The Red Pill Parent
An Introduction to Red Pill Parenting
The importance of fathers is something of a love-hate relationship in our feminine-primary social order. In our inner-cities the narrative is one of lamenting the lack of fathers’ involvement in their kids’ lives — especially boys’ lives.
This is the go-to narrative whenever some kid commits a criminal act. If only men would be more involved fathers this kind of thing wouldn’t happen. The call is always for more responsibility on the part of men who, according to narrative, are little more than irresponsible boys themselves. We’re told their only imperative is to have indiscriminate sex and leave the consequences of an “unplanned” pregnancy to the poor girl he must’ve deceived in order to get laid.
This is one impression of modern “fatherhood”, the deadbeat Dad, the ’Baby
Daddy’, the guy who needs to ’Man Up’ and do the right thing after his girl ’accidentally’ got pregnant. And these fathers are, of course, the products of deadbeat Dads themselves, with no thought of seeing the larger forest for all the trees with regards to the social climate that’s inspires this fatherly archetype.
When we watch the most consistent portrayals of fathers in popular media, sitcoms, movies, etc. we see another archetype of fatherhood; the buffoon, the bumbling Dad so thoroughly out of touch with the mainstream he requires his wife’s uniquely female problem solving to set him straight — usually saving him from himself. This is the father who is essentially a dependent child himself and an archetype women believe they contend with in real life because it confirms their superiority in the Strong Independent Woman® identity — the same media has sold them for generations now.
This fatherhood archetype is reserved for Beta male fathers who are only too happy to play along with it because it neatly fits into their preconceptions of an egalitarian equalism between the sexes. However, this is only to the point where his humorous self-deprecation of his maleness coincides with his own impressions of fatherhood. Then all notions of equalism fall away in favor of his ridiculous maleness as a father.
The third archetype is the asshole, abusive father preconception. This Dad is easy to feel good about hating. Around Father’s Day this is the father who gets the hate cards that explain to him (as well as salve the egos of his kids and wife) how unnecessary he really was after all. His wife, the mother of his kids, was always more than enough of a ’man’ herself to make his influence superfluous if not detrimental to his kids’ lives. In Promise Keepers I’ll outline how this fatherhood archetype is responsible for predisposing young men to a Beta mindset in the hopes of avoiding becoming the father he hated.
I’m not sure if most guy’s really understand the irony of celebrating motherhood and fatherhood in some organized fashion, but it serves as a poignant highlight to the feminine-centric society in which we live.
The contrast between Mother’s Day and Father’s Day is now perhaps one of the most easily recognizable evidences of the code in the feminine Matrix.
As per the dictates of feminine social primacy, Mom is celebrated, loved and respected by default if only by virtue of her femaleness. Dad, if not outright vilified or publicly excoriated, is constantly reminded that he should always be living up to the servitude that defines his disposable gender. Father’s Day is his reminder that he’s still not living up to his feminine-primary expectations.
For children who blame their social indiscretions and psychological hangups on their mother, there is a certain degree of forgiveness. It’s difficult to blame a mother since the impression is that mothering is a supreme effort and sacrifice — particularly when the popular idea is that she must go it alone due to uncooperative fathers and not by her own designs or personal choices. If she fails to some degree it’s excusable. For a man to blame his life’s ills on Mom smacks of latent misogyny, and even then it’s suspected she’s a bad mother because of a bad father. However, when you lay the blame at Dad’s feet, the whole world wails along in tune with you. A mother failing in her charge is negligent, but often forgivable; a man failing as a father is always perceived as selfish and evil.
When the next Father’s Day rolls around make a mental note to visit the Post Secret blog. There you’ll find that week’s batch of anonymously sent, and handcrafted, postcards revealing the inner workings of the feminine-primary mind of both men and women. The usual fare for Father’s Day is a hearty “Fuck You Dad!” or “You’re the reason I’m so fucked up!” interspersed with a couple ’good dad’ or ’at least you tried’ sentiments so as not to entirely degrade the feminized ideal of fatherhood — wouldn’t want to discourage men’s perpetual ’living up’ to the qualifications set by the Feminine Imperative. There has to be a little cheese in the maze or else the rat won’t perform as desired. I always see a marked difference in attitude between Mother’s Day and Father’s Day, especially now that I’ve been one for more than 18 years. Father’s Day is a slap in the face for me now — not because my wife and daughter don’t appreciate me as a father, but because it’s become a big “fuck you” or “try harder”. It’s now a reminder that masculinity, even in as positive a light as the Blue Pill world might muster, is devalued and debased, and we ought to just take it like a man and get over it.
The more I hear how feckless fathers’ perceptions are today only makes me want to be that much better a father to my daughter (even as she’s an adult now), and I can’t wait until I’ve got a grandson to help raise as well. That is until the reality sets in. The reality is that the only reason I feel the need to outperform other men in the fatherhood department is because a feminized social convention briefly convinced me that it’s my responsibility to compete with other men in a game where the rules are fixed to make better slaves of disposable men. Of course the bar is set so low, and men are so debased now, that even the most mediocre of dads can play along and still get the feeling that they’re marginally qualifying. The social convention plays into the same “not-like-other-guys” identification game most chumps subscribe to in their single years. The same desire-for-uniqueness groundwork is already installed.
After realizing this, I stopped worrying about “being a good dad”. I’m already well beyond the fathering quality non-efforts of my own father, but that’s not the point. A good father goes about the business of being a father without concern for accolades. For Men, like anything else, it’s not about awards on the wall, but the overall body of work that makes for real accomplishment. A Father is a good father because he can weather an entire world that constantly tells him he’s a worthless shit by virtue of being a Man with a child. He just ’does’, in spite of a world that will never appreciate his sacrifice and only regard his disposability as being expected. And even in death he’ll still be expected to be a good dad.
I outlined these father archetypes (there are a few more) to illustrate the various ways in which, as with all men, fathers are again caught in the same Masculine Catch 22 I outlined in my first book.
One of the primary ways Honor is used against men is in the feminized perpetuation of traditionally masculine expectations when it’s convenient, while simultaneously expecting egalitarian gender parity when it’s convenient.
For the past 60 years feminization has built in the perfect Catch 22 social convention for anything masculine; The expectation to assume the responsibilities of being a man (Man Up) while at the same time denigrating anything asserting masculinity as a positive (Shut Up).
What ever aspect of maleness that serves the feminine purpose is a man’s masculine responsibility, yet any aspect that disagrees with feminine primacy is labeled Patriarchy and Misogyny.
Essentially, this convention keeps Beta males in a perpetual state of chasing their own tails. Over the course of a lifetime they’re conditioned to believe that they’re cursed with masculinity (Patriarchy) yet are still responsible to ’Man Up’ when it suits a feminine imperative. So it’s therefore unsurprising to see that half the men in western society believe women dominate the world (male powerlessness) while at the same time women complain of a lingering Patriarchy (female powerlessness) or at least sentiments of it. This is the Catch 22 writ large. The guy who does in fact Man Up is a chauvinist, misogynist, patriarch, but he still needs to man up when it’s convenient to meet the needs of a female imperative.
Fathers (and male mentors) in this social order walk a very fine line. As you’ll read in the next section, fathers are viewed with contempt and suspiciousness when they assume an active role in parental investment and their influence in a child’s life. Yet, fathers, and particularly the masculinity they represent, are also blamed for every social ill when they are absent from a child’s life.
Fathers are simultaneously a vital ingredient in a kid’s life, yet still superfluous to a kid being raised by a Strong Independent® mother. The Feminine Imperative is all too happy to assume authorship of a child’s successes, and if not through its mother herself, then through the feminine-primary ’Village’ that we’re told is necessary to raise a child. A father or men’s influence is only valued insofar as it coincides and agrees with the feminine-primary plan for that child’s upbringing. Anything else is just teaching what the narrative deems to be an institutionalized misogyny or ’toxic’ masculinity.
The National Center for Fatherlessness estimates about a third of American children live absent their biological father. The statistics are even worse for African-American families. Estimates vary, but everyone agrees that somewhere between half and three quarters of black children grow up without their dads.
The epidemic of fatherlessness is so pervasive we tend to forget about it. It stays in the background when we consider other social ills. Even so, fatherlessness lies near the bottom of our increasingly dire cultural problems. The conscious awareness of fatherlessness only arises when some tragedy occurs that requires Dad as a convenient foil for it.
Watch any video clip of rioting and social unrest. What you’ll see is young men behaving in a heinous and disgusting manner. Look deeper, and you’ll see boys who grew up without fathers or, alternatively, fathers who did little but tutor them in criminality.
But this is only one example of the consequences of absent fathers. When you look at the boys and girls of what I call the “Participation Trophy” generation you see disempowered, disenfranchised, gender-loathing boys who all too eagerly wish they could become girls. And due to the priorities our culture places on Fempowerment and feminine-correctness in our education methods we have a generation of girls growing up to be male-entitled in their self estimations.
In my own estimate, Beta fathers basing their parenting on this same Blue Pill feminization posing as egalitarianism ideologies are every bit as damaging to the next generation’s upbringing as uninvolved or absent fathers. Perhaps even more so. Fatherlessness can exist with a father present in the home.
The denial of the effects of fatherlessness also supports the larger cultural narrative about the irrelevancy of men. The idea that fathers are not really necessary for children is everywhere. When we laud women who choose to have a child on their own, while we infer that fathers don’t matter — nice to have around if he’s useful, but entirely unnecessary. These days, a pet is typically considered a more crucial part of a complete family than a man.
That’s the way some people have wanted it for a long time. The entire feminist project has been devoted to unseating the father from his role in the family. Now that they have achieved their objective we see the results. We see this even within the modern church; men’s family authority is only a liability for them and, along with that a father’s “headship”, has lost all meaning.
Despite what all the propaganda claims, fathers are necessary for a stable family. Authority and order in social relationships start with him. Without him, things fall apart as we are now seeing. The patriarchy has been smashed, and along with it the patriarch. And, contrary to feminist promises, once the patriarchy has been smashed, what emerges is not a peaceful world of equality and rainbow-draped unicorns. Rather it’s the burned out hell-scape we’ll see on display on the streets of the next riot, and on the faces of boys and girls wherever the father is missing. And we’ll nod together and ask, “Where are these kids’ fathers?”
The Red Pill Parent
In September of 2015 I spoke at the Man In Demand conference in Las Vegas. One thing I found encouraging to see was fathers and sons attending together. I honestly wasn’t expecting this. It was a humbling experience to see fathers and sons coming to a Red Pill awareness together. I hadn’t anticipated that more mature men would’ve been ’unplugged’ by their sons, but I met with quite a few men who told me their sons had either turned them on to my books or that The Rational Male would be required reading for their sons before they got out of their teens.
One of the greatest benefits of the conference was the inspiration and material I got from the men attending. A particular aspect of this was addressing how men might educate and help others to unplug, and in that lay a wealth of observations about how these men’s upbringings had brought them to both their Blue Pill idealisms and ultimately their Red Pill awareness.
I feel I have to start this chapter with some of these observations, but as I mentioned in the introduction, I’ll be breaking protocol and be a bit more prescriptive here with regard to what I think may be beneficial ways to be a Red Pill parent.
In The Rational Male — Preventive Medicine I included a chapter which outlined how men are primarily conditioned for lives and ego-investments in a Blue Pill idealism that ultimately prepares them for better serving the Feminine Imperative when their usefulness is necessary to fulfill women’s sexual (and really lifetime) strategies. If you own the book it might be helpful to review it after you read this section.
For the Kids’ Sake
One of my regular blog readers (and conference attendee) Jeremy had an excellent observation for me about men’s prioritization in the hierarchies of contemporary families:
There’s a certain book that my friend’s wife read, which told her to place her husband above her children. Children come first for a mother, and they should for the father too. I’m not advocating to neglect her husband, but he needs to accept some biological facts and not be hurt because of it.
What’s happening here is actually the first steps of a hostage crisis. That is a textbook first-wave-feminism boilerplate response. This is the first redirection in a misdirection perpetuated by women in order to sink any notion that men should have some authority on matters in their marriages or relationships.
Think of the children. It’s been repeated for so long, it’s a cliché.
This is typical crab-in-a-basket behavior. Women seek power over their lives and somehow instinctively believe that the only way to achieve power is to take someone else’s power away. So they attack male authority by placing children above men. This then becomes a stick with which to beat male authority into submission, as only the woman is allowed to speak for the needs of the children. This default feminine-correct authority is also intimately associated with women’s mystique giving them insight to mothering no man would ever be considered to have a capacity for.
This is literally textbook subversion. When the children’s needs become the “throne” of the household, and only the wife is allowed to speak for the children’s needs, then the authority of the household becomes a rather grotesque combination of immediate child(rens) needs and female manipulation. A father’s only contribution to these mother-determined needs is his support and acquiescence to what she’s decided they are.
Worse still, the children are now effectively captives of the wife because, at any time, she can accuse that father of anything the law is forced to throw him in handcuffs for and take away the kids. While that may never be the first recourse it is always the unspoken ’nuclear option’.
This is the first step in that hostage situation. Equalists will try to convince you of the logic that children come first, that children are the future, it takes a Village, and that all of that which makes them better is more important than anything else. This is bullshit.
Our paleolithic ancestors didn’t sit around in caves all day playing and socially interacting with their babies. They didn’t have some kind of fresh-gazelle-delivery service that allowed him to interact with the children directly. Mothers were not under exactly the same survival conditions, needing to forage for carrots, potatoes, berries, etc, while the men hunted and built structures. If you think the children came first in any other epoch of humanity you are very sadly mistaken.
Children were more than capable of getting everything they need to know about how to live simply by watching their parents live a happy life together. This is how humans did things for eons, changing that order and putting the children first should be seen as the equalist social convention it is and the beginning of the destruction of the family.
Children are more than information sponges, they are relatively blank minds that often want desperately to be adult. Children want to understand everything that everyone around them understands, which is why a parent telling a child that you’re ’disappointed’ in them is sometimes more effective than a paddling.
If you focus on children, you are frankly spoiling them with attention that they will never receive in the real world. If instead you focus on yourself and your spouse, you will raise children that see you putting yourself as your Mental Point of Origin, and your marriage/partnership as an important part of what you do each day.
Don’t put the children first. That sounds selfish because we’ve been acculturated in a feminine-primary social order that seeks to disempower men by making children the leverage with which to do it. This is not to say men ought to be uninvolved or disinterested in the raising of their kids, quite the opposite, but rather I’m stressing the need to be aware of the dynamic of disempowering men, fathers and husbands by women and mothers’ essentially pedestalizing their children above yourself and your relationship with the mother.
I’ll expound upon this later, but as most of my readers know, I am a proponent of what’s called Enlightened Self-Interest — I cannot help anyone until I help myself. I doubt that most of the men of the previous, Old Books, generations would associating their parenting style with such a term, but this is exactly how they used to approach raising children. They came first, and wife and child followed in his headship and decisions.
Your Mental Point of Origin should never waver from yourself, whether you’re single, monogamous, married, childless or a father.
American Parenting is Killing American Marriage
During the time of my writing this I came across a fantastic article on Quartz. com titled, American Parenting is Killing American Marriage. The money quote follows here, but I thought it was a good explanation of how well we parent in western culture is measured by how well it serves the Feminine Imperative:
Of course, (Ayelet Waldman’s) blasphemy was not admitting that her kids were less than completely wonderful, only that she loved her husband more than them. This falls into the category of thou-shalt-have-no-othergods-before-me. As with many religious crimes, judgment is not applied evenly across the sexes. Mothers must devote themselves to their children above anyone or anything else, but many wives would be offended if their husbands said, “You’re pretty great, but my love for you will never hold a candle to the love I have for John Junior.”
Mothers are also holy in a way that fathers are not expected to be. Mothers live in a clean, cheerful world filled with primary colors and children’s songs, and they don’t think about sex. A father could admit to desiring his wife without seeming like a distracted parent, but society is not as willing to cut Ms. Waldman that same slack. It is unseemly for a mother to enjoy pleasures that don’t involve her children.
There are doubtless benefits that come from elevating parenthood to the status of a religion, but there are obvious pitfalls as well. Parents who do not feel free to express their feelings honestly are less likely to resolve problems at home. Children who are raised to believe that they are the center of the universe have a tough time when their special status erodes as they approach adulthood. Most troubling of all, couples who live entirely child-centric lives can lose touch with one another to the point where they have nothing left to say to one another when the kids leave home.
I think these quotes outline the dynamic rather well; a method of control women can use to distract and defer away from Beta husbands is a simple appeal to their children’s interests as being tantamount to their own or conflating them with their husband’s interests. If the child sits at the top of that love hierarchy (see Preventive Medicine) and that child’s wellbeing and best interests can be defined by the mother, the father/husband is then relegated to subservience or superfluousness to both the child and the mother.
This gets us back to the myth of women’s supernatural gift for Empathy; Women, by virtue of just being a woman, are imbued with some instinctual, empathetic insight about how best to place that child above all else. That child becomes a failsafe and a Buffer against having to entertain a real, intersexual relationship and connection with the father/husband and really consider his position in her Hypergamous estimate of him.
If that man isn’t what her Hypergamous instincts estimates him being as
optimal (he’s the unfortunate Beta), then she’s defaults to tolerating his presence for the kids’ sake and you have marriages that have only one common interest.
The first case here was about an incident where a woman was being encouraged to put her husband before her kids in a conventional love hierarchy priority. The fact that this would appear so unnatural for a woman — to the point that it would need to be something necessary to train a woman to consciously consider — speaks volumes about the ease with which women presume that their priority ought to be for her kids. It’s never a consideration that a husband’s concern, importance or appreciation would supersede that of a child’s. In fact, just the suggestion of it reduces a man to being equally as needy as any child, thus infantilizing him.
Most men buy into this prioritization as well.
It seems deductively logical that a woman would necessarily need to put her child’s attention priorities well above her husband’s. What’s counterintuitive to both parents is that it’s the health of their relationship (or lack of it) that defines and exemplifies a complementary gender understanding for the child. Women default to using their children as cat’s paws to assume primary authority of the family, and men are already Blue Pill preconditioned by a feminine-centric upbringing to accept this as the normative frame for the family.
As with all your relations with women, establishing a strong relational Frame is essential. The problem for men, even with the strongest initial Frame with their wives, is that they cede their relational Frame to their kids. Most men want the very best for their children; or there may be a Promise Keepers dynamic that a guy is dealing with where he makes every effort to outdo, and make up for, the sins of his father by sacrificing everything. But in so doing he loses sight of creating and maintaining a dominant Frame for not just his wife, but the state of his family.
Most men, being conditioned Betas, feel uncomfortable assuming any kind of authority, thus, weak Frame is a handicap for them even before their first child is born. This creates a (sometimes impossible) challenge for them once they have a kid, become Red Pill aware, and then seek to assert or reassert a needed Frame.
It’s important to bear in mind that when you set the Frame of your relationship, whether it’s a first night lay or a marriage prospect, women must enter your reality and your frame. The same needs to apply to any children within that relationship — they also must exist in your Frame.
