This week there’ve been a rash of articles all outlining the latest statistics about marriage in this decade. US marriage rates are at a 150 year low and, if you believe the all-female article writers, it’s of course men’s fault for failing to be marriageable. These articles are referencing a study published last week titled Mismatches in the Marriage Market and this study reveals large deficits in the supply of potential male spouses. One implication is that the unmarried may remain unmarried or marry less well‐suited partners.

That’s right gentlemen, you’re unmarriageable and the ladies want you to shape up. If you want to experience marital bliss – despite all the inherent personal dangers for men in today’s “marriage economy” – you must make yourself “economically attractive“:

“Most American women hope to marry, but current shortages of marriageable men — men with a stable job and a good income — make this increasingly difficult,” says lead author Daniel Lichter in a press release.

The stats don’t lie and they are pretty bleak. More women are enrolled in college than ever before and more are expected to enter through the middle of the coming decade. Now, a degree doesn’t guarantee a woman a job, and it says nothing about the majors and job sectors women prefer, but a college education does reinforce the idea that women are entitled to marry an economically attractive man who himself has an education and enough aspiration to make something of himself to become marriageable.

That’s some real shit right there and we’re not even half way through this post. We’ve gotten to the point where the truth of the past five decades is apparent; gendered politics has actively, openly, disadvantaged men in terms of education. Whether this hobbling of men is via educational dispensations (Title IX) or social conventions (divorce, child support, Duluth model feminism) the outcome is now unignorable.

In most western societies today there is a separate standard of justice that applies to women. Women are receive far fewer consequences and are sentenced much more leniently than men for committing the exact same crimes. These are easily proven statistics, but even when they are brought to light the gynocentric social order doubles down and justifies them because, women.

My intent here today isn’t to depress anyone. Neither am I drawing attention to this because I’ve made a new turn to the Men Rights Movement. No doubt there’ve been many article already written about the female hubris inherent in these revelations – revelations the Red Pill community has been pointing out for almost two decades now.

The manifestations of about 50 years of social changes produced by a feminine-primary social order are unignorable. Even mainstream media sources are finally seeing these stories as the red meat du jour for the masses now. A lot of the Red Pill principles and I and many other men in the Manosphere have been drawing attention to about intersexual dynamics are now coming to light in popular consciousness.

Aww Quit Complaining

Last year I delivered the State of the Manosphere Address, and in that talk I outlined the rise of what I saw as a new Gender War (or gender cold war). Naturally I was called a reactionary, and have been since described as “overly negative” even by the organization that asked me to deliver that speech. But yet, everything in that outline has come to pass in less than a year. Of course, the easy dismissal is to blame this on election year propaganda. More than one mainstream talkshow conservative has jumped on the Toxic Masculinity bandwagon, pointing out how the Left and mainstream feminism are one and the same.

However, there have been many swings of the political pendulum in the past 50 years. Conservative zeitgeists have contributed to the same feminine-primary social order that’s resulted in men being unmarriageable today. It’s just been good politics to appeal to the Feminine Imperative no matter what side of the political aisle you happen to sit on.

But I’m a man. I’m not supposed to be overly concerned with issues like this. As long as I’m measuring up to my Burden of Performance any marginal raising-of-awareness to truths like the ones above make me seem like I’m complaining. And that’s something men are never allowed to do. It’s a very effective way of silencing men. Get them to feel like they ought to silence themselves. Real men don’t complain.

Meanwhile, it’s Broke Men who are hurting American Women’s Marriage Prospects. My good friend Dalrock once wrote a series of post around the idea that feminism would be so much more successful if men would only cooperate with it. When women are unable to optimally complete their mating (and life’s) strategies it’s men’s fault for being uncooperative. It’s men’s fault when women’s life plans don’t come together as Sheryl Sandberg told them it would. It’s men’s fault when they won’t play the approved role they should when women hit their Epiphany Phase and their sexual priorities shift.

Confirming the Red Pill

If you needed a better illustration of the Solipsism inherent in women’s nature you’ll be hard pressed to find it on a bigger scale than the dozens of stories bemoaning the lack of marriageable men today. Furthermore, it goes to prove another Red Pill truth: as a man, women don’t care who you are as much as what you are. I’ve taken a lot of heat over the years over my assessment of how men and women have different concepts of love. Men love idealistically. I rarely get any pushback on that assertion, but when I layout how women’s Hypergamous natures predispose them to a concept of love based on opportunism men and women lose their minds.

Yet, here we are. Women enthusiastically proving my point for me without me having to do any heavy lifting. As women become more comfortable in Open Hypergamy we see this embracing of their nature proudly flaunted. Naturally women will double down on this.

Of course women don’t wanna marry no bum!

