The Anger Bias

I don’t think it will come as a shock to my readers, or anyone who follows me on Twitter or on the Red Pill Reddit forum, that I’ve gone to bat in recent months to combat the (often deliberate) misperception that self-described ‘Red Pill’ men are inherently angry men. As such, we’re also meant to presume these ‘angry men’ have a potential for violence or at best self-loathing.

The idea, of course, is proposed that “the guys in TRP are just embittered, deeply hurt men who’ve taken the truths that Red Pill awareness has presented to them and converted it to a real, genuine misogyny”. Furthermore, the convention is proposed that these guys cannot come to terms with their own failures and want to blame them all on women, or at the very least an unkind, unforgiving, pro-female world in which they’ve always struggled (i.e. “losers want to blame their losing on women”). Thus, these ‘bitter terpers’ (TRPers) promote either hostility towards women, or they attempt to check themselves out of the sexual marketplace entirely by “going their own way”. In either case, it’s proposed that it’s men’s inherent anger that motivates them to an anti-woman mindset.

I addressed much of this misguided argument in my essay Anger Management:

But are we angry? I can’t say that I haven’t encountered a few guys on some forums and comment threads who I’d characterize as angry judging from their comments or describing their situations. For the greater whole I’d say the manosphere is not angry, but the views we express don’t align with a feminine-primary society. Men expressing a dissatisfaction with feminine-primacy, men coming together to make sense of it, sound angry to people who’s sense of comfort comes from what the feminine imperative has conditioned them to.

Most of the men who’ve expressed a genuine anger with me aren’t angry with women, but rather they’re angry with themselves for having been blind to the Game that they’d been a part of for so long in their blue-pill ignorance. They’re angry that they hadn’t figured it out sooner.

I understand that a lot of what is written in the manosphere can certainly be interpreted as coming from a source for anger. When I (or anyone else) outline the fundaments of hypergamy for instance, there’s a lot to be angry about for a man. Women get pissed because it exposes an ugly truth that the feminine exhausts a lot of resources to keep under the rug, but for men, learning about the feral reasons for feminine (and masculine) behaviors often enough cause a guy to become despondent or angry. That impression should never be the basis for a Man’s Game, nor is it ever really an aspect of internalizing Game that will benefit him personally.

Anger bias and attribution to men is an easy follow for a social order predicated on empowering and protecting the feminine. From an egalitarian mindset that insists on socially constructed equalism between the sexes it’s ironic that the attribution of a default anger to men, and the conventionally masculine, is something entirely unique to the male sex. To the feminine-primary mindset, all-is-one until a negative trait unique to the male biology serves a purpose, and a positive trait unique to women is flattering for them. Then the ideals of social constructionism are suspended insofar as biology agrees with a feminine-primary social order.

I would also argue that predisposed anger is just one attribute the Feminine Imperative finds useful in men to create operative social conventions. The default presumption of mens predisposition to anger is the basis of most domestic legislation (paternity, domestic violence, child custody, etc.) between men and women.

This is a convenient social constructivism based (ostensibly) on egalitarian equality until a particular emotion or personal quality is predominantly attributable to one sex in the positive or negative; then it’s the ‘differences’, not the similarities, between the sexes that make for social control. It’s funny how we’re all equal, blank-slates until anger is better attributed to “toxic” masculinity and some preternatural capacity for empathy in women are beliefs the Feminine Imperative reinforces in its cultural context.

Anger is a useful emotion for fem-centrism. It’s all too easy to classify men’s propensity for anger (and associated violence) as ‘toxic’ yet women’s anger is something transformative and empowering. This connects back to the social efforts of the past five generations designed to feminize men and masculinize women; the inverse traits that would be conventional to one gender are encouraged as positive traits in the opposite gender.

This may be somewhat remedial for my regular readers, but I’m reviewing this because it illustrates a dichotomy that a Blue Pill mindset is all too ready to accept. To the equalist ideology, biological gender-specific truths are only a minor factor in the human condition – unless the truth of that gender-specific biological fact is something advantageous to the feminine and disadvantageous to the masculine.

For instance, to suggest that women’s evolved neurological capacity for communication makes them more intuitive and sensitive to verbal and nonverbal sub-communication we’re supposed to embrace this biological fact as something that sets women apart as ‘special’ or evidence of women being “more evolved”. But when we suggest that men outclass women in cognitive spatial ability, or neurological gender differences in rational abstract thinking gives men a biological advantage in areas like mathematics, then male professors lose their tenured jobs for expressing these facts publicly. If a biological difference is flattering to women it’s an exception to the blank-slate ideology; if a difference is unflattering to women it’s considered evidence of an institutionalized sexism on the part of men.

For all purposes, a social order founded on the blank-slate ideology of egalitarian equalism (serving the Feminine Imperative) regularly, and ruthlessly, quashes any discourse of biological gender differences – unless those factual differences are flattering to the feminine and/or damning of the masculine.

Anger Bias

One biological difference equalism is happy to promote is the notion that men are biologically predisposed to anger, aggression and violence. The motivating impetus behind this anger is rarely something the equalist mind will consider, but that men are predominantly, naturally, more ‘angry’ than women is a meme that is actively encouraged. If anything, this biological fact is a root basis for the cultural concept of “toxic” masculinity.

However, the fact does remain, healthy men possess 12 to 17 times the biogenous serum testosterone that women do. This naturally predisposes men to be more muscular, hairy, lower voices, libidinous and yes, aggressive. It’s no secret that statistically men are biologically more prone to anger, aggression and potentially violence. In a feminine-correct social context this natural predilection is the basis of all masculine attributes being ‘toxic’, if for no other reason than it presents a threat to women’s social control.

For all this, the male gender-bias towards presumption of anger has a foundation in evolutionary psychology. Men will always be considered more angry than women because of an evolutionary adaptation known as Error Management. And in men’s case, this anger attribution is a species-survival adaptation. The following quotes originate from a study called, Seeing storms behind the clouds: Biases in the attribution of anger. This experimental study, and another similar study (If looks could kill), come to us courtesy of Dr. Martie Haselton and her colleagues in the evo-psych department at UCLA. These studies outline the inherent biases towards anger all humans theoretically harbor subconsciously.

Anger-prone individuals are volatile and frequently dangerous. Accordingly, inferring the presence of this personality trait in others was important in ancestral human populations. This inference, made under uncertainty, can result in two types of errors: underestimation or overestimation of trait anger. Averaged over evolutionary time, underestimation will have been the more costly error, as the fitness decrements resulting from physical harm or death due to insufficient vigilance are greater than those resulting from lost social opportunities due to excessive caution. We therefore hypothesized that selection has favored an upwards bias in the estimation of others’ trait anger relative to estimations of other traits not characterized by such an error asymmetry.

Anger attribution to physical and gender cues is an “adaptive rationality”. In other words, it’s probably better to err on the side of caution and misattribute anger to an individual displaying even marginal cues of a potential for aggression (for instance, they hold implements or tools that could cause physical harm) than to miss that cue and wind up dead or injured.

Moreover, we hypothesized that additional attributes that 1) make the actor more dangerous, or 2) make the observer more vulnerable increase the error asymmetry with regard to inferring anger-proneness, and should therefore correspondingly increase this overestimation bias.

This is an important distinction to make when we extrapolate this theory to a larger social scope. When the actors (men in our case) are made to appear more dangerous, or the observers (women & feminized men) are made to feel more vulnerable there is an increase in the perception that the actors are in fact more prone to anger (asymmetrical error attribution).

Adaptive rationality and error management

The “adaptive rationality” approach contends that the mind was shaped by selection to enhance fitness in ancestral environments rather than to yield accurate judgments. Therefore, human cognition can manifest seemingly irrational biases that are, in fact, “adaptively rational.”

I explored this topic in my essay, Vestiges.

Anger attribution is one domain in which this might occur. Perceivers can commit one of two errors: underestimate an individual’s trait anger (false negative) or overestimate it (false positive). On average, underestimations will have been costlier than overestimations in ancestral populations: assuming that an anger-prone individual was temperate placed the perceiver at risk of assault, whereas assuming that a temperate individual was anger-prone merely led to foregoing potentially profitable interactions. Thus, overall accuracy (i.e., committing false negative and false positive errors with equal frequency) did not maximize fitness over evolutionary time. Rather, in line with error management theory, we hypothesize that selection favored a biased tendency to commit the less costly false positive — overestimating trait anger. Although the same logic applies to the estimations of state anger, our predictions focus squarely on trait anger because traits predict future behavior, and it is costly to underestimate an individual’s anger not only in the moment, but also in future interactions.

For the Red Pill aware, what I’m suggesting is that there is an evolved predisposition to perceive men as generally more prone to anger, and thereby more susceptible to aggression/violence, than may in fact be the actual case with men individually. Largely, as a man, you will always be perceived as potentially angrier than a woman.

