The "love of your life" is a myth. Like earth being the centre of the universe, or us being the apple of god's eyes, or the existence of life after death. All myths we are so prone to believe because they shield us from the (otherwise apparent) horror of reality: the fact that as living organisms, we are essentially alone among other mostly self-serving organisms, insignificant in the grand scheme of things, and finite in time.
The reality in the case of "love" and "relationships" is that you current "significant other" is out there for herself first, her kids second, and some source of security third. She doesn't love you; she loves the fact that being with you make her feel good/loved/secured/protected/high-status, etc. And the day you don't make her feel that way anymore (which comes quickly), and that in the context of the list of priorities written above, the benefits of leaving you outweigh the benefits of staying, then she will have no reason to stay and rationalise that she doesn't love you, or ever did..
This does not mean that there is no chance of you ever growing old and dying together, it just means that you have no way to ensure that it will happen. And that if it does happen, then you've been bloody lucky.
Just like with the other myths, the only way to solve the dissonance between reality and your wants is to drop the delusion and face reality dead on. These myths are just myths; Reality is harsh; it's ok, we'll be fine anyway. Buddhists have been fighting the delusion of permanence for millenia, you can just as well fight the delusion of lifelong love. It just requires to repeat the mantra: "She's not yours; it's just your turn; enjoy it while it's your turn".
[deleted] 7y ago
First two commenters--that makes sense. I was disheartened by this post because it seems so pessimistic about long term relationships. I still like to believe that if both parties are responsible and conscientious of one another that their love can last.
whitesocks2000 7y ago
Empathy is a understanding the feelings of another person. Granted the sadness two lovers express departing at the airport could be the selfish feelings of each missing one another. My scenario was the surgery waiting room. A wife hears the news that the tumor was invading vital structures and can not be removed, the sadness she expresses is somewhat selfish in that she wants her husband to be alive because he gives her pleasure, but I think mostly she is sad because she knows he is going to suffer, be scared and miserable. She empathizes with him and is truly not thinking of herself.
Question, are humans not capable of selfless acts or emotions for one another in the context of a relationship? Does every action or feeling have to be out of self preservation of pleasure or benefit?
throw17453 7y ago
If you pursue the abandonment of all "myth" - you will end up with nihilism.
Morality is illusory - love is illusory - "meaning" is illusory.
Arguably our sentience and consciousness is merely a byproduct to better enable the propagation of genetic material.
You can take a reductionist stance to love and relationships - Just neurochemical states.
You can take a reductionist stance to personality and identity - A interplay of genetic dispositions and social influence to enable our functioning in society. Not a form of unique "self".
So God is dead - Love is dead - "You" are dead - meaningful relationships are dead (everyone is selfish right, and they are a contrived?)
You really can - if you choose - go down this path quite far... the path of "reality". Philosophers have done it, Nietzsche spent his life recognising, and trying to find a way to accept and overcome it - if you're into that kind of thing.
I'm not sold on the idea that accepting "reality" in all forms is a healthy way to live. You need to find purpose and meaning from somewhere.
It's far healthier to ignore all of the above shit - and engage with life as if it does have meaning. Your relationships with others including love, is meaningful. Morality is real, and living a good life is worthwhile etc.
That said your main point seems to be recognising that all is transient and conditional - "Love" especially, and I dont disagree at all, it's insightful.
But Specifically on:
I don't necessarily agree.
sadomasochrist 7y ago
The answer to this is simple. Family and children.
Without them, your life can have no real meaning. Only one that you create for yourself.
Family as a value, is innate.
It is not immediately gratifying or easy, but we are hardwired for it.
A family with
Good food Good friends Good sex Good sleep Health
Almost impossible not to have a great life with that. But hard to obtain and maintain. The duty of performance. Degradation of society. Shift of humanitarian values to the self.
scissor_me_timbers00 7y ago
I love Nietzsche. He has a passage about learning to adore the surface of reality, to exercise restraint in exposing all it's dark corners. He mentions how the Greeks were superficial out of a profound understanding of this concept. do you know the passage?
OSaraiva 7y ago
I agree, we are transient beings so we shouldn't take ourselves too seriously.
Nothing that you can do will change the nature of existence, even if you might have effect on constructs like culture, society or other peoples lives.
As so, you can just enjoy your time and your existence. In the end, you'll end up the same as anyone else, so there's no much use to be over thinking reality.
Seishuu 7y ago
I think that the two aren't mutually exclusive ; they happen to be true on different levels/depending how you look at them. Things can seem contradictory at first glance but it might just be that one lacks the global understanding to integrate both things.
You could say that your life holds absolutely zero importance in the "grand scheme of things", i.e. your place in the universe is irrelevant. That is correct. A corollary to that is that what you do, then, doesn't matter. Also true.
You could just as well say that your actions have a very real and significant impact on others and therefore holds great meaning if you consider it on a more micro scale: the human race, your community, your close ones, your significant other, your own life, your career, your year, your day. Then what you choose to do suddenly starts to matter more and more.
So yes, in the grand scheme of things my existance is irrelevant. But I actually think that the grand scheme of things is irrelevant to me.
[deleted] 7y ago
Perhaps that's a step necessary for the development of passions, meaning, etc. You mentioned Nietzsche, after all. Counter-intuitive as it may be, the further away from emotion and meaning you get, the closer you get.
Surely you recognize the irony of using "reality" in quotation marks!
LOST_TALE 7y ago
I've accepted the whole list. My life is full of meaning. The nihilism is non-sequitir.
Auvergnat 7y ago
I agree fully.
And on the topic that we don't, quote my entire sentence:
I never meant that everyone had to drop their delusions.
If you don't feel dissonance, if believing in God, lifelong love or any other "want" do not contradict with your reality somehow, then by all means keep believing in it and be happy.
If you feel that dissonance, but don't want to lose your wants because they're too important to you and you'd tailspin into depression without them, you are free to keep on living with the dissonance.
