Masculine Conservatism

It’s apparent that the manosphere is giving rise to a new school of thought. Whether you are visiting a game blog, an MRA site, or an MGTOW forum, there are a lot of commonalities in our belief systems that don’t match existing ideologies.

A few months ago I wrote an article on traditional conservativism. Here’s an excerpt:

Traditional conservatives can be boiled down into believing that not all change is good. They look to the past for what was lost and how to recapture it while liberals look to the future for what more can be gained in the form of expanded rights, new privileges, birth control subsidies, and dole money. Both offer a counterbalance to society, with one side hitting the brakes while the other hits the gas.

I think it can be argued that in the past 30 years all we’ve done is hit the gas, with very little thought of how that progress impacts human behavior. The pedal is now to the metal while we all race down the highway in the dark of night without wearing out seatbelts. Traditional conservatives highlight the deadly accidents and say, “Look at this, we need to slow down!” while the left yells, “Fuck it, we need to keep going!”

But how much of the tradcon ideology really matches what you and I believe today? Last time I checked, most of us are not ready to marry a virgin or forgo playing the game. We’re not in a hurry to raise a family. Instead, we seek periods of hedonism to be slightly balanced with more traditional viewpoints that accept reality and human biology.

I thought of what are the most common beliefs in the manosphere. Here they are:

1. Men and women are genetically different, not only physically but mentally. Sex roles evolved in all animals. They did not exempt humans.

2. Free-market capitalism is the most efficient means of economic growth.

3. Libertarianism could be an effective means to prevent government overreach into the lives of citizens.

4. Women are sluts if they sleep around, but men are not. This fact is due to the biological differences in gender.

5. Socialism, feminism, and cultural Marxism will bring down society because it eliminates the family unit and decreases the fertility rate. Entitlements soon outstrip the diminishing tax base.

6. Men drop out of the reproductive game if there is no incentive for them to reproduce.

7. Past traditions and rituals had purposes that benefited family and, in turn, society.

8. Elimination of traditional gender roles and the promotion of unlimited mating choice will unleash hypergamy in females, preventing family formation.

9. A woman’s worth coincides with her fertility and her beauty. A man’s worth coincides with his resources.

10. The most stable family is a man providing the bread while the wife stays home to feed it to offspring.

11. Democracies devolve into welfare states as citizens vote for the candidate who gives them the most money.

12. Testosterone is the biological cause for masculinity. Environmental changes that reduce the hormone’s concentration in men will cause them to be weaker and more feminine.

It’s possible for you not to agree with all twelve beliefs, but chances are you believe at least half if you’re a regular reader of mine. If I were to pull a random feminist off the street and show her this list, she would believe absolutely none of them. In fact, if one of your more liberal friends finds out that these are your beliefs, she will think about ways to start a whisper campaign, either online or off, to deal with your thought crime that goes so strongly against what she believes to be truth.

I’m not a fan of inventing terms or names, and if you read my game literature you’ll notice how I find normal language to be quite capable in describing ways to seduce a woman, but we need a name to describe the world that we think best reflects our shared beliefs. “Red pill” is one, but it often refers to a way of thinking, not the content. I believe the phrase “masculine conservatism” fits better for these specific beliefs.

Now imagine if it was acceptable to discuss these ideas on a university level. Imagine if a men’s rights speaker could participate in a campus lecture without getting harassed. Imagine the volume of data that would be published if we had educational backing. Imagine if you could post your own thoughts under your full name and solicit public feedback without jeopardizing your future employment. Feminism is so strong not because their ideas are strong, but because they’ve accumulated power that limits the development and publication of our thoughts. We’ve been reduced to posting mostly anonymous essays on the internet, disorganized with no guiding mission.

But even in this disorganization is rising new ideas that are challenging the status quo. It’s up to each of us to decide how much farther we want to take these ideas, or if we want to hide them and let only our opponents enjoy free speech while we remain marginalized. The feminists were the underdog once, and look how far they’ve come. I have no doubts that we can do the same.


  1. HCE April 15, 2013 at 9:18 am

    I was thinking about this some time ago and concluded that, no, despite some of my beliefs being conservative and the fact that I recognize some positive effects of conservatism, I am not a conservative.

    Put plainly, I don’t care what the change is. Let the human society evolve, love, abandon or support family, die out, breed, build temples to gods or consumerism. I don’t care.

    The one thing I do care about, though, is truth. That is the key ingredient missing from today’s world. The modern mainstream media is full of bald-faced lies about rape culture, gender pay gap, discrimination, sexism, gender differences, etc. Today’s women openly lie about what they find attractive (i.e. nice guy vs. jerk debate). Today’s men rationalize that morbidly obese women are attractive. And so on and so on.

    I could be happy with most changes as long as no one lied about them. I could live happily with any slutty empowered woman as long as she didn’t spin bullshit about what she wants. Just no deceit, please. It’s the deceit that makes me angry.

  2. Evan McLaren April 15, 2013 at 9:25 am

    I’m wondering–will the university be replaced? It is now a joke. My thesis-writing seminar in college included students who could barely string together a sentence.

    I wonder if intellectual life will take a new course.

  3. William April 15, 2013 at 9:28 am

    Considering “conservatism” in the US especially has been largely hijacked by religious nutjobs – I’d vote for a different name.

    But then again, the whole system is flawed.

  4. OldHornDog April 15, 2013 at 9:36 am

    ‘masculine conservatism’ – I don’t know – what ever happend to ‘reality’?

    I’m not trying to be funny. Whether or not you believe in the list above – it just is. You can debate it to death but that doesn’t change the outcome on a majority of them.

  5. William April 15, 2013 at 9:41 am

    @Evan McLaren

    I think an interesting trend is occurring, where higher education is going to be more and more filled with women, and more and more men are opting out in order to pursue “experiences” and act on their entrepreneurial ideas.
    ..or it could just be me and the guys I hang out with and/or pay attention to.

  6. Afroparisien April 15, 2013 at 9:52 am

    I believe conservatism in the traditional and fiscal sense is the best solution for our social and economic ills. I also believe traditional conservatism is what middle-class families should go by.

  7. Days of Broken Arrows April 15, 2013 at 9:54 am

    Roosh had made an offhand comment somewhere that girls are now being raised as boys. This idea, I think, needs to be explored deeper.

    Moms and dads give their daughters “power” names like Madison and Sloane, prep them for college, sports, careers…and the entire idea of motherhood/homemaker is seen as obsolete, a relic. Even one generation ago you still had girls taking home economics. Now all that is gone.

