SEEING THROUGH THE EYES OF A RED PILL MAN
PICK UP ARTISTS (PUA) are young men who learn tricks that enable them to roam the streets and successfully pick up hot and beautiful women for sex. Who do they learn these tricks from? From other young men, who have been successful. And, of course, from the action itself. Some of these successful and ‘talented’ young men have created lucrative businesses through disseminating the tricks of this trade, called the GAME. Most of their advice is aimed at boosting male confidence and removing the shame from flirting, but hidden within are also tricks that clearly advocate forms of deception that thrive on female biological and psychic neediness, as well as the gullibility, naivety, addictions and excesses of those that are preyed upon.
Examples of some of these tricks?
Lift iron and make good decisions about nourishment.
Only give value to those which give that value you.
Don’t be ashamed of being a sexual man. Be honest and make it clear that you want sex.
Don’t be afraid as a man of showing your vulnerabilities. Women love that.
Perseverance. She’ll say YES eventually.
Make her feel beautiful and she will shine. All women love that.
Show (or at least pretend) interest in mystical psyche. ALL women are into some kind of ‘Chick Crack’.
“If it weren’t so predictable, it would almost be ironic that one of the first useful Game observations PUAs made about feminine nature was their tendency to entertain magical thinking to varying degrees. It wasn’t too hard to figure out that women could be engaged more easily if you started an approach topic, at least playfully, regarding some metaphysical belief.”
Rollo Tomassi – excerpt from his Blog ‘Chick Crack’
These are some of the ‘Manosphere’ ideas emanating from men who claim to have been ‘red pilled’ (as in the Matrix film) about the reality of relationships between men and women. If you are a blue pill man you may or may not take the blue pill Viagra, but in this case, adhere, perhaps blindly, to the left leaning feminist thoughts about equality between the sexes. Blue pill men are ‘feminised’ men. Red pill men have become enlightened about what is really going on and believe that a hierarchical, phallocentric order is more natural and superior to one, where equality is an obligatory outcome. In fact, Richard Cooper, a particularly charged red pill man, claims men can only be happy if they have been red pilled.
Desperate for insights into and acknowledgement of their value as men today, many of these red pill men are dedicated followers of MEN GO IT THEIR OWN WAY (MGTOW) – a still growing movement started at least twelve years ago by Rollo Tomassi, the inventor of the red pill man’s public identity, who in his books and many blogs published on his website, THE RATIONAL MALE https://therationalmale.com, describes an increasingly gynocentric world order. Carefully formulated, so as not to sound overtly misogynistic, but clearly rooted in anger and a sense of masculine entitlement, Tomassi emphasises the differences between men and women… not their similarities. And there are of course very real differences. I can only agree with most of what he says. It is hard NOT to agree. Biological differences between the sexes are undeniable, when seen as polar opposite extremes and broad generalisations. There are, of course, exceptions to every rule. But if you choose to play the game by rules, you might not have space to entertain these exceptions, nor even have an eye for them.
Men are very good at making rules and creating order on their own terms, often in a militant fashion with the muscle power to impress. They like to be in control, not controlled, other than by stronger men than themselves. They are at a loss when they lose control... more specifically, when they are not in control of themselves. We have seen this throughout history. In fact, women, up until the latter half of the 21st Century, have very much had to abide by the rules and laws that men have created for centuries. In this, women have been typically silenced. Rebellion was always a dangerous option for us, so we either danced secretively around those rules or intelligently adapted to them in clever ways. What other option did we have? Thus the seductive phenomenon of hypergamy – the female drive to form sexual relationships and marry a person of a superior sociological, financial or educational background – evolved over time as a female survival tactic, along with the myth of female mystery.
Is hypergamy a biological or cultural female trait? Mmmm… that question of course arises. The ancient Greeks created fabulous theatrical and political events, which only men were allowed to attend. Women and slaves were excluded. I think it is a very difficult argument and probably impossible to prove whether females and males have developed certain traits through generations of environmental, social and cultural influence or whether Adam and Eve were created by God as described in the Bible. It is, in my mind, a contentious debate not worth entering. I am alive now. I believe in equal rights and freedom for all men and women. All I have to do is look around me and see what a fucked-up cultural mess we appear to be in now.
I watch and listen to these modern red pill men speaking out about hypergamy – which they describe as an innate female ‘biological’ drive. They speak about the impact it has had on their lives, and I watch with sadness as these men tell their stories of being ripped off or duped by women they label as ‘gold-diggers’. Again and again the story is told of fickle, ambitious women, who refuse to give their husbands regular sex and who, in the end, run off with his hard earned money and the children. But are these men, with their aspiration to empower themselves, to stake and make fortunes, to surround themselves with beautiful women… are they not also themselves ‘gold-diggers’? What do they want to attract with their fortunes? LOVE? BEAUTY? Who do they want to attract? This MGTOW thing can’t all just be about Success, Status, Sex and biological urges? Or is it?