Far too many fathers are afraid to embody this strong authority for fear of being seen as a “typical man” and expect their wives (and children) to recognize what should be his primary place in the family on their own accord.
The preconditioned fear is that by assuming this authority they might become the typical asshole father they hoped to avoid for most of their formative years. Even for men with strong masculine role models in their lives, the hesitation comes from a culture that ridicules fathers, or presumes they’re potentially violent towards children. Men internalize this acknowledgment of ridiculousness or asshole-ishness and thus, the abdication of fatherly authority, even in as positive a sense as possible, is surrendered before that child is even born.
Comfort in Frame
One of the most basic Red Pill principles I’ve stressed since I began writing is the importance of Frame. This was the first Iron Rule of Tomassi for a reason:
Iron Rule of Tomassi #1
Frame is everything. Always be aware of the subconscious balance of whose frame in which you are operating. Always control the Frame, but resist giving the impression that you are.
The dynamic of Frame stretches into many aspects of a man’s life, but in a strictly intergender sense this applies to men establishing a positive dominance in their relationships with women. In a dating context of non-exclusivity (plate spinning) this means, as a man, you have a solid reality into which that woman wants to be included in.
Holding Frame is not about force, or coercion, it’s about attraction and desire and a genuine want on the part of a woman to be considered for inclusion into that man’s reality. Being allowed into a man’s dominant, confident Frame should be a compliment to that woman’s self-perception. Being part of a high-value man’s life should be a prize she seeks.
This is a pretty basic principle when you think about it. The main reason women overwhelmingly prefer men older than themselves (statistically 5-7 years difference) is because of the psychological impression that men older than a woman’s age should be more established in his understanding of the world, his career, his direction in life and his mastery over himself and his conditions.
From the Alpha Fucks perspective of Hypergamy, the air of a man’s mastery of his world makes an older man preferable, while a Beta older man represents the prospect of dependable, if somewhat unexciting, provisioning.
In our contemporary sexual marketplace I think this perception — which used to hold true in a social climate based on the old set of books — is an increasing source of disappointment for women as they move from their post-college Party Years into the more stressful Epiphany Phase where they find themselves increasingly less able to compete intrasexually.
And, once again, we also see evidence of yet another conflict between egalitarianism vs. complementarity. Because, in an egalitarian utopia, all things should be equalized; equalism espouses that this age preference should make no difference in attraction, yet the influence of this natural complementary attraction becomes a source of internal conflict for women who buy into equalism.
Women’s self-perception of personal worth becomes wrapped up in a tight egotistical package.
It’s an interesting paradox. On one hand she’s expects a Hypergamously better-than-equitable pairing with a self-made man who will magically appreciate her for her self-perceptions of her own personal worth, but also to be, as Sheryl Sandberg puts it, “someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home.”
In other words, an exceptional, high value man, with a self-earned world and Frame she wants to partake of; but also one who will be so smitten by her intrinsic qualities (the qualities she hopes will compensate for her physical and personal deficits) that he will compromise the very Frame that made him worthy of her intimacy, and then reduce himself to an equality that lessens him to her.
The Red Pill Father and Frame
The reason I’m going into this is because of a basic tenet of Frame:
The Frame you set in the beginning of your relationship will establish the tone for the future of that relationship.
That isn’t to say men don’t devolve from a strong Alpha frame to a passive Beta one, but the Frame you enter into a relationship with will be the mental impression that woman retains as it develops. This impression also becomes the basis from which you will develop your persona as a father.
Your establishment and maintenance of a strong control of psychological and ambient Frame is not just imperative to a healthy relationship and interaction with a woman, but it’s also vital to the health of any family environment and the upbringing of any children that result from it.
I’ve been asked on occasion about my thoughts on the influence family plays in conditioning boys/men to accept a Beta role in life. In specific, the question was about how a mother’s dominant Frame influences her children’s upbringing and how an unconventional shift in intersexual hierarchies can predisposes her to imprinting her Hypergamous insecurities onto her children. It gave me a lot to think about.
A common thread I’ve occasionally found with newly Red Pill aware men is the debilitating influence their domineering mothers and Beta supplicating fathers played in forming their distorted perceptions of masculinity. I made an attempt to address this influence in the Intersexual Hierarchies section of the last book, however, I intended those essays to provide an outline of particular hierarchical models, not really to cover the individual health or malaise of any of them.
From Frame, The Rational Male:
The default pedestalization of women that men are prone to is a direct result of accepting that a woman’s frame is the only frame. It’s kind of hard for most ’plugged in’ men to grasp that they can and should exert frame control in order to establish a healthy future relationship. This is hardly a surprise considering that every facet of their social understanding about gender frame has always defaulted to the feminine for the better part of their lifetimes. Whether that was conditioned into them by popular media or seeing it played out by their beta fathers, for most men in western culture the feminine reality IS the normalized frame work. In order to establish a healthy male-frame, the first step is to rid themselves of the preconception that women control frame by default. They don’t, and honestly, they don’t want to.
Post LTR Frame
In most contemporary marriages and long-term relationship arrangements, women tend to be the de facto authority. Men seek their wives’s “permission” to attempt even the most mundane activities they would do without an afterthought while single. I have married friends tell me how ’fortunate’ they are to be married to such an understanding wife that she’d “allow” him to watch hockey on their guest bedroom TV,…occasionally.
These are just a couple of gratuitous examples of men who entered into marriage with the Frame firmly in control of their wives. They live in her reality, because anything can become normal. What these men failed to realize is that frame, like power, abhors a vacuum. In the absence of the Frame security a woman naturally seeks from a masculine male, this security need forces her to provide that security for herself. Thus we have the commonness of cuckold and submissive men in westernized culture, while women do the bills, earn the money, make the decisions, authorize their husband’s actions and deliver punishments. The woman is seeking the security that the man she pair-bonded with cannot or will not provide.
It is vital to the health of any LTR that a man establish his frame as the basis of their living together before any formal commitment is recognized.
The primary problem men encounter with regard to their marriages is that the dominant, positively masculine Frame they should have established while single (and benefiting from competition anxiety) decays (or reverts) to a Beta mindset and the man abdicates authority and deference to his wife’s feminine primary Frame. This is presuming that dominant Frame ever existed while he was dating his wife. Most men experience this decay in three ways:
· A gradual decline to accepting his wife’s Frame via his relinquishing an authority he’s not comfortable embracing.
· An initial belief in a misguided egalitarian ideal redefines masculinity and conditions him to surrender Frame.
· He was so pre-whipped by a lifetime of Blue Pill Beta conditioning he already expects to live within a woman’s Frame before marriage.
Of these, the last is the most direct result of an upbringing within a feminine-primary Frame. I think one of the most vital realizations a Red Pill man has to consider is how Red Pill truths and his awareness of them influences the larger dynamic of raising and instructing subsequent generations.
Hypergamy is both pragmatic and rooted in a survival-level doubt about women’s optimizing it. When a woman’s insecurity about her life-determining Hypergamous decisions are answered by a positive conventionally masculine Man, who is both her pair-bonded husband and the father of her children, that doubt is quieted and a gender-complementary environment for raising children progresses from that security.
In a positively masculine dominant Frame, where that woman’s desire is primarily focused on her man, (and where that man’s sexual market value exceeds his wife’s by at least a factor of 1) this establishes at least a tenable condition of quieting a woman’s Hypergamous doubt about the man she’s consolidated monogamy and parental investment with.
In a condition where that husband is unable or unwilling (thanks to egalitarian beliefs) to establish his dominant Frame this leaves a woman’s Hypergamous doubt as the predominant influence on the health of the overall family. That doubt and the insecurities that extend from Hypergamous selection set the tone for educating and influencing any children that result from it.
In the past I’ve made the case that deliberately single, primarily female, parents arrogantly assume they can teach a child both masculine and feminine aspects equally well. In the case where a wife/mother assumes the headship of family authority, both she and the Frame abdicating father/husband reverse this conventional gender modeling for their children.
That woman’s dominant Frame becomes the reality that not just her husband must enter into, but also their children and, by extension, their family’s relatives. That feminine-dominant Frame is one that is predicated on the insecurities inherent in women’s Hypergamous doubts.
Hypergamy Knows Best
I think this “putting the kids first” phenomenon is very simple to explain. She doesn’t want to fuck you! She is using the kids as a shield, a barrier, to deflect your unwanted Beta sexual advances.
It is generally accepted that women are only interested in the top 20% of men, and if you are talking about as marriage partners I would agree with this.
However if you are talking about as sex partners that they are genuinely hot for, I would estimate this percentage to be north of 5% add in the frame required to maintain her sexual interest in a marriage / long-term relationship and your probably closer to 1-2%.
It’s really that simple.
The women that are with these top tier men, the top 1-2% don’t need to be told to put them before the kids, they do it because he is more important to her than her kids, because if he leaves she will never be able to replace him with another top tier man now she has his kids in tow.
Top tier men don’t raise other mens children and she knows this instinctively. If you think you can mitigate this by being top 20% and reading a few articles on frame and dread game then I think you will be disappointed.
Sure you can improve your relationship but you’re probably not going to be able to command the visceral, raw, desire that women have for the top tier men that makes them do this shit naturally under their own volition.
This was a comment from one of my regular readers that sums up the basic point; for women there is a natural, desired, recognition of a man’s Frame that is attached to his fundamental sexual market value in contrast with her own.
“Is he really the best I can do?”
In a feminine-primary Frame, that question defines every aspect of that woman’s family life and development together.
It’s important for Red Pill aware men to really meditate on that huge truth. If you do not set, and maintain, a dominant masculine Frame, if you do not accept your role in a conventional complementary relationship, that woman will feel the need to assume the responsibility for her own, and her children’s, welfare. Women’s psychological firmware predisposes them to this on a visceral, limbic, species-survival level.
I’ve met with countless men making a Red Pill transition in life who’ve related stories about the burdening influence of their domineering mothers and Beta supplicating fathers leading to them being brought up to repeat that Blue Pill cycle. I’ve also counseled guys who were raised by their single mothers who had nothing but spite and resentment for the Alpha Asshole father who left her. They too, took it upon themselves to be men who sacrifice their masculinity for equalism in order to never be like Dad the Asshole. I’ve met with the guys whose mothers had divorced their dutiful fathers to bang their bad boy tingle-generating boyfriends (whom they equally despised) and they too were molded by their mother’s Hypergamous decisions.
And this is what I’m emphasizing here; in all of these upbringing conditions it is the mother’s Hypergamous doubt that is the key motivating influence on her children. That lack of a father with a positive, strong, dominant Frame puts his children at risk of an upbringing based on that mother’s Hypergamous self-questioning doubt. Add to this the modern feminine-primary social order that encourages women’s utter blamelessness in acting upon this Hypergamous doubt and you can see how the cycle of creating weak, gender-confused men and vapid entitled women perpetuates itself.
Finally, to the guys who are psychologically stuck on the shitty conditions they had to endure because of this cycle, to the men who are still dealing with how mommy fucked them up or daddy was a Beta; the best thing you can do is recognize the cycle I’ve illustrated for you here. That’s the first step to pushing past it. Acknowledging Red Pill truth is great at getting you laid, but it’s much more powerful than that. It gives you the insight to see the influences that led to where you find yourself today.
Once you’ve recognized the Red Pill truths behind your Blue Pill conditioning, then it’s time to realign yourself, and recreate yourself in defiance to them. The longer you wallow in the self-pity condition that your mother’s Hypergamy and your father’s passive Beta-ness embedded in you, the longer you allow that Blue Pill schema to define who you are.
At the Man in Demand conference I had a young guy ask me what my thoughts were about a man’s being interested in becoming a single parent of his own accord. In other words, how feasible was it for a guy to father his own child with a surrogate or some other technology (artificial womb tech), much in the same way women can via sperm banks and artificial insemination?
I had this same question posed to me during an interview with blogger and podcast personality Christian McQueen. At present this essentially breaks down to a man supplying his own sperm, buying a suitable woman’s viable ovum to fertilize himself, and, I presume, hire a surrogate mother to carry that child to term. Thereupon he takes custody of that child and raises it himself as a single father.
I’ll admit that when I got the question about single fatherhood I was a bit incredulous of the mechanics of it. Naturally it would be an expense most men couldn’t entertain. However, I did my homework on it, and found out that ectogenesis was yet another science-fiction-come-reality that feminists have already considered and have planned for.
In theory, this arrangement should work out to something similar to a woman heading off the sperm bank to (once again, Hypergamously) select a suitable sperm donor and become a single parent of her own accord. It’s interesting that we have institutions and facilities like sperm banks to ensure women’s Hypergamy, but men, much less heterosexual men, must have exceptional strength of purpose and determination to do anything similar.
Despite dealing with the very likely inability of the surrogate mother to disentangle her emotional investment in giving birth to a child she will never raise (hormones predispose women to this) a man must be very determined financially and legally to become a single father by choice. In principle, I understand the sentiment of Red Pill men wanting to raise a child on their own. The idea is to do so free from the (at least direct) influence of the Feminine Imperative. I get the reasoning, however, I think this is in error.
My feelings on this are two part. First, being a true Complementarian, it is my belief that a child requires two healthy adult parents, male and female, with a firm, mature grasp of the importance, strengths and weaknesses of their respective gender roles (based on biological and evolutionary standards). Ideally they should exemplify and demonstrate those roles in a healthy fashion so a boy or a girl can learn about masculinity and femininity from their respective parents’ examples.
Several generations after the sexual revolution, and after several generations of venerating feminine social primacy, we’ve arrived at a default, collective belief that single mothers can perform the function of modeling and shaping masculinity in boys as well as femininity in girls equally well.
Granted, the definition of masculinity is a distorted one, defined by egalitarianism and the Feminine Imperative, but the underlying social message in that is that women/mothers can be a one-woman show with respect to parenting. Thus, men, fathers or the buffoons mainstream culture portrays them to be, are superfluous to parenting — nice to have around, but not mission-critical. This belief also finds fertile ground in the notion that men today are largely obsolete.
Secondly, for all the equalist emphasis of Jungian gender theories about anima/ animus and balancing feminine and masculine personality interests, this presumptions is evidence of an agenda that suggests a woman is equally efficient in teaching and modeling masculine aspects to children as well as any positively masculine man could. With that in mind, I think the reverse would be true for a deliberately single father — even with the best of initial intents.
As such, I think a father would serve as a poor substitute for a woman when it comes to exemplifying a feminine ideal. The argument then of course is that, courtesy of a feminine-centric social order, women have so divorced themselves from conventional femininity that perhaps a father might teach a daughter (if not demonstrate for her) a better feminine ideal than a woman. Conventional, complementary femininity is so lost on a majority of women it certainly seems like logic for a man to teach his daughter how to recapture it.
This was the trap that third wave feminism fell into; the belief that they knew how best to raise a boy into the disempowered and emasculated ideal of their redefined masculinity. Teach that boy a default deference and sublimation of his own gender interests to feminine authority, redefine it as ’respect’, teach him to pee sitting down and share in his part of the choreplay, and well, the world is bound to be a better more cooperative place, right?
So, it is for these reason I think that the evolved, conventional, two-parent heterosexual model serves best for raising a child. I cannot endorse single parenthood for either sex. Parenting should be as collaborative and as complementary a partnership as is reflected in the symbiotic relationship between a mother and father.
It’s the height of gender-supremacism to be so arrogantly self-convinced as to deliberately choose to birth a child and attempt to raise it into the contrived ideal of what that “parent” believes the other gender’s role ought to be.
Yet, this is what single mothers often elect to do, and as a society we laud them for it. We encourage and facilitate mothers in their raising children with the idea that they can be effective in teaching both genders’ aspects. This should put the institutionalized, social engineering agenda of the Feminine Imperative into stark contrast for anyone considering intentional single parenthood. Consider that sperm banks and feminine-exclusive fertility institutions have been part of normalized society for over sixty years and you can see that Hypergamy and its inherent need for certainty has dictated the course of parenting for some time now.
This amounts to a unilateral control of what new generations will define as masculine and feminine; this is the very definition of social engineering.
The Red Pill Father
“If I’m not going to have children, she told herself, then I’m going to have lovers.” — Robin Rinaldi, The Wild Oats Project.
In the last section I put an emphasis on men’s understanding women’s rudimentary doubt of their Hypergamous choices with regards to rearing children and the overall health of a family. There are a great many social factors in our westernized feminine-centric social structure that encourages women to delay both marriage and becoming a mother well past their prime fertility windows.
In my essay, Myth of the Biological Clock I detailed the misconceptions women hold with regard to their own capacity of having children later in life:
Popular culture likes to teach women and, by association, unenlightened men that there is an innate biological clock inside each woman that slowly ticks down to a magical period where her maternal instincts at long last predispose her to wanting a child. Perhaps, not so surprisingly, this coincides perfectly with the Myth of Women’s Sexual Peak as well as conveniently being the age demographic just post or just prior to when most women hit the Wall.
[…]I wont argue that women actually possess maternal instincts, I will argue that their understanding of when they manifest has been deliberately distorted by a feminine-centric cultural influence. If women are angry about the revelations of their inability or difficulty to conceive that their postWall biological conditions presents, their anger is misdirected. Rather than come down from the heady pedestal of ego-invested female empowerment psychology, they’ll blame men for not being suitable fathers at exactly the time that conveniences their sexual strategy, or men lacking a will to “playby-the rules” and satisfy the dictates of the feminine imperative by whiling away their time in porn and video game induced comas.
The have-it-all mentality popularized by feminism has led to some very bad social effects for women on whole. While a great deal of having it all is couched in messaging that appeals to enabling ’Empowered®’ women to get a similar deal from career life that men are supposedly enjoying, the subtext in this message
is one of never settling for a less than Hypergamously optimal (better-than, not equal-to) monogamous pairing with a man.
The “have it all” advertising is about life fulfillment from a distractingly equalist perspective. The sales pitch is that women can expect equitable or better fulfillment than what the Feminine Imperative would have women expect that men are getting from life.
Women want to be men. Thus, we see the push for female college enrollment that imbalances men’s enrollment, dangerously reducing the standard physical requirements for combat in the military or being a ’fire-person’, or any number of other arenas in life where men seem to have it all. However, in so doing, the life course women are directed to by the imperative also limits their Hypergamous optimization efforts by putting unrealistic expectations upon it.
Women are taught that it’s possible to serve two masters, male-comparable achievement and Hypergamy.
As a result women either delay childbearing until ages that put them and any offspring at a health risk, or they simply forgo marriage altogether and birth a child with the foreknowledge that the father (though maybe an adequate provisioner) will never be a contender to quell her doubts of his Hypergamous suitability.
If Momma Aint Happy Aint Nobody Happy
I’m fleshing out this aspect of Hypergamy here because I believe, as with all things female, a broad understanding of Hypergamy is essential to a man’s life and has far reaching effects that go beyond just learning Game well enough to get the lay on a Saturday night when a woman is in her ovulatory peak phase.