And then the Trad-Cons join the chorus,

It’s men’s fault they aren’t measuring up to being the men all women are entitled to.

There are dozens of studies that correlate divorce with women earning more than their husbands. In fact, women are reluctant to admit that they out-earn their husbands. Throughout the history of this blog I’ve shown the evolved reasons for this dynamic, but what the articles all dance around is women’s natural evolutionary desire for men who exceed them in all aspects. But because we’ve opted to believe in, and standardized on, social constructionism we lay all of that on “societal expectations” of men and women. In a future essay I’ll be defining how the cope of humans being ‘above it all’ in their evolved instincts is the root source of many deliberate misgivings about intersexual conflict. For now, understand that blaming any inconvenient intersexual truth on a nebulous “society” is the go-to rationale for a feminine-primary social order.

If only men would evolve and rise above what society foists on them we women would be happy” versus “Men need to accommodate women’s success by making themselves more ‘economically desirable’

And “Oh, but love is important too, *wink wink*.”

“Many young men today have little to bring to the marriage bargain, especially as young women’s educational levels on average now exceed their male suitors’,” Lichter says.

It’s interesting that some articles advocate for marriage as a “stabilizing force” in society, all while never (maybe deliberately) seeing the economic risks of disaster that the divorce industry incentivizes in women. There’s nothing stabilizing about promoting marriage between men you’ve deemed “economically unattractive” and women who feel entitled to a man who exceeds their Hypergamous expectations. There’s nothing ‘stabilizing’ about the incidence of divorce between couples where the man is unable to out-earn his wife.

Naturally we want to make this a ‘his‘ problem. He can’t get over the fact that she makes more, has more education, etc. He’s insecure in his masculinity and must feel threatened by Her success. Or it could be the fact that on an instinctual level he understands that it’s an evolved imperative for a man to provide for and protect his family. This is the fallacy of Rise Above It. No matter how enlightened and progressive we’d like to think we are nature drags us back to reality. It’s not a socially constructed problem – if it were it would be easily solved – it’s a human nature problem. Women reveal the true Hypergamous nature in articles like these. They want a man who they can naturally look up to, respect and admire. That’s the natural truth coming out, but they source the problem in a socially constructed fantasy that it’s men’s insecurities that are holding them back from completing women’s mating/life strategies.

Women don’t need to get married anymore. The average age of first marriage is hovering around 27 years old for most couples. Studies also show that more than half of young people in America don’t have a romantic partner. We’ve all but eliminated the Beta Bucks side of the Hypergamous equation for women. Open Hypergamy (and Open Cuckoldry) are the logical outcomes of this provisioning insurance we’ve made ubiquitous for women over the last 40 years. Yet, women still want to be married to a man who outclasses them in all areas of life. They feel they deserve that guy. Their hindbrain knows they do, but the nebulous society still encourages women to believe there’s never been a better time for them to be single. This is the message women are being fed as they complain about men’s not living up to being their “equals”.

Nearly half of working-age women will be single in 2030, a new Morgan Stanley study predicts, a demographic that will drive increased sales for companies in the athletic wear, cosmetics and clothing sectors.

The investment bank’s “Rise of the SHEconomy” report says 45 percent of working-age women between 25 and 44 in the U.S. will be single women in 10 years, Forbes reported.

Single women will drive the economy in the next decade and savvy businesses are already planning on exploiting this demographic. But yet it’s men’s fault for not being marriageable and/or avoiding marriage altogether?

Too many people think I’m down on marriage. Apparently 23 years of what most guys would consider an ideal marriage isn’t enough to convince them. Honestly, as an institution – socially enforced monogamy – I think marriage, based on evolved gender difference complementarity has been the foundation of the success of western culture. But maybe we’re at a turning point in human history where traditional marriage is left behind, replaced by feminine-primary polygamy with all its inherently violent risks. It seems we’re heading in a direction where we convince Beta men it’s in their reproductive interests to abandon their evolved need to be invested in their own paternity – and that attending to and raising the children of men that women selected before them makes them ‘better men’.

There’s a lot more to the anti-marriage reasoning than just the “losing half my stuff” arguments.

It really sucks for a guy like me who’s managed to make a Red Pill aware marriage work in spite of all this. Guys get confused. How can I be anti-marriage and still married? But it’s just that dichotomy that tells the you about the nature of what marriage has become for men today. The way we do marriage today has the potential to be the most damaging decision a man can make in his life. It may even end his life. But despite all that I still believe men and women are better together than we are apart. We still evolved to be complements to the other.

