Red Pill TheoryRed Pill in the Renaissance: Leon Battista Alberti (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by kylerosa21


The Renaissance was a very traditionally masculine era. Traditional gender roles were prevalent. One notable figure that i discovered today was Leon Battista Alberti. He was an Italian humanist that was the ideal RP man of his time. Aside from absolutely hitting the nail on the head about several points he makes about women and gender dynamics, he was apparently an extremely fit man. He is quoted with saying that he could leap over an entire person and throw a coin all the way up and hit the ceiling of cathedrals. He was pretty damn strong, basically. I’ll summarize the points he makes in the Lessons Learned section.


The character of men is stronger than that of women and can bear the attacks of enemies better, can stand strain longer, is more constant under stress. Therefore men have the freedom to travel with honour in foreign lands (Alberti, Della Famiglia).

Those who are familiar with the Pill will read this and completely agree with it. On the contrary, the Blue Pill will jump at this for being misogynistic. Alberti brings up the inherent strength differences of men and women, putting them in the spotlight here and even reminding us that it typically was men that travelled to foreign lands. Marco Polo, Alexander the Great, and even Christopher Columbus are examples of this.

Women on the other hand, are almost all timid by nature, soft, slow . . . It is as though nature thus provided for our well-being (Alberti, Della Famiglia).

Another excellent piece. Alberti recognizes the inherent and natural differences of men and women, but also acknowledges how complementary these differences are. Women are a compliment to men, but they are not the same as men. Women are better fit to perform certain tasks that men wouldn’t be able to perform, and the opposite is just as true.

Finally, Alberti is quoted with saying that male children should be “steered away from womanly customs and ways.” This is something a lot of feminists will find an issue with. Why would a man want to act like a woman? A man should be acting congruent to his gender - like a man. Men shouldn’t act like women, and women shouldn’t act like men. This runs contrary to our human nature. To be a man is entirely different than being a woman. It’s important to note that he did not mention that male adults should be “steered away,” but that male children should be turned from these customs. It’s vital to the development of the male child that he learn how to act in the manners of a man and not a woman. In the modern day, the Feminine Imperative has so thorough brainwashed the masses that this rarely happens anymore, if at all.

Lessons Learned

1) Men are stronger than women. Strive to be as strong as possible; this is how a man should be.
2) Nature made the genders complementary to each other. Understand that women may not be capable of completing a task that you find easy.
3) Teach your kids to be men. Make sure you instill RP concepts in them beginning as soon as they possible can begin to interpret it. Rollo Tomassi outlines a list of some ideals you can instill in your child in his Rational Male series.

[–]evolveorwither 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Interesting. The Renaissance had a lot of good things come out of it, and maybe this is another one. I never thought I would get to the point where I was thinking that the older way of being for men was actually far more correct.

[–]kylerosa21[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

There’s a guy called Francesco Barbaro who is also very traditionally masculine. I might research him a bit and write a post on him

[–]halfback910 5 points6 points  (0 children)

A lot of Red Pill concepts were considered fact in the Renaissance.

A popular philosophical concept was that true love could only exist between men because women were incapable of love.

The problem I find with Renaissance musings is that they really did not have an appreciation for focusing on specific topics. That didn't come in force til the Baroque era, really. So you'll read a treatise from a Renaissance statesman on governing the ship of state, properly managing a rural estate, how to conduct oneself around a lady, a list of recipes that his mother passed down, and a prayer that he wrote.

We've solved a lot of this in the modern era by heavily abridging Renaissance texts, but you can still see it. Try reading The Courtier for the love of God. Parts of it are brilliant insights into how diplomats and courtiers should conduct themselves. 80% of it is rich people making fun of poor people, talking about how sexy poor people are, making puns that are only funny in Italian translations, and talking about the weather.

[–]Psychological_Radish 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Shouldn't come as any surprise that many of the major Renaissance and Enlightenment figures were also some of the greatest poon hounds of their day. Ben Franklin and Talleyrand were pretty notorious for womanizing. Lots of wisdom to be had from these natural Alphas.

[–]NASCARnormie -3 points-2 points  (5 children)

I love how everyone thinks of the renaissance as this peak of human civilization but its not. Sorry for all the dark triad bloopies and normies if i've hurt your feelings. The decline actually started during the renaissance. If you didn't know all these normie ideas such as individualism, subjectivism and personality came about during this time and are still prominent to this day. The foundation of civilization shifted from the spiritual to the temporal world. In other words, all the bloopies jerking off to machiavelli and batista ur retarded. Their power was for selfish reasons based upon political realism and didn't consider any higher being. They were not noble and not princes by any standard.

The sacred can never be surpassed by the mere resources of man

[–]UnbreakableFrame 5 points6 points  (4 children)

Individualism is far preferable to collectivism in the West. Collectivism only works in homogenous societies. Collectivist ideologies (aka slightly evolved tribalism) are what spawned Marxism, Communism, and the current political plague that's ruining the USA, Europe, and Canada.

[–]NASCARnormie 0 points1 point  (3 children)

So apparently communism, collectivism and marxism is to solely blame for the decline. If only you realized how wrong you were.

[–]UnbreakableFrame 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Where did I say anything was solely to blame for the West's decline? I was just explaining the failures of collectivism. I could go on for hours about the other contributing factors, but that's beyond the scope of this particular post.

[–]TheBadGoy 0 points1 point  (1 child)

The response to collectivism is not hyper individualism, but keep reading Ayn Rand and Jordan Peterson, no wonder Marxists are always one step ahead...

[–]UnbreakableFrame 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Who is it that you read? Pick a book that you think is really worthwhile and I'll add it to my list. I'm not being sarcastic. I'm open to the idea that I'm wrong about this.