Way back in the early years of this blog I wrote a post flipping a common feminist trope on its head. In Women’s Physical Standards I laid out the case that it is women, not men, who hold the most stringent and static standards for ideal male beauty.
…from a purely physical perspective, it is women’s idealized masculine form that hasn’t changed in millennia. While there may have been a Rubenesque period when men loved the fatties of the 1600′s, no such era ever existed for women’s physical preferences. The classic broad chest, wide shoulders, six-pack abs and squared jaws of greco-roman athleticism are still the idealized male form that has graced EVERY romance novel cover in existence. I’m still waiting for someone to post me a link for a dating site that caters exclusively to women’s fetish of BBMs – Big Beautiful Men – average to good looking, fit, women specifically looking overweight men. Executive Introductions caters to women seeking affluent, influential men, but women just looking for overweight men, that site doesn’t exist.
I wrote this essay in a time well before apps like Tinder and Bumble became household names. Since then (September, 2011) the sexual marketplace has fundamentally shifted to exactly the state I saw it going to then, and all it took to prove it was a handful of
fucking ‘dating’ apps to facilitate Hypergamy. In 8 years women have proven they are every bit as viscerally motivated by men’s physical appeal as I spelled out in this post. Back then I was run up the flagpole for suggesting women were the ones with “unrealistic beauty standards”, now it seem matter of fact.
Of course, the double standard has gotten much worse with respect to men having any sexual selection standards. In Maryland we have the instance of high school boys being pilloried on a global stage for daring to rate their female classmates’ looks on a 1 to 10 scale. Ironically, the the same teen girls who took such offense to this will think nothing of swiping left or right on a potentially lover on Tinder in just a few short years. In fact, they’ll think it’s normal for a woman to base her sexual selection on the physical, yet the same is sexual objectification for men to do the same. Certainly, men will never be allowed to voice their physical preferences without the fear of personal destruction in our Global Village.
About 5-6 months ago, Pat Campbell, my co-host on Red Pill 101, linked me to a pair of stories about how offensive some social justice warriors found it that young men were avoiding trans-gender ‘girls‘ as potential dates. The logic was that more evolved heterosexual young men should feel attraction towards a trans-gender, biological male, if he was presenting himself as a female. The natural sexual selection process for those young men, and by extension all men, was being circumvented by the social imperatives of others.
Pat also linked me to a story where a popular, heterosexual, high school quarterback accepted the Homecoming Dance proposal of another homosexual young man. As expected, the story was written as a heartwarming victory for modern progressivism and a young man “secure in his masculinity” praised as a hero for essentially accepting a social control over his sexual selection process. Naturally, the predictable hate to overcome would be from ‘less evolved’ guys alleging the quarterback was really gay.
This is the pre-written script we expect will follow (the clichéd triumph over homophobia), but the real story here is that a young man’s sexual selection process has been removed from his direct control. If the quarterback had refused the proposal the best he could hope for would be that no story would be written about it – but the more likely story would be him having to defend himself against his homophobia. In essence, the threat of a global online mob ruining his future makes accepting the proposal a necessity.
In 2019 men’s control over their sexual selectivity is something women don’t want to hear about. Part of ensuring that Hypergamy is the defining social dynamic today includes exercising as much control over men’s sexual selection process as possible. As fluid as men’s selection naturally is, it’s still out of women’s total control. The method to that control is social pressure. Women’s need to insure against their own Existential Fear of pairing with an unacceptable guy is so obsessive they will resort to social engineering.
Tinder and Bumble are social engineering programs as much as they are facilitators of women’s Hypergamy. Body Positivity / Fat Acceptance (exclusively for women) is equally a social conditioning effort. But for these and more the latent purpose is the same – convincing men to repress their evolved sexual selection proclivities in favor of accepting women’s selection process as the ‘correct’ one. The Cardinal Rule of Sexual Strategies states that for on sex’s strategy to succeed the other’s must be compromised or abandoned. In today’s feminine-primary social order, the Feminine Imperative wants nothing less than complete abandonment from men – and it will use every social and political means available to insure men do.
Men must be raised up and conditioned from the earliest age to accept women’s strategy and their role in it as the only acceptable one. Men’s selection of a mate must be made for him according to women’s standards. Many times I’m asked how to go about “vetting for a wife”. I’m asked what the criteria, what aspects, what traits should a woman possess to make her “marriage material”. From a Red Pill perspective a lot of what I lay out seems highly offensive to the sensibilities of men and women conditioned by the Feminine Imperative. But the qualities, and the reasons I define them being desirable, are nothing any man who is invested in his own sexual strategy wouldn’t find mundane.
It’s not difficult to figure out what attributes in women would make for a good pairing – what’s offensive is that a man would ever have the temerity to require a woman to possess them at all.
It’s offensive to feminized sensibilities for a man to speak aloud the things he wants from a woman. How dare he ever have the presence of mind to create a list of acceptable qualities for a potential long term mate. Who is he to make demands? Has he not learned that Hypergamy and women’s needs now define his existence?
