https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oVyQGmD3d8
​
For those that don't know: She is Bret Weinstein's wife and I believe (could be wrong) that they both taught evolutionary biology. I'd like us to discuss what she says here.
​
At about 17 minutes, she mentions how young women constantly have eyes on them. We know this--women are the selectors and young women especially have all the power in the sexual marketplace, therefore they could always be looking for the better option to improve their lot in life--aka hypergamy. This isn't news. I just thought it was nice to hear coming from someone who specializes in the field.
​
She then offers a counterpoint I found interesting: Yes, that is the biological inclination of women, but similarly, the biological inclination of men is to mate with youngest, curviest, most fertile pretty thing they can find, and once their offspring from one woman has been raised to some level of independence, it's off to find the next, most nubile 20-year old.
​
"Do both of those things happen? They do. Is it everyone? No. Is it a risk? Yes. Does it warrant the idea that this is what all women do? No. Are all men going to abandon their wives at the point that they aren't young things anymore? No, they're not. And most men don't. And most women don't."
​
Here's what I want to discuss. She is basically saying AWALT (and AMALT), but that it just doesn't happen that often. Essentially: MGTOWers and TRPers are of course on to something, but we're blowing it out of proportion. Fair enough.
I imagine we'd say this: That young women are now raised in a society where they're told explicitly not just by media and an entire movement revolving around them, but by their sisters, mothers and friends that they should spend their most fertile years gallavanting around, riding the cock carousel, having "fun" and experimenting. This, as we've seen reported many times, has led to actual decrease in happiness and when a woman decides to get married, she will inevitably be more dissatisfied with the marriage than if she hadn't decided to slut it up. And where does it go from there?
We also know 80% of divorces are initiated by women and gee, I wonder why? There could be many reasons for the dissatisfaction. Maybe they settled down with a beta bux and miss the Chads they had in their glory days. Maybe it's because we are incentivizing them to go and seek something better (you go girl! you deserve the best! how dare he spend time working to provide and not spend enough time with you!). Maybe it's because we are incentivizing them to reap monetary benefit and child custody benefit, so they know there's no risk involved once they get that incessant itch that her precious BB just can't scratch. Maybe it's because women have entered the workforce and (though they don't explicitly say it) still want their men to make significantly more than them so they can feel "provided for" and "secure." Wait, this is a post-feminist society...You're not allowed to feel those things, are you? No darling, it's okay that your man makes the same as or less than you, you're just being sexist. Pay no attention to that other man over there who makes significantly more.
​
Funny enough, her proposed solution to both of these problems (AMALT and AWALT) is enforced monogamy--which I agree with. The thing is, as she so acutely points out, monogamy can only be enforced by the female--aka the buyer in the sexual marketplace. So what do we do when we have a whole generation of women poisoned by the idea that riding the cock carousel is the best thing they can do in their youth? And as men dealing with these sorts of women, what is the best thing we can do? Besides, you know, banging sluts.
AutoModerator 5y ago
Just a friendly reminder that as TRP has been quarantined, we have developed backup sites: https://www.trp.red and our full post archive (and future forums) https://www.forums.red/i/TheRedPill. Don't forget to register on TRP.RED and reserve your reddit name today. Forums.Red is currently locked but will be opened soon.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
TheSeaOfFog 5y ago
I think Karen Straughan is right when she said that it'll take older women, i.e. women like Heather, in order to start the change process and address the issues facing men.
But there are three unpalatable things at play here.
The first is emotional. The situation is so dire that men's voices are silenced and shamed. Put another way, women have become so irrational and entitled that when men are saying stuff like "Hey, razor company, I don't want to be treated like a defective woman and lectured to by you and some art school moron", women are incapable of addressing the issue. Instead we get feminists whining about it and every young woman constantly making it about MUH OPPRESSION! This creates alienation and a generation of men who are irritated by women. The damage is done.
The second is economic. Heather may be doing something important and work needing to be done but she is directly benefiting economically by this situation. So not only is Plain Jane selling her panties and nudes to betas and the workforce is bending over backwards to accommodate women who regularly underperform on the job, men's plight is now the economic gain of women.
