Are You A Real Man?

Modern society has warped what it means to be a real man. The result is you have “men” who are successful on paper, who have a house, some money, respectable wardrobe, stylish furniture, and fine tastes, yet they can’t get laid with a beautiful woman. I don’t have to remind you of the hogs that a lot of men are carrying around on their arms in public, a sort of reverse natural selection that our feminizing culture is allowing. I have thought long and hard about all the qualities that make a real man, and have determined that only two are absolutely essential.

1. Ability to get laid at will. If you can’t get laid with multiple women, you’re not a real man, plain and simple. If you can’t mate with superior genes then you’re a blight on the human condition, and should be euthanized. What else is there more important to human existence than fucking? Nothing.

There was a time when I couldn’t get laid, when I was a useless parasite on the world, but then I learned and now I am spreading my seed on multiple continents. It’s true I have not had children (as far as I know), but with a flip of a switch this can be accomplished easily. In all likelihood my human destiny will be accidentally achieved rather soon.

2. Personal strength. Can you defend your lifeblood if the shit really hits the fan? Can you protect yourself against an attacker? Otherwise you are not a real man. Personal strength comes in two forms: the confidence to make a stand and the physical apparatus to carry it out. If you fall over at the slightest breeze then are you not suitable for life, and should be terminated. If I can wrap my thumb and index finger around your bicep then you are a decaying organism that would perish without the nanny state to keep you safe and warm. While I am not a meathead, I am prepared to fight to the death if my being is threatened or questioned.

Real men are made, not born. If you choose not to be a real man, but instead a half-man like 90% of Western males, then you don’t deserve the benefits that come with it—sex and respect. I cannot imagine living life without either.


  1. Josh November 17, 2009 at 10:54 am


  2. Boston66 November 17, 2009 at 11:10 am

    Best post I’ve read.
    Survive and replicate.
    Good shit..

  3. V K November 17, 2009 at 11:22 am

    Any guy can get laid at will if he simply lowers his standards enough…

    Getting laid with HOT women at will is what you should be aiming for. I would edit the 1st point to make this clear lol. A guy who regularly fatty fucks because he thinks he can’t get the hot chicks is just a loser. A real man always goes for the hottest chicks.

    1. Jess MG August 1, 2017 at 3:03 pm

      Knew a guy with a claim of 60-70 lays in a span of 10 years or so. Met many of them. All hideous. All fatties. All well below 5s. 5 would have been generous. He got laid more than anyone I knew. Wouldn’t call him a real man AT ALL.

      1. Anti-Gnostic August 1, 2017 at 5:44 pm

        Somehow methinks you are engaging in the SJW act known as projecting. It was your job as his wingman, IF what you say is true, to then stop him from committed faticide. Some friend.

  4. sa November 17, 2009 at 11:33 am


  5. Carl Sagan November 17, 2009 at 11:33 am

    Funniest post I’ve read.

    Good shit though.

  6. Miley Cyrus November 17, 2009 at 11:41 am

    So gay men aren’t real men?

  7. bcg November 17, 2009 at 11:46 am

    This sounds like sour grapes, since you don’t have those things you say aren’t real. I think the best way to define manhood is winning in any zero-sum game in which you choose to compete – being effective, highly effective, in whatever you choose to do.

    bcg’s last blog post: A Question.

  8. The G Manifesto November 17, 2009 at 12:18 pm

    “The result is you have “men” who are successful on paper, who have a house, some money, respectable wardrobe, stylish furniture, and fine tastes, yet they can’t get laid with a beautiful woman.”

    The Paper Alpha.

    There are tons of these. I have no stats to back it up, but my guts tell me there are more of these now than in years gone by.

    – MPM

    The G Manifesto’s last blog post: Manny Pacquiao VS Miguel Cotto: Post Fight Thoughts.

  9. Chris November 17, 2009 at 1:14 pm

    Survival and reproduction. Basic.

  10. Chris November 17, 2009 at 2:56 pm

    I guess I have to come up with another commenter name, as someone else has usurped “Chris” (above). Thats fucking annoying, as I’ve commented here a lot under that name. Maybe I’m just in a slightly pissed off mood. Time to get laid, I guess.

    Anyway, the funniest thing about paper alphas is that they are just so eager to tell you about their alphaness, as you would never otherwise know if they were in the room. “I drive this car, went to this school, have this job, and own this much property”. There is no question about who is a real alpha, and they rarely have to open their mouths to prove such if they do not choose to do so. I equate “tough guy” alphas, who try to unnecessarily square off with every other guy in the room if given the chance, almost with the paper alpha. Its just about the same thing. Neither are real alphas. However, the real alpha will successfully defend himself if necessary, as Roosh said, you just won’t know about it until you are attacked.

    I pretty much agree with VKs comments, althugh some leeway has to be given to older (40+) alphas who can’t quite as easily get away with banging the 23 year old 9.5 anymore. You have to grade on a curve.

  11. Chris November 17, 2009 at 3:04 pm

    Also, I think BCGs comments, while coming from a good place, aren’t right. I can choose to get very good at a number of things which make me nothing more than a parasite on humanity, let alone not “more of a man”. Think investment banking. Does skimming value out of the economy generated by the working class, while adding no value to it, make you a man? I think not, no matter how lucrative it is and how “good” you are. Integrity and character has to factor in there somewhere.

  12. DF November 17, 2009 at 3:21 pm

    Chris, do you even know what investment bankers do?

  13. Chris November 17, 2009 at 4:05 pm

    yeah, i do. I don’t want to derail the comment section though with a debate about that. Can you tell me how they “earn” their money, though? What value do they trade to society for their income? Product? Service? What? This discussion could easily degrade into an economics discussion, which would be too much for the comments section. But they create no value, they only take it from the economy on a large scale. My investment banker acquaintances have admitted as much. Thats hard to refute. All traders do the same thing, investment bankers only being worse because of the power of their banks and the large scale of their operations. Value/wealth is traded for in a normal economy. Those parasites don’t trade a thing, but gamble their money, our money, and money which doesn’t actually exist to societies detriment. Once you get rid of all of the noise and double talk, it comes down to the fact that they skim value from the economy without adding anything or trading society for it in any way whatsoever.

  14. Chris November 17, 2009 at 4:10 pm

    I mean, if they are buying and selling hard assets, like businesses, thats one thing. Thats just selling product. Nothing wrong with that, and they engage in a lot of equity investment. But a lot of what they do is described as above.

  15. Yeah Right November 17, 2009 at 4:15 pm

    I enjoy reading your blog and I think you have many useful and inciteful things to say about getting laid etc. But what cracks me up are these sort of ego trip posts. You’re not an Alpha Roosh. I’m sorry but you’re not. The real Alphas are those you term the “Naturals”. They don’t need to think about all this existential bullshit to make it happen, THEY JUST DO IT.

    I also get a real laugh reading you talking about fighting. Let me ask you, When was the last time you were in an honest to god fight? (Assuming you have actualy been in one) What went down? Who won and how?

  16. Paper Alpha November 17, 2009 at 4:20 pm

    If you really believe that all traders add no value, Chris, then you must believe that rational, self-interested individuals wouldn’t bother to trade with them, since they would only lose by doing so. But oddly enough, traders of a variety of kinds play an enormous role in modern economies, not only as investment bankers but as intermediaries in the production and delivery of all kinds of goods and services.

    All the parties transacting with traders must be making a terrible mistake, from what you say. But that suggests that an enterprising alpha-male like you ought to be able to correct this massive, trader-wrought, systemic inefficiency in the world economy, and make a buck (or a trillion) doing so, by organizing our complex economy along trader-free lines. Please do so!

    I know I’ll be better off without ubiquitous traders skimming the fat, given that they only take. And you can start small–since transacting with traders is a value-losing proposition, you should be able to enter any line of business in which traders play a role and bypass them, delivering goods and services more cheaply, and thus out-compete them.

    The only thing puzzling me is that no other genius has taken advantage of this gigantic arbitrage opportunity already. Count yourself lucky that you’re so much smarter than everyone else, and strike it rich!