    Mentioning this gets feminists screaming, but why incentive does any man really have to marry a female version of himself (or, to quote Frank Zappa, “a slightly more voluptuous version of your father”).

    I can understand a society that wanted to move some women into the workplace. But a society that completely “progresses” to the point of making traditional women’s roles obsolete is a society with problems. And we see the problems: fat kids, kids without fathers, Ritalin being swallowed like candy, bullying. Do people really not see this all as unrelated and think that kids not getting a full time mom doesn’t affect them?

    And conservatives, with their obsessions with economics and material BS, are just as bad as liberals in the way they raise their daughters. They can talk all they want about guns, abortion and hating gay marriage, but they’re the first to put their girls in a soccer uniform, not a skirt.

    No man has ever been attracted to a woman in a soccer uniform.

  8. abe April 15, 2013 at 10:02 am

    “2. Free-market capitalism is the most efficient means of economic growth.”

    “10. The most stable family is a man providing the bread while the wife stays home to feed it to offspring.”

    This is a contradiction. Free-market capitalism requires two working spouses. The average man cannot support a wife and children on his income alone.

    Decades and decades ago, it might have been the case that the average man could afford a wife who stays home, but the technological and economic progress which have occurred under the free market have devalued the average man’s ability to attain resources, and thus the lifestyle of having a stay at home wife.

    Moreover, free market capitalism itself requires the population to be mobile and willing to relocate. Thus, people aren’t as likely to live near their immediate genetic kin. A housewife will be staying home in a neighborhood in which people only have superficial friendly relations. Thus she’ll get bored and demand more…kinda like Betty Friedan.

    Admit it, the ONLY way to achieve what you want, Roosh, is to socio-economically gimp the female population by law/customs or raise them to be satisfied as housewives. Good luck!

  9. RootlessTorontonian April 15, 2013 at 10:24 am

    This discussion of “masculine” conservatism is incomplete without some discussion of the poisonous nature of multiculturalism, which destroys sense of community and fosters an atmosphere of mutual distrust and suspicion; it does this by imposing rigidly defined ethnic boundaries over what was once a socially cohesive traditional society, which only serves to further alienate and isolate people. Until people realize how damaging the relativistic ideology of cultural pluralism is; unless people realize how destructive the massive annual influx of foreigners into western countries is, all hopes for a return to a traditionalist order are a pipe dream.

    Growing up as a deracinated cosmopolitan in a multicultural society, the call of Blut und Boden is a very powerful one indeed.


  10. dragnet April 15, 2013 at 10:26 am

    “It’s possible for you not to agree with all twelve beliefs, but chances are you believe at least half if you’re a regular reader of mine.”

    Very important to say this explicitly–complete ideological purity is not necessary here in the manosphere.

    “If I were to pull a random feminist off the street and show her this list, she would believe absolutely none of them. In fact, if one of your more liberal friends finds out that these are your beliefs, she will think about ways to start a whisper campaign, either online or off, to deal with your thought crime that goes so strongly against what she believes to be truth.”

    I’m fairly liberal–at least by manosphere standards–and I agree with more than half of the statements.

  11. Wilson April 15, 2013 at 10:53 am

    abe, division of labor does not contradict the free market. Now men might not be able to support a wife any more, but women generally have such meager productivity that they can’t even support themselves without government sinecures and subsidies. Get rid of the government distortions of the market, and compensation for real productivity will rise; there still might be a gap, but cut women’s frivolous spending, and reallocate 1/4 of them to live in brothels and garment sweatshops, and we are on the road to success!

  12. abe April 15, 2013 at 11:13 am

    Then you’d have to explain why Betty Friedan’s-esque feminism arose in the first place. I read parts of “The Feminine Mystique” and my response was: What she’s complaining about is essentially free-market capitalism relocating and uprooting people away from their kin. If all those stay at home wives had their siblings and cousins living nearby to give them a more active and meaningful social life as their husbands worked, then there’d be less of a reason to complain about being a bored housewife. Even if you take away affirmative action for women and all that, it still remains at the end of the day that a lot of women are smarter and more productive than a lot of men, and the free market will give considerable incentive to those women to put use to those talents for a considerable portion of their lives.

    Ironically, it is free-market capitalism itself that so often causes the breakdown of communities and social ties which traditional conservative values.

  13. Hades April 15, 2013 at 11:16 am

    I like the term “masculine conservatism”. If you take the converse, “masculine liberalism”, you basically make the term meaningless because the only necessity towards being masculine would be existing as a male.
    In that world (today, unfortunately), a man would demand to be seen and treated as a man even if he were a simpering pussy beggar or radical feminist.
    Women could take this up as well as feminine conservatives, i.e – acting and looking like actual women instead of tattooed slags.

  14. Arthur April 15, 2013 at 11:19 am


    I think that is a great list of principles. I agree with them all. However I think you need a starting point or core. For me that starting point is the choice people have between being lazy or focusing on doing something valuable using their own brains. Liberals are too lazy to think and so rely on feelings. They would rather be parasites than create something of value on their own.

    Liberals also believe that everything come from the environment, even gender. Whereas I believe that we are all born with are own personalities and we choose whether to let the environment have any impact on us or not. That choice requires effort and so I believe the core difference between people is whether they are willing to make an effort or not.

  15. Vincent Vinturi April 15, 2013 at 11:22 am

    #12 is scary, Roosh. The testosterone levels and sperm counts of men just ONE generation prior were double to TRIPLE what they are in the generation.

    The flipside of unbridled capitalism is that the means justify the ends (money), even if the means release harmful, estrogen-like compounds into the environment, which chemically castrate men and disrupt hormone balance in women as well.

    However, hearkening to bygone archetypes of a ‘real man’ is futile. This is a new age, a completely new situation and longing for the dead past ignores more proactive ways to move forward as human beings.

    The family unit is obsolete. It is the cause of the majority of neuroses and dysfunctions. It has virtually no evolutionary precedent or reason. The TRIBE raised children and thus children were exposed to MANY different men and women; many different ways to be. In short, a fluidity and wealth of experience.

    Men SHOULD drop out of the reproductive game… This earth is about 5x more populated than it can sustain. The people in poor countries have no money for entertainment, so they have sex for recreation. It’s free.

    We don’t need any more children for at least several decades. Yet people have children to boost their ego, that they created a little-me.

  16. jesse April 15, 2013 at 11:22 am

    Perhaps the real revolutionary act for Western men will be finding good, traditional women and starting families, thereby raising a new generation in this way of thinking.

