A critique of Rollo Tomassi’s work.
Readership: Men
Theme: Problems with the Red Pill / Misapplied Models / A Failure of Imagination
Author’s Note: This post contains comments from readers. Links to the original comments are embedded in the initial words.
Length: 2,000 words
Reading Time: 11 minutes
Introduction
Since 2019 when Roosh converted and subsequently unpublished all his writings, Rollo Tomassi has held the distinction of being the last remaining godfather of the Classic Manosphere who continues producing content.
His books and essays are quite good, but IMO, Rollo is a much better writer than he is a talker. The Rational Male books are, in many men’s opinions, foundational for Red Pill knowledge. But in podcasts, he’s taken some heat from some of the younger Manospherian Gurus.
This post will review the value and errors of Rollo’s contributions to The Red Pill.
The Value of Rollo’s Work
As readers have probably already surmised, I definitely have a lot of respect for Rollo.
Rollo’s most important contributions, in my opinion, are his identification of general patterns of human behavior within the dating and marriage markets and how the markets work in general.
Another contribution from Rollo that he established back in 2012 or so is that the SMP/MMP looks very different from either the male or female strategic viewpoints, and both of these change with age. This perspective is now a foundational epistemology of the Red Pill. Along with this comes an understanding of the dynamics of what men and women look for in a mate / spouse. Everything from why May-December romances much more commonly form long-lasting relationships when compared to the feminist notion of cougars in their sexual prime picking up a young cub, to men having to build themselves into something to create value while women are just born with their value based on T and A, youth, and fertility.
His work’s usefulness is in identifying typical behaviors that are ultimately bad for relationships and marriage. For example, all young men ought to know about the dualistic breeding strategy hard-wired into the women in their lives. Being able to identify and understand these behaviors is the first step towards addressing them and possibly fixing them.
Rollo’s enduring contribution to the sphere will always be putting into words the marriage and dating marketplace and defining the valuations of the respective sexes when it comes to dating and marriage. His work in these areas is foundational for understanding macro trends with men and women when it comes to relationships.
Rollo Tomassi and the Christian Manosphere Agree on Many Topics
Many of Rollo’s foundational principles and theoretical models have strong correlations to what the Christian Manosphere has come up with. A few examples of these correlations are as follows.
The Christian Manosphere likens the current MMP to Hosea or Job, cites 1 Corinthians 7:29, and recognizes that this is going to be happening to increasing numbers of men as the years and decades wear on. Thedeti often points out that men are not attractive enough to compete in today’s SMP/MMP. Soup Sandwich used to talk about all the men he counseled in his profession, and that many of them self-deleted. Similarly, Rollo used to talk about men getting “zeroed out” — Men losing jobs, careers, homes, spouses, children… everything. All their accomplishments, achievements, and possessions lost or destroyed or taken. Reduced to zero.
Rollo says the only way for these men to survive is to adopt a mindset of “No lasting attachments” and “If I have to, I’m walking out immediately.” This loosely correlates with Thedeti’s approach of putting his foot down and demanding better from a wife, even if it costs a man everything.
Rollo’s axiom, “The medium is the message” is a practical praxeology that correlates with Σ Frame Axiom 7: “The natural interaction defines the relationship structure according to which model it fits best, not what we think it is or hope for it to be.” Thus, according to Rollo’s view, if a woman ghosts you at various times — that is the message. If the conversation falls off before the first date happens — that is the message. According to Σ Frame, this particular interaction indicates that the man has no real authority over this woman, relational, sexual, or otherwise, and that Headship is very unlikely to develop.
Lastly, Rollo’s exposition of the Male Burden of Performance and his admonition that it is VERY unlikely, if not impossible that a man will EVER be “loved for who he really is” compares closely with the conclusions obtained by the Christian Manosphere; namely, that a man needs to have a purpose and a vision in life, and that if a man keeps after his Blue Pilled notions for too long, his life will revert to cringe status, and it will literally k!ll him in the current marriage / romance market. Dalrock went further to elucidate how the preeminence of ‘romantic love’, as described by Rollo, has been elevated to an idol of selfishness that has replaced Christian morality. Σ Frame has pointed out the apathy shown towards men in the church and added that men must take care of themselves and minister to each other.
The Shortcomings of Rollo’s Work
Rollo’s early writings played a central role in setting the fuse that detonated the SMP over the past decade and sparked the rise of MGTOW. This was not entirely a bad thing, as it brought an end to much of the deception, depravity, and false hopes that were inherent in the former, Blue Pill drenched SMP. However, the fallout has been devastating to men (and to women too as of late).
