The obsession with sex in men today is, ironically, in benefit of the women. Why?
Because men, desperate to get some shitty sex with a random hoe, need to perform, they need to become what she wants (in some way) before getting in her pants. This means that the entirety of male culture is centered around pleasing women, about getting their approval. In every great period of civilization, even if men wanted sex, they would never behave and debase themselves like they do today. Where the ancient Greeks constantly talking about how to get laid? Where they obsessed with "getting better" to get a woman to open their legs for them? Obviously not. They were first concerned with freedom, security and creating a great civilization, and as a secondary consequence of said behavior they would get sex and a family.
None of the retarded shit we see today in young men, watching women shaking their asses 24/7 in some shitty blue-screen while dreaming of how to get her to accept him and sending her money desperately desiring her attention. If you think about it, even the ideas of pubs/discos, etc, are complete degeneracy. Young men spending all their time and energy for years, several nights a week just to get some pussy... I once said this to a friend and he argued: "hey what are you talking about? the vikings were always celebrating and flirting and doing orgies etc" This is a very retarded midwit take. The vikings would fuck girls in a party after celebrating conquering their enemies, their value as men wasn't centered on getting a woman's approvals, it was on fighting and honor, and then because they were bored they would fuck several women, that's all.
The greatest creators/inventors of civilization are YOUNG MEN, full of energy, desire for greatness, desire to build, to fight, to do what's right... well all of that today is spent just looking for the next ass to have sex with, to get some approval, because if said man doesn't get a woman's approval then he's not a real man.
My rant may come off as incelish but the truth is that I have partaken in everything I have criticized in this post, because at the end of the day you just have to play the game, it's either that or losing. Nonetheless, I believe I speak the truth.
PS: I remember reading somewhere that being a womanizer was actually considered feminine behavior until the last century. Today it's considered masculine. In light of what I said in the first paragraphs it makes no sense to consider it a masculine endeavor.
I agree. the black pill is that the only reason things were different back then is because women were property and thus men did not have to compete directly for their. Rape and pillage baby.
Men are biologically and mostly immutably sex obsessed. They always have in the past and will always in the future only fight for higher order things after this need is met (or if they are weird freaks with broken sex drives but this is not scalable for obvious reasons).
Unless you plan to de-emancipate women, the only solution is to teach men how to get women so they can meet their sexual needs adequately, only after which will they actually focus on improving civilization for it’s own sake.
Yes. Your blackpill is correct, and I'd also add another blackpill is that we just can't save everyone, but maybe that's not a blackpill, that's just how it's supposed to be.
You're also on point when you talk about master morality, you don't need the entire society to be like that, just a higher % of men, in fact, when Nietzsche wrote his books, he always said he was writing for "the few", not for the masses.
Apologies for the response to an old article but - how can you teach men to all be successful with women… when the top 20% is a fixed % of the population? It’s zero sum, not positive sum. Before long, it’ll be limited to genetics - height, face, IQ and inheritance… because all the controllable factors will be optimised by most or all already, and thus no way to get ahead.
Also, look into the Red Queen hypothesis. This situation you are describing is one of the the most pervasive and inherent structures of living being and evolution that exists. It is as fundamental as physics, and there is no way to escape it. Anyone who gets close (ex 20th century communism) actually just ends up getting everyone killed.
I fundamentally agree with the Red Queen Hypothesis, and the “if you’re not improving you’re regressing” statement is one I hold dear.
The issue of course gets into the zero sum nature of what is essentially market failure. Looking at how things are in the youngest generations and the trajectory, the idea that 50% of men can find long term romantic success truly looks bleak, and the divorce rate alone kind of actually proves that if one were to argue that serial monagamy following divorces is not successful. Did the man get to reproduce? Sure, but did he get to live a life of commitment, nuclear family, mutual trust and loyalty, living with your kids throughout their entire childhood? I’m not so sure. Very bleak, and regardless of one’s own success and ability to defy the odds, doesn’t mean we can’t step back and recoil at the market failure that is starting to become omnipresent in young men’s minds.
1. It's not fixed. There is a relative factor and absolute factor in female attraction. True that it has never been (and will never or should ever be) be 100% of men. But it has been top 50% and could return there.
2. Even if it were a fixed percentage of "top 20%", No individual woman is experiencing the entirety of male options, making it relative to her personal experience. It's the top 20% of men around her and who should could actually conceivably get to commit to her. This effectively results in probably the top 50% of men today being able to get partners. I talk about this more in the burgundy pill series.