  17. Armenian April 15, 2013 at 12:55 pm

    Problem is men make decisions and develop opinions based on facts and logic while women make decisions and opinions based on emotions which is wrong on so many levels. Hence the reason you now see this obsession with political correctness in the liberal media.

  18. John Rambo April 15, 2013 at 12:58 pm

    A disorganized movement is very powerful and cannot be stopped.

    Beware agents like Paul Elam who are intentionally destroying the antifeminism movement by turning it into a politically correct hogwash and allowing all kinds of stupid bitches to post articles on his A Voice for Men website. Some of the ladies who he allows to post on it site openly promote feminist arguments. Paul Elam is an agent whose sole purpose is to derail the antifeminism movement.

  19. Soup April 15, 2013 at 1:35 pm

    I only agree with the parts of “red-pill/masculine conservatism” that relate to game and helping me get laid.

    I don’t agree with economic side of this paradigm you describe, and I believe their are other people on the forum who feel the same way. If I recall, I remember Tuth even wrote an article for ROK on red-pill liberals.

    On a personal level, I’m sort of like this- I want women to be feminine, sexy, and I want it to be easier for me to get them.

    On the larger societal level, I don’t believe that there is a strong enough connection between game and the economic politics you outline.

    I guess I’m just a game purist and don’t really care about those bigger things unless they will make it easier for me to get laid. I actually consider myself to liberal when it comes to most politics.

    I think everyone should have access to the basic necessities in life (a decent place to live, food, health care, and education).

    Raise the level of education of poor people, and you will have less of them. You will have less black mom’s throwing their babies at people on busses. This is my gamble.

  20. ken April 15, 2013 at 2:02 pm

    If we lived like our parents did, we could make do on one income. My father was a mill worker. We had one used car, a Studebaker. One black and white television, no stereo, a 78 rpm record player, a two bedroom, one bath, rented house, with no air conditioning, for a family of five, one AM radio. We went to the movies once a week and took a vacation to Florida once a year.

    Eventually my mother got a part-time job because she wanted more stuff. I think it led to my parents divorce.

    I call myself a libertarian.

  21. ken April 15, 2013 at 2:06 pm

    BTW, I think all twelve of your points are valid.

  22. Eric Diaz April 15, 2013 at 2:35 pm

    This is the last time I will visit this blog. There were some good things that I learned from this blog, and for that I am grateful. But Roosh is not a free thinker. He despises the radical feminist approach, by saying that it is just a way of gaining power over man, and therefore is not good. While advocating the same thing but on the opposite direction. Which it only seems natural since he is a male. His approach is just as flawed, as the approach of a feminazi.

    And his best argument to justify his position is more or less that “Men have a penis, there is a gender difference, therefore…”

    What Roosh is demanding from the opposite sex is submission. At least, that is what lies in the abstract.

    I think there are better approaches to this issue, in which both sides benefit from, and the satisfaction that gender differences needs can be fulfilled.

  23. Alias_Alice April 15, 2013 at 3:13 pm

    # 1, 2, 3, 6, 10, 11 and 12, or over half of the list, are factual statements, not value statements, so could be argued empirically. Others have empirical components. … 12 is contentious, at the very least; 1 and 2 have rigorous scientific backing- and most people dealing effectively with dating and mating in their normal lives accept 1 to a degree and see evidence for it with their own eyes. While factual beliefs may be associated with values, goals, etc, and that is interesting from a social science perspective (why the association? Underlying personality or cultural variables uniting the analysis of what is true with the feeling of what is desirable), I see them as a separate category from political position. … a) what is true?, and b) how do you feel about it? … Suppose mommy staying home is the most stable family unit. How much more stable? Stable in what way- the marriages are more stable? Perhaps those statistics include selection bias with regard to the individuals entering. Does the fact that most surveyed women with small children want to work part-time matter to how people feel about ‘stability’? Is it less stable: In what fraction of cases would said marriages desolve due to women’s part-time work? How do you feel about it: Should this wealthy society not accept women into expensive programs like medicine because they will be less productive if they work flexibly and/or part-time when they have children, or is a sense of individual justice- that an individual should not be legally barred from something they meet competency standards to do because people with the same value of statistic X as them (here, gender) do Y longterm in 80% of cases (I made that number up), etc. … Maybe I don’t have a coherent point to this comment. Two points. You say that believing half this list puts you in a group- a group you are trying to pin down by making this list, a group that seems different from right-left categorizations from the past and present that you’ve been exposed to. What I find interesting is that, because half this list consists of factual statements, conceivably everyone reasonable (that is, people who can be swayed by argument. And I think most people can) could be part of that ‘group’, provided those statements were true and could be argued well and disseminated widely… I had no second point, really. I was just interested in a discussion. … And it is true that stating some of those empirical beliefs with university women is problematic and can get you yelled at. I emptied a room (literally) in first year for saying quite calmly and innocently (I was young) that I thought the idea that women are discriminated against in the work world was overstated. I also had people get mad at me for saying there’s nothing wrong with wanting to be thin and men prefer thin women, as evidence by porn, men’s mag models, etc. The replies contradicted themselves. I thought it was a parody of real life that I’d entered. I learned to be quiet after that, at least during undergrad. … My friends are cool, so they don’t get mad, even though they disagree (feminists aren’t all censors), but it’s still unfun, because without a basis of accepted facts, you can’t talk about much, really. It just boils down to “You should read this.”, “Well, you should read this.”

  24. RootlessTorontonian April 15, 2013 at 3:15 pm

    The hydra has three heads: multiculturalism, feminism and liberalism. These three must be destroyed.

  25. MarkFromRoK April 15, 2013 at 3:50 pm

    I propose Naturally Civilizing Masculinity or Natural Masculinity.

    All else is the product of unnatural, state-enforced indoctrination.

  26. Richard April 15, 2013 at 3:58 pm

    Yes, I could not agree more. And what is the end game of feminism? One need only look to the inner city for our answer: matriarchy.

    A matriarchy is a society where the woman is the head of the household. Children are raised never knowing or even caring who their father is. Men are mere sperm donors. They run around doing two things: fighting amongst themselves and impregnating women.

    In a welfare state, this works out quite well for women. The more children they have out of wedlock, the more money they receive from the state. No husband is necessary or desired. A husband would only annoy his wife by telling her to lose weight, do chores, raise his children according to certain rules, etc.

    For short-sighted men, matriarchy may seem like a good deal. They can live a life free of responsibility. No bothersome children to raise, no wife to feed. A man can be a player, and need not even use protection; indeed, his women may prefer bareback sex as this leads to more children–hence, more cash. And the more cash his women pull in, the more often a man can ask for interest-free “loans” that will never be repaid.