If you feel it and want to solve it, then you have no choice.
throw17453 7y ago
It's interesting, even quoted fully there is still some aspects I question, mainly:
I am not so certain you solve it by embracing reality - because reality is barren of solution. Maybe it depends on what you mean by solve - balancing and recognising that dissonance, whilst also having the good sense to ignore it and engage in life, perhaps...
One other thing I do know, it is Incredibly easy for someone to rationalise some deep existential, nihilistic, meaning devoid perspective on life - and use that as an explanation for depression or negative outlook.
When in reality they are not successful. Sexually, physically, socially, financially etc. And rather than recognise and address that - its far easier to say "fuck it life has no meaning, and thats why im down" - and it puts the locus of control outside themselves, which is again not healthy.
At some point everyone has to come up with, and find their own meaning in life. And whatever that is could always be argued to be delusion - I think there is a dissonance there that can't really be "solved" - at best accepted - then ignored, as its a downer to enjoying life!
Nigel_Johnson 7y ago
Existential bros, check this out:
www.marshasummers.com/innerman
You're welcome. :)
GreatMenderTeapill 7y ago
I should've gotten a snack...
PM_ME_UR_TECHNO_GRRL 7y ago
Alan Watts speaks to this. This notion that one concept of reality is in any way superior to another is itself a figment of our own imagination.
Whether one way to see the world is healthier or not is one thing, but there is no objective way to discern which reflects what we call reality the closest.
Nevertheless, both you and the OP provide some insight, in my opinion.
LOST_TALE 7y ago
yeah idiots still live among us in the age of the scientific method.
animationphilosopher 7y ago
Which is why buddhists give up the quest to discern reality using thought and concepts. They simply exist
theONE843663 7y ago
Imo best way to live. I think, therefore I am!
JamesSkepp 7y ago
No, you don't. You end up with accurate description of reality that is not obfuscated by our intellectual constructs, created mostly to rationalize and explain something that was not explainable before we had actual science.
The reality is - life has no purpose for you, other than you blowing your load in a random female (it can be the worst RedFlag slut TRP has ever seen, nature doesn't care). That's it, we're glorified gene carriers.
Nature doesn't care - we do. This is why once you drop the fantasies of "higher consciousness, love, god or being one with collective noosphere of universe" you are left with clear picture of how things look like. Then you can CHOOSE to create a purpose for yourself without being manipulated into one by something you willingly decided to believe in while knowing it's not real at all.
Is it healthy to see the world through a artificially created "lense" that provides interpretation of reality for you?
diomedes777 7y ago
This is just a sad way to look at the world. I cannot understand how people can look at this existence as a meaningless, pointless accident. Yes there are objective realities regarding human interaction and sexual dynamics between sexes etc, but to say we are just meaningless pieces of meat floating through space as if you somehow know this is objective truth is just sad nihilism as a result of an aggressive societal conditioning by people who need you to think this way so they can rinse you for all you are worth and control your own perception of your literal existence on this planet.
JamesSkepp 7y ago
Like the church did for last few thousand years?
There is around 100 billion galaxies in observable universe. Some are smaller some are bigger, each contains tens to hundreds of billions of stars. Our Galaxy has 100 billion stars. Most of them have at least one planet. It's estimated that in our Galaxy alone there is 11 BILLION Earth-like planets orbiting Sun-like stars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Nature_timeline
The length of human existence on the scale shown is not even one pixel-to scale. For the majority of the time the universe did well without us.
And you somehow think we, humans, must be special b/c some dude can love some chick and it suddenly gives higher meaning or higher purpose to their existence.
throw17453 7y ago
Yes but any purpose you create could be described as a fantasy, in just the same way as you have characterised higher consciousness, love, god etc.
That's a good question.
I think in some ways everyone see's the world through an artificially created lense - we are all blighted by solipsism.. Now you could say - and I'd imagine you would - that it is better to have an understanding of the world that is as close to objective reality as possible.
But eventually - and this was my original point - you will journey down that path and find zero meaning or purpose. Not a healthy position to be. Accurate? Perhaps.
mystifiedmeg 7y ago
It's a common occurrence that people don't meet the love of their life. However I don't think that you can then say lifelong love is a myth as it does occur. Like you said, it's luck. It's certainly no myth and I do think its healthy to realise that you may end up alone.
Auvergnat 7y ago
I actually agree & it's something I noticed I had phrased wrong, after re-reading myself. Love exists and, as a feeling, is temporary by Nature. But it doesn't inherently prevent freak circumstances to actually make it last a lifetime.
SO yeah if I could edit/rewrite it, I wouldn't state that "lifelong love" is a myth, but our expectation of it is.
mystifiedmeg 7y ago
Anyone who expects lifelong long is not being realistic. We all would love that but reality shows that only 50% of marriages last forever (I think thats the statistic).
Auvergnat 7y ago
The fact that people know that 50% of marriages end in divorce (or whatever is the accurate statistic) yet people still marry gives a quite clear evidence that people do expect a lifelong love. They all think that divorce won't happen to them.
[deleted]
RPmatrix 7y ago
I think the myth of 'The One' persists, because, deep down, everybody would love to know another person of the opposite sex with whom they were 100% compatible and they will be able to live a 'happy, stable Life together.
Now, going back 100rs or so to simpler times this may have been possible, when the lives of a married couple and their kids, literally depended upon them to work successfully as a team so they could achieve the few things they wanted. Like raising their family.The chances of this kind of woman 'branch swinging' was st about zero and the 'death do us part' bit was for real.
But, fastforward 100 or so yrs to 2017, and due to the many influences upon and options available things like, thanks to factors like BC to the average young women to "express herself"
allowing women to revert to their most 'animal' selves, exhibiting biologically 'natural' behavior' that lives in their amygdala, the 'caveman brain' without fear of repercussions (well, at least from her bff's!) but has been socially repressed for several hundred years "becoz christianity's prudishness'
We are now seeing the 'backlash' that comes when restrictions are lifted and the people involved have Not much of an Idea of how to balance their 'animal' and 'human' selves.
