Is Rollo Tomassis Rational Male book still worth reading?

Blade Runner

Pelican
I think there's this idea within religious communities, of which this forum is also becoming - that the 'perfect' one will come from God and she will have none of the innate biological drivers that cause all of the problems we see in relationships. She will be submissive, funny and want sex as much (or as little) as you want and life will go great with your 'one' that was gifted by God himself.

What this does, is foster an unhealthy community whereby men cannot talk about relational problems (usually a lack of sex) because he has to uphold the image of his wife being the 'one' that everyone covets, and if he is to mention his dissatisfaction, he will often be met with scold from the community as a true man of god (TM) would never complain about wanting sex, he must be deep in sin and lust.

Dead bedrooms are incredibly common and it's rarely because of 'differing sex drives'.

What a lot of Blue Pill religious men come to find is that whilst their perfect wife isn't cheating or anything of the kind - they also aren't having sex with him and it's because to her he has become the safe cuddly teddybear that she can rely on to do as he's told, will never leave and will put up with undesired intimacy once a year.

The religious community today offers little to help with this situation and the idealized relationship can become one of 'platonic room mates'.

The Rational male however offers you an actual life line, but to take that life line would depend on if you believe the person you are with is 'the one' or if there are many 'good ones'. If your woman is the chosen one from God, but after one year doesn't want sex ever again and begins nagging you and disrespecting you - is this a worldly problem that can be fixed with worldly solutions, or do we say that actually perhaps this one wasn't from God but the next one will be?

From my perspective we have to live in the real world even if we are not of the world and the Rational Male is one of the best books to have ever existed in understanding how to maintain desire in a relationship, keeping both partners at their optimal happiness and stress free.

Whilst I'm not a fan of Rollo's marketing nor his comments towards Roosh finding God - it would be naive to assume he hasn't helped save many marriages that would otherwise not have survived and this has to have some credit.

I'm sure my opinion won't be popular here and that's OK - I'm just calling it how I see it currently.
Good post. Most of the religious stuff (and I'm Orthodox) that gets spread around here (regarding relationships) is way too ideal. You can tell that it comes from guys that think like us because in order to prove our points, we often exaggerate for effect. Throw the idea of "new convert" on top, and 2D stuff such as writing vs. real conversation with someone addressing the particular needs of each, and it can get a bit out of hand. If you read some of the idealistic articles and aren't immediately struck by this, you need to take a few steps back, regroup and just start asking questions and interacting far more to get the proper balance.
 
I think most of this "redpill" philosophy is incompatible with Catholicism because it tends to generalize about women and "women nature". While it might be useful about learning the nature of modern liberal women, it's basically anti-Catholic to apply that to women as a gender. Why? Because in Catholicism we had plenty of women saints who completely defy what the redpillers say about "women nature". You had pious Catholic women who were chaste, willingly virgins, died to save their honor, were in some cases good leaders (st. Joan of Arc, Isabella the Catholic, Eleanor of Aquitaine, st. Adela...) and loyal. So it's clear that Catholicism can make women great in every way, if God wills it and through his grace. Many redpillers would have you believe that those women would have been sluts or some feminists if they lived in our "emancipation" era, but this is blaspheming against saints from the Catholic view. So either Catholicism is wrong about its venerated saints, or the redpill philosophy is wrong.

Now of course this doesn't mean you need to go all bluepill and thinking you'll get a wife like st. Adela. In reality, Catholics don't really need any pills. Catholicism is so rich, it has 2000 years of tradition full of the brightest minds inspired by holy spirit, if you read Catholic authors from the past, you will learn everything about the genders and other issues.

One of the most important things you need to understand is that Catholicism values celibacy and is some sort of "default" condition. You shouldn't obsess about searching women or your relationship to them. If you can find the right one and you want marriage, great, but in this day and age with so much chaos you should by default assume God wants you to be in some sort of celibacy to prepare for what's coming. You should not adapt to women and act like a sociopath or play some games with them.