    Academics often say (completely without evidence) that prehistoric society was matriarchal. To understand matriarchy is to understand why no history or historical evidence could even possibly exist to either prove or disprove that hypothesis in the first place.

    History begins with patriarchy because without it, civilization is not possible.

    Patriarchy is a deal between a man and his wife. The husband undertakes the chore of providing for his family and raising his children in exchange for the explicit promise that the children he raises will be HIS and not some other asshole’s. That’s it. If you can’t even know whether your children are yours or not, then what’s the point? Families, communities, businesses—civilization itself is founded upon patriarchy.

    The feminist assault on patriarchy began with the liberalization of divorce laws. If a woman can cheat on her husband, then blame him for it and sue for divorce, taking his children and half his income in alimony, then what’s the point? Marriage becomes a trap, not a bargain. The welfare state, of course, is a further development, allowing women to bypass men completely by marrying the state, which then provides for them and their fatherless children by taxing men they don’t even know without so much as the courtesy of a reach-around.

    At any rate, I think the antidote to matriarchy is patriarchy, which not only gives men and women a reason to marry each other, but a strong incentive to remain faithful as well.

  27. Theodora April 15, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    The only way you could truly be a conservatist would be if you actually married a virgin, or married anything for that matter. That’s not happening any time soon. And the girls you praise constantly as being different from American girls, i.e. feminine, thin, etc, are the girls you drop most easy and would never commit to any of them. Secondly, I have mothers around me constantly telling me how much lazier and less verbal and less mobile boy babies are compared to their sisters, so maybe at some point you’ll want to drop the gender differences card too.

    Just believe what you believe, as contradictory as it might be to reality or what other people think or expect from you, if it makes you happy that’s all that matters is what I say.

    And don’t forget that society doesn’t work on what is ideal, but rather on what works best for most people. And we learn how to deal with that.


  28. Anonymous April 15, 2013 at 5:30 pm

    Saya akan makan daging manusia.

  29. dsgntd_plyr April 15, 2013 at 6:15 pm

    you are wrong because you are not factoring in comparative advantage ( men, on average, are better at earning labor market income than women. so you maximize gains (gdp) by having a labor market that’s majority male. how male? it depends on the society.

    in africa women work more than men. how’s africa doing compared to everywhere else?

  30. Thursday April 15, 2013 at 6:35 pm

    Any non-feminist society will inevitably place severe constraints on the player lifestyle. That doesn’t necessarily mean you have to stop being a player now, but being a conservative means wishing for the extinction of your kind.

  31. Indian_Hindu Hot guy April 15, 2013 at 7:48 pm

    I want sex and white girls , i am hindu and i am hot by default , i want sex, tell me how to get

    I know rituals, i am orthodox hindu, i am virgin ,my height is 5,1 inch and my penile length is 3.2 inches

    A black magician has destroyed my testicles but i have performed rituals to get my testicles back

    Now i want women, tell me how i can have sex with countless women

    I am hot , and every girl must love me, but they dont pay any attention

  32. john April 15, 2013 at 7:55 pm

    Liberalism – being generous with other peoples money.
    I admire your positive attitude Roosh. The state and its media were behind feminism. When the state goes so will it. The sooner the better.
    Supporting secessionist movements might be the best way to go.

  33. Spectre April 15, 2013 at 8:37 pm

    This is your single best post ever!

  34. politics student April 15, 2013 at 9:00 pm

    The idea of conservative/progressive is a false conception. Most “traditional” values were invented during the industrial revolution where society was homogenised.

    Before that religion was the paradigm of male female interaction which meant that women basically did what theyre told.

    I agree that masculinity has been attacked savagely in this world but its dumb conservative policies like anti-abortion just as much as progressive “have a baby get free money” policies that ruin the dynamics.

    The cultural war raging right now is one of united states mtv culture (hyper progressive mindless party culture which romans called the bread and circus tactic) vs traditionalised or religious cultures (asia, middle east). More girls to bed in usa culture but theyre dumb sluts, if you want a wife in the conservative sense id say your political concerns here are a bit off.

    Love the site interesting post.

  35. Anonymous April 16, 2013 at 12:07 am

    Anda makan daging manusia.

  36. Anonymous April 16, 2013 at 12:08 am


  37. Anonymous April 16, 2013 at 12:09 am


  38. Anonymous April 16, 2013 at 12:11 am

    You are my “celebrity” exception.
    I needed to say that.

  39. Antifeminist One April 16, 2013 at 12:16 am

    Good ideas, so what do you want to do with that name? I don’t think publicly identifying with it will be so easy.

    The whole reason MRM/MRA/MGTOW and Masculine Conservatism would be rejected at face value is the word ‘male’. And it’s that reason why feminism wasn’t rejected. Playing to society’s libertarian side allows that overt hate movement to thrive. Women’s needs and arguments must be tended to! And again, is the same for non-whites, non-heteros… you get the picture.

    The only solution I see is wear feminism down and destroy it along with its related parasitic ideologies. Otherwise, the only way to publicly discuss these matters is AVfM style. That still enrages femcunts, but at least they can still sell it to the public.

  40. Anonymous April 16, 2013 at 12:33 am

    The following point is becoming less true every year in the culture modern society.
    4. Women are sluts if they sleep around, but men are not. This fact is due to the biological differences in gender.

    This point also eliminates much of the incentive for a man to get married if he is of value. Therefore men of value might have the best life just enjoying sexual variety with tons of women without ever getting married.

  41. J.M. April 16, 2013 at 12:45 am

    @ Erick Díaz

    Yes I know you are a troll, but why misrepresent the things the host said. By the way, when men dominated, women were not marginalized, ridiculed and mistreated as many men are today. There is no other option but submission and judging from the literature women read, submission is what they want.

    @Vincent Vintouri: Only the first line of your post made sense. Testosterone levels are falling in all the first world nations, and most likely have started to fall as well in the third world countries. The implications of this are ominous to say the least, most likely will lead to the extinction or separation of our species, those of the elite that can incorporate nano-technologies and whatnot to purge their bodies from the daily radioactive and chemical fallout and the have-nots who will in time mutate and most will become infertile like those animals subjected to experiments with GMOs…

    The rest of it is typical Freudian and NWO gibberish. If you really believe it you could do the right thing and off yourself, after all you consume 1000 times more resources than what a villager in a hut would!

  42. asian delight April 16, 2013 at 3:00 am

    i think that no 6 is the most controversial in our society….

    plus, if you take away the chances to reproduce from men, you take away the incentive to invest ANYTHING back into society.

