One of the dichotomies I consistently see in the manosphere is the differences in how men approach the importance (or feigned unimportance) of sex. I got a bit sidetracked in last week’s essay. I was planing on writing about this phenomenon when I saw the need to explore how it impacted a larger social narrative. So, let’s consider this essay an addendum to The New Polyandry.
How men publicly and privately prioritize sex is always something that leads to a judgement call about that particular man, how he lives his life, and what it says about his integrity. If you openly make sex a “big deal” in your life, or you acknowledge its importance in intersexual relationships, you open yourself up to men’s Beta Game virtue signaling. The presumption is that if you were a real Alpha sex is just something you should have mastery over. If sex is at all important to a man, and he expresses this, that guy runs the risk of being seen as “obsessed with sex“, a “pussy beggar” or in someway less of a man for allowing sex to control his decisions.
Why is this the perception?
Two weeks ago I had a lively debate with the producer of Pat Campbell’s morning show. While we did have other topics to hit on that morning, she and I dug in and talked about how “sex is the glue that holds relationships together.” You can listen to the full segment here if you like.
As I mentioned last week, the notion that men need sex is nothing I haven’t covered in the past. In You Need Sex I made a case for the importance of sex and how it was, until recently, something that constituted part of a man’s life experience. Now it seems that being a sexless virgin at age 40 should be considered an accomplishment by certain factions in the manosphere:
One very common dismissal of Red Pill awareness I read from Blue Pill men is this feigned, blasé indifference to sex.
For the most part this false-indifference is really a conditioned, response couched in Beta Game. The idea is for the Blue Pill guy to promote the public perception that he’s above his sexual impulses in the hopes that any girl within earshot (or reading his comments online) will recognize his uniqueness in not letting his cock do his thinking for him. From a male deductive logic standpoint it makes sense to the feminized male – women have all told him how off-put they are with guys who only think about sex, so he’ll identify with the women he’d like to get with and “not be like other guys.”
“All that Red Pill, PUA shit is for guy’s who obsess over sex. They only go to the lengths they do to get laid and never see the bigger picture. You don’t need sex you know? You wont die from not getting laid.”
[…]Thats the Beta Game behind the “you don’t need sex” Buffer, but there’s more to this rationale than that. Technically the Beta reasoning is correct; physically, you’re not going to die if you don’t get laid. You could probably masturbate to relieve yourself or live a sexless existence due to a physical disability and live a productive life as satisfying as you can manage it. If you don’t know what you’re missing or if a sexual substitute does the job, what’s the difference, right? The line of reasoning is that if it isn’t food, water or oxygen it isn’t really a necessity for existence.
You’re All Obsessed!
Self-righteous Blue Pill men always look to make their necessities into virtues. It also helps the men who fall on the 80% side of the Hypergamous Pareto curve to convince themselves and others that their sexual strategy – one that follows enforced monogamy – is the moral one; or the logical, common sense one absent the moral context. If you cannot get laid yourself, at least you can make getting laid into an ‘obsession‘ for the 20% of men who can. By doing so you encourage the 20% of men, who women desire to fuck, to police themselves and women by adopting your own, self-superior, one-woman-per-man sexual strategy.
Pretty much every MRA I’ve listened to, most Traditional Conservatives and a few MGTOWs, like to qualify men who can get laid as being in some way obsessed with getting laid. We’re told how morally superior they themselves are for essentially thinking with the big head instead of the little one, thus confirming their own part in a monogamous sexual strategy. As I mentioned in the last essay, a majority of men tend to fall on one side of the Strategic Pluralism Theory with respect to their sexual strategy.
Low SMV (sexual market value) men are basically forced to invest in one woman at a time if they are to successfully reproduce. This is the basis of a socio-sexual order founded on enforced monogamy. The larger pool of men benefit reproductively if the majority of men can be relied upon to follow the dictates of socially accepted, socially enforced, form of monogamy.
In the past this emphasis also had a culling effect on the worst aspects of women’s Hypergamous tendencies. If all men – including the 20% who could enjoy many women – agreed to play by the old social contract and adopted monogamy as their sexual strategy (in spite of being able to reproduce outside it) then more men would have the opportunity to reproduce. Furthermore, women’s Hypergamy would also be forced to accept lower SMV men’s monogamous strategy as a buffer to worst aspects of their own.
In the past, religious and social mores used to act as a buffer against Hypergamy, but the compromise for women was that they could expect to have the Beta Bucks provisioning aspects of their Hypergamy more or less provided for by the majority of men who adopted this strategy. In an evolutionary sense, protection and provisioning are already an integral part of the male mental firmware. But all of that went out the window after the Sexual Revolution, unilaterally female-controlled hormonal birth control and the socio-sexual/socioeconomic landscape that sprang from the Fempowerment narrative.
Today there is a radical imbalance between the old social contract upon which enforced monogamy was a key element and the new social contract dictated by a gynocratic social order that places women’s sexual strategy well above that of men’s. So it’s small wonder that men would revert back to 80% of low SMV men insisting on, and shaming, the 20% of high SMV men comply with a sexual strategy that women readily confirm isn’t in their best interests.
On the male side of the strategic equation a majority of low SMV men cannot afford to have Alpha men playing by the rules of polygyny.
