All Poetry and Such is available for Free; Thoughts on the Manosphere

Hello friends. I’ve made all my formerly Amazon-published writings for free on Scribd.

They are no longer on Amazon. You can reprint, republish, and distribute them as much as you like without paying me anything so long as you don’t screw with my original intentions. Kind of vague, but I think it’s clear what I mean. Respect my work, and you can do what you like with it.

So if you’ve ever wanted to read more BN but were too cheap to pay $3, then you can go help yourself now. They aren’t available on Amazon anymore. Or at least I’m in the process of deleting my account.

I’ve also included some additional writings as an appendix. A few of them are really good. Most are negligible, but I put them all the way in the back. The best ones are at the front of the appendix.


It’s been a year and a half. You are probably wondering how I’m doing.

Writing for ROK was a great experience I will always be grateful for. Having hundreds of thousands of people clamor to hear my thoughts on life was a very rare experience that I am so glad to have had.

But I’m also glad I don’t write for them anymore. For one thing, the website has changed in ways I don’t like, although I’m not sure Roosh was wrong for making the changes. When I first started writing in September 2014, I wasn’t sure I was allowed to openly say that Christianity is good and secularism is bad, and so I wrote around it and made sure to give the audience what they wanted. My, how things have changed…

But also because I don’t like being obsessed with the bad things in society. Things like ROK or the Alt-Right or TakiMag or what-have-you are great for six months, but after that it starts to grow stale and you feel like you are just re-reading everything.

And also, the comments section on ROK is absolutely awful (unlike the comments section on the BN Blog, at least some times). Seriously guys, go fuck yourselves. I spent hours writing my articles, getting them perfect and obsessing over small details about flow and musicality, writing them a month in advance, and then without even reading them you insult me in the comments section with the worst language you can think up. Show some gratitude. You’ll write a thesis in the comments correcting me but never actually submit something of your own. It’s not like ROK would likely have rejected your slop. When I published my law school article and read the comments, that was the day I truly hated my readers, and so I edited my “Most Men Don’t Deserve A Wife” article to be extra harsh as a “fuck you” to the comments, and then I didn’t read the comments just to make it a waste of their time. You validate every bad stereotype about the Manosphere.

Back on topic. My own writing, most of it is just saying “Girls suck”. And while that’s true that most of the girls of my generation are ugly in every sense of the word and love ugly things in every sense of the word (just go look at the jewelry counter at Belk), there’s only so many ways you can re-iterate that. I wrote more on femininity than on masculinity. Had I continued to write for another year, there would have been very little new. I needed and do need the time off to let it sink it and take its effect. I am in my mid-20s. Do you really expect me to have the world figured out?

Some articles I’m somewhat embarrassed about. I had one saying that pregnant women whose husband dies should give up their newborn for adoption, and there was one on the BN Blog that said women aren’t raped if they only ask the guy to quit. I don’t think I agree with my conclusions on those anymore, but I also still think that morality questions about single motherhood or what constitutes consent are still very difficult to answer. I would say that 95% of my writing I still agree with, but the attitude in general is too arrogant and inexperienced. I think my main problem — and this is something I see throughout my life — was that I was too quick to give an answer to a difficult question. I don’t like walking away from a challenge.

The in-real-life friends I’ve shown my writing to seem to like it much more than I do, so I’m probably being too hard on myself. I think articles on Barbie and Docility were my highlights.


The inherent problem with the Manosphere (or whatever they call it today) is one of the conditions of masculinity — you have to pretend you have everything together for other men to respect you. Like all things in masculinity and femininity, this is not inherently good or bad but just is a condition, and it can be used for good or bad based on the situation.

In order to have credibility, the writer has to pretend he has everything figured out. If I were to write, “Really, I’m a pretty lonely guy, and I had a hard time learning to interact with other kids my age growing up, so I’m still processing through all of this, and I almost never go on dates because I only date girls I can see myself marrying, and I live in a black-majority town, and good girls here (or in general) don’t go out with guys they don’t know, and also I belong to a really obscure vein of Christianity that looks like a cult, and I have bad social skills and women can sense my hostility and desperation no matter how much I try to cover it up, but I think I also have some good insights into the fall of civilization”, then it would seem as though everything I wrote was invalid. No one wants to read someone else’s diary (even though I realize there are plenty of badly written diary blogs on the internet, mostly by young liberal women). And so to compensate, I became more of an armchair philosopher and didn’t write much on practicality. The worldview was the same, but because I implied something that wasn’t entirely true (sometimes painfully obviously like in the “Never Envy A Woman” article), it got wider acceptance.