  43. CaptainCaveman April 16, 2013 at 4:08 am

    Great points. I typically enjoy your posts but this one gets the cigar.

    I like how readers have been setting high goals such as cultural renaissance or whatever. In the short run I am finding the approaching thing is really neat. I wish I had invented this whole talking to people for five minutes who I meet by chance thing.

    It’s like a whole new dimension.

  44. Quintus Curtius April 16, 2013 at 11:50 am

    Social movements tend to follow certain trajectories. Ours is still in the propagation and dissemination phase. Steadily, the soil is being tilled, and the seeds are being sewn, for the new ideas to begin to grow. Momentum will be gained, hearts and minds will be won, and our intellectual edifice will continue to be built. L’heure approche…

  45. Martel April 16, 2013 at 12:12 pm

    The central Truth of the Manosphere is “A is A”. Things are what they are. This has economic implications, (there’s no such thing as a free lunch, the tragedy of the commons, etc.), but Game is an expansion on the rules of human nature. We all share some things in common (respond to incentives, etc.), but there are obvious differences between men and women.

    However, knowing A is A is just a starting point. You can perfectly understand how things work, but if you have no idea what you want out of life it won’t do you a damn bit of good. The final paragraph of this post indicates that Roosh also has a healthy endgame, or ideal, in mind.

    The Manosphere understands how people operate, both men and women. PR, marketing, and rhetoric are simply Game with different applications. If we use the skills we’ve honed on babes with the public at large, we can reverse current cultural trends.

    Feminism sold an impossible ideal, but they were very realisitc in how they sold it (as were most other leftists). Conservatives advocate policies that understand human nature better, but the way in which they sell those policies is hopelessly naive.

    We know the Truth, and we know how to SELL. We’ve got the quality product and the best marketers out there. All we’ve got to do is tweak and reapply our skills.

  46. 20th Level April 16, 2013 at 12:20 pm

    The unspoken truth underneath all of this is that most guys would like the option to settle down with a nice woman and have a couple of kids that look like him after he has sown his oats for a decade or two. The problem is that the state has made it too impractical and far too risky to do so.

    If a guy had a CLEAR option of this risks he could weigh them against the desire to settle down. It could be $600 mo. per kid or $800 or whatever plus $50,000 if it dies not work out. If the number was quantifiable a man could weigh the risks and make his choice and simply live with the consequences because that is the deal he agreed to. (And before you mention it, pre nups are not worth the paper they are printed on in most if not all of the U.S.)

    As of now the risk is UNLIMITED. A man could lose everything he has ever had and much more if some woman or a judge puts their mind to it.

    So fill the void of potentially never having family of his own, banging multiple.chicks until one is truly too ole to get it up anymore is the best solution.

  47. Martel April 16, 2013 at 12:28 pm

    Regarding the idea that the Red Pill is compatible with leftism, it’s not.

    The Red Pill tells you that if you buy a chick a drink, you do so ONLY on your own terms (like as a tool for isolation, etc.). If you get her a drink on your terms, you’re a sucker and will be played as such.

    If you believe that yet simultaneously believe that you should be required to buy women stuff with your tax dollars, you’re completely contradicting yourself. If she plays betas for suckers individually, she plays all of for suckers in the aggregate if she can get away with it.

    The Red Pill tells us to get what we want out of life as men. Leftism tells us that we belong to the community. We don’t work for ourselves, we don’t live life on our own terms, we OWE everybody else.

    And crony capitalism with the regulatory and tax structures that favor large corporations at the expense of small business is NOT the free market.

  48. 20th Level April 16, 2013 at 12:53 pm

    Sorry about the double post and shitty spelling, typing from an Android is a bitch sometimes.

  49. samseau April 16, 2013 at 1:15 pm

    “Any non-feminist society will inevitably place severe constraints on the player lifestyle. That doesn’t necessarily mean you have to stop being a player now, but being a conservative means wishing for the extinction of your kind.”

    Most players today are that way out of necessity, not choice.

    I think most men would gladly give up America’s slutopia if it meant having tons of high quality relationship material.

  50. 20th Level April 16, 2013 at 1:31 pm

    Not a fan of the term “Masculine Conservativism” btw. Not catchy enough.

  51. protagonist April 16, 2013 at 2:51 pm

    Red-Pill Conservative has a ring to it. (like Red-State Conservative)

  52. Duke City Man April 16, 2013 at 3:45 pm

    @Martel, although feminism was brought forth with idealism in mind, what it really brought out was human nature such as beta males acting feminine and and women exercising their hypergamy to the fullest because they are not being shamed for seeking out dominant males.

    The patriarchy was set up in order to give the average man a fair shake so the average woman would essentially need his resources and therfore not follow her biological instincts and be picky in order to get the best man. This system was set up in order to build society, not beacuse that is how nature works necessarily. Feminism was brought forth by the elites to destroy the family unit to destabilize society. Feminism gives women choice and power and makes them sluts which is natural if they are given that choice. So in reality the patriarchy is closer to idealism than feminism is because it helps prevent their true nature.

  53. Senior Beta April 16, 2013 at 5:15 pm

    Looks right to me. Especially the capitalism part. For all the moaning and groaning about dead end corporate jobs (and there are millions of them) nerds like Jobs, Gates and Zuckerberg created stuff that made people happier, more productive and richer. They were guys who made stuff that people would voluntarily buy. It happens every day in Silicon Valley. It will be a sad day when the fems shut down capitalism.

  54. Martel April 16, 2013 at 5:17 pm

    Maybe capitalism sucks, but everything else sucks harder.

  55. Cad and Bounder April 16, 2013 at 7:26 pm

    Feminism is strong because -rather like affirmative action- it’s results do not typically challenge elite alpha males. In fact it tends to work in their favour.

    If hypergamy is encouraged by feminism then the relative winner from it will be the elite alpha male.

  56. Anonymous April 16, 2013 at 8:42 pm

    Masculine Conservatism. That just about ensures no female will ever want to be associated with it among other issues. How about Functional Realists.

  57. J.M. April 16, 2013 at 10:18 pm

    @59 Anonymous

    What makes you think any female would join us anyway if we soften our stance? We would have better luck being bad boys it seems.

  58. Andrews April 17, 2013 at 1:47 am

    “The feminists were the underdog once, and look how far they’ve come. I have no doubts that we can do the same.”

    And how did they do that? – The modern world we live in is a safe playground for feminine individuals. Not only that but feminine qualities are necessary to sustain our population density while masculine individuals have to hide and play nice.