A byproduct of the societal embrace of openly acknowledged Hypergamy is the degree to which women are largely disposed to delaying commitment until what I call their Epiphany Phase and then transitioning into a need for security once their capacity to attract and arouse men decays and/or is compromised by intrasexual competition (i.e. hitting The Wall). I detailed this child-birth postponement process in The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine where I outline women’s Party Years through their Epiphany Phase, however it’s important for men to understand that this phase is largely the result of women believing they should have a similar window as a man in which they can have both a career and find the “right guy” to partner in parenting with.
Equalism’s fundamental flaw is rooted in the belief that men and women are
both rational and functional equals, separated only by social influence and selfish imperatives (uniquely attributed to men). The grave consequences women accept in this belief is that their sexual market value declines with age, both in terms of intrasexual competition and fertility.
As such, we entertain the complaints of generations of women frustrated that they were unable to consolidate on a Hypergamous ideal because they believed they had ample time to do so while pursuing the Alpha Fucks aspect of their Hypergamy in the years of their prime fertility window.
Today’s women also believe that the men who are available and ready to fulfill the Beta Bucks aspect of Hypergamy simply don’t measure up to their socialized, overinflated, sense of Hypergamous entitlement (and particularly in comparison to the men who made them Alpha Widows in their Party Years).
So distressing is this prospect, and so keenly aware of it are women, that they are beginning to mandate insurances in anticipation of not being able to optimize Hypergamy — such as preemptive egg freezing and legislating that men pay for their infertility while married in alimony settlements.
It’s getting to the point where the ages of 29-31 are no longer being considered a crisis point for women with regard to child bearing. With the popularization of the false hope in frozen ovum extending a woman’s birthing time-frame, now, even 35-38 years old seems to magically grant women some bonus years in which to secure a man for parental investment. The question is no longer one of a woman making herself suitable for a man’s parental investment (by his late 30’s no less), but rather, she believes, a magical-thinking proposition of waiting out the Hypergamously ’right’ father for her children.
I’m stressing these points here before I move on to Red Pill parenting ideology so men who are, or want to become fathers, husbands or invested boyfriends, understand the importance that Hypergamy plays in any family arrangement they hope to create.
Just to head off all the concerns about marriage being a raw deal for men reading this; Don’t get married. Under contemporary western circumstances there is no advantage for men in a state of marriage and 100% advantage for women. Unfortunately, as things are structured, marriage will always be a cost-to-benefit losing proposition while women insist on making marriage a legalistic contract of male-only liabilities.
That said, also remember that an entire world steeped in feminine-primary social imperatives is arrayed against your efforts in being a positively masculine father to your kids. Those anti-father efforts start with women’s own feminine-centric conditioning that leads them to push for Hypergamous optimization personally and societally. Yet, they will delay that optimization until all opportunities for her have been exhausted. If you are considering marriage and starting a family with a woman between the ages of 27 and 31, statistically, this will likely be the situation and mentality that your would-be wife is experiencing.
I’m presenting these things to you as a father or potential father, because it’s important for you to discern what women have been conditioned to believe and expect from men and for themselves. In the coming chapters I will elaborate on the complementarity both sexes have evolved for to make our species what it is today; and that conventional complementarity is something idealistic equalism would distort for men. However, for now, it’s important to realize that women have been thrust into this zero-hour, jump-at-the-last-second, cashout of the sexual marketplace schedule of mating that their very biology rebels against.
Single Moms and “Good” Fathers
It is also important for men to understand that, while there is a constant ’Man Up’ berating of fathers for their lack of involvement in a child’s life in popular culture, men are simultaneously presented with the female ’empowerment’ meme. As I mentioned in the last section, there is a meme that proposes these fathers’ parental involvement is effectively superfluous to that child’s maturation because Strong Independent Women® can reportedly fulfill that fathers’ role equally as well as any man (this is the ’equalist’ narrative).
For all the public awareness campaigns extolling fathers to be more involved Dads, the message is always one of being “better” fathers and placing them into a default position of being ’bad’ by virtue of their maleness. If men are as ridiculous or potentially violent as popular media has taught us they are, men are already starting their fatherhood from a negative position. In fact a ’good’ father is a rarely appreciated commodity because that ’good’ quality is always tied to a man’s never ending and ever shifting qualification for female ’correctness’.
On the other side, the single mother empowerment meme is endemic. It’s very important to use our Red Pill Lens with this meme because the message is one that forgives women of their inability to make themselves appropriate prospects for men’s parental investment. At the same time this meme also foist the blame for men’s ’typical’ unwillingness to parentally invest squarely on men’s responsibility to women in optimizing Hypergamy to their satisfaction.
The following quote is from an article titled I’ll Probably Always Be a Single Mom by Leah Campbell.
I’m Stupid Picky.
In my 15 or so years of dating, I’ve been around. I don’t mean that to sound skanky, but … it’s not like I haven’t given love a chance. The problem? Out of all the men I’ve ever dated, there has only been one or two that I felt a genuine connection with. It is a rare thing indeed for me to meet someone I feel like I could picture spending forever with. Sadly, I can’t even remember the last time I met a man who gave me butterflies. It’s definitely been years. I Want the Fairytale.
There are very few relationships I’ve witnessed in my life that I would actually want for myself. Which begs the question, what do I want? Well, I want a man who is great with kids and totally open to adopting a houseful with me. I want a man who is smart and driven, sexy and hilarious. One who gets me, and who challenges me, and who makes me weak in the knees. Basically … I want everything. And I’m not sure the image I have in my head of what love should be is something that actually exists in real life.
My Daughter Will Always Be Priority Number One.
If you think my expectations of what I want for me are implausible, we probably shouldn’t even discuss my expectations of what I want for the man who steps into that paternal role for my daughter. Truthfully, as much as I want that father figure for her, I am also absolutely terrified of choosing wrong, of messing up our dynamic by choosing a man who isn’t worthy of being her father.
I add this here because it illustrates many of the common misgivings women have with understanding their Hypergamous choices and their consequences. This article’s entire checklist read like a manifesto for the Strong Independent® single mother with no consideration given to how single men, potential fathers or husbands might interpret it. As expected, it perpetuates the ’put your kid first’ religion of motherhood here, but after reading through her single-mom rationalizations, and then combined with men’s presumptive servitude to the beneficiaries of the Feminine Imperative, it’s easy to see why most, if not all men, might be hesitant to sign up for the duty she expects of them.
My point here isn’t to dissuade men from wanting to be fathers, but rather that they enter into being a parent with their eyes open to how Hypergamy, and a cultural imperative that’s built around it, influences women’s life choices today.
I mentioned earlier about women between the ages of 27 and 31 experiencing the first harsh realities of the consequences their choices have predisposed them to. Understand, as a man, your desire, your potential, for parental investment puts you into a position of being the most sexually selective with women during this phase. So much in fact that the Feminine Imperative has created long-held social conventions all pre-established with the purpose of convincing men they are not only obligated to fulfilling women’s Hypergamous strategy, but should feel lucky to do so.
The truth is that it’s women who are at their most necessitous of men during this phase of their lives — thus placing men with the means and desire to become a parent into a prime selector’s position. Feminine social conditioning has done all it can to predispose Beta men to wait out and forgive women their short-term Alpha Fucks indiscretions during their Party Years, but as Red Pill awareness becomes increasingly unignorable in society the pressures of maintaining an image of being the prime selector will wear on women.
That said, I’ve had many men ask me how best to go about becoming a Red Pill parent. I’ve had many men express that the only advantage to men in marriage is in creating a healthy, hopefully complementary, environment in which to raise children. However, I’m not sure even women would concur with this assessment in the face of a social narrative that tells them they can raise a child as well as any father can. Yet, by the definition of the Feminine Imperative, a ’good’ father is one who will sublimate his masculinity and assume a feminine, subservient gender role, thus making him superfluous whether he’s available or not.
I generally emphasize establishing a strong, dominant, yet positive masculine Frame for men. This is the vital starting point for any long term relationship a man might hope to raise children in.
The next imperative a man must confront is the Herculean obstacles he faces in a western culture that devalues him as a father, but obligates him to be an involved ’good’ father who can only ever qualify himself to the mother of his children (who are taught they should place them above his interests) and qualify himself to a society that’s been conditioned to hold him to her standards.
Finally, a potential father needs to understand the circumstance in which women’s never ending quest to satisfy their Hypergamous doubt places them in at various phases of their maturity. For Red Pill men, a lot gets made of ’vetting’ women for personal attributes and character to make them contenders for being the mother of their children. While this is important, I can’t stress enough how important it is to account for the Hypergamous choices women make prior to his consideration — as well as the consequences she should be held accountable for, yet attempts to avoid by his obligated graces.
If knowing is half the battle, taking action is the other half.
The Vetting Process
I could care less who I’m talking to. In my opinion, if you’re looking to disqualify a woman based on her sexual history you’re doing yourself a disservice because you better believe that the high quality chicks have been fucked in every way imaginable. If not you it’s somebody else… Might as well be you!
This was a comment from one of my blog readers, but it’s a fairly common refrain amongst men dealing with our modern sexual marketplace. Men ought to just sack up and accept that, statistically, women are going to have had more than a few lovers prior to getting together with you.
One of my most widely linked blog posts on The Rational Male blog was called Saving the Best. In it I detailed the increasingly more common situation of Beta husbands discovering that their seemingly sexually-disinterested wives were far more sexually adventurous with the Alpha men of their Party Years when they discover evidence (online or digitally recorded) or personal admissions of it. The money quote was this:
“I married a slut who fucks like a prude.”
I understand this sentiment. Too much overt concern (i.e. asking or torturing oneself) about a woman’s sexual past is indeed demonstrating lower value for a man. Men who women consider Alpha, the men that women already have a mental impression of, don’t overly concern themselves with women’s sexual pasts because those men generally have multiple romantic options going.
On some level of consciousness women know that if what a man can glean from interacting with her about her sexual past is off-putting to an Alpha he’ll simply eject and move on to a better prospect.
An Alpha mindset is often very minimalist, blunt and direct, but there are aspects of interacting with women that come as a default for a man who is his own Mental Point of Origin. One of those unspoken aspects of an Alpha mindset is a self-understanding that he’s got options (or can generate more) and this is manifested in his indifference to a woman’s long term sexual suitability. If she doesn’t enter his Frame, to his satisfaction, he moves on to the next prospect with very little, if any, communication.
However, we’re not discussing non-exclusive dating/fucking; we’re discussing making an investment in a woman we’re vetting for our own parental investment. When you consider the all-downside risks a man must wager on that investment it behooves a man to be at his most discerning about that woman’s sexual past and the consequences that you will be burdened with if you don’t vet her wisely.
Most men (myself included at the time) have very sparse prerequisites when it comes to their considering a woman for marriage or even a long term relationship. Most men simply transition into it. The hot one night stand or the fuck buddy becomes his de facto girlfriend and then his long term partner without any real consideration or introspection about her suitability as a wife or mother. And by then, certain emotional and familial investments make any real, hard vetting a biased prospect.
This lack of insight is the result of a constant battery of shame and preconditioning by the Feminine Imperative that tells men any requisites they would have of a woman for marriage are ’passing judgment’ on her character. He should consider himself “lucky” that any woman would have him for a husband (or “put up with him”) and his concerns about her are shameful, typically male character flaws on his part.
Consequentially Blue Pill men self-censor and rarely permit themselves the luxury of putting their own considerations above that of a potential mate.
If you asked a woman whether she would be wary of marrying a man who was a recovering alcoholic or a cleaned up heroin addict she’d probably disqualify him as a marriage prospect from the outset.
And were she to go ahead and marry him anyway with full disclosure of his past addictions, would we be sympathetic with her if he were to relapse and she to bear the consequences of his past indiscretions?
Now suppose that woman married this former addict, but due to his being offended about her prying into his past, she was actually ignorant of his old addictions. She has her suspicions, but society tells her it should never be her purview to hold him accountable for anything that happened in his past.
He’s moved on and so should she, right? Any lingering consequences from his addictions (such as a DUI, criminal record or his unemployability) shouldn’t be held against him, nor should she judge him, nor should she consider those consequences whatsoever when she’s assessing his suitability for marriage now.
In fact, she should feel ashamed to even consider his past with regard to her feelings about who he is. Her judgmentalism only points to her own character flaws.
Now, would we praise that woman for “following her heart” and marrying him? Would we hold her accountable for the decision to marry him if he relapses?
Reverse the genders and this scenario is precisely why women become so hostile when men even hint at ’judging’ women’s past sexual decisions. There is a very well established operative social convention that the ’Sisterhood’ will all unanimously get behind; and that is the ruthless shaming of men who would ask any questions about any woman’s sexual past. This is the degree of desperation that women feel during the Epiphany Phase when they acknowledge that men are becoming aware of their long term sexual strategy.
They understand that, in their Epiphany Phase, the clock is ticking down to zero. That’s the cause of a lot of anxiety. They are just beginning to understand that their marriageability (Beta Bucks priority) now conflicts with their previous short-term mating strategy (Alpha Fucks priority). Women of this age cannot afford to have their short term sexual strategy count against them at a time when they are at their most necessitous of what that Beta can provide towards her long term security.
Again, on some level of consciousness, women understand that, were the ignorant Beta she’s decided to marry (start a family with or help her raise her prior lovers’ children with) to become aware of what she’d done in her sexual past, he too might expect that same degree of sexual performance. And that performance she reserved for the men she perceived as Alpha then and freely gave to them the sex which he had to earn, and still must constantly qualify himself for now. As such, women are required to keep the details of that past secret and obscured.
So grave is this anxiety that men must be punished for having the temerity to be curious about it. It is vitally important because a woman’s capacity to bond with a man is reduced with every new sexual partner. This is a statistical dynamic; the more lovers a woman has prior to her marriage is proportional to her odds of infidelity and divorce.
According to a study by the National Survey for Family Growth, collected in 2002, 2006-2010, and 2011-2013. For women marrying since the start of the new millennium:
· Women with 10 or more partners were the most likely to divorce.
· Women with 3-9 partners were less likely to divorce than women with 2 partners; and,
· Women with 0-1 partners were the least likely to divorce.
This is a well-studied phenomenon. Every new sexual partner for a woman is a potential Alpha for her to be ’widowed’ by, but the man who marries her must be kept ignorant of those men, and the impact they had on her, if she is to secure his resources and his parental investment. These are important facts to consider for a man looking for a mother of his children. Those childrens’ lifetime wellbeing depends on the stability of the family.
This non-judgementalist social convention operates on absolving women’s past indiscretions by redefining them as a period of learning. It was her “journey of self-discovery” and she’s “not that person” any more. Cleverly enough, this is exactly the same convention and the same rationale of women who divorce their husbands later in life to then “take the journey of self-discovery” a la Eat, Pray, Love that she passed up when she was younger.
“When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier.”
― Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead
It is also vitally important for men to keep women’s dualistic sexual strategy in mind at every age of their maturity.
Open Hypergamy is triumphantly crowed about when women are at their peak sexual market value, but when a woman is in her Epiphany Phase, (between 28 to 31 years old) when she’s anxious and frustrated in securing her own long term provisioning, that is when she will fall back on the social conventions that shames men for their own awareness of the same Open Hypergamy they would otherwise flaunt for men.
Within this convention, men are expected not only to accept that a woman’s sexual past is not any of his concern, but that any interest in it as something he might vet a wife over, is perceived as a sign of his own insecurities (i.e. a Beta tell). Many Red Pill men will see this convention as some fiendish plan to exploit his niceties and resources, but it’s important to keep the latent purpose of it in mind. This is women’s sexual strategy conflicting with men’s sexual strategy.
Once we understand the latent purpose of this social convention, let me explain to every man reading — vetting a woman’s sexual past is not just your prerogative, but an absolute imperative to the health of any future relationship you hope to have with her. When you consider the significant risks you are essentially setting yourself up for, risks no woman can ever acknowledge, empathize with or appreciate, the single most important thing you can do is vet her according to that woman’s sexual past.
This doesn’t mean you make weak, overt inquiries about her past. It means you subtly, covertly and discretely pick up on the many cues and tells she will reveal about that past. Most men would rather use a direct approach to this, and while there’s merit to that, it’s far better to do your vetting by drawing out freely offered information from a woman. It’s also much more honest and reliable. Once you go the direct route, the jig is up and she will play the role she thinks you expect from her, not the honest one you need to make your determinations.
Sex is the glue that holds relationships together. It’s the height of irony that a woman would place so high a priority on her own sexual experiences while in her sexual market value’s peak yet completely disqualify that importance when she gets to the phase where it becomes a liability to her. As a man it is vitally important for you to know whether you’ll be her apex Alpha lover, somone in between, or if your burden of performance will be measured against the ghosts of Alpha men from her sexual past — and all while you endure the stresses and joys of raising children with her.
As an aside here, I should add that I’m completely aware of the studies indicating a woman’s capacity to bond monogamously is inversely proportionate to the number of sexual partners she’s experienced prior to monogamy. I wont argue the merit of that concept, but I also don’t think this fully encompasses the dynamic. I say this because even one prior lover (or even unrequited obsession of hers) can be Alpha enough to upset that bonded monogamous balance.
These then are the Alpha Widows — women so significantly impacted by a former Alpha (or perceptually so) lover that she’s left with an emotional imprint that even the most dutiful, loving Beta-provider can never compete with. A woman doesn’t have to have been an archetypal ’slut’ in order to have difficulty in pair bonded monogamy.
So how many prior lovers is too many? For an Alpha Widow, one’s enough. It’s my contention that the Slut Paradox isn’t a numbers game so much as it’s an Alpha impact game. What if your new partner has only banged a mere two men before you, but had an intense relationship with them and engaged in such intense sexual experiences she feels self-conscious about doing with you? Is she a slut?
When it comes to vetting women for a long-term decision of monogamy, most men fall into two camps; the guys who take that process to a largely imagined, egoistic extreme, and the men who will scarcely give themselves permission to consider judging any woman’s character for suitability to be his spouse or live-in girlfriend.
A few caveats need to be addressed here; the first is for men to understand the risks involved in marriage from the outset. In this era there are no appreciable advantages for men to marry even the most ideal of women. On the contrary, marriage is a losing proposition for men from all perspectives. Legally, financially, socially and evolutionarily, marriage represents an all-downside prospect.
The first conversation you should have with yourself is whether or not having and raising children is worth this virtually all risk proposition. It’s also important for men to understand that even in the best of circumstance he’s always at risk of having his kids and his influence as a parent removed at any time.
I began this section, and really the point of this book, with the intent of educating men on the modern realities that will make his role as a Red Pill parent difficult. No decision will impact your life more than the one you make in determining who will be the mother of your children. Very few guys see a hot girl in a club and think ’wow, I bet she’d be a great mom’. Their concern is the most immediate; that of getting the lay and experiencing sex with her.
However, this is exactly why most men, more commonly, have this decision made for them with no real insight into how a woman might be a great or horrible prospect with which to sire children. The pregnancy was “accidental” or maybe the result of the make-up sex you had after you were determined to leave her because she was such a terrible prospect. As of this writing the rate of all births to unmarried women is 40.2%.