Contextual factors can influence this asymmetry, resulting in a concomitant increase in biases in the perception of a given emotion. Anger motivates aggression, hence an important contextual factor in anger perception is the capacity of the perceived individual to inflict harm. The greater the capacity to harm, the more costly it is to underestimate the extent to which the target is angry, and therefore the more that perception should be biased in favor of overestimation.

I would argue here that men’s state in western(izing) cultures is one that grossly exaggerates men’s overall potential for anger, and by extension violence. Presuming that Red Pill men are “a bunch of angry misogynists” is one such error, but it is also a useful one in that it plays upon this overestimation of anger in men on whole. This anger attribution in men will always be an easy method of poisoning the well or creating straw men arguments from which opponents of Red Pill awareness will dismiss valid, factual arguments.

As you might guess, this male anger bias is a simple tool to use – and one I unfortunately see being employed by many Purple Pill dating coaches who’d like to dissuade their clientele from the less marketable aspects of Red Pill awareness. Anything Red Pill that disagrees with their feminine-sanitized advice is conveniently dismissed as “negative” or the rantings of angry, bitter, burned men. It becomes “Truthful Anger”, but their emphasis is always on the anger part rather than the truth that would kick a leg out from under their positivity marketing scheme.

The default state of women and feminized men is one of a presumed vulnerability due to a persistent social characterization of a default female victimhood in popular culture and media. Likewise, men are portrayed as quick to anger – all in spite of generations of effort spent in Blue Pill conditioning of men to be ideally passive, supportive, non-assertive and entirely less masculinized. Despite all that sensitivity conditioning, from the earliest ages, the default presumption that’s still popularly reinforced is that men are always the angry/violent ones. Domestic violence laws presume a man is always the attacker and always the party to be removed from the home because of this preconception.

Both the Feminine Imperative and even well meaning Red Pill men default to this overestimation. I get that this is largely merited on whole as a characteristic of men. This error management is a useful and pragmatic adaptation, but it is also a useful foil for dismissing men on whole. It’s interesting that I’d be pilloried for expressing that the realities of women’s menstrual cycle predispose them to ovulatory shift, as well as anti-social, behaviors, yet were I to explain that testosterone predisposes men to aggression we largely accept this as a given.

My intent in this essay isn’t to say men aren’t as angry as their evolutionary nature makes them. The point is that a feminine-primary social order readily makes this nature a useful tool in dismissing what would otherwise be valid, but uncomfortable Red Pill truth. This anger bias mechanism is a tool for message control.

218 comments

  1. preternatural capacity for empathy in women

    Ha. There is nothing more cold, calculating, ruthless, and less empathetic than a woman who has decided she is done with you. “Preternatural capacity for moving on without a qualm or backward glance” is more like it.

    However, the fact does remain, healthy men possess 12 to 17 times the biogenous serum testosterone that women do. This naturally predisposes men to be more muscular, hairy, lower voices, libidinous and yes, aggressive. It’s no secret that statistically men are biologically more prone to anger, aggression and potentially violence.

    Generally speaking, I felt LESS anger (as well as irritability, depression, and anxiety) after raising my T level dramatically.

  2. Being accused by feminists of being angry is akin to being accused by a drunk of touching alcohol. Nobody does anger quite like women because women lack all manner of self control in these matters. If men displayed the same lack of control then the shit would be out of control, as they say. Because as men we understand our strength then we are more careful as to when we use it, in general.

    All of this is pure projection on the part of women. But it serves them well to press their attacks in this way as it is a distraction from their own anger. And nobody does anger quite like feminists and the feminine imperative.

  3. Since internalising red pill reality I no longer experience anger towards females, where once I might have felt anger to perceived injustices I have suffered at the hands of females I’ve previously allowed to control frame, I now realise I brought that shit upon myself.

    Why should I be angry for a woman being a woman? They have always been this way it’s just religious/societal controls and the narrative that has changed.

    I’ve said it before and I will repeat it, I now view women as being for entertainment purposes only under the current FI controlled societal contract.

    Fortunately for me I have the luxury to take this position as I have a 14 year old son and no desire for more kids @ 49.

    No shit that a man with upto 17 times higher testosterone levels is more predisposed to violence than the average female!!

    But hang on how do you explain that domestic violence rates in lesbian relationships are higher than heterosexual ones????

    Go figure! That damn toxic masculine patriarchy!!

  4. @Pay

    But hang on how do you explain that domestic violence rates in lesbian relationships are higher than heterosexual ones????
    Go figure! That damn toxic masculine patriarchy!!

    Women are never at fault. Blame is always assigned to a man. Even when lesbians commit murder, a man is somehow at fault.

  5. @Rollo – “One biological difference equalism is happy to promote is the notion that men are biologically predisposed to anger, aggression and violence.”

    All true. It is important to note specifically and primarily man’s anger against women is at issue here. A man’s anger anainst another man is not subject to nearly the same vilification as his anger against a woman. In fact, male blue pill anger against red pill realities is openly encouraged and promoted.

  6. Women have no problem with a man’s anger if it is directed toward another man who threatens her security. Yet, after battle, she will subjugate herself to the victor regardless, even if her subjection subverts the provisioner of her security before the battle.

  7. “To the feminine-primary mindset, all-is-one until a negative trait unique to the male biology serves a purpose, and a positive trait unique to women is flattering for them. Then the ideals of social constructionism are suspended insofar as biology agrees with a feminine-primary social order.”

  8. The anger bias plays out as calls of “misogynist” and is a very good feminist tool to keep men in line by gaslighting them into second-guessing their own behaviours.

    “Why are you so angry?” or “Butthurt” are constantly thrown about so that a natural emotion or reaction is framed as something shameful.

    Anger when harnessed properly helps to pull a guy out of an unpleasant or unacceptable situation.

    The adoption of the Red Pill starts with a kind of eye-opening moment of “I’ve been duped all my life”…Anger allows emotions to come to a boil. When expressed in a healthy way–letting off steam—it allows a guy to focus.

    When left to fester, it becomes resentment and passive aggressivity.

    With regards to the “Anger Bias” the one area I had the most struggles with were the “soft-next”.

    I would drop off the grid and be met with “Why are you so angry!???” trying to call me out.

    Managing anger is critical to adopting a Red Pill mindset. Awareness of the shaming techniques is critical.

    As a way of reframing or flipping the script…call a woman “butthurt” and watch the reaction…

  9. “Did someone hurt you???” Is one of the most common shaming phrases I hear whenever a red pill guy starts dishing out truths to women. Clearly some angel form above broke his heart and he can’t get over it. We’ve all been burned a time or 2 in life by women but we get over it. This is just about seeing inter gender dynamics for what they really are.

  10. Personally, the anger that I see throughout this dialogue regarding RP, is men expressing that one phase of the grieving/loss process. The forum offered through Reddit allows men to expound in a relatively safe place without fear of retribution. Probably, it spills over into real life, and you learn to shut your mouth, but generally we all get through that phase. Being angry at women is stupid. Being angry at yourself is way more productive. I think that the anger phase is the key to self-improvement because it makes one so uncomfortable so that you seek solutions that work. Anger serves an evolutionary purpose except in today’s world, it can be maladaptive and get you in trouble thus the need for self-discipline and caution.

  11. Purple pillers are desperately trying to reign in awakening men. The shaming tactics seem to go through the following progression when you attempt to engage them with a rational argument. “You can’t get laid/bitter virgin”. When that fails they go to “who hurt you?”. When that fails it’s “why are you so angry?”. After that they strawman your argument and declare victory. And finally when that fails they simply censor and later ban you.

    The hilarious thing is that blue pill is destroying women’s happiness far more than men’s. Reality plus time eats away at the blue pill conditioning in both genders. But men have a huge advantage here in that by our thirties when we’re realizing what a load of shit we’ve been fed men are hitting peak SMV while women are ruined and only getting worse.

    Can’t save them though. How’s that song go? Don’t save her, she don’t want to be saved.

  12. Oh on another note I have spoken with several women who are actively engaged in trying to fake being a red pill man and be the first women to gain EC status on the red pill reddit. Lol pathetic women with their penis envy. Their only goals is to be the first girl to do something a shit load of men have already done.

    From what I hear they keep exposing themselves and getting banned due to their emotional based nature. They always end up relating how something made them feel, not how something works.

  13. Rollo, are you familiar with Ann Althouse? She is a somewhat liberal-leaning law professor at Univ of Wisconsin with a blog that is fairly popular because she is pretty balanced in her approach (Glenn Reynolds, the blogfather, at Instapundit has used her as a substitute blogger sometimes). She’s written a few times about the same thing you discussed here. For the NY Times and the liberal commentariat, women are equal to men in every regard except to the extent that women are clearly different — in which case the difference always makes them better. I wish I could remember her exact formulation, but she’s used it for years.

  14. I was taught not to get angry,when a man loses his head in anger his agresion is less efective ,never lose your cool.

    Blue pill men are more apt to temper tantrum,as the egalitarian myth doesn’t work in reality,anger is the fruit of unmet expectations and the further a mans head is from reality
    “blue pill” the more apt things are not as they apear to be hence unmet expectations.What I think I am seeing here is feminist men and women projecting their anger onto red pill men that are more in touch with reality and less apt to be decieved.