    Masculinity is now for play acting – How convincing are you as an Alpha? A little girl can act Alpha as well. It’s actually much easier for her to pretend to be one. Society gave her that power by protecting her from all harm.

    Yes, it takes effort to keep one’s head straight as a man at a time when everything around you is trying to make you behave and think like a woman. That effort is masculine – to swim against the current.

    The point is, at our current levels of population density, material excess, very few new frontiers and no real threat at our respective borders (group size ideal = entire human population), there is not much need for masculine individuals. That is, besides play acting the Alpha.

    This modern society of ours is deteriorating. A ‘Why’ would be too long for this already too long post. But that is the only reason why masculinity will be valued again in the times ahead.
    What the manosphere does well is rediscovering of more realistic truths about women, men and how the world works under the hood. That will be the seeds which will take root in greater numbers at the ‘right’ time – not next week (presumably).

  59. Mark Minter April 17, 2013 at 2:59 am

    I am not from the left wing. I am not from the right wing.

    I am from the male wing.

  60. Cad and Bounder April 17, 2013 at 5:51 am


    The key is the elite alpha male. The US is really run by a few hundred thousand people. The majority of which are male.

    They make the family laws, divorce laws, appropriate government spending, govern education policy, manage welfare systems, decide over affirmative action etc

    And who is suffering from all of this? Check out the bifurcation of the US way of life as articulated by Charles Murray in ‘Coming Apart’.

    The elite alpha male (a real one not a manosphere simulator) is doing fine out of all of this. But who gets the high divorce rates and the divorcerape? The fattitude? The single mum culture? The daily humiliation of being treated with contempt due to not passing some hypergamous benchmark (which the state raises by favoring women in the workplace and handing out benefits to women, which the working man is then taxed to pay for) that women require him to?

    And this isn’t an abstract argument. Just look around you for the evidence.

  61. Lone Wolf April 18, 2013 at 1:31 am

    The educational anchor you applied to this post Roosh, really invigorates a strong premised argument here. Very interesting angle, both consummate and obligatory. It really seems like you’ve taking your experience of the female culture world wide, and applied it so something with real substance. Definable or not in the eye of the reader, libertarian divisions are occurring clearly as we speak. Misogyny is a deflective claim post women’s-lib-developed encultured legislation and subsequent abuse. While the “gas and brakes tear” rips the middle ground open wide, those of us walking the fine line between Pagan and Christian on the topic – so to speak – will be the true frontiersmen writing the book of social reality, and ultimately acceptance I suspect.

  62. GoogleKing April 18, 2013 at 1:44 pm

    I still don’t understand Roosh why you hate feminism. According to your own words:

    Does it make sense to you why I don’t pony up $1,200 a month for my own studio while in DC? Because I don’t need to. Incredibly, I’m not punished for being a 30-something male “loser” with no stable job, no future prospects, and no proper bed frame. But I have game, and today that’s all you need to get more sex than you can handle. Thank you feminism, for helping create a society where I get more pussy than most of my peers, even though 50 years ago the only sex I’d get is from prostitutes. No other period in human history has been more sexually tilted towards men than the time we live in now. As long as feminists remain deluded in thinking they have the sexual power, this magnificent orgy of casual sex will continue unabated.

    From this post:

    Feminism has made America into a society where women have no qualms about fucking guys in ONS that are unemployed. In traditional society this doesn’t happen. So why go against feminism? It has given you pussy! Kill it and you kill the pussy and society basically goes back to the 50s or Saudi Arabia.

  63. Anonymous April 18, 2013 at 7:02 pm

    Can I just ask one thing? I just want to understand. I’m a 22-year-old girl. I’m not overweight, don’t sleep around, nor do I think any girl ought to think those things are alright. I pay attention to my appearance because it’s important to me, though I don’t have enough time to look as feminine as some girls do.

    However, I’m a human being just like any guy is. My brain works just as well as any guy’s. I can get things done like any guy can. I get that men and women are different in terms of how much they want to have sex, how aggressive they are naturally, etc. But some men and women are pretty similar to each other when it comes to ambition and desire to accomplish things. I want to be someone of character and accomplishment too. It’s not just a guy’s right.

    Is that really wrong or something? I wonder if you hate all women like me, because I don’t know if you understand that I’m a person just like you are. I want many of the things that you want too. Is the very fact that I want to make myself an accomplished person annoying to you because then I won’t have exactly the traditional feminine attitude you desire in women?

  64. hypesession April 18, 2013 at 7:12 pm

    Put up a picture of yourself

  65. Robert Seymour April 18, 2013 at 7:13 pm

    Anonymous, the stick in the mud is hypergamy.

    As women’s career success increases, she finds fewer and fewer men attractive.

    You have to decide what matters more to you. The realistic prospect of finding a man who will love and commit to you and raise children with you, or a career. If you follow our feminist society’s path of career-first, your chances of love will evaporate once you cross the 30 threshold and are faced with your last few years of peak fertility. Men will only want to bang you like when you were younger and accepted this. From the man’s perspective, there will not be enough time to fall in love and have a proper family and his desire for paternity will be partly frustrated — you spent your best years with other guys.

  66. TMG April 18, 2013 at 7:21 pm


    If getting married to an attractive, upwardly mobile man is really important thing to you, you need to do that ASAP. Those kind of men are still young and naive at this age. They are stupid enough to get married in the first place, and most of them don’t know that their value will VASTLY, VASTLY increase once they get older.

    If you want to bide your time, play the field, have fun right now, that’s fine too. But the longer you wait, the fewer options you will have. It’s not your fault – it’s partially biology, and mostly because our society punishes good men who want to be good husbands, and rewards selfish players.

    So, again, if marrying is really important to you, find your man before he realizes his life will be better staying single.

  67. durangotang April 18, 2013 at 7:35 pm

    @67 Anonymous

    What do you want to accomplish? Do you want to go to college and get a job to help build things like cars or iPhones? Do you want create advertising to sell cosmetics or clothing? These are just things. Things that are overly valued in our consumerist corporate society.

    What about helping to build people and families? That used to be considered more important. Unlike a career, your children whom you nurture and guide should be there with you for life. So too should your husband, but remember he really wants a wife and not a coworker.

    Ultimately, by the age 30 ninety percent of your egg reservoir is gone. Your youthful feminine looks will start the decline, as will your ability to be a wife and attract a husband if you spent the last 10 years riding the cock carousel and habitualizing yourself as a coworker in the labor markets. Is that what you want?

    It’s your choice.