Put this statistic into perspective. The vast majority of these unwed births is due more to how men and women prioritize their mating habits according to the dictates of Hypergamy, not pre-envisioned long term relationships. As a result we have 4 in 10 children without a father or a greatly reduced influence of that father on the child’s life. The consequences of a feminine-primary social order and its prioritizing the optimization of Hypergamy can get very complex.
But, as I mentioned, most men follow a couple of more or less extreme attitudes with their regards towards vetting women. The first is the guy who takes himself and this decision so seriously that it conflicts with his true self-worth and sexual market value. The guy with this self-impression is easy to spot because his qualifications for women are more like demands which he really doesn’t merit and can’t enforce. This is usually the guy who, like most women, maintains a mental checklist of appropriate traits he needs his woman to have - a list that he’s always happy to rattle off for anyone who’ll listen in the hopes that the right woman will be listening too and step up for his consideration. I should add that this guy is usually given to spiritual notions and justifications.
The other guy is far more common. This is the properly trained and conditioned Blue Pill Beta who would never dream of presuming his self-worth would ever merit his being selective with a woman. His fear is being thought of as ’judgmental’ and this runs very much parallel to his Beta Game of trying to identify himself as much with the feminine as possible.
This man never gives himself permission to vet a woman and follows along with most of the preestablished feminine social conventions that would shame a man for ever being so bold as to believe a woman ought to make herself suitable for any man. For our purposes, I think the Beta perspective of vetting women is likely the most common men will have to deal with.
If children are your priority, and you want to be the best Red Pill aware, positively masculine influence you can hope to be for them, it is vitally important you coldly and dissociatively vet any woman you believe might be a candidate for being the mother of your kids. As I said, most men never do this and fall into the trap of allowing things to happen instead of designing them to happen. A big part of that design is to understand that your risks as a father and husband (if you choose to be one) are life-threateningly great. So great in fact that you must vet women for suitability.
The first step in this vetting is to unlearn the idea that it’s wrong or judgmental for you to do so. This is a Blue Pill conditioned mindset that is in place with the sole purpose of benefiting women in consolidating on their sexual strategies in the long-term, and at the cost of men’s long-term parental investment.
If it is wrong for a man to vet or to judge a woman’s character and worth, it places women as the only arbiters of what an acceptable, “good”, mother ought to be for a man. As a positively masculine, Red Pill aware man it is your prerogative to vet women for long term suitability.
Practical Red Pill Parenting
One of my more prolific readers left me this comment about parenting:
Being a dad isn’t all that great in many ways these days. At best it’s mostly thankless, but for most men, they are fathering into a culture that denigrates them, laughs at them and makes saints of mothers and motherhood. If you think this won’t effect how your children see you as a father, you’re not applying your Red Pill awareness.
I used to ride the train back and forth to the city — leaving my home at 6:30 in the morning and returning at 7:30 or later, wondering if my daughter would ever realize all I sacrificed to provide for her and her mom? I’d wonder if she’d ever get that I sacrificed being as close to her as her mother is to her for her wellbeing? That her closeness with her mom as a result of having a stay at home mom until she was 5 was a consequence of my efforts, not her Mom’s?
Guess what — nobody wants to hear it. Nobody gives a shit what sacrifices you make to be a good father and provider — it’s all about Mom. It’s all about the kids. Dad’s are at best seen as second-best Moms most of the time. And even when we are “in charge”, we can be dismissed as superfluous in myriad ways.
Many men adapt by becoming second mothers and wives in the household — and the entire culture encourages this. Try being a traditional male at parent teacher night or at the preschool or even the Boy Scout troop… Fatherhood and a family is not what it once was either. Trust me, learn from my experience. Your kids will very likely not appreciate all you’ve done for them.
Just like men subscribe to two sets of books — old and new social rule sets that contradict the other — I think our ideas of marriage fall into this same contradiction. When marriage was a social contract and not so much a legal one involving the state, the old set of books applied well to that institution. This old set of rules about marriage and what men could expect from that largely socially-enforced institution worked well and in a complementary paradigm. From the Little House on the Prairie days up to the post-war era, the first set of books worked well with regard to marriage and fatherhood.
After the sexual revolution, the second set of books took social preeminence. Optimizing Hypergamy and all of the social and legal paradigms that make it the foundation of our present social order took priority. Yet, both men and, ostensibly, women still cling to the old order, the first set of rules when it comes to a man’s role as a husband and a father, and simultaneously expect him to adopt and promote the feminine-primary interests of the new feminine-primary order.
Fathers are expected to follow the edicts of conventional masculinity with regards to their provisioning for a family and obeying the liabilities for not acting in accordance with it, but they are also expected to adopt, embrace and internalize their popularized role of being superfluous, ridiculous or even angry and abusively resistant to the second set of rules — those that prioritize the importance of the Feminine Imperative.
In other words, the expectation is that a man should find happiness in his sacrificial role of provider, be happy in his lack of appreciation for it, and happy to have the ’village’ of society raise his children into the next crop of confused, frustrated adult men while he’s doing it. He should be happy in his presence being devalued, but be held responsible for the lack of presence his sacrifices demand.
Oh, and he should also feel a sense of smug pride when he sees another man being pilloried for the same lack of his superfluous presence in his family’s life.
’Village’ of the Damned
I’m sure all of this sounds like a bridge too far for most men. Yes, the prospect of becoming a father is depressing, and I can see how these truths would make the average man despondent about becoming a new parent. However, I feel it’s incumbent upon me that I’m honest with men about what they’re up against before I advocate for being a Red Pill aware father.
You will never be appreciated for your sacrifices, and certainly not while you’re making them. However, your presence is only as superfluous as you allow it to be. While you will never be appreciated for it in any measurable sense, you will be liable for it, so my advice is to make the most of it in a Red Pill respect.
Your reward, your motivation, for being a Red Pill parent and a positively masculine example in your kids’ lives needs to come from inside yourself because it will never be rewarded by a feminine-primary social order outside yourself.
If you don’t think you will ever find being a parent intrinsically rewarding, get a vasectomy now because it will never be extrinsically rewarding. Understand now, the Feminine Imperative wants you to be despondent about your role.
Understand this too, your presence, your influence, will only be as valuable or as appreciated as you are willing to make it to yourself. Just as with making yourself your mental point of origin, your Red Pill aware influence in your kids’ lives needs to matter to you first because it will never be appreciated in your time, and in fact will be resisted by a world saturated in feminine-primacy.
Being a mother and birthing a child is a constantly lauded position today. By virtue of being a mother, women are rewarded and respected in society. Men, on the other hand, must add fatherhood to their burden of performance just to avoid the societal default of being demonized.
The Feminine Imperative wants you to give up and allow the ’village’ to raise your sons and daughters to perpetuate the cycle of the second set of rules. It wants you to feel superfluous; the Feminine Imperative’s maintenance relies on you feeling worthless. The reason men commit suicide at five times the rate of women is due in part to this prepared sense of male-worthlessness cultivated by the Feminine Imperative.
In Preventive Medicine I detail part of our present feminine-primary conditioning and how the imperative raises boys to be Betas and girls to be caricatures of the Strong Independent Women® narrative. All of that begins at a very early age. The first, most primary truth you need to accept as a father is that if you don’t teach your children Red Pill truths there is an entire western(izing) world that is already established to raise them in your absence.
’The Village’ will raise your kids if you don’t. You will be resisted, you will be ridiculed, you will be accused of every thought-crime imaginable to the point of being dragged away to jail for imparting Red Pill awareness to them (in the future I expect it will be equated with child abuse). The Village will teach your boys from the most impressionable ages (5 years old) to loath their maleness, to feel shame for being less ’perfect’ than girls and to want to remake their gender-identity more like girls — to the point that transitioning their gender to girls’ will be the norm.
The Village will raise your daughters to perpetuate the same cycle that devalues conventional masculinity, the same cycle that considers men’s presence as superfluous and their sacrifices as granted expectations. It will raise your daughters
to over-inflate their sense of worth with unmerited confidence at the expense of boys as their foils. It will teach them to openly embrace Hypergamy as their highest personal authority (publicly and privately) and to disrespect anything resembling masculinity as more than some silly anachronism, or reverse it into being all about men’s insecurities.
The good news is that for all of these efforts in social engineering, the Feminine Imperative is still confounded by rudimentary biology and our evolved psychological firmware. That basic root reality is your greatest advantage as a father. If there’s one underlying truth upon which to base your parenting it’s this; children are still motivated by influences that are relatively predictable. Begin from the root truth that we evolved our psychology and our behaviors from intergender complementarity that made us the preeminent species on this planet. It takes a global Village to distort this by teaching failed notions of egalitarian equalism.
I’m often asked when I believe the best time would be to introduce a boy to the Red Pill. A lot of guys with teenage sons want to hand them a copy of The Rational Male before they hit 18, or maybe when they’re 15, some even say 12 is really a good time. While it’s flattering for me to hear men tell me how they gave their teenage sons a copy of my book, I have to think that this is too late.
I’ve been a father to a teenage daughter for a while now and in my 20’s I was a mentor (big brother figure) to a young man I watched grow from a ten year old boy to a mid-30s man today. One thing I’ve learned from dealing with kids as I have is that the Feminine Imperative conditions children from the moment they can understand what’s playing on a TV or in a movie. By the time that kid is ten they already have the ideological conditioning that came from a decade of meme’s and messaging taught to them by schools, Disney, Nickelodeon, popular music, feminine-primary parenting from their friends’ parents, even your own extended family members.
By the time that kid is ten they’ve already internalized the stereotypes and social conditioning of the Blue Pill and they will start parroting these memes and behaving and ’believing’ in accordance with that conditioning. By the time they are in their ’tweens’ and beginning to socially interact with the opposite sex, the Blue Pill feminine-primary conditioning will be evident to any man with a Red Pill perspective to hear and see it. You’ll see the ’tells’ of their Blue Pill conditioning more starkly because they so readily exaggerate them as a deductive, though adolescent, form of Game. Red Pill aware men must also consider that in just the five years or so a ten year old boy has to develop a capacity for abstract thought. He’s already learned Blue Pill terms and has molded his identity around the ideas he’s picked up from the Village. That Blue Pill internalized ideology will seem natural and logical to them even though they couldn’t tell you how they came to their formative beliefs. And the Village will reinforce this acceptance by congratulating him for being more ’mature’ than his peers.
The time to start exemplifying Red Pill awareness in a parental capacity is before you even have kids. As I detailed in the beginning here, an internalized Game that results from strong Red Pill awareness and a positive, dominant Frame control are imperative before you even consider monogamy. That Frame becomes the foundation for your parenting when your children come along.
I realize this isn’t exactly helpful for men who came to Red Pill awareness after their kids were in their teens, but it needs to be addressed for men considering becoming a father. Ideally you want to impart that same Red Pill awareness during a boy’s formative years. Children completely lack the capacity for abstract thought until their brains fully form and they learn from experience to develop it. The age of 5 is the time when kids are most impressionable and learn the most, but they do so by watching behavior. So, it’s imperative for a Red Pill father to demonstrate positive, conventional masculinity during these years.
Include your son in exclusively Male-Space, where only men (and boys) are allowed to participate. Even if all he does is sit and play, it’s important for him to understand male-only tribalism (detailed later). Eventually, as he gets older, he’ll feel more a part of that collective. In a feminine-primary world that is bent on his devaluation as a male human it’s important for him to feel valued in malespace and to institute his own male-spaces as he gets older.
Within this male-space your son needs to learn about his eventual burden of performance. I’d also advise you institute some kind of rite of passage for him from being a boy to being a man. This rite of passage needs to be something uniquely male for which only boys are qualified for. It should also be something which is earned and meritorious of unique, male-exclusive, rewards and respect, as well as responsibilities and accountabilities.
There needs to be a delineation point at which his manhood is marked. This is important because it not only teaches him to value his masculinity, but also to accept the responsibilities of his burden of performance.
Most Beta men are conditioned for gender-loathing in the guise of normative egalitarian equalism. Thus, they become uncomfortable even calling themselves ’men’, so the earlier a kid understands this the better he is in accepting his manhood. The Feminine Imperative is all too ready to teach him his masculinity is a mask he wears; something he puts on and not the ’real’ him to hide his presumed insecurities just for being male. Your son needs to unapologetically reject this notion that his masculinity is an act.
He needs to learn that men and women are different and only deserving of earned respect, not a default respect simply granted to the female sex. Eventually he needs to learn to accept his own dominance and mastery in a world that will tell him his sex, and conventional, constructive masculinity is a ’toxic’ scourge on society.
Your presence in his life is an absolute necessity if you are to thwart the efforts of gynocentrism. As such, it is important that you do things with your son. Even if that’s something you have no interest in, being the Man, his model for masculinity is vitally important and to impart this to him you need to have a mutual purpose. As I’ve written before, women talk, men do. Men get together socially with a purpose, an action, a hobby, a sport, a creative endeavor, a problem to solve, etc. and then they communicate while working towards that purpose.
Your son must learn this from a very early age, particularly when he’s likely to be forced into feminine-primary social structures and conditioned to communicate like girls do in school as well as in popular media. One of the tragedies of our age is a generation of Blue Pill men and women teachers raising their sons to adopt feminine-primary communication preferences because they themselves had no experience with conventional masculinity. They can’t teach what they don’t understand.
Our modern systems of teaching and learning has become highly gender-specific to the point that the only ’correct’ way of learning is in the ways that encourage feminine-primary learning. Unless you home school or pay for private education, your boy will be taught this feminine ’correctness’ in school. Know that you will have to bend your will as a parent to countering this influence by teaching him in male-specific ways.
Demonstrate, do not explicate, is true of dealing with women, but it is also an imperative of Red Pill parenting. Your son (and daughter) needs to see his mother’s deference to your dominant Frame and beneficent authority. He needs to understand on a rudimentary level that his mother responds to your positive masculine Frame. Again, this is imperative since your kids will see a different narrative being displayed in popular culture and their schooling.
Exemplify for him how a man presents himself, how a man reacts to a threat,
how a man commands a dog, how a man interacts with, and helps, other men he values, and how he avoids men and situations he does not.
Don’t make the mistake of thinking that you’ll start teaching him Red Pill awareness when he’s old enough to understand it. By then it’s too late, his conditioning makes him resistant to it and thinks his Beta Game is more appropriate.
Your son will follow your lead, but that must start from day one, not age 12. I have a good friend now whose 16 year old son is literally following the same path as his Beta father. His boy moved in with his estranged ex wife because he’d be closer to his ONEitis girlfriend. Now his girlfriend has left him and he’s stuck living with his neurotic mother.
The consequences of a Blue Pill conditioned mindset also start early. I’ve seen ten year old boys despondent over not having a girlfriend. I’ve counseled a girl whose former teenage boyfriend stabbed and killed her new boyfriend 32 times because she was his soul mate. They fall prey to the soul-mate myth because they are taught to be predisposed to it.
As your son moves into his teenage years, that connection you began in his formative years should strengthen. You can begin to introduce him to Red Pill awareness, but in all likelihood you’ll notice him using his own Red Pill lens when it comes to dealing not just with girls he likes, but his sister, his mother and the girl ’friends’ who would like to be his girlfriend. Be sure you praise him for it. His grasping the fundamentals of women’s dualistic sexual strategy, Hypergamy and how this will be used against him in the future is something imperative that he learns later.
His young-adult years are the time to reinforce that Red Pill sensitivity and capitalize on his own awareness, the awareness you planted in his formative years, by introducing him to Red Pill ideas he wasn’t cognizant of. Bluntly, overtly, declaring Red Pill truths in his teenage years might make sense to you, but plucking out bits of his own Red Pill observations, praising him for them and expanding on them in his teen years will probably be received better and more naturally. Red Pill awareness should come to him as a product of his own curiosity and connecting the dots you put in front of him during his formative years.
One thing I know about teenage boys and girls is that if you try to tell them something profound they roll their eyes and blow you off, but if you wait for the right moment to let them come to that thing you want them to learn on their own then they’re receptive to it. Your demonstrating Red Pill awareness doesn’t stop when they’re teens. For as much as you’d be excited to share the truths of the Red Pill and how best to apply them with your boy, understand that he will be prone to make the same mistakes you made when you weren’t aware of the nature of women and how men might avoid the worst of it.
Much of what I’ve outlined for raising boys would cross over into raising a daughter, however there are some differences in approach. Exemplifying a Red Pill ideal, and demonstrations of positive, dominantly masculine Frame control are still the highest priority, but more so is the modeled behavior of the girl’s mother toward you and her acknowledgment of your Frame. If your wife resists, ridicules or mocks your Frame, if she feigns acceptance of it, devaluation is the lesson your daughter will be taught about masculinity. You must model for and mold her perceptions of masculinity while your wife models the aspects of femininity — for better or worse.
A lot of how you approach raising a daughter can be based on your Red Pill understanding of how to deal with women, and based on much of the same basic gender-complementary foundations. The same Game principles you would use with women are actually founded on behavior sets that little girls learn and enjoy while they’re growing up. Amused Mastery is a prime example of this. The idea is to model the type of man you would be happy to accept into your own family as her husband. This then is reflected by how you interact with a son.
You will notice that root level Hypergamy manifests itself in girls at a very young age. In Dr. Warren Farrell’s book, Why Men Are The Way They Are he notes that girls as young as 7 already have a definition of the (celebrity) “boys they’d like to kiss and the boys they’d like to marry.” No doubt girls’ acculturation influences their preferences, but the Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks archetypes are part of their mental firmware. Popular culture is ready to exploit this nature, and in so doing it eroticizes girls from a very early age, but it still exploits a base nature in women that is inherent.
As a father, your primary role will be one of modeling the provider security seeking aspect of the Hypergamous equation. While that comfort and control is necessary it tends to be a trap for most Betas. The challenge most Beta fathers fail at is embracing and owning the very necessary Alpha / Dominant role that makes up the other side of that equation. That isn’t to say you directly assume the Alpha Fucks role that Hypergamy demands, but it is to say that you adopt and own the Alpha dominance that makes that aspect sexy in other men.
The challenge is exemplifying Amused Mastery with your daughter, but in such a way that it balances Alpha dominance and control with rapport, security and comfort. In Myth of the Good Guy I make the case that adult women don’t really look for this Hypergamous balance in the same man. Alphas are for fucking, Betas are for long term security, and men who think they can embody both are neither directly sought after nor really believable. The root of this mental separation of Hypergamous, purpose-specific, men can be traced back to the impression of masculinity that a woman’s father set for her in her formative years.
Lean too far toward Alpha dominance and you become the asshole abuser who domineered poor mom while she was growing up. Lean too far to the Beta, permissive, passive and feminine side of the spectrum and the future men in her life will be colored by your deferring to the feminine as authority — thus placing her in the role of having to create the security she never expects men to have a real command of.
The challenge of raising a boy is modeling and exemplifying the positive, dominant masculine role you want him to boldly embrace in spite of the same fem-centric world arrayed against yourself. The challenge of raising a girl is embodying the dominant masculine man you will eventually be proud to call your son-in-law. Your daughter needs to be able to identify that guy by reflexively comparing him to the masculine role you set for her.
