Dangerous Times – Part 3

In writing and editing this series for the last few weeks a lot has happened in the Future is Female movement. I’m not a big fan of awards shows for obvious reasons; they have all gone from being a celebration and acknowledgement of creativity and performance in entertainment to being little more than a stage upon which political and social protests are aired by pampered celebrities. However, the recent Golden Globes anti-male / anti-masculinity screed by Oprah Winfrey initiated the next step in what can only be described as socially accepted misandry. I have no doubt that the (now annual) Women’s March planned for January 20th will see this anti-male, female supremacism go far beyond what it did in 2017 and echo Oprah’s open hatred for men and an unapologetic call for the removal of men and the criminalization of any semblance of conventional masculinity.

The original intent of this series was to raise awareness of the dangerous inherent in our coming intersexual social relations. And in the time I’ve been considering this I had to finally take a birds eye view of where we’ve come from and where we’re likely to end up with regard to the social direction I see the sexes headed today. For the final installment of this series there are a couple of articles I’m going to reference that got me thinking recently. The first was an article on Quillette by William Buckner titled Romanticizing the Hunter Gatherer. I’m using this as a starting point today because I think this piece speaks to some common misperceptions of our evolutionary past as hunter gatherer, tribalist beings.

When it comes to evolutionary psychology (evo psych) and biology (evo bio) there is always a tendency to want to focus certain speculations on particular ideological bents. In fact, there is a current push to typify all science as being inspired by male-primary sexism and a motion to reform the sciences by requiring them to basically concur with what ever serves the Feminine Imperative’s most flattering interests. Another popular idea amongst egalitarian equalists is the speculation (really romanticization) of our hunter gatherer ancestors being natural egalitarian equalists themselves. Equalists love to presume that human beings’ natural state is one of collective cooperation and gender equality, but according to new studies there’s no evidence to support these ideas (emphasis mine):

But what about egalitarianism? In a 2004 study, Michael Gurven marshals an impressive amount of cross-cultural data and notes that hunters tend to keep more of their kill for themselves and their families than they share with others.12 While there is undeniably a great deal of sharing across hunter-gatherer societies, common notions of generalized equality are greatly overstated. Even in circumstances where hunters give away more of their meat than they end up receiving from others in return, good hunters tend to be accorded high status, and rewarded with more opportunities to reproduce everywhere the relationship has been studied.

[…] In the realm of reproductive success, hunter-gatherers are even more unequal than modern industrialized populations, exhibiting what is called “greater reproductive skew,” with males having significantly larger variance in reproductive success than females.15 Among the Ache of Paraguay, males have over 4 times the variance in reproductive success that females do, which is one of the highest ratios recorded. This means some males end up having lots of children with different women, while a significant number of males end up having none at all. This is reflected in the fact that polygynous marriage is practiced in the majority of hunter-gatherer societies for which there are data. Across these societies, the average age at marriage for females is only 13.8, while the average age at marriage for males is 20.7.16 Rather than defending what would be considered child marriage in contemporary Western societies, anthropologists often omit mentioning this information entirely.

Much of this article confirms a majority of what the Red Pill has been observing and considering for a long time now. The Pareto Principle being the highlight in this last part here; 20% of men reproducing with 80% of women. I’ll also draw your attention to the studies that suggest that only one man for every 17 women reproduced as little as 8,000 years ago (after the advent of agriculture). The Quillette article is a fascinating read, particularly from a Red Pill perspective, and I’d encourage you to read it. The operative point in this is that this research confirms that, despite the feel-good belief that human beings are naturally monogamous and naturally egalitarian, our hunter gatherer ancestors were largely polygamous.

The second article I’m going to reference is The Link Between Polygamy and War from the Economist last month. This is a very in-depth research that breaks down the connection between modern polygamous social orders and their tendency for political unrest and unstable societies. The Economist is a paywalled site, but again it’s well worth the read. This is a very thorough detailing of how men in these countries are systematically disqualified from reproduction in polygynous social and religious societies due to their lack of resources. Only wealthy men are permitted a wife (the only sanctioned way a man can have sex) and if a man can afford more it is a sign of his prestige that he can take as many as he has the resources for.

Men in South Sudan typically marry as often as their wealth — often measured in cattle — will allow. Perhaps 40 percent of marriages are polygamous. “In [our] culture, the more family you have, the more people respect you,” says William, a young IT specialist in search of his second wife. Few South Sudanese see the connection between these matrimonial customs and the country’s horrific civil war. If you ask them the reason for the violence, locals will blame tribalism, greedy politicians, weak institutions and perhaps the oil wealth which gives warlords something to fight over. All true, but not the whole story. Wherever it is widely practiced, polygamy (specifically polygyny, the taking of multiple wives) destabilizes society, largely because it is a form of inequality which creates an urgent distress in the hearts, and loins, of young men. If a rich man has a Lamborghini, that does not mean that a poor man has to walk, for the supply of cars is not fixed. By contrast, every time a rich man takes an extra wife, another poor man must remain single. If the richest and most powerful 10 percent of men have, say, four wives each, the bottom 30 percent of men cannot marry. Young men will take desperate measures to avoid this state.

The article goes on to link the unemployment of young men to their resorting to criminal (and often open war) means to take the wealth necessary for them to procure a wife. This then leads to violent and social unrest. When we look at militant Islamic organizations one of the first, and probably most convincing, rewards young fighters are offered is the guarantee of a wife – even if she is the spoils of war. Much of what prompted the Arab Spring uprisings has been attributed to the unemployment rates in these countries and the consequent result that those young men cannot ‘legitimately’ afford to marry or have a family. They literally have nothing to lose and a wife (sexual release) and a family to gain.

When one man can monopolize 20 wives and thereby force his rivals from the gene pool we have a similar condition to that of our hunter gatherer ancestors. Only in this instance polygamy (really polygyny) is a socially mandated, socially approved convention.

One persistent debate I read in the manosphere is the contention that human society, achievement, stability, etc. is the result of post-agrarian monogamy. Usually this debate crops up between the more traditionalist faction of the sphere and the more brutally pragmatic of Red Pill aware men. I understand the premise from the traditional perspective; there is every evidence that the conventional family structure has been the lynchpin of social progress. I agree with this assessment, but from an evolutionary perspective human beings are not innately monogamous. Our conventional monogamy and family structure, and the resulting progress is really in spite of ourselves. The evidence is there in our genomic records. Our success as a culture was due to controlling the feral aspects of both men and women’s natural sexual strategies via social conventions, religion and personal conviction. And the result of this control is a social contract that is based on monogamy.