In short, men are sexually, economically, and emotionally frustrated and women are capitalizing off of it.
Which brings us to:
The third issue is relational.
Men are given a choice between enforced monogamy or female hypergamy because women, by and large, hate freedom. They're incapable of making independent choices. This has and will continue to lead to a rigid bureaucracy which constrains men's choices, sexually and otherwise. It's essentially talking men back onto the plantation with no suggestion of reforming law which stacks the deck against men.
And who is a man to be sexually monogamous with? Women who are already run through, act like angry children, probably have loads of debt and other emotional issues, and are the very ones who shamed them and dismissed their issues. Seriously, that's your offer? Fuck off.
So, once again, men will be the caretakers of women, likely without none of the prior benefits and all the constraints and challenges of post-feminist modernity.
Shit deal.
GirTheRobot 5y ago
I agree it is, in its current state, a shit deal. The only enforcers of monogamy are wall-approaching or post-wall women. That is for men, as you've said, a shit deal. But maybe women like Heather (and Karen and others) can get other young women to see that they've really dug themselves into a hole and they need to figure it out fast. Quit fucking around in your youth or you will be damaged goods and price yourself out of the market later.
​
But yes, that's why we're here. We don't want a shit deal (which could also lead to divorce rape, loss of child custody, any number of things) so instead we're taking advantage of the young women slutting it up and riding the ol' CC. Yet we're the ones quarantined.
p3n1x 5y ago
+1 Fuck Off.
That proposal is veiled white night bullshit.
Enforced marriage was a survival tactic that is now obsolete in today's society.
GirTheRobot 5y ago
Then what do you propose we do for future boys who will lack fathers and grow up on adhd meds, act out aggressively, not grasp masculinity.
How do we solve the boy crisis?
mazaw19 5y ago
God damn it we built this fucking society... we're men! We where bread with the ability to obsess over unsolved problems. We already have a community behinds us, although somewhat underground. Whenever I meet a young buck at work I probe and see if he's Redpilled if not I do my part to point him in the right direction. I figured anything helps.
As far as solving this? They get the future generations at a vary young age. Education? keep pumping out Redpill content into the internet. come up with ways around censorship, it's only going to get worse. They control everything in term of education.
A bad economic collapse would probably force the woman back to a traditional role.
Cut the head of the dragon? remove the source responsible for pushing the agenda, not by any forceful way, but by actually holding them accountable for crimes they have already committed.
play the same games they play.. raise money, put up adds. Make community funded Documentaries.
​
Also look how much our community has grown. they shut one Youtube channel down three more pop up. I feel as though they are the once's fighting the loosing battle. Just do a search on how many feminist channel are up on the tube VS MGTOW channels or Redpill channels.
​
​
p3n1x 5y ago
What goddam crisis?
You poked your head out of the beta bucket, try and understand, the majority belong in there. Solve yourself first, everything else will fall into place. You can't fix jack shit until you are 100. Lead by example through action.... you know, everything in the sidebar.
dropit_reborn 5y ago
Obsolete? What do you think you'll be in fifty years?
Children are the foundation of any society.
p3n1x 5y ago
I'm a man, in 50yrs I can still get females pregnant.
100yrs from now my frozen sperm can do it also.
Children are easy to make. Childbirth is no longer a death sentence for women like it was just a few hundred years ago.
Marriage is NOT needed for kids. Why is this such a difficult thing to understand?
Just because you need to be told what to do and how to act doesn't mean others need the same "enforcement".
GirTheRobot 5y ago
If marriage is not needed for kids then please explain toe how the black community's poverty levels and incarceration levels have only increased as their out-of-wedlock births increased. It's something like 3/4 of black kids are born in fatherless homes now, whereas in the 50s and 60s it was less than 1/4 (and they were better off)
p3n1x 5y ago
Two people living together do not need to be married. You don't need Government to be decent or to raise children. Marriage was originally a tax break and incentive that ended up turning into a way to get divorce raped and forced duel incomes. Government handouts hurt minority communities, not the lack of fucking marriage. Don't pull out 1% of a problem and try to bullshit logic it into the whole picture.