Most contemporary men (that is to say 80%+ Beta men) are very uncomfortable in asserting dominance with their daughters for fear of being perceived as misogynists according to their feminine-centric acculturation. The zeitgeist of this era’s approach to fathers parenting girls is one of walking on eggshells around their little princesses, or treating their daughter as if she were a son. The fear is one of avoiding instilling a crushing of their independence or limiting their future opportunities by being more permissive with girls. The gender-correct hope is that in doing so they’ll all go on to be the future doctors and scientists society needs, but that permissiveness and coddling does them no favors in the long run. To the equalist father of today there is no greater sin than to think of their daughters, or have any man think of their own daughters, as anything less than co-equal entities as boys.
If you were uncomfortable experimenting with Red Pill concepts while you were single, you’ll be even more so in raising a daughter. The most important impression you need to leave her with is that men and women are different, but complementary to the other. She needs to know that your masculine dominance is beneficial, protective and valid to both her and her mother, and your personal mastery of you conditions and environment are an aid to her and the family.
She needs to understand that girls and women are, sometimes, excluded from male-spaces, particularly if you also have a son. In fact, it’s boon if you have a son to teach while you bring up a daughter as she’ll see his upbringing as a model for positive masculinity.
Lessons for My Son
As many of my readers know Mrs. Tomassi have raised a daughter for the past 19 years. We had one child by design, and in all honesty I’m rather relieved it was a girl. Take this however you’d like, but I think raising a girl has allowed me more insight into how women grow and mature into young women, and it’s been through this experience that I’ve based more than a few of my theories.
I have one younger brother, so the maturation process of growing up female was something I’ve never been familiar with until the past 19 years. I suppose the possibility exists that I may at some point be able to pass on my Red Pill wisdom to a future grandson, certainly my brother’s son, and many older male relatives, however I don’t really have any regrets since I’ve had more private messages and consult requests from the sons I never had.
One of the best compliments I get from Red Pill fathers is when they email me about how they’ve bought an extra copy of The Rational Male that they plan to give to their sons or some other male relative. Nothing encourages me to keep writing than the stories I receive like this.
So, it was with some admitted pride that I came across a post on the Red Pill Reddit forum detailing lessons a Red Pill father hoped to impart to his soon to be born son. This guy had come to Red Pill awareness late in life.
There is a definite want in the manosphere to help other men, and particularly the coming generations of young men, to awaken them to what to avoid and how best to proceed in a Red Pill awareness. Most of these men’s father’s advice consisted of , “I don’t care who you do, just don’t do it under my roof.” Either that or they were raised on the Blue Pill idealism and misguided presumptions of equalism from their thoroughly feminized Dad’s.
So it comes as no surprise that today’s Red Pill men would find one of the most important things they can do is prepare their own sons for manhood.
The following is a list collected from the suggestions of Red Pill men as to when (sometimes how) it’s best to introduce a son to Red Pill concepts.
1. (13 & up) Non-Exclusivity
Whatever you do, don’t settle for one girl (oneitis) until much later in life. Play the field, spin plates, date lots of girls. This is the only way you’ll be able to separate the wheat from the chaff and realize what you really want in an LTR relationship down the road if/when you want a family.
2. (13+) Physicality & Alpha Character
Your physical characteristics matter (looks, body type, etc.)… An alpha attitude matters more.
3. (13+) Don’t Chase
Set yourself apart. Let girls come to you. If you do pursue, do so in a carefully calculated way: Pursue and retreat. Push and pull.
4. (13+) The Value of Ambiguity
Keep her constantly guessing. Always imply that you have options.
5. (13+) Say less than is necessary - Avoid Social Buffers
Texting, phone calls, etc… Be disciplined in your response. Use the 1-3 ratio in responding to her texts, phone calls. Give her one short text response/phone conversation for every three she gives you.
6. (13+) Girls are a complement to your life, not the focus of it
Define your mission and pursue it (not girls) passionately. Admittedly, this will be undefined and in flux for an adolescent, but whether it’s sports, studies, extracurricular activities, make those your first priority.
7. (13+) Bigger & Better Deals
Develop a keen understanding of the psychological/biological nature of women… Understand how girls think. They are always looking to upgrade. If you’re not always the “best in show”, they will cheat on you to find someone who is.
8. (13+) Nice guys finish last.
There’s a reason all the girls like the boy who teases them. You don’t have to be a ’jerk’, but you do need to harness the jerk’s energy.
9. (17+) Niceness will never get you laid
If it is a friend she sees, that will be her lasting impression of you. Even if later in life you think she’s finally come around to finding you attractive, her impression of your personality will be that of the Beta she rejected initially.
10. (17+) Establishing Frame — Be a leader in every relationship
If you’re on a date, make sure you’re doing something that you want to do. She can come along for the ride.
11. (17+) Rejection is better than regret
It is better to have attempted something great, to have defied the odds, to have approached that girl, than to live with the regret of never having attempted it.
12. (17+) Shit Tests
Understand shit tests and learn to master them. Girls will always be qualifying you to make sure you’re of the Alpha mindset she wants. If you start getting a lot of shit tests, re-evaluate your frame — you’re probably coming across as too needy.
13. (17+) Know the plumbing
Understand female physiology and how to bring a woman to orgasm.
14. (17+) Understand the Long Game
Girls’ sexual market value will peak around 22-24. Men’s doesn’t peak until their early to mid 30s. Do not be disheartened by her rejections now, in 8-10 years it will be you doing the rejecting. Remember what she was like during this phase of her life, it will give you greater discernment of women when you are doing the choosing later in life.
15. (17+) Men and women have different concepts of love
Don’t believe the lie that men and women mutually share an idealistic concept of love-for-love’s-sake. Girls will love you, but only opportunistically. If you demonstrate lower value, their love for you will evaporate.
16. (17+) Vulnerability is NOT strength
Your character should be Alpha to the point that this is women’s overall estimate of it. Show your Beta traits sparingly and use extreme caution when dong so. Girls will want to see that you are stoic, self-reliant, and confident. If you want a shoulder to cry on, get a dog. Use Beta comfort only as a reward for good behavior.
17. (17+) The Medium is the Message
Women don’t send men “mixed messages”, their behavior is their message. The only practical way of judging motivation and intent is observing women’s behaviors. Believe what they do, not what they say.
18. (17+) Smile less, smirk more
Agreeableness, virtue, generosity and kindness make for a man of noble character, but they are never traits or behaviors that women find arousing.
19. (17+) Charm is treating women like little girls
Tease relentlessly. Women find comfort in men who are so in control of their frame that they are fearless in treating women like their older brothers did when they were children.
20. (17+) Experiment with Game
Learn what style of game works best for you: Are you the extroverted “cocky-funny” type? Are you the introverted “aloof-amused mastery type?” Are you the asshole type?
21. (13 & up) Stay away from online porn
Learn the dangers of instant gratification. Realize that the build up of testosterone is what gives you your masculine energy. Don’t masturbate as a crutch to avoid meaningful interactions with real women. That guy who sits in his basement fapping to online porn all day? Women are repulsed by him because his masculine energy is depleted and he has not learned to focus that energy on real women.
As an adolescent, you will be consumed with thoughts of sex. Control your masculine energy so that it can be harnessed outwardly instead of inwardly in the realm of fantasy.
22. (15+) The greatest risk you can take is no risk at all
Men’s great fear ought not to be aiming too high and failing, but rather aiming too low and succeeding. This applies to all aspects of life.
23. (17+) Never apologize for your sexual nature
Embrace the fact that men have huge sexual appetites. Never be ashamed of this and fully appreciate your masculine sexuality.
24. (17+) Ovulatory Shift — Menstruation is your friend
Understand the behaviors and evolved functions of the female menstrual cycle and what it means for them, and more importantly for you (e.g. up the Alpha during ovulation, throw in some rapport during her down cycle.)
25. (17+) Learn the cognitive process of women’s arousal
Understand that for females, sexual arousal typically takes place in the brain and that they are less visually aroused than you are. Men’s sub-communication and emotional impact (good or bad) are vital aspects of female arousal.
26. (17+) Be aware of SMV ratio
Make sure that your sexual market rank is at least 1-2 points above hers at all times. This can be done either with attitude, physical fitness, your life passion or some combination of the above. Never be beholden to the idea of ’leagues’, but do understand how SMV affects women’s attachment to you.
27. (17+) Practice makes confidence
Approach and open often. The more girls you talk to, the more you’ll refine your specific style and what works for you. Your Game success is directly proportional to your practice.
28. (13+) You cannot negotiate genuine desire
Don’t think doing nice things for girls (giving them flowers, valentines, carrying their books, etc.) will make them like you more. It won’t. Women will not rationally fall in love with you because you provide some material value. Obligation is not desire.
29. (13+) Adolescence sucks
You will likely be filled with insecurities, you’ll be self-conscious, you’ll think you look like a goof, you’ll say dumb things to girls and then obsess about it. It’s only temporary… You’re learning and practicing the skills to be a man and there will be failures and mistakes. Always remember that everyone of your peers is going through the exact same thing, but you have the benefit of a Red Pill father.
30. (17+) Life is risk
Push boundaries, take risks and be exciting… Even when you’re scared shitless. There’s nothing sexier to a woman than a man who is unafraid to embrace challenges.
31. (15+) Respect is earned, but respect is all with women
The minute a girl disrespects you call her on it. And if she continues to disrespect you “next” her immediately no matter how emotionally difficult it is. This is absolutely critical to build your long term self-respect/self-confidence.
Admittedly, this isn’t an exhaustive list, but it is an actionable start.
If you cannot teach your son positive masculinity from a Red Pill perspective, rest assured, the Feminine Imperative and a fem-centric world will teach him its version of masculinity. This is a version that will convince him any aspect of masculinity that isn’t directly benefiting the Feminine Imperative is “toxic” masculinity. It will teach him that any definition of masculinity that is a benefit to himself or places his interests above that of women is a detriment to society.
Blue Pill conditioning will teach him to despise being male and to mock conventional masculinity as an act, a facade, that hides men’s real insecurities. That the egalitarian equalist ideology has promoted this notion for the youngest boys isn’t really an issue — the very fact that western(izing) educational systems have opted for learning methods that favor a feminine-correct basis is something even liberal academics have a hard time arguing against. What is at issue is why and how this pacified, feminized and feminine-correct idea of masculinity should need to be validated as the real, genuine, definition of masculinity in young boys.
At no time in history has it been more advantageous to be a woman in western cultures. Author Hannah Rosin acknowledged the advancement of women at the expense of men in her book The End of Men as far back as 2010. I add this here because it outlines the degree to which society has opted for the betterment of girls and women, while simultaneously affirming the idea that men and boys ought to become more feminine since the time of the sexual revolution.
Since this time there has been an effort in social engineering not just to feminize boys and men, but to fundamentally, and fluidly, redefine ’genuine’ masculinity as a feminine-correct ideology. Ostensibly, egalitarianism has been about gender neutrality; a leveling of the playing field that ignores the inconveniences of human nature and evolved biology and psychology. The truth is that the Feminine Imperative uses the cover story of egalitarianism while it attempts to geld conventional masculinity by defining anything inconvenient about male nature as “toxic”.
Is it mere coincidence that men have been encouraged to “get in touch with their feminine side”, to identify more like, and as, women? To alter their ways of communication to be more female-accommodating, and to redefine conventional masculinity as “toxic” while reinforcing a new feminine-correct definition of masculinity for men?
Is it coincidence that 90% of all transgender children are boys being encouraged and affirmed by their parents and teachers to switch to being girls? And is all of this coincidence in an era when the social condition is one that provides benefits and entitlements to girls; one in which teachers presume a feminine-correct bias in their teaching methods? This of course is all speculative, but these are unignorable observations about our feminine-primary social order. I believe that the Red Pill men of today will be in the perfect position to exploit this, or to inform the next generations of men how to exploit this shift for themselves.
At present, boys drop out of school, are diagnosed as emotionally disturbed, and commit suicide at four times the rate of girls. They get into fights twice as often, murder ten times more frequently and are fifteen times more likely to be the victims of a violent crime. Boys are diagnosed with Attention Deficit Disorder at six times the rate of girls, Boys get lower grades on standardized tests of reading and writing, and have lower class rank and fewer honors than girls.
At universities women now constitute the majority of students, having surpassed men in 1982. In the next eight years women are predicted to earn almost 60% of bachelor’s degrees in U.S. colleges. Women now outnumber men in the social and behavioral sciences by about 3 to 1, and they’ve moved into such traditionally male fields as engineering (making up 20 percent of all students) and biology and business.
Elementary schools have been ’anti-boy’ for several decades now, emphasizing reading, communicative feminine learning styles and restricting the movements of young boys. They feminize boys, forcing active, healthy, and naturally rambunctious boys to conform to a regime of feminine-correct obedience and pathologizing what is simply normal for boys. As psychologist Michael Gurian argues in The Wonder of Boys, despite the testosterone surging through their limbs, we demand that boys sit still, raise their hands, and take naps. We’re giving them the message, he says, that “boyhood is defective.”
In The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine I outlined the institution of socialization classes wherein 9 year old boys were asked to list all of the reasons they dislike being boys:
· Not being able to be a mother
· Not supposed to cry
· Not allowed to be a cheerleader
· Supposed to do all the work
· Supposed to like violence
· Supposed to play football
· Boys smell bad
· Having an automatic bad reputation
· Grow hair everywhere
It used to surprise me how young boys knew exactly the right feminine-centric terminology when asked how they ought to deal with girls. Not anymore. I’ve had boys as young as ten rattle off buzz words and catch-phrases I would expect from a women’s studies major whenever I’ve asked them what they think of girls or some intergender situation. Each of these boys was eager at the opportunity to ’prove his worth’ to any girl in earshot by parroting the mantras of the Feminine Imperative he’d learned in school.
However, this eagerness was always tempered with a hint of fear; fear that, as young as ten, he might slip up in relating ’his beliefs’ about women and be perceived as a misogynist. And that is the word they’ll use. Blue Pill conditioning of boys begins from a very early age. I get asked constantly what exactly constitutes a “Blue Pill” conditioned mindset by my critics, this training for gender loathing is why it’s such a arduous task to explain it.
Part of the feminine-primary social re-engineering western cultures have endured for over sixty years now is raising generations of boys to hate conventional masculinity. At the same time those cultures’ educational charter has been one of empowering girls at the expense of boys. Thus, we have largely female (or feminized male) teachers molding the minds of generations of boys to despise being male (who will become potentially despotic men) and simultaneously defer to the feminine.
This is the cultural narrative that you, as a father, must continually be vigilant of in raising your sons. This understanding needs to color every interaction and every teachable moment you have with him. I cannot emphasize this enough. While it’s important for you to embody, demonstrate and live out a Red Pill aware model for him, you must always recognize that your example will be exactly the opposite of what he’s being taught is the feminine-correct model in school, not only by his teachers, but by his feminine-identifying peers.
The basis of all the feminine-correct messaging your boy will be fed is founded on the idea that emotion and emotiveness are the only legitimate way of communicating. As I mentioned earlier, he will be conditioned to believe that the more he concerns himself with expressing his emotions the better a boy he will be viewed as in the hopes that this carries into his adulthood. It’s gotten to a point where boys’ natural competitiveness creates a competition among them to ’outemote’ one another.
The counter to this is a necessary step on the part of fathers to teach their sons emotional control. Ironically though, a father teaching his son to contain and reserve his emotionalism constitutes the other half of the conflicting messages boys are conditioned to think is fundamentally wrong with them. Boys are sedated by any number of methods (drugs, behavioral modifications, etc.) to get them to contain their natural masculine energies, yet are encouraged by their feminization to be more emotive, to cry more, to roll over and be more vulnerable and to believe that is strength. This is masculinity defined by the feminine.
As a Red Pill father it’s your duty to teach him that vulnerability and expressions of insecurity or weakness are not a well of strength. Instead you must encourage your sons to develop real inner strength of both mind and body and to acknowledge it as such despite a world arrayed against them doing so. They need to understand that withholding feelings and controlling their emotive states are security measures that have preserved men for millennia. They need to know that true, conventional masculinity is derived from inner strength and resolve.
Red Pill fathers must stay media literate and make constant efforts to understand just how boys and men are portrayed as ridiculous or moronic, while simultaneously aggrandizing women and the feminine. Your boys need to develop their own Red Pill Lenses through which they will instinctually filter the feminine narrative. When a boy sees an ad or a TV show in which negative male stereotypes are present, make sure you point it out. When they see media that inflates the feminine narrative as being the only correct one, point it out to them too.
Teach them that there is more to men than what the feminine narrative wants him to believe. Teach him that everything he sees around him was conceived, designed and manufactured by men with creative, intellectual and physical strengths. Discuss famous men who have done, and are doing, important things — that should include athletic accomplishments as well as men who are examples of intellectual, strategic and creative achievements.
Engage him with questions about the differences between boys and girls, and men and women. Illustrate for him examples of how men and women differ in their thinking, their manner of solving problems and how girls manipulate boys to do things for them. Make sure your son knows the consequences of making girls his highest priority. Teach him that respect is earned and never granted without merit for either men or women — there is no default respect for women.
Teach your boy to fight and to know when it is appropriate to use force to defend himself. This is tough for many Beta fathers striving to raise their boys in a Red Pill paradigm. Most Beta men are conditioned to believe that masculinity is equated with a potential for unsolicited violence. Most Beta men are confrontation averse. If you don’t know how to fight, learn a martial art with your boy. It’s an excellent example of doing something male-specific and you both learn together. This also illustrates a man’s willingness to submit to the experience of a master in order to become a master himself.
Mental Point of Origin
Let your son know he is to make himself his mental point of origin. This is perhaps the most important lesson you can impart to a boy in an era when he will be debased for just being male. Endowing him with the bearing of putting himself first is one of the most vital gifts you can leave to your son.
For some Fathers it may seem like a good idea to insulate your son from a world that is determined to condition him to what the Feminine Imperative would make of him, but it’s far healthier to arm him with his own sense of enlightened self-interest. His feminine-centric world will make every effort to convince him to put the needs of “others” (really women and female interests) before himself, but he needs to know that he cannot help anyone until he first helps himself.
This deference to others is a key component in the conditioning that the Village would have him internalize. It is the central part of feminization’s push to have his mental point of origin be extrinsic, if any thought is ever given to his own wellbeing. But more importantly, it is determined to have him internalize the idea that emoting like a female and considering girls’ needs before his own is the correct, rewarded, first thought he should have in any gender-specific exchange.
This isn’t to say a Red Pill father should encourage sociopathy in his son, but that his own wellbeing and his own interests need to be the first thought that originates in his mind. The Blue Pill mindset always jumps to binary extremes, thus, the criticized fear is that encouraging enlightened self-interest in a boy will lead to Dark Triad personality traits in him later in life. However, he should know that teamwork and cooperation, while valuable in his male world, need to pass through the filter of his self-centric mental point of origin.
Men face challenges in order to feel that men we respect hold us in the same esteem. It happens wordlessly. The sense of what is expected of us in these situations, and of what our choices mean arises naturally for us. So many men who struggle with shame do so because they know they have failed these tests more often than they have passed them.