I think women have noticed men find this much easier to do, and are in some ways 'jealous' (penis envy) of our ability to be an animal one hour and a gentleman the next! Women would love to be able to do this, but they can't, it's not 'how they're wired'. They wish they could have such guilt free sex as men do BUT to do so they must trade a part of their 'nature' to do so. Just ask any hooker.
What we are currently seeing in the US and UK et al, are a bunch of women trying to balance their 'animal selves' with 'society's current 'ideal woman' as seen in this month's Cosmo!"
It can't work, won't work BUT the old habits die hard and it's their death throes we're dealing with. One of those 'old habits' is the female (and BPmale) belief in "The one" and there are too many businesses with vested interests in "marriage" who vocally support the idea.
At the end of the day, De Beers take the cake! What a clever appeal to female (and male) sentimentality!
It's ALL about the Money and had been for at least the last century!
Roaring40sUK 7y ago
the benefits of leaving you outweigh the benefits of staying
This, especially when the state rewards her for leaving with cash and prizes...
I suffered with this BP myth in the past and lived through the effect this myth can have on you, when she branch swings, I can say, its fucking painful.
Divesting yourself of this myth now could save you a shit load of money, not to mention your sanity.
Briffaults Law that way ------------------------>
irun247 7y ago
You seem to overlook that companionship is a benefit.
Roaring40sUK 7y ago
"companionship" is Blue Pill thinking..
sickofallofyou 7y ago
If you want companionship get a dog.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted] 7y ago
The biggest raise I'll ever get was when I internalized that I'll never have kids or get married.
Roaring40sUK 7y ago
Kids are great, but they come at a price, and wont make you happier per se. They are little hostages/cash generators for the woman..
slay_it_forward 7y ago
And you'll also miss out on the most rewarding sacrifice there is for men - raising children. But enjoy the new power tools.
Roaring40sUK 7y ago
The word "reward" has to be linked (as you do) with "sacrifice".
Megacorpinc 7y ago
I love my kids. They're amazing.
Child raising isn't for everyone though, but seriously, you don't even realize how awesome having kids is until you have some.
So I totally agree with you
theONE843663 7y ago
Parents are wired to love their kids. No surprise there. Outside your perspective, child rearing is a Fool's errand!
joseph177 7y ago
Talk to us when you are 80 and alone.
theONE843663 7y ago
You'll be dead by the time I'm 80 and alone so I don't think that'll really workout man.
joseph177 7y ago
Tweet me - I'll be checking it from beyond.
theONE843663 7y ago
Afterlife isn't proven but I guess we'll find out when we dead!
Appleseed12333 7y ago
Raising children is a coin flip on whether your wife will take them away while yelling false accusations.
somarain 7y ago
Thank you. You'd think the point of this sub was to get white people to stop reproducing.
sickofallofyou 7y ago
Doesn't mean you cant volunteer and be some fatherless kids big brother.
waking-life 7y ago
Pretty selfish reason to have kids. Well, most reasons to have kids are. Think of the world you're bringing them into. What they will have to endure. And what if you have a son who is short and BP? Why would you put him through that? Or a daughter that rides the CC. Same thing. You can never know how they will turn out. It's not always positive.
[deleted] 7y ago
Or what if your kid is retarded or has cerebral palsy? Or is just a fuck up or really dumb? Welcome to your burden. A lot of people have kids with the false notion that the kid will provide companionship later in life, but there's no guaranty of anything, especially of these days.
slay_it_forward 7y ago
Yes, no one have kids because there's risk involved. What a stupid mentality.
CHIPPENDALESIXNINE 7y ago
Men already miss out on that and their money when the woman branch swings and takes both.
Godskook 7y ago
You do realize, that redpill doesn't change the fact that some ~50% of marriages never get divorced. Not once, for any reason. That's ignoring reasons that -don't- boil down to hypergamy. Yes, hypergamy is shit, but that's not the experience of at least half of men who get married. Its a dangerous game, but if you go in knowing the odds, the rules, and which women play for keeps and which women play for cheats, you can come out of this with really good odds of a life-long marriage.
But that doesn't negate the red pill. You just gotta step off the rage.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/marriage_divorce_tables.htm
https://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p70-125.pdf
NWGDox 7y ago
Unfortunately, the statistics you provided do not account the "cheaper to keep her," situation that many abused husbands endure simply for the sake of their children or finaces. The loss of attraction is fact, divorce simply may not be one of the early symptoms.
[deleted] 7y ago
You're making the false assumption that the ~50% of people who never get divorced are in happy marriages. They're not, at least not all of them and I'd wager that a high proportion of these men are miserable. I know lots of married guys, and there are many on this sub, who will tell you to never get married. And besides, consider the number we're starting at anyway . . . HALF?? Where I come from, 50% is a failing grade.
Godskook 7y ago
No I'm fucking not. I never once mention the word "happy" nor is that contextually relevant to what I said.
Totally agree. 50% is bad enough, no need to do what the guy I was responding to was doing and pretend like it was 0%.
slay_it_forward 7y ago
Some men already miss out on that and their money when the woman branch swings and takes both.
Fixed.
CHIPPENDALESIXNINE 7y ago
When you take the remainder of that some, you get the other half, which are men that get to enjoy their children, which also wasn't specified. Therefore in the context of the conversation it didn't seem necessary for me to have to. Logic
slay_it_forward 7y ago
No you were insinuating all men get fucked over in marriage which is untrue.
bolupua 7y ago
I have kids, money and divorced my bitch wife and she didn't took a dime.
Helps that I was smart enough to never actually marry her.
[deleted]
fruguy 7y ago
You divorced your wife but didn't marry her. How does that work?
shitfireson 7y ago
Probably referring to common law
bolupua 7y ago
You live with a girl for years and never marry. Incredible, I know.
RPmatrix 7y ago
then she's not your wife, she was a long term gf
bolupua 7y ago
Kind-of. We lived together 10 years and had a child. Pretty wife-iy.
[deleted] 7y ago
Nope, although of course YMMV. Not for me. I hate being around kids. Plus, my mom had a daycare in my house throughout my entire childhood, so I know better than most about the 'pleasures' of child rearing. Pass.
slay_it_forward 7y ago
The choice is yours but equating growing up in a daycare to raising your own children is pretty stupid.