That said, there is no denying that monogamous societies make for the most stable societies – or at least they have up to this point in history. Even the Economist article highlights this fact. Monogamy reduces reproductive stress on Beta men – or at least until recently. One reason we have Disney myths of soul mates so prevalent in the past generations is as social a social reinforcement for monogamy. The social convention of idealistic love being a mutually accepted concept between the sexes is also a social reinforcement for monogamy. These were conventions that held men in an idealized state of monogamy. Even the worst Beta still had a hope to reproduce if the mythology was such that “there’s someone for everyone.”

But again, all of this idealization of monogamy is really in spite of ourselves. Left to our own means and our unfettered sexual strategies men will be ruthlessly polygynous and women will resort to ruthless Hypergamy.

The New Polygamy Polyandry

You can probably see where I’m going with this now. Since the time of the Sexual Revolution (and unilaterally female-controlled hormonal birth control) we have seen a systematic degradation of this monogamous social order in favor of a female-primary social order. This social order is predicated on women’s complete control over the reproductive fate of society. Whereas before there were social checks and balances in conventional monogamy, these have been replaced with the unrestrained, unquestioned imperatives of women’s sexual strategy – Hypergamy. In just 5 short decades men have ceded any claim to not only our own sexual strategy and interests, but to any right to paternity.

When we look at how social trends have shifted with regard to women’s sexual selection process we can see the end game more clearly. We’ve gone from ’No Means No’ to ‘Yes Means Yes’ , to itemized permission documentation of every sex act, and now to “enthusiastic consent”. Women’s end game is not unlike our original state of polygamy in that only the most desirable Alpha men will be allowed breeding rights to women – with the social contract being all women are entitled to Alpha Fucks. Enthusiastic consent is a ‘thing’ because on some level of consciousness women loathe the idea of transactional sex with Beta men. And as women’s provisioning and security needs are already met by the state and men’s own direct or indirect resource transfer, there is no longer any desire for “sex they’re really not that into.”

If not for ubiquitous, free online porn and soft prostitution (Sugaring, Tinder, Seeking Arrangements) western culture might find itself in a similar situation to the polygamous countries described by the Economist.

I think it’s important for Red Pill aware men to consider that as women consolidate more and more power via social conventions that only apply to men (MeToo, Times Up, etc.) the end game is one of polyandry for women. This cartoon was a funny one because it accurately describes women’s sexual selection process, but it’s unfunny because it also belies women’s idealized state – one in which men are either draft animals or breeding stock. 

I had quite a few men ask me where I think we’re headed with regards to intersexual social dynamics and I would say that what I’m ultimately seeing is an erasure of conventional monogamy replaced with a Hypergamous polygamy in which women will have uncontested control over reproduction. I see a lot of similarities occurring with men who drop out of life, and either neglect or refuse to build their lives around supporting a family or entertaining a wife. The guys I talk to very much want to get married and have kids, but the downsides are so unimaginably dangerous for men it seems hopeless to them. The old monogamous social contracts no longer exist, but men are still being held responsible for not putting themselves on the line to take risks that only apply to them.

So, not unlike the young unemployed men in the Arab Spring, today’s drop out guy has very little hope for a monogamous future with a woman. But this hopeless circumstance is being instituted by western women, not a religious dogma. Un restrained Hypergamy leads us back to our feral, tribalist polygamy, simply because women have no use for Beta men. Sex with Betas is (or soon will be) considered rape and without porn or some other sexual sedation Betas would likely resort to violence to solve that problem.

What to Do

Anonymous Reader hit me with this comment:

Distilled to it’s essence this is how women in uncontested control of men and masculinity will view men: according to their basest Hypergamous needs and in the context of complete solipsistic self-interests.

Something more like an ant colony or beehive than a civilization of humans. A society of women owners, a handful of males allowed to breed and a whole lot of neutered workers.

I’ve used the Sadie Hawkins’ World analogy for some time now, but this is what the new order of Fempowerment has created for men and women going forward. As much as it goes against every evolved instinct for women, it will be women who must pursue and make the effort to initiate sex and intimacy with men. There will likely be some pushback from more traditional/conventional women who truly desire men to pursue them – nothing is more flattering for a woman’s ego – but the social environment will be such that the risk of personal destruction will become so high, and the juice not being worth the risk of the squeeze will be so low, that even the top tier men in the SMP will be incentivized to allow women to make the first move.

Essentially what MeToo, Enthusiastic Consent and Fempowerment is establishing is an even higher standard of what constitutes an ideal Alpha. It is a tightening of the market of sorts. Women are reluctant (and then resentful) to settle for a less-than the best Hypergamy with a suboptimal male as it is now, but add to this the condition that only the most ideal of Alphas represents the only legitimate sexual experience

Some Solutions:

  1. Play the Game better: Learn Game so thoroughly that you can use the corrupted system to your best advantage. The bar is set so low for men today that even marginal self-improvement, Red Pill awareness and Game savvy can set a man apart from the overwhelming majority of Beta, feminized symps. In essence men can make themselves into commodities women will compete for. There is a danger in this though; women who want to consolidate on the Alpha who wont commit open themselves up to false accusations in reprisal.
  2. MGTOW: As there are varying degrees of MGTOW I can’t say that the most isolationist of MGTOWs response is really a solution. Distilled down, MGTOW is an abdication of meta-Frame to women. However, not all MGTOWs are cut from the same cloth. Many will explain that MGTOW is just men not using women as a benchmark for their ego validation, and my response is, great, I think any Red Pill aware man ought to do the same. Taking womankind off the pedestal and replacing them with your own Mental Point of Origin is key in any man’s unplugging. That said, isolation may not be the best approach to dealing with the Future is Female crowd.
  3. Transactional sex: Reducing intersexual relations to Tinder hook ups, Sugar Baby/Daddy contractual agreements, or ‘Seeking Arrangements’ will preclude a transactional understanding and imply specific positive consent. This still has its dangerous though. Even a Tinder hook up can go bad for a guy if a woman still has regrets at a later date. However, at least from a social standpoint a woman seeking a sexual encounter can be thought of as being proceptive about the experience and not a victim of coercion.