  17. Il Capo November 17, 2009 at 4:27 pm

    @ Chris:

    The important job that i-bankers (or rather i-banks) do is making the economy as efficient as possible by enabling capital to flow from source to use. All the economic theories based on an efficient allocation of capital are moot if capital does not flow efficiently. Without i-banks and some other financial institutions, the flow of capital would be stifled.

    We could argue whether i-banks enable this flow in the best possible manner or which is the optimum trade-off between efficiency and protection of some stakeholders and then we would have an interesting discussion. But denying the service they provide is, in my opinion, rather ignorant.

  18. Cliff Arroyo November 17, 2009 at 4:38 pm

    ¿Quien es mas macho, Roissy o Roosh?

    ¡Roosh es mas macho que ese maricon Roissy!

  19. Roosh November 17, 2009 at 4:39 pm

    “You’re not an Alpha Roosh. I’m sorry but you’re not. The real Alphas are those you term the “Naturals”.”

    I didn’t use the word alpha in this post. Got any more pent-up insecurities to vent? I’m sure the tide will turn for you soon.

  20. tots November 17, 2009 at 4:39 pm

    Roosh your 2nd criteria doesn’t make sense. A man with a skinny bicep with a gun can defend himself better than a man with a big bicep without one. Personal strength is not only relative, it’s up to interpretation. It’s better defined as power rather than muscular strength.

  21. Anonymous November 17, 2009 at 4:42 pm

    And these are the only two things that everyone has told me for my whole life are the least important for being a man. But now I’m putting a lot of thought into it and working on it. I’m 22 by the way.

  22. The G Manifesto November 17, 2009 at 4:57 pm

    “And these are the only two things that everyone has told me for my whole life are the least important for being a man.”

    American Society will teach you that.

    Transport yourself to a 3rd world beach town or city and you will find that these two things are all that matters.

    And being a “cool” person. (Read into that however you would like).

    – MPM

    The G Manifesto’s last blog post: Manny Pacquiao VS Miguel Cotto: Post Fight Thoughts.

  23. Rush November 17, 2009 at 5:01 pm

    My understanding is Real Men are BORN, not MADE. You don’t teach a lion to hunt…Its in his nature to hunt. Was that a typo from you??

  24. Roosh November 17, 2009 at 5:01 pm

    20: hit the gym bro, no excuse to have a minuscule bicep

    23: You were taught wrong. Read men are MADE. Nurture. Research it. Also please pick a new moniker. Yours may confuse my dear readers.

  25. Anonymous November 17, 2009 at 5:39 pm

    I don’t rely on the nanny state. I rely on the state to protect my right to life. The guys with big weapons would run the world without a state to protect rights, not the guys with big biceps.

    You are coming from the right place, but you are creating a cartoon version of the truth.

  26. Paper Alpha November 17, 2009 at 5:44 pm

    Just out of curiosity, Roosh, when was the last time you punched a man in the face?

  27. DF November 17, 2009 at 5:57 pm

    I agree that men aren’t born they’re made by their fathers, grandfathers, and uncles but claiming that these two qualities are the only one’s that matter devalues the very statement you concluded your post with. I know guys that are good at pulling chicks and fighting but that’s about it. I would classify each one of them as nothing more than a man-child at best. Irresponsible, directionless, devoid of discipline, resolve, purpose, or ambition.

    A few years back I sparred with this one cocky mofo that had maybe 3 months boxing training under his belt but he wanted to fight. He liked to lift weights, spent weekends blowing his construction job money on chicks, drugs, and bottleservice. He had maybe 20 lbs on me and the first words out of my trainers mouth were, “take it easy on him.” Shiiiittt. He came at me so quickly he ran out of gas in a minute, so much so that his punches were coming at me slow motion. I floored him with a hook to the body that curled him up into a ball. He quit after that, not just boxing but the sparring match not more than two rounds in. He had no heart, no discipline. If you can take punches and still think about what you have to do, that’s a real man and I don’t mean literal punches either.

    1. Roosh November 17, 2009 at 6:50 pm

      DF: Like bcg said, in the end that guy couldn’t fight, but I think you’re thinking of a definition for GOOD man (you mention heart, discipline). That’s something else.

      joker: Where do i boast about fighting? I’m talking about standing up for yourself, defending yourself, not having fear.

  28. bcg November 17, 2009 at 6:28 pm

    DF: I think your story supports Roosh’s point. He couldn’t fight, so he wasn’t a man.

    This post is surprisingly thought-provoking. I was trying to construct an imaginary man who couldn’t fight and who couldn’t get laid but who still seemed manly, but I couldn’t. Imagine a story where Albert fights Barry. Barry wins, then Barry bangs the girl who watched them fight. You can say anything you want about Barry, but can you call him a boy? Give Albert a house, a job; give him money; give him a sweet car; give him anything you can think of, as long as he loses in a fistfight and doesn’t get laid. What mystery object or quality can you give him that makes him a man? I can’t think of any.

    bcg’s last blog post: A Question.

  29. joker November 17, 2009 at 6:38 pm

    I’d just love to meet Roosh face-to-face. I mean he’s such an Internet tough guy – but then again, he’s a great writer and likes to provocate. It’s also super funny when a skinny guy like him boasts about hitting the gym and fighting.

    I don’t know what to think of Roosh. Some day I’m reading this blog, I consider him being completely lost in this life. The other times he’s very spot on. As I said, it’d be interesting to meet him face-to-face.

    Btw, how does getting laid not make you “a useless parasite”? I mean, this globe is becoming so overcrowded already, what good is it to be able to produce multiple offspring? Oh, letting YOUR genes pass on? What good does that make to you actually?

  30. bez November 17, 2009 at 7:12 pm

    So your idea of a real man is a brute? I think a real man has many levels beyond this cliched idea of “man’s sole purpose is to replicate” bullshit.

    Real men are good for a few things, but EXCEPTIONAL MEN are the ones that matter in this world.

    If it weren’t for those exceptional men, we would still be living in huts and fucking our daughters.

    Man has higher faculties that separate him from other animals, and to reject that is to reject reality.

    What is my idea of a real man? A real man is someone who understands the circumstance at hand (or at least does his best to learn) in order to make it work in his favor.

    This would work in your case because you understood there was something wrong because you weren’t getting what you wanted, so you went and figured out a way to get what you wanted.

    bez’s last blog post: Fan Death – Reunited.

  31. The Rookie November 17, 2009 at 7:35 pm

    What about guys who have huge dudes around them for security? Would 50 Cent be less of a man now because he hires security?

    If you fought to the death and lost, would you say you weren’t a real man? It sounds like personal courage is what you’re aiming at…

  32. Tyler November 17, 2009 at 7:56 pm

    I think about that personal strength theory all the time. I see people commenting about if they had a gun, or people around them for security.

    You won’t always have a a gun on you, or security to protect you from dangers.

    There is a large majority of the country that wouldn’t even be able to run down the street for the sake of their own life. In the event of a natural disaster, you might need to be agile enough to escape danger. A gun or security is not going to help you then. Strength and agility is your best defense.

    I’ve been robbed at gun point in Amsterdam, and mid robbery I smashed his head against a brick wall. Turns out, as suspected, he didn’t have a gun. It was fucking scary, and the adrenaline probably helped…but if I never stepped foot into a gym, I don’t think I would have pulled that off…

    Tyler’s last blog post: Groundhog Day.

  33. Anonymous November 17, 2009 at 8:30 pm

    I just want to say that I love Roosh, but I don’t think pickup, or any other aspect of life, should really define a man. I think we should do whatever we want with this life. I choose to study pickup and to approach and try to bang girls, but I don’t think anyone is less of a man because he chooses not to. Just my two cents…

  34. paully November 17, 2009 at 9:20 pm

    When was the last time you were physically tested by another man? When was the last time you put yourself in a position to be tested, even in a controlled situation (training/sparring)? How often and regularly, if at all, do you do it?

    Lifting heavy objects will not help you defend yourself in a fight. If anything, it will endanger you by giving you a false sense of confidence, similar to how people who carry guns put themselves in dangerous situations.

    That said, I think I know the answer to my first question. If someone is an experienced and proven fighter but cannot execute game and bang chicks (but understands the theory behind it), is he not a man? Since you are inexperienced at defending yourself and are yet untested, aren’t you by your own definition seriously lacking? Like game, shouldn’t you be practicing some method that is proven, rather than deluding yourself into thinking that weight training will help you in a scrap?

