Billy just may be learning. I like how he changed the lock, boxed her things, and put them outside.
This is a good observation. Even joking about it is a red flag to me, whether or not she actually did it.
Have you been married? I suspect not. I see this mistaken belief on here sometimes and it overlooks women's sexual strategy once they lock down an alpha male. You can't alpha your way to a good marriage. Once women snare an alpha male and lock him down through marriage, they become less concerned with keeping him around (through good behavior toward him) and more concerned with other women procuring his resources. She may well attack those alpha qualities that attracted her because they also attract other women. For example, instead of being pleased with his high-powered career and excellent physique, she will complain that his work and gym time result in him neglecting his family. This is why the sidebar advises not getting married or cohabiting with a woman. You can't make it work through alpha behavior because of the nature of women's sexual strategy once cohabitation occurs. Women lose sexual interest as the duration of a relationship increases, and it isn't because the man becomes less alpha. This can be part of it, but that loss of interest will happen no matter how alpha he is.
Those who think they can make a marriage or cohabitation relationship work if they are just alpha enough should pay close attention to this post, because it accurately describes what really happens. Having a high SMV attracts women. Knowing that other women are attracted to you increases your partner's attraction to you, but also bothers her in that she know you have options. If you don't live with her, her primary concern is locking you down, and you can effectively use dread to deal with bad behavior.
Once you live with a woman, though, no matter how high your SMV, you can't apply dread as effectively, especially if you are married. Moving and getting divorced are costly and a pain to do. Women know this and their behavior becomes far worse than it ever gets if you don't live with them. If you have a high-powered career and are very fit, for example, she might well start picking fights over these things, saying you're neglecting her and the kids by putting too much emphasis on the career and gym. That's right--she'll try to tear down your SMV. It won't work in your favor like it did when you weren't living with her. She's got you locked down now, and she wants to decrease your options so some other woman doesn't snare you away.
Dread can be effective when you live with a woman, but you can only apply it so many times before she knows you aren't leaving, and then you either have to leave or resign yourself to being miserable. It sounds like the OP here is doing everything right. Does dealing with a woman like this all the time sound appealing to anyone? Well, that's what it will be like if you live with a woman, even if you have a high SMV. Men who've been married for 15 years, have several young children, have great sex 4 times a week, and a submissive wife exist only on the internet.
Many people get on here and think they can alpha their way to a successful marriage or live in arrangement, but it won't happen. Therefore, take to heart the sidebar article about cohabiting. Don't do it under any circumstances.
I too was losing hope with the answers I was seeing. I don't know how on earth anyone could think the OP was mate guarding or that this was a shit test, and also can't imagine any self-respecting man tolerating this. She may as well have invited the other guy to home with them. OP handled it fine.
What the OP is talking about is hard to describe, but if you do it correctly, you'll know it. I was in a meeting yesterday with a woman probably 25 years younger than me. I was sitting relaxed facing her and giving her an amused, confident expression. She was looking at me while speaking about a subject. She meant to say "docs" but said "dicks" and got an absolutely mortified expression on her face as she corrected herself. I knew then that my posture and body language were proper, though in this setting, no way was I going to pursue anything.
I think there is something to Freud's theory and Karl Abraham's explanation of it, and it isn't limited to feminists. It's national news every time some poor sap's genitals are mutiliated because women love love love love those stories. They get very excited when they read them and are quite happy about it. It's not just raving feminists who do this. I've observed women I thought were well-adjusted do it. It's eye-opening when you see what appear to be nice middle-aged women wish that upon their husbands.
I didn't read it but your comment is interesting. Banks hire large corporate law firms, the kind of firms that normally don't represent individuals on minor issues because it doesn't generate large fees. They have overhead to cover. Sounds to me like she's full of shit.
In general, private schools are as bad as public schools in terms of brainwashing kids with political correctness. In particular, don't expect religious schools to be any better in this respect unless you're Islamic. Feminism has taken over every branch of Christianity, and most Jewish day schools are quite liberal. I know of some that celebrate Linda Sarsour and hold her out to kids as a positive role model, despite her anti-Semitism.
You have to work hard at home to counteract negative things kids are taught in school, but it is very doable by sensible fathers. For example, schools make a big deal over bullying, and as part of that, teach kids that they never ever ever should defend themselves, but should instead take a beating and then go tattle to the teacher. That message doesn't resonate with normal boys, so when you tell them the school's policy is idiotic and they are to ignore it, they'll like that, and they'll view you as the authority and not the school. That example came to mind based on my own experiences, and I'm sure there are plenty of others if I gave it some thought. The broader point is that if you provide good guidance at home, they won't get brainwashed by the schools.
You mention early civilizations and how in every major religion, adultery was a crime. One point I'd like to add is that in Judaism, adultery had a specific meaning much narrower than how the term is used today. Adultery meant someone other than the husband having sex with a married woman. It did not include a married man having sex with an unmarried woman, or a man divorcing his wife and remarrying, or any of the other meanings taught by Christian churches today. Thus, the Seventh Commandment forbids having sex with a married woman, and does not include other sexual behavior. This meaning used by the ancient Hebrews indicates to me that, in key ways, they understood sex differences much better than the modern world does. Note how no Christian churches today use that meaning of adultery and instead focus almost exclusively on male sexual behavior without regard to who the male's partner is.
You're giving the NFL way too much credit. Not only will the NFL force some team to put a female player on its roster, the NFL also will make sure that female player is fully protected; indeed, I'd expect it to put out a narrative that she hits harder than men, is a better player than men, has injured men, etc. No way will the league let its propaganda darling get injured in any way.
I assign the most blame for women like this to their fathers. Weak beta dads get some sick pleasure out of having their overly-masculine, poorly raised daughters compete with boys. Maybe it's because they can't stand the thought of their little princesses getting fucked someday, so they raise them like boys. These dads are loathsome.
-not giving him any pussy & he's still happy about it
Don't believe that for a second. Married women do this too. They lie and say they never sleep with their husbands anymore, etc. etc. But their husbands have no plans to ever leave; they supposedly just accept sexless existences. Right. Once you've been around women for a while, you'll start seeing patterns with their lies.
I've read pros and cons of distance running, and have done various types of it throughout my training history. My ortho isn't a fan of it long term, and I've seen lots of runners my age need knee and hip replacements. People will counter with "you have to use proper form." Maybe. What I found effective with strength training was doing 1-2 mile runs twice or three times per week, and sometimes substituting 400 meter or 800 meter intervals. I never had any joint problems from doing this, and it kept me in good shape. Instead of doing this, those with enough time could go to a boxing or MMA gym twice a week and get an excellent cardio workout. For those whose primary focus is strength training and who desire doing some form of long, steady state cardio, I'd use an elliptical or bike instead of pounding my joints on the pavement for 5 miles or more. I don't know if there's anything to this or not, but it strikes me that a muscular 200 lb athlete would absorb a lot more force than a 130 lb distance runner, and thus the former should do different forms of cardio.
Nothing drives them crazier and draws them closer to you than them knowing that other women are after you. It's something that has to be experienced. You don't have to rub it in their faces or be rude or anything; them knowing is enough. So many average guys can't grasp this. That's why women flip out over rock stars. They see other women flocking to them.
This comment most accurately reflects the U.S. legal system. Much of the time, the way things work in prenups and in other types of cases is the judge picks which party he or she wants to win and issues rulings favorable to that party. Judges have a wide degree of discretion. Precedents are easy to distinguish. In family court matters, the outcome of a prenup and most other issues is highly dependent on the particular facts of the case, and guess who gets to decide what the facts are if the parties dispute them? That's right, the judge, the same judge who decides whether precedents apply or not. Any judge worth his or her salt knows how to issue decisions that will stand up on appeal. A prenup will get upheld if the judge thinks it is fair and sides with the party relying on it. If the judge doesn't like the prenup, he'll find some way to invalidate it. There are very, very few areas of law where the judge's hands are tied and he has to follow the law whether he likes the outcome or not. Prenups aren't one of those areas.
Welcome to Forums.Red
The Red Pill: Discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.
What you see here is an archive of many of the red pill network subreddits from Reddit.com. These forums will serve as a backup in the case that anything should happen to /r/TheRedPill on Reddit.
Until an event which causes the forums on reddit to close, the forum mirrors here will be locked and read-only.
Some forums, such as off topic, may be opened prior to this event.
All the subforums on forums.red have specific topics, however the front page is a listing of all the threads in each subforum- much like an overview.
If you'd like to visit some of our subforums, try these out:
/i/TheRedPill - The Red Pill
/i/RedPillWomen - Red Pill Women
/i/AskTRP - AskTRP
/i/ThankTRP - ThankTRP
/i/OffTopic - OffTopic