I’d encourage more solutions in the comments. I’m sure a lot of this series seems overly reactionary or disheartening for men who are looking for a return to that stabilizing monogamy. There is an element in the manosphere today who are looking for their Red Pill Trad-Con woman who will police the worst of herself in order to return to the golden era of monogamy. I have my reservations about the real motives of the few women who subscribe to this story, but the issues isn’t about what they will do, but rather what they can do in a feminine-primary social order that allows them to renege on their convictions without consequence.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

637 comments on “Dangerous Times – Part 3

  1. @ Palma I’m due @ Waterloo @ 2.35pm and not due to meet Italian chick till 8pm on the south bank so it sounds doable.

  2. @ Palma
    I’m pretty sure I can get there by 3 maybe a bit ealrlier as 2.35 is my eta for Waterloo but I can just go straight from Euston to Piccadilly so I think is doable.

    I’ll be the big lump in a white “pimp coat” with brown fur collar you can’t miss me!

  3. Homo sapiens have existed anatomically the same for at least 200,000 years and new discoveries indicate possibly 300,000. History only reflects the past 10,000 at best. “Civilization” has not been around very long. Romanticizing hunter gather existence certainly reflects a dissatisfaction with modern life. But which is worse, living a free life while risking starvation, dehydration, hypothermia, other predators…the trials and tribulations nature doles out….or…. living in a fucking cage ruled by bureaucrats, con artists, frauds, homosexuals, misandrists, slobs, whores, sociopaths, and all forms of human parasites? Is being a fat lethargic indolent slob afflicted with self-induced diabetes and or cancer living in front of the TV, the internet, artificially kept “alive”, and being subject to and brainwashed by all the modern bullshit better than roaming free, hunting, gathering food, building shelter and exploring? If it is better, then why are we even discussing this? What is better, no fences, few to no laws, not much concept of property…or… all of those and more which effectively support and ensure dominance by and preeminence of human parasites at the “top” and the “bottom” of “civilization”? Which really is better? I guess, personally, its whatever you want at whatever time you consider it.

  4. The article paints a biased bleak picture of 190,000 years of human survival without mod cons, modern medicine, etc. If hunter gather tribal existence is that bad, then how in the hell did we survive, endure and thrive prehistory, pre-civilization? Why would any individual need unnatural artificially imposed “civilized” “rules” to protect themselves against the harsh realities of hunter gather existence unless they knew they could not (or do not have the gumption to) survive as such?

    Is the human race ultimately guaranteeing its own extinction by protecting itself from the all factors that cull out weaklings and the malformed?

  5. @ROLLO-

    “The evidence is there in our genomic records. Our success as a culture was due to controlling the feral aspects of both men and women’s natural sexual strategies via social conventions, religion and personal conviction. And the result of this control is a social contract that is based on monogamy.

    That said, there is no denying that monogamous societies make for the most stable societies –”

    “Stability”?

    Is this stability? or is it “building block” a phenomena that fundamentally propels us in a certain direction progressing further away from our primordial biologically (sub atomically in fact) defined existence, disassociating us from the natural world as we delude ourselves into hoping, pretending that we can escape or harness all of nature including our own nature?

    “Success”?

  6. @NBTM:

    The average lifespan of a hunter-gatherer in Britain was circa 28 years. The maximum was circa 40. Everyone died of disease or trauma “before their time.” Everyone.

    On the other hand, those who managed to live to old age (30) had probably spent more of their time as their own than a modern 60 year old, which is something to think about.

    I assert that it is not he who dies with the most toys wins. It is he who dies having spent the most time playing with his toys that wins. A 40 year life minding your own business beats an 80 year life minding someone elses business.

  7. “A 40 year life minding your own business beats an 80 year life minding someone elses business.”

    Stolen. Can’t wait to incorporate that into my RP life coaching seminar.

  8. The Pareto Principle being the highlight in this last part here; 20% of men reproducing with 80% of women.

    This is NOT what we observe in the field. 20% of men have 80% of the sex is what we observe. Women frequently have sex with their beta husbands to have children. Once those children are had, women have recreational, non-reproductive sex with alphas and reduce the sexual frequency with their husbands. This we observe.

  9. @Rollo – “Un restrained Hypergamy leads us back to our feral, tribalist polygamy”

    I partly disagree because the feral tribalist form of polygamy primarily expressed polygyny, where as, this modern form of polygamy attempts to facilitate almost universal polyandry. Polygyny and polyandry are both forms of polygamy but different. Polygyny is a man with multiple wives. Polyandry is a woman with multiple husbands. The FI is focused on promoting polyandry. Hunter gatherer societies were, and are, far more prevalently polygynous rather than polyandrous. The “balance” of nature including human nature was maintained by a more prevalent occurrence of polygyny as opposed to polyandry.

    The female imperatives are different than the male. She will use her power (as either sex will) to facilitate personal goals and mitigate or delay those of others that interfere with hers. This includes such actions as delaying pregnancy at the cost of fetal health and normal formation as well as using males for sexual or economic opportunities according to how she perceives each. This is what we are experiencing today. Her artificially unnatural facilitated empowerment provides her less mitigated opportunity to exercise personal self-indulgence at a cost to men, offspring and the entire species. Such a nearly universal manifestation of polyandry has not occurred before. However, I think it will prove to be inherently and ultimately self-extinguishing. The “bitch” is ultimately “cooking her own goose”.

  10. Men simply taking over responsibility for birth control would be a step in the right direction as far as I’m concerned. Removing a woman’s control over reproduction takes away much of their power.
    I know that many men feel that voting is a useless endeavor, but I feel it is an important social responsibility and will also reduce the control that women are exerting. Just look at all of the politicians who cater to women’s causes at the expense of men. Vote against any politician who exhibits a total lack of concern over men’s issues and politicians who automatically support women’s issues at the expense of men.
    Finally, getting the white knight manginas to see the light and stop blindly supporting the feminazis is another way to reduce the danger that men are facing. Women have a herd mentality, it would benefit men to develop their own herd mentality for causes that concern them.
    Voting and converting the white knight manginas is difficult and will take time. Men taking over birth control responsibilities is something that men can control immediately, if they so choose. As we all know, once a woman gets pregnant, the man is a bystander who has zero say in whether the fetus is aborted or kept (along with the 18+ years of financial support).