That polygyny is really a form of female-directed polyandry (see last week’s essay), but to the 20% of men who enjoy the benefits of falling on the enthusiastic consent side of Hypergamy it just makes sense to go with it. As such, low SMV men are compelled to find ways of discouraging these Alphas from following their r selected sexual strategy. They realize women will want, and pursue, Alphas. And in a polyandrous socio-sexual order based on the Alpha Fucks side of Hypergamy low SMV men drew the shortest straw.
Intrasexual Combat
When Beta men shame women for wanting to fuck Alpha men it has the effect of making those Beta men seem more insecure. In a feminine-primary social order one of the highest crimes is to attempt to challenge Hypergamy in any way. Even in a religious context, to challenge Hypergamy is to be guilty of repressing women’s sexuality. Today, just this impression is conflated with ‘toxic’ masculinity.
In truth, it would never occur to most low SMV men to shame women for their sexual strategy because they know that in doing so they reduce their own chances of reproduction. Women simply deem them ‘losers’ in the SMP (sexual marketplace). They become scolds, or worse, they become men who are “insecure in their masculinity” because they confirm their low SMV status in doing so. In today’s socio-sexual environment men policing women’s Hypergamy is a lost cause.
The solution then becomes an effort to disqualify the Alpha men they compete with by changing the rules that “real men” are supposed to play by. If you can’t win the Game, change the rules to better fit your strengths.
The ‘Real Man®‘ becomes the guy who exclusively invests himself in one ‘Quality Woman‘ – just like they do.
The apex of masculinity becomes whatever definition best aligns with what they believe they represent.
The’Real Man®‘ is the guy who best fulfills a woman’s, often duplicitous, sexual/life strategy by adopting the K mating strategy of socially/religiously enforced monogamy – just like they do. Oh, and the Quality Woman becomes whatever woman whose necessity compels her to agree with and adopt that strategy (Epiphany Phase).
The Real Man®‘ is the guy who plays by the old social contract rules of enforced monogamy, so more Betas might have a better shot at reproduction. True ‘Manhood‘ becomes a title Betas now feel qualified to bestow on other men; just as women also do with men who help complete their Hypergamous life-strategies.
Trads vs. The Playboy Lifestyle
In order for Beta men to effect this reigning in of the Alpha men women want to tame and breed with, the high SMV man must be demonized and disqualified from the SMP for following his sexual/biological imperatives. The most common way to do this is by conflating his strategy with a degenerate hedonism. he must be made to seem as if he’s not in control of his sexual nature. So the effort becomes one of building an archetype around the ‘Playah‘ – A man who would be a bad long term bet for women’s Hypergamy because he lacks self-control. For this straw man character his little head does the thinking for the big head making him unreliable as a prospect for parental investment.
If enforced monogamy defines the accepted SMP, and women are presumed to be coequal, co-rational participants in it the ‘Playah’ needs to be cast as the outsider. The latent message is the same intrasexual combat method women use with ‘slut shaming‘; the ‘Playah‘ is a bad bet for long term security even if he is the guy women want to fuck.
However, that Playboy is a cruel reminder to low SMV men that they’ll never be able to fully exercise their own masculine imperative – unlimited access to unlimited sexuality. The closest the majority of men will ever get to this is online porn; which of course is why it’s so popular. There is a reason why 68% of Christian men watch porn. They understand that it’s the only viable substitute for their sexual imperative that they’re likely to experience in this lifetime.
While MRAs and MGTOW tend to reserve a special hate for ‘Playahs‘, it’s the Trad-Con mindset that is the most vocal against the Playboy lifestyle. There’s an overarching need amongst Trads to confirm their ego-investment in locking themselves into enforced monogamy.
There’s two complications to this:
First, Trad men (and women) tend to superimpose their religious and social belief set on their own sexual strategy. It’s a sin if they don’t accept monogamy as the standard. Today, this belief is a vestige of the old buffers that used to guard against either sex getting too far into their primal sexual impulses and strategies. It’s much easier to impose your sexual strategy on other men, effectively policing their strategy, if it’s ‘God’s Will’ that everyone behave according to that old social contract. I should add that this is the primary reason most Trad men suffer the worst from having their belief in the old set of books destroyed by Red Pill truths. It is galling for men who’ve invested their whole lives in the old social contract to have it vividly disproved by ‘Playahs’ (and women’s behaviors that confirm it) who understand the new social contract well enough to make it work for them.
Second, there’s the self-fulfilling idea that a man who opts for the traditional monogamous lifestyle is in some way more progressive or evolved, or life-satisfied than the ‘Playah‘ with the option to enjoy his non-exclusive sexual strategy. These are the guys who play up the ‘sour grapes’ Law of Power:
Law 36 – Disdain the things you cannot have
If there is something you want but cannot have, show contempt for it. The less interest you reveal, the more superior you seem.
MRAs and Trads alike don’t like being reminded that sex has always been an integral part of a healthy life experience for the majority of men who’ve ever lived on this planet. However, to them, sex is almost always a reward for desired behavior that they believe women expect of them. For most of them sex is always transactional so they never live out any frame of reference of having sex with a woman in a validational sense. It’s likely that they will never experience sex in any other context than the transactional. This is simply one of the visceral realities of a Darwinian sexual marketplace. As such, this pretext colors all of their understanding about what is, or should be accepted as, a legitimate sexual strategy – which unsurprisingly is his enforced monogamy strategy.
“Meaningful” Sex
The low SMV majority have many contrivances to corral uncooperative Alphas to adopt their sexual strategy. However, there’s also an involved necessity to convince themselves that their Blue Pill conditioning is the best sexual strategy that would benefit everyone if we’d all just see the validity of it as they do. To effect this they apply a subjective “meaningfulness” to their enforced monogamy (K selection) and “meaninglessness” to pursuing men’s biological imperatives (r selection) or the Alpha sexual strategy.