It’s the coming together and living together, and all the downside risks to men today that I have no solution for at the moment. Maybe it’s going to take a war or a meteor striking the earth to set gender parity back in balance, but at the moment there’s only a future of sexual segregation to look forward to.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

457 comments on “Unmarriageable

  1. Palma, yes, so this online dating thing is interesting.

    My approach to the “3pm cancellation” was just to assume it was going to happen and either double book dates or have an alternative plan always available (for first dates when I hadn’t met the girl before). Even 4-5 years ago when I was in the peak of my online dating, the first date flake rate was 50% plus.

    I’ve had a similar path to you in the sense that I’ve wound down my online dating. Even back in the day, the effort/reward ratio for messages/dates wasn’t really worth it and I (mostly) focussed on sugar daddy sites where the effort/reward ratio is much better and the girls are more attractive (of course, there you have to filter out the hookers and girls who want cash which is a different challenge). Then I had my major crash and burn debacle with the drug girl/extortion fiasco (not sure if you were on TRM when that went down).

    After that I almost completely stopped online dating and focussed on cold approach – partly because of the effort/reward ratio but mostly because I wanted to develop my game in other directions because I was routinely getting lays in 2 hours with 80% plus girls I met (I did the odd online date when travelling or when I was particularly horny at home).

    I remember YaReally posting in 2015/16 about how Tinder etc were great in the first couple of years then it became shit and female focussed (with the intro of Bumble etc) and hordes of random guys got on it by 2015-16 and we should just focus on real life. But that was probably the peak of it…now it looks like men are responding to that incentive and checking out – it would make sense that if that is indeed happening that it happens at the top with the guys who have the most options and I imagine there are more of them on Inner Circle.

    It would be interesting to see the dating apps’ internal figures about customer engagement use and whether there is a drop in male use..

  2. “It would be interesting to see the dating apps’ internal figures about customer engagement use and whether there is a drop in male use”

    The ones who have dropped out are the bottom of the 80% of males. Because they got fed up with getting zero matches (or the girls they did end up matching with (because online guys typically swipe right on everything) were hb3-5s. And they figured paying that monthly premium (whatever the cost for that is) for them wasn’t worth it). Chads are still dominating tinder/bumble. Just that it isn’t as easy as it used to be (“u DTF?”). If online dating was completely dead then there wouldn’t be weekly/monthly videos like this:


  3. @thedeti

    I read Novaseeker as saying in his comments on this post, that women have adapted within this particular milieu. In other words, women noted the changes and have adapted to them. It helps that the changes were geared to them and prepared with them in mind. But women have adapted, and men have not.

    You can observe women’s usual behavior, then turn around and tell me with a straight face that all that meets the dictionary definition of „adaptation”, and I’ll believe you. But if you then try to convince me that men’s behavior, on the other hand, does not count as adaptation, I’m sorry but I just cannot take you seriously. I’ll assume that you fell for the male version of the apex fallacy, or that you’ve internalized a gynonormative mindset. You can argue, for example, that a quarter of men will never sire children – I reckon this is a recent finding in Norway – and that this proves their failure to adapt, but then I’ll ask you to take a look at the proportion of childless women, and the total fertility rate in most large Western cities, which is below 1.0. I don’t consider what is basically voluntary extinction to be adaptation.

    What makes you sincerely think that the sort of male behaviors Novaseeker denounces are not examples of adaptation, but the same sorts of female behavior are?

    About 100 years ago, it was all geared toward men and the sexual and marriage marketplaces were prepared with men in mind. They were prepared to advantage men and disadvantage women.

    If you actually believe all that, you have fallen for feminist bullshit. The patriarchy in fact advantaged men’s investment in society and thus social stability, plus the well-being of children.

    I think that what’s going on is that many men are saying “want to stay the same, don’t want to do a lot of work, but I still want women to be attracted to me and to be able to date a lot and eventually get married and have a family like (a) mom and dad had when I was growing up; or (b) like I didn’t get to have growing up.”

    Do you unironically believe this?

    But a huge part of the reason that a lot of men are allowing women to push them harder is because those men have no SMP or MMP power. They have no bargaining power. They have no leverage. They have almost nothing that women want. They have nothing to incentivize women to get with them, stay with them, give them anything, or compromise with them.

    What about the men who do have bargaining power? Do they have any incentive to push back?

    Yeah, that’s what thought.

    A lot of these men are true Roissy omegas. Or Vox gammas (I don’t want to go down that rabbit hole so please don’t ask). Unlike AFCs who can attract women but can’t keep it going; a lot of these men can’t attract women AT ALL. They’re autistic. LIke, actually autistic/Aspergers. They’re hopelessly fat and out of shape. They get winded walking across a room. They literally smell like shit. They can’t dress for shit. They have terrible hairstyles. They literally tip fedoras. They don’t know even the first thing about inserting a penis into a vagina. They can’t carry on a conversation for more than 2 sentences without getting weird or anxious or jumpy. They can’t go up to someone they’ve never met and make small talk. They are legitimately weird, strange people.