This is why the Manosphere will never go mainstream. Even if it tried, it could never go across this condition, because masculinity (and femininity) is not something that can be erased or modified as needed. The common reader can see that I’m putting on a façade, even if I never technically tell a lie, and so he thinks it’s all just bluffing. After all, not everyone on that site can be Hercules, and some things writers teach (a man’s sexual experience doesn’t hurt his SMV, a man’s SMV improves in his 30s) are so blatantly false, that the rest of society will never trust the Manosphere.

In fairness, that’s not just a Manosphere thing. Even “I’m old and childless and totally happy” Oprah Winfrey does it to peddle her life advice. Nobody wants to take advice from an amateur. But whereas the Oprah genre is just comfort food, what the Manosphere teaches is difficult and sometimes painful and requires a lot of hard changes and personal sacrifice (notice the parallels with Christianity), and so there’s a lot more room for error. It’s more of an all-or-nothing philosophy, but it’s also built from a patchwork of experience and good guesses, so it’s inherently imperfect and constantly changing (here the parallels with Christianity end).

Creative people are, almost by definition, vulnerable sensitive people. This includes the good writers on ROK. The bad writers aren’t creative and aren’t interesting to read, so they don’t matter. But the writers on ROK you like, they are almost certainly sensitive artistic types who had a bad childhood and are trying to make a better life for themselves. And part of that process of making a better life involves a lot of trial and error, which is exactly opposite of the “I have everything altogether” mentality you need to portray to be an expert on life advice. The Manosphere was supposed to be men comparing notes, but due to male nature, it quickly devolved away from that into dick-measuring as soon as it grew popular. And there is definite good in the Manosphere, and there are still writers I like, but “neomasculinity” will never be the mainstream movement it wants to become, and it’s not the kind of genre I want to write, nor is it the kind of audience I want to write for.

You are probably wondering if I will ever go back to ROK some day at least part time. I am open to the possibility, but I probably just torched my chances. If I did go back, I would wait until I had more life experience. At least until I was married. Maybe in a couple years you’ll get another email saying, “New Post on the BN Blog,” but I wouldn’t hold out on it.

ROK is like my short-lived plumbing career. I’m very glad I did it, and I gained a lot of very valuable information. But I’m also very glad I don’t do it anymore.

New Poetry Book Is Ready To Purchase (And Some Final Thoughts On Quitting)

I’ve compiled the various poems I’ve written since my last volume (plus just a few I had written in college and lost). It’s called A Second Round On The House. It’s a little shorter than I would like, although not nearly as much as I thought it would be. While it covers much the same subject matter, it has far less profanity, since I didn’t write it bored in philosophy class. Still has much the same teenage-like angst mixed with dreamy fairy tale themes, though.

You should also realize that Amazon wants to jack up the cost of your self-published books. I was hoping The Death Of Ideology would be cheaper, but I wanted to make some profit off of it. However, despite rave reviews, neither happened, so A Second Round On The House will be $7.00, giving me $1.77 per paperback sold. So if you buy my books and enjoy them, TELL YOUR FRIENDS. The Kindle version is only $3.00 or free if you buy the paperback first. It’s also free for Kindle Unlimited subscribers.

I paid $100 for reviews of The Death Of Ideology and probably didn’t make $10 off of it. This time I’m not paying anything for reviews, although Matt Forney and maybe Janet Bloomfield will review them anyway. If you want to know if I’m a good poet (instead of believing the trolls on Amazon who voted it down just because of the subject matter), I’ve got free samples of the first work. And I’ve now made a third sample available of The Death Of Ideology.

Click Here to Buy A Second Round On The House: Another Collection of Poetry From Blair Naso

I realize the last anthology had some minor proofreading errors. I’ll probably go back in the near future and fix those, since either CreateSpace has made it easier or I’ve better figured it out. I’ve always been bad with technology. The errors in the last volume probably weren’t as bad as Matt Forney made them out to be, but in fairness, I wouldn’t have written a second anthology if not for his review. So I can’t be too upset. At any rate, rest assured that the new volume won’t have that kind of sand in it.

