In Brazil there is a pseudonymous author whose name has circulated in men's online communities for over twenty years: Nessahan Alita. Between 2002 and 2009 he wrote a series of essays on love, relationships and the psychology of the sexes, and gave them away for free as PDFs. They never went through a publisher, and his real identity has never been confirmed.

Despite that, his books became foundational texts of the Brazilian manosphere. They spread first through Orkut communities in the early 2000s, then through Facebook groups, YouTube channels and audiobooks. Academic researchers studying the movement describe him as a kind of "guru" who "helped form a generation of antifeminists in Brazil." Until now, his work existed only in Portuguese.

I've translated all seven of his books into English. They are typeset to follow the original editions, footnotes included:

• Man's Suffering in Love (his main series):
  • How to Deal with Women
  • The Profane Feminine
  • The War of Passion
  • Masculine Reflections on Woman and Love
• Magnetism in Social Relations, his first essay, on manipulation and self-mastery, inspired by Eliphas Lévi
• Supplementary Texts and Supplementary Texts II

What makes him different from most dating-advice writers is the mix. He combines relationship strategy (emotional indifference, "cornering," the "continuity of male interest") with ideas drawn from Gurdjieff, Jung, Schopenhauer and Western esotericism. His recurring theme is less about "winning" women and more about men mastering their own passions so they can't be manipulated. He insisted his books were philosophical essays, not seduction manuals.

Fair warning: these are polemical books, and many readers and researchers consider them misogynistic. The translation is faithful: nothing has been softened or edited to fit anyone's views. Read them critically and judge for yourself.

? Free PDFs, a summary of each book and background on the author: https://github.com/the-true-return/nessahan-alita-books

I'd love to hear what an English-speaking audience makes of him. Does he hold up next to the authors you know? Is he ahead of his time, or a product of it? Feedback on the translation is also welcome, either as GitHub issues or in the discussion thread linked in the README.

She, like most women, has no clue what chivalry was, or what the motivations for it were. It's not something that men did for women unconditionally just because they're women, it's because both sides got something out of it: the man would be kind and courteous, the woman would be graceful and pleasant. This also applies to the medieval definition of chivalry: knights weren't chivalrous just for shits and giggles, the entire social substrate benefited from it, including the knights themselves.

From that lens, the video is a painfully obvious example of why the practice has largely died out. This woman approaches the topic as if men are beneath her and owe her something for nothing, and scoffs at the implication that her "me me me" attitude had something to do with men's change in behavior. It's not possible for chivalry to remain in a world where women treat men with disdain, that kills their side of the symbiosis.

Why aren't men taking women out on dates anymore?

In my experience, and the experience of thousands of other men who have shared their experiences across various Red Pill, MGTOW, PUA, and other various manosphere forums such as this very one, the women who wanted to fuck me were plenty willing to do so with or without a date, and the ones who didn't want to fuck me were still plenty willing to string me along to get free food and attention. We men have swapped notes and shared our experiences with each other over the past couple of decades, and a lot of the younger men have learned from our suffering. THAT'S why men don't take women on dates anymore.

Related essential reading: Wait For It? by Rollo Tomassi.

chivalry really is fucking dead [emphasis added]

1) proper chivalry was the code of conduct for knights fighting other knights in battle. Nothing else.

2) the crap you're thinking of is "men treating women like they're special" but is frequently mislabeled "chivalry". And yes, it's dead because women killed it.

3) you wouldn't have been due that treatment anyway. In less than a minute, you displayed several un-ladylike behaviors.

what's crazy is, there's going to be these Red Pill men that'll be like, "well, what do you bring to the table?" [*scoffs, pretends to laugh] don't even get me started on that shit.

Like @No-Stress-Cat already said elsewhere in this post's comment section:

In other words, not a goddamn thing. Get the fuck outta here, skank-ho.

The women who react the worst to that question are always the women with the least to offer.

And for any lurking women who are legitimately confused about that question: women and men are supposed to complement each other (and that's with an E, not an I). In other words, we fill each other's gaps. For millennia, the arrangement was that the woman brought the uterus and eggs, her virginity and faithfulness, and her willingness to do domestic chores to make the man's life easier. In return, the man brought protection and provision and a rational, logical, calm brain to reassure the woman whenever her hormonal neuroticism got out of hand.

Thanks to feminism, women have made themselves into the men they want to marry.

Men don't want to marry other men. Sure, we'll still fuck you if you look even half as good as the woman in the video. But if you're even half as annoying as she is, good luck getting a man to stick around.

And back to what I said a moment ago:

;For millennia, the arrangement was that the woman brought the uterus and eggs, her virginity and faithfulness, and her willingness to do domestic chores to make the man's life easier

Thanks to feminism, most women bring none of those. Why would we want you around besides fucking? What value do you add to our lives? For most of you, the answer is nothing at all, worse, negative value. No eggs, some other dude's (or dudes') kids, and laziness and entitlement and bad attitude. No thanks.