I’ve written in the past about how women commodify their own sexuality. We’ve pandered to the security needs of women for so long they feel entitled to their being met. We’ve developed a social order that’s prime directive is to insure against women’s Existential Fear of ever having to worry about a bad Hypergamous decision. We ensure that they can voluntarily reproduce at will via sperm banks and frozen eggs. We demand that men find them arousing no matter what their physical condition and in spite of 100,000 years of evolved arousal cues. Gynocentrism demands men be nothing more than willing participants in women’s sexual / life strategies.
A day ago I posted this quote on Twitter:
Women and their ‘allies’ lost their collective minds. Follow that link, see for yourself. It’s a litany of middle school blathering and presumption about my motives for making public what most of these feminists confirmed. All the responses are the predictable boilerplate you’d expect from a generation of women used to parroting back what the Village has taught them to respond with for so long.
But what is my observation revealing here? Nothing that we don’t already know – women define the reproductive process in western culture. And again, most of these feminists proudly agree with the observation. They say, “Yeah, as it should be”, while their oblivious male ‘allies’ seek affirmation.
The boys at the Maryland high school got caught in the gynocratic gears. They weren’t properly conditioned to know their place. They did what most guys in high school do, they compare notes, they make comparisons, because they still believed they might be allowed to have a preference of who they want to date, bang, have for a girlfriend, have for a wife. How dare they!
When the Beta Bucks / provisioning side of the Hypergamous equation is more or less accommodated for by the social order the only thing left is Alpha Fucks. This is Hypergamy on a meta-scale. Why would any woman bother with the notion of Value Added to make herself more ‘marriageable’? Men aren’t allowed to have preferences. They should feel lucky that a woman would date them in the first place. Feminism has taught her that if she is to be the ideal Strong Independent Woman® she is “never to do anything for the express pleasure of a man.” And besides, the exciting guys, the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys who she does swipe right on; those guys don’t care about ‘value added’ – they care about fucking.
The New Polyandry I described is an extension of ensuring women’s Existential Fear is always compensated for on a societal level.
The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.Roissy
I’ve quoted this in other essays. Usually I’m asked why this would at all be feminists goal?
“You think feminism is all about controlling your dicks?”
In essence, yes, but really it’s about affording women unilateral control over their Existential Fear and absolving them of any consequences for the bad decisions made in controlling for it. In the last essay I stated that Abortion is Eugenics, but isn’t affording women total control of human reproduction eugenics? Isn’t socially engineering and conditioning men’s behavior to accept women’s sexual strategy as the “correct”, normal one eugenics as well?
I would say yes, except, the Sisterhood doesn’t have a ‘master race’ planned. There is no uniform conscious direction to this eugenics. It’s all driven by women natural, evolved mental firmware and impulses – all facilitated by the power afforded to them by men. We’ve unfettered Hypergamy. We’ve allowed women to do something unprecedented in human history, we’ve given women the reins of the direction of human reproduction.
And we’ve done this at the same time we’ve maximally restricted male sexuality. Dr. Jordan Peterson once predicted that in the future any expression of male sexuality will be illegal. I would amend that: any Beta male expression of sexuality will be deemed offensive or illegal.
When men work together
“I would say yes, except, the Sisterhood doesn’t have a ‘master race’ planned. There is no uniform conscious direction to this eugenics. It’s all driven by women natural, evolved mental firmware and impulses – all facilitated by the power afforded to them by men. We’ve unfettered Hypergamy. We’ve allowed women to do something unprecedented in human history, we’ve given women the reins of the direction of human reproduction.”
Reproduce ourself’s with both nature and nurture
“For one gender’s sexual strategy to succeed the other gender must compromise or abandon its own.” “In last week’s essay I outlined the the Existential Fear women hold in their evolved unconscious – that of the Hypergamous doubt. “Is this guy the best I can do?” is the question that their hindbrains ask.” First, genders don’t have sexual strategies. Men and women do. Gender is a noun of a adjective. What’s a soy-boi’s gender? Feminine. He’s a feminine soy-boi. Secondly, in animal nature doesn’t compromise. The Roissy quote is irrelevant there. Animal nature allows abandoning it’s strategy but it is… Read more »
“She took him to a neuropsychologist, who told them Cracknell had ‘tunnel vision’ and that ‘frontal-lobe injury makes you more of yourself’. Having won a place at Cambridge (a year after attempting to become an MEP candidate), the strains on the couple became too great. And what of the rower in all of this? Before the split was announced, Cracknell spoke of his determination not to be seen through the prism of the accident. ‘I had some bad characteristics before the accident as well, so it’s not fair to label being stubborn and selfish on the truck driver.'” Re: Cracknell… Read more »
she’s sliding down the SMV scale…..
Lt. Col. Richard Cole, Jimmy Dolittle’s copilot and last survivor of the Tokyo raid has died.
30 seconds over Tokyo 18 April 1942
30 seconds over Tokyo 18 April 1942
30 seconds over Tokyo 18 April 1942 (3)
Arrival over Tokyo
” Fifteen aircraft reached China, but all crashed, while the 16th landed at Vladivostok in the Soviet Union. 77 of 80 crew members initially survived the mission. Eight airmen were captured by the Japanese Army in China; three of those were later executed.”