This dynamic is lost on most people. Feminists and the culture they have influenced generally portray this aspect of masculine nature as pure foolishness; the stupid attempt of overgrown boys to “out-macho” one another. The male need to face challenges and to feel acceptance in a band of brothers, a tribe, who have also faced them ’valiantly’ is derided in popular culture, in schools and in pop psychology.
Many young boys are confused by these messages. They suffer needlessly because their inner desires for respect and a sense of purpose conflicts with their social conditioning. The nature of a boy inclines toward bravery, risk and a desire to control his surroundings, but his teachers praise weakness and call cowardice good. His feminine-correct teachers seek what women primarily seek in the long term, security, safety and regulable stability. This is what they hope to condition your son for — to suppress that natural risk-taking and replace it with placating to the cause of providing women a sustainable sense of security.
The result is young men who either shrink from every challenge and seek to retreat from life behind a wall of video games, junk food and porn, or those who act out their natural inclinations through all manner of dissipation and base self indulgence. We end up a society where men are divided into cowering, compliant sheep or callous, untutored boy-men driven by testosterone and an unending quest for making their burden of performance entirely about qualifying for the approval of women..
Without a culture of mature, conventional masculinity to train boys’ inner instincts, things fall apart. This is just another way that feminine-instituted fatherlessness drags civilization toward its destruction. It’s a self-perpetuating process — Blue Pill conditioned boys become the Blue Pill compliant fathers who became disenfranchised with the exploitative roles they were raised to believe were correct. Fatherlessness then becomes a social mandate by a societal order that believes fathers are superfluous.
A society with a chance of survival supports, rather than targets for destruction, organizations like the Boy Scouts. Such groups train boys’ desires for respect and recognition by placing them under the watchful eye of mature men who keep them from undue danger, give them a model toward which to aspire, and a troop of brothers.
But this is too ’toxic’ now. Men banning together in male-exclusionary tribes is far too risky for a feminine social order. Those old groups are practically gone now. Either that or the integrity of those male-spaces has been redefined. In their place, we have transgender day camps for boys, a million Snapchat stories and gender -neutral bathrooms. The Boy Scouts have become an object illustration in how the Feminine Imperative recreates male-space to better effect weakening conventional masculinity. We have decided the trade off was worth it.
We are left with the illusion of freedom and a pervasive sense of some unavoidable decline. We all tremble to behold the boys we have made, boys deliberately confused about their natures, anxious about belonging, and unable to join or even understand that company of conventional men upon whom the future so desperately depends.
Despite all of this social conditioning, despite all of the interests that would condemn you for even considering raising a boy in a Red Pill manner, remember this, for all of it there is a root level hunger for a positively masculine father.
One of the first preconception we have about strippers or ’damaged’ women is that they have “daddy issues.” We presume the root cause of a woman’s personal problems lies in some deep hunger for a father that never fit the mental model her evolved unconscious mind wanted for her life. “Fatherless” young men bear a similar ’damage’.
Once the deep longing for a father takes root, the ache never goes away. Instead of disappearing, it goes underground, often so deeply we don’t recognize it for what it is. The desire for a father, for a steady masculine presence to guide and anchor boys and girls masquerades these days as numerous other maladies:
social anxiety, anger, purposelessness, and emptiness.
But, our culture makes it easier to talk about anxiety than about father hunger. Fathers are considered disposable or ancillary to the child rearing process. To admit we suffer from their absence would be to challenge the cultural narrative of equalism and to have oneself branded a traitor to the consensus. So, we keep quiet and compound our sullen anxieties with the shame of knowing deep in our hearts we long for the archetype of a conventional Dad. Take the effects of father hunger on a personal level: the directionlessness and weakness in men and, in women, the desperation, the fear, the pitiful, never-ending search for affirmation and multiply them by millions. This is where we are now.
General cultural attitudes toward fathers that veer between indifference and open hostility. It magnifies these personal problems and makes them pervasive cultural threats. Fatherlessness is an easy foil for social ills, but masculinity and men’s unique influence is always suspect. It’s always one degree away from ’toxic’.
When an individual kid losses his father, he suffers, his spouse may suffer, his own future children might. But, if he lives in a culture that recognizes the inherent goodness of fatherhood and fathers’ necessary contribution to his development, he may be able to find a surrogate — a mentor.
Not so now. Father hunger and its consequences are now so widespread we take it to be normal. At the bottom of our many of our social ills lies the hunger for a father who has been displaced by the state or by other the proxy of the Village. That father has been supplanted by the attacks against him launched by a thousand feminists in the name of the Feminine Imperative and amplified by every media production of the last fifty years and by the decision to make divorce easy, expected and grossly beneficial to a mother.
All this makes the importance of what fathers do even more important. For those of us who still have young children, we must not be persuaded by Village culture to doubt our own importance. Instead, we must double down on our commitment to do our duties. We must be there in the knowledge that we are not superfluous and our mere presence satisfies.
If you aren’t a father, even your Red Pill aware mentorship of young men is supremely valuable and needed. Look for opportunities to educate young men. An intentional dedication to mentoring young men in Red Pill awareness is admirable, but even just a casual involvement goes a long way. It is only by your involvement that young men’s Blue Pill conditioning can be interrupted.
We cannot father a whole world. The damage is done. Generations without fathers are now ascendant and their hunger for conventional, positive masculinity will drive civilization down if we neglect to act. The best we can do is set the example, refuse to compromise, keep on doing what fathers have always done: provide, educate and protect in a collapsing world.
There is much from which we must protect those in our charge. A fatherless world is a dangerous one. But, in the middle of this dangerous, dying world, we can cultivate pockets of healing and resistance. This is part of the bottom-up approach needed for Red Pill awareness on a societal level.
When we can, we can reach out. We can be a Red Pill mentor, a friend. At the very least, we can tell people that fathers are good and our hunger for them is real. We can be the shoes thrown into the machinery of the feminine-primary social order. We cannot save them all, but we can save some.
I once had a 25 year old guy relate to me about how disappointed he was with himself. He’d gotten together with a new girlfriend, made a commitment of exclusive monogamy, and had all the noble intents most Betas assume when they enter that form of quasi-marriage.
His problem was he’d had a ’fuck buddy’ for some months prior to his ’legitimately’ dating his now girlfriend and regrettably had to cut her out of his life. The ’friend with benefits’ was upset as most usually become when presented with losing the investment of all those sexual encounters unencumbered with little or no emotional rewards. The guy was determined to honor his arrangement with the new girlfriend, but the fuck buddy persisted and became more emotionally invested until they settled upon a ’just be friends’ solution to their prior intimacy.
After a week the guy had doubts about the girlfriend and since he and the fuck buddy are ’still friends’ they got together to discuss said doubts. Needless to say this discussion then led to comfortable, reliable, “sure thing” sex with the former fuck buddy and now we come to the regret and disappointment he feels about himself. One might think that this is a simple case of a 25 year old sorting out what works for him sexually and his struggling with monogamy in the light of having other actionable options, but his disappointment didn’t originate in this.
“I feel like a piece of shit because I promised myself over ten years ago I would never do this. I broke my only promise to myself that I always stuck with.”
I found it interesting that a, then fifteen year old, boy would have the prescience to make some vow of fidelity to a future girlfriend (or wife) to himself. For obvious reasons he didn’t strike me as particularly religious — he didn’t have a ’promise ring’ on either for that matter. So what was it?
“I can pick up girls and bed them with no problem, but when it comes to relationships, I’m lost completely. And yes I do feel like something is missing with my current girlfriend.”
This explains part of it. Alpha while single, Beta when monogamous is a very common theme for the feminized, preconditioned youth of today. And of course in light of having (and having had) other sexual options that Alpha-when-single / Beta-when-monogamous conflict about a girlfriend is to be expected, but that still didn’t explain the self-promise or the disappointment adequately.
“I felt like a piece of shit. Over ten years ago when my Dad cheated on my mom, I promised myself I would never be like my father and cheat.
I never cheated ever, until tonight. I feel numb, confused, and don’t know what to do.”
Slay the Father
One common theme I’ve encountered amongst the more zealous Beta White Knights I’ve counseled over the years has been exactly this obsessive determination with outdoing the life / relationship performance of their asshole fathers.
Before I go on, many of these guys did in fact have legitimately rotten, alcoholic dads, who were abusive to them and their mothers. Others had the perception of their fathers colored for them either by the bad mouthing of their ’Strong Independent®’ single mothers, or by watching their fathers resolve their own Beta mindsets and tendencies in a post-divorce life.
Whatever the case, each of these guys had a mission — to be a better man than their father was, protect their mothers, and by extension victimized women and the future mother their girlfriends and wives would become for them. His father’s personal failings would be his personal triumphs.
The problem in this modern day Oedipus scenario is that the Feminine Imperative is more than happy to use this promise to its universal social advantage.
Feminization and its Blue Pill conditioning of boys to create better “men” is defined by how well that “man” is acceptable to a feminine-primary culture. Thus, we get gender blurring and boys are taught to pee sitting down by single mothers because “your asshole dad always made a mess and left the lid up.” Better ’men’, uniquely feminine-acceptable men, pee like women.
Now, that’s just an allegory of the mindset behind women raising future men solo, but the father-hating boy becomes the masculine-hating adult Beta male. Feminine social conditioning of boys is cruel to be sure, but nothing cements that conditioning in better than having a living example of the role of what a man is not to be and then committing your life to not becoming it. And as I stated earlier, those considerations may be legitimate, but the end result is the same; a Beta who thinks women will categorically appreciate his devotion to identifying with the feminine by his promise not to become like “typical men” — like his asshole dad.
This is an extension of the Blue Pill presumption that women will view him as unique amongst other men for being so well adapted to identify with the feminine. And, it follows, the majority of women, who care more about dominant Alpha characteristics, have no appreciation for his ’promise to be a better man’ then become “low quality” common women to him. Shoot the arrow, paint the target around it.
This is the root of the conflict the guy in my example was experiencing. He’s likely coming into a more mature understanding of what his father experienced with his mother and women in general, but it’s clashing with that adolescent declaration of devoting himself to what he believed, and what his conditioning taught him, ought to be his imperative.
“If I’m a better man than dad I’ll be deserving of love the way I envision it.
I’ll be appreciated and hypergamy will be inconsequential due to the equity I’ll invest in our relationship.”
Only at 25, he progressively finds that he is just as human, and just as male, as his father was.
Unsurprisingly this is one very tough psychological schema to dig out of a Beta who’s invested his ego in it for so long. Even when he experiences first-hand the trauma of realizing that women aren’t the way he’s always believed they would be, and despite Red Pill awareness, this ’promise to be better’ persists. Layer onto this the social reinforcement of the ridiculous / reprehensible male archetype, then compound it with either his mother’s vulnerability, popularized ideas of female victimhood, or her consistently negative characterization of his asshole father, and you have a recipe for a permanent Blue Pill existence.
That said, it’s not impossible to unplug ’promise keepers’ with enough harsh, experiential reality to awaken them out of their adolescent paradigms. Making them aware is the toughest task, but introspect on their own part is the next step.
It’s very important to recount the ways ’bad dad’, and a child’s reaction to him, has directed and influenced their interactions with women (or men in the case of girls). It is a supremely uncomfortable epiphany for ’promise keepers’ to realize that Mom is just as common as the women rejecting him, who are helping him realize his adolescent presumptions were naive. Most ’promise keepers’ get shaken awake by two sources: the consistently incongruous behavior-to-stated-motivations by women, or by his own internal struggle with keeping his promise in the face of what he can’t quite place is what’s in his best sexual interests.
Father Knows Best
I received a request from a father petitioning me for advice on how a Red Pill divorced father might best go about re-initiating a relationship with his estranged son. I thought this might be valuable here for the Red Pill parent.
How a might a newly Red Pill divorced father approach his son, especially if there has been a period of estrangement?
I have a “date” for a phone call with my son after quite a long period. You might imagine my relationship with my “old family” is sort of “interesting”, to put it euphemistically. My daughter has dropped my last name from social media accounts. My son calls himself “Younger Surname” and his assumed “middle name” is “Fucking”. Sort of a throwback to mine back in the day, but he seems quite pissed though.
I have been told these things can be quite emotional, and then a flurry of contact, but then a “backsliding” away from contact. Inevitably and probably rightfully so, he has innate loyalty to his mother. And he grew up in one of places that is so liberal it is often referred to as “The People’s Republic of …” So the question is “How to bring him along?”
If by “bring him along” it means convince him you’re not the asshole he’s convinced you are, that’s really subjective to your personal history and how amenable he is to listening to your side of the story. That said, there’s a world aligned against you that’s likely conditioned your son not just to hate you, but to loath his own sex by association with your past decisions and circumstances.
This then begs the question, how does a father go about reestablishing a lost or misguided connection with a son or daughter, from a post-Red Pill awareness perspective?
Being the father in this scenario and attempting to reestablish an after-the-fact, positive connection with a son is a very tall order. It’s almost easier to address the particulars of a daughter with ’daddy issues’ whose absent father contributed to her ’victim status’ condition than it is to right the corrupted upbringing and feminine conditioning a boy receives in his father’s relative absence.
The difficulty being that a son will have every negative perception of his father reinforced for him by a feminine-primary social order. Even in the rare instances when an insightful mother doesn’t resentfully color her son’s negative perceptions of his father during his formative years, there is an entire world of feminine social conventions and popular culture pressing and affirming that impression into him.
Furthermore, it’s also likely your feminine-conditioned son will see the utility in playing along with that ’victim-of-dad’s-misogyny’ narrative as a way to highlight his Beta Game. The idea being he will believe women should find him overcoming your failure as some source of attraction for girls/women. It’s sort of a ’better hope for the future of women’ narrative he mistakenly thinks will make him unique in the view of women.
It’s a difficult task to unplug a man who is a friend and open his eyes to Red Pill awareness. That guy has to be seeking answers to really be open to having his ego-investments in his conditioning challenged and realigned — you can’t really make a man Red Pill aware, he’s got to come to it in some fashion. This is a very important distinction to make when the man you’re attempting to unplug is your own son.
A father in this predicament has the double jeopardy of clearing his name as a father and as a representative of masculinity — the representation of all the negative aspects the Feminine Imperative has ever embedded into his son about the taint of his own masculinity. Some of the most ardent anti-conventional-masculinity crusaders I’ve ever encountered all had the common denominator of a ’bad dad’. ’Deadbeat mothers’ don’t spoil conventional femininity for men.
One of the more painful aspects of waking up and accepting Red Pill truths is coming to terms with the consequences of basing your past decisions on a Blue Pill paradigm. I can empathize with younger unplugged Betas getting angry with themselves for having wasted part of their lives with the effort of chasing after the carrot of Blue Pill goals, but it’s an entirely different anger older men feel after coming to realize that their lives and the lives of their children (the only reason to get married, remember?) are the results of their Blue Pill decision making.
This is doubly so for the Red Pill awakened father since part of his Blue Pill disillusionments meant coming to accept that his children’s personalities and their own Blue Pill choices are a direct or indirect result of his own Blue Pill idealism.
Fortunately I had my Red Pill awakening prior to my daughter being born and had the foresight to live by example. However, I know enough men in similar straights to see what an impossible task it is to untangle and reconcile the past Blue Pill version of themselves with the Red Pill aware men they’ve become.
I do not envy them.
So what is the solution then? The first step is coming to terms with the task that’s been set before you as I’ve done here. These are some things to consider before you set out to make your son’s unplugging a mission for your life.
I hate to come off as callous from the start here, but it’s entirely possible that your son, nephew, younger brother, etc. may simply be too far gone. One of the Rational Male’s maxims is that unplugging men from the Matrix is like triage; save the ones you can, read last rites to the dying. What’s important in this assessment is that you use your Red Pill lens as objectively as possible. That will require an almost clinical evaluation of your family member, and one that’s particularly difficult because it forces you to set aside all of your emotional investment in him.
This is a very tall order for most men and more than a few have found themselves compromising in areas of Red Pill awareness in an effort to placate a very Blue Pill invested son they desperately want a new connections with. Be hyper-conscious of the pitfalls I mentioned above in this section, and make your clinical assessment accordingly.
Is your son (male relative) too far gone already? Is his estimate of your character an accurate one in light of what his mother, his school, his sister(s), popular culture and more importantly, the girls he wants to get with have conditioned him to believe about you? Remember, you’re not just fighting his preconceptions, you’re fighting a social order that needs you to neatly fit into its archetype of your kind of man.
There are a few angles you need to consider when you plan an approach with your estranged son. This starts with doing an accurate assessment of yourself with regard to how popular conception of your type of guy is perceived.
Are you the asshole father who left mom to get with some ’arm candy’ trophy wife? That’s a popular cultural meme. It’s one that’s an exaggerated distortion, but a popular one because it feeds women’s innate need for indignation. For the moment, it makes little difference if it’s accurate or not, what’s important is that you understand that’s how you are perceived by your son according to what fem-centric culture has fed him.
Are you the ’nice’ accommodating, let-everything-slide Blue Pill kind of father who never had Frame (or even knew what it was when you got their mother pregnant)? Are you the guy who bought into the egalitarian-equalist belief that it was no man’s ’right’ to presume he ought to be dominant or be concerned with his own interests? Are you the type of father who deferred to the mother of his kid’s will and as a result she assumed the dominant masculine role because ’bumbling Dad’ could never be trusted with the family’s security?
Are you the father who never put himself as his mental point of origin and only later became Red Pill aware? This is almost a more difficult position to be in than the Asshole Dad because you’re attempting to recreate your Beta impression of your character while simultaneously attempting to unplug your son with a Red Pill awareness that may be new and uncharacteristic to you.
While I cannot give you a specific recipe or map to follow for your individual situation, I can give you some important things to consider before you make your attempt. I should add here that these are equally important to acknowledge when you’re re-establishing a connection with your daughter there are some differences in approach for daughters — I’ll mention these in a bit.
· Assess your previous Blue Pill impression you held with your son/daughter, their mother, your extended family (her and your sisters, mothers, fathers, close friends, etc.) and consider that impression based on what you understand from a Red Pill aware perspective.
· Assess your son’s acculturation in the same Blue Pill conditioning you had to unplug yourself from. Consider how his mother’s influence (bad and good), his schools, his friend, the music and media he’s into and the girls he hopes to impress have created his persona.
· Assess how resistant he will be to your implementing some sort of reconnection effort based on what your Red Pill awareness would have you reasonably predict. If you’re the Asshole Dad and he’s the Beta nice kid, or he’s bought into a Promise Keepers’ mentality this will require a different approach than if you’re perceived as the weak Beta Dad who’s establishing himself as a Red Pill assertive father.
· Did you have Frame when you were involved with your son’s mother? If so, did that Frame slip while you were together or is it still a part of the personality your son expects from you now? Consider how your son has been trained to perceive his own masculinity both as a result of your (strong or poor) example as well as how feminine primary society has distorted and confused him about it. These will be the things you’ll be up against when you try to reconnect.
· Is your son amenable to reconsidering your recreated persona? It’s likely your son’s concept of masculinity was molded by his mother’s false interpretation of a masculine ideal, which is to say a feminine-correct ideal. Thus, his conditioning centered on identifying with, and appeasing of, women. As such, your conventional, complementary, masculinity is likely to be offensive to his trained sensibilities.
· Would a covert, understated approach over time be better than an overt, blunt declaration of your intent? It comes down to your persona, but which would be more believable in conveying your Red Pill awareness?
These are a few things to consider before devising a time and a way to reconnect with your boy. I should also say that these are considerations a father ought to take into account before he attempts something similar with a daughter. In the case of daughters I would also advise considering much of the same Game foundations with the associated principles you would when dealing with women in general.
Most fathers with sons, assholes or not, will be disappointing to them in some (or many) ways at some point. Not to downplay the difficulty, or the headwind of the Feminine Imperative, or the divorce toll, but I’d do my best to see this as an opportunity for both of you. Which isn’t to say it is all pleasant or nice even. You still have each other and it is a significant event for an estranged father to have his time to present his side of things while, hopefully, educating his son in Red Pill awareness.
As with most ’unplugging’ it is likely that your son’s most receptive moment will be when he’s hurting from some woman’s rejection of him. It’s a bitter pill to swallow for a father to see his son suffer for the same Blue Pill misgivings (or outright exploitations) he endured himself — particularly if the consequences were also what led to his son’s birth.
The Prodigal Son
A Red Pill father should always be sensitive to moments of opportunity like this. Often it’s a personal trauma that leads men to seek out the Red Pill community, even if they don’t know they’re actually looking for it. This seems horribly opportunistic for Red Pill men, but it’s the experience of that personal trauma that breaks up a Blue Pill man’s comfortable, normal, ego-investment in what he expects will be rewarded or punished in a feminine-primary social order.
Learn to see these signs in men (your son) you think may be ready to hear Red Pill truths, but more so, be ready to be there for your boy when this trauma shakes his comfortable preconceptions. This will make your story and Red Pill awareness that much more poignant for him. This could be your teenage son reeling from having his soul-mate girlfriend dump him for a new college lover during what I call the Break Phase in Preventive Medicine. It could also be that your young adult son is stinging from a similar disillusionment from a woman who’d used him as a useful Beta to get what she needed at a particular phase in her maturity.
A very common situation is a young adult having his ideal of Relational Equity destroyed for him by a woman in which he believed he’d done everything the right way and played by the set of rules he believed women would universally appreciate and universally reward.
His invested equity is based on how well he believes he’s doing what women have always told him would be valued (i.e. equity) only then to have Hypergamy destroy that notion for him. It’s at this time a young man might seek out his father’s perspective, particularly if something similar happened to him.
As a Red Pill father it is important to be prepared for these occasions. They make the reconnection you hope for, as well as your hope for opening his eyes to the Red Pill, that much easier. They’re sure to be stressful times, but see them for the opportunity they are.
One of my regular readers of The Rational Male blog related a very inspiring reconnection story that I simply cannot omit from this section.
My dad passed before we could ever have these conversations. He was a self-made man; solid granite. But through the years of Feminine Imperative driven hailstorms and my bipolar mom, with hammer and chisel, I watched him become a crumbling statue of his former self, a draft horse whose only pleasure was sneaking into the basement to watch TV.
He was no asshole. But I held some anger in me over him — for him; his lack of spine, his constant laboring to serve the female needs, his complete lack of self-regard. He was a true giver. But it was painful to watch his gifts just send him further into oblivion. Together, he and mom, passed it on to me. I was to be respectful, full of character, “nice”, but never aggressive, never flexing my strengths unfairly. Blue. So Blue. And so, of course, I became that pain.
Before he died (I was 30) when I would visit, we would sequester ourselves in the work shed to build. He wanted to tell me things, I wanted to ask him things, neither of us finding the words. I was moments before being divorced and he was moments before the beyond. It was too late for both of us.
But we spoke some through our bodies, hands turning the wood this way or that; our conversations would follow, circuitous arcs and tangents cut from linear minds. The words eventually began to hold some shape. The lathe was setting loose years of unspoken things, along with long curls of pine gathering at our feet.
He insisted that I cut, not waning to admit that his hands were already too weak. I let him tell me how; instructing me in the same way he did 20 years back when I’d first checked out on the machine. Those words that annoyed the living shit out of me back then were welcomed. “Jeeze, I know dad!!” became “Oh, I forgot about that trick, thanks.”
He always wanted me to be a better man than him. I always wanted him to be better man for him. No, for me too. I wanted him to be the rock not the puppet. It’s not just women who feel unease at seeing a man not hold his ground; it is also future men. But beneath the crushing weight of that much Blue Pill conditioning, those conversations are just bubbles rising up.
There was no Red Pill wisdom that day or any that followed. There was an understanding though. A beginning. For me, it would take more time. More pain. But I was on my way to becoming some version of him, a lot closer to the one that I always wanted him to be. He saw it in me. And in so many words, that was his gift to me that day.
Now, RP aware, I both understand his choices as well as my own. For me, a lot of it is about the principle of giving of self; it can be both beautiful and destructive. We need fathers to tell sons these things, these words that give steerage to navigate past the treachery and on to the joy that awaits them.
A boy becoming a man will likely hold ill feelings for his father for some reason, for some time. Better it be for truth, the hard lessons leading to workable skills, the tough conversations that unbind manhood from the Feminine Imperative, and those small moments together that will feed his soul when you are long gone and he is looking at his future — or holding it in his arms. Be that kind of asshole.
Learning the “right” way to cut wood will result in some splinters, but removing splinters is not nearly as painful as a lifetime of never truly knowing how the machine works.
This story is part of why it’s so important to maintain yourself as a Red Pill aware man and father, unafraid and unapologetic to the feminine-correct social paradigm that’s prevalent today. The narrative of the Feminine Imperative, the Village that is so ready to emasculate your sons, will see this as some open communication touchy-feely moment that reinforces their religion of emotions, but what this should serve as is a stark reminder of what happens because of the machinations of the Feminine Imperative. This is a warning, not a heart-felt moment of reflection between father and son, a warning of what awaits fathers who never unplug and sons who follow in his feminine-correct path.
Just to start, try to engage your son in comfortable, non-emotional events. Remember, women talk, men do, so have a common purpose prearranged to complete. It’s likely he may be uncomfortable ’doing’ because he has no concept of conventional masculinity, he may even ridicule it. Be prepared for that.
Don’t mention his mother. That should serve to provide some contrast between her influence and your own. He needs to see, to experience, how a man behaves, and men should be able to move on and make the best of things without harboring enfeebling resentment.
I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention referring your son to the manosphere or reading my prior books, but do so only if you believe he’s at a point of being receptive to what I or other Red Pill authors might open his eyes to. Introducing him to the manosphere prematurely will only reinforce his previous mis-perceptions of you and genuine masculinity. It’s better if his unplugging comes from you.
Be patient, wait it out and keep the door open. Don’t play Daddy with him if you’ve never been a significant influence in his life up to this point. You’re not his father. The Feminine Imperative is his father and has plans for him to fulfill.
This is the an important part to understand.
If at all possible do not talk things out over the phone. In my opinion the phone, texts, emails are all a buffer against real personal rejection and a terrible medium for serious conversations. Any hope of rebuilding your relationship with your son will have to be face to face, over a period of years. Demonstrate, do not explicate. Actions speak louder than words, like with a woman, you’ll never convince her why she should be with you through debate or explaining yourself adequately. You show you’re a man worth being with, as well as respecting by your character, achievements and accompanying behaviors.
There is a related issue to consider in all of this too. It’s known as Parental Alienation that is also well informed by the Feminine Imperative. It’s how father’s who don’t abandon their children and meet their financial responsibilities have their parenting role whittled away over the years down to nothing. The short story is that if your ex-wife remarries when your kids are young, the new guy will functionally be their Dad.
Essentially, the new guy is treated like Dad when you aren’t around, but when you are this fact is often hidden. This is another important consideration since in many instances you’re dealing with the mindset and temperament of the stepfather and the influences this embeds in your son or daughter’s persona as they mature into adulthood.
If you’re dealing with a Beta stepfather you may be tempted to think that your task of reconnection might be that much easier from a Red Pill perspective, but unless your kids are more enamored by your Red Pill cavalier spirit it’s likely both he and your kids’ mother will have doubly reinforced a Blue Pill, feminine primary belief-set in them. Needless to say, this can make your reconnection a tougher go if you’re trying to unplug your son from their Matrix.
Oddly though, if your task is to reconnect with your daughter this Beta stepfather dynamic can work to your benefit. Most estranged daughters will be looking for that positive masculine dominance that their Hypergamy demands. On some level of consciousness her hind-brain understands that Beta Step-Dad is a less than Hypergamously optimal model of masculinity.
Even the most ardent feminists and thoroughly indoctrinated girls still pine for the dominant masculine authority that they’d hoped their fathers would be. Providing this contrast for her against the role of the emasculated Beta stepfather and your reconnection will likely be easier.
Live the Red Pill for Your Son
A divorced father can also help his young son by becoming a more Alpha and masculine leader in his own life as an example, live a social life that his son would like to emulate, and invite his son into that life. Put plainly, that dad gets a younger/hotter/nicer girlfriend or step-mom, by acting like a Man. Let your son bond with her, see how nice she is, and transfer some of his attachment and interest as a “love object” onto her. As I always say, demonstrate, do not explicate. You need to demonstrate the possible for him.
The Oedipal Complex might reset over this new woman. Without a verbal argument on the father’s part, the son will start comparing his own mother, or the Village women who’ve influenced him, to this new woman. Eventually, the son will desire whoever is more appealing and learn to pattern his life accordingly to attain that type of relationship. If the father is being conventionally masculine and creating a more desirable relationship, then the son will desire his new woman, emulate him to get something similar, successfully resolve the complex, and learn to be masculine himself.
Adopting a Red Pill awareness and internalizing it as a way of life is something that a man must come to of his own accord. If your relationships with women can serve as a contrast to the uglier side of the feminine-primacy he’s learned, coming to this ’on his own’ is made much easier.
Be a Mentor
Finally, I’ve got to advocate for Red Pill mentorship for boys who aren’t your sons. Casual, indirect mentoring is something I’ve been doing with young men for some time now. It may be you only have daughters or it may be you have sons, but their friends or other young men in your life would benefit greatly just from interacting with a Red Pill aware man as a role model. Embody this positive conventional masculinity and serve as a counterbalance to the Village indoctrination these young men are being taught.
For the guy who has internalized this awareness to the point that it’s become a way of life it may simply comes as a matter of course for you to exemplify it in your lifestyle, mannerisms and interactions with men and women. However, always remember that your attitudes and behaviors are what young men are interpreting against the backdrop of what they’re learning from the Feminine Imperative in school and in media. Your example, even with sons who are not your own, will serve as a contrast to his conditioning. You need to be aware
of this impression. In your absence, you will be talked about. You will occupy head-space of young men, young women and that of the Village women who would try to disparage your persona.
Whether you’re aware of it or not, you will serve as a mentor to young men. Far better to be conscious of this and understand your Red Pill effect. Do be careful, however, to understand the contrast you may provide with respect to that boy’s father’s impression on him. Statistically, that kid’s father is likely a Blue Pill conditioned Beta and / or an uninvolved (perhaps absent) father himself. Your impression maybe his only example of a positively, conventionally masculine man.
That’s going to be a stark contrast for a boy raised on Blue Pill ideals embodied by his father or those instilled in him by a single mother as well as that of the Village. Keep this in mind too. A Red Pill parent needs to counter the Village by being a Village to himself. This is an important task to remember; you may be able to invest yourself in your own sons’ development as men, but if you serve as other boys’ mentor, including them in the same Red Pill upbringing as your sons’, you serve as a Red Pill teacher for men beyond those you personally created.
Look for opportunities to mentor. That doesn’t mean you have to sign up to be a Boyscout troop leader, just look for the opportunities that present themselves.
When my daughter was about fifteen years old I got into a debate with an allegedly Red Pill wife/mother who was determined not just to home school her own daughters, but to only fund their college aspiration if they chose the local state university and lived at home while attending it. The “dorm life” experiences and online stories of alcohol-fueled orgies on campus played prominently in her fears, but more so, her hesitancy to cut the apron strings were about worries that her little darlings would have socialist/feminists/cultural Marxist ideologies implanted in their impressionable brains.
I found this interesting because her fears were founded on the presumption that her daughters would still default to being indoctrinated in all of the Village’s teachings despite all her carefully planned homeschooling intended to make them resistant to such influences. This is the same woman who meticulously screened and censored her girls’ exposure to the ’corrupting’ influence of the cultural narrative in various forms of media — TV, online, music, movies, etc. Yet, despite all of this concern, she still felt an almost obsessive need for control even when her daughters were well past the age of young adulthood. The fear was so great that she insisted she would not pay for, nor help pay for, any university tuition that was outside of the two or three in-state colleges she felt she could monitor her girls at.
Part of this was, ostensibly, motivated by the overly publicized ’rape culture’ (and the entirely debunked 1 in 4 women are raped on campus myth) she believed was so prevalent it required her parental supervision well into her girls’ adult years. The other part was a tacit acknowledgment of the behavior she’d engaged in herself while in college and her acknowledgment of the nature and predispositions of young women when allowed unfettered freedom to pursue them. There was an unspoken understanding that she knew what she herself had the capacity for, but in the post-millennial era she contrasted this with the lack of direction and lack of accountability for women.
Back when he had a terrestrial radio show, I remember talk-show personality Tom Leykis did a topic about this: He had everyday women call in and tell their stories of how they used to be sexually (i.e. slutty) and how they are now. He came up with this after driving past a grade school on his way to the studio and seeing all of the women there waiting for their kids to come out and wondered about what their lives used to be like in their childless 20s. This was a wildly popular topic and the confessions just poured in like all of these women had been waiting for years to come clean anonymously about the sexual past that their husbands would never dream they were capable of. Each of these women sounded proud of themselves, almost nostalgic, as if they were some kind of past accomplishments.
Mothers today know what their daughters are positioning themselves for in their young adult years because, often enough, they too want to relive their Party Years vicariously through them. Even if it’s not to ’relive’ them, it’s to experiences, in part, some of what their romantic notions have convinced them might be possible in this era. That’s not to say mothers want their little girls to be slutty hedonists — far from it in the case of the woman I described — but it is to say that in their daughters women recognize an opportunity to direct the lives they wished they’d had the foresight to guide for themselves.
According to the Census Bureau, U.S. women now lead men in educational attainment for the first time since the Census began tracking the measure in 1940. A lot gets made about this ’gender gap’ in college enrollment, but what usually gets lost is the social dispensations made available to women and the increasingly steep prerequisites for men to attend college. In 2017 where more than 40% of children are raised by single mothers it’s interesting to note how the rise in female higher education contrasts with falling birth rates and the longer and longer delay of marriage to older ages for women.
As a Red Pill father of girls it’s vitally important to get your head around two very important elements; the evolved gender-specific biological imperatives your daughters will be subject to and how a feminine-primary social order, the Village, will seek to accommodate them at every strata, every opportunity in society. While similar in intent to how the Village seeks to condition your sons, so too will it raise your daughters into its own image. That image is usually one founded on convincing them of their limitless potential, ignoring any evolved reality particular to their sex and masking it all in ideological premises of egalitarian equalism.
Equalism is the call sign of the Fempowerment narrative of today. You’ll read about this more later in this book, but as a contrast to how your boys will be taught in a feminine-correct context about their inherent male flaws, girls are conditioned to embrace their roles as strong, independent and ultimately blameless of any consequence for the decisions based on these impressions of themselves. Girls are taught that they are ’correct’ as a default.
First and foremost this is a social dynamic fathers must bear in mind at every stage of their daughter’s development. Asking a Red Pill father to be a child psychologist is a tall order, I know, but most men are often taken unawares as to how early their girl’s Fempowerment indoctrination begins. Whether that’s how Disney Princesses openly carry the water of the Feminine Imperative, or how the Girl Scouts mold impressionable minds to prepared them for a feminine-primary social order, the purpose is the same; immerse young girls in a sense of their default social, personal and moral superiority above boys (and later men), irrespective of realistic limitations and devoid of any consequence of their actions or decisions.
It’s vitally important for a Red Pill father to keep in mind that the Village will at every opportunity seek to convince you and her of its ideology. This is where many a Blue Pill father loses his Frame with both his daughter and her mother. Any man, particularly a girl’s father, is ruthlessly shamed for not being supportive of his daughter’s independence and “strength” should he even marginally disagree with what schools, media, care-providers and an ’empowered’ mother would inculcate in his daughter. One of the vicious cycles Blue Pill men become trapped in is transferring their sense of self-sacrificing “supportiveness” duty from their wife/mother seamlessly to their daughter. It’s an easy shift for a Frameless Beta provider to convince himself that he’s also duty-bound to make sure his girl becomes the focus of his support. In doing so he becomes an active participant in his own daughter’s conditioning by the Feminine Imperative.
This is likely to stir something up in most fathers, Red Pill or otherwise. What am I getting at here? Should fathers not be a positive, supportive encouraging element of his girl’s life? Of course, but this sentiment is exactly how the Village convinces fathers (often unwittingly) to foster its ideology in their girl’s lives. Who wouldn’t want the best for their daughter? I certainly do and I’ve made the mistake of sparing no expense for it many times. Yet, this is exactly the natural loving attitude that the imperative uses to promote feminine supremacism in girls as well as a supplicating father. There is so much guilt invested in fathers in general today that avoiding it, avoiding the epitaph of being an uninvolved, unsupportive father is so imperative, that (largely Blue Pill) fathers will make efforts to give their girls “the world”.
Earlier in this chapter you read Promise Keepers, and the same dynamic of wanting to avoid the legacy of a ’bad dad’ applies to raising daughters. Blue Pill fathers worry that if they don’t foment the ideals of feminine social primacy they too will be just like ’bad dad’ and their girl will suffer for it as he and (he believes) his own mother suffered.
Raise a Daughter, not a Son
For all of the effort the Village goes to in order to convince us of some infinite number of non-binary genders, it is often very specific in its identifying girls and women in as binary-masculine a way as would remove men from embodying it. Part of this ceaseless drumming of girl’s superior potential to boys is an endless encouraging of putting girls into conventionally masculine positions. Thus, we see father’s enthusiastically encouraging their girls to involve themselves in what we might think of as boys sports, hobbies and interests. If you want to have your girl become a boyscout today there is an active engagement to in the organization to get girls in. Needless to say there is absolutely no similar effort in the girlscouts to recruit boys, rather boys are forbidden from joining (probably for the best). As part of the imperative to get girls into male-space you’ll have no trouble finding special programs that’ll allow your girl to join everything from a football to a wrestling team where she can show the boys how “girls can do anything boys can.”
Even for a Red Pill father there’s an element of wanting to encourage a girl to participate in traditionally boy’s endeavors. In and of itself this isn’t necessarily a bad thing until that desire interferes with your daughter’s natural development as a girl. Being Red Pill aware means you also must be vigilant in determining how the Village will attempt to shame both you and her for encouraging her to traditionally female, conventionally feminine interests. And even within what you believe are conventionally feminine organizations or interests the influence of the Fempowerment narrative will be there. Look at any pageant (no longer “beauty pageant”) organization, any girls-club, especially the girlscouts, and you will hear this feminine-primacy message loud and clear.
When you read the section Male Space you’ll get a better understanding of why this push is so strong today. For now, it’s important that you be aware that not only is this push directed at foisting masculine adequacies on your daughter, but it’s also intended to make a father feel ashamed for not joining in that effort.
For the Blue Pill Dad it becomes a point of pride to get his feminist merit badge by proving how ’with it’ he is in redirecting his daughters natural feminine interests to what’s generally male spaces. There may be nothing wrong with that if a girl has a genuine desire to participate in something she feels passionate about, but from the Blue Pill perspective it becomes less about the endeavor and more about the desire to one-up anything and everything male-associated. This becomes a real concern when that endeavor involves pitting girls against boys on a physical level. While I’m all for women learning martial arts or contact sports there is a reason the sexes are segregated in competition — there is a real danger in the difference of boy’s physical nature and aggressiveness compared to that of girls. The Village, being founded on the misguided ideals of egalitarian equalism, would have fathers believe that fundamental biological differences between boys and girls is insignificant. They want gender parity and this means ignoring the nature of the male and female biology.
For Red Pill fathers the temptation is one of wanting to relate to your girl as if she were a son. This is an interesting predicament for fathers who may have all sons and a single girl, or only girls and no sons. It’s easy to fall into the trap of investing your positively masculine self into a daughter. This may be particular challenge if your wife happens to lean towards the Fempowerment narrative herself.
Even a well-meaning “red pill” woman will still be given to the Strong Independent Woman® narrative that’s become part of her ego investment, and usually, this is just something she takes for granted. She may want a strong Red Pill son to handle his own business, but she also wants a daughter that a feminine-primary social order has convinced her needs to be “just as tough as a boy.” Again, this is the result of the equalist narrative that believes gender is a social construct and that any biological influences of gender are simply obstacles to be overcome. I should also point out here that if the mother of your children likes to think of herself as “Red Pill” she will still expect your sons to have a default, unearned, respect for women and this will extend to your daughters, their mother or women in general. There is a growing trend to conflate Red Pill with traditional conservative (trad-con) values, and as such the idea of Red Pill (however it’s defined by trad-cons) becomes more appealing to women who believe men should be conventionally masculine, but also to defer Frame to women as is convenient.
She’s a Girl who will become a Woman
We live in an age where the most common complaint amongst women is the lack of any marriageable men. We’ve come to a point where women feel the need to freeze their eggs due to their lack of long term prospects with regards to men with whom they believe will be their ’relationship equal’. We know this status really refers to women’s doubt of optimizing Hypergamy in a single man, but what we’re seeing now is a generation of adult women, women well past their sexually competitive years, who were raised by the Village and fed a steady diet of the Empowerment message. These are women who were raised to believe that it was men’s duty to be ready and available for them once they’d pushed the boundaries of their “limitless potential”. In fact that used to be the old answer
as to why women might want to freeze their eggs or look for a sperm bank to have children without a real father — they were “so career focused they never had time to think about motherhood until now.” The real truth is now in fashion though; it’s really due to their inability to attract and settle into a secure long term relationship with a man who could meet her impossibly high Hypergamous optimization prerequisites.
So the Feminine Imperative arranges convenient social conventions to help them salve the pain brought on by the prospect of never becoming wives or mothers with an equitable man. The Village taught them never to settle from the time they were little girls. Boys were ridiculous, men even more so, and all of them needed the correcting influence of the feminine. Now, in their post-Wall years, it’s men’s fault once again for not having properly prepared themselves to accommodate their long term sexual strategy. Disney taught them they were Princesses, yet they were raised to also believe that they would be self-sufficient, autonomous, self-fulfilling individuals — who would grow into Strong Independent Women®, never to be in need of a man for anything. Yet, here they are freezing their eggs because of exactly this “independence”.
This is what the Village will teach your girl and this is what you must prepare her to expect. She must learn that eventually there will be a price to be paid for her decisions. This is what the Village never wants her to believe; that with decision comes consequence. The Village will tell her to reject the idea of likabilty and embrace her innate solipsism. Never do anything for a man, never prepared yourself for his pleasure or his acceptance; it’s his privilege to even be taken into your consideration. What the Village will not teach her is that there are long term consequences for this enduring mindset, one devoid of real appreciation, one devoid of even the idea that men are to be respected for their experiences.
As I mention early, the best education you can give your girl is to give her an example to mold her ideal of a positive masculine man upon. It’s so easy to say, lead by example, but the same fundamental core dynamics of Red Pill awareness and Game in practice can (must) be used to teach your daughter that a man is deserving of respect and deserving of her desire to be a better daughter, wife and mother for him. Exactly the same Red Pill-aware psychological core, exactly the same understanding of Hypergamy that will help you be the dominant masculine figure with your girlfriend and wife will help you model the type of man you’ll hope your eventual son in law will be. Demonstrate positive masculine dominance, never explicate it to your daughter. She will be taught that “girls rule” and boys are sad saps. She’ll be taught that men are ridiculous, but not Daddy, never Daddy.
There are a hundred different studies that indicate women without a father or with a weak (Beta) father becomes adults with “daddy issues”. They often become ’broken women’, rudderless and prone to all the stereotypical tendencies you’ve probably come to expect — early promiscuity, depression, life-long insecurities, etc. And of course the Village is already prepared to vilify fathers (or insist on his superfluousness) and play to women’s default victimhood. The truth of this father-daughter dynamic is that girls and women are fed a self-perpetuating, self-defeating cycle of empowerment and victimhood with the weakman father mixed somewhere into the blame cycle. This, first and foremost, is what you will have to be prepared to fight while being the living example of the positive masculinity she’ll never know unless you live it for her. You are vitally important in her development as a woman. You are an example of masculinity that no single-mother will ever be able to emulate. And you must be so fearlessly in the face of a world that’ll accuse you of being abusive, typically male, chauvinistic and misogynistic for your conventional masculinity.
Be the Example in your own Marriage
Finally, you need to be the example of positive masculinity in your own marriages. Assuming you’re married to the mother of your children and you’ve initiated a relationship model based on your own Red Pill informed Frame, you also have to know how important it is that your wife reflexively responds to you as the masculine example. It’s important that both your sons and daughters recognize your authority as such, but doubly so in the case of daughters. How your wife interacts with you, how she gender-communicates with you, defers to your decisions, how she responds to your Amused Mastery is vital to your daughters perception of a masculine role model.
I would argue that having a weak Frame with your wife or living in a power dynamic such that it’s her to whom all defer to for decisions and authority is almost more damaging to children’s gender perceptions than if a father were absent from the home. A weak, Beta, Blue Pill masculine role sets a weak perception of masculinity for girls who will as adult women be seeking out men who either embody a man who will dominate them or one whom they can dominate themselves as their mother did. Considering the direction that Open Hypergamy has set us on, I’d say both.
Relationship Game - A Primer
To cap this section off I felt it incumbent upon me to finish with a few basics I think are necessary to promoting a Red Pill defined relationship. How you choose (or not) to effect it, whether in marriage or a sustained long term relationship (LTR), is up to you, but these are some basics I think are likely to help men enter or develop a relationship based on Red Pill fundamentals.
Before I dig in here I think it’s important to bear in mind that the principles of Game do not change in an LTR, only the context does. Every behavior set, every frame control tenet, every aspect of Amused Mastery and even Pick Up Artist (PUA) skills like Cocky & Funny are all necessary, if not more necessary in an LTR. One of the greatest failings married men begin their nuptials with is starting from a position of Beta-ness. I’ve encountered, and counseled, far too many men with the same story; they entered into their LTR or marriage from a default position of being the “supportive” submissive partner only to discover Game later in their relationship and then fight the very uphill battle of convincing their spouse that they’ve ’genuinely’ experienced a radical shift in their outlook and personalities.
If all she’s ever known is the Beta you, convincing her you’ve gone Alpha is a tough row to hoe. An Alpha shift in a long term relationship is threatening to a woman who’s built a lifestyle around the predictability of the Beta guy she committed to. It stirs up the competition anxiety she’s been numbed to for a long time, and while that’s beneficial in prompting her genuine desire for you, it also upsets her sense of security. It’s for this reason that Beta men are reluctant to experiment with being more dominant; they carry over from their single-hood the same mistaken belief that women require comfort, familiarity and security in order to become intimate or “feel sexy”. They still fail to grasp, even in marriage, that sex by definition requires anxiety to be grounded in genuine desire. Sexual tension requires urgency, learn how to stoke it in your woman.
So from the outset it’s important to acknowledge that going Alpha from a Beta default is going to require a measured, practiced effort. The ideal position is to begin an LTR from an incorrigible, irrationally self-confident, Alpha frame and encourage the belief in your partner that it was she who ’mellowed’ you. It’s ingratiating and ego-flattering for a woman to believe that she has the capacity to charm the savage beast with her feminine wiles.
It never ceases to amaze me how readily divorced women (and sometimes thrice divorced) are to dispense tips on the makings for a great marriage. Or more fascinating, to hear pussy-whipped husbands parrot these same lines. A divorced guy’s marriage advice is usually “just don’t get married.” So allow me to toss in my two cents here.
In all the years I’ve been counseling men I have yet to have a guy tell me he’s getting more sex now than when he was single or dating his wife, but sex isn’t the issue here — desire is the root of the problem.
As I’ve stated in many previous essays, properly motivated, women will move across the country, crawl under barbed wire and out a 2 story window to fuck a guy she has the genuine desire to fuck. This applies equally to your wife of 10 years. Before marriage women look for ways to get laid with a guy they want to fuck, after marriage they look for ways to avoid it, but it’s desire that motivates it.
Chris Rock says it best when he goes into sex after marriage —
“If you like fucking, marriage aint for you. I haven’t fucked in 8 years. I’ve had ’intercourse’, but I haven’t fucked since I got married. I haven’t had a blow job in 8 years. I’ve had ’fellatio’ but I haven’t had my dick sucked in 8 years.”
This is the essence of desire after marriage; it generally becomes another chore to add to a woman’s to-do list. Get the kids to soccer practice, go get groceries, fuck her husband and fold the laundry. Add a full-time job to that list and sleep becomes the new sex. But it’s not about being tired or overwhelmed, it’s about desire. My wife used to work a night shift and if she came in at 2am and woke me up telling me she felt like having sex, I could be in the deepest of REM sleep and wake up to knock it out with her and be ready to go for two, because I want to have sex with her. Women love to play the “but I really want to, I’m just not into it now” card to counter this, but as always, never forget it’s her behavior that defines intent, not her words. Remember, a woman will fuck; she might not fuck you, she might not fuck me, but she will fuck somebody. She just needs to be properly motivated.
All of those preconditions she had for you to accept your offer of marriage — a good job, be a good provider, a good listener, be funny, have status, being reliable, a good physique; all of that does nothing to increase her desire to have sex with you. The single, bachelor is concerned with Interest Levels, the married man should be concerned with Desire Levels.
So how do you prompt this Desire? How do you get a woman who knows every intimate detail about you for the past 10 years properly motivated to fuck you like she did when you were 20-something? Women will offer the Oprah-correct, “more romance!” and men will roll their eyes and murmur “more alcohol.” Put out of your head right now all of these feminine-correct notions that you need to “rekindle the fire” or find some gimmicky ritual that will lead you back to that desire she picked up from some article in Cosmo — I’ve gone down that road before. ’Date Night’ is a band-aid for a symptom of a larger ill and this is a prolonged lack of Desire. There is nothing worse than going through the motions of a preplanned, prescripted, ’date-like-you-used-to-have’ only to have your wife lay on the bed like a dead fish. Starfish sex. No amount of opportunity (which is what a date night is, scheduled opportunity) will lead to her wanting to have sex with you.
It’s not about frequency, it’s about quality. Frequency declines after marriage, it’s just logistics (especially after kids), but spontaneity doesn’t have to. Would your wife fuck you in the car like she did when you were dating? Would she be up for fucking in the great outdoors if you were hiking together somewhere? Would she be down for anything kinky that she hasn’t done before or in ages, or is it all just ’vanilla’ sex now? Here’s a list of things you should do from a man’s point of view:
Make her want it
If you’ve been married for years, she probably feels pretty secure with you and whatever degree of control she has in regards to regulating the flow of sex. Make her uncomfortable. As counterintuitive as it sounds, this is the single most important advantage you can take. Begin to incrementally take the power that her intimacy has had sway over you for the past 10 years back from her. When you were unmarried even the slightest bit of anxiety that she may be put off for another, better, prospect than herself prompted that desire to fuck you better than the others.
Most important though is to do this covertly. If you go popping off about how you’re taking your balls back and she’d better shape up or you’ll be looking for a woman who is into fucking you — you’ll just come off as inauthentic. You have to imply with your attitude and behavior that something has changed in you. The best principle to remember in marriage is that you will only get what you’ve gotten if you keep doing what you’ve done before.
The power of the ’takeaway’
In one form or another PUAs use the takeaway to shape desired behavior. This is behavioral psychology 101, reinforce the behaviors you want and punish the ones you don’t, all the time remembering that too much reward leads to satiation and cessation of the desired behavior. Don’t buy your wife flowers in order to get her to fuck you, buy them after she’s performed accordingly and to your satisfaction. So many married men I know (even in their 60s) still attempt to purchase sex from their wives by ’allowing’ them to buy expensive things thinking it will lead to ’appreciation sex’. In reality it will invariably lead to negotiated, obligatory and desire-less ’debt sex’. Remember, the personal trainer that your wife cheats on you with didn’t buy her a goddamn thing to make her want to fuck him.
Your attention is your best tool in this regard. One thing I tell recovering Betas is not to give away the farm on the first date and that women are by nature attention craving. When you give away your attention without her having to seek it, it devalues your attention. This is a paradox in marriage because she was taught to expect that she ’should’ have 100% of your attention and over the years there is zero mystery about you. When you begin to take away attention she’s grown accustomed to she will seek it. And again you must do this covertly as she will respond to it covertly. You have to be sensitive to the adjustments she makes in her attention seeking, in conversation, in posture, in habit and behavior, because she wont overtly tell you “oh please pay attention to me.” This will add to her desire to have sex with you in order to reaffirm this attention. Sex then becomes a reinforcer for her in this attention seeking which you can then use to modify her behavior — in this case being genuine desire.
Other forms of the takeaway may include certain regularities she’s grown used to over the years that she takes for granted. One of these is a regular kiss. I used this to a great effect with my own wife. I would regularly come home from work and go kiss my wife as soon as I saw her, she became accustomed to this and after a few years I came to realize that I was like a puppy dog in this regard, immediately seeking affection as soon as I got home so I began to take this away.
Eventually she covertly recognized this and began to greet me at the door with a kiss. She was prompted to desire that connection by a takeaway.
Stay in shape
Nothing kills married sex faster than one or both partners letting themselves go physically. Most married Mothers who do so love to use their pregnancies as justification for their lack of motivation and obesity. Arousal is the important component to desire. If your wife kept herself in bikini model shape after she’d been overweight your desire to fuck her would undoubtedly increase. The same applies to you. Every day I’m in the gym I see countless 30 and 40 somethings straining and training as if their lives depended on it. Actually their sex-lives depend on it. For far too long we’ve been taught that “it’s what’s on the inside that counts” and how wonderful inner beauty is. Funny how hard men and women will train once they’re divorced eh? The question is, what is it about their situation that would make them take care of themselves physically that they wouldn’t while married? Before the divorce, they never had the time or motivation, but now it seems they have plenty of both.
By staying in shape — and by that I mean better shape than your spouse — you send a message, not only of confidence, but a covert understanding that she’ll have some imagined competition for your attention via social proof. Thus, you not only create genuine desire by physical arousal, but you simultaneously create a psychology of desire by prompting her natural competitive impulses (i.e. Dread).
Dont drive drunk
“It provoketh the desire, but taketh away the performance.”
Alcohol is not an aphrodisiac. I know that sounds odd coming from a guy who’s worked in the liquor industry for 12 years, but it’s true. Alcohol does lower inhibitions and perhaps predisposes your wife to lovemaking. After years of experimentation I’ve perfected the ’pantydropper’ — that magic formula of just enough alcohol to get her going, but not so much as to have her passed out over the toilet bowl. Still, sex is better sober and the obvious setback of whiskey-dick isn’t going to improve her already dubious desire to have sex in the first place. Understand the dynamics of her sexuality too. Strike while the iron’s hot and be sure to be up and ready to go at the peak of her menstrual cycle. Catch her right after a good workout and after you come back from lifting and that’s the benchmark for ’real’ genuine sexual desire. You simply cannot inspire her to a standard of desire if one or both of you have a depressant in your bloodstream. If anything you want to accelerate blood flow not impede it.
Predictable is boring. There’s nothing more predictable than sex with the same person you’ve been getting after it with for over 10 years. Oddly enough the spontaneity principle is exactly why garbage advice like ’date night’ and “keeping it fresh” articles in Marie Claire sell magazines and don’t save marriages. All of these “freshen it up” ideas are predictable. For all of the wacky ideas you can come up with for ’new’ sex, you’re still fucking the same old lady you married 10 years ago. You’ve got to be willing to push the envelope with her expectations of predictable sex. Suggest it when she least expects it. Tell her to flash you her boobs or some other cheap thrill when the opportunity presents itself at the beach or somewhere semi-public. Creating a condition of desire doesn’t have to directly and immediately lead to intercourse. Ask her for a blow job in the parking lot before you go to dinner one night. Even the asking is arousing. Even if she turns you down you can still use her rejection to your advantage since it implies that, perhaps at some point in time, she (or some other girlfriend you had) used to do this because she wanted to (i.e. assume the sale). When you do proposition your wife make it seem as if it just popped into your head at that very moment. Again, think covert, not overt. Overt requires planning and planning = predictable and boring. Covert implies spontaneity.
The Cardinal Rule of Relationships
In any relationship, whether romantic, personal, business or familial, the person with the most power is the one who needs the other the least.
This may sound Machiavellian, but it holds true, especially in marriage. If you wonder who has the greater degree of control in your relationship the answer is always her. She must come to you. If you are the prize and she recognizes this, you will inspire genuine desire. So many married guys I know have walked their entire married lives on eggshells because they put their wives in a position of being the gatekeeper of his own sexuality. “She’s got the vagina man, I don’t wanna piss her off” is the mantra they repeat to them and themselves. This then flows over into other aspects of their lives and places a woman into becoming the authority in the marriage. Just as in single life, if her intimacy is used as her agency to get a desired behavior from her husband that’s the value it has. When you can prove to her that her pussy is no longer a rewarding reinforcer for her desired behavior of you, you remove this agency and reset yourself on at least a partial footing of your prior bachelorhood.