  11. As regards lifespans, as far back as the author of Psalm 90 (ca. 1500 BC…the psalm is attributed to Moses in the heading) we KNOW that men lived an average of 70-80 years:

    As for the days of our [k]life, [l]they contain seventy years,
    Or if due to strength, eighty years,

  12. @Rollo – “Women are reluctant (and then resentful) to settle for a less-than the best Hypergamy with a suboptimal male as it is now, but add to this the condition that only the most ideal of Alphas represents the only legitimate sexual experience”

    ….and her expectations of “alpha” as well as her insatiable consumerism, being primarily formed by completely unrealistic bizarre motifs like the Disney Princess, urges her into insanity.

    You asked for suggested solutions in these comments. Your #1 solution, game, is what I recommend, but only if one becomes fully developed and expert. Become a master and remain autonomous. Simultaneously embrace the reality that you are essentially alone in this world. Accept the truth that when it comes down to the real nuts of it, no one is going to sacrifice themselves for you in any way they aren’t forced or conned into. Your goal should be to use others to your benefit, not necessarily to their demise or unhappiness. But do not waste a second or one joule of energy on someone who will not provide at least an equitable real exchange. What are the real benefits of associating with this person, not hoped for benefits, not benefits fraudulently offered. Be careful who you befriend because you will need to watch your friends more closely than your enemies. Above all, in this context, be extremely careful who you imagine your lovers to be.

  13. Rollo:

    I agree that in polygamous societies where most men don’t get to have sex or take a wife or have a family, the men go feral in the worst sense of the word – unbridled masculinity, brute violence, crime, fanaticism, etc. But that’s what you see in tribal subSaharan Africa and the Middle East, mostly backward nonwestern cultures. The West, the (former) First World, has a saturation welfare/social program culture. Most of these guys will end up on some form of welfare or another, and supplement it with minimum wage work. These guys aren’t going to take to the streets in numbers. They’re going to live in apartments, spend their money on their faptops and internet connections, xBox, weed and porn, and subsist on processed food. They’ll use internet porn to sate their sexual desires.

    The other thing I kind of disagree about is women initiating and pursuing. Most women aren’t going to do that. I’ve been harping on this for almost 5 years now, that if women want good men they’re going to have to go out and find them, beat the bushes, and ask them out and have sex with them, and they won’t do it. I don’t think they can do it. They don’t have to do it and they never will. Because we all know 5 minutes of alpha beats 5 years of beta, every time, and women will still have alphas pursuing them.

    Otherwise, agreed, and great job.

    1. @thedeti: I’d be careful when referencing Sub-Saharan Africa as “mostly backward” & “non-western”.
      You’ll find this true in probably less westernized and urbanized areas.
      And even then I’m sure the writer of the article Rollo chose picked Sudan for a certain reason.
      But in former colonies and increasingly urbanized cities/countries where western religion, and thus mores and norms, have permeated, things are more “western” than you think.
      Take it from a Sub-Saharan 😎.

      Rollo’s work, but especially other RP work, is becoming mainstream. Even here in Kenya.
      On a certain Kenyan forum I have been approached about Rollo’s work countless times, the female contributors on that site are up in arms about how ‘RP is a cult’ and what have you.
      Also, a few months ago when the #MeToo bullshit started we also had our own accusation orgy here as well….didn’t take off thank fuck. But, I hope you see what I’m trying to say?

      The internet has reduced certain ‘gaps’ between western & non-western culture massively.

      Anyway, I get what you were saying though.

  14. @ASD:

    They were not hunter-gatherers. That is not the average life expectency, but the “natural life” expectency, which is now held to be somewhere around 120.

    Youthful mortality was so high that it wasn’t included in the concept of life expectancy.

  15. I like Russell’s ideas. Here’s another. Introduce as many men as possible to this blog, the books, Robert Greens books.

    Create a phantom email address to send out a link to this blog, etc. if you want to avoid getting personally attacked. Send it in mass, each post. Spread the word any way you see fit and are comfortable with.

  16. @palma
    There is still the issue that for some reason roaming on Vodafone data won’t allow access TRM site so I’ll have to find broadband to post.. where I am

    I had the same issue with a UK provider. I rang them up and told them to remove content restrictions. Once they disabled that (had been on by default to protect me lol), I had to restart my phone and it worked. I’m guessing TRM might be blacklisted somewhere as adult content? Geez…

    Alternatively, use a proxy (e.g. http://www.proxysite.com) to access websites you have no problems with otherwise (you’re not in the UK most of the time and TRM works then yeah?).

  17. @Russel – If we come up with a b/c method for men similar to the Pill the game truly starts to change. Feminism got women the vote and into the work place. The pill and abortion got them everything else.

  18. I really don’t understand the antipathy directed at legal prostitution and sex dolls. Anyone familiar with the joys of the Fleshlight products knows that while it isn’t as good as the real thing, it is vastly better than nothing and often as good as mediocre level safe sex. Prostitutes in some countries are safe, affordable, and often very attractive. Without divulging too much personal info I was recently in a legal country in Europe and a very hot 21yo could be rented for 70eu for 30min, 120eu for an hour. Their enthusiasm and skills vary, but it’s still vastly cheaper than paying for successive nights of bar tabs trying to pick up a woman who can also be lame once she’s unwrapped.

    Before you trash me, I was also spinning a plate from Tinder so I do still hunt.

    Any man with experience knows that even a woman who “loves” you is sometimes going through the motions if a breakup is imminent or whatever; there is no shame is paying a sexy young woman for her time.

    Perhaps men who have never been in LTR’s or whom have difficulty getting women are harmed psychologically by having to pay for it, but really, as George Carlin said: selling is legal, sex is legal, so why is selling sex illegal?

    As to marriage and LTR’s in this cultural climate? No thanks. I’m thankful I was in my 20’s back in the late 90′-early 2000’s, as this crop of women high on social media likes are just total pains in the ass. Pump and dump.

  19. top 1 list of wwaakked’s shitstorm:

    “Going MGTOW isn’t a solution. It’s a transit stop. If it takes 7 years, build your shit and be a shining beacon to the next generation of men. Share. Step into the fire.”

  20. NBTM
    I didn’t think it could get worse than Hillary Clinton…

    Just for a start, there are so many images out there of Oprah snuggled up to Harvey Weinstein that are already being memed. #SheKnew would be a fun Twitter trend, if it isn’t already. Lots of things can and will happen in the next 2 years. Put down the black pills.