What’d you do today? Me? Nothing of consequence.
“Sexually powerful men don’t harass, they seduce. It’s the insecure men who need to use power in order to leverage the insecurity and the inaccessibility or the unavailability of the women. Women fear rape (edited to add: from beta males), and men fear humiliation. (edited to add: if they are beta males)”–Esther Perel
“What’d you do today? Me? Nothing of consequence.” I had some imagined somethings of consequence. I had an unusually hard day at work (god, that never happens…), both shooting up hot babes with Botox and having patients acknowledge I saved their lives. (?catching melanoma early? Not cause I was trying to catch external validation. I was riffing with one older guy, perhaps 82 y.o., the guy that arranged to sell me my hunting property/wildlife habitat 12.5 years ago. He only had two melanomas caught early and one squamous cell. I joke about the pimple popper M.D. Seinfeld segment. And he… Read more »
I’ve only seen the movie once, but had read the book several times and built up a model of the Hornet with the B-25s on deck before I was out of grade school. These men were in the upper echelon of my personal pantheon of heroes and my mojo has been a bit off today on hearing the news.
“What’d you do today?” Wait. There was another HB I walked into the room without my medical assistant to check out her hives (And I never do that ever, except her age was listed as 61. Medical chaperones for a pink clip on the door “girl in her undewear, get a chaperone, uber alles. Whoops. I introduced myself and looked at her and said, wait, what is going on here. “Your not really 61” are you? She looked 41, lithe and a HB8. Genetics. She said: “You told my mom that before, too.” I, though charmed her and medically treated… Read more »
Regarding the comments the ‘offline’ thing is definitely annoying, it creates too much of the barrier between each post visually and methinks the comments flow much more smoothly without it. Also i reckon you should make the font the same size as the article, without zooming in one has to squint on a laptop. Regarding the article, this state of affairs would only be beneficial if the offspring was being born into stable families, but we know they’re not. We’ve basically recreated the environmental conditions of the stone-age Congo, so mud huts here we come. I know this blog hasn’t… Read more »
Dionysus Good morning. So, would you like to see more< i/> heated political content from Rollo, or in the comments or both? From what I’ve seen in the sphere, when that happens the blog turns into a giant, yet insignificant echo chamber. Nothing useful imo comes from that, and the ability of readers to learn and hear anything different outside of their own beliefs and experience is blunted. Historically the world has always been fueled by genius and useful idiots. The trick is in the discernment between the two factions. Societies have normally been lead by a handful of people,… Read more »
😂 italics fail first thing in the morning.
“We’ve pandered to the security needs of women for so long they feel entitled to their being met. We’ve developed a social order that’s prime directive is to insure against women’s Existential Fear of ever having to worry about a bad Hypergamous decision.” Women do not have judgement. It’s why she’ll date an alpha loser. It’s also why they do not know justice. To her, justice is defined merely by good feelings. There is no incentive to be fair. All she knows is that fairness = being a princess. She will accept boundaries from her King or from real dangers,… Read more »
Interesting development https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-divorce-law-to-end-the-blame-game Proposals for changes to the law include: retaining the irretrievable breakdown of a marriage as the sole ground for divorce replacing the requirement to provide evidence of a ‘fact’ around behaviour or separation with a requirement to provide a statement of irretrievable breakdown retaining the two-stage legal process currently referred to as decree nisi and decree absolute creating the option of a joint application for divorce, alongside retaining the option for one party to initiate the process removing the ability to contest a divorce introducing a minimum timeframe of 6 months, from petition stage to final divorce… Read more »
@dionysus and redpill77. Your comments are what make the “manosphere” great. Rollo teaching men to understand female nature and be your own mental point of origin is great but it does nothing to actually change the decaying social situation and the mentality of women which ultimately is the problem. This is more serious than just “getting laid”. I find it interesting that Rollo and his blog want to stay out of politics while the other two of the three original R’s (Roush and Roissey) now have completely dedicated their blogs and YouTube content to the reality that by certain groups… Read more »
Talking about spinning plates just seems kind of stupid in the face of all this and clearly Roush and Roissey would agree with that as well.
What’s stupid is wasting your precious time and mental energy worrying about and mentally masturbating over 10000 ft macro issues you have close to ZERO ability to impact instead of focusing on individual self-improvement to better your life.