    If the definition of being a man is being able to bang the hottest chicks, then shouldn’t it too include the ability to defend yourself against other tested male opponents?

    Go to Brazil. Bang Brazilian hotties by night. Immerse yourself in the world of BJJ by day. Learn what it is to struggle. Become a complete man. Learn humility like you never thought existed. It’ll give you plenty of fodder for another book. You’re right there. You won’t regret it.

  35. DF November 17, 2009 at 10:26 pm

    DF: Like bcg said, in the end that guy couldn’t fight, but I think you’re thinking of a definition for GOOD man (you mention heart, discipline). That’s something else.

    No. Having discipline, persaverence (i.e., heart), or ambition are not uniquely moral qualities. They can be found in the most depraved men as well. Had I mentioned ethics or honor then yes, it would have been applicable to the definition of a “good” man.

    I should point out that boxing or sparring in a gym is a controlled environment. When shit goes down on the streets, there are no rules. Knowing how to fight won’t guarantee a damn thing, it just imparts you with some confidence to carry yourself with a little bit more swagger.

  36. torchbearer November 17, 2009 at 10:59 pm

    I disagree.

    With a few tweaks, your arguments are similar to those provided by some extreme racists when they are asked to explain why they are racist. Just expand your focus from the individual (i.e., yourself) to the race, and from “fucking” to “propagation of the race.”

    “not suitable for life, and should be terminated” — Many handicapped people have been sent to concentration camps for being handicapped.

    “If I can wrap my thumb and index finger around your bicep then you a decaying organism that would perish without the nanny state to keep you safe and warm.” — I can almost wrap my thumb and index finger around my own arm, but you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who opposes the state more strongly than I do.

    Realize that “the nanny state” (or any state, for that matter) is based on violence. Although you throw in a reference to self-defense at the end of your post, most of your comments seem to encourage the *initiation* of violence, which makes you no better than the state you condemn.

    The state has no legitimate moral authority to initiate violence against innocent people, and neither do you.

    Support freedom all the time, or don’t support it at all.

  37. paully November 17, 2009 at 11:09 pm

    “I should point out that boxing or sparring in a gym is a controlled environment. When shit goes down on the streets, there are no rules. Knowing how to fight won’t guarantee a damn thing, it just imparts you with some confidence to carry yourself with a little bit more swagger.”

    I agree, but while it is a controlled environment you are dealing with an unwilling opponent who is trying to “hurt” you back. If you train regularly and for a while you’re going to own 99% of the fools who wanna bow up on you. you’re going to be used to physical confrontation if it comes down to that, especially if you compete, and you’re not gonna spaz and gas when someone comes at you. more importantly, you’re going to have a better appreciation for the fact that half the guys out there who are gonna fuck you up don’t look like they can fuck you up.

    if you’re really interested in self defense, time spent doing 3 x 10 curls could be spent in the ring or on the mats. roosh brags a lot about how many approaches he’s done to get where he is now, which explains his skills at picking up chicks. how can he explain his prowess for defending himself? he can’t. he just thinks he can. it’s the same as someone who reads all the blogs about picking up chicks and claims to be a master PUA w/o ever having done so. easy concept to understand.

  38. bez November 17, 2009 at 11:18 pm

    I really think one of the best ways to reinforce your manhood is to get into regular “fights”. My old college roommates and I used to have these little fights, everything below the neck was game, and I remember during that time I walked differently, and people looked at me differently– just like in Fight Club. Although this probably sounds childish to you MMA/Boxing goons, it’s still an effective exercise.

    The confidence that comes from knowing you can defend yourself can really push you to another level in sooo many aspects of your life. Girls smell that testosterone and drop to their knees and give you 20 (licks). “I guarantee it”

    bez’s last blog post: The Well-Rounded Man.

  39. Jon November 17, 2009 at 11:29 pm

    A fascinating post because it highlights so many of the intellectual dangers of the Game community.

    Sad. Unfortunately, this is a very real and dangerous tendency amongst all who think very long about Game – they run the risk of slipping into a kind of primitive and brutish machismo. It happesn on Roissys site too.

    At its best, Game is invaluable in developing an authentically masculine personality, but it always teeters on the brink of slipping over into adolescent machismo, it always skirts the abyss.

    It is pathetic to define ones self-worth by how pleasing one can be to women – good god, that is giving women way too much power, and is actually a subtle, subterranean form of woman-worship.

    That is another danger that constantly threatens the Game community – to fall into a kind of slavish woman-worship one surrenders ones meaning and sense of worth to the judgement and decisions of women.

    As regards violence, physical violence always represents a fairly low form of power and those in our society who spend much time and effort developing their physical strength are typically on the lowest social scale. There is a reason for that.

    The reason is that a much greater power and strength is achieved through reason, rationality, cultivation of the intellect, and psychological qualities like self-discipline.

    One only has a limited time in life to develop and cultivate ones assets and best qualities – those who focus on their physical strength as their best – sometimes only – asset are clearly at the bottom of the social pole.

    In our society, one simply dosnt HAVE to spend too much time developing physical strength, and to do so would be detrimental to developing our other, higher, and more powerful faculties. That is one of the glories of being civilized.

    Now of course, one should probably devote SOME time to being physically strong, but it should clearly NOT be ones primary pursuit. Its definitely one of the lower ranking pursuits for anyone who has been blessed with other, more important personal assets.

    What defines a man can be expressed in one word – strength. Yet strength has many different manifestations, and physical strength, while shouldnt be entirely neglected, is perhaps its lowest form. Intellect and psychological strength, even culture as a form of enhancement, count for far more.

    And finally, philosophically, you are continuously and apparently unconsciously commiting what is called *the naturalistic fallacy* – you seem to think that just because we have genes that help us get laid, we should adopt that as our only *purpose* in life. But life or nature has no *purpose* – the genes that help us get laid survived merely because they helped us get laid and thus were ABLE to survive. Its a kind of tautology. The whole process is entirely impersonal and without consciousness and doesnt imply any kind of *purpose* that we should now adopt consciously.

    Our genes dont WANT us to get laid – there is no consciousness there. Those genes are there as a result of a completely random, pointless process.

    If you want to say that getting laid brings you great pleasure, that is one thing, but to say that reproducing is ones *purpose* in life and that is ones *destiny* is to involve oneself in a whole host of misunderstandings and probably shows one hasnt really understood the nature of evolution and gene selection.

    Developing a genuinely masculine personality and eliminating weakness and fear is very worthwhile – being macho is childish.

    There is a built-in tendency in the Game community to skirt the abyss

    There is something pathetic about defining your self-worth by how pleasing you can be to women. There are things a self-respecting man should refuse to do no matter how many hot women it gets him.

    It just so happens that the world is set up in such

  40. Jon November 17, 2009 at 11:31 pm

    Oh, the last few lines of the last post were meant to be deleted. Sorry for the messiness.

  41. Cliff Arroyo November 18, 2009 at 2:11 am

    “when was the last time you punched a man in the face?”

    I think he’s more into punching girls, he’s certainly hinted pretty broadly at it a few times.

  42. Johnny Dair November 18, 2009 at 3:03 am

    First of all, if you’re trying to present some standard by which men should live, referring to men who meet your standard as “real men” is not a good idea. There are already too many bizarre and conflicting ideas about exactly what being uber-manly means.

    For example, there’s this idea that real men are supposed to coldly analyze things and be very rational, right? I read a story about two guys that were drunk and fooling around with an axe. One of them lay his head on the table and said “I’ll bet you aren’t man enough to chop my head off.” The other guy *was* man enough. How rational was that?

    Aside from giving your standard a name that’s already in widespread use, you don’t present much of any reasons for why anyone might want to follow it. Instead of promoting the benefits of individual items in the package (having sex with hot women is fun, being able to defend yourself is useful) or the combined benefits of all the items in the package (fucking and fighting raise testosterone levels and will help you live longer and healthier, I just pulled that out of my ass), your main arguments go something like “Anyone who’s far enough away from my standard deserves to die”. Well first of all, the idea of someone “deserving” something is meaningless in my moral system (utilitarianism). Someone should die if and only if they’re life is too miserable to be worth living and they can expect things to stay that way. I don’t find it plausible that most men who are far from meeting your standard fall into this category.