  21. blax – I take a shot of nbtm with a chaser of his intent to smooth it out…. women aren’t the only ones in need of a good bitchslap from time to time

  22. ole sean there in a masterful demonstration of a cool frame

    he knows she’s trying to bait him and he’s a solid motherfucker regardless

  23. dr zipper
    top 1 list of wwaakked’s shitstorm:

    Glad you read all that, so I don’t have to. That’s a real service, zip.

    Yeah, ideally MGTOW is just a phase, part of the anger / depression stage of unplugging. Some men get stuck there…

  24. @GhostofSteveMcQueen – Fully agree that better male birth control (vasalgel for example) would be a game changer for men. Improved male birth control is one of the causes that I think that most men can agree on (beneficial male herd mentality). Even white knight manginas would have a hard time arguing against improved male birth control. What a game changer it would be for men to control their own reproduction without needing the approval of women. Quicker development and approval of vasalgel, which is basically a temporary vasectomy that can be easily reversed, is a step in the right direction.

  25. @Rollo: on the last article someone brought up Civilian Conservation Corp and that got me thinking about J. Donovan’s project: neither one is quite MGTOW. Maybe it’s a fourth option: do shit with other men for a period of time (DSWOMFAPOT).

  26. > “The alpha beta realised man is stronger than the alpha or the beta ”

    To paraphrase the estimable Blaximus: WTF is going on in this forum?!

    Is a confederation of dunces starting to coagulate curdles of nonsense from the pure milk of red Pill Wisdom?

  27. @ wwkkd

    “The proper response is to ally.”

    I fully agree. What Rollo does here is great and necessary…but it needs to be coupled with action in the real world. Time to start building and re-affirming Masculine Tribes—something I’m sure Rollo would agree with.

    This is why I still hold Roosh in fairly high esteem. Despite the (entirely deserved) criticisms he’s received, his forum remains the top outpost for gathering & organizing red pill men online and then facilitating their connections in waking life. Just today I traded texts with forum guys in my city to pull together another meetup.

    We can either knuckle under and get organized, affirm other likeminded men and begin to pushback. I know which one I pick.

  28. “organizing red pill men online and then facilitating their connections in waking life. Just today I traded texts with forum guys in my city to pull together another meetup.

    We can either knuckle under and get organized, affirm other likeminded men and begin to pushback. I know which one I pick.”

    Dr. Zipper,

    That is the topic I wish to discuss. Encryption and anonymity for privacy. No skin lost if you’re not interested brother.

  29. @palma

    Ah ok, then it’s more likely on your side. I guess you’ve tried the usual steps: restart your phone, clear browser data, reset network settings, Soft Next, GFTOW… 😉

  30. “That is the topic I wish to discuss. Encryption and anonymity for privacy. No skin lost if you’re not interested brother.”

    Do not overlook simple word codes and samizdat.

  31. Blaximus
    Tacking on 20-30 years of age does not make her more formidable. Ever.

    HIllary Clinton probably looked like that a long time ago….

  32. @ kfg

    “What for?”

    lol who cares “why”? Everything starts with just showing up. Networking and linking up in real life. From there anything is possible.

    Grab beers, talk shop and chase pussy. It’s not the endgame–it’s where it starts.

  33. Is samizdat like a sammich but more zesty?

    Thanks KFG. I had heard about that practice but never knew the correct term for it.

  34. This has probably been said somewhere here before, I think Rollo has essentially said it, not exactly with these words but….

    The requirement for woman’s “enthusiastic consent” effectively self imposes a feminine interlude from sex. Here is why. Her sexual desire is partly but importantly stimulated by the man “just getting it”, meaning that the man understands her desire and receptiveness without having to ask for “consent”. Consent is predicated upon permission, not desire. You do not have to ask to give what is already desired. If she wants you, then you know she does, unless you are clueless in which case she will not want you. Mandating “enthusiastic consent” only serves to further confuse, agonize and perturb all males, alpha or beta. Metaphorically it is like castrating all men then temporarily sewing the balls back on certain ones only when, and for as long as, it is convenient to serve a females desire at her whim. What man in his right mind would go along with this? What woman really wants a man who would?

  35. “It’s not the endgame–it’s where it starts.”

    Correct. Start what?

    “lol who cares “why”?”

    You do. Or at least you should. My question was rhetorical, to get you to think. To think “why?”

    I understand that young men today are in such a state that simply getting together as a group of men, without women, is a revolutionary act, in their own minds, that will take some acclimating to. So you’ve started that. GOOD!

    But if all you do is start, you finish nothing. What IS the end game? It would behoove you to start thinking about that. Women sit around and talk, men get up and DO. You go to pub to plan what you’re going to do, or after to talk about what you did, but . . .

    You need a mission. Your men’s group needs a mission.

    Hunt. Fish. Build a model railroad. Knit sweaters (women stole that from the men who invented it, men who fished the North Sea from open boats in winter, as hard a group of bastards you’d ever be likely to meet outside of a Spartan phalanx). Train to win the Tiddlywinks championship . Save kittens from trees.

    Just do it.

  36. dragnet
    lol who cares “why”? Everything starts with just showing up. Networking and linking up in real life. From there anything is possible.

    Remember that RooshV’s meetups didn’t work out well a couple of years back. Especially the one in Canada

    Fortunately you’re smarter than him.

  37. @Roused: An example of doing a simple code old school:

    You have a group of guys who are down for regular meetup once a week, but you don’t want anyone outside the group to be able to know where it is before you get there. Pick six venues. Assign each one a number. On the meetup day one guy rolls a die to determine the location randomly. Then he sends a bullshit email to all all the guys. Somewhere in the body he makes some kind of OMG sort of thing. The number of exclamation marks indicates the location.

    Plain text, hiding in plain sight encryption.

    Ya’ll work in the same office/building, but don’t want to use company equipment? Put it on a post it note and stick it on a board where it blends in but you can all go by it during the day.

    You work in different buildings, make hash marks in chalk on a sidewalk you can all walk down during the day.

  38. Re Samizdat: that method of moving info around is how Solzhenitsyn’s “Gulag Archapelago” got smuggled out of the USSR. It’s also the reason that typewriters were registered with the police, including the serial number and a full sample of typewriting. Possession of an unregistered typewriter was a crime that would get you sent to the Gulag.

    No need for that kind of thing now. Between ISP URL data, Facebook and Google most people give away all the information on themselves that might be needed.