@Blaximus Politics is obviously inherently divisive. Personally I both enjoy and respect the underlying focus of this blog and Rollo’s dedication to keep it how he wishes, productive and on point. That being said it is also becoming increasingly obvious that treating topics such as the SMP and especially the FI in isolation from the politics behind them is becoming increasingly difficult. This is because a thorough analysis and correct identification of the underlying problem necessitates taking into account the ‘higher’ power dynamics at play, all manufactured by man, not nature. As such it follows that any solution and advice… Read more »
I don’t disagree on the whole. There’s more than one cause to the ” problems “, and it’s important that men gather all of the intelligence and attack from multiple angles. And the number one ” attack ” any man should first perform is on himself regarding what he’s been taught, what he believes, and who he is. If ” being ” for a man isn’t satisfactory, then that man needs to course correct. That message is much more efficient than a man becoming a joiner or followed of any ideological dictate.. That’s how men wound up where they currently… Read more »
@Blax “And the number one ” attack ” any man should first perform is on himself regarding what he’s been taught, what he believes, and who he is. If ” being ” for a man isn’t satisfactory, then that man needs to course correct.” Robert Greene’s Chapter 4 in The Laws of Human Nature The Law of Compulsive Behavior When choosing people to work and associate with, do not be mesmerized by their reputation or taken in by the surface image they try to project. Instead, train yourself to look deep within them and see their character. People’s character is… Read more »
As such it follows that any solution and advice provided from now on must on some level take this into account. @Dionysus — No. There is no solution on that level. No realistic one at this time, and likely for a long, long time to come. Therefore focusing on that is simply a distraction. You can’t change jack on that level, but you can change a lot on your own personal level — that’s where you focus. Guys who end up focusing on the 30,000 foot level issues generally end up very burned out and bitter because they can’t get… Read more »
when they could be spending that energy on improving their outcomes given the environment we have as a given.
Patriarchy… or Re-Patriarchy if you will, begins at home. Win back your dinner table, then your classroom, then your pew…
It is house to house combat.
There are many reasons for that, but the main salient one is that when women are involved, even theoretically, men fight with each other brutally to establish dominance. That is our nature, and it is in our blood. It can be overcome to some degree when males share a kin-bond I would add that women both at the individual level AND AT THE GROUP LEVEL are adept at getting men to white knight for them, and so it would be very easy to play the “victim” and get groups of men to fight against any “reactionary” rollback of female “progress”… Read more »
Poptarts I find it interesting that Rollo and his blog want to stay out of politics while the other two of the three original R’s (Roush and Roissey) now have completely dedicated their blogs and YouTube content to the reality that by certain groups of men aiding the corrupt tendency of female nature along with other biological realities involving race and government policy is ultimately going to destroy Western Civilization and then no one is goung to be safe or free from living in fear of big brother. Run-on sentences are not part of good writing. Doing the same thing… Read more »
Morpheus I would add that women both at the individual level AND AT THE GROUP LEVEL are adept at getting men to white knight for them, and so it would be very easy to play the “victim” This is evo-psych 101. Every man should understand this from at least his teen years, but the blue pill obscures it. Those men who run around yelling “we gotta ORGANIZE and DO SOMETHING” are always ignorant of the past. How did we get here? In the US who decided that women should be given the vote about 100 years ago? Was it…an organization… Read more »
“Red Pill” and the “Sphere” has sort of in my mind been contaminated with political ideologies sometimes bordering on racial and nationalistic ideologies that have absolutely nothing to do with Intersexual Dynamics. I agree, Morpheus — all good points in your comment, but this one is of particular importance I think. TRP has never been about “alt right”, not in terms of the racial politics. There were people who participated in both areas, but they were distinct, and they should remain distinct — TRP doesn’t have anything per se to do with that stuff, and should keep itself distinct from… Read more »
I’m commenting from my phone so run on sentences are a given. I don’t see why that is a needed critique. I also don’t see why you can’t talk about both the individual and the larger issues that are part of the conditions that create the need for all this teaching that will probably only benefit a minority of men. Someone’s marriage might be “saved” and that may not actually be a good thing for that individual in the long run. Basically I view this self help for men while going out of the way to not criticize women directly… Read more »
TRP doesn’t have anything per se to do with that stuff, and should keep itself distinct from it. Absolutely agree, although I think unfortunately that distinction has been partially lost. I don’t really read Roosh or Roissy (Chateau Heartiste) anymore, but my sense is they allowed if not actively embraced sort of conflating and commingling the intersexual dynamics “stuff” with the “alt-right” politics and its associated racial politics and ideologies if not outright racism. It makes it easier to “throw the baby out with the bath water” and dismiss it all as the ravings of extreme crackpots. I think a… Read more »
Can the two really be separated? There’s people that see Red Pill as a chance to explain the behavior of people. Those people have historical origins, racial identity, personal inclinations, strategic positioning and concerns, political interests, and more shit I can’t think of right now.
By all means “return to form” if you think you can. But both poles of the meta-frame are evolving with or without our input.