    You need to think carefully about which of your instincts make sense and which don’t. Does being afraid to approach strangers make sense? No, and you overcame that. Doing traditionally masculine things might make sense if you feel happier that way, but don’t get religious about it. Carl Sagan: Better the hard truth, than the comforting fantasy.

  43. Max November 18, 2009 at 12:54 pm

    I agree with number 2. However, I disagree with the perception of the extent of the problem.

    There are plenty of men left in manual trades and with active lifestyles who don’t conform to the cunty, metro.MediaNorm.

    Also, being a gym rat alone doesn’t make you tough.

    Max’s last blog post: Condemned To It.

  44. Javier November 18, 2009 at 3:38 pm

    It’s seem very telling the author will not reply to any question about real life fighting experience.

  45. work November 18, 2009 at 4:40 pm

    its not telling at all, he said nothing about wanting to fight or how he fucks people up in his weekends. being prepaired to defend yourself verbally and physically without being foolish about it is what a real man does.

    paully, yes sparring and mat time are the best ways to prepare yourself for that situation, but your trying to tell me that lifting is conterproductive? get out of here. being stronger then a man you are facing off with is always an advantage. especially as 95% of men have never sparred.

  46. Gio November 18, 2009 at 5:41 pm


  47. paully November 18, 2009 at 6:41 pm

    “paully, yes sparring and mat time are the best ways to prepare yourself for that situation, but your trying to tell me that lifting is conterproductive? get out of here. being stronger then a man you are facing off with is always an advantage. especially as 95% of men have never sparred.”

    i never said it was counter productive. lifting 3 sets of 10 of a different muscle groups isn’t any more effective for fighting or self-defense than, say, running or circuit work. the latter might even be more effective, considering how quickly people gas during confrontation, or if you need to run away.

  48. Carl Sagan November 18, 2009 at 8:43 pm

    And finally, philosophically, you are continuously and apparently unconsciously commiting what is called *the naturalistic fallacy* – you seem to think that just because we have genes that help us get laid, we should adopt that as our only *purpose* in life. But life or nature has no *purpose* – the genes that help us get laid survived merely because they helped us get laid and thus were ABLE to survive. Its a kind of tautology. The whole process is entirely impersonal and without consciousness and doesnt imply any kind of *purpose* that we should now adopt consciously.

    Solid point.

    Something that’s never addressed by the game community.

  49. Military Man November 18, 2009 at 10:22 pm

    Very, very few men have actually been tested (like in combat) so by your definition there are almost no real men. A boxing match (while good training) isn’t the same as getting shot at.

    By your definition most of the real men in the world are either special forces (get laid easily) or gangsters.

  50. Anonymous November 18, 2009 at 11:45 pm

    Your points are flawed. I just came back from happy-endings trip to Russia, where pretty much all the women are hot. It’s not hard to get laid there. There are a lot of losers there who can get laid at will (to any assortment of hot women). Likewise, you can take karate classes, go to shooting range, etc. To both, the question follows, “so what?”

  51. str8up November 19, 2009 at 3:38 am

    I respect your free spirit. I am a traveler myself. I get away when I can and I enjoy the company of women.

    That said, your definition of a “real” man falls short.

    1. If you are not impregnating these women, you are as much of a “useless parasite” as the smelly bum on the corner who hasn’t seen cooch since 1976 (in the “genetic” sense, that is). I realize you acknowledged this point, but until you have a brood of curtain crawlers, you are technically of no more benefit to the human race or yourself than the aforementioned smelly bum.

    2. The ability to get laid is definitely a factor in being able to define yourself as a man, but if you are spilling your seed in a Trojan or down the back of yet another skank, it’s all for naught. You are judging yourself to be superior to other males based upon your ability to fuck hot women. How much does this raise your status in society in general? Negligible.

    To put it simply, your definition of a “real” man is a manifestation of your ego investment in the idea that fucking hot women (without impregnating them) is the end-all-be-all of life. Your “hippie” lifestyle is great, but unless you are able to parlay it into something that provides you with a steady stream of retirement income (I don’t know how well your intellectual assets are doing, maybe that will work out for you), there WILL come a day when you will be forced to re-evaluate your current philosophies on life.

    Sorry man, but game might bring you sexual gratification into your 40’s and 50’s, but you aren’t gonna be tagging 24 year old centerfolds when you are 80 like Hef. Unless you have the wealth/power/status that you seem to criticize, that is.

    What’s my point? Well, you are cashing in your long term potential for a short term payoff. You’re banging broads left, right, and center, but you are neglecting your masculine calling to build an empire that will provide you with a SUSTAINABLE supply of everything you could want in life, including (but not limited to) pussy.

    Me? I’m gonna spend the next 5-7 years building my empire, then I’m gonna flip America the bird and set out for Central/South America or Eastern Europe where I will use my knowledge of the female species and my substantial passive income to live out the rest of my life in hedonistic pleasure.

    Of course, in the meantime I plan to pillage and plunder some low grade American ass, and travel when I get the chance. I just think that you are cheating yourself by discounting the “rest” of life.

    A well rounded life is not simply a result of how many cum receptacles you manage to tap before you are too old to care.

  52. Hooligan Harry November 19, 2009 at 4:24 am

    Sir Isaac Newton died a virgin, and I doubt he could punch his way out of a wet paper bag.

    There is more to life than pussy. There is a whole world out there. The problem is that you value quality minge in the good ol USA because its in such short supply.

    Ironically, its when you actually become a man that you get your pick of the litter. You dont become a man because you managed to fuck a few hot chicks along the way.

    By your definition of a man, Ron Jeremy is alpha.

  53. Roosh November 19, 2009 at 7:03 am

    My fighting experience is not relevant at all to the real man definition.

    Fact is if you can’t physically defend yourself, you’re not a man.

  54. Paper Alpha November 19, 2009 at 10:58 am

    But Roosh, how can you claim to be able to physically defend yourself if you’ve never been tested? You can’t know a priori that you can defend yourself on the basis of your muscular development–many factors come into play in a real fight, including speed, timing, coordination, strength, grappling technique, and killer instinct. You may be certain that you have strength, but the others are (to me) unknowns in your case. And even if you do have the basic athletic prerequisites, you can’t know if you have the killer instinct until the time comes to punch another man in the face–that’s why I asked you that in my previous post. Lots of athletic men have (psychological) trouble using another man’s face as a punching bag, even if it looks easy in their imaginations. And non-physical confrontations are poor guides to this–I’ve seen cocky, athletic dudes talk big up to the last second, and then get creamed because they didn’t have the fighter’s spirit.

  55. Anonymous November 19, 2009 at 12:34 pm

    True. Very true.

  56. str8up November 19, 2009 at 3:21 pm

    Roosh- don’t take this the wrong way. I think both you and roissy have a lot of insight to offer guys of all ages. But I don’t think you have the proper perspective to be able to distill what it takes to be a “real man”.

    Being able to defend yourself is a GOOD thing, and the confidence in knowing that you have the ability to do so will reap you benefits in other areas of life, but is it really one of only two qualities that determine whether or not you are a “real” man?

    If I were pulling in $10mil per year and I felt the need for protection, I could live in a fortress with my own “secret service” agents following me everywhere I go.

    Of course, this is the 180 degree opposite of what you are saying and it is equally as short-sighted to say “A real man can pay people to protect him” as it is to say “A real man must be able to defend himself”.

    My point is, the definition of a real man isn’t that simple. You are a “real man” in your eyes today because you know how to talk your way into women’s panties and drop a guy with one punch, but where are you going to be in 20-30 years?

    It’s all about balance my friend.

  57. paully November 19, 2009 at 6:16 pm

    “My fighting experience is not relevant at all to the real man definition.

    Fact is if you can’t physically defend yourself, you’re not a man.”


    fact is that there are a lot of people who are gonna take your milk money if they want to take it, regardless of how manly you are.

    paper alpha’s got a point. you never know how you will react until you’re in a situation that has escalated past what you’re used to. ive been in and around a lot of scraps as an adult and i can tell you that most people stand there with a dumb look on their face, and the flight instinct is generally stronger than the fight. people more comfortable in these situations are that way because theyve been in them a lot. similar to someone being comfortable with, i dunno, approaching women?

    your absolutist attitude doesn’t hold up on this one, my freng. act like a toughguy and someone will shit test you. do you want that?

  58. Jack Donovan November 20, 2009 at 12:43 am

    Manliness is strength, and depending on how that’s defined, that’s pretty much the beginning and end of it. I tried to hit all of the bases here:

    The ability to “seduce” the objects of one’s desire is a minor factor that flows from the main one. Strong men get what they want, or they take it, or they buy it. The most successful man in history, genetically speaking, is probably Genghis Khan. Strength made that possible.

  59. str8up November 20, 2009 at 1:11 am

    “The ability to “seduce” the objects of one’s desire is a minor factor that flows from the main one. Strong men get what they want, or they take it, or they buy it.”


    The ability to assert your will is the essence of masculinity. It doesn’t matter if how you get it, what matters is that you have the ability to get it.

    We live in a modern world where most of us see very little in the way of physical danger but no shortage of people who wouldn’t think twice about stealing your retirement fund. We pride ourselves in the number of women we fuck, not the number of children we sire. With the right combination of talent and timing, you could make a billion dollars in a couple of years starting a company in your spare bedroom.

    Makes it a lot more difficult to define the qualities that make a “real man”.

  60. Pingback: Mailbag: Letter from an Omega

  61. Jon November 21, 2009 at 11:23 am

    Jack Donovan, true, but physical strength is a relatively trivial form of strength – if it werent, then nearly half the animal kingdom would be *superior* to humans – and reason and intelligence end up being far more effective – and thus powerful – in the real world, as is seen not only in mankinds domination of the animals but in the intelligent countries domination of the less intelligent countries, whose men no doubt contain many *real men* who are physically strong and capable but whose physicle strength counts for nothing against intelligence.

    In the contest between intelligence and physical strength physical strength loses out in the long run every time – that is why it is so misguided to elevate physical strength as the measure and definition of a real man and to fail to realize that physical strength is a relatively trivial form of powe.

    We can all go to the gym all day and pump iron and train for fighting – and waste endless hours doing this – but that would mean cultivating a relatively trivial form of power at the expense of our real assets as human beings.

    The great boon of civilization is that it frees us from the need to cultivate a lower level of power in order to develop a much, much higher level of power.

    Wishing to return to a more primitive form of life where physical strength is the measure of manliness means returning in every way to a much weaker, less powerful form of life, where men are WEAKER.

  62. Dan DeLa Cruz November 21, 2009 at 11:58 am

    There’s something to be said about personal strength both in character and being physically fit. These things no doubt contribute to your overall manliness, and also help to get laid.

    But I think your diminishing the value of money and wealth. Money gives you the means to provide the most essential needs for yourself including food, and shelter. Money also gives you personal freedom to pursue things such as travel, game, physical activities, and leisure. If you have money, you can essentially buy time for yourself to pursue things that can help build your character and help you become more of man.

    The reason that things like money, wealth, and education aren’t seen as very important things in wealthy countries like the U.S. (and the women that live there) is because there is so much of it. It’s basic supply and demand. The more money there is, the less valuable it becomes.

    But in countries where economic limitations are a reality, and things such as access to education are limited, these things are still seen as highly important.

    I do agree though that money is not everything. A real man is well rounded in all aspects.

    Dan DeLa Cruz’s last blog post: You Have a College Degree: So What?.

  63. November 21, 2009 at 5:28 pm

    Here are the qualities of a real man:
    Comfort with Vulnerabilities
    Ability to Lead the women in his life
    being functional
    Ability to get his expectations met

  64. Jack Donovan November 21, 2009 at 6:52 pm


    You obviously didn’t read the post I linked to, because it addresses your concerns.

    When it comes to manliness, physical strength is the root of the metaphor from which all else flows, but yes, there are ways to exert strength and influence that don’t depend on physical strength. Dana White can buy, sell, ruin and lionize the Ultimate Fighters who depend on him for their bread. I was very careful in crafting my definition of strength.

    Where discussions of manliness–specifically manliness–are concerned, if you stray too far from a strength grounded in physical reality as a base and start talking about abstract forms of strength, there is a point where you stop talking about manliness and are then talking about gender neutral definitions of power. Hillary Clinton and Oprah Winfrey wield power and influence, but they are not manly by any sane definition of the word. Perez Hilton probably wields more power than I do, but he is in no sense manly.

    There is a difference between manliness and power.

    Manliness is grounded in the physicality of men. That’s the only thing that separates manliness from other abstract qualities.

    Mind you, also, that I am not making any hard and fast line between REAL MEN and other males. Manliness comes in grades, and men are more or less manly based on manly qualities they exhibit.

  65. Matt November 21, 2009 at 8:32 pm

    The definition of “real man” is opinionated. Everyone will have a different definition. You dedicated your life to being accepted by women. Therefore, you think it’s manly to be liked by women.

    Personally, I think there is more to life than getting laid. I believe that basing your life on the whims of girls is a sacrifice of freedom. In the end, you accomplish nothing except for a mere number. And this is how I justify my lack of success with women and remain truly happy pursuing other goals.

  66. Jon November 21, 2009 at 10:54 pm

    Jack Donovan,

    An interesting and valubale distinction between power and peculiarly manly power, but not as stark as you seem to suppose – through strength training women can become stronger than most men, and indeed, any form of power can be attained by women.

    However, you have helped me to refine my thinking on masculinity and forced me to a slight re-definition.

    My primary point was that physical strength, while having some importance, should not be overemphasized to the point of making it a primary criteria of *manliness*. This line of thinking will elevate the brute and the savage to prominence.

    I am much more partial to the view that manliness resides primarily in the psychological quality of having temperamental fortitude – or psychological *strength*.

    I find *real manliness* quite compatible with a relatively low level of physical strength – because of dedication to other pursuits or perhaps, because of accidents – is a mentally tough man who is paralyzed not *manly*? I would say its ridiculous to say that philosophers, say, like Aristotle, or poets like Homer, would not be real men for failing to devote much time to developing their physical strength.

    So perhaps I would now say that while rationality, intelligence, and forms of cultural or social power are not the basis of *manliness*, they are higher forms of power than physical strength and more worth spending our limited time on earth attaining, and that *manliness* is quite compatible with having a relatively low level of physical strength, and not investing great amounts of time in developing the ability to defend yourself.

    I would now locate manliness primarily in a psychological quality of mind – *testicular fortitude*, as it were.

    And manliness cant be located in forms of power unattainable by women – as that doesnt exist – but only in forms of power that are typically found in larger measure and better expressed in men. Perhaps that is physical, but since that is so trivial a form of power a real man would much rather develop other things.

    But thanks for your clarifying comments.

  67. Jack Donovan November 21, 2009 at 11:38 pm


    The strength training comment is an avoidance of reality, not a thoughtful observation. A rare woman can train to be stronger than many men who haven’t trained at all. Strength and womanhood aren’t mutually exclusive and I would never assert that they are, but on average untrained men are 50% stronger than average untrained women. If both groups were trained to their potential, strength would still, proportionately speaking, be attributed to men. I deliver exercise equipment to (many) women for a living, and they pay me to do it because in most cases they are really not built to push 300 pounds of steel up a staircase.

    That aside, I understand what you’re saying. In some sense, it’s very Bushido–or maybe I just think Bushido whenever I read the word “fortitude.” Samurai weren’t giant men but they were so ballsy they could cut their own stomachs open without so much as a grimace. Fortitude is definitely one of the key manly virtues.

    I would actually recommend Harvey C. Mansfield’s “Manliness” (2006). He shares a lot of ground with you (and me) on the topic of manliness. He boils it down to “assertiveness.” I’m re-reading it now and while I would quibble with him on certain points, it is by far one of the best books on the topic.

    However, I have to go after this statement:

    “And manliness cant be located in forms of power unattainable by women – as that doesnt exist – but only in forms of power that are typically found in larger measure and better expressed in men. Perhaps that is physical, but since that is so trivial a form of power a real man would much rather develop other things.”

    The first sentence is perfect and eloquent.