Men’s general reaction to his writings (summarized in this post) is intense anger, disgust with wimmin, and hopelessness. Furthermore, IMO, out of all the most renown Red Pill writers, Rollo is perhaps most responsible for the widespread Red Pill angst, bitterness, and hopelessness in the Western SMP/MMP. He has addressed this reaction in many of his writings.
His obvious motivation is an attempt to “shake the ghosts out of the machine” and analyze the mating dance as it is. The problem with Rollo’s work is not its’ empiricism, but his trying to import the epistemology of the exact sciences into life in general. Under the premises he states within an assumed context, he arrives at logical conclusions, but the sensible meanings thereof necessarily bring about nihilism in his readers.
Why?
In the process of creating an inductive abstract model of human behaviors, the logical reduction of the number of variables necessarily requires some omissions. Rollo has chosen three key considerations to omit from his calculations, discussed as follows.
1. NOT Regarding People as Human Beings
People, as he describes them, are evolutionary robots, and he assumes that this is how people in general actually are. Qualities which define men and women as human and make life worth living, such as desire, devotion, glory, humility, joy, love, purpose, thankfulness, values, etc. are cast aside as irrelevant to his analyses.
Case Study 1 — Guys Who Don’t F_ck (are Losers)
Rollo Tomassi: Guys who don’t fuck. (2024/1/31)
In this piece, Rollo argues that coital encounters are the Be All and End All of Relationships.
The problem with his argument is his round condemnation of guys who don’t f_ck as being ‘lesser men’. This may be true strictly in terms of staking out territory and having a socio-sexual / evolutionary advantage, but there are also many disadvantages with prioritizing sexual conquests which work against procreation that he fails to mention.
We also know that most women are attracted to ‘Bad Boy’ / ‘Dark Triad’ / narcissistic / villainous types. So he’s basically arguing that these types of men are ‘greater men’. The problem with this reasoning is obvious.
Also, when too many women sit and spin on the carousel, the resulting centripetal force causes most men on the periphery to fly off. This is a consequence of market dynamics and NOT necessarily an indicator of a man’s character.
Adam and Gunner have also responded to Rollo’s piece.
- Adam Piggott: Spiritual Survival in the Sexual Marketplace (2024/2/1)
- Gunner Q: Rollo In the Rear-View Mirror (2024/2/2)
* Dalrock, Jack, Larry Kummer, et al. have pointed out that our general respect for men and male authority must not be discarded.
2. No Regard for Metaphysical Reality
In emphasizing evo psyche / naturalist materialism, Rollo has discarded the important effects of boundaries, faith, gestalt, honor, love, reputation, self-control, virtue, etc. Obviously, you can see how this is unpalatable to Christians. We believe in free will, an immortal soul, and a loving God. Even the most ardent atheists cannot live as evolutionary robots and only claim to in order to win arguments.
Case Study 2 — The Errancy of Sex Sans Headship
The Eye of Sauron wrote,
“The 70s-80s-and a little bit of the 90s’ was the perfect time if you were a man who was inclined toward serial monogamy. Rollo has said that serial monogamy is the female preferred dating strategy,* and I can accept that as a generality. It’s just that in my case, for whatever reason, I preferred it too. It was very easy to achieve and felt “correct” morally and emotionally.
Looking back now, I realize I was playing their (women’s) own game and found that it is lacking in some key areas for me. Luckily, human males do not have their ability to bond decimated by multiple partners as tends to happen to women.
Once you have plowed through that many women (and realize that they have all been doing the same for all these years), it becomes increasingly difficult to find a woman who is not wrecked by previous relationship baggage, even if she was not a “sl#t.” Many of them were following the life script as presented and had no idea the damage it would do them long term.
The men over 35 reading here know exactly what I am talking about.* I can’t even imagine what navigating all this now feels like. It must be humiliating.”
* Rollo, TEoS, and many key Manospherians are Xers, and they are, in many ways, a product of their time.
3. No Consideration of Long Term Outcome
Coming of age, dating, mating, and marriage all have a season in life. During those seasons, it is all-consuming. But it becomes less so after a man develops his identity and the major issues are settled. Most guys completely age out of this sometime in their 40s or early 50s and then focus on other things in life. But the godfather of ye olde Manosphere never looks that far ahead. It is as if he wants to tell us to Sit-and-Spin on the Carousel until you get Bedsores on Your Hairy Old Wrinkled Ass.