  68. Darius April 18, 2013 at 7:56 pm


    What if she wants to be, for example, a Doctor? Helping people is definitely a worthy cause, should it not be something she aims to achieve in her life? It doesn’t have to be one or the other, women can retain their femininity while accomplishing things other than just family as long as they don’t make stupid decisions along the way.

  69. Durangotang April 18, 2013 at 8:21 pm

    Doctor? She’ll be pushing 30 after undergrad, med school, intern and residency. In addition to having massive debt, working long hours and the need to work years more to pay off the debt. Career status and jobs of authority like doctor also don’t attract men in the same way as they do women.

    But sure, doctors are helpful and needed. It would be a giant balancing act to be a doctor, wife and birth and raise children. Is that even possible? After 30? Something had got to give. Good luck.

  70. 47f274a3faaf April 18, 2013 at 8:32 pm

    > really wrong or something?

    No there’s absolutely nothing wrong with female ambition. It’s just very sadly sullied in today’s world with the feminist and affirmative action agendas. When well read men hear women talking about equal pay for equal work or female ambitions to achieve, they think about certain pervasive lies in our society. Like the lie that has half the Ivy League admissions as female when average female scores are much lower. This variety of lie permeates all our social institutions today.

    You sound smart and considerate so I don’t think certain criticisms you may be responding to apply to you. The problem is the “you go grrl!” drumbeat in the society. What that drumbeat effectively produces is artificially promoted women who wind up as spinsters, and men artificially knocked down a peg or two by the political agenda.

  71. Durangotang April 18, 2013 at 8:35 pm

    Ultimately she should do whatever she wants, just be willing to accept the consequences. I am simply highlighting possible consequences to her line of thought.

  72. Darius April 18, 2013 at 8:36 pm


    What? Med school is 5 years, you graduate at 23 (unless you’re in the US in which case it’s probably more akin to what you’re saying). The debt is minimal in a place like the UK, it used to be just 3k IIRC. And yes, it’s definitely possible, I know women who’ve raised great families and they still work. I think it is mainly down to them being raised with good values, they were smart and educated (and not in a shitheap liberal university), unlike most of the women you see in red pill blogs. It is not THAT hard to balance out.

  73. 47f274a3faaf April 18, 2013 at 8:43 pm


    Oh, I wasn’t addressing you. Your points are great. I’m just saying the tone of a bunch of guys rolling their eyes at ambitious women is really rooted in a bunch of laws and policy.

    I don’t think anybody has any complaints about a woman being successful. The problem is just that so much female success is now artificial. It’s institutional policy rather than meritocratic. All the elite organizations in the west now effectively discriminate against men. The pendulum has swung way, way far.

    Absent this bullshit that has women as half of the admissions to elite engineering colleges and medical schools, I don’t think anyone would care about female ambition. As I tried to say it’s a matter of idiotic policies and agendas tainting a perfectly fine thing.

  74. Full-Fledged Fiasco April 18, 2013 at 8:46 pm

    “My brain works just as well as any guy’s.”


  75. hypesession April 18, 2013 at 8:56 pm

    “I want to be someone of character and accomplishment too. It’s not just a guy’s right.”

    You can be whatever you want. Every path you take has it’s consequences. If you want to be a person of accomplishment at the expense of your femininity and desired traits of being a woman to guys don’t expect guys who want those things to want to fuck you.

  76. 47f274a3faaf April 18, 2013 at 8:57 pm

    Heh, I’d also question how much doctors really help anybody in the west. There’s zero correlation between lifespan, quality of life, and health care dollars spent within the USA despite dramatic variation in spending across regions. Cubans spend pennies on shitty health care yet are healthier than Americans. Unless you are in the small minority of doctors doing truly necessary surgeries, like addressing trauma, odds are you ain’t doing shit to “help people.” Even oncology is substantially BS; the treatments typically just buy people five more really shitty years of life.

    If you truly wanted to “help people” in terms of their health it seems you’d do best to go on some unibomber campaign against junk food. But hey, being an M.D. sure pays better.

  77. Darius April 18, 2013 at 9:12 pm


    Come on that’s such a feeble argument. Are you really saying the only useful doctors that help anyone are surgeons? Do you know anything about this field?

  78. 47f274a3faaf April 18, 2013 at 9:22 pm

    Look, it’s a hand-wavy argument and the details matter, but on a statistical basis medicine is irrelevant next to nutrition and lifestyle for the health of a national population. On aggregate, doctors and modern medical technology don’t matter. And I stand by that argument.

    Of course the orthopedist who fixes a kid’s fucked up leg is helping. But in America 85% of the time he’s going to be doing pointless knee replacements for obese, sedentary Medicare patients. I hope you follow my gist.

  79. 47f274a3faaf April 18, 2013 at 9:54 pm

    > men might not be able to support a wife any more

    I call bullshit on this. Given control of the purse strings I could easily and comfortably support a wife and eight kids on a budget of $45K USD. That’s enough money to far surpass the standard of living even my parents had, let alone my grandparents.

    This is all about the hedonic treadmill (the Joneses) and social status. A lot of men want their over sized house and three cars and private tuitions for the kids more than they want their wives to be full time mothers and homemakers. I think this particular area might be almost as much about male laziness as feminism. Of course women being status obsessed doesn’t help.

  80. MattW April 18, 2013 at 11:08 pm


    First thing I’d say is that the life/the world is not fair. It’s not supposed to be fair, there’s no god-of-fairness to make everything work out for good people.

    Second, the dating market is most definitely a market. Each person has a market value and for women that value generally declines over time. The quality of a man you can demand right now is higher than it will be when you are 40 regardless of the accomplishments you have under your belt by then.

    And third, it’s not an all-or-nothing proposition, you just need to prioritize. Accomplish what you want to accomplish but don’t let that get in the way what will ultimately make you happy.

  81. AW April 19, 2013 at 1:45 am

    The anonymous comment thread provides an exquisite example of women’s inability to comprehend reality on a theoretical level — and men’s inability to comprehend it on a personal level.

  82. AW April 19, 2013 at 1:49 am

    For that matter, of women’s tendency to view life in terms of resource accumulation and men in terms of reproductive access.

  83. Revo Luzione April 19, 2013 at 2:29 pm


    If you want to accomplish something and still retain your feminine charms: accomplish this:

    Find and attract a smart, fit, attractive high value man. Make babies with him, make sure that those children grow up to be exemplary human beings. I guarantee you that you will have far more life satisfaction at age 70 if you accomplish that, rather than forgoing an excellent family and accomplishing a bunch of corporate ladder-climbing. Starting your own company and/or creating great works of art *may* provide as much satisfaction as creating an amazing family life, but then again, maybe not.