[deleted] 7y ago
No it's not. I literally helped raise over 30 kids. You're an idiot.
slay_it_forward 7y ago
30 kids that aren't yours. You don't see the difference, making you the idiot.
[deleted] 7y ago
It doesn't make you alpha to come on TRP just to argue with people over nonsense. I looked at your posts and all you do is talk shit. You will now be ignored, troll
slay_it_forward 7y ago
But regurgitating trp talking points in the trp echo chamber is super alpha.
mrbluesdude 7y ago
Same here, it was a tough pill to swallow but I would never go back. Ignorance isn't always bliss..
fuckeduphomebody 7y ago
/u/Auvergnat : I don't think it's always true.
What you are talking about is a girl who has never really be in love with you. Maybee she thought she was or maybee it was just comfortable to be with you - I can't count how many couples are together because it's more comfortable for them. To be clear, what you are talking about is a fucking reality and highly regular.
So, I feel you when you say this is a myth. You are just saying that you are not looking for true love with your partner. In other words, you don't have that kind of expectations anymore with girls.
I would suggest you to avoid those kind of girls. It's quite simple, in my experience those girls often used instagram a lot, are deeply insecured, give too much importance to their image, don't read a lot. They use a lot facebook, instagram, etc. They also make a lot of eye contacts even if they are with someone just to check their "power pussy". In short, they are very superficial. I would say those girls must be 80% of the girls I know. You can't expect something significant with them.
Avoid them at all cost. Or, just have no high expectations with them.
I know some girls who are not with someone and do not test their "pussy power". They are just focus on their work and hobbies. It's really pleasant to chat with them. And they don't want meaningless relationships just to be in couple. They prefer to be alone and focus on themselves. I respect that.
Nota bene : I'm in a university in Europe with people aroud 20-25 years old. So, maybee it's different in your country
Auvergnat 7y ago
I didn't say that "love" is a myth, but "lifelong love" (and actually, as I wrote in another post, I think I should have written "our expectation of lifelong love" is a myth.)
"Love" is real (if you mean infatuation). Humans get infatuated with each others. But infatuation is a feeling that is essentially temporary (though some cases might last longer under the right circumstances).
Your thinking is dangerous. If you start separating girls who can love from girls who can't, you simply run the risk of finding one that you "decided" is one who can, and then start expecting her love for you to last.
I've had girls loving me. For a night, for 6 months, for a few years. All of them eventually moved on. All it took would be a new man for them to love. I've had girls so incredibly infatuated with me (usually because of me not being infatuated with them) just completely get over me over night because they met a new man. Rollo's post War Brides is particularly relevant to my life experience.
[deleted]
[deleted] 7y ago
[deleted]
Auvergnat 7y ago
Don't confuse the philosophical stance of nihilism "life has no inherent meaning" with the popular view of nihilism "I don't find enjoyment in life, I might as well kill myself now". The first is a strong intellectual stance backed by evidence (or rather, the complete lack of evidence to the contrary) and do not prevent, in any way, to live an enjoyable life, even one filled with meaning that you created yourself. Which is basically your stance.
Draviz 7y ago
the existence of life after death would be cool
hahayeahthatscool 7y ago
if it is a myth it needs to stop being so prominently promoted here. so many endorsed trpers falling for the LTR bait and somehow hamstering that it's somehow alpha walking into a situation you realize is shitty
sup1337hax 7y ago
She doesn't love you. She loves the idea of you.
MattyAnon Admin 7y ago
I'll take this one step further: there is no short term love either.
It's important to take love 100% out of the equation when you deal with women. Their so-called love is worthless to you, your love is a benefit to them and a liability to you.
This idea that "love conquers all" or that somehow "two people love each other and therefore sex and everything else magically works" is a complete myth.
Love is used by bloopers to enforce this idea that your relationship is purely caused by compatibility, that if person A and person B are "right for each other", they will love each other and it will all just magically work. This is a fiction. The relationship is all that matters, and that's a very temporary ethereal thing. Feelings don't last forever because they are based on the relationship and not directly on her and you. What has happened in the last week has more impact on her feelings than anything to do with who you are or who she is or how "compatible" you are.
Women use love as leverage against you.. "if you loved me you would..." while also not using their own love to mean anything, seen most confusingly in their hamster somersault of "I love you but I'm not in love with you" (which really means "I want you to keep providing for me, but no longer find you attractive).
By making it all about "love", she is free to obligate you endlessly. While her own love is almost worthless. "I gave him all my love" means ... at the most... some sex and possibly some good company. As always with women there is no sacrifice and little investment. We know the score. We know how little women have to offer us beyond sex and our own feelings of satisfaction we may get in their company.
We are just mammals who exchange sex and other forms of value. Attraction exists, affection exists, mutual care sometimes exists, need exists, emotional investment exists, a certain amount of devotion exists. Love does not exist, especially female love.
[deleted] 7y ago
Ha . . . if you really loved me, you'd want me to be happy and you'd welcome strangers into our bed. You know how much I love BBC!!
MattyAnon Admin 7y ago
This is actually where we're at. "But he's just for fun, why are you complainining? Don't you want me to be happyyyyyyyyyyy?"
Auvergnat 7y ago
"If you really loved her/me, you would want her/me to be happy" is the biggest blue-pill shaming tactic ever devised. A catch 22 hiding a false dichotomy; either you let her do what she wants and crush your balls, or you must admit you don't really love her. Fucking brilliant.
MattyAnon Admin 7y ago
Fortunately it includes a really easy get-out, if you wish to pretend you live in the bluepill dreamland:
"If you loved me, you wouldn't ask".
This works best when armed with Red Pill knowledge about the nature of female "love".
Auvergnat 7y ago
Excellent. Almost too bad I'm now RP-aware enough to not get caught in a ONEitis to the point of hearing that sentence ever again.
MattyAnon Admin 7y ago
Yeah.
Stuff you can handle with women tends not to happen to you again.