As a result, low SMV men tend to deemphasize the importance of sex in life. I asked this in the introduction; why is there a perception that a man who enjoys many women is somehow having sex that is less ‘meaningful’ than a man whose sex live is dependent on his relationship with one woman – or, a man who is ostensibly celibate?
The tactic involved here is the control over what constitutes meaning in sex. Low SMV men need this control to direct a meta-Frame that foments their sexual strategy; sex is only valid if it’s ‘meaningful’ in a way that aligns with an enforced monogamy sexual strategy. Thus, they can disqualify high-SMV men by delegitimizing his sexual experience. The higher the notch count, the less meaningful the sexual experience – and the likelier he can be seeen as “obsessed‘ with (meaningless) sex.
“Meaning” is deliberately ambiguous to better salve the egos of low SMV men, but meaning only aligns with what better promotes the enforced monogamy strategy. This strategy conflict actually serves Hypergamy in the long run as well. Women will endorse the importance of meaningful sex since it helps to convince the r selected Alphas that they should (eventually) shift to K selected commitment and parental investment with them. To the Beta moralist, any sex that doesn’t implicitly lead to marriage, children and the formation of families it’s always ‘meaningless’.
For the less moralistic low SMV man the idea that sex is something easily had, something inherently cheap, serves in devaluing Alpha men’s sexual experience. A popular idea among MRAs is that meaningless sex is something any guy can realistically achieve in a random club on a Friday night. This also serves to debase the value of learning Game; something MRAs never seem to have any facility with. By unrealistically cheapening the process of Game the same ‘meaninglessness’ imperative is created.
If any guy can find a worthless club slut with minimal effort then the low SMV man can raise his value by appearing to have higher standards than to lower himself to doing so. See how that works? This is a variation of the ‘sour grapes’ strategy I mentioned earlier. The Alpha who can easily get women becomes common. And by enjoying what Beta men believe should be a common sexual experience that man is reducing himself to his baser instincts. They say he’s “obsessed with pussy” or a “pussy beggar” because he’s applied himself to learning, in the most marginal way, how to have sex on his terms. And if he plays by a rule set that doesn’t align with the “correct” rules all his efforts become “meaningless”.
I should add here that MRAs and some Trad-Con men also like to foment the idea that because they eschew all that easily-had “meaningless” sex that Alpha men and Low Quality women are engaging it frees him up to pursue more esoteric, philosophical and creatively productive pursuits. Again, this helps to boost their esteem while presenting the appearance of uniqueness in spite of the fact that few of them ever have anything concrete to show for it. Along these lines they also love to imply that famous celibate men of antiquity were somehow more accomplished because they had the forbearance of mind to understand sex was a hindrance. When no one believes you aren’t making your necessity a virtue it’s sometimes necessary to paint men more famous than you with the same false-virtues.
The common refrain is that they’ve reached some Nirvana state of higher purpose or that they’ve evolved above the common need for sex. They shame the Alpha’s intelligence by claiming they allow their sexual nature to dictate to their rational nature. This too is a sexual quality signaling (or they believe it should be). They hope that their coequal, co-rational, Quality women will respond to it because they presume they’re using the same enforced monogamy rule book. Most Beta moralists are egalitarian blank-slate equalists. If they are evolved above their sexuality, then evolved, rational women should be too – but only if they are quality.
Social proof and performance
They say he’s “obsessed with pussy” or a “pussy beggar” because he’s applied himself to learning, in the most marginal way, how to have sex on his terms.
“His terms” is irrelevant. There’s a biological mating dance that humans do and a man has to know the proper moves to complete the dance. Real desire is part of the mating dance. A man can have sex on transactional terms as well, but no dance is required for that.
Damn it this is relevant was dreaming about a lot of these points in your post
“The larger pool of men benefit reproductively if the majority of men can be relied upon to follow the dictates of socially accepted, socially enforced, form of monogamy. Unlimited access to unlimited sexuality “how to have sex on his terms.”
Approach and learning Game is the last part of what i can use to function in modern day society and the sexual marketplace.
Good call Rollo “The Real Man®‘ is the guy who plays by the old social contract rules of enforced monogamy, so more Betas might have a better shot at reproduction. True ‘Manhood‘ becomes a title Betas now feel qualified to bestow on other men; just as women also do with men who help complete their Hypergamous life-strategies.” What happens when a high SMV man plays by the rules and becomes a “REAL Man”? None believe he is doing it, the hypergamous women won’t let him be and the 80% that are actually thinking with the little head are still jealous… Read more »
” It’s likely that they will never experience sex in any other context than the transactional. This is simply one of the visceral realities of a Darwinian sexual marketplace.”
It’s basically over for the 80% of men. Beta provisioning is obsolete and open hypergamy is becoming socially accepted. This is one those Rollo’s posts that deliver covert black pills.
“We just about managed the meeting but he refused to work with me and refused to pay money he owed me. Tried to shame me with the management. You name it..”
This is the type of shit that threatens your lively hood! I call it beta bitch game, hard to ignore when it hurts your ability to ne a “real man” and do the “right thing”.