Novaseeker TRP has never been about “alt right”, not in terms of the racial politics. Because “They are all girls” is true. Of course social and cultural variations exist and reading women of a different race offers some challenges, but Game works on women. Period. Full stop. Because at the hindbrain level, “they are all girls”. There have been real conspiracies through out history, some of them quite seriously dangerous to people. That doesn’t change female “firmware”, but focusing on some “them” who have “screwed us” is just a distraction. Over 100 years ago, in the US, the Methodist church… Read more »
Which … will never happen. You will never get a majority of men to discuss taking away women’s “rights”, as they now exist. There are many reasons for that, but the main salient one is that when women are involved, even theoretically, men fight with each other brutally to establish dominance. That is our nature, and it is in our blood. It can be overcome to some degree when males share a kin-bond (tribes, and the outgrowth of tribes) and are aligned against other groups of kin-bonded men. Nations were the outgrowth of this. Our current setup does not facilitate… Read more »
Poptarts I’m commenting from my phone so run on sentences are a given. Nope. They are a choice. I don’t see why that is a needed critique. Communication skills are important. I’m always seeking to improve mine, and help other men improve theirs. I also don’t see why you can’t talk about both the individual and the larger issues that are part of the conditions that create the need for all this teaching that will probably only benefit a minority of men. Because it always turns into a shitshow. Test this assertion by trawling through Heartiste for an actual Game… Read more »
Yollo Comanche But both poles of the meta-frame are evolving with or without our input. Well, yeah. Because some very large social and economic forces are at work globally. So there’s no need for RP men to rush out and join some group, is there? There’s no need to turn comments into a shitshow of “Jews!” “White people!” “Blacks!” “Homosexuals!” rants back and forth, is there? Two thoughts: First, hardly anyone is ever convinced by online arguments. Second, again there are some very large socio-economic currents flowing. If I’m sitting on the beach and the tide is coming in, I’m… Read more »
It makes it easier to “throw the baby out with the bath water” and dismiss it all as the ravings of extreme crackpots. Exactly — this is the problem. It interferes with the spread of information that is useful to all men regardless of their own personal politics. Basically I view this self help for men while going out of the way to not criticize women directly (almost like it’s an impossible task and could never result in any change anyway) a form of white knighting for the FI. My opinion. The perspective is pragmatic. Criticizing women for taking advantage… Read more »
The speed of light is white, patriarchal toxic masculinity, because it is a privileged speed.
This is the sort of nonsense you end up with when you let the nose of the camel politics into the tent of fundamental knowlege. You want to talk the politics of it, fine, no problem, but you want room 12A next door.
@Poptarts — “These men like Rollo will just say “oh it’s impossible anyway, you can’t do that” etc. Actually it is possible if a majority of men start to discuss it. Novaseeker: “Which … will never happen. You will never get a majority of men to discuss taking away women’s “rights”, as they now exist. There are many reasons for that, but the main salient one is that when women are involved, even theoretically, men fight with each other brutally to establish dominance. That is our nature, and it is in our blood….. ….This facilitates a Hobbesian all-against-all atmosphere among… Read more »
“In essence, yes, but really it’s about affording women unilateral control over their Existential Fear and absolving them of any consequences for the bad decisions made in controlling for it.” Understand that when men hold their freewill at arms length from their freedom-to-act-consequences, they too lose juice for the squeeze, are dodging the consequence for their decisions too. I’m not being judgy here. I repeat: I AM NOT BEING JUDGY HERE: There’s a function, meaning, defined use for sex and that is reproduction. Any other attendant emotional feelz or orgasmic joy is a benefit but not the purpose. The further… Read more »
EhIntellect There’s a function, meaning, defined use for sex and that is reproduction. Any other attendant emotional feelz or orgasmic joy is a benefit but not the purpose. That’s both a tautology and an inanity. Following that notion a married man only gets to have intercourse with his wife 3 or 4 days per cycle, and only prior to menopause. That is way more extreme than the teachings of the Roman Catholic church that you sometimes attend. Combine this latest hair-shirt tendency with your earlier comments here and at the very least you convict yourself of being an hypocrite. Is… Read more »
“Red Pill” and the “Sphere” has sort of in my mind been contaminated with political ideologies sometimes bordering on racial and nationalistic ideologies that have absolutely nothing to do with Intersexual Dynamics. This is the way to lose a ton of utility. Right now TRM benefits from a wide mix of agents on the ground around the USA and overseas. The benefits of observation and reporting about varieties of women from varieties of men should be self evident. The going-political sites inevitably lose these perspectives over time until only one thing is left. They drive away some, or much, of… Read more »
“Following that notion a married man only gets to have intercourse with his wife 3 or 4 days per cycle, and only prior to menopause.” You see it though a good-bad binary lens. There you fail and will continue to as to measure yourself outside of your comfort zone is, well, uncomfortable. Sex has many on and off-label uses. How a person chooses to define those uses, defines how he relates to the world. If he finds sex a validational tool, then he’ll get that validation so long as he can get sex and when he doesn’t sex and the… Read more »
“Combine this latest hair-shirt tendency with your earlier comments here and at the very least you convict yourself of being an hypocrite. Is that a good plan?” It is. It is the only way to become better is to openly admit one’s hypocrisy and faults and act differently. I do and have here often. A man claiming perfection is hiding something. If others would side with you and reinforce your position I might find your narrow logic more convincing. They don’t, so I won’t. You refute nothing as you logically can’t and thus are rhetorically impotent. What’s your antipathy to… Read more »
I just realized something about AR. He’s been following my story since I showed up years ago. He suggested that my story would end badly. He suggested my wife would stick a knife into my chest. That was the extent of his commentary. Sure, I’ve had my ups and downs but I am ultimately much much better than I could’ve imagined, in my marriage, in my job, with all my children, with my friends. I could run on and on and on and on with a sentence how much my life has improved since. That pisses him off. Bucketed crabs… Read more »
What would you say to a woman in love with an Alpha male?