  39. Dang KFG…you have some spook potential. I love the suggestion. There are many ways to play that with endless variations.

    AR, the idea is to keep anonymous. Using the right software you can mask your IP. There are things like TOR and PGP encryption tools to help keep privacy as well. If you’ve read anything about groups like anoneeemuss you should know there are some damn clever folks out there that would enjoy outing a bunch of piggly wiggly vanilla patriarchicebunker misogynists given the right set of circumstances.

  40. @Roused

    kfg is handing out old school spycraft for free. A bargain at twice the price.

    AR, the idea is to keep anonymous. Using the right software you can mask your IP.

    Right. Most people don’t. That’s a training issue for anyone you meet with.

    There are things like TOR and PGP encryption tools to help keep privacy as well.

    Although using those things could get you attention because “using those things” is suspicious to some spooks. There are now petabyte data centers. There’s one in Utah that’s classified – even the amount of water the site uses is classified. Not to discourage, just mentioning.

    If you’ve read anything about groups like anoneeemuss you should know there are some damn clever folks out there that would enjoy outing a bunch of piggly wiggly vanilla patriarchicebunker misogynists given the right set of circumstances.

    That’s what went wrong with RooshV’s meetup in Canada, the feminazis found out.

  41. I’m all for enforcing enthusiastic consent. The only difference is that it should be men enforcing it. If you aren’t getting enthusiastic consent, then get the F up and leave. She’s not into you and nothing but trouble can follow. Can you imagine the turn around that would create when the average beta just gets up and leaves? “Sorry Babe, your not giving me the enthusiasm I need. I’m going to the gym to work this energy off.”

    Also, MGTOW is absolutely part of the solution. Every man that willingly takes himself out of the game makes it that much easier for those still in it trying to play. The bottom 50% of men don’t have a shot anyway. MGTOW is their only real answer for self preservation. If those guys consciously went MGTOW, can you imagine the drop in female validation? No more empty likes of their facebook posts of them modeling their new yoga pants, etc…

    Throw in vaselgel for reproductive control and it would be a completely different world.

  42. “Dang KFG…you have some spook potential. ”

    At the same time the Gulag Archipelago manuscript was being smuggled out of the Soviet Bloc in bits and pieces, bits and pieces of dollars, Duetsche marks, Levis and Hershey bars were being smuggled in.

    I carried a few of the bits.

    The 20 years or so of my mom’s working life she was an international photo journalist. When she retired at about 70 I built her her first computer. Since her friends and colleagues were scattered all over the world she immediately started getting pressured to join Facebook; so she went to have a look at it.

    She was aghast. “Why would anyone join that? Do you have any idea what that could be used for?”

    Yes, mom, I do, but you’re a sharp cookie and I didn’t have to spell it out for you.

  43. At the same time the Gulag Archipelago manuscript was being smuggled out of the Soviet Bloc in bits and pieces, bits and pieces of dollars, Duetsche marks, Levis and Hershey bars were being smuggled in.

    I carried a few of the bits.

    The 20 years or so of my mom’s working life she was an international photo journalist. When she retired at about 70 I built her her first computer. Since her friends and colleagues were scattered all over the world she immediately started getting pressured to join Facebook; so she went to have a look at it.

    Nice. Now you’re peaking my interest. Can we get a second helping of your tales?

    Another reason to sit and hear stories over beers or bourbon.

    I’ve known a few photojournalists in my day. A lot of friends and colleagues at both major U.S. metros and small dailies. Most of the world travelers worked for National Geographic. Many of us got out or were laid off and migrated to other jobs. There were always fascinating stories from those that worked abroad.

  44. AR, lots of goodies to read at Cryptome and Cryptogon. You can get lost in the large volume of documents uploaded at Cryptome. Some of it is dry and mundane, but there are nuggets.

    I’m up to speed on spook spending and their fancypants facilities. Also aware of what might draw their interest. Keywords are fun to play with.

    TOR was developed by U.S. Naval research labs. So while it is an option, it always makes me wonder about a backdoor.

  45. Then he sends a bullshit email to all all the guys. Somewhere in the body he makes some kind of OMG sort of thing. The number of exclamation marks indicates the location.

    Ok, lemme rehearse that.

    Dear Gang Tribe Members,

    Remember when Mark Wahlberg left this note on the dad’s red convertible in the movie Fear?

    That’s some cheesy nineties handwriting and one uncalled for apostrophe. Also, here’s where I mention that I saw this movie with my dad and brother in the theater when I was 13. I confirmed with my brother via text last night. Me: “Do you remember seeing Fear with Daddy?” Him: “Yes!!!!!! I totally do. Remember being bashful when Reese got fingered on the coaster? Lol.”

    http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/vulture/2013/04/23/23-fear-cherries.w529.h352.png

    ___________

    (Indeed, forums with Private Messaging are quite a decently private way to contact each other and pass off emails confidentially.

    I don’t want to join any more forums, get any more friends or lead or join more than a fire team of five to seven.

    Although I can confirm that reports of online and phone meet ups leading to incredible value for like minded individuals–virtual meetups. With the caveat that they are task oriented. Frequently Field reports and observations with someone that has gotten to know your strengths and weakness and that you resonate with and have like minded goals.)

  46. “Can we get a second helping of your tales?”

    Not here. There’s only a few almost, but not quite, amusing anecdotes about daily life anyway. Nothing exciting. Playing patty cake with the Soviet secret police sounds like it ought to make a thriller, but doesn’t really. Imagine trying to make a story out of walking a wire:

    “Yeah, it was pretty intense. And then I got to the other side.”

    Mom did it the hard way, freelance, but she was very good and didn’t have any trouble selling. A lot of phone calls at 8 at night saying something like “We’ve got a seat on a plane to Estonia at 8 in the morning, be on it,” and that would be the gig, just a seat on the plane. Whoever provided the seat knew she’d come back with pictures they wanted for something. I hung one of her shots blown up to poster size in the front hall. A friend came in and saw it and wouldn’t believe it wasn’t a painting. Point and shoot camera, no filters, printed straight by a bulk commercial lab. Mom had “the eye.” Her fine art was displayed in the Guggenheim a few times. It was so unique they didn’t know how to classify it.

    Wouldn’t be surprised if you’ve seen her stuff somewhere along the line. Sunday color NYT, Boston Globe, news stand national magazines.