I may have a different POV on the whole alpha/beta dichotomy – the Testosterone level that is. I ended up going on TRT two years ago for reasons unrelated to sex drive, and since then I’ve been able to confirm experimentally what I concluded deductively: the vast majority of young men i run into seemed to be my former self, the Low-T guy. One of the immediate effects of doubling then quadrupling my Testosterone was that the majority of women i ran into first became unattractive, then repulsive. I assumed higher T made me more aware of higher value women… Read more »
“Yes it could do.”
Say you are,a; good looking alpha,b;in a “real man” monogamous relationship with children.
You have a triple burden when adding the beta bitch game on top of it,now shit gets serious,the beta isn’t just fucking you over he is fucking over your family.
@Palma,good day sir.
“Show me what a man holds dearest, and I’ll show you the means by which to control him.”
Bears are K-selection breeders. They are not monogamous and the males are not family men.
This blog entry is just as self-interested as the attitudes of betas who claim sex is overrated and that “playahs” are degenerates, etc. It’s a commentary on the beta sexual strategy that is itself an expression of a competing sexual strategy. To hear Rollo tell it there is nothing positive about the attempt to norm monogamy; it’s all in one way or another a dishonest and elaborate ploy by betas to rein in playboys. Maybe that is true though. Maybe Rollo’s speculations are 100% on the money. What concerns me is not the morality of “the playboy lifestyle” but which… Read more »
I should add that this is the primary reason most Trad men suffer the worst from having their belief in the old set of books destroyed by Red Pill truths. It is galling for men who’ve invested their whole lives in the old social contract to have it vividly disproved by ‘Playahs’ (and women’s behaviors that confirm it) At the late, lamented Spearhead a regular commenter who went by “Anonymous Age 60+” would sometimes repeat his experience in the 1980’s running groups for men who had just been divorced (frivorced). I recall he mentioned more than once that the traditional,… Read more »
Rollo your missing some very important things about the Christian view. Eg:
https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2017/02/mired-in-roiling-tar-pits-of-lust.html
Christian view acknowledges that sex is a glue. We believe that it is a an extremely powerful one indeed. That is why St Paul urges couples to provide each other access to it. Christians are called to become like Christ – a living God. We believe that gluing your desires to random strangers makes it incredibly difficult to achieve that. In fact, we believe that it is so powerful, that even gluing yourself to a wife makes this task difficult. Christian mission is to become a living God. Something that we will never achieve. Christian celibacy comes from making the… Read more »
@Student
Do you speak for all denominations?
Does there have to be an end-game? Does it have to be “virtuous”? Would it not be a “proper” goal for a man to hope to bang as much quim as he can before he dies (or bang the same one as many times as he can)? On the other hand, why must a man’s goal be to fuck lots of women? If he wants to eventually die on his couch whilst playing video games, it’s his life, let him do what he wants, as stupid and pointless as it sounds to others. I’m usually wary of people wanting to… Read more »
*”some Trad-Con men also like to foment the idea that because they eschew all that easily-had “meaningless” sex that Alpha men and Low Quality women are engaging it frees him up to pursue more esoteric, philosophical and creatively productive pursuits.” You say ” SOME trad-con” but why is your investigation of the other tradcon always so limited? You never go into it. *Traditionalist Christians certainly don’t think sex is ‘meaningless’. They also acknowledge that for monks that pangs are even worse because they have to fight the possibility of it. *You often state that it is an end of an… Read more »
“Do you speak for all denominations?”
No Traditional Catholic/Orthodox. Other denominations deviate from Christianity in important respects.
Incidentally, as a consequence, increasing fit the criticisms that rollo has made as a result.
@Boris “If every beta learned Game women would still go for the top 10-20% of men so that’s not going to work. I want to know what Rollo’s end game is. He asks this of MGTOW (and don’t go there – I’m not MGTOW) so it’s only fair that he provide us with an account of a society where every guy is “red-pilled” and aping the playboy by learning game.” Legit. I made this point on a previous post arguing that working hard to fulfill and satisfy hypergamy is like the myth of Tantalus where he was to stand in… Read more »
Does there have to be an end-game? Does it have to be “virtuous”?
Virtuous means right action so the end game does has to be virtuous.
‘end-game’ yes even before taking things to the Christian level. Both aristotle and Aquinas define man as the rational animal.
Like beavers build dams or birds fly man is rational.
So the end game of man will be to maximise his rationality. This is within the context of all the structures that support this purpose reproduction work etc. In the Christian context this eventually leads to God.
Does there have to be an end-game?
Someone has to raise children. If we’re all screwing our brains out, are we screwing the same small group of women and saving the rest for marriage, or are we screwing women indiscriminately? Rampant promiscuity is a receipe for divorce and single-motherhood.
I understand that men in this community avoid marriage. That is reasonable. But who raises kids? Single moms? “Playahs” aren’t known for settling down, and betas don’t want their sloppy seconds. The more sexual partners a woman has, the greater the chance that she’ll initiate a divorce.
https://therationalmale.com/2011/12/16/truth-to-power/
Yollo
Interesting post
Christ says that to reach perfection one must abandon the family much like Paul Gaugin in the post above. Traditional Christianity facilitates this so cannot be centered around hypergamy in essence
Game must be ordered to something higher to enact fundamental change. Something that causes change to the interior. Traditional Christianity facilitates this.
Where Christianity does not align with the post is in the matter of confidence. The Christian does not need or want self confidence. The Christians confidence is in Lord Jesus Christ.