    They also happen to exist mostly in the imagination of SJWs and, it seems, various Manosphere vloggers. Seriously…do you actually believe such men are even a sizable minority anywhere?

    They need Free Northerner’s Omega’s Guide. They need to learn “how to man”. They need to learn even more basics than the AFC which prevailed here at the ‘sphere in the early 2010s.
    Those are the problems, guys. And it’s getting worse.

    Any civilization that fails to elicit sacrifice and investent from its men, that views it as completely optional, will perish. That is as clear as day. It cannot happen otherwise. Men didn’t abandon this civilization; this civilization abandoned men. That’s why I have argued before that the greatest contribution the Manosphere can make to future generations is to carefully chronicle the decline and downfall it witnessed, provide the most accurate explanation for it possible, and ensure that it survives in recoverable form for centuries.

  4. In Hollenhund’s laughable article, you find gems like the following: “Ethnic Africans and Europeans had to evolve to digest milk”.

    Yep, babies couldn’t digest breast milk. It’s true. Some pointy head said it and I believe it. :):):)

  5. Yep, babies couldn’t digest breast milk.

    That article was sloppy. It should have read ‘cow’s milk’. There a specific genetic mutation in humans for the ability to produce the enzyme to break down lactose

  6. In fact, not only did it happen, but the ratio used to be much more lopsided:

    This was even documented in the Bible.
    As well as the following children’s Sunday school song:
    Father Abraham, had many sons,
    Many sons ha father Abraham,
    And I am one of them, and so are you…
    so let’s all praise the Lord
    right arm left arm nod your head turn around sit down….

  7. @Palmasailor Sentient



    Sentient told you what the acronym stands for, but i think it’s interesting because it’s a direct reaction to the liberal ideological ‘defense’ of ‘because’…lol

    normie: why do you believe THAT is true? (whatever stupid cultural assertion liberal/progressives make)
    sjw: because… [expecting this ‘argument’ to carry the debate…)

    normie: because why? (really trying to understand…)
    sjw: BECAUSE…

    normie: because WHY?
    sjw: BECAUSE!!!!!!…. [storming off in a huff… before trying to dox the normie for ‘bad think’…]…lol

    normie: ????WTF???

    that^^ is just an ideological defense of a cultural belief… that really CAN’T have any grounding in reality…lol… bc that’s not its function in the communication exchange…

    so the normie reactionary response to ideological attacks on normie culture has become


    good luck!

  8. Seems to me that Novaseeker is merely embodying the spirit of Male Hierarchy. If anybody should be calling out weak men, it’s strong, healthy men. The issue is the preponderance of weak men make society wobbly and chaotic, which is bad for everyone.

    Reading between the lines of books like Sex at Dawn and Manthropology (the later a fun read, if taken in the spirit it’s offered) one sees that men always had to be taught by other men to man-up through rites of passage (morphing into apprenticeships and mentorship programs in the market system) Women cannot do this for boys and create men. They’ll bitch and complain, but they always do that anyway, even in the best of times (just less so when with an oak-frame man). Women turn weak men into slaves.

    @Hollenhound: womens MO: adaptive behavior to current circumstances to procreate. That’s it. It’s who they are, at base. So, yes, women have always been better at this then men. That’s why most women have offspring and most men don’t.

    Another book, the Hidden Life of Trees, compares oak trees (singular and strong) to beech trees (nearly socialist in their behavior). An MRP trope is being the oak tree for your woman.

    Since society thinks that beech forests are better than oak trees, we’re getting much fewer oak trees.

    But women really do want oaks as mates, not beeches.

  9. Once again, with feeling:

    Understand what’s happening with” society “, then decouple from it and all its fuckery immediately.

    Learn how to navigate and use societal nonsense to your benefit instead of just blindly joining in and being a dutiful follower.

    The whole” tree ” thing? Men shouldn’t give any fucks about this. If you ignore all of that outside of just hearing it, it’s pretty hard not to be an oak.

  10. @Blax

    The “tree thing” is just a metaphor, a teaching tool,ie. Another way to put things.

    Just trying to be helpful, and suggesting some books I enjoyed that relate to the current topic and red-pill.

    As HABD would say, good luck!

  11. Palma

    solid 40’s demo… It’s so sad really…

    “look at me!!! look at me in the shop window!!! Somebody tell me I’m prettty!!!”

    Wager more than half have some kind of “strong independent” bio…

    This kind of display, this neediness is such a turn off. I don’t think I could ever online date.

    How were the ones that opened you?

  12. This is what I was looking for:

    adjective: pathetic
    arousing pity, especially through vulnerability or sadness.

  13. “Meanwhile Zaddy’s are taking over…”

    How much money will you spend to look like you shop at the salvation army. Three outa five look like they are expecting flood waters or are wearing handmedown slacks. The other two are OK looks.

