Rollo Tomassi has written three outstanding books and these best quotes from his 2nd one, The Rational Male – Positive Masculinity. The book is well worth reading and I think as you read these quotes, you’ll start to see why.
* 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.
* 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.
* 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
* 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.
* 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.
* No decision will impact your life more than the one you make in determining who will be the mother of your children.
* 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?
* 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
* 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.
* 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.
* 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.”
* 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..
* Women cannot listen to Men talking about or working out their dating/ mating/relationship issues or problems. Women reflexively view a Man discussing such issues as “whining” or “complaining” or “bitterness” or “sour grapes” or “well, you just chose poorly, so sucks to be you” or “suck it up, no one wants to hear you bitching about it”.
* There is nothing more anti-seductive for women than appealing to her reason. Arousal, attraction, sexual tension, subcommunication of desire, all happen indirectly and below the social surface for women.
* For women, one of the qualities of the Alpha her Hypergamy demands is a guy who Just Gets It. An Alpha would intrinsically know what women’s arousal and attraction cues are without being told and without even the inclination to ask.
* Your doing homework with your children to better their lives (while very ennobling) doesn’t make your wife any hotter for you in bed, nor will it be any bargaining tool should she decide to leave you. Women don’t fall in love with who you are, they fall in love with what you are, and no appeal to their reason will convince them otherwise.
* Women despise a man who needs to be told to be dominant.
* If masculinity has to be explained to a man, he’s not the man for her.
* Thus, we get socially acceptable default presumptions of ‘male privilege’ without qualifying what it even means, or we get catchy jingoisms like ‘mansplaining’ to give a name to women’s need for silencing men’s inconvenient observations of women’s ‘presumed-correct’ perceptions, their decisions and the reasons they came to them. We get default presumptions of male guilt for sexual assault and lack of sexual consent as fluidly defined in as convenient a way that serves women’s imperatives. The true intent of feminism has never been about establishing a mutually agreed ‘gender equality’, rather it’s always been about retribution and restitution for perceived past wrongs to the Sisterhood.
* A commenter, Driver, had a good comment that illustrates another aspect of this feminine-power consolidation: “All the “feeling good about your body” that a fat woman can muster is NEVER going to be an aphrodisiac or a substitute for having a great body that men are aroused by.” It’s funny how women are very attracted to a guy who works out, eats right and takes care of his body but they fully expect men to love them (or be attracted to them) for “who they are” – thin or big. You would think that these overweight women would get the memo by now but women (and more of them) keep getting bigger each year.
* Individually men are competitive. It’s part of our survival instinct to desire to win. Studies prove we get a rush of testosterone when we are the victors over some adversary or adversity – a fact that coincides with women’s sensitivity to, and arousal for the winners. However, we are also cooperative in our victories.
* Never appeal to a woman’s sympathies. Her sympathies are given by her own volition, never when they are begged for – women despise the obligation of sympathy. Nothing kills arousal like pity. Even if you don’t seriously consider yourself pathetic, it never serves your best interest to paint yourself as pathetic.
* To be sure, a woman can be loyal and dedicated to you, in theory, but she’ll only give that loyalty to the guy who needs it least. It’s like a cruel, cosmic joke.
* Men believe that love matters for the sake of it. Women love opportunistically. The Red Pill aware man realizes that men are the “romantics pretending to be realists” and women; vice versa.
* If you read through any woman’s online dating profile you undoubtedly come across some variation of what’s described as the “483 bullet point checklist” of stated prerequisites a man must possess in order for her to consider him a viable candidate for her intimacy. While I don’t think there are quite that many items on the checklist, you’ll find a host of common-theme personal qualities a guy has to have in order to “be her boyfriend” – confident (above all), humorous, kind, intelligent, creative, decisive, sensitive, respectful, spiritual, patient,.. The point is that all of these characteristics that women list as being ‘attractive’ have absolutely no bearing on how sexually, physically, ‘arousing’ a woman finds a man. While Game and personality can certainly accentuate arousal, all of these esoteric personal qualities have no intrinsic “‘vagina tingle” value if a man isn’t an arousal prospect to begin with.
