Unca Bob has had quite a few excellent articles recently that critique much of the thinking in the manosphere. Here the articles are with a quick "what my take is" commentary - read through the comments, they are also excellent!
About the five classes of men: upper, middle, working, bottom, and those who step outside the class system to do their own thing. Reading between the lines, how the manosphere advocates taking on the characteristics of the bottom-class - deliberately crippling themselves. So that they can "score" with (prey upon) promiscuous and drunk women. Yet working within the class-system and sneering at those who step outside it.
About the scholarly, warrior, merchant, criminal, and other classes. He writes of the left- and right-wing (r/K respectively) scholars, how the left-wing ones destroy and the right-wing ones build up. With the manosphere's narrow focus (obsession) on "sex, sex, sex" - how that makes us clueless to other things that exist in this world. Of course, when all you're doing is looking for the next fast-fuck it's no surprise when everything else slides - including standards, society, and the rest around us.
How much of what we attempt to portray is superficial crap. Which involves a lot of the self-help "fake it until you make it" crapola. Certainly it can be useful (NLP has it's uses in some situations) yet it's just a surface veneer. Much of it is posturing - style above substance - yet it is substance, mastering something, that brings the real rewards of self-satisfaction and personal accomplishment. Chasing after pleasure is a fleeting thing, very shallow in comparison to the self-assurance and inner well-being that is developed through mastery.
How we imitate the wrong people. Which is no surprise - many of us don't have fathers of worth (or at all) to look up to and imitate. Everyone imitates somebody that they admire, takes on a role-model: it might be a Robert Kiyosaki or Donald Trump, it might be a parent or uncle, it might be some teacher - or a posturing closeted academic selling "you too can fuck hawt chicks" book. Too many people (especially modern children) imitate the wrong people.
About philosphy and mediation - very much worth reading. Then thinking about, and reading again. In my opinion it will pay dividends. We lack much awareness, no huge surprise in this modern society which focuses entirely on sensation and things. In my view this is where much of religion has failed us: instead of passing on the wisdom of ages, helping the inner self, they started focusing on people in order make themselves seem more relevant. Newsflash: it was a very bad mistake catering to the ADD-addled modern person (both men and women).
Overall, my takes:
* posturing is rife, because it's easier to posture and make yourself an ersatz authority than make the effort required to become the real deal
* we are adolescent, because like a horny teenager we focus upon one thing: sex (once that's dealt with we can then focus upon something more worthwhile)
Regarding posturing: I remember something that (I think Vox Day) wrote about long ago. He and a girl were somewhere near a pool (at a resort?) and there was a posturing teenage "alpha" in front of an audience of girls. The girl with Vox remarked disparagingly about it, yet - tellingly - could not seem to drag her eyes away from the teenager.
Regarding adolescence: we go back to the old definition of women from the No-Ma'am website: Woman: The Most Responsible Teenager In The House. (A slightly updated version is on The Masculine Principle website.) So let's take a step back and look at the obsession with sex that is rife in the manosphere - and you have to admit it: it's like we're stuck with our testosterone in overdrive, wanting to stick our dicks in as many hawt chix as possible.
No wonder those who are attempting to actually grow up - to become more well-rounded human beings - and who say "no thanks" to the rotten meat "women" that a lot of the manosphere says we should be lunching on and glad of it - attract a lot of flak from other parts of the manosphere. They're still juvenile, still adolescent, still acting like the male version of the most responsible teenager in the house.
Which makes me wonder: when Mystery nicknamed Neill Strauss "Style", was it a conscious thing? Because the PUA espouse and exemplify the "style over substance" mindset of this modern, fashion-conscious, degenerative society. Much like many women can only grasp the style - because substance is both invisible and not sexy when it comes to the attention.