I've been blessed in my life that I found traditionalist Catholicism very early in my life (it was the only ideology I ever followed) and I never needed any "pills" to enlighten me. When the PUA-redpill stuff was at its peak, I didn't fall for it. Many of those guys looked down on me because I was into chastity and celibacy, and thought it was "unnatural", "beta" or "gay" or whatever. It's only recently that manosphere is embracing pro-Christian views after they saw what this godless society can do to men. But as someone who has ALWAYS trusted in Catholic teachings, the development of this society and how women behave is no surprise to me. The Catholic authors in the past clearly told us what will happen if men abandon God. NOTHING that happened in the 2010s surprised me one bit.

This is why "Godpill" is the only pill you need, everything you need to know about life, you can find in Catholic teachings, European Catholic history and so on.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't read manosphere authors, many of them have good ideas and observations about this society, and I will always respect dissident authors of whatever kind for their courage and willingness to think differently, but you can't really apply it to Catholicism.
 

Sitting Bull

Woodpecker
I think most of this "redpill" philosophy is incompatible with Catholicism because it tends to generalize about women and "women nature".

Indeed, and they cover this over-reaching generalization in the pedantic reverse-sci-fi known as "social darwinism".
in Catholicism we had plenty of women saints who completely defy what the redpillers say about "women nature".

I'd go even further as say that even if we limit ourselves to modern liberal women, the "redpill" picture of "women nature" is still far from acurrate -it's just a good "default rule of thumb of assuming the worst", not a scientific description of reality. Even most liberal women are not yet complete devil-possessed robots, and assuming they are beyond recovery is an intellectually lazy attitude (besides being un-Christian, of course).

if you read Catholic authors from the past, you will learn everything about the genders and other issues.

Could you elaborate and name a few ? (Not that I disagree, but I'm curious to know which examples you're thinking of. I am a traditional Catholic and I love reading Catholic authors of all sorts, but "gender issues" is not the first thing that comes to my mind when I think of all that I have read. I'd have thought there are no such things as gender issues in a Catholic world).
 

Sitting Bull

Woodpecker
A thought experiment I often make : if today's Roosh could meet and talk with the Roosh of a decade ago, and try to persuade him out of his evil ways, how would the discussion have been going ?
 

Sitting Bull

Woodpecker
So it's clear that Catholicism can make women great in every way, if God wills it and through his grace. Many redpillers would have you believe that those women would have been sluts or some feminists if they lived in our "emancipation" era

History shows otherwise. During the French revolution, at a period when mostly everyone believed the anti-monastic propaganda and thought it was a good thing for the government to close all monastic establishments, you still had many nuns begging to be just left alone.

Later revolutionaries generally use a modus operandi of systematic rape when they attack convents.

Anyone defending the nonsense you describe deserves to be called a rape apologist.

By the way, I like to say that the way of the nun is the only kind of feminism that's peaceful, non-intrusive and does not hurt other people. Don't like men, think men are evil ? Then become a nun and you will be preserved from the contact of those evil creatures, without having to contribute to a giant class warfare between men and women and sacrifice many males for a few priviledges (of which you will never have enough anyway).
 
Could you elaborate and name a few ? (Not that I disagree, but I'm curious to know which examples you're thinking of. I am a traditional Catholic and I love reading Catholic authors of all sorts, but "gender issues" is not the first thing that comes to my mind when I think of all that I have read. I'd have thought there are no such things as gender issues in a Catholic world).

Thank you for your feedback. I meant that entire Catholic tradition is so rich with knowledge about sexuality and differences about the sexes so you can easily find a lot of answers from what was already written on these things. Obviously st. Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas should be where you start. I think st. Augustine in particular should be a must read for people who were into "game" and fornication because st. Augustine was a fornicator in his youth and then abandoned it, converted to Christianity, and he details his experiences in his book Confessions. But there are also other things from him like On the Good of Marriage (De bono coniugali) and On Marriage and Concupiscence (De nuptiis et concupiscentia) where he talks about the purpose of sex, pleasure and marriage. I know today people (including modernist Christians) consider him "too extreme" and "too pessimistic" regarding sex, but I think this is precisely why you should read it because he's so disliked by the modern world and they blame him for "making sex evil" and things like that. The modern "sexually liberated" people know that his writings are powerful and they fear him. After all he was a huge influence and inspired centuries of chastity.