    Now take a fighting pit bull for example,once he is provoked he will wag his tail and rip to shreds the object of his agression not in anger it is what he does…and happy to do it.

  15. Oy-Vey — The many times I’ve been accused of “Oh, you just hate women”..

    My response is always the same; “No, I do NOT “hate women” — I *understand* them.
    You’re confusing” knowledge” with “animosity” !

  16. Speaking of false positive errors made by women in assessing risks, this video by Coltaine talks about the phenomenon more generally, and how it might explain why women tend to see threats in everything…

  17. I’m not angry at women. I’m not a misogynist.
    I don’t hate women.
    I just hate *shitty female behavior*.
    Unfortunately, to do the latter in this day and age is to be accused of the former.
    Do I care?
    Not a lick.
    MGTOW and loving it.

  18. The feminist efforts to re-define what masculinity is and paint it as toxic seems equivalent to burkas for men. They feel threatened by the power of it. That power is rooted internally in their own psychology, in their desire, need and want of it, which feels vulnerable and scary, and completely unacceptable to a “strong independent woman”, so they try to eliminate the threat with projection of fear and shame and anger, concepts they are very familiar with.

  19. @Rollo – Is there a link reference for the claim below?

    “For instance, to suggest that women’s evolved neurological capacity for communication makes them more intuitive and sensitive to verbal and nonverbal sub-communication we’re supposed to embrace this biological fact as something that sets women apart as ‘special’ or evidence of women being “more evolved”.”

  20. Contrast this.

    Back in the old days (1970’s) we (me) didn’t know or care that the Queen band was queer. Go figure. We thought they were masculine in a power rock band kind of way.

    Somebody to Love
    Queen

    Can anybody find me somebody to love
    Ooh, each morning I get up I die a little
    Can barely stand on my feet
    (Take a look at yourself) Take a look in the mirror and cry (and cry)
    Lord what you’re doing to me (yeah yeah)
    I have spent all my years in believing you
    But I just can’t get no relief, Lord!
    Somebody (somebody) ooh somebody (somebody)
    Can anybody find me somebody to love?
    I work hard (he works hard) every day of my life
    I work till I ache in my bones
    At the end (at the end of the day)
    I take home my hard earned pay all on my own
    I get down (down) on my knees (knees)
    And I start to pray
    Till the tears run down from my eyes
    Lord somebody (somebody), ooh somebody
    (Please) can anybody find me somebody to love?
    Everyday (everyday) I try and I try and I try
    But everybody wants to put me down
    They say I’m going crazy
    They say I got a lot of water in my brain
    Ah, got no common sense
    I got nobody left to believe in
    Yeah yeah yeah yeah
    Oh Lord
    Ooh somebody, ooh somebody
    Can anybody find me somebody to love?
    (Can anybody find me someone to love)
    Got no feel, I got no rhythm
    I just keep losing my beat (you just keep losing and losing)
    I’m OK, I’m alright (he’s alright, he’s alright)
    I ain’t gonna face no defeat (yeah yeah)
    I just gotta get out of this prison cell
    One day (someday) I’m gonna be free, Lord!
    Find me somebody to love
    Find me somebody to love
    Find me somebody to love
    Find me somebody to love
    Find me somebody to love
    Find me somebody to love
    Find me somebody to love
    Find me somebody to love love love
    Find me somebody to love
    Find me somebody to love
    Somebody somebody somebody somebody
    Somebody find me
    Somebody find me somebody to love
    Can anybody find me somebody to love?
    (Find me somebody to love)
    Ooh
    (Find me somebody to love)
    Find me somebody, somebody (find me somebody to love) somebody, somebody to love
    Find me, find me, find me, find me, find me
    Ooh, somebody to love (Find me somebody to love)
    Ooh (find me somebody to love)
    Find me, find me, find me somebody to love (find me somebody to love)
    Anybody, anywhere, anybody find me somebody to love love love!
    Somebody find me, find me love

    Back a couple years ago, before the manosphere was invented, we didn’t know that solipsism was actually a thing. Turned out it actually was. A way for women to weasel out. No anger here. Girls will be girls.

    Somebody to Love
    Kacey Musgraves

    Lyrics
    We’re all hoping, we’re all hopeless
    We’re all thorns and we’re all roses
    We’re all looking down our noses at ourselves
    We’re all flawed and we’re all perfect
    We’re all lost and we’re all hurting
    And just searching for somebody to love

    We’re all liars, we’re all legends
    We’re all tens, I’d want elevens
    We’re all trying to get to heaven, but not today
    We’re all happy, we’re all hatin’
    We’re all patiently impatient
    And just waiting for somebody to love

    We’re all good, but we ain’t angels
    We all sin, but we ain’t devils
    We’re all pots and we’re all kettles
    But we can’t see it in ourselves
    We’re all livin’ ’til we’re dying
    We ain’t cool, but man, we’re trying
    Just thinking we’ll be fixed by someone else

    We all wrangle with religion
    We all talk, but we don’t listen
    We’re all starving for attention then we’ll run
    We’re all paper, we’re all scissors
    We’re all fightin’ with our mirrors
    Scared we’ll never find somebody to love

    We’re all good, but we ain’t angels
    We all sin, but we ain’t devils
    We’re all pots and we’re all kettles
    But we can’t see it in ourselves
    We’re all livin’ ’til we’re dying
    We ain’t cool, but man, we’re trying
    Thinking we’ll be fixed by someone else

    Just tryin’ to hold it all together
    We all wish our best was better
    Just hopin’ that forever’s really real
    We’ll miss a dime to grab a nickel
    Overcomplicate the simple
    We’re all little kids just looking for love
    Yeah, don’t we all just want somebody to love?

  21. Stan
    Rollo, are you familiar with Ann Althouse?

    I’m not Rollo, but she’s an aging boomer(born 1951) and out of touch with Red Pill reality. It’ not just her. Look, the whole cuckservative establishment is back in Blue Pill kindergarten at best.
    At worst…pedestalizing, clueles…

  22. Gah. There goes the thread again, this time it’s sticky-sweet Sincerness. What next, Green Day?
    It’s like cotton candy stuck to the comments.

    What to do? What to do? Must clear palate. Now. Must have sanity. Now. GImme a beat, and a pretty girl. Yes. Pretty girl. Beat. “Somebody to love?”. Got it. Yes. Yes!

    Must have….must have…must have!

    Boogie pimps. Boogie Pimps. Boogie PIMPS

    BOOGIE PIMPS, NOW!

    Green light, GO!

  23. When confronted with gender bias against men, feminists will often claim that it is not possible for men to be victims (because we are so awesome, ha).

    Libertarian feminists, who actually take equality and fairness seriously, have talked about giving men the “right to choose.” As things stand, if your condom breaks, and it is a one night stand, you are stuck paying the ‘daddy tax’ for 18+ years. If a man dare complain about this situation, he is told that he should have kept it in his pants until marriage (along with “man-up” and “think about the child,” etc.). Basically, the same shaming tactics used with women once upon a time.

    So we could start with just giving men the Right to Choose. Maybe we could also look into how many states force men to pay child support, even when he or she is the child of infidelity. And then how many men are imprisoned for not paying child support… arguably men’s “glass floor” is a lot more onerous than women’s “glass ceiling.”

  24. “Generally speaking, I felt LESS anger (as well as irritability, depression, and anxiety) after raising my T level dramatically.”

    This is my experience as well. In fact, “irritability” is considered one of the symptoms of low testosterone. As I guy with low T, I felt generally anxious/neurotic and trying to assert myself often came across as bitchy. With more testosterone, I am assertive in a pleasant sort of way. Frame also comes more naturally… all the sort of stuff covered in RM. My TRT doc says that he is regularly told that he has saved a guy’s marriage, which is not at all surprising.

    So yes, testosterone does allow you to be more assertive, but not in the stereotypical “aggressive male asshole” sort of way. Really, I am much more pleasant and personable with lots of testosterone. The fact that Testosterone has been associated with only negative personality traits is just more proof of the “toxic masculinity” gender stereotype.

    I was thinking of doing a Low Testosterone post on the RP Reddit sometime. There seem to be a number of young guys on there who are in the “don’t get it and never will” category. It is actually possible to have low testosterone when you are young (I include myself in that) and I imagine that may describe some of them.

  25. @ Boxcar

    Can confirm that having high T levels makes me calmer and a better person to be around.

    Calm but more assertive in a non aggressive way

    However I did experiment stacking it with trenbolone for gym gains but had to stop after about 4 weeks it turned me into an aggressive short tempered sex obsessed animal.

    My gf of the time loved it until we went on holiday ( we didn’t live together) saw her 1-2 times a week. She lasted till about day 5 until she had a mini breakdown and called me sex pest ( she was sore) however the hotel maids and reception staff were all very friendly IOI’s all over the place and the gf knew it so she soldiered on to keep me happy!

  26. I was thinking of doing a Low Testosterone post on the RP Reddit sometime. There seem to be a number of young guys on there who are in the “don’t get it and never will” category. It is actually possible to have low testosterone when you are young (I include myself in that) and I imagine that may describe some of them.

    Yes. I definitely had symptoms of low T even as a teenager – and unfortunately, I only understand this now, in retrospect. What also angers me, in retrospect, is that NONE of my physicians for decades noticed this or ever checked my T levels. I had to figure it out for myself and go to a specialist.

    There are low T threads on RP from time to time, for example

  27. I have a pet theory that women are *not* generally more empathetic than men, but perhaps more sympathetic.

    Being sympathetic — sensitivity to emotions in others — is a cornerstone of nurturing. It also enables a more social/communicative disposition. These are generally regarded as feminine.

    Empathy on the other hand, seems at direct odds with solipsism and its ‘my reality is the only one’ view of the world. I think many men, when they see another struggling with something that they themselves struggled against, can identify and again ‘feel’ back to the time when it was them in the same place. This stirs up in a man a different sort of approach when dealing with this other person than if the man only had sympathy. Maybe this is also related to the ‘mentor’ posts/comments previously discussed on this site.

    As a child and young(er) man, my own sense of empathy could be debilitating in that I was self-steered into choices that weren’t in my best interest only because I wanted to spare someone else’s feelings. Coupled with a BP upbringing, this made me an easy mark for other to take advantage. It’s a big hole to climb out of but I’m nearly there.

    Now it’s all about me. And while I’m not the complete package yet, it just feelz better lol

  28. “As such, we’re also meant to presume these ‘angry men’ have a potential for violence or at best self-loathing.”

    All non-conformist ideas, any man who doesn’t “Just get it” or is into non-FI endorsed self improvement must be shamed, hated, driven to the margins, so fragile is the FI fiction, it doesn’t sell itself.

    Saul Alinsky: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.“ Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

    “Anger bias and attribution to men is an easy follow for a social order predicated on empowering and protecting the feminine.”

    I’ve been called scary, woman hater more than a few times OTJ…just for maintaining frame, thoughtfully, not reflecting BP, orbiter behavior. It’s incomprehensible to most men, women, esp. Strong Independent Women, that a man wouldn’t want to reflect women’s fascination with themselves.

    There are actual angry people here, but they’re BP angry, do not threaten the FI, thus are given wide leeway among the women. One threatened to “Shoot me in the head…ha-ha.” That was poo-pooed. I, ignoring frivolous female complaining? I’m a hater.

    “Anger is a useful emotion for fem-centrism.” “One biological difference equalism is happy to promote is the notion that men are biologically predisposed to anger, aggression and violence.” “Largely, as a man, you will always be perceived as potentially angrier than a woman.”

    Ironic that I desired to stop the marital violence (a.k.a. my wife hitting me). Mission accomplished. I wasn’t fleeing my marriage, but the FI binding my hands, daring me to defend, thus condemning myself. Now I contend with strangling, assaults, punking, haranguing, being tackled from WK’s, BPed guys. Who’d of predicted that? Oh right, TRM.

    “women’s evolved neurological capacity for communication makes them more intuitive and sensitive to verbal and nonverbal sub-communication”

    Intuitive, sensitive communication is quite powerful…when speaking to women. Thus, inter-female communication is wrought with tacit cattiness, surface level niceties. I contend that communication capacity is generally unproductive as erred assumptions are made. Example: Women routinely undervalue another woman’s compliment, as her subcom habit injects doubt.

    Wikipedia Error Management Theory: “evolved mind-reading agencies will be biased to produce more of one type of inferential error than another.”

    Communication is helpful in so far that the content is valuable, understood. Elaborate, overt female verbal content is inchoate, content facile. Lipstick on a pig…

    @ Not born this morning

    ‘Women have no problem with a man’s anger if it is directed toward another man who threatens her security.”

    a.k.a. You two fight over me and to the victor go the spoils!

    She has no idea how to protect her security…especially in a LTR with a low grade Alpha. She’ll ride or die, literally. Dalrock’s titanic post dealt with women not wanting to be separated from their men.

  29. Oh… An anger thread…

    “Anger is an energy… Anger is an energy… Anger is an energy… Anger is an energy… “ – Johnny Rotten Lydon

    Use it…

  30. goddammit Rollo, I thought of that empathy/sympathy stuff long ago all by myself. Not nice to steal my idea, invent a time machine, and go back a number of years to write about it.

    I thought I’d read all your stuff but I honestly don’t remember that link at all. It’s a good one. I would expand your statement “…women fundamentally lack the capacity to empathize with the male experience…” to be that they lack empathy for *anyone* else’s experience, not just male’s.

    Topic idea: men are actually more empathetic

  31. Great article Rollo.

    Thanks for ripping the final scabs off.. it was time, and now only the scars will remain.

    These conventions you write about here are exactly the primary weapon used by the divorce rape machine against men.

    In short, 99% of people who have ever known me would call me a good guy. And an above average gentleman. A happy person. Someone who cares.. gives a damn. A consistent person. A good father, and husband. They would all also tell you I can be wild, fun, tough, ornery, a little self-destructive and didactic.. but they would vouch for my character.

    Through the year long ordeal of my divorce battle, I was very efficiently painted a physically abusive, neglectful, drug-addicted, alcoholic, violent, rapist. Good stuff, eh?

    Since there is zero penalty for hurtling these false or exaggerated accusations at me.. This was the guillotine they hung over my head, to make me deal (translation, capitulate), under threat of going to trial and having to prove my innocence. The only effective way of doing so, to drag all the people who knew us into the court room, so they can get fully involved in this disgusting display.

    No thanks, I caved.

    Very effective and efficient stuff.

    Anger Bias FTL

  32. @Rollo

    Re “men inferior at communication” link

    The whole “no useful information” is such a stupid thing to say in genetics. “No known purpose” is much less likely to be shown to be stupid later. 2003 is ancient in genetics because knowledge is added so rapidly. There is so much yet to be discovered in genetics!

  33. Through the year long ordeal of my divorce battle, I was very efficiently painted a physically abusive, neglectful, drug-addicted, alcoholic, violent, rapist. Good stuff, eh?

    Yep. I think what most people don’t realize is that a good (heck even a decent experienced) lawyer can make almost anyone you know look like a low-life, addicted, angry, unreliable lying piece of pond scum. It’s not hard to do, because almost everyone has incidents here or there which, when you strip them from context and line them all up to one another, can easily paint a picture that is very uncomplimentary. Of course, the context is that normally these incidents make up for ~5% or less of a person’s total personality and behavior, but in a legal proceeding all you need to do is line up the small amount (taken in total context) of bad stuff/incidents next to one another in a neat row and you’ve successfully painted the person as a quasi-psychopath.

    It’s a problem inherent in a gladiatorial legal system, really.

  34. Consider the unwritten social rule that an angry man’s opinion is invalid and irrational, where a pissed woman’s opinion is vital and inherently truthful — it must be heard and obeyed. See, for example, the Woman’s March(es).

  35. I would expand your statement “…women fundamentally lack the capacity to empathize with the male experience…” to be that they lack empathy for *anyone* else’s experience, not just male’s.

    That’s possible, given the need to protect herself and her young as the prime directive.

    I think, though, that whether or not it is based in empathy, that the in-group bias women have is quite real, and quite strong. I remember waiting in a car at an intersection with some work colleagues a few years ago, and there was a homeless person there panhandling. One of the women in the car noted that she would give money if the homeless person were a woman. This went without comment, and was said in a matter of fact way as if she were simply remarking that the sky were blue. I think this is reflexive in women, and it “just makes sense” to them, whether it is based in empathy or something else, there is a very strong bias in women in favor of each other against *external* threats (i.e., from men or from nature/circumstances, rather than from other women) that does not have its basis in feminism.

  36. @nova

    Exactly right.. and she did have about 10 combined minutes of material to use against me. 10 minutes out of 20 years.

    10 minutes of my angry side on display, even though completely provoked by her, was all she needed.

  37. Nova – yes, I’m sure there is some biological reason that women are less inclined to empathy but more to sympathy. The point that I was trying to make — but after a re-read, didn’t do very well — was to show how my own un-tempered empathy worked against my best interests. It seems quite possible that the woman’s need for self-protection would also be hamstrung by excessive empathy. So for the sake of survival of her and hers, empathy should be minimized.

    Better to know someone is suffering but not feel it (sympathy) than to *feel* the suffering and have it adversely color your subsequent choices. What fascinates me is that it sounds so cold and calculating and therefore considered ‘bad’ which means it must be a masculine thing… but we’re discussing women’s behavior!!! LOL

  38. Exactly right.. and she did have about 10 combined minutes of material to use against me. 10 minutes out of 20 years.

    10 minutes of my angry side on display, even though completely provoked by her, was all she needed.

    @TuffLuv — Yep, it’s a stupid and terrible system, unfortunately.

    What fascinates me is that it sounds so cold and calculating and therefore considered ‘bad’ which means it must be a masculine thing… but we’re discussing women’s behavior!!! LOL

    @dr zipper — Yep, women are tough mentally, really. They aren’t physically strong compared to us but they are mentally pretty strong in certain situations which can surprise us. One of them is the empathy issue you are looking at. Another one that directly impacts us is how quickly and easily women detach (see Rollo’s “War Brides” article on this) as compared to us. There are aspects of their psyches that are quite nimble, tough and well-adapted to self-preservation. Again, it makes sense that the physically weaker sex would develop these traits, but often men overlook them because they’re the physically weaker sex. Women play along with that deception exceptionally well, which adds to these strengths and magnifies them.

  39. @TuffLuv

    Allow me to pick at that scab…

    Were the scandalous allegations hearsay, written, video, witnesses?

    Enough people have seen me drunk to bury my reputation. That’d be enough to propagate a salacious monster out of me. No doubt.

    I’ve concluded that I’d rather do what I want now and not try to hide my trail. Ultimately, the divorce diversifies my portfolio. Trashing my rep in a divorce is analogous to a boss rapping some tenuous dissatisfaction at me, asking me to DEER, then firing me anyways.

    At least I’m free to do this ZFG. Hence Mrs. Eh knows I comment here. If it fell apart, no surprises, no delusions.

  40. @Nova – you’re making sense, as usual

    Some of the mentally toughest people I’ve ever known are women (looking at you, Granny).

  41. “it sounds so cold and calculating”

    Spoken as only a playa would…

    “Now, women. They’re the most jealous and callous human beings. Extremely jealous. Heck, they’re even jealous of other women. Jealous of what other women have accomplished. Jealous of the men the other women are with. Even jealous of the handbags their friends carry!”

    “They have no loyalty to anyone but themselves. They do what their feelings tell them to do. If they find the guy sexy, they’ll fuck him. It’s that simple. Regardless if they have a boyfriend, husband, or anyone else. The word loyalty isn’t part of their dictionary.”

    “I have met many guys like him before. “Hardened players,” as I liked the call them. Guys who’ve approached hundreds or even thousands of women in all kinds of situations. Guys who’ve been rejected by tons of women. Probably rejected more than they needed to be rejected. Guys who chased pussy like it was their last day on the planet. Guys who were deep, deep in the “game.” Not seduction—game. Not the art—technique. They weren’t smooth casanovas; they more resembled cold and calculated players than smooth casanovas.”

    “No such thing as seduction,” he replied. “It’s all about manipulation. Either you manipulate her or she manipulates you. It’s a race to the finish,” he answered.

    https://mavericktraveler.com/conversation-cold-calculating-manipulative-seducer/

  42. Rollo
    My intent in this essay isn’t to say men aren’t as angry as their evolutionary nature makes them. The point is that a feminine-primary social order readily makes this nature a useful tool in dismissing what would otherwise be valid, but uncomfortable Red Pill truth. This anger bias mechanism is a tool for message control.

    “Angry man” as an outgrouping tool works very, very well. Even in so-called “patriarchal” situations it works; the churchgoing beta who get ticked at his wife’s public contempt of him will suddenly be isolated by White Knights urging him to calm down, while the conservative feminists will fllutter around the woman to assure her she’s part of the herd.

    There’s some projection involved as well. Women are prone to flare up in quick anger and just spout crap that they mean at that moment but will disavow moments later. Because words are tools to women but not the same tools they are to men. So when a man ponders things, thinks long thoughts, and comes to a conclusion that is ugly to him, leading to anger – the natural solipsistic female response is ‘Oh, you’re just angry! We won’t take you seriously!”. Maybe it’s a favor.

    Screen Gone with the Wind sometime with women, see how they react to the big ending scene where Rhett leaves, saying “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn!”. 99% of them will claim “He’ll be back”, the men know better. Men have lines they won’t be pushed over. Women generally do not.

    Anger can represent a loss of control. (Hence the power of a jerkboy smirk) Claiming that a man is “out of control” when he tells a truth about women is one way to dismiss that claim rather than deal with it or acknowledge it. Control of men is one of the prime directives of the FI, and individual women, because that gives them access to the sperm and resources their biological mission requires.

  43. Enough people have seen me drunk to bury my reputation. That’d be enough to propagate a salacious monster out of me. No doubt.

    @Eh —

    You would very easily be made out to be an alcoholic. That’s silly, of course, but it’s how these things work. String together enough incidences of people seeing you drunk, and voila, clearly an alcoholic. The court could (and I’ve seen and heard of such things) do things like order you to mandatory alcohol counseling for a year or more as a condition for being permitted to see your kids and nice things like that.

  44. RP Man debates FI Girl

    RP Man: Women ride the Cock Carousel until Epiphany over BB.

    She: You can’t get sex. You’re a loser.

    RP Man: Veteran pony on the CC here, speaking from experience. Then women get a loser to commit to a LTR.

    She: You’re angry and misogynistic.

    RP Man: Lol, I love women. Then women cheat on the loser who is sexually unattractive to them. At the very least, women diminish their sexual availability to their partners over the years, according to sexual surveys of married people by age group.

    That’s how I would do it.

  45. “That’s silly, of course, but it’s how these things work. ”

    Hence, and I quote my nephew, “Sometimes you just gotta say “Fuck it.”” and live my life as I well as I can.

    My divorced friend was court mandated to psychological counseling. He didn’t attend and it was worth skipping. It was a fool’s game to play along with that system, the betaizing system that will reinforce a man’s unstable character to the community if he resists OR submits.

    Wasn’t a need to fight the system, rather just Irish revolution. Not go, lose privileges, the counseling wan’t a contemptible order, thus he moved on. His kids turned out to be a sexually abandoned daughter (she hit on me) and juvenile delinquent son, last I saw them.

    I seriously doubt his allowable visitation would have helped his kids, but who knows? Well, probably someone here.

  46. I seriously doubt his allowable visitation would have helped his kids, but who knows? Well, probably someone here.

    It’s true, you don’t know, every situation is different. Rough, though, not seeing your kids.

  47. @Eh

    I could spend some time here with a long list of things I could have done to change the actual divorce situation in my favor.. but ultimately they are all iffy.. you just don’t know (at least here where I live) which of the 13 judges you’ll get, more than 50% of them always siding with the woman. Pretty bad odds in any case. So, I do subscribe to your M.O. It’s far too much to worry about and you should live your life your way.

    She baited me and provoked me, then video’d me discreetly. The funny thing is this footage was actually during our divorce.. That is, during our amicable settlement we had going initially, which we completed, filed, and were divorced. It was 25 days later she appealed that, won, and dragged me through the whole year long ordeal. This video footage was premeditated material for her to use to show I coerced her into the settlement, and that I am an abusive asshole. Even though the spat had nothing to do whatsoever with the settlement. I had taken her to a doc’s appointment, and she blatantly berrated me in front of several doctors. When I got her outside, I maintained my cool, but later on the car ride home, she then gas-lighted the whole situ as if I was the jerk, and I lost it. I chewed her ass out all the way home, of course totally amplified by my frustration at the whole affair-divorce thing.. I was still nailing her daily at this point, which put me in a situation where I still partially trusted her, in a she’s-gonna-do-the-right-thing wrt to the divorce.

    However, one piece of advice I could offer, is that anything you can think of that she might throw at you (look at my list above cuz that’s the gambit), you should set yourself up with sufficient evidence of her hypocrisy. A video of her tantrums, her being overly tipsy on wine, her smoking a little pot, her being emotionally abusive to the kids, even her depraved sexuality can certainly help you if she throws a rape accusation at you.. These things can’t hurt, and most guys have what I had, zero. I had ample opportunities over the years to get some of that secured.. she regularly had tantrums, and even punched me, and threw shit at me a time or two. Another thing she did in the divorce is accuse me of “defrauding the estate”, because I had a private bank account where I would occasionally put money for things like family vacations, the more expensive gifts I bought her, smh… and yes, some personal things. This was straight outta my paycheck.. Over 5 years it amounted to about $3K.. she was accusing me of $25K, and unlike a true fraud case, the burden of proof is on the accused in family court, so it was on me to account for what each dollar was spent on. Well if you’re as bad with receipts as I am, that’s pretty much impossible.

    That one is really important. Find away to stash your ‘bug out’ cash, but do it very carefully. And certainly collect all bank statements that show any exhorbitant spending she does, and put them in your warchest.

    Guys, it is very very hard to do these things with your wife when you’re living under the illusion of mutual trust, and death do us part mentality. Just tell yourself it is righteous and hope you never have to use it.

    Understand, I could have possibly won this thing on ALL counts, made her look like the cunt she is. But just the ominous threat of an unknown judge listening to that stupid tape, alone, was almost enough to make me fold right then and there. Instead, I made the ill-informed decision to fight on, which basically cost me another $30K in lawyer fees for nothing, because I eventually folded anyway.

    Also note, that just her introducing these accusations, evidence notwithstanding, complicates the entire process to the point that just for me to have made it to the trial so I could stand there and “defend my good name” would have wiped me/us out completely, because of the added complexity.

    This is why my advice remains.. take the 50% you’re supposed to give up, call it 65%, give it up, and GTFO.

    Unless of course you did your prepwork and are ready to flip the script.

  48. “Hence, and I quote my nephew, “Sometimes you just gotta say “Fuck it.”” “

    ‘What the fuck gives you freedom. Freedom brings opportunity. Opportunity makes your future… If you can’t say it, you can’t do it.”

  49. It was a fool’s game to play along with that system, the betaizing system that will reinforce a man’s unstable character to the community if he resists OR submits.

    “but it’s not quite Ivy League now is it.”

  50. It was a fool’s game to play along with that system, the betaizing system that will reinforce a man’s unstable character to the community if he resists OR submits.

    I also have experience with this. At the behest of my own (3rd) scumbag lawyer, I started up “Parent Coordinator” meetings with my ex and some Psychiatrist at $300/hr (costs split). This was “on agreement of our lawyers” because we were deemed “high conflict”.

    At first, it seemed ok.. the psych was on my side, willing to listen to my grievances, putting her in check, etc.. This was supposed to be about how we were going to manage our 3 children, but ended up being more of a pissing contest. Then the new fiance was invited in, and the psych actually demanded he be present at all meetings going forward because “he keeps her calm”.

    Then I learned the real game. On about our 5th meeting, the psych turned on me. Started accusing me of alienating our older sons from their mother. Yes they had witnessed some ugliness, yes they don’t like their mom much, but she straight up blamed me. That was it. I could see that what the pro was trying to do was balance things out. It just wasn’t fair that my ex is an idiot and I’m not. So, she had to level it. Well, our battle was ongoing, and I’ll be damned if I’m going to let the ex now bring in expert testimony against me on such an egregious offense.

    I told them both to go fuck themselves that day, and never returned. I announced that I would be parallel-parenting, not joint-parenting (meaning I will decide whatever the fuck I want for my kids when they’re with me, and she can do the same), and they could both suck my dick.

    Walked out and realized that yes, this is part of the system that puts us men into a double bind. I was cooperating, trying to build brownie point for the judge, but all I was really doing was giving her more cannon fodder against me.

    Again… GTFO.

  51. Novaseeker: “the in-group bias women have is quite real, and quite strong… I think this is reflexive in women, and it “just makes sense” to them, whether it is based in empathy or something else, there is a very strong bias in women in favor of each other”

    TuffLuv: “I could see that what the pro was trying to do was balance things out. It just wasn’t fair that my ex is an idiot and I’m not. So, she had to level it.”

  52. Guys, it is very very hard to do these things with your wife when you’re living under the illusion of mutual trust

    Always test whether your wife is trustworthy. Be on the alert for small betrayals…they signal big betrayals either coming or ongoing. If your supposed woman undermines you in your social circle, then she will cheat on you soon or is cheating on you.

  53. I should add that if you’re banging her, then your emotional guard will be down and actually working against you, so that it may cause you.to miss signs of betrayal. Your own emotions can betray you and a clever woman will use your emotions against you. Don’t live in your emotions and listen for that small voice that says, “Something isn’t right.”

  54. “Consider the unwritten social rule that an angry man’s opinion is invalid and irrational, where a pissed woman’s opinion is vital and inherently truthful — it must be heard and obeyed. See, for example, the Woman’s March(es).”

    Funny, didn’t quite seem that way on November 9th last year.

    Oh right, women talk, men do…As you were.

  55. “Something isn’t right.”

    Always trust but verify. Always

    Since RP, its been insanely easy to question the motives of women, any woman. There is no longer any such thing as “benefit of the doubt” or “motivated skepticism” for things that are suspicious, there is only watch carefully and don’t tip your hand.

  56. @ Rollo Tomassi

    Whether Red Pill men are angry or not is irrelevant. As Stefan Molyneux would say, it’s not an argument. It’s a distraction.

    It also begs the question: What are they angry about?

    RP men shouldn’t take the bait when accused of being angry and try to appeal to their critic’s sense of justice or reasoning. They shouldn’t waste their time, because you don’t argue with the enemy. Debate is a luxury between neutral or friendly parties with explicitly mutual or similar goals.

  57. Funny, didn’t quite seem that way on November 9th last year.

    Well, but as it was happening and for the next several months what happened that day was dismissed as “angry white guys being irrational, acting out on their anger” and so on. Textbook case, really.

  58. This anger bias mechanism is a tool for message control.

    This is in fact being used in online communities. The representative sample of TRP in many online circles I dabble in is 99% MGTOW (specifically the type ranting on YouTube while permanently trapped in the Anger phase) with 1% being MRAs. There is no mention of the positive, self-improving, enjoyable masculinity that has lead men like myself to become almost universally loved and enjoyed by the groups they join after learning the truth.

    I am unashamedly masculine, outgoing, gregarious, controversial, well-liked, confident, and happy in my interactions with others these days. I still fight my own demons behind the scenes here and there, but those demons no longer define me. However, I am not what represents TRP to most people. That is somewhat by our own design though. “Demonstrate, do not explicate”

    I do not speak widely and openly about what brought me to where I am. Only on occasion and in private to men I think would be open to and need my counsel. I’ve given copies of Rollo’s books to probably 4 or 5 men at this point, and pieces of Red Pill advice to only a few more than that. I am not seen as a representative of TRP, only as an example of a naturally awesome guy. After all, you don’t talk about fight club right?

    The perception of Red Pill men as angry will be almost impossible to overcome, as the rules basically require our silence to reap the benefits while our opponents may be as vocal as the like. It will be a long road to fix how men as a whole are seen.

  59. The best advice ever from this forum is to treat women as merely playthings. It’s the essence of the teachings of RP philosophy in my opinion. Don’t listen to what they say, but watch closely what they do. Never get sucked in by their manipulative bullshit. Don’t ever get married, let alone have kids in this day and age. The ship is sinking big time, with rampant uber-feminism coupled with climate change and corrupt corporate capitalism, things aren’t looking good for ole humanity. But nevermind, never be a victim & build your cave, do what you want, buy a motorbike & learn to ride, learn new skills and how to use tools etc, make music for fun, enjoy hanging with your bros, always bros before hoes, keep fit and most importantly, keep your financial independence. No pussy is worth losing that for! The better looking the bitch, the more it will cost you in the long run.

    My current lover knows i consider her as my plaything as i often tease her about it. Recently in bed she got upset about something i said, got up crying, left the room (i didn’t respond at all to her tears like i would have pre-RP), then finally came back in all misty eyed (knowing i wasn’t going to indulge her little tanty), so i just laughed and showed her my guns & like a flash she was all smiles and all over me like a rash, “Daddy this” & “Daddy that…” Don’t get angry at them for they are merely children. You can’t have a rational discussion with a child so why would you expect to be able to have one with a woman? Use your anger to make yourself a better person, and always, always, maintain frame, for he who loses his cool will always lose…

    Happy playing, gents!

  60. that self-described ‘Red Pill’ men are inherently angry men.

    I’ve heard that often from the lame-stream media and other libtards – but it simply isn’t true. To recognize the weaknesses of a system requires the ability to “SEE” reality. Understanding the nature of women doesn’t make a man angry – it gives him power over things. I’ve used my understanding of women for the last 35+ years after coming to understanding the nature of the beast when in grad-school.

    The key was to stop listening to the non-sense, and look at what actions and behaviors are rewarded, and then use that to your advantage. I love women – I enjoy them as often as possible. But I NEVER grant them control over my life, or depend on them other than to do what I want this weekend – and if one won’t, I have backups. That was why I stopped with the “one-itis” and started keeping a group of three women to satisfy my needs – they are my core, others come and go for a night or a weekend, but those three are my foundation. But they are constantly changing – some of them last several years, others only a few months. The door is always open for them to leave, and there are others waiting in the wings that I am grooming all the time.

    That way my needs are ALWAYS met, and as such with your needs met you can start to do other things for fun. The starving man doesn’t have options – having several women to see to all of your sexual and emotional needs, means that you are free to enjoy. That doesn’t make for an “angry” man – quite the contrary – it makes for a contented happy man. I think that is why the libtards, media, and feminists attack RP men all the time – they hate for any men to be happy and content as they have zero control over such men.

    To a certain extent, I see the election of Trump to be the embodiment of the RP man – he (Trump) sees things as they are, and calls it out as he sees it. That is why the liberals are all in melt-down – their little false narrative doesn’t work, and the people that put him in office don’t buy their non-sense. To a certain extent I see what is going on today as the embodiment of what was seen on the night of the election – their little false world collapsed in a big way and they couldn’t lie to themselves. Now they are back – building up their fiction to themselves, and saying that reality isn’t real… It was someone else’s fault, and wasn’t a reaction to failed ideas and policies.

    It would be funny if it wasn’t sad… That is what the RP man has most of – sadness that women have fallen so far. But they are still useful – but only for sex, and to enjoy. For everything else there is something rotten at the core. That’s fine – you can use that rotten-ness to your advantage to have young women, married women, pretty much any of them. The RP man may wish that it wasn’t so easy to nail the hot-wife of another man, but it is. He’s not angry about it – he enjoys her just like he enjoys all women, he just never gives her power over him. THAT is why they try to say that is “anger” – it isn’t. Understanding a snake will bite you doesn’t mean you don’t like playing with them any less – it’s part of the fun and excitement, But it’s the man that doesn’t see a snake for what it is, that will die from the venom. The wise man never gets bit – much to the frustration of the snake…

    Now women will say that I’m angry for the “snake” comparison – I’m not. I just recognize that women have power to destroy you if you don’t understand their nature.

  61. “Anger attribution to physical and gender cues is an “adaptive rationality”. In other words, it’s probably better to err on the side of caution and misattribute anger to an individual displaying even marginal cues of a potential for aggression (for instance, they hold implements or tools that could cause physical harm) than to miss that cue and wind up dead or injured.”

  62. Real empathy in a woman would make it very difficult for her to branch swing or be a War Bride.
    That would make propagation of her genes less likely. It’s not a survival feature.
    Therefore women cannot have empathy towards men. It’s not in their genes.

    Not feature, not bug, not good, not bad – just is. Blaximus already explained this from a different angle in detail.

  63. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. A Star Wars quote. Note the suffering is not your own.
    My fear is meeting a woman with the same psychological traits as my older sister. It’s an irrational fear I pay little heed to, as such a woman would compel anyone to leave her.
    Here’s a woman so nefarious, that if you were given a gun with a single bullet and shown a room with her and Hitler in it. Then told you could shoot one of them.
    You would place him in front of her, shoot him and pray the bullet went through. Some of you reading that will think I’ve gone too far. But believe me, it doesn’t matter how good you think you are, she can bring it out in you.

    I would to take this moment to acknowledge the strong posts from Walawala mar 29 5:24 and Stuffinbox mar 29 7:24.

  64. “RP men shouldn’t take the bait when accused of being angry and try to appeal to their critic’s sense of justice or reasoning. They shouldn’t waste their time, because you don’t argue with the enemy. Debate is a luxury between neutral or friendly parties with explicitly mutual or similar goals.”

    I used to get pulled into this shit all the time. My personality type leans heavily towards being a debater, though you wouldn’t know it from my infrequent posts here. I would be accused by a woman of being angry and that it’s unhealthy, toxic and a sign I’ve got issues blah blah blah.

    After slowly digesting the RP, I still get a lot of indigestion because of my blue pill thinking. Thankfully I’ve come to realize when my anger is appropriate and less and less I allow a woman or blue pill guy to shame me for it. Even more importantly, I’ve realized how important it is not to engage in these type of discussions or arguments. Allowing yourself to be pulled into any discussion with a woman about anger is akin to talking about Fight Club. Don’t do it.

  65. Our first meeting with that Psych/Coordinator.. In our laying the ground work to get her up to speed, my ex popped off one of her usual gas-lighted kidney punches.. I immediately told her to shut the fuck up, and if she’s going to be a cunt, I’m leaving. This was not a visceral thing though.. I did it intentionally, because I wanted to try something.

    I think it was Shari Schreiber’s site that Rollo had ref’d about BPD, where I read, Anger is a valid emotion. Perfectly valid.

    Knowing that this psych thing was probably a bunch of bullshit, I actually planned to drop this on the pro, because I knew very well my ex would try to provoke me in there.

    As soon as the pro said, Mr. Luv! we must be cordial here! I said, ” I will not be cordial to a lying cunt who tries to assassinate my character with lies!” .. “Are you telling me I shouldn’t be angry when this bitch does that? Are you telling me anger is not a valid emotion?”

    She heard those words, and retreated fully.. Yes, Mr. Luv, anger is definitely a valid emotion.

    Thanks again, Rollo.

  66. The friend I’m presently counseling is also in ‘marriage therapy’. First thing I ask, “is it a man or woman therapist?” He says woman. I say, you’re fucked; start planning your exit now.

    He agrees, but still has that BP hope he’s not wasting his money (she’s a SAHM) and they’ll be able to negotiate something. When we invest ourselves in something we’ve accepted is supposed to be effective we’ll hold on to hope that it will because there’s a part of us (especially men) that doesn’t like to think we are able to be conned. This is a very well studied psych phenomenon. We convince ourselves that we ‘got something out of’ an experience regardless of it being a provably bad investment.

    I gave him a list of things to keep in his head as he was going to these counseling sessions, but I also told him the truth that marriage counseling is always ‘last stop before toll’ and that he needs to be careful now because his wife will eagerly use this therapist’s testimony to destroy his character. That’s the profit model for therapists in divorce proceedings. They’re getting paid when you’re coming and going.

    I told him she will turn into someone he never thought she could become and most of it will be at the prodding of their therapist and her attorney (who he’ll also be paying). It’s in all of their best interests that they create a monster of him. The male anger bias I write about here will be the primary basis for his character assassination.

    Anything even remotely positively masculine or Alpha is still a ‘man being a man’ and this can always be reinterpreted as potentially aggressive or violent. In a feminine-primary social order where feminized men and women are taught that men are inherently evil and prone to anger and violence (the “culture” of masculinity) there’s an army of women and White Knights who want nothing more than to stick it to the ‘man’ symbolically. And when they draw a paycheck from doing so they’re all the more ready. Add to this that they feel a sense of moral justification in “making the world a better place” by burning him in an effigy of all men and you get to where we are now.

    I know how his story is going to end. I’m doing what I can to give him fair warning – it’d be better for him to completely pull up stakes and remove himself from the situation than stick around and ‘try to make it work’ because the longer he lingers the more ammunition she and the therapist get. I think this is also the profit model; keep the Blue Pill chump husband around the house for as long as it takes to build him up as a stereotypical man and then escalate the most marginal conflict as a ‘typical’ domestic violence incident and he’s gone.

  67. The family alpha
    http://wp.me/p6OxfZ-dQ
    “Final Reminder: The rules of Men of March:

    You will not masturbate, edge, or touch your dick for pleasure during the entire month. You can have sex, but not with yourself.
    You will not watch porn, sexy gifs, look at provocative photos or anything of the sort as this will lead to you breaking rule one.
    You will do 100 push-ups every day. Don’t give the ‘time’ excuse, or any excuse as I don’t give a fuck, just do them. Break it up however you have to, but before you sleep at night, 100 must be done; chest day or not.
    You must start reading a book. Even if it’s just a few pages a day at first you must be reading a book. I will be reading New World Ronin by Victor Pride this month. You don’t have to finish the book in the month, just actively read a few pages every day to build the habit. With that said, my goal is to finish the book this month.
    You have to start giving genuine answers to people. If someone asks if you’re busy, don’t say “No” when you are. You have to stop avoiding conflict at the expense of your true self. If your wife asks a question, give an answer, “I don’t know/care” is not an answer a leader gives to his crew. Start knowing, start caring, and start telling the world your true opinion.
    If you have a vice, remove it. You have to be honest with yourself; if you’re overweight and drinking to numb or are smoking pot and being unproductive, that shit has to go. This isn’t a ‘dry’ challenge, if alcohol or pot isn’t a problem good to go. If it’s more than that, leave it be for the month.
    Every day there will be a challenge, you must complete it.”

  68. Amplifying our sensei’s advice to his Mr. BB friend:

    The cue that therapy-wise things are going down the shitter (regardless of therapist gender) is to see if Dr.TheRapist* is focusing on Mr. BB as the source of all problems. Getting him to open up with his emotions and experiences in response to the wife’s problem statements. What is HE going to do to change? How is HE going to work on himself? Anything HE would like to get out in the open to discuss, to resolve? Make his masculinity less toxic?

    A lot of these therapists come out of old-school Attachment Psychology – therapy based on close personal bonding – most effective for parent/child therapy and such. Not so readily adaptable to therapy for adult spouses, but that’s how they roll. Which is the parent, which is the child? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

    All these are signs he’s being set up for a report to the court, or further expert solo coaching to the wife for later use, explicating his incorrigible and irreparable horribleness. As the movie title says, GET OUT!

    That said, long as he sticks with it, everything said to the therapist is privileged and confidential under the psychologist-patient privilege. Mr. BB can forbid the therapist’s testifying against him to the extent he has said anything in confidence. He should do so in absolute terms. He should NOT sign any waiver of the privilege or agree to it. He and his lawyer should be highly suspicious of any court-appointed professional who may be called upon to report back to the judge.

    The only exception to the privilege is if there’s a threat of personal bodily harm or threat of imminent violence to another (based on an infamous California case).

    *this misspelling is an old Benny Hill gag

  69. “The point is that a feminine-primary social order readily makes this nature a useful tool in dismissing what would otherwise be valid, but uncomfortable Red Pill truth. This anger bias mechanism is a tool for message control.”

    What I find interesting is that, from my own personal observations of men in both marriage and long-term relationships, is that this dismissal happens readily and frequently at the micro level in sexual relationships as well. It’s impossible for men not to notice the hiprocrisy.

    A man need not experience the trivialization of his anger from “the sisterhood” response in the media, in the corporate setting, or even while at a party with other couples.

    I think it now common for a wife or long-term girlfriend to assume a certain privilege or “authority” to express and direct her own anger, indignation and outrage rather freely and loudly – whenever she wishes – toward her male companion, without much consequence.

    But should her male companion ever lose his composure, raise his voice in anger toward here, then this is either considered “verbal abuse”, an uncalled for overreaction, or his complaint is simply trivialized, ridiculed or disqualified by her, much like she would belittle the tantrum of her own young child.

    Who has not witnessed wives scold their husbands in public at a restaurant or at a park like little children for his getting angry at her attitude or behavior? “Don’t you EVER raise your voice at me, mister!”.

    I realize this is all about a man’s frame in the relationship.
    I know that it is a weak man who tolerates this, while a wise man just ignores or nexts it.

    Indeed, it is all about control.

    But I still find it fascinating the confidence level with which so many women feel they can just scoff and ridicule the anger of men in relationships overtly, while unilaterally assuming the validity and overriding importance of their own anger whenever convenient for them.

    It’s seems like an added bolt-on power up of feminist triumphalism.

    Even among ourselves, we men are not supposed to show such angry emotions, at risk of verbal abuse or a humiliating well-deserved fucking beat down.
    Us dudes are to be these rational Vulcans walking around and doing shit, deleting emotion commands from our code. Because the thought is this: allowing someone else’s behavior to determine your feelings and emotional response is regarded as a sign of male weakness.
    Anger should be expressed infrequently, and when expressed, done decisively and with brevity and action.

    I think a lot of dudes recovering from blue pill conditioning struggle with this immensely, and are not sure what to do when their anger and frustration is openly minimized, trivialized or negated by their wife or LTR.

  70. “We convince ourselves that we ‘got something out of’ an experience regardless of it being a provably bad investment.”

    Regret aversion can explain an investor’s reluctance to sell losing investments to avoid confronting the fact that they have made poor decisions.

  71. Us dudes are to be these rational Vulcans walking around and doing shit, deleting emotion commands from our code. Because the thought is this: allowing someone else’s behavior to determine your feelings and emotional response is regarded as a sign of male weakness.

    I may write a post about this expectation of emotional control. In a feminine-primary social order men are expected to show exactly this emotional restraint out of fear for being considered a typical angry, bully for any marginal display of aggressiveness. Yet, men are simultaneously conditioned to be emotionally expressive, emotionally available, in order to be ‘fully actualized’ human beings. They’re taught that strength is weakness and weakness is strength, and that vulnerability and emotionalism makes them whole persons.

    Then the narrative changes again as per the needs of the Feminine Imperative. Men who are agreeable and show humility are punished with a removal of women’s sexual interest in them, while more conventionally masculine men, more Alpha, potentially more aggressive men who display outward signs of it – the ones they’re taught to repress – are more commonly rewarded with women’s sexual interests.

    So when you have a social structure based on designed duplicity and confusion of purpose is it any wonder we see a generation of frustrated Betas with a perceived potential for violence? We’re supposed to delete emotional commands, but also to be more emotionally available and in touch (whatever the fuck that means) with our emotions. What is really comes down to is men are socialized to be automatons whose emotional connection should only apply to those emotions that benefit and comply with the Feminine Imperative and repress the emotions that frighten or potentially threaten the Feminine Imperative.

  72. ” . . . there’s a part of us (especially men) that doesn’t like to think we are able to be conned.”

    And so conmen attempt to con other conmen for fun. It’s a form of professional sport. It’s played in two varieties; in the first the conman mark doesn’t know he’s being conned. The trick is take someone who should know better.

    “We convince ourselves that we ‘got something out of’ an experience . . .”

    In the second, the target knows he is being conned. The trick for the one running the con is to set it up in such a way that the target wants in to the game, because even if he loses – he gets to see how it was done.

    ” . . . a ‘typical’ domestic violence incident and . . .”

    . . . the family court itself gets a paycheck. Even without that they get a commission on child support. The system is utterly corrupt.

  73. @Rollo

    I’m always simultaneously amused and saddened to hear about emasculated BP Betas being told they’re still exhibiting “toxic masculinity”. They’re typically the least masculine men I know, yet the system continues to try to beat the last vestiges of anything remotely unfeminine out of them. Then they can’t figure out why these guys are so angry and depressed.

    It’s funny that they actually consider them masculine for purposes of exploitation in court, but it’s saddening to see what it does to them.

  74. @constrainedlocus

    Us dudes are to be these rational Vulcans walking around and doing shit, deleting emotion commands from our code. Because the thought is this: allowing someone else’s behavior to determine your feelings and emotional response is regarded as a sign of male weakness.

    This was actually my experience being parented by a single mother who was surrounded by extended family that consisted of divorced/widowed/cunty women that constantly henpecked any man that came around them. If emotions crossed my face during punishment of my minor wrongdoings (anger, defiance, frustration, hell even just a look of “the fuck did I do?” or quite literally bowing face to the floor deferentially to her authority; there was no winning once HER anger got rolling), I would receive a hard slap to a face and a demand that said emotions be wiped from my expression. Threats of calling the police were frequently used if I looked ready to strike back. My sister received no such treatment. Expression of all emotion was strictly forbidden for me, and excused for my sister.

    Men should exhibit Stoicism, however the motivation should come from within (“I wish to achieve this goal, and it requires not allowing emotion to rule me”) not from without (“If I don’t do this as instructed, I will be slapped by someone who threatens to call the cops on me if I so much as look at her wrong afterwards”). It always comes back to mental point of origin. When a woman angers me these days, I explain to her that I’m graciously allowing her to walk away from the encounter unscathed; she should thank me for the privilege and take her leave before I decide otherwise. There have been no further arguments or threats from any woman I have handled that way.

    They’re not dumb. They’re just children that need boundaries.

  75. @Rollo
    “I may write a post about this expectation of emotional control. In a feminine-primary social order men are expected to show exactly this emotional restraint out of fear for being considered a typical angry, bully for any marginal display of aggressiveness. Yet, men are simultaneously conditioned to be emotionally expressive, emotionally available, in order to be ‘fully actualized’ human beings. They’re taught that strength is weakness and weakness is strength, and that vulnerability and emotionalism makes them whole persons.”

    Come now Rollo, it’s not that bad, you can have any emotion you want as long as it’s the “right” emotion.

  76. Rollo
    We’re supposed to delete emotional commands, but also to be more emotionally available and in touch (whatever the fuck that means) with our emotions.

    In other words, we are supposed to live in a perpetual state of cognitive dissonance, believing two contradictory things are “true”; as emotionless machines able to emote on command in a “genuine” manner.

    We are supposed to be women in men’s bodies, ready to repeat the truth-of-the-moment, even as that truth mutates and changes. That’s the “counsel” men receive from “counselors”.

    Which sooner or later, winds up looking like this.

  77. Sun Wukong
    I’m always simultaneously amused and saddened to hear about emasculated BP Betas being told they’re still exhibiting “toxic masculinity”. They’re typically the least masculine men I know, yet the system continues to try to beat the last vestiges of anything remotely unfeminine out of them. Then they can’t figure out why these guys are so angry and depressed.

    The beatings will continue until morale improves

  78. In this latest discussion about masculine emotional control, Rollo is commenting about it in the context of Red Pill Awareness.

    I want to bring to everyone’s attention there is also a context of Game emotional control. Namely keeping Frame in Game. Frame is a concept that is super abstract and I find it terribly important and see improper frame battling going on all the time (otherwise known as butt-hurt in relationship game). It took me a long time to settle my Frame properly in Game. But it is high on the list of important things to master.

    (With apologies for all you that would like to read it in concrete terms, there is an excellent post that went up yesterday on MRP reddit in abstract terms.)

    I won’t post a link to the original post because it is very long and WordPress handles links by posting the whole thing.

    But here is one of the follow along comments and you can track back to the original article by clicking on the (whole) reddit comment below. The original post was titled A Practical Guide to Building Frame posted by reddit user/resolutions316

  79. Unfortunately masculine anger is a pussy lubricant. The other day I recieved a text from a plate asking me if they could give my number to some deliquent sister of theirs who had gotten herself into trouble and she wanted me to help her. For some reason I got pissed of at her implied presumption that she would expect me to drop what I was doing and start meddling with some deliquent silly nutcase’s troubles.

    In anger texted back two leters, no

    (I was busy at the time anyway).

    The next day (the day before yesterday to be precise) she texted me,

    “Have a good day my king I love u mwaah” (Where I come from mwaah is a common denotation by millenials esp gals for blowing a kiss).

    I could tell she was craving for it.

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