For the Christian true confidence is confidence in Christ. This was hard even for the disciples after witnessing many miracles. Christ is constantly reframing his statements so that they don’t loose heart. See the Homilies of St John Chrysostom* for an excellent analysis of this. Aquinas said he would give the whole of Paris for this book. The problem for the Christian is that Rollo attacks an imperfection in men in a way that diverts them from the church. The church is the hospital for the damaged that can lead them to Christ and true confidence. Homilies of St John… Read more »
@Boris
When you realize society is full of shit, why should you care to help it put it’s mask back on? You’re all you’ve ever had and all you’ll ever have.
@Student
You will never eliminate the need to reason with works derived from Aristotle.
@ All
Can we leave all the religious/ god squad bullshit out of this comment section! this blog is about intersexual dynamics and sexual strategy’s.
There are other red/pink pill blogs more suited for you to debate the self imposed anguish caused by your frankly pathetic religious control systems.
Thanks. Big hugs 🤗.
Yollo. “You’re all you’ve ever had and all you’ll ever have.” Man is a social animal and cannot thrive without society. Could not learn language without being taught, cannot attain any excellence without conversation. The lesson behind all Greek myth is that “confidence leads to downfall” see ‘The Idea of History’ by R G Collingwood for an excellent discussion of this. This can be seen enacted in history repeatedly. All tragedy is based on it. Self confidence can never be greater than confidence in Christ. It requires greater confidence to abandon self confidence. “You will never eliminate the need to… Read more »
@ Playdontpay
I only discuss from a religious point of view insofar as it relates to the post and comments resulting from it.
After swallowing Red Pill, I’ve realised that sex is an absolute must. I was what Rollo described as “Blue Pill Alphas”. Think of 9 on SMV chart but also a white knight. Luckily this has changed after reading The Rational Male books (I have printed version). Getting laid was never really a problem for me and I can always go for some girl who is lower on SMV. But what I have realised is that with sex comes not only physical satisfaction but also big big respect from women. If they fuck you, they also respect you. It’s all in… Read more »
Women respect men who reject them.
Almost every time, after enough time has passed for them to know it.
Their eyes will water with desperation when they look at you.
Women don’t respect the needy.
@ all god botherer’s Religion is just RAPE disguised by ceremonial bullshit, strange clothing and mystical “woo woo” fantasies. Using a rigged shaming structure to extract obligation sex from women is just another form of Beta game and is weak as fuck! Its tantamount to Rape! Being attractive charismatic and alpha is too hard for most betas though so they try and deploy religious rape game just to force women into giving them some obligation based action as they are “good men” . Genuine desire cannot be negotiated by shaming tactics and all the shame should be directed at you… Read more »
@play
Can you really not accept that ‘Being attractive charismatic and alpha’ for the sake of women gets boring pretty quickly.
What higher purpose do you have? That would stand up to scrutiny?
Sex is just one of many many things that traditional Christians abstain from. Can you not accept that it’s not all about sex?
[There are a lot of “celibate” Catholic priests who feel the same way, until they think the altar boys are winking at them]
@Student
So many fallacies.
I have a test for women
It’s called “the boner test” if they pass i May Fuck them or maybe even pair bond with them until they fail the test.
All very natural no “woo woo” required!
Women have a similar test, one that you are trying to circumvent by applying religious shaming tactics!
Like I said shame on you mr rapist.
@ student
“What higher purpose do you have ?”
I just like to enjoy and appreciate the good things life has to offer, beautiful places, travel, great food/wine/ other alcoholic based drinks, women/sex ( I’m currently in an 11 month ltr that I’m enjoying immensely so far) I love sport and excercise.
Your question confuses me because like Hypergamy I’ve never felt it’s pull because I’m a Man.
“To the Beta moralist, any sex that doesn’t implicitly lead to marriage, children and the formation of families it’s always ‘meaningless.’” My trigger words here is ‘always.’ It is the analogue to the word ‘always’ in your assertion that “if a woman wants to fuck you, she’ll always find a way to do so.'” No – she won’t. And even if she tries, she won’t always manage. I think you’re right in identifying the ‘beta’ stance of hypocritical morality – but what would you say to someone who takes (as I do), the amoral view that any sex that doesn’t… Read more »
Student I saw a group of traditional Christian men yesterday evening under the overpass high above their pile of necessities. So much like Christ leaving thair homes and families behind to live with only one set of clothing,sharing what little they had for the group sustenance. So much in contrast to those pyramid scheming bible collegers trying to find financial stability like so many predators in Jesus name. The big benefits of forgiveness are social acceptance,physical health and self respect. The big problem is not picking up your bed and walking ,going and sinning no more and redefining sin to… Read more »
Taking the overall male sexual scattergun imperative, strategy and calling it alpha is even more wrong as the social pressure on alpha to be beta is imposed from day one. He is the least likely to excersise his full options.
“Virtuous means right action . . .”
Actually, it means manly action. Which is right, for a man.
“But who raises kids?”
The village. Dominant men are an important part of the village.
“The more sexual partners a woman has, the greater the chance that she’ll initiate a divorce.”
Divide by zero error.
Agree…low smv men try to attach “meaning” to sex in the way that someone On a diet tries to spoil themselves with a chocolate brownie as a reward. The end result in both cases is never satisfying because the mindset is one of pedestalizing the “reward”. As a guy who now “gets it” I meet and bang young women in their 20s regularly who openly describe and participate in sex as part of a biological need. They want a guy who understands that and won’t blow the whole experience out of proportion as “special”. In fact in my recent experience… Read more »
I’ve never judged alphas for their ability to have easy “meaningless” sex as a 26 year old virgin myself. If betas risen above, alphas are in the instincts, incels are angry at women then im probably under instincts because i’ve never had any interest in sex and related activities nor im entitled to it. There was never a “hormone rush” in puberty and that alienated me from other teens.