  14. “Not kidding though, it’s been ticking up for the past few months from a base thats been literally zero for years, and I haven’t changed the profile.”

    Your a trend setter, or the global situation is spiking hypergamy and these women are giving up their independence for a strong protector.

  15. Men shouldn’t give any fucks about this. If you ignore all of that outside of just hearing it, it’s pretty hard not to be an oak.

    I was wondering what piece of shit are you?

    Person with Dissociative Personality Disorder
    Person with Avoidant Personality Disorder
    Person with Split Multiple Personality Disorder

  16. Damn we’re onto race again??? I just had a breakthrough on male nature and fatherhood and shit. Literal cow manure. Just my fucking luck. I’ll have to catch up with this later.

  17. “That article was sloppy. It should have read ‘cow’s milk’. There a specific genetic mutation in humans for the ability to produce the enzyme to break down lactose”

    We are all born with that gene…some people lose the ability somewhere in adulthood…something must happen to make that gene ineffective in some people…the lactase regulation gene is recessive, which means that heterozygous genes allow lactose digestion…the fact that the loss of lactase expression in adulthood requires homozygous genes indicates that the recessive gene is a mutation…so lactose tolerance into adulthood used to be the norm at some point all across the globe…

    …and my main point concerning the fact that the conclusion of the article is bullshit still stands…the actual scientific article which the pop science article which Der Hund references makes no claims like the pop science article…the pop science article relies totally on the opinion of one of the many authors of the foundation article…and he’s not even a biologist, so his opinion is going to be very questionable…

  18. Palma, these old professional gals are piling up like driftwood after the spring runoff. You are what they are looking for but they don’t know or care what you want. I’ve talked to some and they are all brag about their accomplishments and assets( trying to qualify themselves to me. LOL) but they aren’t happy not even the ones with children. They are looking for the rugged individualist or they wouldn’t give me the time of day.

    My main problem with it is they don’t know how to overcome strength by taking the lower position in other words not in the least bit feminine other than the hamsters solipsistic spin. Like raw instincts with a bare coat of polish. They can’t let go of their power and enjoy the natural relation of male and female yet this is the yearning. If they get that guy they would destroy him in short order. My favorite question is what kind of bird feeders they have.

  19. Palma, also on another note the same age group of women are increasing in the local homeless sector. I am starting to see more of them than the men. This is a sign of an overwhelmed system that deals with these types. Like driftwood.

  20. @thedeti

    If you want women and sex, you’re going to have to make yourself attractive to women. And the way you’re going to do that, the ONLY way to do that, is to stand out.

    Yes, but the trading plane has grown substantively more tilted against men. Before you’d work 5 and get 3, now you should work 8 or 9 to get 1 or 2. Girls compare you with all the men they see on Facebook and other social media/dating apps.
    Also, their parents no longer have a say in their choices — hardworking betas with heavy degrees got married due to the women’s parents’ influence, in the past.

    Also, the very idea that I have to work to get her while she has to stay there, mentally idle, and do the picking, and the general climate of feminine supremacy that she will mindlessly parrot making it a point of being mean just to feel she isn’t a loser, all of this, now that I notice it, makes me too angry to relate with them productively.
    You can’t be likable while you are furious, I guess.
    And then, if the thing sets off, I “have to work” to stay attractive to her (while she stays attractive to me without having to “work for it”).

    So, yes, I am better off as a MGTOW.

  21. In other words… the red pill hasn’t improved my success with women; it has brought it down to nought. I had the most success when I was blue pill. I had half the success when I was half red pill. I have had zero success since I am completely redpilled.

    Even if I was given a great body, a swollen wallet, and lofty social status/career tomorrow, playing the mating rituals would still have me sickened, and very angry, at nature if nothing/no-one else.

    I am not even black pill now. I still think life has pleasant sides, and moments, and sources of interest. It’s just the trade-and-battle with the other sex that reliably lacks any such qualities
    As for reproduction, the only meaningful goal for male-female relationships at this point in their mind’s development (and in our cultural climate), hiring a surrogate mother will still cost less, probably, than going the other ways.

  22. “Yes, but the trading plane has grown substantively more tilted against men.”

    …well, as men grow weaker in the knees, the plane may seem to become more tilted…

    “Also, the very idea that I have to work to get her while she has to stay there, mentally idle, and do the picking, “

    …that’s the angry MGTOW view, but it ain’t reality…I know when pretty girls hit on me late at night that their options are limited…not ragging on myself, but I know that they are hanging around late at the bar without meeting ‘Chad’ and they’ve been hit on some, but not that much, or by guys that they think aren’t adequate…girls do a lot of waiting…and the very pretty girls get the least attention because most guys are too scared to approach them…

    …e.g., the most beautiful girl I’ve ever seen–including girls in beauty pageants–only danced with her date, one of my buddies, and me because all the other guys were too awed to ask her to dance…(she wore hardly any makeup and had natural English blush)…

    “Girls compare you with all the men they see on Facebook and other social media/dating apps.”