I have examined women through the eyes of the red pill man and can only agree that YES, the female human animal can be competitive, ambitious, jealous, greedy, pathologically mean, confused and selfish – even if they appear to be beautiful, physically hot and have a high IQ. (You can read more about this in my BLOG – Female Motivational Types). In this, females are just like male animals. Like attracts like?
What these angry men fail to mention or see is that actually they (men) have been disadvantaged not so much by women, but by themselves, by the rules they have created – in particular, ironically, with regards to the legal system today, which currently favours (at least in Europe and USA) the female animal’s interests with regards to divorce, financial maintenance, property and child custody.Incredible really, because this 21st Century turn around in the court system in favour of women is absolutely in its infancy. The reversal of the legal system in support of women is a phenomenon that is hardly a quarter of a century old… and already men areup-in-arms aboutit.
In the majority of cases of human outrage, only 50% of the story is being told. Humanschoose to be blind to what doesn’t fit in with their own story or world view.Humanscling tothe security of black/white definitions, where clear rules,divisions and guidelines can be made, offering a promise ofcertainty; a certainty thatmany are even prepared to pay a high price for. No-one likes to be duped or fooled or mislead by things we fail to notice. Through the centuries though, women have indeed become very adept at seeing through the words, lines and rules created by men, intuitively reading what is going onunder the surface, behind the mask. Maybe this is connected to the female biological urge to care for, empathise with and understand children. Women have studied these things (often secretly)over centuriesand made these skills work to their own advantage in an attempt at survival for themselves and their loved ones.
When ‘flower power’ arrived in the 1960’s – a cultural explosion the likes of which history has never recorded before – thousands of middle class and poor womenin Europeand the USA were suddenly permitted a taste of sexual and financial freedom and independence, perhaps for the first time in centuries. We became active political beings. We were powerful exotic flowers and men were bees. Funnily enough, in retrospect, it was probably the men who thrived the most in this new environment of free LOVE. Suddenly he had all the drugs he wanted, freedom from work, all the flowers he could fuck, whenever he wanted.Men were intoxicated with feminine mystery and the goddessin new ways –butthis is where the male, perhaps, missed a beat. Men became super romantics, roamers,drifters, wizards and wanderers looking for beauty and the next sexual fix. In the meantime women became educated, rose in power and took control of their own bodies and their legal rights. The anti-baby pill was invented by men and introduced in 1960. Thank you. Ruth Baden Ginsberg wasthe first female everto be voted into the US Supreme Court in 1993 – an exquisitely beautifuland wise role model for modern feminists. Thus we came into power with some generous male support. Thank you.
A few decades later ME TOO hits the headlines. Harvey Weinstein, one of the most powerful men in America, an Alpha male and a serial predator, gets 23yrs in prison. Have women gone too far? No, is the simple answer. Rape, abuse and enslavement of women has happened globally for centuries. For centuries women have either been ignored or silenced about this. And it still happens today with the fucked up modern popularisation of rape culture. Butcan we really claim that ALL men are guilty? And what part do women play in this?
Let’s take a closer look. All men have penises and, for the greater part of their waking and sleeping hours, think with their penises. Their penises make decisions for them, mostly without them knowing it. A penis has a life and a will of its own. In this men are weak. Men can do very little against it, other than become a monk. It’s all to do with that fascinating Y chromosome that only men have. Women have two X chromosomes, meaning they have a biological back-up system that is essential to life. Men are weakened in the womb when they switch from XX to XY. From that moment on men have no back-up system and half their total being is ruled/dominated by the Y chromosome – which is solely and exclusively devoted to their testosterone, penis and testicles. It’s not their fault. It’s default. This is why male babies die much more frequently than girls during trauma at birth. It’s a fact. They don’t have a back-up system. Men are weaker than women. It’s no wonder they are afraid of chaos. It’s no wonder they try to create order. And this is perhaps why Jordan Peterson has received so much acclaim for his book 12 RULES FOR LIFE – an antidote to chaos – especially amongst thousands of young men who seek purpose and identity in an increasingly gynocentric and chaotic world today.
NotALL men are rapists, misogynists or paedophiles.But all men (yes, ALL men) want to get their dick wet on a regular basis. It’s one of their main drives and pleasures in life. Closely associated with this primary urge to spread their seed far and wide, is the aspirationof becoming an Alpha Male, surrounded by beautiful women that adore him and want to be fucked by him. What a pleasure. What an ingenious vision of nature. The amount of fucks he gets, offers him higher status amongst men. This is why many men often feel obliged to lie about how much sex they are having. Sadly, if a man is not mentally or physically attractive to women, it’s an all round bummer for that poor guy. It must be extremely frustrating not to get that relief, touchand acknowledgement, but I don’t think women are responsible for this male biological condition.
Do I believe ALL women are by default treacherous and hypergamous? No. But in this modern climate of ‘women expose all’ they can behave in very dumb ways in order to get what they want from the male phallocentric order. Many young women today are using sex, instead of using their wisdom, as an easy, but not cheap, bartering tool to get rich, famous and influential quick. And, of course, men buy into it with their addictions to sex. Countering this, on the other hand, is the ME TOO movement, clearly stating that intelligent women (many of them Hollywood stars) do not want to use sex as a bartering tool any longer, certainly not through force or deception. Yes, it’s chaos.
I ask myself again, what do men actually want from women? If a chimpanzee is presented with two pictures, one of female monkey genitalia and the other of a recognised Alpha Male, the chimpanzee’s eyes will automatically choose to hover over the Alpha Male. It seems the primarymale biological drive is actually to become or act like an Alpha Male, or to be as close in radius to an Alpha Male as possible. This, I speculate,must be strangely governed by the intelligence of the penis (Y chromosome), which tries to learn how to spread sperm as effectively as possible. In a time of sparsity of human life and resources, this would OBVIOUSLY be a fantastic drive towards the survival of the human race. But, at this time of human density and over populated chaos right now, do we really need to spend time talking about how a man can raise his status in order to get his dick wet as much as possible? If that’s a confidence boost, then it’s a false one, for which young men are paying far too high a price.
When I watchred pill men speak about the treacherous nature of women – I see people, who are creating an identity out of being a victim. Men are, perhaps, their own victims. Is their only hope to learn from Alpha males –the likes ofDan Peña, Rollo Tomassi and Rian Stone - who tell them to lift ironand stop being a pussy? Thus, sadly, we witness an increasing identity divide between the female ME TOOs and the male MGTOWs. This is ridiculous.
Where does love, beauty, compassion, empathy and generosity come into all of this – the higher echelons of human beingness? Are we all really only driven by our animal biological nature?My experience is that, if you don’t look for the qualities of love, beauty, compassion, empathy and generosity, they won’t be in your field of vision. We don’t see what is there. We see who we are. And, even more importantly, what is a relationship? First and foremost, it is a relationship with myself. Money and power mean nothing to me. Money and power only reveal who I am.
This is perhaps the right moment to introduce Zan Perrion. Canadian born, now based in Bucharest, Romania, Zan published a book about women, titledThe Alabaster Girl, in2013. He describes his journey around the world as a wandering romantic rogue, his many encounters with the opposite sex from prostitute to CEO, and his musings as to what women desire in men. He is of course one of the men with those desirable attributes! It is certainly a book worth reading, because of its poetic framing of human biological urges. He speaks of women’s hotness, dirtiness, fickleness, their dual nature of ‘mother and whore’, their hormonal moodiness, their need for safety and securityand their conflicting need for male attention... but Zan’s main theme in his book is the search for BEAUTY –if you see with the eye of beauty, it will manifest itself.
One of Zan Perrion’s most influential male role models is Sir Roger Scruton (r.i.p. 12.01.20), English philosopher and writer specialising in aesthetics and political philosophy, particularly in the furtherance of traditionalist conservative views. Roger had a particular eye for beauty in ancient art forms as apposed to the ugliness in some modern art. In this way Zan and Roger unite in the pursuit of beauty… and Perrion is on the entrepreneurial track of something quite interesting here. In his isolated hotel room, under COVID lock-down, while writing his new book, he raises his left index finger adorned with a beautiful black ring and says: “Mark my words – beauty is the next thing.” Thus spoke Perrion!
Zan Perrion, from a female perspective? The woman on the cover of his book is classically beautiful, delicate, slim, dark and ethereal. Some of the passages in his book are truly written with a flow and an eye for eternal (external and internal) beauty. But he too excludes women’s voices from his on-line debates and there is no feed-back to be found anywhere from the women who fortunately or unfortunately encountered him. What do we know about his amorous prowess? Only what he tells us. In a series of You Tube episodes, he is filmed sitting around a coffee table talking with three of his disciples. He’s the Alpha male and the three others are Beta males… at least when they are in his presence. They ask him, with reverence and wonder at all times, what his views are on women and the art of male attraction. He answers, often ambiguously (are there any certain answers?) and with a softness and vulnerability that is not congruent with his repeated need to raise his left index finger high in the air.
He inspires in many young men a sense of freedom from machismos – displays of superior male strength that are rooted in a male inferiority complex. He offers them a freedom from shame about a vigorous male sexual drive and a freedom from the responsibilities of love attachments. Although he encourages men to show their vulnerabilities; to be both the Father and the Boy – because women always love that – he sets an example of a polyamorous-polygamous life style with no real fatherly responsibilities and nofemale apron strings attached. This is clearly very attractive to many young men in the current increasingly gynocentric order.My fear is that, if women are generally biological ‘nest builders’, he will have broken many a woman’s heart. The success of his book, and the business he has created through it, thrives on men’s eternal biological need to get their dicks wet. Is there an ancient beauty in that? If beauty becomes manifest through his roguish and wandering male gaze, then it will only be temporary.
Red pill men seem to want admiration from men and sexual adoration from women. Are we heading back to the old conservative phallocentric world order? That’s what it seems like, because maybe that is all that men know, all they need to know and all they want to know. Maybe they are making the mistake – for the second time – of missing a beat. There is definitely something missing here.
Do men not also want to be admired by women?