/blogpost
Great post. Made me as angry as hell, but only because it was true. There does seem to be a war between Men Who Get Laid versus Men Who Don’t. The way I see it, Men Who Get Laid see Men Who Don’t as losers. They happily screw other men’s wives and brag about it on forums like this one. I’ve read so many comments on this blog alone in which some man proudly describes how he seduced a hottie right under the nose of her AFC boyfriend. I hate it. Rollo’s argument seems to be that I only hate… Read more »
“Having the Men Getting Laid tell me what a loser I am though—that’s a different story entirely. Why would I want anything to do with them?”
Do you think you’re going to learn how to be a winner from the other losers?
@ student
Who’s scrutiny?
And why would I give a fuck? As I’ll be over here enjoying my life! And sleeping like a baby next to my hot girlfriend after she’s fucked me like I like being fucked?
“They happily screw other men’s wives and brag about it on forums like this one.” So what a man is supposed to do if other’s men wives give them strong IOIs? It’s not the fault of top 20% of men that women are hypergamous and enjoy cuckoldry! Rollo is right about how certain men deemphasise the importance of sex to cope because they are not getting any. What Rollo does not address much is the implications of having the majority of male population in a society sexless! [I wrote an entire post on exactly this just last week The New… Read more »
@kfg “Do you think you’re going to learn how to be a winner from the other losers?” This is exactly what I mean. Your question contains the premise ‘Man Who Gets Laid = Winner’. In other words, I’m a loser for not getting laid. Fine. Congratulations. You win. But since I have no chance against you, I prefer to play OTHER games which don’t involve sex. As my handle suggests, I have a talent for drawing. I have a talent for public speaking. My freelance business is doing pretty well. None of this makes me attractive to women. Okay, if… Read more »
There’s a lot of noise about “what ifs” that have a very, very low probability of happening. Really, suddenly every man on the planet (ok, let’s just restrict it to The West) will swallow the Red Pill and act accordingly? Has everyone in the world got the memo that washing hands reduces the incidence of diseases? If a simple message can’t get through, complicated theories are unlikely to get better traction. And let’s say they somehow do get enlightened en masse, and every man gets swoll and dark triad and rich (although with no comparator, the adjective is meaningless) and… Read more »
Xist cartoon
You are your own self fulfilling prophecy. You best rewrite your own script and do it quicklikey.
@Palmasailor “I’m banging other men’s girlfriends at the moment, or rather they are banging me.” @Orson “So what’s a man is supposed to do if other’s men wives give them strong IOIs? It’s not the fault of top 20% of men that women are hypergamous and enjoy cuckoldry!” Part of me wonders whether you’re kidding. You really don’t understand why 80% of men would see you as a threat? An enemy even? The bottom line is this: Women are hypergamous; they cannot help what they do. But men pride themselves on being rational. Indeed, that is Rollo’s whole argument–that men… Read more »
“However, that Playboy is a cruel reminder to low SMV men that they’ll never be able to fully exercise their own masculine imperative – unlimited access to unlimited sexuality. The closest the majority of men will ever get to this is online porn; which of course is why it’s so popular. There is a reason why 68% of Christian men watch porn. They understand that it’s the only viable substitute for their sexual imperative that they’re likely to experience in this lifetime.” The best and surest cure for porn addiction is TRP it is a little red pill,hard to swallow… Read more »
Mineter
Show me a man who tries to control me and I’ll show you a .45.
And maybe this is the entire issue I have with this–whether getting laid is more important than winning the trust of other men. A man who bangs a lot of women may be envied, but rarely is he trusted. But then, if he sees men who don’t get laid as lesser men, then their trust is not something he’s going to value. Why should he care? He’s getting laid.
@Exist cartoon
“And maybe this is the entire issue I have with this–whether getting laid is more important than winning the trust of other men.”
You can’t be serious, other mens wives rule their lives,yet they notice the little IOI’s.
If I bang them or don’t I will never win their husbands trust as they will judge me on what they would do in my shoes wthout ever having to live in them. This bis much easier for the average man to get away with unsuspected.
Suck on it son.
@ex-cartoonist Let’s say Monica Bellucci came at you and told you to fuck her silly would you say no because she was married? Don’t you know that 99% of men would fuck other men’s wives if given the opportunity? Women are the gatekeepers of sex so it’s up to her to decide wether she will cuckold her man or not. There are no consequences for her behaviour and she will eventually dump her man …so why should there be consequences for men that fuck around? Also women are actually capable of acting in a rational way but today they are… Read more »
“Your question contains the premise ‘Man Who Gets Laid = Winner’.”
No. You introduced the terminology of “loser.” If you came to me for advice on cycling, lifting, computer programming, et al I would use terminology like “better” and “more effective.”
Not challenge series,conquer series. Still good luck with that. What these men need but won’t swallow is “the red pill”.