I’m reasonably polite, so I imagine I’d start with “Hello.”
“I’m reasonably polite, so I imagine I’d start with “Hello.””
The scenario implies this isn’t a cold open, so I’d save that to plug into a conversation lull.
I know this is a difficult thought for you gents to understand, even though many if not most American men before the 1980s or so understood this. For some reason, this understanding has been bred out of Americans. Well, it is what it is, we’ll see where it leads us. The understanding is this: most (90% or more) of men are not capitalists. Even white men. 90% of white men in America are not capitalists. If you a white man reading this and you have to get up and go to work, you are not a capitalist. The owners don’t… Read more »
@Revolution is inevitable
Call some of us indifferent to that shit. I’m a capitalist and I got stuff packed away.
That’s not what we are discussing here.
Okay, I’m confused. So capitalist don’t work , but they do work, but not the way you work, especially if you’re white, but this somehow makes one beta, and Bezos doesn’t give a shit about you and you’ll never be him…. Whoa. Too many oysters for me tonight evidently. Does this mean that in order to be a capitalist, you don’t work? Wealth just materialized? Are you a hater?😁 envious? Jealous? Socialist? When Scrib sees what you wrote, he’s gonna set you straight and call you a few colorful names. Alrighty then, wealthy ” no fucks given ” men are… Read more »
“American men before the 80’s….”
Well no judgy here but he was laid like tile…
But you guys won’t admit it. Betas never do. You are not going to be Trump or Gates or Buffet or Bezos or Musk. Not now, not 50, not 100 years from now. And they don’t give a shit about you, at all. You will live your entire lives and go to your grave not being them, and they will live their entire lives and go to their graves and not give a shit about you. You do not register in their thoughts…zero, nada, zilch. But of course, hate me, call me all sorts of names, and love your overlords,… Read more »
“But of course, hate me, (masochism projection) call me all sorts of names, (self-loathing projection) and love your overlords (frustrated hope-lost chump), like the good little American (envy) beta (inferiority projection) serfs (chronic self-depreciation anxiety) you are. Messengers are always hated and killed (self-despising and fearful of feedback).”
Holy freaking false humility.
Eh sez sex is only for babies: “Following that notion a married man only gets to have intercourse with his wife 3 or 4 days per cycle, and only prior to menopause.” Eh You see it though a good-bad binary lens. There you fail and will continue to as to measure yourself outside of your comfort zone is, well, uncomfortable. I see your words through the rules of English and elementary logic. The only “uncomfortable” here is you, because you posted some random nonsense and got caught. <i<Sex has many on and off-label uses. LOL! You just claimed that sex… Read more »
Eh used to brag about his sexytimes with wifey, now he’s all about “sex is ONLY for BABIES” “Combine this latest hair-shirt tendency with your earlier comments here and at the very least you convict yourself of being an hypocrite. Is that a good plan?” Eh It is. It is the only way to become better is to openly admit one’s hypocrisy and faults and act differently. I do and have here often. I just outed you as a hypocrite. Where have you ever admitted it? LOL A man claiming perfection is hiding something. So? If others would side with… Read more »
Eh I just realized something about AR. He’s been following my story since I showed up years ago. Sort of. He suggested that my story would end badly. He suggested my wife would stick a knife into my chest. That was the extent of his commentary. LOl. Nah, that’s not even close. But this fantasy you keep repeating is obviously important to your feelz, so cling to it as tightly as you want. Not my problem. Sure, I’ve had my ups and downs but I am ultimately much much better than I could’ve imagined, in my marriage, in my job,… Read more »
“Instead you get into an altered state of mind, post dumb stuff in a lame attempt to troll, and then get defensive when someone points that out.”
AR offers nothing but defeatism. Bleh.
“You claimed sex is only for babies.”
No, I didn’t but he redefines arguments to refute something he’s more personally indignant about but really doesn’t have to put in any skin. He needs to live the lie as without it he can’t really measure up IRL. He measures himself with himself.
An internal combustion engine has a use. It can be used as a boat anchor too.
It all depends how much you want to get out of it. That’s the point AR doesn’t want to address.
“Eh used to brag about his sexytimes with wifey…”
“You claimed sex is only for babies.”
No, I didn’t
LOL! Who wrote this? Was it a forged comment?
There’s a function, meaning, defined use for sex and that is reproduction
Even your own church catechism doesn’t go that far. Maybe you should try reading it some time.
Defined use isn’t only use.
AR resists change.