Gratitude Over The Last Week

I also want to thank everyone who emailed me or left a comment asking me not to leave the Manosphere. I didn’t realize people liked reading me that much, since even I don’t really like my writing. Nor do I 100% fit the ideology. Frankly, the reader response was very touching. I had maybe not quite a dozen emails and comments in all. But it’s changed nothing.

It seems that the writers understood I wasn’t leaving over AmRen but the readers figured I was just making excuses. I assure you, AmRen is a near non-factor. And if AmRen was anything like a deciding influence, then your emails and comments would have convinced me to stick around. Most of the embarrassment has died off after a week.

Since quitting, the general weight off my back since has been enormous. Being a marginally successful internet personality is far more stressful than I imagined, something I have never handled well. I have a lot of things going on in my personal life over the last several years, much of which I wrote about in A Second Round On The House but don’t want on such an easily referenceable source as a blog.

At heart I never even wanted to write anti-feminism. I wanted to write theology, although I doubt that will ever happen either way. Fools rush in where angles fear to tread (to quote a Bob Dylan song).

ROK happened to be the first website that accepted my work, since I was previously rejected by Cracked and OrthodoxyAndHeterodoxy. I think part of Manosphere writing for me was a kind of rebellion, since I had had a bitter falling out with a monastic spiritual mentor just a week or so before I came across the Manosphere and less than two months before I began writing.

Furthermore, I haven’t written anything unique or new. All the Manosphere is doing is regurgitating what we’ve always known, especially those like me who focus on armchair sociology and not game. If we were to all die, our ideology would still win. There are bits of red pill in everything you see, because red pill is merely reality regardless of whether anyone accepts it. (I could swear the writers of the Netflix show Bojack Horseman have read plenty of red pill literature.)

For those of you who are curious, the name Blair Naso is a reference to George Orwell (whose real name was Eric Blair) and the Roman poet Ovid (whose Roman name was Publius Ovidius Naso), two of my favorite writers. Orwell’s essays are fantastic and unfortunately largely forgotten. He’s the one who taught me how to read Shakespeare, and I’m just a little bitter at ROK for shitting all over the fantastic Down and Out in Paris and London. Ovid is absolutely charming and coincidentally wrote the first book on game.


There is an invisible hand at play. These things correct themselves in time by default. The reason the left fights so hard is because they know what an uphill battle they have. One cannot dismantle the patriarchy any more than one can undo gravity, and it is much the same for the neo-reactionary and race realism beliefs. These are not so much ideologies as they are natural laws.

Times are dark now, perhaps more or less so than we think, but our grandchildren will live in a better world. Or if not a better world, then at least a happier one, because I cannot imagine a society with more individual misery than our society today.

female misery

Read More: “If You Want to Change the World, Love a Man” By Lauren Wilce

Quitting The Manosphere

I’m quitting the Manosphere and will very likely not return, because it’s been exacerbating some personal demons in my life for the last several months, which I won’t go into detail here with a sob story.

It would seem like this is a product of the fiasco at AmRen, but that would be a wrong assumption. AmRen at the very most only moved it up by a few weeks, if even that. This has been coming for a while, and it takes more than a few dorks who live on the internet to make me quit. That post I wrote on it was my swan song. I’m quite proud of it. It’s much more layered than one might think.

Suffice it to say that the immaterial benefits no longer outweigh the drawbacks. However, I’m still going to publish my second book of poetry within the next few weeks on the off chance someone buys it. Last time the critics loved it despite its near non-existent sales. I’ll publish a post once I have it up. I’ve still got another ROK post in the hanger.

I realize some people will call me a blue pill beta whatever who quit as soon as it got hard, but I don’t care. I’m doing this for myself, not for internet strangers. Someone else will write these things that need saying.

Also, the Manosphere is pretty bleak reading. I could have gone my whole life without being exposed to Jessica Valenti and Lindy West. We are writing against some truly vile and empty human beings on a very deep level of the soul, regardless of their actions. I think any man or woman who is exposed to mainstream feminism long enough will lose some part of himself, no matter what his reaction.