“https://conquerseries.com/why-68-percent-of-christian-men-watch-porn/”
https://conquerseries.com/why-68-percent-of-christian-men-watch-porn/
Orson I.call bullshit on the notion that 99% of men would fuck another man’s wife if given a chance. And it’s got nothing to do with religious style morality either. Over my lifetime I’ve barely met a handful of men that would actively go after a man’s wife. Nowhere near 99%. And I’m not talking about a man who’s being enticed and invited to have sex by a married woman. That’s different, and that’s mostly on the husband and his poor choice . that shit happens and at worst, it’s a learning experience for the man. 99%? 😂 fuck no.… Read more »
The bottom line is this: Women are hypergamous; they cannot help what they do.
This is pure and utter bullshit. Women have agency. Women can be trained just like men can be trained.
If you fuck another man’s wife, be aware that there are still men around who will put you in the ground.
Women are the gatekeepers of sex
…with betas…alphas hold the sex gate as far as women are concerned…betas compete for women and women compete for alphas
@Blaximus
Isn’t Rollo debunking your “Meaningful” Sex in the essay above?
Also, I forgot to add that contrary to the current belief/understanding, women are not the gatekeepers of sex. I get it, it’s a popular bigger in the sphere, but it’s also a glaring abdication of authority and manhood to voluntarily accept this idea, and then set out to act accordingly. Orson, chew on this idea for a minute ( warning: this idea doesn’t require a.man to consider people or ideas vastly opposed to his own MPoO ) – what does it mean if a woman is more.concentrated on what ” society/culture ” will accept and allow over how she sees… Read more »
P.S.
Rollo is talking about something else.
Nobody can debunk my experience. Problem is, you cannot fathom what I’m talking about, hence your frustrations and odd blanket statements.
FWIW, I had several opportunities handed to me to bang married women back in my Rock Star period and I declined every one. I want to say it was because I still retained some of my Blue Pill ideals even when I was at my most Alpha, but that wouldn’t be entirely true. I declined these women because I could. I had the capacity to nail single women with no attachments, and I did fuck my share of women who had boyfriends who only let me know about him after we’d gotten after it. But I had options and I… Read more »
…. Monica Bellucci😂😂
Just a girl.
“Just a girl.”
And they’ve made billions of newer models since they made Monica.
That’s my story. I wasn’t into banging married chicks because I was it as enabling their behavior, and that while idea that all men will fuck any woman anytime, giving women some kind of power. I’ve rejected that since I first recognized it. It’s downright insulting. The one woman I was banging consistently and diligently, I didn’t have any idea she was married. There were clues I should have picked up on, but I dismissed them in light of the voraciousness of the sex, and how she pursued. Even though the sex was an 8 in the Richter scale, in… Read more »
Hmmmm…. What shall you do with your dick? What shall you do….? What are you “SUPPOSED” to do with your dick? What shall you THINK of your dick? What are you “SUPPOSED” to THINK of your dick? There are so many questions being asked about your dick here…. so much confusion…. so many doubts and concerns, frustration and PROPAGATED worry. Who knows the “real” answers? Where can you find a dick map? How are the dots connected? Why read all this stuff? Why ask these questions?…… Is it because you do not know what to do with your dick? Because… Read more »
Rollo: I think why there was such push back from Carly is that the mainstream views protect the female’s interests, her interests, and has been her expectation of “the deal”. The view of stand by your woman even if she gets fat and stops being intimate with you because sex isn’t everything is a prime example. The shunning of you by her is just reinforcement of her interests. She doesn’t want her “deal” to change. Her friends and potentially husband are listening. Obviously if the mainstream view of this changes to be more in line with your discussion, it begins… Read more »
I love where this is going. And right on the holidays too.
The village. Dominant men are an important part of the village.
Only when the men in the village are close kin so they have a common genetic interest in raising the kids which may or may not be theirs. If one guy in the tribe impregnates all the women, it’s not much different than if his brother or cousin impregnated them. Either way the same set of genes are propagated and the family grows. Are you suggesting that we return to this state of dysgenia?
This is pure and utter bullshit. Women have agency. Women can be trained just like men can be trained. That is not evidence of agency because we can condition children to do things. Do children have agency because they can be trained? This is another logical sticking point that the “red pill” community struggles with and why it tends to lapse into crypto-feminism. If women don’t have agency, then they ought to be in the care of a responsible authority. Their fathers or some other patriarchal figure should have custody over them until marriage.That’s how things were done for centuries.… Read more »
@Blaximus “A lot of your understanding is misguided and rooted in abandoning masculinity and still expecting women to just magically afford respect and a healthy dose of love combined with fear.” A lot of guys in the red pill community/lookism crowd fail to understand that this type of mentality is actually men trying to see masculinity through female lenses, trying to guess what they find attractive and to accordingly modify their behaviour or their looks to suit her capricious and ever changing hypergamous demands. This is the proof that feminine imperative pulls the strings behind the mating game. Women are… Read more »
@Boris: “Only when the men in the village are close kin so they have a common genetic interest . . .” Same as it ever was. When a village succeeds to the point where it spawns neighboring villages it becomes a nation. “Are you suggesting that we return to this state of dysgenia?” I have suggested nothing. I addressed your question. Noting the existence of explosives is not advocating that you should blow up your neighbor. I would note, however, that if it were dysgenic we would not have evolved. What it is is dyscivic, which is something rather different.… Read more »
Orson
My.condolences on your ” decent ” sized cock.😆😂
( I’m kidding)
@Rollo “I had several opportunities handed to me to bang married women back in my Rock Star period and I declined every one” Did they look more like this? because I wouldn’t say that requires herculean strength to turn down lol. “I think a lot of guys who do bang married women don’t actually have some cruel fetish to cuck other guys”. Hmmm gonna have to disagree here. I’ve banged two married women (that I know of) thus far. Both under 30 with beta husbands. One was a plate for a long time. And the other was a one night… Read more »
“Did they look more like this?”