They're clever like that.
max_peenor 7y ago
Men - loves -> Women - loves -> Children - loves -> Puppies - loves -> Men.
The circle of love, but only if you define love as a compulsive desire to please and nurture. Aside from that, there is no such thing as love. Instead there are three base emotions one person feels for another--Lust, Comfort or Disdain. Of course, this is ironic, since that is the course of how all women feel in any given relationship. The only hope is you can extend Lust as long as possible, since the state and society is no longer enforcing Comfort (i.e. marriage).
fackdack 7y ago
For me, this is not a harsh truth. Why would I want to grow old with a woman anyway? Why would I want to sleep in the same bed as a wrinkly old lady? Fk that.
Sure, and I don't really love her. I love that she is attractive and young and gets me hard. The day she no longer does that for me, i'll kick her to the curb.
charnet3d 7y ago
Bloody fucking wisdom.
I've experienced the "doesn't love you, never did.." thing twice with my SO, and it puzzled the shit out of me. When I drop the ball hard and not make her feel the way it should be she breaks down to her own insecurities and she "decides" to leave me.
But of course that's one of her big nuclear shit tests, and she needs some reassurance that I'm the reliable man she expects me to be, especially because we're in a LTR.
[deleted] 7y ago
Am I correct in understanding this post is supportive of polyamory/open relationships/swinging/exhibitionism? As long as everyone is disease free and not getting pregnant, why care?
Auvergnat 7y ago
I don't think my topic is strongly related to that question, but my personal view is that:
A strong society requires monogamy and marriage.
Our society is now such that this has become a really bad proposition for men. Better off doing what we want. Fuck the strength of our society now. Enjoy the decline.
If one wants monogamous relationships, let him do that. Just as long as he's aware there are little chances it'll last. It's ok, series of LTR and breakups are a valid sexual strategy.
[deleted] 7y ago
Thanks. What's your personal criteria for care/don't care? Appears inconsistent at first glance.
Auvergnat 7y ago
Gut feeling. If I feel that beginning of a twinge of shock/pain/discomfort at the news, I recognize it as over-investment on my part and let her go (only other option since acting butt-hurt and mate-guarding is the sure-fire way to her losing respect for you).
If I just don't feel anything at the news, it means I'm currently non-invested so I don't mind keeping her around. My lack of reaction may actually result in her increasing her investment in me and stopping fucking the other one.
[deleted]
max_peenor 7y ago
You can raise the victory flag after you die. Until then, enjoy it.
iamanenemy 7y ago
Mate. If you don't handle that send her my way. Also, name of theach County in which you met her for research purposes?
Auvergnat 7y ago
Good on you. But guess what. She's still in a relationship with you because it benefits herself, not you. And as a result, if at any point it doesn't benefit her anymore, she'll be out. It doesn't mean it'll happen. You might still have her "love" for the length of your life, as long as you remember she's in it for herself. And if you don't believe me, don't hesitate to test it for yourself: lose your job, get fat and lazy and introduce her to some hot, wealthy single buddy of yours.
[deleted]
fruguy 7y ago
If an LTR did that I'd leave her too.
[deleted] 7y ago
[deleted]
PM_ME_UR_TECHNO_GRRL 7y ago
Their image of themselves does not allow them to leave the husband.
[deleted] 7y ago
[deleted]
Htowngetdown 7y ago
Can't you see the manipulation in that statement? If you leave I will kill myself. Sounds like a real healthy dynamic. AWALT.
[deleted]
Htowngetdown 7y ago
You're right I just remembered a friend of mine who tried and failed to break up with this chick because she kept threatening to kill her self and it didn't seem healthy. You do you
Kenny_Twenty 7y ago
Who the fuck wants some old lady around?
Once your libido goes, women are no longer necessary. I'll never understand why some men just want a woman around for company.
Fuck that.
Ryzatron 7y ago
Maybe your a lil young and sheltered to understand that having a spouse around who actually cares about you can prevent you from being put in a nursing home (where you will probably be abused and stolen from) when you get old and sick. That's real life and certainly not as cool as being tough and pretending you don't need anybody.
Kenny_Twenty 7y ago
I'm thirty six.
Maybe you're just weak and feel the need to invent silly reasons to explain away your weakness. You want a fucking wife to protect you from being stolen from?
That's some pitiful shit. Shame on you.
And besides, you're being a strawman creating faggot by misrepresenting my argument. I never said I didn't need anyone. I just don't need women for companionship.
Ryzatron 7y ago
You like to name call, you little pussy? Maybe I've seen some shit. Maybe I've seen some good people victimized by scum because they didn't have any representation. Let's see how you feel when you are old and cancer-ridden, you know-nothing pea brain. "Once your libido goes, women are no longer necessary." What a philosopher you are! Does that logic apply to your own mother, you fucking joke? I am so impressed by your respect for you own women.. your own blood.
Kenny_Twenty 7y ago
Yes. I want to shame you. You should feel bad. You're being weak and that's bad.
So that's your best reason? You think it's a good idea to get married so you won't be taken advantage of in a nursing home?
No, of course not. You need mommy there. That's what it's really about.
I'm pretty philosophical, yeah.
No. Not really the same thing, right? We're talking about sexual relationships here. You do know this is The Red Pill, right? A forum about sexual strategy? That's the context of our discussion. I can't believe you're making me explain this to you.
Oh, well you didn't wait for the answer before you presumed.
Ryzatron 7y ago
Look up the statistics. Percentages of elderly that wind up in the care of paid strangers. Those that live alone vs those that live with spouse.
Wanting a partner in life is not "weak" and saying so is simple-minded and foolish. It is human nature to pair off. Marriage is the foundation of the family... which is the foundation of Western Civilization. I'm sorry that you have trouble with women. Good women, like good men, are hard to find.... esp when your a simple-minded, one-dimensional, internet-tough-guy.
Kenny_Twenty 7y ago
Just because you're weak doesn't mean I think I'm tough.
And convention isn't a good reason to do things. Use your fucking brain and think for yourself. Jesus.
Ryzatron 7y ago
Tradition is what keeps culture alive, you dumb fuck. Read world history if your capable. You're culture is being ripped away from you and your reaction is to go online and talk about how women (50% of the population) are just sex objects -demonstrating your novice level of understanding. Good luck with a life of loneliness and resentment.
PourScorn 7y ago
Honestly Kenny_Twenty tore you a new one in this thread. Also, learn how to use "your" and "you're" correctly.
Ryzatron 7y ago
Aww.. he called his friend to pop on a day late to announce him the victor! Pathetic!
Everyone knows that saying "everyone who gets married is weak" mixed with grammar policing is a top notch argument!
Kenny_Twenty 7y ago
You're not thinking clearly. Bad traditions should be discarded. Marriage is a bad tradition. That's why they fail so often.
Your? Really? You just called me dumb. Lolol
Dude, you used 'you're' wrong again. Wow.
Anyway, the culture has already been ripped away. That's why marriage is no longer a good idea. You're not good at thinking.
Heh heh. I don't get lonely. That's why I don't feel the need to get involved with a woman unless sex is involved. You're really not good at thinking. You are obviously the one who struggles with loneliness yet you accuse me of it? Hilarious.
You're just a butthurt lil bitch. You know what I'm saying about you is true and that's why you're so upset. I'm not mad at you, I'm just disdainful of you. I think weak men like you set a disgusting precedent that perpetuates the problem between men and women today.
I think shaming men like you is important. You should be made to realize that you're not doing a good job at being a man.
Ryzatron 7y ago
I can list the things i've seen and done in life - my accomplishments, or explain how chances are i could destroy you in a physical altercation... but i won't do that. Thats what people at your cognitive level like to do. Despite me using "your" wrong, yes, you are simple minded. 90% of the relationships with women I have had been positive. I'm not lonely.. i just got my morning BJ, in fact, from my lovely fiance. Im sorry that no one wants to fuck you or spend any time with you. But i think everyone reading this understands why.
Velebit 7y ago
There sure is a way to ensure if your significant other loves you. All you need is detailed emotional analysis with functional MRI during simulations of various situations using best psychoanalysts and neurologists.
Of course, to every girl you go out with. That can answer the question of does she love you.
At that moment.
sezamus 7y ago
The worst thing we men can do, after meeting a nice woman, is aborting our life mission.
She CANNOT fulfill the void - the desire of doing something with your life. She is a great addon to this life and sometimes you wish you could be with her. Sometimes you think you should change your mission and redirect all your energy to make her happy and make her your mission, but:
[deleted] 7y ago
I don't need to be blackpilled this early in the morning.
xRedStaRx 7y ago
Bunch of pussies.
Learn to be men, and you will understand why we don't seek the love we give in return. I see a whole deal of TRP is just one giant facade for learning to man the fuck up in simple, instructuble, and replicable English.
As much as I enjoy the good, once in a while, from the bad shit here.
LOST_TALE 7y ago
in a poll kids were last, after shopping and shit.
vorenak 7y ago
Men love women women love children? children love puppies kittens and candy.
NeoreactionSafe 7y ago
Okay, so what was Natural Law and why hasn't anyone talked about it for a hundred years now?
Well you might say the Red Pill is Natural Law in that it's the way things actually work.
Let's say we wanted to create lifelong love... how would you create that situation?
Well, in order to follow Natural Law you must realize that females are all about "Feelz before Reals".
This means women cannot be given any power if things are going to work out.
Okay, so in the 1800's women had no power in marriage or much else and the success rate in marriage was a lifetime rate of 95%.
"But 95% isn't 100%" you might say.
True.
Even in a well structured society that obeys Natural Law you cannot achieve perfection, but you can get as close as humans can get to it.
True love can only exist when women aren't trying to be the "Whore of Babylon" all the time.
http://themillenniumreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Whore-babylon-luther-bible-1534-saturated-PD-US.jpg
rafanadal14 7y ago
If you ever have an LTR, the most important thing to understand is the "broken glass" theory. Internalize that. Once you do, you realize that there is no "love of your life," only someone who has already left you in the future. This way, not only do you create a healthy dynamic in the relationship (you lead, she follows), but it keeps you positive when the breakup actually happens.
RPStone 7y ago
This is true. It also prevents you from over-investing emotionally and financially. Remembering that she is temporary affects every decision you make.
If you're not prepared every day for her to leave you tomorrow, then you're doing it wrong.
[deleted]
Degener0 7y ago
Some of you are too damn jaded and unhappy. Apathy and the like is a form of weakness. Understanding the nature of the beast is one thing. Seeing meaninglessness in the hunt is another. Open your eyes a bit wider.
https://youtu.be/-xzP_9-Y2qg
pawoukcz 7y ago
people like to idealise everything in this life they do not want to know the truth...
for example 70% of people are dying alone at some shitty place...
life is brutal and somehow beatiful at the same time and we must accept this flow of life
Landry86 7y ago
I prefer it that way, actually. I think it protects us from sadness. The concept of only one person in the universe being your soulmate is too much of a liability. What happens if that person passes away? You can never experience love again in your whole life? That's depressing. My grandmother passed away and grandfather happily remarried.
This doesn't mean it's not possible to be more than just someone's "turn"...
[deleted]
Futon_Rasenshuriken 7y ago
How can one be absolute that there's no life after death if they've never experienced death?
Auvergnat 7y ago
Very true and one can only be agnostic on the matter. There are no proofs one way or the other. But there are major elements that make me really doubtful.
Do dogs live after death? Do mosquitoes? Flowers? Bacteria? Why would we have a life after death and not the others? Because we have consciousness? What about animals who do have some form of consciousness then? Do apes have a life after death? Dolphins? Doesn't is seem extremely suspect that we totally consider the possibility of life-after-death for humans (because oh boy that would alleviate a lot of our fears!) but the possibility of it for animals, we just do not give a single shit about it and mostly suspect a bacterium doesn't go to some bacterium-heaven. Doesn't it make it really suspect that this is but a whishful thinking we cling to, like Santa when we were kids ?
diomedes777 7y ago
I think life after death refers to reincarnation which every living being would experience. We all return to where we came. Personally I find it more absurd and fantastical to look at my existence and then have to accept what Ive been told to believe that this is all a pointless accident, that we are a cosmic mistake in a limitless universe for which we have no real proof. Of course we have no proof of life after death, but to believe we are literally an accident and detached from any form of intelligent design (I'm not talking about a specific God- just something from which we came) is just absolutely absurd and borderline insane to me. It is a sad state of affairs when we have become shamed for believing that we might come from something greater and our lives might have some purpose. Really fucking sad.
Auvergnat 7y ago
Not shaming anyone. Just giving my opinion since you started debating it. But I'm not here to change other people's spiritual beliefs, so believe what you believe. I really don't mind
Degener0 7y ago
Some of you are too damn jaded and unhappy. Apathy and the like is a form of weakness. Understanding the nature of the beast is one thing. Seeing meaninglessness in the hunt is another. Open your eyes a bit wider.
https://youtu.be/-xzP_9-Y2qg
bolupua 7y ago
For me "love of my life" doesn't means she loves me too, in fact she doesn't.
I was in love (oneitis) with a girl for almost exactly 20 years. She was the love of my life? probably. She means absolutely nothing to me now, but hey, hard to beat 20 years of unrequited love.
[deleted]
[deleted] 7y ago
this is misandryst bullshit.
men are the keepers of commitment, women the keepers of sex. if you said discussing the negatives of and preventative measures for sexual rape is "so sad and offers no positivity whatsoever... offers absolutely nothing" you'd be labeled sexist trash and you'd probably lose your job. there's nothing wrong with men discussing the negatives of and preventative measures for divorce rape.
the sexes break up non-marital relationships equally 50/50, but add in the financial incentives of divorce, and suddenly 70% are filed by women, 80% as no fault, and over 90% result in the man paying out. this is why the generational cohort marriage rate is in fucking freefall. men are walking off the plantation en masse. just by sheer financials, you buy insurance for financial catastrophe that happens to a fraction of people. yet people slap the word "love" on it, and financial catastrophe that happens to 50% of marriages is suddenly okay? "love" is a shit reason to get married. the data overwhelmingly shows that women walk the second benefits to leaving exceed benefits to staying.
maniclurker 7y ago
Ahhh... that concern trolling is really cute. Did OP hurt your feelers saying something you disagreed with?
max_peenor 7y ago
I think I need a tampon after reading that.
Sad. Unhappy. Miserable. Bad. Bitterness. Hurt.
A man faces reality and accepts it. He doesn't ejaculate emotions and ask to be spared from their own despair.
Auvergnat 7y ago
Thanks for your concern mate, but I am doing perfectly fine. I still enjoy my sleep, eating my meals, chatting with my parents, drinking a coffee on the sunny terrace of a cafe, sex with my current girl, the appreciation of my current friends, going out for a trip, spending inordinate amounts of time on my hobbies, etc. And I've spent more of my time with a smile on my face after finally realizing that lifelong love is a myth, than during the time I believed in it and wondered with acute anxiety why had I been "singled out" for not getting it "like everyone else".
It's difficult to write about the all-around lack of inherent meaning in life without passing as depressed. Not everyone has the verve of Carl Sagan
cashmoney_x 7y ago
"drinking a coffee on the sunny terrace of a cafe"
god you're so modern and hip
Auvergnat 7y ago
Yup. I also enjoy showing off my skinny jeans and sailor tattoos while I'm there doing video editing on my mac
[deleted]
cleverley1986 7y ago
fuck me I needed to hear this tonight
SasquatchMcKraken 7y ago
I think perception is reality when it comes to this. She really does love you. Until she doesn't. I think there's a difference between a woman never loving you in the first place and her changing her mind with her feels. They are very emotional creatures, so it's a rare chick who is actually consciously running a cost-benefit analysis in her head. For most of them, tingles trump whatever might rationally be considered their interests. The trick is how to keep those tingles going as long as possible.
I've ripped the heart out of two really good girls who never did me wrong ("you don't love me, you only think you do. Out you go.") with this mentality of 'love is a lie.' Not that they were unicorns, because unicorns don't exist. But I can't help but thinking I missed out on something beautiful. I didn't trust the fact that they weren't the typical sluts we all know and love, and I probably missed out on two Top 5% women (gorgeous, conservative-leaning, religious backgrounds, good attitudes, etc.) as a result.
I'm an ENTP. I think a lot, am very into abstract shit, and care deeply about the future. It isn't easy for me to 100% absorb myself in the present. So I get that at a personal level. But when it comes to chicks I think that's what's necessary. Let her love you until she doesn't. Cross that bridge when you get to it. If you have it constantly in the back of your mind "this bitch is full of shit" or "in six months we probably won't even be speaking," it can fuck a good thing up.
[deleted] 7y ago
We all know this. We treat our girlfriends well because we can fuck them real good. I don't believe in true love at all or anything. I do feel attraction. Sexual attraction or lust but whatever. I listen to her conversation and keep her interesting with talk and flirting...but for what? So I can fuck her in the pussy and oh I do! To all the killers and a hundred dollar billers. For real, niggas who ain't got no feelings
Hakametal 7y ago
My SO the other day talked to me about if I "believed in the One, or soul mates". My RP knowledge kicked in immediately and it actually scared me to what she was saying.
It was like she was baiting me into a BP trap or something.
whitesocks2000 7y ago
Visit any surgery or ICU waiting room in America and spend some real time in theses places. You will see a lot of good and bad news delivered. The emotion is quite real and joy and sadness expressed is not only based on saving one's own skin or meal ticket. I suspect you are young and have never had to see the person you love suffer and die. Cheers.
Auvergnat 7y ago
I am mid-30s, been traveling the world a lot and lost dear ones.
You point simply at the "existence of human emotion", which I do not deny. Like all humans, I enjoy it myself and I enjoy seeing it in others through mirror neurons. I actually do appreciate chilling in airports before or after a travel and look at people's emotions before departure, or on meeting again.
Yet the existence of human emotion does not negate in any way the fact that people experience them for selfish reasons. The two lovers crying in the departure hall of an airport as one is leaving are both mourning the impending loss of their own pleasure in the relationship.
[deleted] 7y ago
Confused...So since women only "love you" for how you make them feel and what you provide for them, do men actually feel love for the woman? Or do they also "love" women in a superficial way?
Auvergnat 7y ago
TRP canon theory would be that men are "the true romantic", implying that "our" kind of "love" is "superior" or "real". It ain't; we're just as opportunistic and self-serving, but it expresses itself in different ways.
First, the Fundamental Premise and its result - men being the ones filled with testosterone and therefore the needier ones, the buyers - mean that most men have few sexual options and will therefore be more prone to clinging to their options (ONEitis). We tend to feel a deep, strong bond because we're aware it'll be difficult to get another one anytime soon.
Second, women, as primary carers, are basically stuck with their progeny, while men have in theory the ability to get away from caring responsibilities at any time. And indeed, our need for sex and sexual variety means we have urges to do so. In order to counter this effect, we developed a psychological module to force us into staying in the relationship to help the mother of our child care for our offspring.
The result of this is that men's "love" tend to be stronger than women, making us doing the most foolish things such as: waiting for a girl to finally love us back, staying in unhealthy relationships, marrying a woman after she got pregnant because "that's the right thing to do", staying with a woman after she got unattractive, etc.
Yet our "love" still is self-serving, except that it's more serving our genes rather than our self. In a way, just like women's "love" is. Men's love is also "opportunistic".
And it being "typically stronger" does not mean it's indestructible: many men leave their wives, or cheat on them despite loving them. Just like women's love being "typically weaker" does not mean it's always going to break: although it's pretty common for women to leave a suddenly disabled or fired husband, many do stay and support him because of a combination of sunk-cost fallacy, Stockholm syndrome, social pressure AND love-induced pair-bonding.
SasquatchMcKraken 7y ago
A man's love is based more around loyalty and possession. Especially loyalty. The late Patrice O'Neal broke it down pretty solidly when he talked about the difference between a man loving a woman and a man liking a woman. Love for us isn't all butterflies and coochi-coo nonsense, and if a guy is doing any of that beyond the age of 16 he needs to unfuck himself. It's "this is my bitch, maybe the mother of my children, and I'm going to take care of her and do my best not to stick my dick in any other bitch." Masculine love is more of an undertaking than a feeling per sé. It's a task that you determine to stick with almost no matter what comes.
KidGrizz 7y ago
Wtf is love...i dnt even know what that word means anymore. Fuck love. Dont need it.
[deleted]
Degener0 7y ago
Some of you are too damn jaded and unhappy. Apathy and the like is a form of weakness. Understanding the nature of the beast is one thing. Seeing meaninglessness in the hunt is another. Open your eyes a bit wider.
https://youtu.be/-xzP_9-Y2qg
[deleted] 7y ago
are you crazy? I am the living proof that there is only one love in ones life. I had three!
[deleted]
_the_shape_ 7y ago
I found TRP back in the Summer of 2014 and I still continuously remind myself of this once I get involved with a girl. In fact, it's probably an even more important practice to maintain when everything is going swimmingly - that's when you're most prone to a rude awakening.
The more you accept it, the more it will show up in your thoughts, in your words, and in your behaviors. You loosen up. You cannot be bothered to "mate-guard" as it contradicts your understanding of women. It becomes more clear that you "get it". Think of it as a form of 'good hygiene' (in other words, not smelling of attraction-killing desperation)
Stythe 7y ago
This is a good point to illuse rate the kind of internal change you develop with a correct mindset and how it helps you improve
[deleted] 7y ago
deleted ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^0.6433 ^^^What ^^^is ^^^this?
[deleted] 7y ago
So easy to start thinking . . . 'well THIS girl is actually really cool' and there you have yourself some oneitis. You can actually feel the genetic programming kick in.
IllimitableMan 7y ago
Oneitis is really just a pair bond. If you ever settle down and have kids, you're going to get oneitis for your girl. Doesn't mean you shouldn't be aware of her nature and yadda yadda, but pair bonds are pair bonds. I don't even think pair bonding is bad per se, what is bad is when you're a shit judge of character, don't know very much about women, and end up bonding with a piece of shit excuse for a woman. That's when it spells trouble. If you're going to fall for a chick, you have to ascertain her quality from the bat and keep your leadership ability. You never get to just love them, you have to lead, can't get too soft, have to be mindful and retain pimp hand.
But yeah, oneitis = pair bonding and I don't think it's really all that bad unless you pair bond with a crazy whore or something. Better to have a deep and meaningful relationship where you feel connected to the woman than some soulless detached shit IMO. Some men prefer quantity and soulless detachment, others prefer quality and a mental connection. Men have to ask themselves what they really where they're currently at in life, just sex, or more? And if more? Remember, it's always in the confines of female programming - but more is available. LTR game is way harder than just banging whores, because you actually feel deeply for the chick you're dealing with.
Nigel_Johnson 7y ago
Well said. Vet, and vet some more.
[deleted] 7y ago
I agree . . . it might even come close to making sense back in marriage 1.0. The problem now is that the bar is so low, the proportion of crazy whores is higher than ever, and the means to identify them completely obfuscated in our modern western culture. Society tells us that crazy whores are special snowflakes and that we should sacrifice our lives for them.
SanjayMethylPump 7y ago
Good post, OP.
Soulmate, life long love, "the one" is all bullshit. People grow apart all the time. Love is conditional and convenient, like everything. Personalities grow and mature, people change perspectives and goals, even lifestyles. And as such, their criteria change. Lift weights, make money, and spin plates, my bruddah.
[deleted] 7y ago
P O O I N L O O
O
O
I
N
L
O
O
Degener0 7y ago
Some of you are too damn jaded and unhappy. Apathy and the like is a form of weakness. Understanding the nature of the beast is one thing. Seeing meaninglessness in the hunt is another. Open your eyes a bit wider.
https://youtu.be/-xzP_9-Y2qg