3. I'm not trying to fix all men. I'm trying to fix you. Even if it were true that women wanting the top 20% of men is both fixed and absolute, that actually works in your favor not against it. You can't change the world. You can only change yourself. And if every other dude sucks, you actually have to do far less work than you otherwise would to get into that top 20%.
1. I believe the evolutionary and current data shows that female attraction to men is more about relative comparison, than absolute success. Obvious example being height - women have always biologically been attracted to men who are taller* than the men around him. It’s a proxy for status and quality amongst options, not an absolute level off the floor. The exact same applies to income - celibate priests used to be attractive to women due to their high social status. This is why it is zero sum and scales at the same rate as men improve. As a result, body dysmorphia is expected to become more prevalent in men than it is in women, due to the new selective pressure being applied to them.
2. The problem here is - women are somewhat experiencing top 20% of men via constant, repeat digital exposure to them through social media and online dating. The former is more reinforcement at a distance “this is what a real man looks like”, and “this is how many holidays a man should take his partner on”. Online dating is the almost Pavlovian reinforcement of swiping no on almost everyone that is not in the top 10% of looks/ job title… and then expecting that to not make a serious impression on how they apply status to men in the real world on the remaining 10 hours a day they spend not sleeping or on their phones.
3. What if a man competing in the environment I’ve touched upon, is genetically handicapped in the short height, average face, and low to average IQ department? In this new world, based on stats and trajectory on them, he is more likely than not, destined for another divorce or dead bedroom statistic at best.
I guess I’m not so much trying to argue with you, but more discussing and dissecting the ultimate biological conclusions for many men in today’s age.
"...you probably have a lot of resentment and need to process that. But this is a phase. And this phase is a means to an end. Not an end in itself."
This is, I submit, the message that made the manosphere something far beyond a reverse feminism, and made the revival we're beginning to see possible. It's an important message to keep repeating, especially as the follow-on waves with less personal affinity for it replace the early adopters.
Your article does an excellent job of that, and is a solid grab-you-by-the-collar summary.
I'm pretty sure I'm on the spectrum, and I saw someone say TRP isn't really meant for autists, because you have to be at least average for it to be useful and there's a heavy dose of irony to all of it. A lot of it seems like you would have to be neurotypical to be able to implement, without turning into a full time actor anyway, and I don't see issues with Mark Manson's Models (it's really quite redpill, minus the vitriol), and some other stuff more targeted to help autistics.
I guess I'm saying this to let you know I don't see room for myself in your worldview, unless you disagree.
I will say that both TRP and the Burgundy Pill suggest are not easy. This is especially true if you have ASD and struggle socially. But that doesn't make them any less necessary. Everything important and worth doing is hard.
Been reading through that, yeah, you're doing important work here. Sketching a way out of the redpill mindset without eschewing it entirely. Did you ever write about your own personal journey in figuring out how to become attractive? I feel like it's different for us on the spectrum than for a neurotypical AFC. I think I have a fawn response going, been trying to ditch it.
the process i lay out in plate spinning 4.2 is basically the exact steps i followed.
I think i always naturally had the foundations for being driven and assertive but my own self doubt and feeling “lost and out of place surrounded by aliens” (asperger’s) caused me to be really timid and weak for a long time.
Step 1 was to like sort out my mind and become assertive and competent in like basic life stuff. required like 5 years of weekly psychotherapy for me. that unlocked some confidence and drive.
2 was to truly hone in on my passion and Big Gay Life Mission that maximized my strengths and made up for all my weaknesses (and if anything turned them into strengths). that unlocked a lot more confidence and drive.
all the while i was just like practicing socially. All the basic stuff you’ll find in TRP of like how to meet new people and start conversations and all the rest.
Once you are confident in yourself and socially competent women just kind of start throwing themselves at you.
I have a life mission, but yeah, doesn't make me assertive and competent with people. What does basic life stuff mean here? I think it's people specifically where I feel like I lack competence and assertiveness, particularly when cold approaching women.
I have a big life mission.
Not super familiar with The Red Pill, does it ultimately say something all that different from Models? You did recommend that book.
The obsession with sex in men today is, ironically, in benefit of the women. Why?
Because men, desperate to get some shitty sex with a random hoe, need to perform, they need to become what she wants (in some way) before getting in her pants. This means that the entirety of male culture is centered around pleasing women, about getting their approval. In every great period of civilization, even if men wanted sex, they would never behave and debase themselves like they do today. Where the ancient Greeks constantly talking about how to get laid? Where they obsessed with "getting better" to get a woman to open their legs for them? Obviously not. They were first concerned with freedom, security and creating a great civilization, and as a secondary consequence of said behavior they would get sex and a family.
None of the retarded shit we see today in young men, watching women shaking their asses 24/7 in some shitty blue-screen while dreaming of how to get her to accept him and sending her money desperately desiring her attention. If you think about it, even the ideas of pubs/discos, etc, are complete degeneracy. Young men spending all their time and energy for years, several nights a week just to get some pussy... I once said this to a friend and he argued: "hey what are you talking about? the vikings were always celebrating and flirting and doing orgies etc" This is a very retarded midwit take. The vikings would fuck girls in a party after celebrating conquering their enemies, their value as men wasn't centered on getting a woman's approvals, it was on fighting and honor, and then because they were bored they would fuck several women, that's all.
The greatest creators/inventors of civilization are YOUNG MEN, full of energy, desire for greatness, desire to build, to fight, to do what's right... well all of that today is spent just looking for the next ass to have sex with, to get some approval, because if said man doesn't get a woman's approval then he's not a real man.
My rant may come off as incelish but the truth is that I have partaken in everything I have criticized in this post, because at the end of the day you just have to play the game, it's either that or losing. Nonetheless, I believe I speak the truth.
PS: I remember reading somewhere that being a womanizer was actually considered feminine behavior until the last century. Today it's considered masculine. In light of what I said in the first paragraphs it makes no sense to consider it a masculine endeavor.
I agree. the black pill is that the only reason things were different back then is because women were property and thus men did not have to compete directly for their. Rape and pillage baby.
Men are biologically and mostly immutably sex obsessed. They always have in the past and will always in the future only fight for higher order things after this need is met (or if they are weird freaks with broken sex drives but this is not scalable for obvious reasons).
Unless you plan to de-emancipate women, the only solution is to teach men how to get women so they can meet their sexual needs adequately, only after which will they actually focus on improving civilization for it’s own sake.
Yes. Your blackpill is correct, and I'd also add another blackpill is that we just can't save everyone, but maybe that's not a blackpill, that's just how it's supposed to be.
You're also on point when you talk about master morality, you don't need the entire society to be like that, just a higher % of men, in fact, when Nietzsche wrote his books, he always said he was writing for "the few", not for the masses.
Apologies for the response to an old article but - how can you teach men to all be successful with women… when the top 20% is a fixed % of the population? It’s zero sum, not positive sum. Before long, it’ll be limited to genetics - height, face, IQ and inheritance… because all the controllable factors will be optimised by most or all already, and thus no way to get ahead.
Also, look into the Red Queen hypothesis. This situation you are describing is one of the the most pervasive and inherent structures of living being and evolution that exists. It is as fundamental as physics, and there is no way to escape it. Anyone who gets close (ex 20th century communism) actually just ends up getting everyone killed.
I fundamentally agree with the Red Queen Hypothesis, and the “if you’re not improving you’re regressing” statement is one I hold dear.
The issue of course gets into the zero sum nature of what is essentially market failure. Looking at how things are in the youngest generations and the trajectory, the idea that 50% of men can find long term romantic success truly looks bleak, and the divorce rate alone kind of actually proves that if one were to argue that serial monagamy following divorces is not successful. Did the man get to reproduce? Sure, but did he get to live a life of commitment, nuclear family, mutual trust and loyalty, living with your kids throughout their entire childhood? I’m not so sure. Very bleak, and regardless of one’s own success and ability to defy the odds, doesn’t mean we can’t step back and recoil at the market failure that is starting to become omnipresent in young men’s minds.
1. It's not fixed. There is a relative factor and absolute factor in female attraction. True that it has never been (and will never or should ever be) be 100% of men. But it has been top 50% and could return there.
2. Even if it were a fixed percentage of "top 20%", No individual woman is experiencing the entirety of male options, making it relative to her personal experience. It's the top 20% of men around her and who should could actually conceivably get to commit to her. This effectively results in probably the top 50% of men today being able to get partners. I talk about this more in the burgundy pill series.
3. I'm not trying to fix all men. I'm trying to fix you. Even if it were true that women wanting the top 20% of men is both fixed and absolute, that actually works in your favor not against it. You can't change the world. You can only change yourself. And if every other dude sucks, you actually have to do far less work than you otherwise would to get into that top 20%.
1. I believe the evolutionary and current data shows that female attraction to men is more about relative comparison, than absolute success. Obvious example being height - women have always biologically been attracted to men who are taller* than the men around him. It’s a proxy for status and quality amongst options, not an absolute level off the floor. The exact same applies to income - celibate priests used to be attractive to women due to their high social status. This is why it is zero sum and scales at the same rate as men improve. As a result, body dysmorphia is expected to become more prevalent in men than it is in women, due to the new selective pressure being applied to them.
2. The problem here is - women are somewhat experiencing top 20% of men via constant, repeat digital exposure to them through social media and online dating. The former is more reinforcement at a distance “this is what a real man looks like”, and “this is how many holidays a man should take his partner on”. Online dating is the almost Pavlovian reinforcement of swiping no on almost everyone that is not in the top 10% of looks/ job title… and then expecting that to not make a serious impression on how they apply status to men in the real world on the remaining 10 hours a day they spend not sleeping or on their phones.
3. What if a man competing in the environment I’ve touched upon, is genetically handicapped in the short height, average face, and low to average IQ department? In this new world, based on stats and trajectory on them, he is more likely than not, destined for another divorce or dead bedroom statistic at best.
I guess I’m not so much trying to argue with you, but more discussing and dissecting the ultimate biological conclusions for many men in today’s age.
"...you probably have a lot of resentment and need to process that. But this is a phase. And this phase is a means to an end. Not an end in itself."
This is, I submit, the message that made the manosphere something far beyond a reverse feminism, and made the revival we're beginning to see possible. It's an important message to keep repeating, especially as the follow-on waves with less personal affinity for it replace the early adopters.
Your article does an excellent job of that, and is a solid grab-you-by-the-collar summary.
I'm pretty sure I'm on the spectrum, and I saw someone say TRP isn't really meant for autists, because you have to be at least average for it to be useful and there's a heavy dose of irony to all of it. A lot of it seems like you would have to be neurotypical to be able to implement, without turning into a full time actor anyway, and I don't see issues with Mark Manson's Models (it's really quite redpill, minus the vitriol), and some other stuff more targeted to help autistics.
I guess I'm saying this to let you know I don't see room for myself in your worldview, unless you disagree.
I have Aspergers. I wrote a little 20,000 word series on version of TRP called "the Burgundy Pill". Check it out and let me know what you think.
https://minordissent.substack.com/p/burgundy-pill-plate-spinning-part-bf6?utm_source=publication-search
I will say that both TRP and the Burgundy Pill suggest are not easy. This is especially true if you have ASD and struggle socially. But that doesn't make them any less necessary. Everything important and worth doing is hard.
Been reading through that, yeah, you're doing important work here. Sketching a way out of the redpill mindset without eschewing it entirely. Did you ever write about your own personal journey in figuring out how to become attractive? I feel like it's different for us on the spectrum than for a neurotypical AFC. I think I have a fawn response going, been trying to ditch it.
the process i lay out in plate spinning 4.2 is basically the exact steps i followed.
I think i always naturally had the foundations for being driven and assertive but my own self doubt and feeling “lost and out of place surrounded by aliens” (asperger’s) caused me to be really timid and weak for a long time.
Step 1 was to like sort out my mind and become assertive and competent in like basic life stuff. required like 5 years of weekly psychotherapy for me. that unlocked some confidence and drive.
2 was to truly hone in on my passion and Big Gay Life Mission that maximized my strengths and made up for all my weaknesses (and if anything turned them into strengths). that unlocked a lot more confidence and drive.
all the while i was just like practicing socially. All the basic stuff you’ll find in TRP of like how to meet new people and start conversations and all the rest.
Once you are confident in yourself and socially competent women just kind of start throwing themselves at you.
I have a life mission, but yeah, doesn't make me assertive and competent with people. What does basic life stuff mean here? I think it's people specifically where I feel like I lack competence and assertiveness, particularly when cold approaching women.
I have a big life mission.
Not super familiar with The Red Pill, does it ultimately say something all that different from Models? You did recommend that book.
Incels lol celibate my ass. They’re gooning to every porno on the Internet. Clearly.