How the can you think "forced marriage" is healthy over a long term? Stop regurgitating a woman and explain your own ideas.
Last, you are making the worst fucking assumption of all time, that Marriage = good parenting.
The hell they were, where are you getting your history from?
GirTheRobot 5y ago
I agree that two people can be living together and not married and raise children, but also there is a sort of binding that marriage makes so that you're less likely to run off. At least that is the hope. As you say, divorce rape is pretty bad now. You're right government handouts hurt minority communities, but they especially incentive women to be single mothers. That is the real problem.
It's not literal "forced marriage." You've misunderstood.
I'm not making that assumption at all. The only "assumption" I'm making is that a present father is better than an absent father, and that marriage at least (hopefully, or at least used to) guarantees that.
I got those exact numbers from Thomas Sowell's book Black Redneck and White Liberal. It is an indisputable fact that black Americans were financially better off before LBJ's welfare programs.
dropit_reborn 5y ago
I can't roll my eyes any harder. Single women with children get more goverment handouts than married couples---handouts hurt minority communities by disincentivizing marriage.
Marriage is not a conspiracy of women against men.* First, because women are incapable of conspiracy on that scale, and second, because they're the most prone to leave it!
Now you might say, "marriage is a shit deal." And that may be so. But that's like finding a cake with shit in it and saying it was never a good cake in the first place. No one crusading for marriage here is on the yay-divorce-rape train. They're mad about that same train, because it hurts marriage.
No marriage -> no male stake in society -> invasion -> culture death.
* Quite the opposite
p3n1x 5y ago
And you have never known a man to take advantage of that?? This tells me you don't know shit about the realities of low-income humans. Nobody would ever scam the system../s. Do you ever take a moment and realize how much your own bullshit smells?
Fuck off with enforced marriage. <- period, if you can't recognize it.
Imperator_Red 5y ago
Um... no. Marriage was not conceived as a tax break. Is your understanding of history and the world in general so limited that you actually believe this?
Marriage was conceived as the bedrock of society, independently, by multiple civilizations in different places. It works because it stops the top males from monopolizing the majority of women and so provides incentive for average males to buy into the society and live within its rules, which leads to economic prosperity.
It may not be wise for a man to get married today, but that is because the legal, social, and economic incentives have disappeared in modern times.
SubstantialTension3 5y ago
Also marriage was a kinda paternatity thing too. They didn't have test back then and virginity was ranked very highly
Imperator_Red 5y ago
Yep this too. In a small community men practice mate guarding (hence our innate desire to do it), but mate guarding is ineffective in large societies where women cross paths with hundreds of strange men every day.
Imperator_Red 5y ago
How are they going to reform laws which "stack the deck against men" when they don't even acknowledge that this is a thing, and indeed their entire worldview is based on the exact opposite of this - that we live under a patriarchy that still is yet to be crushed. There is just such a disconnect right now that I cannot see how anything can ever improve in the short-medium term. How do you deal with people who believe that they are oppressed but in reality are oppressors?
WarriorMonkMode 5y ago
Enforced monogamy was developed to mobilize the industrious nature of the beta male, specifically in Western culture.
Men who are involuntarily celibate, won't be inclined to participate in society. And why the hell should they? Just because they're far less desirable than the men on the top doesn't make them any less inclined to be sexually successful. Hell, if anything it makes them more motivated. Which leads to terrorism and rape gangs like in the middle east.
This breakdown into free market practices in the sexual market place coupled with the removal of guilt/shame in regards to riding the cock carousel has led to a whole generation of men who are doomed to genetic death- and they know it, which is why we're seeing a rise of "toxic masculinity" ie men who cannot be men, and have no place in today's society even as lowly providers due to the fact that women have entered the work force as well as secured political power through social welfare programs.
For all of religion's faults: the leaky roof, the draft shutters, the poor foundation, the broken door (metaphorically speaking) at least it stabilized the sexual market place. As it stands now, the upheaval we're currently experiencing is good for the individual as well as mother nature, but bad for today's society.
