but the principle is the same.”

    Good Lord I can’t take it. By not performing – I’m performing. I’m playing right into the enemies hands by not giving them what they want. Jesus Christ.

  • SJF

    @Mersonia

    Your comment is inscrutable and I fail to understand the context.

    Please elaborate.

  • kfg

    @mersonia: “I still can’t fathom how you interact with actual humans in society.”

    Quite sociably. I smile and say hi to people, often complete strangers, as I pass them on the sidewalk. I remove other people’s garbage cans from the road, because it helps make a pleasant neighborhood environment for everybody. A convenient store manager took me aside a while ago to tell me that the employees had all agreed that I was their favorite customer to deal with and I am in demand as a dinner guest, because if I am there the odds of the evening being pleasant for everybody goes up dramatically.

    In fact, as I hear it, it is the prospective guests themselves who inquire if I am on the invitation list before they decide they will attend.

    So yeah, what SJF said.

  • OrlanT2

    Obviously, a man needs to set his boundaries with a woman. Harder to achieve, but still achievable. And he definitely need to screen a woman for traits that are more compatible to his character and preferences. Women are unreliable, thus this talk from women about what is good for them has a tinge of “if I can’t have it, I’ll look elsewhere”, which is a threat in itself. What can a man do? Aside from his obligations to his relationship that may still fail, he should plan for the breakup.

  • Andy

    @sjf

    He just doesn’t understand you like I do. 😉

    Completely off topic, but it gets hard to watch the guys in the anger phase once you’re past it. And I’m barely past it. lol. To anyone I blew up on… Sorry.

  • SJF

    @Andy

    What can you tell me about myself?

    As in: Critique me. And no, this is not a trick question, nor am I waiting to pounce.

  • Water Cannon Boy

    I’d describe Charlie Sheen as reckless more than a screw up. A persona of do everything in a blaze of glory. A screw up doesn’t appeal to women. At least somebody that I would describe as a screw up.
    Reckless, even if you go down in a blaze of glory, you had to soar at some point before the crash. That high point of excitement is what women love. Well actually, the whole rise and fall together. Fun when you’re soaring, her life becomes dramatic when you’re not.
    An actual screw up doesn’t get up in the air.

  • newlyaloof

    @Dutch, then tell her that if she decides to walk that:

  • Andy

    @sjf

    haha hmmm… Like, I see pure intention behind the facade. But IMO, it seems kind of like you protect your ego. And maybe you take yourself a little too seriously. And sometimes your tone is unnecessarily condescending which can hurt your points despite their validity.

    Of course I could be reading you completely wrong.

  • newlyaloof

    @Dutch, opps. Meant that to be in the previous post’s comment thread.

Speak your mind

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: