As most of my readers know I have my third book in the Rational Male series coming up soon (very soon, promise). When I began this new book I had an initial working title – The Rational Male, The Red Pill – however, as I progressed I shifted this to Positive Masculinity. I spoke briefly about this in my last two interviews, but there came a point in my compiling, writing and editing where I’d taken a different path in the purpose of the new book. Where I had wanted to explain and / or defend the initial, intersexual, definition of what the term ‘Red Pill‘ has increasingly been distorted away from, I found myself leaning more into expressing ways in which this Red Pill awareness could benefit men’s lives in many ways in and apart from intersexual dynamics.
I’d hit on this in my Red Pill Parenting series from a couple years ago and I knew I wanted to revisit and make that series a prominent part of the book. As it sits now, it accounts for a full quarter of the book’s content, but as I moved into my writing more I decided that the best way to really define ‘The Red Pill” as I know it was to go into the various ways men might benefit from redefining masculinity for themselves in a conventional, Red Pill aware sense.
When I finished the parenting section I realized that I was really laying out general, if not prescriptive, ideas for ways men might better raise their sons and daughters in a feminine-primary social order that’s determined to condition them. My purpose with both the series and section was to equip fathers with Red Pill aware considerations in making their sons and daughters Red Pill aware themselves in order to challenge a world that increasingly wants to convince us that fathers’ influence is superfluous or dangerous.
It was from this point that I’d made a connection; what I was doing was laying out a much-needed reckoning of sorts with regard to what conventional, positive masculinity might mean to future generations of Red Pill aware men. Since my time on the SoSuave forums and the inception of this blog I’ve used the term positive masculinity. I’ve even had a category for it on my side bar since I began too. From the time I began writing I’ve always felt a need to vindicate positive, conventional masculinity and separate it from the deliberately distorted “toxic” masculinity that the Village of the Feminine Imperative would have us believe is endemic today.
In Vulnerability I described this deliberate, but calculated, confusion thusly:
For the greater part of men’s upbringing and socialization they are taught that a conventional masculine identity is in fact a fundamentally male weakness that only women have a unique ‘cure’ for. It’s a widely accepted manosphere fact that over the past 60 or so years, conventional masculinity has become a point of ridicule, an anachronism, and every media form from then to now has made a concerted effort to parody and disqualify that masculinity. Men are portrayed as buffoons for attempting to accomplish female-specific roles, but also as “ridiculous men” for playing the conventional ‘macho’ role of masculinity. In both instances, the problems their inadequate maleness creates are only solved by the application of uniquely female talents and intuition.
Perhaps more damaging though is the effort the Feminine Imperative has made in convincing generations of men that masculinity and its expressions (of any kind) is an act, a front, not the real man behind the mask of masculinity that’s already been predetermined by his feminine-primary upbringing.
Women who lack any living experience of the male condition have the calculated temerity to define for men what they should consider manhood – from a feminine-primary context. This is why men’s preconception of vulnerability being a sign of strength is fundamentally flawed. Their concept of vulnerability stems from a feminine pretext.
Masculinity and vulnerability are defined by a female-correct concept of what should best serve the Feminine Imperative. That feminine defined masculinity (tough-guy ridiculousness) feeds the need for defining vulnerability as a strength – roll over, show your belly and capitulate to that feminine definition of masculinity – and the cycle perpetuates itself.
From my very earliest writing I’ve always seen a need to correct this intentionally distorted perception of masculinity with true, evolved, biologically and psychologically inherited aspects of conventional masculinity.
As you may guess this isn’t an easy an task when a Red Pill man must fight against many different varieties of this masculine distortion. We live in an age where any expression of conventional masculinity is conflated with bullying or ‘hyper-masculinity‘. The Blue Pill teaches that inherent strength ought not to be considered “masculine”, if a boy acts in a conventionally masculine way he’s to be sedated, and boys as young as four can decide their gender to the extent that doctors are chemically altering their physiologies to block hormones and transition them into (binary) girls.
To the Blue Pill Village, a definition of masculinity is either something very obscure, subjective and arbitrary or it’s something extraordinarily dangerous, ridiculous and toxic. As I said, even the most marginal displays of anything conventionally masculine are exaggerated as some barbaric hazing ritual or smacks of hyper, over the top displays of machismo. With so much spite arrayed against masculinity, and with such an arbitrary lack of guidance in whatever might pass for a form of masculinity that feminine-primary society might ever find acceptable, is there anything positive about the masculine at all?
There is only one conclusion we can come to after so much writing on the wall – there is a war on conventional masculinity that’s been going on in progressive western societies for generations now.
I found it very hard to describe what exactly a Positive Masculinity might mean to Red Pill aware men. One of the more insidious ways that Blue Pill conditioning effectively neuters masculinity is in the recruiting of men to effect their own emasculation. Usually these men themselves have had no real guidance in, or embrace of, conventional masculinity precisely because this Blue Pill conditioning has robbed them of maturing into an understanding of it. Blue Pill fathers raise Blue Pill sons and the process repeats, but in that process is the insurance that Blue Pill sons are denied an education in what it means to be a man.
Thus, we get masculine apologists like The Good Man Project who think ‘real’ masculinity can be found in an egalitarian parity between men and women – rather than our evolved, complementary gender roles. This is a manifestation of years of gender-loathing indoctrination. If men would just apologize for their maleness and all the negative aspects that it’s characterized and defined by, all can be made well. These are the Nice Guys who are accused of using their niceness as a ploy to win over women’s sexual favor. These are the male feminists, who never acknowledge that they are, but who still place the “divinity of the feminine” above their own self-loathed gender identity.
Next we get the men who are all made of honorable intent. These are the guys for whom a rational, firm, no-nonsense appeal to a woman’s reason should be enough to not only convince her of his quality, but he expects her attraction to be based on it. These are largely Red Pill aware men who still hope that old books virtue is something they might parlay into some form of attraction with women.
These tend to be the long game kind of men. When a guy is given to aspirations of virtuousness-as-game they’re generally cut from Beta cloth. I’m very familiar with this from my younger days. I too believed in the Boy Scout 12 point law: a scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent. In and of themselves these are noble aspirations, and ones that an old books / old social contract rightly endorsed. The problem is that none of them translate into an ounce of arousal for women.
Dean Abbot tweeted this recently:
I would argue that since the rise of our feminine-primary social order and the dissolution of the family in terms of conventional (and evolved) gender roles, even with a family, men have little idea of the impact their influence makes. As I’ve written before, women fundamentally lack the capacity to ever appreciate the sacrifices men make to facilitate a woman’s reality. Few, if any, women understand just how their lives are made possible by the ceaseless efforts men make directly or indirectly to ensure their safety, provisioning, security, ambitions and support. This is only exacerbated in a social order that entitles, coddles and overemphasizes women as the gender whose imperatives define our social context.
Family isn’t what defines men’s virtue or integrity, ideally it ought to be a result of it. However, I tend not to deal in “what ought to be” on this blog, I deal in what is. The fact remains that Virtue is only valued and estimated by men on an individual basis.
“There is no such thing as moral phenomena, but only a moral interpretation of phenomena.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche
A lot of well-meaning Red Pill aware men want the old order, old books noble aspects of men to have a reinvigorated worth today. As we make Red Pill awareness applicable in a broader perspective in men’s lives we get to an impasse over what a ‘legitimate’ use of that knowledge ought to be. I believe we get a couple of extreme positions in this respect. I touched on this in The Bitter Taste of the Red Pill:
Game-aware women – the ones who have been forcibly exhausted of all pretense of maintaining 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.
I think it’s important that we not allow ourselves to fall into a similar trap with regards delineating what is appropriate use of the Red Pill advantage we have. This isn’t an endorsement for or against ethics in the Red Pill – I’ve already written that post – but it is to emphasize that I think objectivity should precede any pretense to what may or may not be on or off limits in Game or Red Pill awareness.
The Red Pill Moralist
On one end of the spectrum we get men who’ve accepted Red Pill awareness and the truths it presents as a guiding influence to varying degrees. I think it’s a mistake to think the Red Pill moralists are always an ‘Old Married Guy’ who wants to justify his decision to ‘do the right thing’ (no matter how disastrous his personal outcome may be). There are an increasing number of younger idealists who believe the Red Pill aware man has a civic duty to use that awareness in an ethical way that promotes the reinstitution of the conventional family. That may be a noble cause, but I don’t think it should be a straightjacket for Red Pill objectivity.
For the Red Pill Moralist, proper application of the Red Pill is to use that knowledge to vet women for a marriage suitability and a prospective family. With full knowledge of the inherent downsides and liability risks of modern marriage, the moralist takes it as his masculine duty now for the future to still assume the “sucker’s bet”. Needless to say this masculine social-sacrificial position seems more like men running back to the plantation of marriage for unresolved Blue Pill rationales, but I would argue that in a post-Red Pill awareness the belief is that a strong, dominant Red Pill aware Frame control can make the difference to offset the overwhelming risks. The core notion is that reestablishing the conventional family as a man’s civic duty warrants the almost certain prospect of a man’s own detriment.
The moralists have a tendency to disdain or moralize any other application of Red Pill awareness that would facilitate a self-serving or hedonistic purpose. Usually this comes after their living their own lives hedonistically, but also because they were “awakened while married” or just post-horrible divorce. This mirrors a Trad-Con position of encouraging men to “Man-Up” and volunteer for their own fleecing and disdaining the trappings of anything that doesn’t serve women’s imperatives for their own lives – but again as a kind of self-imposed noble duty of masculinity.
This is the flip-side of moralist’s position might be the self-serving use of the Red Pill solely for individual pleasure or gain. This is characterized by the PUA, Game-is-all, guy whose only purpose ends with himself. To the moralist, this use of Red Pill awareness is furthering the destruction of a family archetype that seems to be a solution to societal decay. The Rational Male comment threads are no stranger to the debates of PUAs whose pass or fail, Alpha or Beta benchmark for success rides on what would likely be considered sitting poolside while the world burns.
The last hurdle most men still refuse to get over is that they want women to meet them half way because, despite their Red Pill awareness, they still believe in egalitarian equalism. The most intelligent men still think that women use the same operating system that men do. They don’t, and that’s why these otherwise great men fail with regard to their approach to women. They believe women have the functional capacity to understand men’s motives as if they were any rational being’s motives and agree and comply with them. They simply do not, but unlearning the programming that women should have the capacity to reach some mutually acceptable bargain between men and women’s sexual imperatives is something intelligent men can’t seem to factor.
In Moral to the Manosphere I wrote this:
If you choose to derive your personal value from some esoteric sense of what sex ‘should’ mean, more power to you, but I find it’s a much healthier position to accept a balance between our carnal natures and our higher aspirations. It’s not one or the other. It’s OK to want to fuck just for the sake of fucking – it doesn’t have to be some source of existential meaning. If you think it means something more, then that’s your own subjective perspective – even in marriage there’s ‘maintenance sex’ and there’s memorable, significant sex – but it’s a mistake to think that the totality of the physical act must be of some cosmic significance.
It is as equally unhealthy to convince oneself that self-repressions are virtues as it is to think that unfettered indulgences are freedoms. There is a balance.
While I do think that whatever becomes the Red Pill family unit needs to have some structure similar to that of conventional gender roles, I think it’s important to understand that the new Red Pill ‘family’ will live or die by men’s capacity to accept and apply their awareness of intersexual dynamics. This is one very important difference between an idealized, pre-sexual revolution family and what will evolve in a post-feminist social awareness.
Pickup, Game, really the use of any aspect of Red Pill awareness that isn’t bent to the reconstitution of what I assume would be a Red Pill family unit, is an illegitimate use in the moralist perspective. I think this also goes too far in that Red Pill awareness shouldn’t be limited to what anyone might consider a pro-social purpose for it. Much of what I go into in the parenting section of the new book centers strongly on a man, a father, a husband applying his broader understanding of intersexual dynamics to create a better marriage and family for himself; but I think it needs to be said that all of that Red Pill awareness comes to those men courtesy of the hedonists who wanted to simply crack the code of how to get laid. Too much of either will lead to an imbalance.
[…] Family Integrity […]
@Rollo Another great in a series of great posts. I don’t agree with this here completely, if you would change the “all” to “a large portion”, that would take into consideration those of us that figured out “how to get laid” to the point of frivorce causative to a solid redpill awakening. Also the scientific study of evolution and behavioral psych is disregarded by giving all the credit to the virtual PUA. ” but I think it needs to be said that all of that Red Pill awareness comes to those men courtesy of the hedonists who wanted to simply… Read more »
Rollo, this is a very chewy posting. There’s a lot to read, and then read again. Sometimes it’s like being in a glass maze with mirrors in it, there are so many illusions that we’ve been fed over the last N years. N is more than 50, more than 60, it has to include the Victorian era of the 19th century (“women don’t really like sex and yet can’t become pregnant without orgasm”, duh?). It includes the cult of courtly love, which kfg has from time to time mentioned, and Dalrock has documented to some extent in terms of its… Read more »
It might be helpful for men to think of (themselves and) women in terms of the praying mantis. It always tends to end up badly for the male, regardless of whether or not he is “aware”; if he decides to couple with the female, the result is more or less predetermined. Quite simply, it is in the female’s nature. Just as it is in his. It’s hard enough to recognise let alone change one’s nature, it’s arguably impossible to change another’s.
@theasdgamer @kfg @blaximus
It seems Rollo answered my debate with you guys in the last comments section by writing a whole new blog post on the topic I raised 😉
Amen Rollo, amen.
If you think that Rollo’s post supports your position, then you need to work on your reading comprehension.
The goal of the wise modern man is essential animal husbandry.
Another epic post Rollo. I’ve decided to ignore what is moral and replace it with whatever works. True red pillers should be in the results business, morality be damned. The FI is all about results and positive outcomes for women, the red pill is the antidote for men. Being red pill aware isn’t enough! without the conviction to apply this knowledge to gain power over your personal circumstances all you would be left with is nihilism and hoping for the best outcome despite understanding the true nature of females and that’s not a position I’m prepared to put myself in.… Read more »
This is the flip-side of moralist’s position might be the self-serving use of the Red Pill solely for individual pleasure or gain.
This sentence from the OP is unclear.
Let me attempt to summarize Rollo’s post and maybe Rollo will comment on whether my attempt was successful.
TRP is amoral. Neither anti- nor pro-marriage men can use it to justify imposing a moral/ethical system on other men. Egalitarianism will poison any application of TRP. TRP is about men/women’s complementary roles in sex and relationships. In a family, a man must decide what the family is about–he cannot defer to the wife in his decision-making.
Interesting post. In the above essay, I would be the awakened in marriage guy that is still in marriage maybe out of habit or bP conditioning. I don’t hold anything against those using rP game for their hedonistic pursuits, and I like MGTOW men as well. I’m in a situation of leading my marriage into a state of a new rp game aware reality. I gave myself about a year to decide if I wanted to remain married, and that year has already passed. I’ll be staying with my woman for now, as long as she is adding value. Actually… Read more »
@Anonymous Reader @stuffinbox
“Also the scientific study of evolution and behavioral psych is disregarded by giving all the credit to the virtual PUA. ”
Nope. If you dig far enough you find evo psych in any number of PUA writings. They just discovered some of it emperically, that’s all.
PUA research was empirical, that’s for certain. Controlled? Nah. Useful? Hell yes!
Ya don’t need to buy into evo-psych justification to use a praxology.
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). The opposition to polygyny isn’t about Game. Feminists understand that as a relationship structure, polygyny destroys feminism because by definition the structure reinforces that the man and the women are NOT equal. When one of my girls shared that she was entering into a poly relationship, her friends went nuts. One of them thoughtfully summed up why “polygamy” was SO BAD: Women automatically KNOW that… Read more »
I have always viewed the churchian men as gamers playing a suckers game. Their wives practice open hypergamy,open cuckoldry and right in the sanctuary, while a true masculine man would be the object of the women’s desire,they end up being the brunt of the churchian gamer man’s ridicule. Therefore I have basically always viewed game as being “BLUE PILL” and teaching natural “positive masculine” men game as part of a “RED PILL” aware survival tactic if you will. Basically the nearly extinct masculine men never really needed game as a natural and things have regressed to the point that now… Read more »
I’ve been considering doing a post on marriage lately due to what I view as a lot of “red pill men” having issues giving up the idea of getting married at some point. Now, I’m not fundamentally against marriage or having a family, however I think it’s important to review the balance of tangible vs intangible aspects of such a union. Many such men are focused not on what marriage is, but what it used to represent. An oath of fealty from a man to a woman, and vice versa, before a higher power. The right to get married and… Read more »
” . . . polygyny destroys feminism because by definition the structure reinforces that the man and the women are NOT equal.”
Hypergamy doesn’t care.
there is a war on conventional masculinity Another entry on the “not news” list… There has been an on-going war against masculinity from the Femi-Nazi’s and lame-dicked-Liberals for years. Everything male is evil, and all maleness must be drugged into acceptable behavior. I’m convinced that is why I’m still popular with the ladies – they may spout the BS about what they are told they should find acceptable, but they cannot control their reactions. And I treat them like they want to be treated – rather than the way the say they want to be treated. Today’s man-like-things are more… Read more »
@BLL, my thoughts in this post were partially inspired by a trend I’m seeing in the ‘sphere. It’s like the only legitimate reason to use Red Pill awareness is to vet a wife and start a family in order to do a man’s civic responsibility and ensure a new generation of Red Pill kids who’ll magically resist the influences of the FI and follow the same parenting paradigm. I think this is a noble purpose, and I’ve written about it many times before (RP moralism is nothing new), but I’m going to also defend the YaReally’s of the world too… Read more »
“RP moralism is just Trad-Con values minus the “divinity of woman” narrative”
“Neo” movements are running around all over the place these days (as they were during the Victorian Era). The essential problem with these movements is that they are trying to engineer in retrograde from current social norms and understanding, rather than forward from the now lost social norms and understanding that gave foundation to them.
The result is a sort of cartoon of culture without a fundamental basis (as happened with Victorian Romanticism, which infects current social norms and understanding).
@Black Lable I know you are right in what these young men desire doesn’t exist anymore and never really did. This vision of the perfect union that is being sold is responsible for more grief than loneliness. The Immoral Moralists are asking men to step up and ridiculing them for not doing so are the selfsame ones that have disincentivised the married with children plan in the first place. I hear this everywhere I go,from the seventy year old carpenter laughing about the millenials that wont be able to realize their dreams,to the Old biddies asking where have all the… Read more »
Actually learning that Laci Green is an ex Mormon literally explains everything about her. So she is coming around to a more classically open view of free speech? Well OK that is one of the two times a day a stopped clock is right, so she gets a dunce hat tip for that, far too many of her academic colleagues are as tight assed and censorious as Jeff Sessions and the Paleo right wing lawmakers trying to outlaw protests they don’t like, or suppress sex education or evil-lotion. I have descanted on this elsewhere. But whammajamming the red pill moniker?… Read more »
“So she is coming around to a more classically open view of free speech?”
That’s where she claimed to be coming from, back before she went to college and got all transmogrified into a feminist “sex educator.”
Between Mormonism and Feminism she was an anti-theist of the Four Horsemen ilk.
A perspicacious article. “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.” Despite what many may think of me, I hold no illusions about a woman’s nature. They’re deceitful and conniving to a fault. Mercenaries, if you will. No loyalty, beyond, what your coin can… Read more »
As a Christian, I’ll allow that the Mormon church is one of the most genophobic denominations of the faith, so in that sense, Laci’s behavior was at least partially understandable. Now that she’s “gotten it out of her system,” it looks like she might be coming to her senses.
@ Artisinal Toad I’ve always found what you’re saying to hit home. My interpretation: Women are only happy when they submit to a dominant man. Men are only happy when their sexual urges are unrestricted. It reminds me of the “pillowcase of M&M’s.” A story about an obese little girl that was obsessed with M&M’s. The mother was horrified when a dietitian recommended filling a pillowcase with M&M’s and letting the girl have unrestricted access to it at all times. Guess what? She ended up losing weight. Having restricted access to the candy and having so much taboo around it… Read more »
The FI and Blue Pill men would have you believe that the desire for polygamy = the desire for poosy paradise, like some juvenile fantasy about being able to eat as many cookies as you want without mommy punishing you. The reality of polygamy is very different: it’s the ultimate complement to Hypergamy, by being a self-contained relationship that simultaneously utilizes comfort, security, competition anxiety and Dread. And de facto implies the dominance and leadership of the man. He’s the one in the lead role and he employs women as he sees fit. If this isn’t unadulterated, straight Red Pill,… Read more »
It’s not merely an intellectual exercise.
We have many real life examples of polygynous societies.
If the red pill is reality it should be based on result, not theory.
@ anon I agree that it’s not merely an intellectual exercise. from “As Good As It Gets” “But what if as good as it gets is simply entertaining a succession of non-committed, non-exclusive relationships? In essence, a sustainable plate spinning until such time as a woman demands committed monogamy, and then she’s replaced with a new plate and the cycle continues. I’m sure this would seem manipulative and horribly selfish to women, and furthermore it might contradict what I’ve just written about men’s general want for marriage (or at least an idealized union), but contrast this perpetual plate spinning strategy… Read more »
@Softek “I feel like if most men had truly “unrestricted” sexual access, they wouldn’t turn into the frothing at the mouth, horny and sexually possessed monsters everyone seems to think they would be (or rather, thinks that they already are, and feminism is the cage necessary to contain such a violent, mindless animal as man).” “It’s a complete denial of the fact that a man can fuck another woman consequence-free and be emotionally unaffected by it. This is something a woman can’t do, because her desire to fuck is driven by Hypergamy, not testosterone.” These are very interesting statements, them… Read more »
Ollie But with cycling (especially along steep uphill slopes, like where I live) it seems, over time, as though the dopamine receptors in my brain have malfunctioned. I use to derive pleasure from IOIs. But for the life of me, I can’t remember the last time I did. Could be a lot of things, but one is obvious: what kind of bike saddle are you riding on? The degree of interconnection between body / mind / emotional state is still being sussed out, don’t assume that doctors know much about it. There’s lots and lots of nerve bundles in the… Read more »
What was it like when …. men … Boys…
Less loud more to the point of maturity and balance of madness
It’s all about forced wealth and power transfer. Women can’t build civilizations nor maintain them, nor implement laws and policies that are ‘egalitarian’ – because ‘egalitarian’ means negative exposure to women – so they demonize men to continue their sloth and cowardliness – and call it ‘feminism’. Yes. Tradcons look down on MGTOWs. There are many tradcons in the MRA group, which is why MGTOWs and MRAs often don’t see eye-to-eye, which is putting it mildly. Tis also why MGTOWs and PUAs clash. There are two prevalent forms of gynocentrism. (1) Tradcon Gynocentrism and (2) Feminist Gynocentrism, or ‘hyper-gynocentrism’. The… Read more »
Looks like wordpress ate my reply. @Rollo I’m reminded of something my Econ 101 professor told me “As economists our job is to explain the economic effects of choices, not to make value judgments about the choices”, which reflects my view of the sphere as well. This is a fairly small community, and internal strife over what is moral or not moral use of the material, right or wrong use and so on, will always be value judgments, and those should be made by each individual man. “As it sounds right now, RP moralism is just Trad-Con values minus the… Read more »
BLL Great observation, as we touched on in the podcast, some of the greatest “gurus” of days gone by have found themselves backsliding into Betahood, and I suspect that many “Red pill trad-cons” are running this risk as well. “Red pill tradcon” is a contradiction in terms. A Traditional Conservative is usually some sort of neo Victorian with a romantic view of women. No red pill there. Everyone should vet their wife, but they also need to consider their own internal beta, have they killed him or is he merely laying dormant waiting to pop out at an opportune moment?… Read more »
Jesus…. Take a Valium and a nap.
We already have our resident ‘ socialism expert ‘ around these parts.
…. Can’t see the fucking forest, etc.
I hate mosquitoes, but I see no reason to link men’s nor the entire planet’s ills to the annoying fuckers.
Yeah, wealthy conservative guys got it all right and never did any harm to society at All, ever, in the history of mankind. By God, they put a stop to the rise of feminism 50 years ago.
You’re looking inside a fun house mirror.
It’s not even entertaining anymore.
Pull my middle leg and it plays jingle balls, genius. I really couldn’t care less what you think. You’re exactly the type I enjoy screwing with. Let us agree to not like one another. In fact, let’s draw the line here and see one another as mortal enemies. You really don’t want to go head to head with me. I’ll just embarrass you further, schmuck. But you go ahead…come back at me. I enjoy wrecking morons such as yourself.
Lol. OK keyboard tough guy. See, because I don’t think like you do, I don’t have ‘ mortal enemies ‘ or boogey men, and I can’t be fooled or controlled, or otherwise made a sap by politics or associations. How very ‘ old set of imaginary books ‘ of you though. The shit you expose here will never solve what you perceive as the ‘ problem ‘. The Left nor the Right is the issue. Have some delicious red pill why don’t you. It might help your vision if you’re willing to widen it’s application. But, again I’ve grown tired… Read more »
Tim, why are you here? What’s your point, your goal, your objective?
The solution for a man who is either (ideally both) of seriously Christian and/or wishes to have a family that he raises (WELL) to maturity is NOT NOT NOT “picking carefully” and “gaming her forever”. The Sword of Frivorce Damocles only has to fall on ONE day, out of >70,000 days, for him to lose everything. Neither is it to bring a foreign wife from a better-cultured country back to the U.S. We all know she will likely be irreversably damaged in time, and then she can use the same &^%*$ men’s-fault legal system that panders to Ameriskanks by cannibalizing… Read more »
Well thanks for that. Sounds reasonable and rational. Everyone disperse, there’s nothing to see here. Let’s just toss any RP and get some eggs and have our way.
Oh, and don’t forget the governess….
Maybe I’m just grouchy today. Lemme have some coffee or something ( no eggs though ).
“Let’s just toss any RP and get some eggs and have our way.”
@Softek I’ve said it on my blog more than once, I’m not there to tell people about Jesus. As Don Draper put it, “you either have him in your heart or you don’t.” That said, I do focus on what the Bible actually says about sexual morality. Which pisses off everyone to no end, because about the only things the modern church teaches about sexual morality that’s correct is men and women are not to commit adultery and Christian men are not to bang whores. Even there, the meaning of the word “adultery” has been redefined to include a husband… Read more »
” . . . some eggs . . .”
Does that come with toast?
@ Artisinal Toad So sex with a virgin woman = marriage, and sex with a non-virgin woman = adultery, correct? i.e. as long as the first man she had sex with is still alive and the marriage hasn’t been annulled by her father, she and any man she has sex with in the future are guilty of adultery? I have a very long and troubled past with Christianity, but — and most disturbingly — I can see how all of what you’re saying makes sense in a RP context. That is to say: even someone disregards Christianity and whatever the… Read more »
“The last hurdle most men still refuse to get over is that they want women to meet them half way because, despite their Red Pill awareness, they still believe in egalitarian equalism.” I’ve been reading your blog for quite some time and you never really answer this directly but from what I’ve gathered from reading your blog is that you have to expect the worst from women all the time and nothing should surprise you because that’s just how they are and society reinforces all their bad habits so don’t fight it overtly and make decisions based on red pill(your… Read more »
Brilliant stuff. Great read. Thanks for that.
Ya’ll are hopeless romantics… “Red Pill, Blue Pill”.
There is a living yogi that would tell you the intellect is overused and mistaken for instinct. Wisdom is not just knowing a thing but understanding it.
Your romantic intersexual relationships are best approached as animal husbandry. It’s a cold, hard seat at the head of the table.
Can we drop all the “bible says/ god wants” bullshit?
Fucking retarded imaginary friend for adults comfort blanket crap it’s fucking embarrassing tbh.
I wouldn’t say that as a polite atheist, but yeah, stop already?
Topical / largely relevant
“Your romantic intersexual relationships are best approached as animal husbandry. It’s a cold, hard seat at the head of the table.”
As luck would have it, I’m in the process of creating some erotic animal husbandry videos designed to improve conjugal relations!
Maybe a bit impolite but the blog is called The RATIONAL male ffs!
This is not the place to talk about your imaginary friend/ some book that’s been rewritten countless times to suit every king/ruler since the original.
We don’t deal with retarded delusions here we deal with reality and truth, this is a discussion place for rational men to swap ideas about red pill praxeology, not a religious nut jobs discussion board.
Just for shits and giggles I suggest you watch George carling “religion is bullshit” video on YouTube he pretty much nails it.
LOL! just watched Laci’s utube and she wants folks to go on to debate. Any regular here would blow them out of the water. Her vid was not redpill at all… it just used the red pill for marketing herself, which is not surprising (AWALT). Polygyny will not be popular nor constructive for civilization as it ignore the rest of us beta’s… we want pussy too. It will work for a limited segment of the population, but once it deprives enough men of pussy there will be problems. However if guys are ending up like antifa cucks the problems will… Read more »
OMG….. divorce rape again? ReallY??? Luke The correct solution for an American man who wants a family is: egg donor, gestational surrogate, hire a nanny/governess as needed, and NEVER NEVER NEVER marry, cohabitate with a woman (outside of using a contracted no-sex-with, impregnated only via fertility clinic GS) impregnate a woman, or allow any woman to legally adopt his children. This is complete fantasy because as soon as the “mother” (whoever that is, now ya gots choices) gets some feelz, the court will accommodate her rights to “her” child while saddling you with continued support. Happy Mother’s Day! The only… Read more »
You smoked that one out alright. The complexity won’t be whether or not the woman is accommodated at the man’s expense, only which woman will get the lion’s share of his imputed income.
Egg donor will have a case as mother. Gestation surrogate will have a case as mother. Even nanny/governess might make a case based on spending majority of waking hours caring for child while the man is working his McJob to get money for child support.
The joys of having loads of time on my hands due to being really sick this past week and a half and having recently re-read Rollo’s The Best Of…
walking down Rollo’s blogroll and found Black Label Logic blog…
We’ve been down this road before. If you want a surrogate/egg donor, she has to be out of the country and stay out of the country.
Nothing says “Beta” more than running around with complex documents and seeking to enforce relationship rights… meanwhile street hustlers with 10 baby mommas have those women coming by and giving them gifts and money…
” . . . those women coming by and giving them gifts and money…”
Women providing for access to a man? Unpossible!
I’m not saying there shouldn’t be a code of ethics. There should and it needs to be based on a solid Red Pill awareness. What I’m saying is that guys who don’t want to follow the plan of making that code their priority (or reason to learn RP in the first place) the RP is still just as legitimate as adhering to a moral imperative. There are a segment of men who will tell you that just you getting married is Beta and Blue Pill, no exceptions. And there is another segment of men who will tell you that if… Read more »
@ Sentient, Playdontpay
I’d like to see you guys try to convince these guys that they’re Beta males for following a religion:
How can a man abandon his role without abandoning his society? Huh? Males exist for one principal reason: to give sperm. If we strip everything to the bare threads (pun alert), life is about dna, threads of neucleotides spinning away in the center of cells to make copies of themselves to no particular end than to provide sort of an audience for the apocalypse. Then when it is all over, start again in some other part of the universe. It is hard to be religious or even a moralist without having to chew on such…err…banalities (as someone may put it)… Read more »
Thank you Rollo.
Marriage is a religious concept. And a political concept. How can we talk about marriage in the same breath as TRP and then maintain that TRP should be apolitical and areligious? We can’t, because it isn’t. Are you married? Congratulations, whether you’re a theist or an atheist, a part of your life has been highly influenced by religion and politics, whether you like it or not. What “marriage” means is defined by the religion and politics of the culture in which you’re married. If Christianity wasn’t so feminized and instead allowed for polygamy as Artisinal Toad asserts that it does… Read more »
” . . . there is another segment of men who will tell you that if you don’t use RP awareness to vet a wife and mother and save western culture from itself, you’re part of the problem for wanting to watch the world burn.” Vox Day’s Mother’s Day theme. I must say that it felt a bit odd to have to drop a Red Pill reminder to the proprietor of Alpha Game Plan, even knowing that his primary focus is civilization. “Marriage is a religious concept. And a political concept.” No. “What “marriage” means is defined by the religion… Read more »
@Anonymous Reader; “We have to contend with the misandrous feminists on one hand, the slavemaster tradcons on another, the self-deluded equalists on the third hand…sometimes it’s dismaying how many different ways there are for men to be fooled, or to fool themselves.” Straight up pithy. Enough to make a man want to go poolside or at least spend his weekends in the woods hunting agates with a flask of bourbon and a few stogies or step onto an airplane. Personally I’m always trying to cool it when it comes to culture warring but if I had to name the number… Read more »
Look at the list for country’s where VR is being used the most
Now look at the governing systems of power…
@ Married Guys: Happy Mother’s Day shit test from your wives. I worked hard to avoid it, but it’s here. I have a method for dealing with these and others (see below). Also, I credit this gentleman’s music with enhancing my masculine cave time, and the main reason why the wife has not discovered my participation in this blog. @ All I attempted to post this a while ago in Field Reports, but it got hung up in moderation and never got out. It contained too many links and perhaps it was too whimsical, but after skimming some of the… Read more »
@ kfg Okay. I’m just going to assume that your argument is that marriage is something that occurs naturally on a biological level completely independent of societal constructs, and that marriage can and does occur regularly in nature completely independent of all religious and legal systems. Because that is the only rational refutation of the idea that marriage is a social construct. Formal social recognition of a couple being “married” as a natural hard-wired occurrence in humans is plausible, as humans are extremely social animals, and it could be argued that the religious and legal systems we have today stemmed… Read more »
“I’m just going to assume that your argument is that marriage is something that occurs naturally on a biological level completely independent of societal constructs . . .” No. Marriage is a social construct, and social constructs have a root in biology. We are not the society of ants. Religion and politics are also social constructs, but they do not define Social Construct. “So if you’re going to argue that marriage is fundamentally not religious or political then you have to concede that it’s actually some hard-wired biological reality that these religious and legal institutions simply give a name and… Read more »
“Another plausible theory is what Artisinal Toad has argued when he says that when you fuck a virgin you become married to her by default, *whether you or her know it or not.”
Artisanal Toad was talking about Biblical Constructs. Religious law within the framework of the Abrahamic traditional scriptures.
“Close enough for hand grenades.”
I’m going to have to steal that one.
Have at. It’s public domain. All I did was redact the “horseshoes and.”
Softek “It’s just extremely irritating to have read dozens of articles here about how feminism has corrupted women and all the negative things that happen to women as a result of buying into feminism, and then to have completely contradictory and unresolved assertions in the comment section, basically asserting that the only thing that matters is the man’s behavior and everything else is irrelevant” Which is it? It’s both. Men abandoning their historical role, over a few generations mind you, created femism writ large. The effect is just her nature acting on the cause… But to that – your own… Read more »
So if you’re going to argue that marriage is fundamentally not religious or political then you have to concede that it’s actually some hard-wired biological reality that these religious and legal institutions simply give a name and framework and rules and regulations to, but did not in and of themselves create. Perhaps [hard-wired biological reality] was true in 1967 when it was discovered, in the US, by the court, a man and a woman have the right to found a family. However, the latest ruling indicates marriage is a tax shelter and the primary determinate of pension (private or public)… Read more »
Marriage is religious construct marriage is a social construct bull shit. What marriage is is a transfer of property she is property Chattel exspenseive slave what ever you wish to call her but she is property. If a man ask the father for her hand in marriage then she belongs to the father. If he goes to the state and ask for a marriage lisense then she belongs to state or commune. thru history females don’t inherit because property doesn’t inherit property. So vet your son-in laws and brother- in laws Well before you give then valuable property. I know… Read more »
“All I did was redact the “horseshoes and.”
I’d only heard the “horseshoes” bit (without the rest).
“What marriage is is a transfer of property . . .” As I have said, many, many times, marriage is about inheritance rights. Some of that inheritance occurs at the time of marriage. ” thru history females don’t inherit . . .” This is not correct. Isabella inherited Castile. Elizabeth inherited England. “In the Mosaic law, for monetary matters, women’s and men’s rights were almost exactly equal. A woman was entitled to her own private property, including land, livestock, slaves, and servants. A woman had the right to inherit whatever anyone bequeathed to her as a death gift, and in… Read more »
@Keith: Perhaps you are pointing out women were cultivated by men against the current trend of women teaching young females the highest good is barren.
One of the principles that all men should get from Red Pill understanding, is that as men, each man is responsible for his circumstance and developing his masculine self. Since I’ve been reading in the manosphere, I’ve seen a very persistent trend of men doing the very woman-like, beta behavior of looking for someone to blame for their blue pill mind’s lack of understanding, and hence the inability to ‘ figure it out ‘ and take action. Listen, chicks are just being chicks. They are following their programming. When masses of men all decide to accept and follow the tenets… Read more »
I don’t think that Rollo is aimed at anyone here by saying that trying to make marriage morally required or trying to advocate marriage can’t be Red Pill.
@Blax The root cause is men’s abdication of their manly responsibility and mindset. Large groups of men at some point decided to give the wimminz what they thought they wanted. Just shut up about this shit if you can’t see the FI programming behind men’s emasculation. And if you haven’t looked at history about how the left is driving the FI, then you haven’t bothered to look. The right is a little complicit in being fooled by the left and trying to support the FI, but the left knew exactly what it was doing in powerfully advocating for the FI.… Read more »
Well there you go telling the truth and making sense again.
You will never be able to run for office that way bru.
Kfg Ancent egyption weman had rights ? Was that before or after they started sucking roman cock ? Tell me all about alaxander the great who Helenized the world into equality and how all there grandchildren wound up sucking roman cock. Power is power. Property is property
All the whining and “shoulda” and blame shifting any man can do won’t change reality.
Any man who plans to have children should get Rollo’s books, for a start.
@ ASD Nah, I’m not given to being invested in that silly ‘ right-left ‘ shit. I look at the facts on the ground. We have different life experiences. Just leave it at that. I look for fucked up behavior that’s detrimental without regard to political and ideological affiliation. That’s how you don’t get snookered by having allegiance to men’s machinations. When those machinations go awry, if you’re so, as the manosphere loves to say – ” ego invested “, then you go awry as well. Its what they do, all of it, not what they say. Even your reaction… Read more »
Man, lots of folk live and die over politics. I’ll never be one of them. I have my own mind and I’m not fond of flowery, false bullshit.
Tow the party line? Nope.
But con men and scam artists need targets too. Nature’s balance.
My failures with women pre-Red Pill were not my fault. All the humiliation and embarrassment…not my fault. Even remotely. It was impossible for me to have known what to do. I didn’t even know that “skills” with women even existed, much less having anyone to teach me fuck-all about anything. I was a pure product of the FI conditioning that I grew up with. It was a reality that I was thrown into and had absolutely no say in. I have a friend several years younger than me. I coached him one night out of a Blue Pill nightmare with… Read more »
tl;dr: On the wallowing extreme, we have “woe is me, I’m fucked for life, this happened to me and nothing can ever change for me.” On the invalidating extreme, we have “whatever, I’m not a victim of anything unless I choose to be.” Despite the fact that you WERE actually victimized and taken advantage of by forces outside your control. And you didn’t choose that at the time it happened. This attitude is a great way to unnecessarily beat the shit out of yourself because you’re shouldering the responsibility for things that happened to you that weren’t your fault. It’s… Read more »
Rollo is starting to fall down the same trap as Jordan Peterson….i.e, he gets the Red Pill truths but then tries to graft “safe” old world beliefs onto them.
Purple Pill warning signs….religious preaching, virtue, nationalism, for-the-good-of-the-family etc
@Peter, read for comprehension. I endorse nothing of the sort. If anything I’m calling moralists to account.
@Blaximus Remember way back in the 70s when the plastic adhesive label’r hit the shelves? Even as a kid I couldn’t see any reason to go and label stuff in the garage,but folks were about running around labeling everything even if it was obvious what it was,just to use the invention I guess. If a person has half a memory and stuff is important enough to keep,then it is important enough to organize and keep clean,amiright? Now the label’r is separatist seriously fn stupid,if you work hard for your money you are a tradcon,if you don’t you are a liberal,if… Read more »
That’s what feminism tells them. They can do whatever they feel like doing and no one can judge or say anything.
*stops to think it over* Does every woman of my acquaintance throughout my entire life live by this motto? They’ve certainly always had a ready answer to anyone that might “judge or say anything”. I’m going with yes.
What do you know, they were/all are feminism adherents. Even, or maybe especially the ones that would avow they were not.
Listen, chicks are just being chicks. They are following their programming.
You’re an inspiration Blax.
“@ Married Guys: Happy Mother’s Day shit test from your wives. I worked hard to avoid it, but it’s here. I have a method for dealing with these and others (see below). Also, I credit this gentleman’s music with enhancing my masculine cave time, and the main reason why the wife has not discovered my participation in this blog.” I did get shit-tested by ladies in the office for this point of view, as they expected me to be like their AFCs and buy shit for the wife, but I just told them my wife is my woman and lover.… Read more »
You are a good guy,I let the kids take the wife out to the movies,while I gave my mom a card and a copy of men on strike.
@Keith: “Was that before or after they started sucking roman cock ? ” Until she started sucking Roman cock, Pharaoh was a woman. There was no word for “virgin” in the Egyptian language. Women could marry who they chose (about 25% of the time it was a man about her father’s age, by her choice) and could divorce as they chose. Marriage was regulated neither by the state nor by religion (both basically the same thing. Pharaoh was a living god). There was a reception, but no ceremony. The marriage was formed by simple declaration. ” Tell me all about… Read more »
There has never been and never will be a society of individuals. Family is the root of all and a society that loses its sense of family loses itself and is replaced by one that has one.
That isn’t Blue Pill, that’s a bit of Red Pill for those out there on the equalism/anarchism spectrum.
“Now the label’r is . . .”
. . . necessary, because you can’t tell what the important stuff is without one, but only computers can read the labels. Yay!
A label’r in the right hands can be used properly,you can keep yours.