    …which is why you approach women in person and spike their emotions and get their eyes focused on you…(did I say “in person”, lol?)…

    …smh, lol…it’s easy to not be stupid, if you try a little…

    “(while she stays attractive to me without having to “work for it”).”

    …there’s that nasty four letter word…’work’…lol…

    …yeah, without having to work…the cosmetics and fashion industries are chump change…lol…some guys have never been around women…and noticed what they do…how much money they spend on looking good…how much time they put into taking care of their skin and hair…hours, every day…and some of them work out at the gym as well…then they usually do feminine hygiene shit…

    Don’t be a lazy ass! Now get to work! lol

    (This is more my style than “Good luck!”)

  23. “Even if I was given a great body, a swollen wallet, and lofty social status/career tomorrow, playing the mating rituals would still have me sickened, and very angry, at nature if nothing/no-one else.”

    Why are you angry? Have you examined yourself?

  24. “Also, the very idea that I have to work to get her while she has to stay there, mentally idle”

    …more like in a constant state of insecurity and worry…and girls are experts at hiding their emotions when they want to…girls look mentally idle, but they aren’t…girls worry that other girls are prettier, so they throw themselves at men…the prettier girls worry that men aren’t approaching them enough and that they might lose out to less attractive girls (which happens a lot)…men will mate down, unlike women…

    …so you need to become truly Red Pill…

  25. “Yes, but the trading plane has grown substantively more tilted against men. Before you’d work 5 and get 3, now you should work 8 or 9 to get 1 or 2. Girls compare you with all the men they see on Facebook and other social media/dating apps.”

    The ” trading plane “(?) has grown substantively more tilted against weak men. FIFY.

    Serious question, because I get a little tired of the ” Girls do this…” thrown out as indisputable fact. Do you actually see, with one or both of your own eyes, girls comparing you yourself with all of the men they see on Facefuck and other social media/dating apps? Do you see this in your very own life and actual experiences?

    Are you working 8 or 9 to get 1 or 2?

    ” Also, their parents no longer have a say in their choices — hardworking betas with heavy degrees got married due to the women’s parents’ influence, in the past.”

    How old are you, if you don’t mind my asking. What is this past you’re talking about? Circa 1909? Guys haven’t called on chicks for parlour dates in a long time either.

    “Also, the very idea that I have to work to get her while she has to stay there, mentally idle, and do the picking, and the general climate of feminine supremacy that she will mindlessly parrot making it a point of being mean just to feel she isn’t a loser, all of this, now that I notice it, makes me too angry to relate with them productively.
    You can’t be likable while you are furious, I guess.
    And then, if the thing sets off, I “have to work” to stay attractive to her (while she stays attractive to me without having to “work for it”).”

    Lol, this is your personal problem.

    1) You don’t work to ” get her “. You work because you are a man. ” Her ” is of no consequence wrt you working.

    2) Men aren’t afraid of women, or teh ” feminine supremacy “.

    ( I’ll skip all that ” makes me angry stuff you’re talking ” )

    3) Again, how old are you? You work to stay healthy and ” attractive ” is a small component of that. You cannot have a decent shot at the kind of women you might want if you’re just some kind of blob that barely resembles a man – but that’s beside the actual point.

    Time/years can do some very odd things to men, and people in general. I’m beginning to see this in myself. Every passing year, the space where abs used to be prominent is now occupied by some smoother, vague series of bumps that aren’t what I consider ” abs “. I own mirrors, so I can see this digression daily.

    I do not care for this situation. This situation can be rectified. I will rectify this situation for myself.

    It’s got zero to do with my wife, or any other female on earth. I had abs and a pretty nice body before I was ever married, and I didn’t pursue fitness to get women. I did it for myself.

    Whenever I was in groups with unmotivated, angry ( lol ) and badly out of shape men ( which didn’t happen often because I grew up in a community that put a lot of stock in being fit and strong ), women became a side benefit and not the focus.

    It ain’t about them.

    But yet they come.

    As far as being furious and not being able to ” relate ” productively, this is 100% on you and 200% within your own control.

    ProTip: The world doesn’t give a damn about your anger – neither men nor women.

    Just sayin’.

    ” So, yes, I am better off as a MGTOW.”

    Okay fine with me. It’s your personal choice based on how you interpret your environment. But I’m not with walking around joyless and shit. Life’s way too short for any of that. It also doesn’t mean that what you believe you’re seeing is based totally in reality.