The same goes for Catholic views on women and differences between the genders, st. Augustine wrote a lot about that as well.

But regarding gender issues as we experience today, there is a lot of material by Catholic publications in the 1890-1940 era, when post-industrial revolution feminism became a thing, albeit written by lesser known Catholic authors. It depends where you are from but here in Central Europe a lot of Catholic periodicals were published at the time, including some periodicals for women where they dealt with those questions a lot. Back then the Church was still heavily traditionalist. If you come from a country with a Catholic population, try looking up if you can find anything from that era. Those old periodicals are usually a true gold mine for interesting Catholic perspective. I don't want to reveal my country but there is a lot of material in my language from the pre-WWII era that really inspired me.
 
History shows otherwise. During the French revolution, at a period when mostly everyone believed the anti-monastic propaganda and thought it was a good thing for the government to close all monastic establishments, you still had many nuns begging to be just left alone.

There were also women who actively fought in the Catholic and Royal Army of the Vendee against the revolutionaries, most famously Renée Bordereau who killed around 20 jacobin revolutionaries, and Céleste Bulkeley who was the most notorious one of the six "amazon" women who fought for the François de Charette, the great leader and martyr for the Catholic cause.
 

Bluto

Kingfisher
I don't think so. From what I can recall, Rollo tirelessly promotes fornication through the guise of "spinning plates."

The question to ask yourself is, "would you give your son The Rational Male?" My answer is a hard no.
That is more due to the current dating age than anything else. In more puritanical times, the theory of spinning plates would still be utilized, it would just not have a sexual component, and you would move on a lot faster from a falling plate.
 
I followed his work closely in my early and mid twenties and was curious to see how he reconciled that information with religion when his new book came out. I found it unreadably bad and put it on the shelf after about half an hour.

I probed him about his religion as one of the commentators under one of his streams. And he only seems to understand Christianity as an Atheist albeit with useful insights into human nature. He doesn't actually believe that Jesus Christ is God or that our God was raised from the dead.

If people refer to Christianity as just "Religion" then its a pretty reliable indicator that that person is an atheist.

However in regards to subversion. He does reliably predict that the skinsuit dynamics of the subversion of all religions including those who claim the name of Christ for themselves. The West as it stands is quite the solvent. Even Islam isn't safe from said solvent.

I follow him on twitter and the evidence is very convincing.

As a revealer of the existence of the Holy Spirit's presence within a person it is quite reliable as a winnowing mechanism in that regard.

I remember I posted a video about one real life Muslim Father who immigrated to the West yet their children and grandchildren get invariably corrupted by Western Culture.
 

2Beta

Chicken
The problem with Roosh removing the Travel and PUA posts, is the “bridge” of manosphere to religion will simply erode over time in regards to this forum. More and more rote platitudes and pious advice, but hardly any cause and effect, who, what, how, and why, etc. Eventually you are just back to modern Christianity, where everybody stopped participating because nobody understood the point anymore, and viewed it as a bunch of stuffy no-fun nannies telling you to keep your hands out of your pants.
 

BiggNastee

Woodpecker
The problem with Roosh removing the Travel and PUA posts, is the “bridge” of manosphere to religion will simply erode over time in regards to this forum. More and more rote platitudes and pious advice, but hardly any cause and effect, who, what, how, and why, etc. Eventually you are just back to modern Christianity, where everybody stopped participating because nobody understood the point anymore, and viewed it as a bunch of stuffy no-fun nannies telling you to keep your hands out of your pants.
You should probably go read the Bible before you go off like that. Also 4/10 on the trolling attempt.
 

Jay

Sparrow
Yes, especially because it's nuclear when it comes to addressing the atheist's beta bubble in modern times.
Memory needs to remember your mistakes so that you don't end up repeating them.
 
Last edited:
Top