The thing that Rollo keeps missing is that there is more to life than slip dipping the stiff snake that spits through its winker.
- What about children?
- What about the effects on the community?
- What about building a domain or a legacy?
- What about glorifying God through having a family?
- What about the Christ : Church :: Husband : Wife model?
At this point, it seems he just churning out whatever he thinks will get more views, clicks, and cash.
Case Study 3 — The Dead End of the Road
The longitudinal outcome of sticking to Rollo’s analyses as a pillar of masculine identity or as a prescription leads to either despondence or depravity.
LocustsPlease said,
“I stopped following Rollo a while ago [as did many Christian Red Pillers], when the heathen secular Manosphere started to irritate my Christian ears. The way he sits in his chair with the guitar behind him looks like horns.
He had this wh0remongerer on constantly bragging about how many playmates, bikini models, porn stars, and assorted harlots he was friends with. Maybe it’s an accomplishment to incels. That was an accomplishment to me 15-20 years ago, but not now. And yeah, his vasectomy comment needed a better explanation. I remember hearing about it and being confused. He is normally over-analytical.”
Conclusions
Rollo Tomassi’s view of the world only describes how soulless people behave (for instance, most of the girls on Fresh & Fit). As such, his work offers an excellent analysis of the fleshly nature, but it excludes any higher place or purpose related to man’s identity of being made in the image of God. It is for this reason that he is hated by Churchians, Conservatives, Liberals, Media, and anyone else who is allergic to truth. However, we must be careful not to reject the ugly truths about human nature that he has exposed simply because they are ugly. We would be better served to use his insights to enhance our discernment, self-awareness, and wisdom, and perhaps also introspection, repentance, and vetting.
Related
- Σ Frame: The Dispensation of the Red Pill (2018/4/7)
- Σ Frame: Rollo Tomassi on Female Agency (2022/11/4)
- Σ Frame: The Godfather undermines Fatherhood. (2023/7/10)
- Σ Frame: Lovebreaker (2024/3/20)
- Σ Frame: Rollo Tomassi’s Concepts of ‘Love’ (2024/4/15)
- Σ Frame: Rollo Tomassi’s Take on the Meet Cute Phenomenon (2024/4/29)
ArchAngel
caterpillar345
Soup Sandwich
Lexet Blog
Novaseeker
Oscar
Red Pill Apostle
Jack
thedeti
Σ Frame 
Think you hit the nail on the head. It actually highlights a kind of inherent schizophrenia you see in some psychology (as an academic discipline). Assumption one is we are all evolutionary meat robots, and assumption two is we can use our free will to better ourselves. Obviously trying to believe in total determinism and free will at the same time is going to do funny things to your mind.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Don’t expect people to be something other than what they are. Rollo doesn’t promise you The Meaning of Life or The Truth. He’s not an oracle or even a guru. He used to say, “I’m just a guy who connected some dots.”
Rollo is a 21st century Morpheus, telling you “All I’m offering is the truth” (lower case “t”). Or, paraphrased, “All I’m offering you are facts about male and female nature. What you do with this knowledge is up to you.”
No, his view of the world describes how people behave in a wide open free sexual market that even Christians participate in. Remember: He’s describing male nature and female nature. This is how people act, including Christian people. Don’t believe me? Go to any local church and you’ll see a Sunday morning nightclub in which fully half the wives are cheating on their husbands and the other half desperately want to; and most of the men are so incredibly frustrated it’s palpable.
Exactly. That gets back to the first point. Here are the ugly truths. Ignore me if you want, look away if you must, but the truth doesn’t stop being the truth simply because you won’t acknowledge it as such, don’t like it, or won’t examine it.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Rollo’s “Average Frustrated Chump” describes Vox Day’s “Gamma” male:
There is a lot of exploitation for the 60-80 % men going on, based on the delusion that by some Tradcon / W0ke magic they will become attractive to women.
Once they blow this delusion and are ready to face reality, their lives will improve, while the lives of those deluding and exploiting them won’t.
Compare this to the Book Exodus. It won’t be pretty for a while.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thedeti,
Where is the line between sinful, soulless, and depraved?
LikeLike
Good question, but for most men’s purposes, I’m not sure it matters. What matters is how men address women in the “power” position they currently occupy in the SMP/MMP, and how men deal with facts on the ground/boots on the ground. Fact is that most men will be going without while most women share the top 10% of men. Just how it is and how it will be going forward.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“The Patriarch edition” is ironic. And their lifestyle isn’t conducive to effective Patriarchal Dynasties.
Like the so called fake machismo of roidheads like this one:
Masculinity comes from inner integrity as much as physical competence. Being a roidhead whose buttons are easily pushed is a weakness that could very well be exploited to cause self-destruction.
Jesus was perfect in inner integrity. And hence his enemies found it hard to overcome him. Until he allowed himself to be crucified and suffer his Father’s Wrath.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Bingo!
The man who governs himself is masculine. That’s not even a Christian concept, it was universally accepted by many generations of philosophers.
Lest anyone think that was a case of soy boys coping with their weaknesses, according to Thucydides, Socrates was an absolute badass in combat, and Plato was an Olympic wrestler.
Men aren’t supposed to behave like giant toddlers. We’re supposed to understand the times and behave accordingly.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“If your enemy is quick to anger, provoke him.” ~ Sun Tzu, The Art of War
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep. Simply being Angry isn’t Masculine. Its Anger that is properly controlled and channeled to effective action.
LikeLiked by 2 people
And the fact of his extensive Tattoos are a sign of the fake Machismo that he has.
In fact some of the greatest Soldiers looked and dressed like standard Office Workers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Those who believe in Evolution as opposed to what God told us happened, are already going to be predisposed towards feeling a greater sense of meaninglessness, if they think logically and rationally. If you imagine that the intentionality behind your special-creation is a lie, and that instead you’re just the current stage of a super lengthy process of unguided eugenics, then you really must conjure up some additional meaning for your life, to raise it up to the level that is intrinsic to the viewpoint of the Creationist.
LikeLike
There’s no money in any of that.
There’s no money in any of that either.
That’s putting it mildly.
That, and it gives them an excuse to behave immorally.
That’s false.
There’s no money in teaching men to look that far ahead.
Leave out the part about the hairy old wrinkled ass and the message sells, and long before men age out of that message there’s a whole new crop of young men from whom to grift.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” ― Upton Sinclair
There’s no money in any of that.
Yeah, so like I said…..
LikeLike
Oscar,
You said what EoS wrote is false.
You’re both partly right. There have been some estimated numbers offered by the Classic Manosphere, allowing some variance depending on the individual.
Women’s ability to pair bond is lost after ~5 partners.*
Men’s ability to pair bond is lost after ~25 partners.
In general, women get burned out about 5 times faster than men, so to speak.
EoS’s count is under 25, so he probably didn’t experience that.
* I used this data to write Bon Mot of Slut Science (2017/10/13)
LikeLiked by 1 person
I can’t give you an exact number, but I’ve observed that women burn out faster than men. I agree with that, as I’ve said before. I disagree that men don’t burn out at all. That’s why a lot of red pill grifters have switched to saying that it’s not cheating when men do it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Is this true?
https://x.com/DeanAbbott/status/1794368495615950904
LikeLike
It’s a convoluted way to express Rollo’s “men who don’t f_ck” trying to emulate “men who f_ck” and ultimately failing at deceiving women about their socio-sexual rank. Once a women correctly identified the male’s position, she is going to react accordingly.
LikeLike
Info,
“The more nervous he gets, the more he will resort to manipulative or coercive tactics. Women sense this and, even if they comply with this kind of guy, will ultimately lose respect for him.“
A good man will try to coerce, at least for a time. His wife does sense the coercion attempts as weakness and often does not yield because of this making his life pretty miserable. This type of wife is a boat anchor on her husband, making him have to pull three times as hard to accomplish anything in life.
The wife that sees her husband trying to lead, then fights him on it and ultimately loses respect for him because she’s contentious leaves her husband with one option and one option alone to prove he isn’t weak. That option is to leave her.
The type of woman who fights for control and then loses respect for her man for how he enforces his leadership is the problem Every. Single. Time. This becomes readily apparent when we compare such a woman to the role God gave her as a helper. She is to nurture, encourage, build up, support and specifically help her husband in his areas where he needs it (his weaker spots).
All men have weak spots, meaning all men get nervous, have fears and areas of uncertainty. Her loss of respect ultimately shows she’s bad at her job.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Sounds like Hyperagency of men that is talked about by Zerse:
LikeLike
LikeLike
Pingback: Philosophical Dualism | Σ Frame
Pingback: The Challenge of Transcending the Abyss | Σ Frame