I’m completely stepping away and almost certainly won’t be back. If someone doxes me and tells lies or embarrassing truths, it won’t affect my career. If someone makes a fake Blair Naso profile and says things to make me look bad or good, then it won’t be more than a mild annoyance. I’ll leave this blog up for the archives, though.

Ever since I was a child, I’ve wanted to be a writer of some kind. Now I don’t think so anymore. I guess there really is no such thing as a dream job. Even if I made $50k a year writing, it would still be a major drain that I would dread.

Update: The second book is ready to purchase, and I’ve added a few final thoughts on quitting.

Read More: An Email Summarizing the Red Pill Movement

In Defense Of The Crusades

This is a guest post by Vincent Law. It was originally published on Atavistic Intelligentsia.

Of all things, why defend the Crusades? Because, there is nothing that undermines Tradition more than historical revisionism. A people dispossessed and ashamed of their own history are susceptible to suggestions from all quarters. You are not the proud descendents of Europe, the conquerors of the known world, the vanguard of christianity, you are just _____ (insert revision here). We know what gets filled into the blanks nowadays: “You are just CIS privileged white oppressors!” If you do not know your own history, what can you say against that? Or what about the claim that Christianity caused the Crusades and the mass killing of non-christians all over the world. “Aren’t you ashamed to be a Christian? How dare you be proud of your heritage of oppression!?”

Think about how few people know about their own history nowadays. This is not a chance happenstance, but part of concerted strategy to make us forget who we are. Sure, your average human ignorance plays a role here, but that is why history has always been a mandatory subject of instruction. An understanding of who you are is inseparable from what came before you, and what you aspire to be. If you don’t know the history of your own faith, you are also susceptible to the venom of those that hate everything your culture stands for, to the mad ravings of a charismatic church pastor even, or the self-flagellation of our ruling SJW Politburo. Existentialist philosopher Sam Keen diagnosed the problem well in his book, To a Dancing God.

“Until recent years the keystone of personal identity was participation in the shared stories, legends, and myths of a tribe, nation, cult or church. The past, present, and future of the individual were bound together by the memories and hopes of a people to which he belonged. With the birth of secular, pluralistic, technological society, a new type of man has emerged– the man without a story, the rootless protean man living without the stability of a tradition which her remembers with pride or a future he awaits with longing.”

So what do we do? How do we recover our sense of being part of something greater, our feeling of belonging, our belief in our own destiny? Its simple, we teach our children their own history. Lets start with the much maligned crusades of the 13th,12th, and 11th centuries. Teach then about how the crusading ideal, aka an alliance between christian princes under the command of religious authority for holy war against infidels, was born not in the 11th century, but in the 9th in the context of Muslim invasions of France and Italy. Tell them about the great battles that Christianity had to fight to maintain its existence in Europe, against invading armies of a foreign religion.

Start with this:

Then show them this:

And this:

Teach them that for about 500 years, Christianity’s very existence was in peril from Muslim invaders. And that the Crusades, were born out of a need to wage defensive warfare even before it was brought to the Holy Land. Teach them about how Thomas Aquinas basically had to create a just war theory from scratch to justify self-defense of Christianity before the Christian authorities were convinced of the morality of going on Crusade against a religion that was founded by a warlord, on warring ideals, and forcible conquering and conversion of infidels.

Remind them that they are here, that their very culture exists because their ancestors fought for what was theirs, and that when their backs were against the wall, they finally had enough and decided to stake their claim to exist in this world. Tell them that the West owes its very existence to the Crusades. And finally remind them, that fundamentally, absolutely nothing has changed in this world, and that our complacency as a people endangers everything our ancestors spilled blood and spent treasure to build. Or better yet, just show them this: crusades Read More: God Only Knows Why Women Are So Cold

How To (Not) Argue With A Leftist

The above short video isn’t particularly worth watching. An willfully ugly woman who uses feminism to avoid responsibility for why she’s so miserable and lonely mocks a group of people who try to reason with her. Supposedly she was acting flippantly after a man had committed suicide, but the video is difficult to understand.

The mistake the people arguing with her make is that they are trying to be reasonable. Perhaps you can be reasonable with a woman who is well-trained by a traditionalist man, but you can never reason with a leftist of either sex.

My solution is just to make fun of liberals. A bit of a double standard, sure, but I’m interested in results here. I’ve dropped the term “SJW” in favor of the more demeaning term “young white liberal”, because it’s makes them feel ignorant and racist. And if the person is elderly, then “aging hippie” suffices well enough.

Liberalism is an identity—particularly a smug one—so I find it best to cut down their identity however possible. Tell them they are ignorant and that they just want to feel like a good person after accomplishing nothing in life.

And really, most liberals adopt their beliefs as a fashion statement. They view blacks and queers like pets. They dote on them with affection, but they have no interest in interacting with them in depth. It gives them a sense of accomplishment after failing their way through life. All of which, when arguing with my liberal friends, I make a point to point out instead of using Aristotelian logic.

All the people who suddenly stormed Twitter to protest the Washington Redskins’s name, have they ever done anything at all to actually help the Indians? Most Indians are more worried about liver cancer or starving to death than they are about an offensive name from a team halfway across the country, because only a young white liberal or a black person gets offended over things that don’t affect them.

Why are young white liberals and blacks so often manipulated by demagogues and internet activism? Because, with a few rare exceptions, those groups are made up of painfully stupid people. Blacks have a culture of poverty, and young white liberals have a culture of narcissism. Both cultures make it near impossible to think rationally. And it’s near impossible to change a culture.

Read More: Why I Describe Myself As A “White Anglo-Saxon Protestant”

Why The Manosphere Will Win And The MRAs Will Lose Despite Whichever May Be Right

Before I ever came across the Red Pill, I was vaguely familiar with the men’s rights activists. And although I definitely agreed with many of their complaints, I had no interest in joining them before even investigating them. Why are men naturally put off by the MRAs?

Masculine Solutions

Because men are fixers. We want to solve problems ourselves. And we are economic with our resources, both material and immaterial. Complaining on the internet for something that won’t change any time soon seems like a waste of time and energy.

This is why men love the Manosphere so much. The Manosphere—despite it’s terribly dorky name sounding like a gay bar—is all about self-improvement. Take charge of your own life instead of waiting for someone else to do it for you. It’s empowering.

Same reason men love Art of Manliness but are less interested in GQ and AskMen. AOM is a mentor, and GQ and co are lecturers. I made a good faith effort to get into AskMen, but the advice seemed more like opinions than life experience. This recent article from AskMen is about how to date a feminist, which conveniently fits the popular narrative to avoid the dreaded label of “misogynist”.

And of course there is GQ’s hiring of Lindy West.

End of GQ

That’s GQ’s editor doing the white knighting there. Notice how he criticizes a “sausagefest”, as though you must be gay if you think men and women should have be allowed to have separate magazines. But then he criticizes me for being “heteronomative”, when he’s the one claiming to be afraid of his own dormant homosexuality. Also, I’m the “pedantic” one, but it’s his writer who’s talking about women’s legal issues in a men’s magazine. And I have no idea what the word “creep” means.

You can’t argue with a leftist.

Why The Men’s Rights Movement Is Full Of Women

Ever wonder why there are so many women in the MRM? Because filing complaints is how women solve things. Same reason most activists for any cause—with the possible exception of Black race rights—are women.

Women are snitches. Almost every time I have gotten in trouble at a job, it has been because a woman told on me. Same thing with grade school. Men usually have the self-respect to move past a problem and not bother the manager over his personal drama, but women will go out of their way to interrupt the important things going on at work in order to receive their perception of justice.

Despite feminists’ claims of empowerment, marching in the streets is an expression of impotency. It is admitting that you cannot take control of your own life, so you are asking someone else to fix it for you. While sometimes that may be the only viable solution, it is an admission of inadequacy.

The Nature Of Belief

People believe in something not because they think it is true but because they believe it has a function. I do this. You do this. Everyone does this. Men are more easily able to see the greater rationale and function than women, but we men still must always have a use for our beliefs.

The Red Pill Movement, though named after a shitty 90s scifi movie, provides men with answers and solutions. It is irrelevant to the success of the RPM whether or not these answers and solutions are correct, much how 60s feminism promised a rainbow and a song to women regardless of the reality.

Feminism will fail because men and increasingly more women believe that it offers them no solutions. AskMen can argue perfect Aristotelian logic all day long, but it will convert no one.

Feminists are the new evangelical Christians, believing that if they just hand out enough pamphlets or spread the news on Facebook enough, they’ll be able to build back up their momentum. Feminist apologetics—like those of the Christians—can accomplish nothing but cementing the faith of those who already adhere to the dogma.

Read More: People Who Want Equality Don’t Know What The Word Means

Why ROQ Failed: Lessons We Can All Learn From

I would just ignore this altogether, but I think on some level I owe it to the 35 or so loyal subscribers I’ve got. It really doesn’t deserve it’s own post, but here we go anyway. If nothing else, I’ve been dry on content lately, so it’s given me something to write.

Remember that time long ago when ROQ, despite the hate it got, put out quality content? (Yes, it really happened.)

Well, no more. They’ve thrown down the gauntlet. My suggestion is that we leave it there and ignore it. The article isn’t worth reading, but among other things they’ve accused us of encouraging rape and then pretended it was just an April Fool’s joke.

You may notice I have a comment there. That’s not actually what I wrote at all, although I suppose it’s still my fault. If a snake bites you once, then it’s your fault for getting bitten twice.

Dining With Enemies

I recently made the mistake of interacting with Return of Queens again, now known as Kings and Queens Return. For those of you who don’t know, ROQ was an ROK knock-off for women made last January. They soon began attacking us (so I’m told), and we decided to ignore them altogether. However, I wasn’t around at the time, so when I came across them in August, I thought very favorably of their recent content I had read. One article was on why you should never vote for a woman or a black person because only white men are expected to hold the best interest of everyone. Another was instructing women who want to get married on how to write classy online dating profiles without all the games.

Because I kept an eye on them once every couple months or so, I happened to notice the day they changed the site to KQR. We had a few interactions, and I wrote about it here (they’ve since also screwed with what I wrote on their About page). Somehow Rollo Tomasi found and tweeted it, giving me a huge traffic boost. Cool. During all of this, KQR invited me to write for them, but I declined since it seemed like a conflict of interest.

A few weeks ago, I looked them up out of curiosity. They had a big image that said “Fuck you Google” for canceling their advertising. I wrote them a polite email telling them it was trashy. They sent me a sarcastic personal attack. That’s the point where I should have learned my lesson.

The Manosphere Is For Adults Only

The article from last week is played off as an April Fool’s joke, but it’s thinly veiled. I wrote a comment about how it’s sad the direction the site has gone, and they changed it to a raving compliment. Then they made it so all the comments on the article had to be approved by a moderator so that I couldn’t protest.

This is as much my fault as it is theirs. I naively assumed ROQ had a good heart underneath everything, despite their obvious devolution into bitterness and self-absorption within the last half year or so. Old habits die hard, and I’m still under the delusion that if I just present the right information, I can bring people to agree with me. Therefore I can assume that I will make a similar mistake in the future.

A few Manosphere writers—although ROQ was never quite Manosphere—have changed what commenters’ wrote, and I’ve always found it low class. It’s like a child who delights in controlling others. But at least then that’s just some random hater. No matter what I wrote, the new owner of ROQ would have changed it to spite ROK and me. This was personal for him, not business. Nor was it merely a light-hearted joke.

Normally I wouldn’t care if someone changed my comment, but on the highly unlikely chance that some of my readers actually saw it, it could hurt my reputation. It’s probably considered libel under the law, but I’m not about to sue for something so trivial.

No one reads ROQ/KQR, but it still bothered me. I sent them a message asking them to delete my comment, telling them I had far more internet influence but would keep quiet if they would delete it within the next few hours.

Predictably they haven’t responded and likely won’t. If they do delete it, then I’ll add an update commending them. But I doubt that will happen.

I find it sad. Once upon a time, I was the only ROK columnist who thought ROQ was a positive force in the alt right and had potential to be a major player. Had they changed their name and quit trying to be the lone wolf while also trying to steal readers, then they might have turned into something truly magnificent. The article is a symptom, not the cause, of various things I’ve seen on this site. ROQ didn’t fail merely because they stole our name. ROQ failed because they demand respect instead of seek to earn it, a life lesson anyone can use.

Read More: Men Only Deceive Women If The Women Let Them, Because “Cheap” And “Prostitute” Are Not Synonyms