Maybe if she put on glasses and stopped doing something with her hair.
j
The rings go on the left hand like on your second blond girlfriend.
In the right place at the right time some wife will be the bait to roll your ass in the alley.
@Boris
He’s talking about the extended family brah. You know, like in Game of Thrones?
What playbook is the average woman going with then in 2019 USA? She has her naturally RP hypergamous instinct, but that has to be enacted within the social morays of her local environment.
Willpower??? Based on….what exactly? Even when 30 years younger and single, it wouldn’t take ” willpower ” to not bang a Monica Bellucci. WIillpower??? If I wanted to bang, I’d bang, but she doesn’t have some kind of irresistible super power. Hence, she’s just a girl. That’s how I see her. That’s how I see 80% of them. Lol, some of the hottest chicks I’ve ever had sex with were the worst sex partners ever. And I let them know this most times. Because guys get dazed by their looks, and only want to put dick in ( masturbating with… Read more »
The extended family in the absence of strong paternalism. The historical basis for The Game of Thrones was medium-strong patriarchal. Women could wield direct power of their own, but only on the rare occurrence of lacking any male relatives. I don’t know how it’s handled in TGoT, I haven’t paid much attention to either the books or the show. The absence of patriarchy does not imply matriarchy; the dominant men are simply not the husbands/fathers. Without certain paternity male dominance falls to other men who are of certain blood relation. The male offspring of women. Brothers and maternal uncles. Family,… Read more »
@kfg
“The absence of patriarchy does not imply matriarchy; the dominant men are simply not the husbands/fathers. Without certain paternity male dominance falls to other men who are of certain blood relation. The male offspring of women. Brothers and maternal uncles.”
Yeah its not like single mothers are pointing their children towards Justin Bieber and other such freaks. Yeah a single mother is really likely to have been brought up by dominant males and not wuss bags.
Exposure to cannabis alters the genetic profile of sperm
Whether genetic changes can be reversed or are passed on to children is still unknown
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/12/181219075846.htm
Same as it ever was. People no longer marry their second and third cousins, except in the Arab world and sub-Saharan Africa. The Catholic Church banned consanguineous marriage in the 12th century. It survived in places but it gradually died out. If it was literally “the same as it ever was” then our intelligence would be the same as it ever was. The black guy who impregnates a bunch of girls he can’t support was never part of my nation. Even most white guys aren’t part of my nation. Not everyone is Amish. if it were dysgenic we would not… Read more »
Nah. I know she’s married. Just don’t care (might end up getting me killed one day tho lol).
Sure could. But you can enjoy your memories as your life blood oozes out of your chest and your back arches at the end.
If my wife hoodwinked some guy into banging her, I wouldn’t hold it against him. But someone like you, J, would just disappear one night. There wouldn’t be any screams because of the gag. If you haven’t guessed, I can be a monster. I don’t always run from a fight.
Do children have agency because they can be trained?
Irrelevant. Men and women have mature judgment centers in their brains. Nowadays, it’s about at 22 for women and 24 for men. Being on your own can accelerate the maturation is my guess.
He’s talking about the extended family brah.
The government is the village.
The current generation doesn’t really believe in consequence. Too many weak fuckers that can be walked all over by other men. It’s like extremes – guys that become mass murderers because ” lpissed “, or guys that just shrug and cry and complain. Lots or younger guys don’t get it. It’s how they are socialized. Fuckin around with a.man’s wife is a great way to get got. There was a dude a long time ago that kept pushing up on my wife, and one day he made the miscalculation of doing it in front of my face. He didn’t die… Read more »
It wasn’t about her.
@blax
if I was presented with the opportunity to bang some dude’s “Monica Bellucci” (circa 2000), without anybody ever finding out about it (didn’t reveal my name, where I live, what my job is, etc.,), I’d do it. No question. Hey, maybe her sex game turns out to be shit. Aight well, I won’t bang her again lol. but. She IS a very attractive woman. She wanna bang, even tho she got a ring on her finger, I ain’t saying no.
Ain’t yo “thing”?
Cool.
We different. And that’s cool too.
“one day he made the miscalculation of doing it in front of my face”.
shhhhiiiiiit.
R.I.P.
lol
“All organisms that exist evolved.” And continue to do so. That’s what makes dysgenic evolution an issue in the first place. However, I note that we evolved advantageously from proto-simian ancestors. “The Catholic Church banned consanguineous marriage in the 12th century.” The time of the Crusades. And of course before it was banned, it was not banned, so it happened up until that point. So the Church and its civilization thrived and grew while it was done. “People no longer marry their second and third cousins . . .” People no longer know who their third cousins are and marry… Read more »
@kfg
Could you make your point clearer
@J
ignoratio elenchi. Just saying
“Men and women have mature judgment centers in their brains.”
https://infogalactic.com/info/Lawrence_Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development
Could you make your point clearer
The details were left as an exercise for the Student.
@ASD:
Note that the feminist theory of moral development does not refute the claim that men have a more justice based conception than does that of women.
They merely refute that that matters and have posited a caring model of morality.
So you are, ironically enough, at odds with feminism in claiming that women have the same sort of moral agency.
@Anonymous Reader
“‘Could you make your point clearer’
The details were left as an exercise for the Student.”
I’ll take that as a no then