This is Pandora's box. There is no going back. Women will never give up the right to vote. They will always have access to birth control. They will never exit the workforce. The internet will always be with us. Automation will render the beta male obsolete. Any Traditional Conservative who advises us to go back to the "gold ol' days" is delusional.
We as a race either boldy march into the brave New world and learn to adapt or we will fall back into times akin to the dark ages. There is no going back to "enforced monogamy."
GirTheRobot 5y ago
Why does it have to be all or nothing though? I agree, women will never give up the right to vote and never leave the workforce and always have access to birth control. But why do they have to slut it up? What about those women popping up on YouTube talking about being traditionally feminine, saving yourself, etc.? Is it at all possible their movement can grow, just as (we perceive) ours has?
WarriorMonkMode 5y ago
If women have no incentive to change, there will be no change. What you're seeing is called "the resurgence" which is the death rattle of traditional conservatism before it's eventual collapse as we ride out the decline.
Imperator_Red 5y ago
Ding ding, we have a winner.
DoneScannedIt 5y ago
Starting at 11:15, the interviewer introduces the "seems-like" cause and effect of not-having-the-conversation-in-the-open, to cause the conversation to be more toxic. There's no proof to that statement, but they both agree with each other that that is exactly what is happening.
I think it's a bad assumption. But I would say the converse, in a sense, is true. The conversation can only happen in a closed group. If the conversation were to be held openly, ... Oh, even in a closed group, we can be "quarantined". Reddit maintains a list of NSFW subreddits making it a breeze for me to see thousands and thousands of posts, with pictures, objectifying naked women. Yet, we can't have a conversation. Like women with Fallopian, Reddit with censorship, they control the tubes.
I think the interviewer and interviewee both see topics like TRP, MGTOW, Incels, whatever, as aberrations, as outliers. When in my case, I'm a man pushed-to-far. I'm expected to be the man they think I should be, instead of me being the man I know I am and should be.
monsieurhire2 5y ago
"The biological inclination of men is to mate with youngest, curviest, most fertile pretty thing they can find, and once their offspring from one woman has been raised to some level of independence, it's off to find the next, most nubile 20-year old."
That's just a biological "inclination." That's why we have things like "culture" "civilization" and "morality." I mean, it's also a biological inclination to compulsively masturbate, shit and defecate at will, walk around naked, kill people for their stuff or for the luls, but the vast majority of us are civilized and don't do these things, or if we do, we do it within some sort of civilized framework, or else we get locked up with the rest of the animals.
Whenever I hear women justify their hypergamy with this "he'll just find a younger, hotter woman and leave me," I think, "No, not if you are actually a pleasure to be around, don't act like an asshole, and add value to the relationship."
I mean sure, everyone can be tempted, but the average guy is not going to leave. Even the above-average guy. It's really the guys at the apex they are thinking about, and worrying about. And so what. So he has a mistress. That doesn't mean automatic disenfranchisement. If anything, the wife can leverage that to secure her position, but tolerating it and winning brownie points from the grateful hubby who can have his cake and eat it too. And that's just one outlier scenario. The guy can just as easily sublimate his adulterous inclinations into politics, community, a hobby, inventing something.
WinjetRed 5y ago
Nothing you can do. Go try and police women's actions and see what happens. The patriarchy is dead. You are literally living in a time where the female imperative is openly celebrated and incentivized and the make imperative is demonized and castrated.
The only answer is to raise your value high enough you're above the bullshit, try and raise your daughters to be better ( good fuvcking luck), and never ever fucking ever get married if you're not already.
tteabag2591 5y ago
I don't personally believe modern marriage is the healthy choice to make BUT I am also not naive enough to think there should be nothing anchoring men to the children they produce. Some men think so highly of their own sense of honor and morality that they forget how prone they are to giving in to the urge to ditch their old wives for a younger woman. I've seen it more often than I can count. That's pretty much why child support and alimony exist. Yeah they're unfair now but men really can't pretend they didn't have a hand in the motivation behind those laws. It's really hard to get too mad about it when you put it in perspective.
[deleted]