The manosphere got off on the wrong foot with Roissy. Roissy taught core beliefs that confidence was the root of all attraction, and that dark triad traits were valuable to emulate.
It then stumbled drunkenly into a very dark alley with Roosh, who has serious Cluster A personality disorders.
Then Rollo came along, and hypnotized people with his pseudo-academic speak, and kept hammering over and over propaganda about alpha fucks and beta bucks until everyone just soaked in it and considered it to be true. Incredibly damaging poison.
All three have some insights into women and man-woman relationship dynamics; especially pre 2012 Roissy/Heartiste. However this has acted as fly bait, luring people into a dangerous trap, rather than feeding them.
The root of my personality and my best writing ever is in this post I made back in 2005: https://www.stickmanbangkok.com/readers-submissions/2005/12/face-guile-and-the-commerce-of-living/
It has at it’s root the Buddhist notion that all suffering stems from our unbridled immature human tendencies towards greed, aggression, and indifference. And that there are deeper more healthy and fulfilling ways to approach and deal with each other, that are based in open and awakened heart and unifying the mind in a cohesive honest whole.
We can be loved and give love.
We can. You can.
Stop listening to bullshit manosphere memes. Life is really pretty common sense. Love and be honest.
Below are comments that I made in the last post and elsewhere. They are relevant and I believe you can piece the ideas together yourself well enough, saving me the effort of making a coherent blog post.
Blackdragon lives in the US and gives advice about maintaining open long term relationships, and has done so for many years. I don’t share his psychological makeup and so would and could not share some of his dating strategies (for instance I can get very jealous), however from my very long and detailed experience I will say that I judge his blog to be his real truth, and his system works exactly as he says, for him. That’s a stake in the heart of your argument right there.
There are countless millions of men in healthy loving long term relationships in the US.
There are pimps in the US.
There are differences between countries, and some basic human nature similarities.
If you want to change the subject to be about risk versus reward, then I’ll simply point out that every risk you mention can be mitigated.
And if it can’t, why the hell would you not simply MOVE?
Here is a quote about an MGTOW commentor that I found amusing:
You must be happy you live in the U.S. so you can blame alimony. Imagine if you lived in another nation, and had nothing to blame.
By the way, alimony is only an excuse not to get married. But you can’t even get a date, much less get laid. So nice try.
People can be, by nature and nurture, overly risk averse, and make this trait a habit that becomes an excuse to avoid personal development and confrontation.
Sometimes it’s better to risk losing everything, rather than live a shit life that isn’t even worth living at all. Because if things really do go sour after losing at a really bad risk:
There are things worse than death. And a timid life lived in fear of love is one of them.
But I really think it comes down to apples and oranges. The title of this blog post is:”If you respect Rollo Tomassi you have been brainwashed into accepting total loserdome for the rest of your life.” for a reason.
Because he is selling the cohesive world view of an apple, and to be happy and successful at life you need the cohesive world view of an orange.
He does not have the personal lived experience of becoming a highly charismatic man able to continually charm his woman to maintain her respect and devoted passionate lustly love, and his own authority and boundaries. *
It’s a very long arduous road to become such a man.
Only AFTER you are such a man, will you even be able to comprehend that the world could possibly be an orange.
But BEFORE you are such a man, you really really really NEED to KNOW that being an orange is a fucking option.
Rollo says it’s not even an option.
Which is why he is, without use of hyperbole and quite literally, an evil man causing tremendous social harm. Who attracts losers and sells loserdome for financial and social profit.
* (There are videos of Rollo online, and you can judge for yourself by his body language if you think he has lived a life working towards such masculine coherent charisma. I think his facial expressions are sometimes smarmy and effeminate and that he is not taking care of his physique. He does not strike me as a dominant sexy man who a woman would naturally give her best to, year after year. His body and facial language don’t give me the opinion that he values being such a man, or knows how to get from A to B, or even what B is.
I think this is a perfectly fair argument to make, because Rollo once posted a video of an Autralian teen named Cory Worthingon, and we were to judge by his body language and the coherent world view that it expressed (his attitude), using the “I know it when I see it” test, that he was an Alpha. He referenced the video and his argument many times. He would tell us to watch Cory’s body language, as proof of his argument that “Alpha is not a demographic”.
He later went on to pull a sly and unspoken 180 degree turn and limit alphas to a class of physically attractive men that inspire lust on the spot, and claimed that if lust was not inspired on the spot that the man should look elsewhere on the spot. An opinion that is a blatant tell of a keyboard jockey; no experienced charismatic man could possibly hold that viewpoint.)
I appreciate the careful thought that you have put into your questions.
Please read this and confirm and then I’ll take the time to respond in detail.
It’s about some major disagreements I had with his philosophy in 2014. I stopped commenting after the exchange, and if you make it to the bottom of the post, you’ll see why.
