They do not disagree, but they mean different things.

Glover is speaking about "Nice Guys" who are spending enourmous amounts of time and mental energy hiding parts of themselves that they believe are bad, wrong or socially unacceptable. The first correct step is acknowledging your own imperfections and flaws and accepting that this is who you are NOW

Society as a whole sees this moment as the pinnacle of perfection, but this is off course horseshit.

Once you know who you are NOW, you start to improve yourself. This is a life long journey and a central part of TRP teachings. When you take "being yourself" as "to lazy improve", then like Rollo says it is shitty advice.

Basically:

1. Acknowledge and accept yourself with all the good and bad.

2. Evaluate what side of you is weak/bad/crappy

3. Start improving until the day you die.

There are two definitions of just be yourself:

bluepill: be a nice guy and treat her like a princess

redpill: be the best man you can be and treat her as an equal

Just be yourself is some of the best advice you can give someone. I take it as code to just relax and let go of your thoughts, insecurities, assumptions and anything else that might be weighing you down mentally and just live in the moment.

The catch is that you must always be working to improve yourself.

They are in fact mutually exclusive ideas but feed off one another. There is a time to be yourself (in public) and a time for introspection and improvement (alone time).

Just be yourself because that's all you can be.

Accept yourself for who you are is bullshit patronizing advice coming from others. Most men do not know who we are, and are in denial about details of ourselves, so how can really accept who we are when we don't even know it? Peoples visions of themselves are largely bullshit. Telling someone to accept who they are, to just be yourself, is telling someone to be who we want them to be, to drink the kool-aid....

Also, who we are changes. We are a byproduct of our communities, our friends, our upbringing, our genes, our self conditioning. If I just be myself, which of these am I to be? Who I want to be? Who my genes say I am? Who my girlfriend wants me to be. Who I was yesterday? Who are these mes, exactly?

But, if these phrases find meaning for you in your search for self awareness, so be it. Be yourself, is similar to, but no replacement for and follows: know thyself. Also, is a corollary to love thyself.

Temet nosce

Disce pati

Nihil relinque

This is unconditional self-acceptance:

You pick an important goal—such as work or love—and you evaluate its achievement as good or bad, successful or unsuccessful. But—watch it now!—you refuse to rate or measure your self, your being, as "good" or "bad". You realize that your performance is a part of you, but certainly not all of you. You did it and are largely responsible for it. But it is a single performance, can easily change (be better or worse) tomorrow, and is always—yes, always—one ever-changing aspect of you. You are not your behavior. You are that and thousands of other behaviors—good, bad, and indifferent.

So you accurately tell yourself, "I did that desirable or undesirable act. It certainly did not do itself! I did it with my little hatcher; and I will—because of my talents and fallibilities—do many more desirable and undesirable behaviors. But I am not my acts—just a person who behaves well and badly."

You evaluate the efficacy of your thoughts, feellings, and actions; but you don't rate or measure your total self or efficacy. In fact, you can't—because you are a changeable individual. You are not static. You grow, develop, progress—and retrogress. Why? Because you do.

In other word, "I accept myself, my existence, my being with my fallibility. Too bad about it. But I'm still okay. To define myself as non-okay—worthless—is silly and will make me more fallible. I'm okay because I think I am. Or, more accurately, I am a person who has many good and many bad traits. Let me rate them, such as they are, and not rate me."

-Albert Ellis, the father of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT).

No More Mister Nice Guy advocates unconditional self-acceptance, while Rollo rightly points out that "just be yourself" is an excuse to not change your behaviors. Both NMMNG and TRM are correct; the correct answer is to accept yourself as a person while still working to change your behaviors.

I take that to mean accept the things about yourself that you can't change - so you're short, or balding, or whatever. Accept it, because these are in your genes.

But you can workout and get stronger, you can shave your head, you can get a higher-paying job, you can learn a new skill, and more. These are all things that you can change about yourself.

TL;DR Accept the things that are unchangeable, but bust your ass and change the things that you can.

How you "are" is different than who "yourself" is.

You "are" a man, a rational animal(a animal that has the skill of reason), a sexual being, self aware primate.

Your self, your identity is: a good guy, a friendly, honorable, kind, gentle evolved rational person.

Your identity is constructed from what your 7 year old self saw, was told or was forced to be by his environment. At best it is the toilet training for the beast inside but more often than not, it is the neutering and domestication of a marvel of nature.

When discussing acceptance of who you are, we are trying to remove the apologetic nature bred in your identity(this is what NMMNG basically is for). Resetting your standards and values to be at least in line with your basal needs, if not removed all together are replaced with something more tangible, pragmatic or healthy. That Pragmatism that rational animal, under a blanket of velvet so people don't get scared of you in social standings is nothing more than masculinity, that is being an alpha, being a rational animal, an animal with reason.

There's a question I got from Nice Guy book too :

Breaking Free Activity #12 Do you believe it is OK for you to have needs? Do you believe people want to help you meet your needs? Do you believe this world is a place of abundance?

Do I actually have to answer this with a yes? Because I dont believe in it.