  47. TOR’s gonna be the best you’ll find out there; it’s biggest weakness isn’t a technical one — it’s stymied many-a-3-letter agency — but one of participation; for TOR to work, there needs to be entry/exit nodes to pass your requests around the internet anonymously

    guess who hosts a shitload of these nodes? it’s only at these points that a nosy fuck even have the slightest chance of tracking anything and the more nodes you control, the better the chance of piecing something useful together

    Signal is awesome but once again, getting participation is the hard part; only like-minded folks with a bit of motivation need apply

  48. and as far as impressive pre-digital, pre-industrial encryption…. check out the Romans and the Knights Templar; both had to have secure communications, monetary transactions, military info, etc. across vast distances

    very clever stuff that would likely work today very easily since today’s digital appetites have dampened the possibilities and appreciation of meat space

    getting a bit closer to our primal just feels right on many levels

  49. ” . . . today’s digital appetites have dampened the possibilities and appreciation of meat space . . .”

    Yep. The very reason I point out its possibilities. That and a side order of it’s best to a get a bit of experience with it before the shit hits the fan and the system goes down.”

  50. Do alpha widows give consent?

    Is it part of the alpha widow shit test, the need to be forced?

    Can a man only expect enthusiastic consent from a desperate woman that is ovulating on spanish fly?

  51. “With an N count of well over 100 I have only had about 3 women who could do a decent blow job and suck harder at the right moment without being fucking dramatic about it..”

    palmasailor, not sure how I feel about it all, as I got a great son out of it, but if my ex did not suck my dick properly, I would not have stayed and my boy would not have existed. It really was that close to not happening…

  52. For all the guys saying that a perfect balance between Alpha and Beta might be optimal, just remember, women no longer expect nor find that balance believable. Especially in the era of instant social gratification and connectivity women polarize men into either the guy they want to fuck immediately on a SNL and the guy she thinks is “relationship material” who she’ll make wait to have sex so he doesn’t think she’s the kind of girl who’d immediately fuck a guy on a SNL.

    And remember, women feel absolutely no conflict about either AF or BB sides of Hypergamy:
    https://therationalmale.com/2014/09/01/the-myth-of-the-good-guy/

  53. All of this – if it will come true – will invariably lead to the destruction of the western race(s) and cultures as no matter how much access to alpha fucks only women achieve, the amount of offspring will be too tiny to keep the genetic line(s) going. And they will be unhappy with all their power as you can already see in increased usage of SSRIs in women. If you go to a “progressive” (rather regressive) part of the western world such as the SF bay area you will meet an incredible amount of once extremely – and still decently – good looking women who are about to hit the wall, hording cats or whoring themselves out to corporations 24/7 to paint over the dullness in their private life, never had kids and know nothing else but to go out, drink wine and party. They are past the stage where they can keep a partner or have kids (maybe 1 if they are very lucky) but still demand being treated like the princesses they once may have been. Definitely long pharma (SSRI) stocks.

  54. if you don’t fuck her the first night, you’re beta

    Back when I was in college, and a freshman, a senior girl invited me to her room. We made out and I discovered that she was on the rag. I got mad and left. I should have been cool and told her to call me when her period was over, then left. I let myself get triggered. Never noticed her after that.

    Alpha is a state of mind.

  55. KFG
    “Can we get a second helping of your tales?”

    I didn’t expect another helping, but spy tales are fascinating. Had to just throw it out there though. I might have seen your mother’s work. Perhaps someday I’ll know for sure.

  56. Although I can confirm that reports of online and phone meet ups leading to incredible value for like minded individuals–virtual meetups. With the caveat that they are task oriented. Frequently Field reports and observations with someone that has gotten to know your strengths and weakness and that you resonate with and have like minded goals.)

    Agree. I would have to say we’ve been highly successful staying on task. We don’t waste time jabbering about the draft prospects of the Browns (even though the draft is the only highlight of the season for the Browns) or inane crap. 95% of our discussions have been about RP.

    If there is a need and desire guys will find a way to communicate, build or whatever it is their heart desires.

    Yep. The very reason I point out its possibilities. That and a side order of it’s best to a get a bit of experience with it before the shit hits the fan and the system goes down.”

    Good point. Though if the system really goes down I don’t think field reports on RP will be as much of a concern as provisions and security. Simple comms solutions with few failure points are usually the best. We don’t need a world class currency system, just some basic tools. Tech tools help make things faster, but also come with complexity.

    Reminds me of how my Dad used to cultivate his vast and impressive vegetable garden. One shovel, two hands and his right foot.

  57. Prescient incisive analysis.

    Distilled, one triangulation:
    “. . . there is no denying that monogamous societies make for the most stable societies . . .” (Rollo)
    This is supported by the disintegration of monogamy correlating with rapid systemic/social change, perhaps accelerated by technology, so that change takes sometimes only weeks:
    “In writing and editing this series for the last few weeks a lot has happened in the Future is Female movement.” (Rollo)
    “In just 5 short decades men have ceded any claim to not only our own sexual strategy and interests, but to any right to paternity.” (Rollo)

    Correlate with:
    http://www.nber.org/papers/w14969 (Stevenson, Wolfers)

    The fem-unhappies MAY be because men are not cooperating with the New Feminist World Order. Men, after all, tend to have outside interests quite apart/away from the woman; tend to cede cooperation only conditionally (i.e. form up to bring down the mastodon); are task oriented/focused; so that cooperation is voluntary, conditional, and time-limited. A man cannot be coerced.

    So the current trajectory is flying up a blind canyon with no way out. What is happening, is happening very quickly. Society is actually a very complex system, and it all has to work: consider what had to happen for that can of beans to get onto the store shelf. Sheer complexity makes the whole structure vulnerable; just looks solid. It will not be long before things get truly critical. The degree of unhappies this course is generating and the resulting destabilization will shape attitudes/force change — rapidly.

    Got Popcorn?

  58. I think what we’ll see is a Beta-awakening of sorts. As the Female Primary Social order gains more territory, the burden of that territory will become very apparent. The order loves the idea but will not like the reality of having to manage both the Female and Male sides of society. The blame will naturally still fall upon men, but the Beta-Awakening will be stirred by guys with their backs against the wall and nothing left to lose. Right now what keeps Beta men in check is the perceived reward, the carrot at the end of the stick. Once it become overtly in-their-face that “the cake is a lie” (to quote portal), the great Beta whole will see the shame and take to action. There will be some pain in the process, but the pendulum will swing back as the disillusioned Betas with still loathe the Alphas, but they will also be more clued into the fact that what Alphas do works.