    The second is bad form and pretty obviously an attempt to emasculate men who the majority of men would consider manly–presumably to place yourself above them as the REALLY real man. You’re not fooling anyone with this “revenge of the nerds” strategy.

    I am comfortable associating manliness with strength while also admitting that I am not the strongest of all men or the manliest man in mantown. I am talking about strength in precisely the way I defined it, not just physical strength.

    Some of the greatest, and manliest, of all men were both strong and smart. Plato was one heck of a wrestler. A large number of Navy SEALS also have PhDs or advanced degrees. Sir Richard Francis Burton comes to mind.

    A civilized society fails its men when it fails to recognize the primacy of strength in the male identity. It succeeds when it recognizes the need for its male role models to be strong, and encourages them to be strong and just and smart.

    If you think you can sell the idea that strength is unimportant to manliness to young boys and inspire them, you, along with a lot of feminists, are sorely mistaken.


    “The cynicism that regards hero worship as comical is always shadowed by a sense of physical inferiority.”

    – Yukio Mishima,Sun and Steel

  68. Jon November 22, 2009 at 2:22 am


    The snide comments demean you. I can easily characterize the way you elevate brute strength over intellect as a mere reflection of your own inadequacies, but what would be gained by that?

    And argument needs to be argued on its own merits. A greater respect for intellect might have made you more appreciative of that fact.

    Oh, and you didnt understand my strength and women comment – it was to point out that you cant locate true manliness in a form of power UNIQUE to men. Your response that men are on average stronger is to have completely missed the point of my comment.

    Anyways, we simply dont see eye to eye on this one.

    Physical strength has its place, but it is far from the core of masculinity, not its defining feature, and spending too much time cultivating it is pointless.

    Its sad to me that youre so hostile to intellect – to the point of mocking me for being a *nerd* for elevating it above physical strength – and cling to a coarse and primitive form of masculinity which takes the one quality we share with animals, and the quality most prized by thugs and criminals, and makes that the defining feature of masculinity.

    It is a coarse, brutal, and primitive vision that does a massive disservice to men. No, for me, psychological features like temperament and intellect will always count for more in defining masculinity.

    Yes, physical strength is important, but paramount? The defining feature? Only a brute thinks this way – that is, only someone weak.

    Because that is what a brute is – someone form whom physical strength forms the greatest form of power he knows.

    Again, SOME physical stress is undoubtedly important, but it is far from paramount.

    Even the Navy Seals dont stress it – they stress stamina, both mental and physical, and skill with weapons, and ferocity. The selection process for Seals doesnt even test for strength, but for psycholoigcal qualities.

    Why? Because of the obvious truth that strength is of relatively trivial stature and easily built up if need be.

    And I would never tell young boys not to aspire to physcal strength – I know I did when I was young – but I WILL tell young men who grow out of boyhood to aspire to higher levels of power. What is appropriate to boyhood – the realtively easy – isnt whats appropriate to adults.

    A civilized society is precisely one which recognizes that men need to be mentally and psychologically strong – and that such a society will always defeat the merely physically strong. That is why Europe colonized Africa, and not the other way around.

    Thanks for the tip on the Harvey Mansfield book – Ill check it out. You make some good points, but sadly you fall into the familiar pattern of crude anti-intellectualism and primitivism so prevalent amongst the advocates of *manliness*. Alas.

  69. Jack Donovan November 22, 2009 at 3:12 am

    Not snide. Just right.

    I gave credit where it was due and I think it’s fairly clear that I have an appreciation for the value of thinking and writing. I recommended a book to you written by a Harvard professor that examines the topic in great depth, and sung the praises of men who have balanced the pen and the sword. I have not advocated wanton thuggery.

    However, the elevation of the importance of being an intellectual is a common, self-important vanity of intellectuals.

    As a pal of mine has argued, “there is no argument you can make down the barrel of a gun that it will not refute.”

    “Yes, physical strength is important, but paramount? The defining feature? Only a brute thinks this way – that is, only someone weak.”

    This is so laughable. You are still using strength as a club to emasculate me for defining masculinity by strength. As the defining metaphor for manhood you cannot escape the primacy. Even in your defense of intellect you are saying, “See, I am stronger than you. You are weak.”

    What thugs understand that intellectuals who have been indoctrinated by feminists (passive or active) do not is that masculinity must have strength as its root so that you can successfully inspire men to embrace other ideas.

    There’s another excellent book called “What is a Man? 3,000 Years of Wisdom on the Art of Manly Virtue” that catalogs many of the intellectual virtues, many of them laudable, that (predominantly) Western men have attached to manliness. Without strength as I’ve defined it, they are merely pretty ideas. Heroic men, good men, wield their strength in alignment with virtue. Virtue informs and directs strength, and I would argue that it should. But virtue without strength is…a greeting card.

  70. Johnny Dair November 22, 2009 at 6:25 pm

    After thinking for a bit, I’m inclined to believe that saying certain things are or are not manly is just another way some people in society try to control others. Fuck you, I won’t do what you tell me.

  71. jeb December 2, 2009 at 6:58 am

    I thought a lot about your blog post last night and I just had to post a reply. I like girls and sex, but I am more conservative than you. I was raised as a Catholic and was taught that premarital sex was wrong. While I am far from pure anymore, I was wondering what you think about the moral questions about sex. Are you worried about STD’s? Illegitimate children? Does sex outweigh work? Playing around may be fine now, but do you think you may want a little more security from marriage when you are older? Picking up chicks may become boring and uses a lot of time that you could be devoting to something more productive.

  72. Johnny Dair December 5, 2009 at 11:41 pm

    @jeb: You heard Roosh, he thinks copulation is the most important thing in life and is therefore the most “productive” thing a person can do.

  73. Craig December 9, 2009 at 10:32 pm

    all of you only have a chunk of the puzzle and lack the necessary depth of knowledge to fully grasp the topic you are proclaiming to know anything about. Please refrain spewing stupidity around, it’s contagious. Just look at yourself ,your government and education systems.

  74. Anonymous December 23, 2009 at 12:51 am


  75. lol January 5, 2010 at 9:17 am

    Oh, how very convinient that messages get caught by “anti-spam” so they can be screened by the owner.

  76. Simrekinus January 6, 2010 at 12:16 pm

    I’ve generally thought of the whole “game” movement as a load of bullshit subscribed to by gullible losers with low self esteem who felt they needed a guide to approach a girl.

    I still believe it’s success is largely owed to the fact that it forces men to approach. They probably would have done fine before, but didn’t have the balls to walk up and say hi. They then attribute their success to what essentially amount to self-help books.

    That said, I may actually rethink my stance on the matter. There are obviously some really smart people here and I congratulate you on the intelligence of your arguments.

    1. Roosh January 6, 2010 at 12:20 pm

      “I still believe it’s success is largely owed to the fact that it forces men to approach”

      I’ve said this many times myself. But approaching combined with “best practices” on how to treat a girl can make a HUGE difference on how much more you get laid. There’s always a better way to accomplish a task, and game is just a manual on the most efficient way to get laid.

  77. Simrekinus January 7, 2010 at 5:14 pm

    Good point. I’m about a third of the way your through your first book – I’ll post thoughts when I’m done. Oh, left some info on DC Ethio chicks on the corresponding page.

  78. Simrekinus January 19, 2010 at 12:22 am

    Nopers. Just nope. Sorry “Human Dildo” – don’t believe a word of it.

  79. Will February 4, 2010 at 3:35 pm

    Like your post, it’s short and to the point. And I agree.

    But as far as defining a man by his ability to defend himself against physical attacks as well as verbal attacks, I wanted to know where men with disabilities measured up to your definition of manhood.

    Sean Stephenson comes to mind– dude’s in a wheelchair, has a congenital condition that renders his bones soft and infinitely breakable. He’s about the size of a large baby. But he’s more of a man than most men 4 times his size.

    Would he still qualify as a man for you? It would be interesting to hear your thoughts. Peace–

  80. James G March 12, 2010 at 5:08 pm

    The fact that many of today’s men willingly self-feminize themselves is the most disturbing part of the Pussifacation of America

    At one time you could blame the feminists or political correctness – now the only ones to blame are the Prius driving, vegan, low-rise jean wearing “men”

    James G’s last blog post: Motorcycles, The Old School Man Way.

  81. Moreval July 5, 2010 at 2:45 am

    Roosh, if you are who you say you are, I would wager that someday you will get married, and then there’s a good chance that you will have offspring. If it is a girl, rest assured that your views on women will change. Human life, male or female, is more precious than you can imagine. How precious? Read about it here: wwwstepstochristus

  82. Galloway July 19, 2010 at 12:12 pm

    So whenever I do not get laid I am not a real man? Thats a rather self defeating attitude, especially for newbies. Damn ,you wanna get laid because you look better in the eyes of other people or because your horny?

  83. Kristina July 29, 2010 at 7:06 pm

    I would add that the ability to teach others contributes to being a Real Man. The ability to get laid, along with the ability to defend/conquer are both forms of Smart and smart men teach others.

  84. myth buster August 15, 2010 at 10:46 pm

    A real man only needs one woman. Whatever you may think of marriage, most marriages have solid potential- if they fall apart or the spouses are miserable, it’s because they’re not trying hard enough. Know your partner.

  85. Anonymous November 17, 2010 at 10:15 am

    Is there an underlying insecurity? This post has a different attitude.. Is Roosh seeking validation for his choices? Why does he feel the need to judge which genes are worth preserving?

  86. quantumleap January 8, 2011 at 4:54 am

    i’ll address the women point here on the ‘real man’ criteria as I’m getting a little too old for fighting although I would not hesitate to defend myself or those I wish to protect the best that I could.

    I think a big problem in the community with many PUAs is the focus on outcome. Keeping ‘score’ if you will even if it is only within your own thoughts.

    I have been studying and practicing game seriously for 5 years now after the end of a LTR. It has helped me see clearly that there are many things that define a man.

    I know other PUAs who get laid almost every time they go out or on D2s. But so many of them accomplish this through blatant lying and setting up false expectations. That’s a man?!!

    I’m not suggesting Roosh condones or practices this himself but these guys are getting the same results as him but with no integrity. That makes them even less of a man.

    Lastly on this I do much much better with getting laid by various attractive 8+ HBs (in my estimation – so damn subjective) in their 20s and early 30s and can consistently close these girls. not bad for a 40+ PUA I think.

    But regarding the closes “so what?” can apply here. if we’re going to define real men in the PU arena then let’s qualify that as having the balls to approach no matter your ‘success’ with that particular women or not.

    that courage in all areas of life is the stuff that real men are made of.

  87. Philip B January 18, 2011 at 7:37 am

    So, in effect, you’re saying that ability to defend one’s self and get laid are the main yardsticks by which any non-idiot should measure manliness?

    Pardon me a moment but…BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHA! This sounds like a definition right out of high school or some action-adventure flick!!

    A REAL man defines what a man is for HIMSELF!

    A REAL man doesn’t base his self-respect on what others’ (or even the majority’s) definition of what a man is!

    A REAL man doesn’t even care what others (or mainstream society in general) thinks of him!

    A REAL man simply lives his life as he sees fit without having to check over his shoulder at what the Alpha Male gamers think!

    A REAL man doesn’t start with the assumption that sex is the end-all, be-all of life, much less build his whole skyscraper on that brittle foundation!

    Now to what a REAL man ACTUALLY does:

    A REAL MAN is an independent thinker, and I mean independent to the point where he follows the truth no matter how weird, strange, and – yes – even pussified the truth may seem!

    A REAL MAN sees courage more in terms of saying and doing the right think even at the cost of social status, and even the cost of losing his standing as a man in the conventional sense of the word.

    A REAL MAN is someone who realizes sexual desire is just some mind-altering neurochemical cocktail a la street drugs AND self-disciplines those desires.

    A REAL MAN finds his happiness inside himself and his passions, rather than in the outside world and from other people or things. That includes being happy if he fails to meet conventional, traditional definitions of “manliness”.

    A REAL MAN sees that conventional “manliness” is just bunch of cultural assumptions based on arbitrary criteria (in simpler language, that means ideas just pulled out of thin air without asking whether those criteria really make any sense).

    Bluntly, a REAL man sees that if you chase pussy, you become a pussy!

    Thanks for a load of laughs, Roosh! My lungs haven’t had this much of a workout for at least a month!

  88. PuaHate April 12, 2011 at 8:49 pm

    Gayer than a $2 bill.

  89. Pingback: The Beta Test | glitteringopprobrium

  90. 33 July 9, 2011 at 3:19 pm

    my personal experience and what i have analyzed from many experiences of other men is that…”nice guys” always fall short of ever gaining anything.
    The reason is because they sacrifice the major essence that is important “being a man” in order to gain the thing they want a “woman” … in most cases women are not interested in marrying another woman “nice guy”
    Being a Evil jerk is another subject …

    YOu can be Strong and Good…but you cant be “nice guy”

    sometimes being Good requires a man to take the lead..and to be a leader
    WOman are seeking a Leader
    And facts are that “nice guys” behave like followers.
    woman dont want jerks or evil guys…What they seek is Strenght and Leadership

    hence the most popular guy or the strongest
    Or the guy with the plan and Money.
    All have one thing in common high chance for leadership


    if you look like a leader “leadership Qualities in personality and charisma”
    then your heading in the right direction
    Part of being leader is being nice sometimes “kissing a baby” while also being strong “locking up criminals”

    nobody wants a Weak leader.
    Nobody wants a feelingless leader

    Imagine yourself as a Leader
    and you will head in a right direction
    because a Man is the leader

  91. vanderjohn July 15, 2011 at 11:37 am

    The naturalistic fallacy. Cute that Roosh thinks the ways of nature and evolution should dictate how we spend our time before we die.

  92. Liz July 21, 2011 at 2:29 pm

    hehe I seduced a straight female over all the guys doing theatrics to get her attention…I identify as straight but I think the dance with a man or woman is fun. Seduction is a lost art form. You engage without being desperate…make it about them and weave yourself into it…a lot of it has to do what you exude and your own self image…people pick up on it–men and women.

  93. PolishGuy September 6, 2011 at 1:52 am

    This is the guy who left the US cause he could only get fat chicks and moved to Poland where 6s and 7s throw themselves at him cause he’s foreign looking and tall .. he even admitted he gave up and wants to go for “low hanging fruit”.. read his site
    i hope some jacked up polish skinhead catches his ass alone in a dark alley and gives him an opportunity to show how strong he is LOL. nie daje sobie rade w ameryce to spierdala do polski frajer kurwa

  94. Johnny December 28, 2011 at 10:15 pm

    Roosh, I think this makes sense if you just want to stick to male biology…but you seem to be where I am. Going after external things to make yourself feel alive. Traveling, searching, restless for the truth. Living in this world we are conditioned that being male is taking home the trophies….to feed the ego. Meaning, it’s man made. You have to construct a world of where what we do is relative. We get RESPECT from others than just respecting ourselves. What you’re talking about is what man has been doing. And many who believe this, still get burned…man. I’ve been to many schools in the military, where physical prowess is essential and being able to get back up when the chips are down is crucial to everyone’s survival. But you know what….we all get old, and we can all easily die. Sure anyone on here can whip my ass….but you all need to remember this, you have to sleep.
    Anyone can pull a trigger, or press send on their cell phone to initiate an IED; and what your describing is what thugs do.
    A man, in my opinion, is a person who can master his emotions and insecurities. In the military, heroes are the men who stared at death and went willingly…Knowing that death awaited them. So tell me, how is following our reptilian brains going to make me a man? I’ve proved myself physically and gotten quite a few hot women…but I’m still hungry, still feel lost, and not a man…though I’ve done some of the hardest schools in the army and deployed.
    I say, do yoga. Study Buddha. Discipline yourselves from resisting desire…and believe it or not….women love it. Because, you’re a man.

  95. csmass January 14, 2012 at 11:03 pm

    No offense roosh, but I am 5′ 8″ 150 and I would kick your ass any day, even if my arms are small. Don’t brag about size, it means you lack it somewhere!

  96. madmax March 16, 2012 at 11:23 am

    I like your stuff, but I think this article was too ‘black or white’. It’s easy to say ‘you are not a real man if you don’t get laid with multiple women’….but for some guys it has been much harder than it has been for someone who ‘gets laid at will’, and they didn’t get laid at will because of insidious causes, such as bad health (which WILL affect severely anyone’s confidence, I don’t give a shit how confident he think he is), or things such as ignorance. In my case, I had to fight with both problems, and while I have certainly worked my ass off on the second problem, there’s little I can do about the first. I know I would be much fucking confident if my health was good. I am in shape and I could have had a LOT of potential. I agree about your other points, though. If you can’t defend yourself, you are a wimp. More precisely, if you are a lazy ass who never tries to improve on anything, ONLY then you are a real loser. But no one deserves to be terminated, unless he has badly harmed someone else. In that case, I am all for the death penalty.

  97. Alex May 2, 2012 at 10:14 am

    I dont like this type of thinking. Especially this Alpha stuff. Gunwitch was on this stuff too much, he wound up shooting a chick in the face. There are ”real men” out there who fuck lots of women, get in fights alot and beat their women and dont give a fuck about anyone else but themselves. I tried to prove myself to be a ”real man” when I was younger doing alot of boxing,MMA anything because I wasnt ”tough enough” because I was thinking like this. I was not happy, I didnt enjoy it but forced myself to do it. Im not a fighter I dont care to be. Alot of these people in the PUA community who talk about being ”real men” and kicking people’s asses are not real men. Talk to the ”real men” in prison doing 10 plus years or all the ”real men” who have to fight everyday and worry about getting shot because in the neighborhood they live in you think they give a fuck that you think theyre ”real men?”

  98. Frank Wunder June 16, 2012 at 2:17 pm

    I think I’d rather be euthanized than actually care about whether someone else thinks I’m a “real man” as if such a thing could be defined and actually exist.

  99. The Big Bang! August 8, 2012 at 3:35 pm

    It’s the 21st century people! What standards are there but to get laid, do it sooner rather than later, really. That’s what life is all about!
    Who is sex starved, anyone?
    Rooshv how about you?
    Call me at 1-800-Iam-Game

  100. Instant Loser August 11, 2012 at 1:49 am

    1. No.

    2. Yes.

    Does this make me half a man?

  101. Pingback: On Being a Man (For Realsies) « The Caveat Lector

  102. angryguyblog August 15, 2012 at 11:46 pm

    So, do you prefer the cock in your mouth or just gingerly dangled over your shoulder?

  103. Nouseforaname August 16, 2012 at 3:50 am

    Are you a man if you know when NOT to fight but instead to stand down or flee – how to choose your fights.

    ROOSH – Say your thumb and finger go halfway around my bicep and I’m trained in Judo. I’m talking with a girl at a bar, about to close the deal, when a sober meathead whose biceps are twice the size of mine comes up and shoves my (nearly) drunk ass. Am I a man for fighting this asshole and spending two months in a body cast, contemplating my humiliation? Or could I only redeem my manliness by looking at myself in the mirror every day telling myself I’m a man – that when I’m out of that miserable state I’ll hit the gym everyday and bang a new girl every other day?

  104. rockblock September 21, 2012 at 11:09 am

    this article is simple and blunt… i love it

  105. rockblock September 21, 2012 at 11:11 am

    i was thinking of another attribute.. I believe providing for your family and/or loved ones is a must.. because even if you can get laid at will and can fight off people, if you aren’t making money to sustain a future… you aren’t really fulfilling your duties

  106. Rocklp4 October 3, 2012 at 9:46 pm

    This is really ironic to me. This post just makes me think that you’re not a true man. A true man is noble, kind, caring, and intelligent. It does not have to do with physical strength or getting laid. Unless you wish to return to a state of nature that is…which I feel is rather fitting as you display the cognitive abilities of a Neanderthal.

  107. Rogz October 4, 2012 at 10:38 am

    Excellent way to write an article and generate more business.

  108. Cat December 6, 2012 at 2:40 pm

    A recipe for Papageno’s everywhere….I’d sooner be a prince who can think and feel e.g Tamino! 🙂

    What about Einstein or Mozart….I don’t suppose genius counts either??

  109. Cat December 6, 2012 at 3:01 pm

    By your definition of a man, Ron Jeremy is alpha…..

    I’d argue Pope John Paul II was more Alpha than Ron Jeremy….courage is what makes a real man…not women!!

    And if if you think JP was a pussy think again…WW2 Poles vs SS etc…

  110. Cat December 6, 2012 at 3:12 pm

    Final word on this Alpha stuff… I’ve seen similar posts by other gurus spouting similar views on being Alpha…ie like some Arnie, or Hip Hop wannabe to young guys …it’s total bollox…with maturity you’ll see it’s quite the opposite…don’t take my word for it read Robin Horsfall’s book see page 248

    Ex 22nd SAS, Iranian Embassy, mercenary…after killing a guy with his hands as a mercenary he really asked some questions about himself and what he was running away from…he realised he wasn’t that hard…not really….he reckons Jesus was the bravest guy who lived…funny that eh? Jesus would have been a total pussy by your standard but not an elite ex Special Forces trooper…who has seen death and courage up close!!

  111. Anonymous February 15, 2013 at 10:38 am

    None of those things make you a real man. Maybe if you’re really unattractive and that’s all you’ve got going for you…

  112. The Male Insider March 5, 2013 at 7:03 pm

    Lots of great conversation Roosh, those two things aren’t what “make you a man”, but they’re still important. Every guy should be in good physical condition, the same as women – being able to get laid is important, all men need to go through it, overcome their problems etc to do it.

  113. Anonymous March 9, 2013 at 1:32 pm

    This idea shows the excessive ego-centric and selfishness of the writer not to mention immaturity of a child. Getting laid is not a sign of a so called real man… that is total BS.

    A real Man has behaviors like integrity, and self responsibility, they have compassion and honesty. Any yes, a person of this caliber can get laid… but life does not revolving around his penis… except for a child that is still seeing the world in a myopic self centered everything revolves around me outlook.

    There is a lot of good information here, but this is not one of those…

  114. Anonymous March 23, 2013 at 11:33 pm

    A “real man” doesn’t define themselves according to Roosh or anyone else.

    Be a good person, and let the rest of this shit sort itself out.

  115. Sarah April 9, 2013 at 12:25 am

    Dude you got some issues if think of yourself as a “useless parasite” unless you’re having loads of impersonal sex. You really should see a therapist and sort through some of your deep-seated self-hatred that you’re now expressing as hatred toward women.

  116. The Bross May 14, 2013 at 1:52 am

    Human Garbage

  117. Chris June 11, 2013 at 2:26 pm

    Some of the confidence posts make some sense, if the woman you are targeting is a mindless toy for your disposal.
    Zero posts about meaningful discussions or relationships??? Zero posts about helping a woman with her life, or her helping you through yours?? There’s a serious lack of empathy. I hope you find the help you need through connections online like your website; it’s obviously not happening with your nightlife.

  118. Anonymous June 18, 2013 at 3:38 pm

    You are not a man. You have no integrity or honor. You’re a little boy that cries and Winnie’s how it’s unfair. Manhood is earned.

  119. Joey July 1, 2013 at 8:09 pm


  120. Joe Dick July 8, 2013 at 8:36 am

    got to say that, as much as I admire you and your writings, this is probably the crappiest thing you wrote.

    You can never generalize about anyone. And as horny I can be, sex is NOT the most important thing in the universe. I find that view fucked up, unrealistic and immature.
    I am not a pushover, I am not afraid anymore to approach women, but I am not having sex, because there’s other problems that have nothing to do with my dick, my mind, or myself, in fact. If anyone think you are really the master of your universe, you dudes are fucking delusional, and it’s only a matter of time before you’ll see it for yourselves.

  121. Blue Tropic May 27, 2014 at 9:11 am

    There’s one thing missing imo: The capacity to mantain yourself

  122. Words Don't Come Easy April 7, 2015 at 5:31 pm

    “Real men are made, not born”

    And genetics then? I’m very short and didn’t choose it. That alone shrinks my dating pool a lot. It also means I can’t fend off a taller attacker. I guess suicide is my only option.

  123. Hearn April 10, 2015 at 12:26 pm

    You’re still alive after all these years, Adolf!? How’s Argentina?