(Note: In 2013 I wrote the multi-part series of blog posts The Great Manosphere Invasion of Russia. Below you’ll find a barely edited follow-up article, which I didn’t get around to publish until now. Did I mention that I’ve been very busy the last few years?)

We’ve spent quite some time discussing the problems of the manosphere, not just from a more philosophical perspective by exposing their shaky theoretical foundations, if you want to call them that, but also by highlighting the stupidities those people act out in real life. It’s one thing to sit in your mother’s basement filling your head with manosphere nonsense. Nobody cares about that and people will leave you alone. On the other hand, if you make plans “slaying pussy” in the Russian hinterlands, although you can’t even get laid in the West, you only invite ridicule.

But let’s have a long deep look at Roosh himself. I really have no idea where this guy is going. He claims to have worked in biotechnology, but if this would have been a six-figure gig, I don’t think he would have left so readily. Just think about it: What is so enticing about vagabonding around the world when you’ve got a secure job, plenty of dough, and enough spare time? Sure, I get the idea of rebelling and sticking it to the man, but among the geniuses who weren’t fortunate enough to have been born into the upper class, it was quite common to hold a day job to pay the bills and then spend your spare time on your passion, whatever it may be.

The previous shouldn’t strike you as odd at all. A large part of progress in science is due to outsiders who didn’t want to conform to institutional pressures, or couldn’t swallow their pride. The most famous example is quite possibly Albert Einstein, who couldn’t even get a job as a physics teacher, and ended up as a clerk in the patent office, before revolutionizing his field. In other disciplines, it seems that virtually all progress has come from outsiders. Just look at philosophy, for instance. I’m digressing, though. The point I want to make is simply that you can arrange yourself with the world. Nobody demands that you put in 100 hours a week on minimum wage. If you think you’ll “show ’em” by moving to the Third World, digital-nomad style, living off $250/month, you’re deluded.

But what do you do if you think the world has trapped you, and that all the women around you suck? Frankly, it’s quite a statement to collectively denounce all of the women in the US. Of course, if you’re an uncultured brute who never left the intellectual level of your average frat, then you may find it hard to accept that women have — gosh — some standards regarding the guys they fuck. It’s not as if you can waltz into a hipster bar, think they are all douches, dress like Roosh, and walk out with the hottest chick. You simply have to put in some work if you want to get laid, and this is a point I’ve been hammering so hard that I’m getting tired of repeating it. Yet, plenty of guys are deluded and think they deserve the hottest girls because, well, because they are who they are. This is as absurd has overhearing some walruses discussing who’s the most eligible bachelor in the States.

I’ll reiterate: to get something out of dating, you have to put something in it, too. It’s the same in any activity, be it sports, education, or, heck, even video games. However, people are always looking for shortcuts. They buy supplements that promise to bulk them up, cheat on tests and confuse the piece of paper they’ll graduate with with what it is supposed to represent, or play games that offer instant gratification and little substance. But where is the “cheat code” for dating? After not getting anywhere in the US, Roosh V concluded that the solution has to lie elsewhere: abroad.

I’ve covered the problem with believing in the existence of a pussy paradise abroad, as well as the Mighty Whitey trope before. The reasoning of such people is rather simple: it sucks wherever you are, but if you just went somewhere else, the world would suddenly be better. But how much truth is there to it? Not much at all. Even Roosh himself admits that he’s basically just banging the occasional 6. Is this a life worth emulating? What is even worse is that guys like Roosh show little compassion. To them a good-looking woman just represents another potential notch on the bedpost, and if they don’t get her, then they’ll gladly go for one of her ugly girlfriends, too, with little interest in her at all. Evidence of this is of course the PUA and manosphere thinking of dating as some kind of algorithmic procedure: Do X, and if she does Y, respond with Z. Repeat.

But here is some ugly truth for PUAs: you may think that girls are interchangeable. However, the girls you’re approaching and those who eventually go for you view you in exactly the same light. Roosh V isn’t really attracted to the 6 he pulls, and the 6 isn’t particularly attracted to him either. However, if all he brings to the table is his almost unconditional willingness to have sex with more or less any girl who would want him, then he’s hardly unique. The consequence of this is that he will find it harder and harder to get anywhere with girls. Roosh V has a pathetic track record, and that’s pretty much all he has ever had, even back in Washington, DC. Now that he’s around 40, younger women will find it more and more difficult to relate to him. (2017 addendum: Roosh V seemingly dropped writing about how to pick up women altogether, and instead focuses mainly on politics.)

Please note that I’m not knocking Roosh V in particular, but anybody who thinks he can be this super player until he dies of old age. The women will age with Roosh V, and all he’ll ever get out of it is random sex with some chick every two or three weeks. Is this really so much better than having an okay job, and a nice girlfriend or wife? The “betas” he and his ilk make fun of lead stable, secure lives and most likely have more sex with hotter women.

Lastly, let me briefly discuss the many alleged psychological defects of women. Sure, there are some entitled bitches out there. However, there are also plenty of disagreeable men out there. The manosphere seems to be full of them. The problem is that if you view human interaction as nothing but a quid pro quo, in other words, if all you ever ask yourself is, “What’s in it for me?” then you’re headed straight for a life of misery. If all you want to see in other people are their negative aspects or, even worse, if all you ever do is project your own insecurities and twisted worldview on them, then this is what will be reflected back to you. Perceived reality is, to a large degree, a construction of your own mind. If you only want to see the bad things, then that’s all you’re ever going to see.