    One thing is sure: you cannot have it all. You must make choices.

  84. Peter April 20, 2013 at 6:42 am

    Existential realism.

  85. Mohammed Stevenson Braun April 20, 2013 at 1:39 pm

    Arthur: “Liberals are too lazy to think and so rely on feelings. They would rather be parasites than create something of value on their own.”

    Liberals are usually smart and well-educated but terribly unworldly. They are somewhat like the Church in the Middle Ages, preferring their own theory and theology to reality. Too lazy to think? Possible. In may experience, they do think about social issues but don’t think about them all the way through. They get stuck at a certain point, and won’t make the extra effort. Some of them know deep inside that “it simply won’t work” but go with liberalism because they know liberals will somehow win in the end. Rely on feelings? Everyone is a slave to their feelings. Liberals lack self-awareness and don’t realize just how much they they are guided by anger and revenge. Conservatives, even the dumb ones, usually have more self-awareness.

  86. Alice April 22, 2013 at 2:54 am

    A few questions, Roosh.

    Do you think the “honourable manliness”, or rough-and-tough, etc., manliness promoted by people such as the writer behind is beta, as you would call it? Do you despise it, or have some affinity for it? Do you consider those men fellow-supporters of masculine conservatism? … Speaking of living by code, or being a good “man”, not just a good person: Do you think such a notion is inherently “beta”, inherently weak, or misguided? Or, have you just learned through experience that it doesn’t help you to get laid- rather, hurts you in achieving that goal- so you see it as something to be fought in yourself, and advise others to fight it in themselves, so your opposition is more pragmatic? In short, do you despise honourable masculinity, and if so, is it on pragmatic grounds(ie. “it doesn’t work”) or other grounds?

    Somewhat related to the above, as these “honourable” chaps seem to be more family men, do you think the average man will ever really be open to ideas of masculinity if they are presented by players when the ideas themselves relate to gender-relations so a person’s sexual goals, practices and morals seem relevant to their conclusions? Do the mores and morals of a player alienate the everyman? If the same ideas were presented by, say, a “family man”, how might listeners hear them, instead? … Alternatively, does being a player give you that wee bit of “contempt” of women that wills you to speak up as opposed to being “protective” of women, and so accepting of obvious crap, and really many men see and feel as you do, just don’t have that will to “call bullshit” on feminists? … On a similar note, does having an unconventional life where you are rootless and more without community spirit (seemingly) mean that you cannot appreciate the average man’s wants/needs/circumstances and speak to them? OR, does it mean that you are in an ideal position to speak the truth, because you won’t experience the same consequences as others to your life, not being stuck in one place or stuck with a job that requires more jumping through other people’s hoops? Those with a “loner streak”, who don’t need as much approval from their neighbour, say, or who, by will of their “loner streak” or by fluke, aren’t as reliant on fitting in to make a living, may yet be able to advise those who do and are, respectively, if they can put themselves in the others’ shoes to appreciate the differences and similarities between them. Differences?: A more wandering, self-reliant, high-lust disposition; more literary, seemingly less love of sports and less engagement with physical things (like machines) as opposed to abstract ideas and introspection, perhaps… What is similar, what is different? To whom are you speaking and to whom can you offer advice? … Maybe it is male nature to hold your feelings in, or seek solutions in yourself and you life, not solutions in other people or government, giving men a disadvantage? Thus, you calling some bullshit by its name is necessary because most guys will just grumble, pissed off, and keep it to themselves, resigned in stoicism. …. I am a libertarian-leaning woman and have thought on occasion that I am “disadvantaged” in any battle with, say, censors, because I’m more inclined to live-and-let-live than pushing even censors around and I’m not inclined to ask other people to save me, even if I feel I’m being mistreated, so am less likely to be strong in disputes, ever. Stronger in “lonely” tasks, I think, that comprise the majority of life and self-improvement, but weak in the game of public discourse. Writing on a few websites in the last few months and engaging in a few arguments on facebook are as much as I’ve engaged. Reading, of course reading, but never participating… I think certain political orientations are more inclined to that, so the airwaves will always be biased. … Anyway, there were more than a few questions there.

    I look forward to reading your posts in the future! … Though, in person, the deceptiveness, and unkindness of players is repulsive. I can smell them and it’s gutterally repulsive. … C’est la contradicting feelings. Je t’aime la manosphere, anyway.

  87. madmax April 23, 2013 at 5:43 am

    ”We’re not in a hurry to raise a family”

    I am in my late 30’s and can say that it doesn’t even cross my mind. The world is overpopulated and I am not going to work 24/7 to feed a bitch and some kids. The bitch might file for divorce any time and take my car, my house, my savings, and my balls.

    Fuck that. As for kids, who knows if my life would be worse with them than without?

    I just don’t trust women anymore. They are all crazy bitches. Just have sex with them, nothing more.

  88. madmax April 23, 2013 at 5:47 am

    Alice, shut the fuck up, you are not a man and you’ll never understand. Your mind is too full of bullshit, junk, crap, pap and prejudice to understand anything about men and manliness.

    Be content with trying to understand yourself, for that would already be a miracle.

  89. V April 25, 2013 at 9:07 pm

    That’s a pity that these are still “politically incorrect” stuff to talk about. I think I’m pro ‘truth’ so I think there shouldn’t be anything wrong to talk about. Thanks to Roosh that had the balls to start this discussion. I call this list still a draft though. There’s still a lot to be discussed about this school of thought to make it polished. I’m sure at least parts of it could be backed by scientific studies an so on.
    Personally the reason that I keep reading your blog and stuff is not because I agree with all these points but because it talks about an aspect of the reality that’s ‘taboo-zied’ to talk about by main stream culture.
    One thing that I think you always miss in your discussions is the actual ‘genetic individual differences’. Not all men and women are ‘born’ the same. I know you talk about what main stream culture is pushing people towards but I’m talking about genetic differences before any social pressure. Not all men are born as absolute masculine and not all women are born absolute feminine. The extreme form of that are trans-genders who are actually none or somewhere in between and I don’t believe that we should wipe those people from earth or push them to a life of shame, guilt and sense of inferiority, exact same thing that’s being done to masculine men who believe in traditional role of genders. Any denial of individual differences is a cognitive failure and ends in fascism.

  90. Martin5750 June 4, 2013 at 5:17 am

    Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” 1 Timothy 2:11-12

  91. drew April 3, 2014 at 9:54 pm

    Still your best post so far.

  92. Dirk Diggler May 9, 2017 at 12:09 pm

    In looking back, the embrace of this ethos is what has given us President Trump.