  26. Sentient

    Lol, we’re ” cosmically ” connected or some shit.

    Thanks for posting this –


    As I was explaining in a way to TT, Shit’s happening to my body more rapidly and it’s time to get back to serious work. I’m starting to suffer from ” old man ass ” where your pants start sagging a bit in the rear. Gotta address this shit before I wind up like this in a couple of years


    Zaddy’s rule!!!! Lol.

  27. “Gotta address this shit before I wind up like this in a couple of years”

    Luv this comment…chicks seem to dig guys with small butts…my butt has definitely shrunk from what it was when I was younger…girls touch it a lot now, lol…

  28. I’ll cosign on the mating market shift, something I can see also.

    I was out hiking with a guy with a guy this week, after talking he confessed porn was just easier for him at this point than dealing with women at this point, this is a fit guy, not autistic, decent socially, has a house/job, etc.

    Contrary to common red pill wisdom, not all non redpill guys are white knights, some understand the game but just have no wish to play it. In the coming years women are going to start piling up as they hit their late 30s/40s if they are still single or divorced.

    It’s not guys turning red pill it’s just guys reacting to all the bullshit they see from women and simply withdrawing commitment.

    1. I was out and it tricky business park the other night eaves dropping on successful business women in their 30s and 40s chatting about how there are no professional white collar and choose from as they are all taken, but there’s a lot of skilled treatment at blue collar men yet none of the women dared to show interest with one another seeking these prospective men as they apparently feared embarrassment or lowering their expected sexual market value being associated with lowering their social status. Yet ironically almost all of my successful blue-collar skilled tradesmen are dating or married to foreign women and repelled by educated black and white women. Isn’t that ironic?

  29. @HABD
    “men restructure themselves for ‘themselves’ (like Novaseeker is suggesting)… that focus is much different… and the results won’t be ‘civilization’…”

    This is on the money, prior to red pill I was a lot more civic/society minded and would take that into consideration. Post red pill the improvement is for myself and myself only and those whom I choose to share it with. The results will not definitely be “civilization” but rather tribal/familial.

  30. “when the university considered race, it did so only to benefit applicants’ chances — as a “plus” factor — not to hurt them.”


    Good news Chinamen… Your race isn’t a negative. It’s just not a positive.

    Not sure where to file this?

    Under “racism is a social construct” or “some animals are more equal than others”…

  31. @Sentient: file it under “Quotas are discrimination”, same kind of thing.

    In a zero sum game (and admissions is clearly zero sum), positively benefiting one is the same as negatively affecting everyone else, and discriminating one is the same as positively affecting everyone else.

    This isn’t even that hard to get… But I’m still unsure on this:
    “when the university considered race, it did so only to benefit applicants’ chances — as a “plus” factor — not to hurt them.”
    my doubt is whether whoever wrote that is actually just putting positive spin on it intentionally or if they actually believe it, because some of these very special people actually can’t get things that are easy to get if they run counter their ideology.

  32. Off-Post, but On-Blog topic:

    Any of you guys watch Tim Pool?
    A couple videos of his from the past 5 days or so are HILARIOUS….
    Keep in mind Tim is very very deeply blue-pill, but he’s not a dishonest person. He just clings to specific beliefs and has reasons for doing so. He will, however, confront all lies including those in his own life (given time).

    First one, September 29th

    Follow-up, October 1st


  33. Has anyone picked up on the fact that’s Corey Worthington (a.k.a. “Alpha Buddha”) in the cover pic??
    RT’s selection is no accident.

    The irony of Corey settling for that landmass😆

  34. @Corey was the standard for “Natural” alphahood. “Unrehearsed alphahood”

    The many steak-eating, gun-shooting Americans on this blog, descended from the Boomers and inheriting their sensibilities, require that their “Tallest trees be born from the hardiest Acorns.”

    Therefore, they make the false assumption that Alphas are bulletproof once they become Alphas. But they don’t.

    First they gain the will to self-determine, THEN they move to prove their power and potential among other men. One of those abilities is “making it look easy.” Which inspires confidence from the other baboons in the troop.

    Some win and some lose at this.

    The foolish hope of the squeamish is that they can learn how to alpha from a book. Or from a man that they hope wont be lying to them to preserve their own power. Or that they can learn how to be leaders without offending the people they depend on.

    The closest those types get is learning from the right psychologist.

  35. HAHA…
    Tim released a 3rd video. This is educational watching someone who is defending a fem-centric culture to death but is also honest no matter what try to deal with attacks. It’s like watching an unstoppable force meet immovable object.

  36. @The church lady Rollo

    I wouldn’t be worried if I were you. The Red Pills will soon be “Red Pilled” on MGTOWs(and male nature) and then likely what will happen is that they’ll shrink the gap between the two outlooks considerably if not dissolve it entirely.