* Even if it doesn’t result in a pregnancy, the latent urgency in a woman’s peak is to ‘get the seed first, find the provider later’ (i.e. protracted cuckoldry).
* The fantasy for women of course is to ‘tame the savage Alpha’ and convert him into a parentally invested partner by encouraging Beta traits in him as he matures, and hopefully prospers.
* There is no Beta with a side of Alpha because that side of Alpha is never believable when your overall perception is one of being Beta to begin with.
* Women may love the Beta, but they only respect the Alpha.
* The sexual alphaness of a male towards a female is exhibited by her wanting to please him, and the sexual betaness of a male is exhibited by him needing to please her.
* It is always time and effort better spent developing new, fresh, prospective women than it will ever be in attempting to reconstruct a failed relationship. Never root through the trash once the garbage has been dragged to the curb. You get messy, your neighbors see you do it, and what you thought was worth digging for is never as valuable as you thought it was.
* Even if you could go back to where you were, any relationship you might have with an Ex will be colored by all of the issues that led up to the breakup. In other words, you know what the end result of those issues has been. It will always be the 800 pound gorilla in the room in any future relationship. As I elaborated in the Desire Dynamic, healthy relationships are founded on genuine mutual desire, not a list of negotiated terms and obligations, and this is, by definition, exactly what any post-breakup relationship necessitates. You or she may promise to never do something again, you may promise to “rebuild the trust”, you may promise to be someone else, but you cannot promise to pretend that the issues leading up to the breakup don’t have the potential to dissolve it again. The doubt is there. You may be married for 30 years, but there will always be that one time when you two broke up, or she fucked that other guy, and everything you think you’ve built with her over the years will always be compromised by that doubt of her desire.
* The misunderstanding is to see a Three Strikes rule as a threat. “She’d better put out after tonight or I’m outta here”. I can see why that would place a burden upon a woman, but you must take into account why a Three Strike rule would even be a necessary concept. Three dates (and I mean real dates, none of this coffee / lunch crap) over the course of three weeks should be ample time to make the assessment as to whether a woman has interest and attraction enough to become intimate. Anything beyond this is indicative of filibustering on a woman’s part and usually points to an only lukewarm interest level if at all. In this way a Three Strike rule benefits both men and women; why would either sex want to engage in a relationship that was lackluster from the start? Why would either want to be involved with a person who was settled on or settled for?
* It’s urgency and anxiety that makes for genuine, chemical-fueled sexual desire – not comfort, not familiarity. This is precisely why I say “any woman who makes you wait for sex, or by her actions implies she is making you wait for sex; the sex is NEVER worth the wait”.
* The opposite of love is not hate – the opposite of love is indifference. When your silence inspires more anxiety than any spoken threat, that’s when you’re approaching Alpha status.
* However, it is important for a Man to bear in mind that his SMV will eventually exceed that of any woman if he continues to improve himself and grows personally, physically and financially into his SMV peak years. There will eventually come a time when a woman’s SMV will decay to the point that her necessitousness will exceed her value. In other words, due to her fast burn-fast decay SMV, and recognized or not, she will eventually need a Man more than he needs her when he enters his peak SMV phase and she’s declined to the Wall of her own. It’s during this critical phase that a woman must rely on her man’s socially expected love, charity, obligation and parental investment to maintain his secure attachment to her in the face of an obvious SMV imbalance. As I’ve covered before, women fundamentally lack the capacity to appreciate the sacrifices men make to facilitate women’s reality – and once those facial wrinkles and cellulite can no longer be disguised by makeup or collagen, women will still persist in the expectation of monogamous obligation, in preference to the genuine desire, love, devotion, etc. a man may legitimately feel about her regardless of her wrinkles.
* Confidence is derived from options.