Eh Defined use isn’t only use. You aren’t very good at hairsplitting. At this point you can claim victory and run away, continue to spiral down into “meaning of ‘is'” territory, troll for flames…or you could admit that you typed out a foolishness, correct yourself and move on….but, nah, that last one is not your style. Too much false pride. AR resists change. Non sequitur. Let’s review: Sex is the glue that holds a marriage together – Rollo Tomassi There’s a function, meaning, defined use for sex and that is reproduction Eh”Intellect” Which man makes more sense? Common, every day,… Read more »
“Eh used to brag about his sexytimes with wifey…”
Lol! No, simple logic.
Step 1: EhIntellect describes sexytimes with wifey. All men here approve and many cheer.
Step 2: Eh writes There’s a function, meaning, defined use for sex and that is reproduction
The actions of step 1 are contradicted by the words of step 2. Eh preaches to other men a standard he doesn’t hold to, he is a hypocrite.
Can’t smell the stuff you are shoveling? Really?
“You aren’t very good at hairsplitting.”
AR isn’t very good at grammar.
“Which man makes more sense?”
AR pulls the resident expert card as he’s pooped his rhetorical pants.
somehow I’m reminded of
Thank you. You are pure class. Ball busting at its finest!
Really great read
Re: Politics – What a silly criticism of Rollo. Chateau Heartiste and Roosh’s ideas about politics are a juvenile melange of pop culture white nationalism, hackneyed conservatism and superficial libertarianism. They actually demonstrate the number one reason to “stay in your lane”, as you won’t sound like a gibbering imbecile if you stick with what you know. And if you think those guys are dishing anything worth listening to on geopolitics, economics and political/social order, that merely signifies that you are as uninformed about the world and political thought as they are. I think Rollo misses the confluence of politics… Read more »
” . . . the very idea of socialism was to replace the classical liberal world order.”
The very idea of the classical liberal world order was to replace the right wing.
Not a fan of the pop ups that tell us if someone is online. It’s not a big deal on desktop, but super annoying on a phone. I see you’ve not hooked up a Google Analytics tracking ID to the WordPress plugin that is not installed. If you do so you would be able to see what percent of users are on the phone vs. desktop.
Also, could we get a comment post field box at the bottom of the page so we don’t have to scroll all the way back up?
Thanks, and appreciate all you do.
@Scribbler Back in the day, many people didn’t discuss politics, they would say, “Yeah, I’m just not into it.” and they shut their mouths You see, back then you had to read books and newspapers and magazines to actually be up to speed on these issues. There weren’t Youtube videos on every idea. So, most people didn’t put the effort into it and the folks you would end up discussing politics with were well informed. You see, most people are too lazy to read deeply as it takes a lot of time and focus. People have long been discussing politics.… Read more »
Re: The superficiality of so many commenters on our politics. While this video reveals the juvenile stupidity of a Leftist with a gamer/politics channel on Youtube (gamer/politics should be your first warning, as people who are smart about politics and the world spend their leisure time learning about the world, not gaming 30 hours a week). John Lott, a true intellectual and thinker, with the credentials to prove it, decimates this man-child. It’s on gun control laws and violence, and Lott is a truly a legend. You’ll enjoy it regardless, even as it’s OT. Get this – most of the… Read more »
Everyone should read about Jekyll island at some point in life. Lol, my introduction to ” political discussion ” came via William F Buckley on PBS when I was about 10-11 years old. I didn’t realize it was a political show at the time, I watched because I was fascinated by how Buckley spoke, slouched and how disheveled he looked from time to time. I caught on to the politics later. I agree with Roused though, people have always talked about politics as far back as I can recall. Sunday morning was when my dad would be in the living… Read more »
…. That video.
Those last two comments were very interesting to read and pretty insightful. So you’re saying that the right believes the only thing uniting uniting the left is their disdain for the right when it’s in fact the opposite? Both the left and right are gynocentric. How do we cure THAT disease?
“Both the left and right are gynocentric. How do we cure THAT disease?”
One man at a time.
And now how to address the Right’s disdain for Liberal values? Point out how the left corrupts them and poops all over the liberal’s after party?
“Point out how the left corrupts them and poops all over the liberal’s after party?” Because 200 years of doing that has worked out just great. As Scribbler points out the “left” has an ideological definition, but the “right” has become associated only with conservatism, which is a relative position, not an absolute. Yesterday’s progressivism is today’s conservatism. And so it goes. As Scribbler illustrates when he refers to the definition of the left (the Enlightenment values of secular republicanism) as the right. The right is defined as God and King, the conservative position of hundreds of years ago. There… Read more »
Then the terms must be invented. Though I think the terms already exist. I’m not well-read enough to know them. But I’m sure I’ve heard them somewhere.
We may not even need new terms, just reapplying old ones. There’s this frog that commented on Kill the Beta just recently. What a timely post, maybe I’ll research that.
You seen this?
Ad campaign by the Victoria government demanding men prospectively white knight on behalf of women and DO SOMETHING about guys the men perceive as creepy… Of course given the state of Aussie masculinity today, doing something amounts to not saying a word to the offender and merely getting in his line of sight to m’lady…
What could go wrong here ???
Collect them all… One for every occasion…
Even just sitting around at lunch with your mates!!!
[I’m going to eat BBQ and whiskey just to stabilize… smh]
Sex is the glue that holds a marriage together – Rollo Tomassi
There’s a function, meaning, defined use for sex and that is reproduction – Eh”Intellect”
“Which man makes more sense?”
AR pulls the resident expert card as he’s pooped his rhetorical pants.
Reading is fundamental, Eh. I quoted Rollo and you, no one else.
The fact is, Rollo makes sense, you don’t.
Even your own church doesn’t go that far.
Your position is obviously nonsense. Keep doubling down on stupid if you want, it won’t make you look any better.
Rollo’s observation about the different reproductive strategies of men vs. women partly confirmed in the world of ducks. Some girl named Susannah was obviously triggered by mating strategies of drakes vs. hens but she managed to convey some information despite that.
The “blind alley” in female ducks is a really interesting adaptation.
Just to tiptoe around the political morass… Suppose that “left” and “right” are not universals. Not just in the sense of who sat where in a building in France for a while in the 1790’s, but in a larger sense. Suppose that liberty itself is not universal, as a variety of writers have assumed for centuries. What effect does the admixture of genes from vanished humans such as the Neanderthals, the Denisovans and others have on modern humans who carry those genes? Suppose that in the argument of “nature” vs. “nurture”, the answer is – both. People come into the… Read more »
Australia is going full Clown-World. Different version of what NZ is doing, but still full Clown-World.
So’s the US, just in a different way. The cognitive dissonance between SJW’s “ought” and the “is” all around us must be hugely disturbing to them, but since they can’t ever admit they are wrong, we can expect more doubling down. Then tripling down.
Those vidja spots are just begging for someone to play with – new audio and a few titles supered, the SJW’s cant stand to be laughed at.
What if Anonymous Conservative wrote a book examining those questions?:
“There can be no political discourse where the language lacks the terms. See 1984.” Geez, I see it all the times in political forums. Leave out the fucking terms of engagement. And then rhetoric on…. Same thing here. EhIntellect has been on a roll (In real life, he packed up his shit and sold it away. Then he started thinking with a clear mind without the cob-webs. And AR has no fucking idea what he is saying. Doesn’t matter. Fucking is still fucking.): https://steemit.com/philosophy/@krnel/the-trivium-method-of-thinking-and-learning Grammar – Input – Knowledge – Ontology/Metaphysics Logic – Processing – Understanding – Epistemology Rhetoric –… Read more »
I like this blog but I can’t hang with “The Cardinal Rule of Sexual Strategies”. It implies that nature does not want a successful pairing or mate bonding, whereas it seems self evident that the opposite is true. Nature or evolution or whatever you want to call it, wants good genes to find good genes and create, and nurture, optimal offspring. That’s a win-win, not a win-lose or a lose-win. So how can one sex’s success be the other one’s failure? It doesn’t hang together. I think you’ve been done in by your own past experience with a BPD partner… Read more »
@LEX The cardinal rule has nothing to do with who mates with who. It has to do with who calls the tunes. Try as women might, a man who passes the test passes muster and she’s missing out on him. That’s something hypergamy doesn’t allow her to suffer gladly. That has nothing to do with who is soft or hard. It has to do with who lives. Women actually behave such that both alphas AND betas survive. Both alphas AND betas are born and reproduce because not everyone can win. If it were up to women the losers would never… Read more »
Men didn’t get softer because life is too easy. It’s easy for some, not for a majority here or anywhere else around the globe. Men got softer because they accepted the training program for the elite wonderbread league. Societal influence betrayed them. Just the constant mentioning of ” tinder ” is an example of accepting Nd trying to play nice by women’s and societies new paradigm, instead of smashing it or ignoring it and carrying on as a man. Society teaches men that it’s better to seek ” easy “.. Easy is enormously profitable for those that offer it. Just… Read more »
@Blaximus. Haha… good post. So what’s going to eventually happen? You know what is going to have to happen. The discussion among men will eventually have to involve taking away the rights of women to choose, like I said. We all know this and yet some are afraid to admit it or say it’s impossible because they have daughters and those men will have to be CONFRONTED with violence if necessary. And if a battle needs to be fought it will be fought. There is no other alternative unfortunately. The alternative to this is either complete social collapse or a… Read more »
Any time I hear the “Repeal the 19th” cry of freedom my next thought is “how”? What does that look like and is it even feasible to be discussing it? You don’t remove women’s rights without bloodshed today. The toothpaste is out of the bottle. It’s messier to put it back in than to go with something new. Actually, it’s ugly and messy no matter what you do and this is what scares MGTOW. Even if you can force women to give up their rights (they and their allies wont do so without force), what happens the day after the… Read more »
@Poptarts [@Blaximus. Haha… good post. So what’s going to eventually happen? You know what is going to have to happen. The discussion among men will eventually have to involve taking away the rights of women to choose, like I said. ] It is not about taking away the right of women to choose. It is about men standing up within their own mental point of origin, acknowledging their burden of performance and not falling into any woman’s frame. Women’s innate predisposition is to go into the man’s frame. It is their choice to enter into the man’s frame, it is… Read more »