  59. As far as solutions go, why do otherwise reasonable red pilled men have so much fear of polygyny?

    Consider a couple of interesting points from a meeting of the Anthropological Society of London in 1863 by Sir Richard Francis Burton. Noting historical data, he first made an observation born out by our modern understanding of hypergamy:

    “Of course, in polygamy, few men have more than one wife.”

    Why? Because women will not willingly share a man unless he is very high-value and there aren’t many of them. The difference between a polygynous society and a monogamous society is that in the poly society men have the right to have more than one wife, but even so very few have them. So why do men like Deti say things like:

    “I agree that in polygamous societies where most men don’t get to have sex or take a wife or have a family, the men go feral in the worst sense of the word – unbridled masculinity, brute violence, crime, fanaticism, etc.”

    This is what I call the “Beta Apocalypse Fantasy“, which is the idea that if the alphas each get a harem, the rest of the men won’t have wives and they’ll turn feral. Historically that is incorrect and it’s proven by early accounts as well as modern research. Again, Mr. Burton:

    “In monogamy, ours for instance, there is a slight preponderance of male births ; in polygamy female births become greatly in excess ; in polyandry male births are enormously numerous, as many, for instance, as 400 boys to 120 girls.** We sometimes read that polygamic lands are thinly populated : true, but it is their population which causes polygamy, not vice versd. Moreover the two most populous empires in the world, China and Japan, are eminently polygamic.

    That was from a meeting 155 years ago. The entire discussion (with links to source material) is at the post I linked above.

    What most people don’t realize is the issues of polygyny and divorce go hand in hand. From the Bible we see that marriage was for the purpose of forming a family into which children were to be born, raised and nurtured. Polygyny was permitted, divorce wasn’t. The point is that the right of every man to have more than one wife was the regulator that gave women in monogamous marriages accountability. That right also gave highly successful men who wanted sexual variety and more children the option of doing so within marriage.

    Relevant to the discussion because of the impact on our culture, around 400 AD the church decided sex was the most evil thing ever, was only for the purpose of procreation and sex for pleasure was a sin even within marriage. Believe it or not, that’s a fact. A few hundred years later they banned polygyny for political reasons (officially the ban was because of all the evil and wicked sex), but kept the ban on divorce. Everything was monogamy, monogamy, monogamy. Or, to put it a better way, monopoly.

    That was like redesigning a hot water heater with no safety blow-off valve. Later, when the church and state lost the power to contain the pressure that built up in such containers, they started blowing up on a regular basis. Instead of putting the blow-off valves back on, they decided that when the pressure got too high they should break them up, distribute the parts and call it done. Now we have no polygyny but quick and easy divorce, with lots of broken parts (men, women and children) all over the place.

    So… why on earth is everyone so flipped out about polygyny when the historical evidence says it’s not a problem?

    Consider a scenario of two jurisdictions with much different laws:

    Husband 1 is married to one wife, but he lives in a patriarchal jurisdiction in which he has the *right* to have more than one wife, but he can only divorce his wife for adultery. The wife cannot divorce her husband for any reason. In this scenario wife #1 does not have a monopoly on her husband. Even though he committed to marriage to her and he’s stuck with her, she still has the threat of competition from other women because he *could* add a wife. He doesn’t have to add a wife, just the threat of competition provides accountability for her to do her job because there are possible consequences if she doesn’t that she will have to live with.

    Husband 2 is married to one wife, but he lives in a feminist jurisdiction in which he does not have the right to take another wife without first getting rid of wife #1. That isn’t a problem if he wants to trade her in for a newer model because divorce is “no fault” and either party can end the marriage for any reason or even no reason at all. Wife #2 has an complete legal monopoly on her husband as long as they’re married, absolutely no accountability for her behavior and the husband’s only recourse to bad performance/behavior on her part is to divorce her. To make matters worse, the laws are set up to reward her with cash and prizes if he does so. Of course, she can divorce her husband at any time knowing she will get cash and prizes for doing so, custody of the children and years and years of child support payments.

    Everyone already knows all about jurisdiction #2 because we live in it right now and it’s only going to get worse. There isn’t any point in discussing it. It is also obvious which of these two jurisdictions is better for the children and more likely to produce well-adjusted adults for the next generation.

    So… in Jurisdiction #1, assuming a free society in which everyone has a reasonable level of liberty, women must consent to marriage and there is no slavery, what percentage of men might be able to achieve multiple wives? Not more than 10%, because women will only do this sort of thing for a superior man. And when it happens, the number of female births increases so there isn’t any problem with other men finding a wife. Call it evolution, God or science, it is a historical fact that it happens.

    The second part of this equation is female competition. The Alpha with multiple wives has multiple women who will work to ensure he is well cared for at home, which means the alphas will no longer be available to any other women. That produces assortive mating and causes the remaining men to be “promoted” as far as the remaining women are concerned. Women will no longer even be able to get a pump and dump from alphas, so they will have to settle for the best they can get or do without.

    Female competition being what it is, the fact that her husband *could* take another wife means she has accountability, something completely lacking in our modern monogamous-only environment. To put it bluntly, the *presence* and *possibility* of polygyny is the institutionalized dread game necessary to maintain monogamous marriages in good condition. A woman must desire to be pleasing to her husband in order to do so. Sure, he can do what he can to game the hell out of her, but he cannot force her. The best way to give her a desire be the best wife she can be is called the accountability of competition.

    It both fascinates and disturbs me that men who are otherwise rational and red pilled are so enamored with monogamy. Any man who can spin plates can continue to improve himself and eventually spin those plates into a poly marriage. If done correctly, it’s the most durable family structure available today. A divorce-rape is basically impossible, although it one of the women wants to leave she can and will. However, if all wives have children, even if one of the women wants to leave the children will in all likelihood stay with their father.

  60. Polygamy really is a bad idea. In societies which allow it, it tends to be restricted by tradition, but even restricted polygamy leads to a shortage of young women. That’s another problem – men are considered eligible for marriage across most of their life, but its only young women who are really desirable as wives. You don’t see many of these polygamous patriarchs taking middle aged women as new brides. This exacerbates the problem.

    Polygamy does does lead to many problems in societies where sex and romance is restricted to marriage.

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: