The Red Pill: Discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.
universalabundance1
Posted 5y ago in Red Pill Theory - Permalink - Locked - 368 Views
TheRedPill Sidebar
Welcome to The Red Pill
The Red Pill: Discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.
Original Reddit Red Pill sub (quarantine bypass) that contains the full original sidebar
The Rules & Glossary
You are REQUIRED to read these before posting. Ignorance of the rules is not an excuse.
Endorsed Contributors: Respect The Tag
Glossary of Terms and Acronyms (2015)
Here to troll? Here's a Glossary of Shaming Tactics, try to be creative and avoid these. We know you won't, that's why you're easy to spot.
The Red Pill Network
Official Fail Safe Forums (Currently Locked)
New Here?
New here? Read the following threads and the Theory Reading below. Read before participating:
Confessions of a Reformed Incel
Theory Reading
Relationships, the Red Pill, and you
Women, the most responsible teenager in the house
On Value and the Value of Women
Powertalk and other Language Categories
References
Everything you need to know about Shit Tests
Comprehensive Guide to Shit Tests
Goals - A beginners guide on how to attain them
One Key Step to Not Giving a Fuck
Links to the Manosphere
Subreddit By Flair
Red Pill Subreddits
/r/TheRedPill
/r/RedPillWomen
/r/askTRP
/r/RedPillParenting
/r/thankTRP
/r/becomeaman
/r/altTRP
/r/GEOTRP
/r/TRPOffTopic
The Archives
Special Thanks
/u/CrazyHorseInvincible
/u/bsutansalt
/u/EpicLevelCheater
/u/Halitenina
/u/SlyGradient
/u/TheRedPike
/u/RedForEducation
/u/RedShifter99
/u/LegendOfTheFrontier
/u/MachiavellianRed
/u/RedSovereign
/u/OldMuckyTerrahawk
/u/Aerobus
/u/RedAsteroid
/u/CrimsonPerspective
/u/RedGoldSaint
/u/GaiusScaevolus
/u/SoftHarem
/u/-Anteros-
sanos7 5y ago
So basically, we’re in a free sexual market place right now and that will eventually (re-)create a patriarchy? Seems about right, since there is heavy selection on alphaness.
majani 5y ago
I think the pendulum will swing back once male birth control takes root
Laconique 5y ago
Indeed. What will be interesting to observe is if this "hard patriarchy" as TFM would call it will come back before a societal collapse caused by a myriad of reasons.
the-dan-man 5y ago
i think you missed the word collapse?
tarmongaidon99 5y ago
Doubtful - the pressures aren't the same anymore ... on the female side they don't need men for resources in the same way and on the male side there is little to no benefit to legal, binding marriage. I think we're in a time where both sides are testing out all available strategies - it's already messy as fuck. One feature that may change things - young people who were the products of single parent households ... recognizing the benefit of two parent households and making different choices than their parents. Would require a new contract with regards to marriage.
kerrielou73 5y ago
I don't know. Parents are getting more balanced and creative with co-parenting and less adversarial. Women are figuring out having the kids the vast majority of the time isn't all it's cracked up to be, especially if they work and make their own money, and men are less willing to settle for every other weekend and six weeks in the summer.
I come from exmormon. A lot of us end up divorced after one or both leaves the church. Women (myself included) often don't want the kids 271 days out of the year. It can be difficult to admit as a woman, because that's how it's supposed to be, but there's really no reason for it anymore.
[deleted] 5y ago
Indeed, and TRP is certainly a reaction to this. I have a FWB who hasn't missed a Monday (or Sunday) in a full year. She comes over, has some dinner, we do some gaming/watch a show/play board games, and hop in the sack. She PM's me the next day at lunch and thanks me for the high hard one, every time.
Not even a little drama. Not once. But she knows, if she pushes, she's nexted. Is this a good strategy for her? It must be, she could be (and might be) dating some betas who might want more in a LTR than I do. But, she keeps coming back and acting right. Her call, not mine.
​
kerrielou73 5y ago
It's possible she doesn't want a relationship, in which case you're acting right. I realize it goes against every stereotype, but women who don't want an LTR do in fact exist.
[deleted] 5y ago
Do you Red Pill? LOL
Look, I'm acting right one way or another. If she desperately wanted an LTR, I'm still acting right.
That said, a core Red Pill realization, that most guys here can't even capitalize on, is that women have their shit together these days. They don't need plow horses, they're not all tied to some man in order to have a good life. It's like the song says:
"Gimme, gimme, gimme a man after midnight
Won't somebody help me
Chase the shadows away
Gimme, gimme, gimme a man after midnight
Take me through the darkness
To the break of the day"
​
kerrielou73 5y ago
I noticed the tenor of Red Pill had changed since I last checked in several years ago. I like it. Especially the emphasis on squashing this rediculous notion endlessly talking (communicating) will make a good relationship. "Communication" isn't a substitute for chemistry. Be real. Know who you are. Be confident. Don't be a jerk.
GorgeousGamer99 5y ago
I'd hazard a guess that she's trying to get you to commit. You have the power my dude, keep it up.
[deleted]
WiseMonkeyGoodMonkey 5y ago
Currently. Last I heard (and I cannot find the link atm) our government spends ~1 trillion annually on supporting women and single mothers. This is completely unsustainable, of course. Eventually that will have to stop, as the govt makes a decision between women and having, for example, a functional military. IMO we cannot be too far off the gravy train drying up and a sharp reversal of certain expectations.
GorgeousGamer99 5y ago
My dude, that is 25% of the federal US budget. There is no way in hell that is anywhere close to accurate.
EDIT: $2.74 trillion on all mandatory spending. Medicare and Medicaid are $1 trillion. Social Security - old age and disability payments - are also about $1 trillion. The rest, food stamps, housing assistance etc, are $611 billion. I don't know how anyone could ever have a problem with anyone getting assistance through healthcare programs or people in poverty getting food stamps and rent assistance, so I'll ignore them. I'm not American, but I'm familiar with how shitty life is for your working poor class, and I'm not a fan of shitting on people in already-shit situations.
This leaves really just TANF, which is the general payment for poor people including single parents. Total combined state+federal expenditure in FY16 was $30,867,692,360, or just shy of $31 billion. In the same year, there were 637472 adult recipients, 542506 of which were women. 450692 recipients reported as single, lets assume that all of those were single mothers for simplicitys sake. So 70.7% of recipients are single mothers, and just doing a straight split without accounting for individual circumstances gives them a toasty $21,823,458,500, or almost $22 billion. That's 8 percent. Of the entire mandatory spending budget. You want to talk about unsustainable? How about you start off by NOT repeatedly crippling the countries income pool. I hear its easier to pay for things if you actually have money. TRP isn't really the place for politics, but perhaps it's time to admit that 50 years of neoliberalism hasn't exactly don't much for American society. I'm not a communist, I just know a failure when I see one.
Sources:
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ofa/fy16_characteristics.pdf
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ofa/tanf_financial_data_fy_2016_121817.pdf
WiseMonkeyGoodMonkey 5y ago
Not gonna argue that (mostly because I still cannot find the link I was reading). Will just point out we are 22 trillion in debt atm. That's coming from somewhere.
GorgeousGamer99 5y ago
I've edited my original post to address this.
AdmirableStretch 5y ago
About 2/3 of the US budget is "mandatory spending", i.e. social programs. That's about $2.7 trillion right there, and we can assume most of it goes to women and children (Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security accounts for most of it).
GorgeousGamer99 5y ago
I've edited my original post to address this. I also have to point out that you're using children getting healthcare and food stamps as an example of something that's "unsustainable".
AdmirableStretch 5y ago
First of all, I didn't write the original post. Second of all, the person's point is that the government is providing food stamps for the children, which facilitates single motherhood and thereby, open hypergamy because women can use the state as a provider
GorgeousGamer99 5y ago
Women are going to be hypergamous anyway, and it's an exceptionally small minority of all people who think "I'm going to fuck around and not get a job because I can get welfare". I can link you to any number of studies that show that people would rather work than live off the government. My point is this is a non-issue, both in terms of economic sustainability and supporting poor peoples lifestyles.
[deleted] 5y ago
I don't see a lot of beautiful, powerful women queuing up to marry homely poets, so yes.
rektHav0k 5y ago
Of course they did. Look at how it greatly reduces mate selection. The only women complaining about the "patriarchy" are the ones that are too ugly/broken to compete with other women within the bounds of its rules.
[deleted] 5y ago
Women stayed at home while men went out and worked.
Who did something similar? Royalty throughout the ages. They stayed in luxurious places while their subjects went out and worked.
“Patriarchy”
kerrielou73 5y ago
Women have always worked. Before the invention of modern appliances staying home was A LOT of work. When you start thinking of a world without refrigerators, microwaves, washing machines, dryers, etc. the job of the "stay at home mom," isn't so pleasant.
The image of the 50's housewife meeting her man with a drink at the door and throwing dinner parties was an anomaly. It was a weird time where large numbers of average women were still staying at home, but the job was suddenly much easier and increasingly less satisfying and like royal women, they had time to think about how unhappy they were. Donna Reed was a blip in time and many of the women she supposedly represented were closet alcoholics with a Valium problem.
Our images of the past focus on people with power and money. Far more women worked in Downtown Abby than didn't. Those royal castles were full of women who rarely saw their families. Large numbers of women worked in factories during the industrial revolution. Those who didn't were taking in laundry, which is a very labor intensive when you don't have a machine to do it for you or hot running water.
Women have always worked. They just had really shitty jobs.
guyau 5y ago
Not true. Women have always had their sphere of work. The image the idle woman kept in doors while the man has all the fun/work is a historical anomaly/ class specificity than it is the norm
Imperator_Red 5y ago
You are thinking of the modern British royal family who are a bizarre vestige of the past. Historically, the the rulers got where they were by kicking a bunch of asses to take their thrones and then staying vigilant enough to keep their thrones.
Managicall 5y ago
So stay at home mom = school teacher now days?
Proto_Sigma 5y ago
Eh, it's a mix. There have been a preponderance of royals who were born to the purple and sat on their asses. There were some ass kicking usurpers but when they would secure power for their descendants their descendants would lack the ass kickery that put the family power in the first place.
the99percent1 5y ago
Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.
shaggyctes88 5y ago
Ouroboros all over, again and again
destraht 5y ago
If you are taking enough spice then you can see ahead that you're grandchildren might be lining up to be some serious pussies. It can be excused by society but there is a consequence for lack of vision. There isn't an English term for being so head up your ass that you can't comprehend the otherwise-obvious consequences that span out over what the middling person can see. Our purveyors of our culture like it that way.
[deleted] 5y ago
Marclar. I think it's Marclar.
Laconique 5y ago
“It's a fact...that in societies like ours sex truly represents a second system of differentiation, completely independent of money; and as a system of differentiation it functions just as mercilessly. The effects of these two systems are, furthermore, strictly equivalent. Just like unrestrained economic liberalism, and for similar reasons, sexual liberalism produces phenomena of absolute pauperization . Some men make love every day; others five or six times in their life, or never. Some make love with dozens of women; others with none. It's what's known as 'the law of the market'...Economic liberalism is an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society. Sexual liberalism is likewise an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society.”
​
-Whatever, Michel Houllebecq
Unrealenting 5y ago
That’s true, but keep in mind that men decide what the status is determined by. Men form the hierarchies and then women select from whatever hierarchies we form.
scissor_me_timbers00 5y ago
I just barely posted this in another thread but it’s even more relevant here so I’m gonna re post it. That guy’s tweet is onto something but it’s fundamentally incorrect that women create the patriarchy. Your comment is correct tho. Here’s my input from the other thread. Pardon the length:
This is why patriarchy is necessary to civilization. Men discern much better between themselves who is legit and who’s not. And so in an all male hierarchy (or mannerbund, the foundation of civ), the right males get promoted up the ranks. And that patriarchy-approved status makes women wet.
Therefore you can establish a system of values that diverges adaptively from the system of values that worked in our caveman tribal past. The female hindbrain falls for those rudimentary values. And some are certainly still important. But to build a society and enhance group fitness you need to enhance group cooperation and promote other traits and values which may be highly valuable in a societal context but which may have been less so in our ancestral past.
Women have pretty basic wiring and fall for the evolved traits. But when a patriarchy bestows status on a different type of guy, he can still get laid and be treated w respect by women.
Think of these idiot thots who fuck thugs who will never be good long term options. Yes they can enact BB/AF, but many women are damaged because they are hoodwinked by their biology into falling for a loser thug.
I noticed all this from my mormon upbringing. Left the religion cuz it’s make believe but there’s a lot of insights in there. They have a formal patriarchy. And you get some pretty milquetoast square mormon guy types with these bangin hot virgin wives. And it’s because if they live the religion fully and go on a mission, they get a big fat stamp of approval from the established patriarchy.
This essentially raises the value and status of beta provider family man types, and lowers the value, basically erases the status of irresponsible and player/thug types. Hence how a pro civilization, group fitness enhancing, healthy social fabric enhancing set of values is established and maintained, with the full buy-in of the females, even tho it diverges from the brutish value system of our ancestral past which their hindbrains usually respond to. But their hindbrains still respond to status, even if it’s modulated by the patriarchy to fit new values which are more appropriate to a complex and civilized world.
Apologies for redundancy.
ucfgavin 5y ago
Is that true though? I feel like if that were the case, hot dog eating competitions and video game playing would be higher up on that scale.
Unrealenting 5y ago
It is, there are absolutely women who go to hot dog eating competitions or video game tournaments and try to fuck the winners. If enough men as a group decided that eating hot dogs or playing video games determined status then women would flock to mate with the men who are the best at doing either. You have to keep in mind that a woman’s hierarchy of values is determined by what she was inculcated by as being important for social survival, and changes over time as social environments change. This is why there isn’t really a single standard status edification women find attractive. For instance, some women prefer musicians, some prefer bodybuilders, some prefer artists, some prefer comedians, some prefer dancers, some prefer politicians, etcetera etcetera etcetera. It’s entirely relative to what determines social status in her environment, although the qualities of those characters do not change insomuch that they have to be the best at those things (read: have the highest value in the hierarchy).
Read my posts on the Animus and Science of Attraction to understand in more depth.
[deleted] 5y ago
This is why nerdy girls rock. If you have brains and brawn, you have an advantage over nerdy girls that's a lot harder to get over basic bitches. Nerdy dudes need to get to the Iron Church like last year.
destraht 5y ago
Look guys, there are some dope ass perfect places to live in the empty beaches all around the world. The problem is that women don't go to these perfect, easy places and its all but impossible to get a woman from the scene to go and just chillax/live there forever or even tiny amounts of time unless you are paying through the nose. They want to live where the rent is high and the power has stratified. That means that you are paying to exist to be a dick so that a woman accidentally falls on it someday.
That is fine when you have a life hack but always there is class whom exists only to do what I'll call for his conversation pussy juicing. They'll setup shop as sole means of production and then charge you to gain access to all of the women that they don't have time to fuck. It gets built into the tax structure, environmentalism and the works. Women don't want us to have it easy. They want us to grind ourselves to the bone and then they will choose the men whom manage to come out on top.
If it was too easy then the women wouldn't want to fuck us (ehm Europe).
the99percent1 5y ago
Obviously not the case in eastern europe. Wrecked by years of communism, wars and tyrants, the pussy supply is through the roof.
destraht 5y ago
True. Don't tease. I'll be there in a several months. Doing it.
22oregon22 5y ago
Absolutely correct. Planning an Eastern Europe trip this summer. Very excited to meet non westernized women.
X-ray-OH 5y ago
Women raised the children for almost all of history. If they didn't like the system, they could have just taught the sons to change it.
Of course, feminists will bring the "internalized patriarchy" excuse.
majaka1234 5y ago
Internalised patriarchy = the idea that women aren't strong enough to warrant their own thoughts.
As usual, the ones screaming that you're an -ist or -phobic are the ones that require the same to justify their warped world view.
You can't have "internalised misogyny" unless you truly believe that women aren't capable of independent agency.
ROTHSCHILD_GOON_1913 5y ago
this is totally wrong. the patriarchy and human civilization are an entirely male creation that is forced on women by men. in patriarchal civilization, women have their mates mostly suggested and chosen by their fathers and brothers (and in the west, their female relatives too), based on matchmaking within the local social hierarchy
what you get when mate selection is left up to women is polygyny and harems, because outside of any social pressure, women will choose to only mate with the men with the best genetics. this is the exact opposite of the socially enforced monogamy that results from patriarchal civilization
patriarchy, civilization, and monogamy are all one and the same. you cannot have any of them without the others. if you believe one of these things to be desirable and good, you should support the others too
out_looking_in 5y ago
The "women were the selectors" argument doesn't make sense.
Males are bigger and stronger than females, so the only thing stopping a male from mating with a female would be another male, not her tingles.
Thus, it seems much more likely that it was not female preference at all that controlled who was allowed to mate with who, and it was the hierarchy established by the males that did. It wasn't a woman's "no" that prevented a male from mating with her, it was the fear of getting smashed over the head with a rock by another male.
In other words, where a male was on the dominance hierarchy determined which female(s) he had access to such that the highest "ranking" male of the tribe had access to higher quantity and quality (youth, health, aesthetics) than the guy below him, and the guys at the bottom where left yanking their dicks.
Someone explain why this is wrong and the "women were the gatekeepers of sex" hypothesis is right.
kerrielou73 5y ago
Fathers were the selectors.
WinjetRed 5y ago
Same reason why most men don't get satisfaction from prostitutes, rape, or masturbation. It's not about sex strictly. It's about being accepted and your being confirmed. Are there men that do get satisfaction from taking something because they can, yes but its not the norm.
adam-l Endorsed Contributor 5y ago
The lady who posted it, Roxana Kreimer, belongs to an extremely rare, breed of dignified feminists, along with Esther Vilar and Cassie Jeye, whom their position that the sexes must be equal eventually lead them to acknowledge the systemic discrimination against men.
Respect.
HumanSockPuppet 5y ago
Women did not create the Patriarchy. Men did. By taking action.
The truth is, a typical woman has little or no personal motivation to change things. She's perfectly happy outsourcing her effort to men, using men's protective instincts as the instrument to achieve her goals. It's easier and requires less effort on her part.
She'll do this ad nauseam, and pat herself on the back for her ingenuity and independence.
To avoid being a woman's useful monkey, all YOU have to do is make sure she's pays upfront for whatever time you eventually decide to invest in her. Have clear expectations, and only reward her with your efforts when she has met them.
Women are afraid of men learning this fact. They're afraid of losing their slaves. They are afraid of actually having to take risks and work the way men do. This is what they don't want you to know.
Nergaal 5y ago
The bronze age that gave rise to the agricultural revolution was the one that switched the human species from a matriarchy to a patriarchy, where competence means more mouths can be fed, which means females have a reason to artificially select for male genetic material that gives competence.
Societies who have done the most of these iterations, where females ruthlessly select for higher competence males (and leave >50% of the male genetic material as dead end) have given rise to first cultures, and eventually the most developed cultures. There is a reason why societies that created the source of "western culture" have measurably highest iq among all cultures, while aboriginals in Australia are somewhere at the end.
surfingjesus 5y ago
Yeah this is kinda dumb. As if men always respected women's rights, or as if women always had rights. I bet all of us here have a rapist ancestor somewhere down the line.
VeryTalentedCheff 5y ago
In most old societies rapists were killed because they destroy the stability of the hierarchy.
xiaodre 5y ago
unless its prima noctis? literally a rule stating lords of land and status can fuck women on their wedding day, thereby assuring these genetic lines?
the concept of rape is a social idea. what is and is not rape goes back and forth with the society, old and new.
Laconique 5y ago
Prima Noctis is a myth created during the Renaissance.
VeryTalentedCheff 5y ago
Well it still serves hierarchy doesn't it? Lords have dips over filthy peasants.
xiaodre 5y ago
the idea of prima noctis? well, yes, i suppose in a way. In another way, it doesn't..
but hierarchy is another one of these stupid buzzwords that can mean all kinds of things, because its use in the language goes back and forth. its a social idea, like rape is.
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted]
RightHandWolf 5y ago
How is a beta successful in their sexual strategy? The alphas have the endless pussy buffet while the betas have to manage on whatever crumbs get left on the table. Betas get to drive a 2001 Chevy Geo with 300,000 miles and chattering lifters while the alphas get to test drive a fleet of Porsche 911 Turbos. Alphas have dozens of options, all day, every day, while a beta is lucky if he has a halfway convincing daydream about the girl he's orbiting. Even if the daydream comes alive, while he's thinking about taking a victory lap, she's thinking about everything else she's experienced on the circuit.
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted]
RightHandWolf 5y ago
The idea that women will hit the wall and seek a beta provider means the beta and alpha are equally successful reproductively.
Dude, seriously . . .
The post-wall female settles for a beta only because the alphas are using their flesh-tone jack hammers to pile drive the younger skankazoids. I guess we have different definitions of "success."
AutoModerator 5y ago
Why are we quarantined? The admin don't want you to know.
Register on our backup site: https://www.trp.red and reserve your reddit name today.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.