I have a lot of ideas about your questions, however after years of internet discussions have long ago come to realize that very often people are completely fixed in their views, and only use what looks like rationality in order to either confirm their confirmation bias or dissimulate.
That’s why I asked you to put in a little bit of work to test your intellectual sincerity.
However for now I’ll just cut to the chase, and contrast the gist of all your questions, with the gist of my post about how to give and receive love
In order to give and receive love, you need to:
1) Believe that this is possible, attainable, and good, for you personally
I’ve also made many posts that uses the quick shorthand term of “losers” to categorize Rollos commentors and the very closely related MGTOW movement.
I’ll be happy to expand on the argument that those who refuse to give and receive love, and use all sorts of rationalizations and dissimuations to avoid it, are losers.
And I’ll be more than happy to explain in 100 ways why love is essential to basic human well being. And that it’s attainable, sustainable, healthy, noble, and far above risk in reward. And I’d be happy to go into great detail about what love is and can be.
If you are worth talking to. Most people are not.
We are all a product of our reference experiences. Your questions would lead me to believe that if I were to describe my life’s experiences that you would have no option but to discount and re-write them, and to explain them away in ways that make me completely deluded to believe that my personal experience actually happened and is happening.
And I understand the sneering disdain that I not only don’t try to hide, but try to make as obvious as possible. I think it’s good and appropriate. I’ve seen myself get fat and unattractive. I’ve seen myself get drunk and treat people poorly. And I’ve seen myself diet and get fit and learn how to behave better. I’ve seen myself being completely unskilled at relationsips, and I’ve seen myself grow charming and fun and a respected authority in my relationships whom girls routinely sing loving love songs for – for year after year. I’ve seen myself suck at sex, and be great at it. I’ve seen myself lazy, and I’ve seen myself keep trying to get back on the horse.
I have every right to be disgusted by what is disgusting in myself, and to point it out when I see the same in others.
And what’s far far worse than mere personal laziness (everyone has the right to personal ruin and suicide, along with the ridicule that they should expect for following a path to ruin) is TEACHING others to give up. That they SHOULD give up, because relationships – the most noble of all possible endeavors – are low reward at best and more than likely dangerous.
When someone projects out his own inadequacies onto society as a whole, and then sets himself up as an authoritative teacher, that is, in a word, EVIL.
This is a comment that I think fits into the basket of “can’t we all just get along”. It’s a non-comment. A self-entardation meme-hammer.
Polemic is polemic is polemic. Why do you need to soften the edges? Make things all warm and fuzzy, and feel good and everyone gets a gold medal just for participating?
No, some things suck. Some things suck less. Some exact specific things that Rollo says are toxic, some exact attitudes that he has are toxic.
Don’t bring your photoshop smudge brush here and blur everything into a gigantic smear of “it’s all good, man”.
I used to sell wares on Grateful Dead tour, and the dreadlocked hippy wanna-bes tried their best to share a philosophy, that revolved around the saying “It’s all good”.
Fucking idiotic twats. When I could be assed about it, I’d confront them. No, it’s not all good. Fucking dimwit, non-confrontation is not a god damned philosophy!
Fucking hippies. It’s been studied that too much LSD makes people passive and afraid of confrontation. I keep losing the link, but I found the study on erowid.
I don’t suffer fools gladly, and people who think that confrontation is a meltdown have never witnessed a debate with a participant like Christopher Hitchens.
It’s NOT all good. No, we can’t just learn from everyone. People get sucked into entire world views, and YOU KNOW IT.
To get unsucked, you need to be vigorously shaken, sometimes. How hard is it to stop being Catholic, for instance? It’s all good? Just pick and choose the good that the good Pope says, and ignore the rest?
YOU KNOW very well that it doesn’t actually work like that at all.
World views are cohesive, and swallowed cohesively. People create authorities and swallow up everything they say, because they imbue no only specific ideas with validity, but the speaker of the ideas. YOU KNOW THAT.
Rollo’s food is laced with life sucking toxin, and so on the whole, his food is toxic. You can’t pick and choose from Rollo, practically. Because 99 percent of people who read him swallow all the intenesely life harming garbage – as a specific example the HIGHLY toxic meme that alpha fucks and beta bucks.
I’ll drop this here again:
And what’s more, if you want to understand what a book teaches, don’t just read the original text.
Ask readers of the book what it means. Then you’ll get the most important message – not what the book says, but what it is being read to say.
Anyone can paint a picture of a pear, but if everyone sees an apple, then the picture is of an apple.
Want to understand Rollo’s teachings? Examine his comment section. Compare his commenters with other slices of society.
They are for the most part MGTOW losers who have very little clue at how to date successfully, let alone how to maintain long term passionate relationships with attractive women. Which could be a fine starting place, yet nearly to a man they want that to be their ending place.
THAT is what Rollo teaches. The maintenance of class immobility. Alphas are alphas and betas are betas, so it’s not really your fault – it’s womens fault for wanting an alpha. And if you ever do become alpha, you’ll realistically have to pump and dump.
The passive agressive mind-fucker keeps pretending that he’s amoral and agnostic and just describing a real world.
He’s creating a diorama. NOT describing a world. His world is a fucking cartoon with gigantic meter wide pixels and only 4 colors used in the pallate. It’s a diorama that barely resembles life at all. And it’s all due to his lack of real world experience in relationsihps, combined with what experience he has coming from an underdeveloped place, combined with his confirmation bias of only accepting input from betas and losers at the game of relationships.
His view is not agnostic in the least – it’s the view of a loser, to losers, who swallow it up thankfully, as it absolves them of any responsibility or hard work to change their own circumstances.
Days of Broken Arrows Said:
Terrific write-up. I agree with this and upon reading it realize why I never go to his blog anymore. In addition to what you wrote, his writing is also joyless and humorless. His worldview is that having a love life is a backbreaking slog that required work, work, work 24/7 — and you’ll probably still fail because hypergamy.*
Chelsea Dagger said:
I never thought much of Rollo’s writing to be honest. It is very dry and humorless and his followers do seem to be a bunch of angry guys. It reads like a chemistry textbook and is simply too tedious for me to get engaged by it. I think Roosh is just as humorless unfortunately. Whenever I read his blog, you can really see that he is a lost soul, just meandering along with no purpose. Neither of these guys are well adjusted, happy guys and their followers are much the same. Roosh’s forum these days in particular is really attracting some dregs between the white nationalists and the nihilistic hedonists who’s only purpose in life is scoring one night stands.
These joyless, miserable men are guys I quite frankly want nothing to do with.
I like how you made the theme of this blog post about lifestyle and positive habit maintenance-grind as being fundamental to good inner and outer game and logistics.
I’ve also let things fall apart a bit, and am trying to get things in order. So much constant maintanance required to be able to be optimal and ready to give and receive at opportune moments.
Gym and diet
Meditation and chi kung
as the top three, usually.
keeping up with a tan
keeping a good home environment, which might include gardening, decorating, cleaning, maintaining audio and video equipment, furniture and bedding and kitchenware and toiletry
Doing what we do in the moment is of course always a product of what we’ve done in the past, and much of what we have to do falls into the category of maintenance.
It’s not like a video game, where you just need to be good while in set.
There have ben some fun critiques over at Krauser’s lately of dodgy commercial PUA trainers.
It comes to mind that trainers that don’t mention the maintenance issues, and over-emphasize game, might have some of the common traits that Krauser laughs at, such as:
* outright lying about their stats
* paying for sex
* fucking ugly girls
* low to zero retention
* sexing drunken girls who are so easy to fuck as to be repellant to most men
* interested in the notch more than the quality of the girl, sex, experience, relationship, and her experiences of you, the sex, and future relationship; notch is the win – like a video game point.
Writers who use the term “well rounded” seem more authentic and trustworthy. It’s just like you say – a well rounded together life is embedded right in the exact present moment you bring. You can’t be actually attractive without being well rounded.
At least not to girls who aren’t crazed and dangerous human rent-a-bikes.
I feel that relationship game is barely discussed on the popular blogs that deal with seduction. I have a long habit of living with much younger women, and at 52 my current live in of 8 months is 21. We get along very well, and she treats me well.
I assume that just like day game, it’s a hard won skill that one continues to learn about and get better at. Of course it’s not just about set, or your internal framework, it’s also about setting, or the girl and her culture and your external setup. It’s still unusual and difficult to arrange big age differences with an attractive young woman who isn’t bonkers, but it’s much easier in some places, such as SEA.
And ya, people vary hugely, and while there may be trends, a lot of guys really aren’t built well for long term monogamy. And open relationships are possible but extremely challenging and volatile. The options for relationships are MUCH vaster than is generally discussed. The possibilities are MUCH bigger than is usually even hinted at.
I assume because it’s an overlapping, but still distinct and separate skill set. You can’t just transition out of day game into relationship game, as if it’s all the same thing.
Update: This is a low traffic blog, but sometimes gets a traffic boost if linked to by higher traffic sites, such as reddit. If any reader finds the idea I’ve put forth that the meme of alpha fucks and beta bucks by definition could only be true from within the perspective of a “beta bucks” man, and would always be false to a charismatic man and dangerously limiting to a man who wants to learn to internalize being seen by the woman he’s fucking as a dominant man, it would be helpful to your fellows to start a thread or comment that includes links to these recent posts. I know that Rollo has snuck in as a cornerstone in peoples ideas of dealing with women, and this is actually a very serious sickness that needs serious discussion, in as many forums as possible.