  37. ” there’s a lot less bullshit in blue collar jobs”

    Lol, have you ever done blue collar work? I have, and I’ve seen plenty of bullshit in blue collar work. Workers fucking up and the union covering for them. Workers destroying their pinkie finger in order to get money to buy a new bass boat. Racketeering. Etc.

    I’ve also done white collar and there’s plenty of bullshit there, too.

  38. Here’s the classic result of toxic feminism and the normalization of single mothers, and it’s goal of the destruction of the West…

  39. “It’s the coming together and living together, and all the downside risks to men today that I have no solution for at the moment.”

    I think the only solution for men is to be M.D ( preferably surgeon) for leveraging status. ALL THE Other ways are all about genetical gifts and pure luck.

  40. The Silver FoX
    Here’s the classic result of toxic feminism and the normalization of single mothers, and it’s goal of the destruction of the West…

    Nah, that’s just hypergamy and LARPing. Downscale version of Lana del Rey.

  41. Spartan
    I only hope that the photo is not from a real marriage.

    It is real. Think of it as an example, of the “Don’t be this guy!” kind.

  42. “Single women will drive the economy in the next decade”

    I have some doubt about this. Not that I have a hypothesis, just that I don’t think the underlying premsies which have made this true for the past ~20 years will hold true moving forward.

    Yes, women will likely continue to get more degrees. But those degrees don’t lead to paying jobs. And we’re seeing that crisis already with “student loan debt relief” being a new political thing rivaling Healthcare (whose solution is much more rooted and known).
    But even that is just a symptom.
    The automation that likes of Yang is talking about will be empowering for men. Women live off those cubicle jobs… HR, low level customer-facing IT, PR, marketing, records, etc.
    Every one of those can be replaced with Python scripts.
    The Corporate Culture we live in won’t flinch to fire all of them.
    Men will largely be fine. You can’t automate trade jobs.
    … trucking is the only big one that comes to mind that will be on the chopping block, and the regulation aspect of computers driving down the road will likely stall that.
    You can’t automate aircraft maintenance.
    You can’t automate the programmer writing and maintaining the python scripts.
    I know my job is secure, and the jobs of other men like me.
    Women refuse to enter STEM fields in Uni. Frankly, few can even wrap their head around it. The few I’ve known who can do my job just aren’t wired like most women.
    Their selfish nature also tells them they shouldn’t need to do these kind of jobs — the jobs that actually add value, rather than simply leach off it as unnecessary bloat and overhead.

    I don’t know that this will go down in a way that flips the current situation or really benefits men. We’re still getting squeezed by the two faux political parties manipulating economy for sole benefit of their campaign financiers… and that will only get worse.

    But the winds of change are here… and the paradigm of the last 40 years is about to experience some kind of shift.

  43. “I came across research suggesting that tiny neuronal stuctures called spines in the hippocampus, a brain structure involved in memory, are denser in female rats than they are in male rats. But in rats that received electrical shocks, which cause them stress, the sex difference is reversed: The spines are dense in males and sparse in females.” –Dr. Daphna Joel

    In other words, even when male and female brains appear to be physically the same, they are different.

  44. I’m 25 been red pill for about 5 years, in the gym for 3 years, banged maybe 15 women in the past 3 years since I left my ex. Point of the mater is I completely agree with you bossman. When you said your not completely turned off on marriage. It used to work, but women and men changed.

    Women forgot how to play their role and men got lazy and comfortable. However I do believe there are few women out there that do compliment the “rationale male”. I am currently talking with a female who is extremely submissive, and very traditional..ironically she is not from America. She is Mexican and grew up in the kind of house hold where those traditional correct gender roles were heavily taught.

    I have her in the gym 3 days a week, drinking more water, changing her diet and really changing her life for me. She has 4 notches on her body count, does not drink and does not smoke. Of course you never put anything past a woman when it comes to her body count, all women have the capacity to cheat and or lie, however she is on the low end of that range.

    Known her for 2 year’s as JUST friends, but during that period she knew about my sexual adventures with my plates, as she was Genuinely a friend. Now I am investing in her because she is playing her role. She was even okay with me having plates on the side while I fuck her, however her female emotions did catch t up so I decided to drop my plates and just talk to her exclusively, however not a official titled relationship yet.

    She is 21 so she is a few years younger than me and looks up to me for a lot. Since we were friends she knows what it takes to keep me happy, a big part being how she must keep her body fit and attractive for me. She completely understands that I will leave if she gets lazy in that regards. Sex is great of course. I believe she is that one out of the 20+ women I’ve banged that has the best opportunity to be my traditional woman. Only time will tell.
    Thank you so much for your writing.

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: