Forums.Red / TheRedPill / Uncategorized

controversyonly

Posted 2y ago in Uncategorized - Permalink - Locked - 885 Views

Briffault is known for what is called Briffault's law: The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place..

I copy pasted this from Google. While this is technically true, Red pillers interpret this the wrong way. What many of us on TRP think is this means: "a woman will leave a man with status and money when he loses it, bro!"

"Women don't love the same as men, bro! They only love opportunistically, bro!"

I'm here to tell you why this is largely a load of horse shit.

Often, we point to the man who betabuxes for a woman and gets divorce raped. "He loved her so much," we say, "he provided for her, bought her a house, gave her everything she wanted, was a good father, and yet she still cheated on him and divorced him". "There it is! Proof women can't love you," internet virgins larping as slayers type, "The red pill is law, Briffault's law is the truth!".

If men were to really face, the truth, we would know why that statement is erroneous. Let's analyze this "male love" that is so different from female love. What is male love founded in? Male love is built upon sexual attraction. Without sexual attraction, a girl will at best be a quick fuck while a man is in a dry spell, (we've all been there), and at worst ignored all together. Without this sexual attraction, no love can exist. Therefore, the betabux in the example above was never loved by the woman not because of some obscure internet law, but because she was never sexually attracted to him.

Men on here who site Briffault's law on this site have likely never seen the way women chase "Chads", for lack of a better word. I have literally heard of girls forgiving dudes doing crazy shit I won't type on this site in the name of love. I have heard of girls taking in homeless men simply because she thought they were "hot". Most of my friend group who are in relationships, the girl is more successful than the guy. Ask the girl why she likes him: "he's hot and treats me well" (without being a pushover of course. The whole thing about women liking assholes is kind of not true as well, you can be dominant and assertive without being an asshole. Obviously they'd take an asshole over a guy who was nice and passive though).

The flaw of the betabux is that he hears LMSG, looks, money, status, and game, and knowing he has no looks and no game, he pursues money and status, when those things never have and never will create sexual attraction. Sexual attraction is actually, the LAST thing that girls consider for LONG TERM RELATIONSHIPS. They consider social status, provisioning potential, and how well the partner treats them all before sexual attraction for long term relationships. However, for short term, dominance, and sexual attraction are the first thing considered, studies have shown.

LTRs are great if your girl is sexually attracted to you, but most girls are not sexually attracted to their long term partners. How much money you make does not make her pussy wet. How much status you have only makes her pussy wet to a small degree. For sexual attraction, Looks and Game are the only thing that matters. And don't be like the betabux and think, "I don't have looks, I might as well develop my game,", because in all honesty, looks are a bigger piece of the pie here. Work on both.

Women can exhibit "male love" that is "unconditional" too if they are sexaully attracted to their partner. It's just that the pool of men women are attracted to is significantly smaller than vice versa. But on the bright side, a man's behavior plays a much larger role in sexual attraction for women than vice versa. I'm not saying a 4 will be an 8 if he "mAinTaIns fRaMe". But a 6 with good frame, masculine energy, charisma, and wit who also matches that particular woman's personality might be an 8 to that woman overall.

We should really stop saying Looks Money Status = SMV, because SEXUAL market value and relationship market value are two different things. SMV = Looks and GAME. RMV = looks, money, status, and game to a much lesser degree.

A girl will go hop on a "Chad's" dick for free, while making the guy with money and status take her on 9 dates for a kiss. A girl will beg for a "Chad" back after he cheats on her, and stay faithful to him, while cheating on the betabux who gives her everything. A woman's love is probably MORE unconditional than a man's if she is sexually attracted to you.

Permalink

mfhommie 2y ago

Bro, thank you for this. this is so damn helpful.

PatternEast7185 2y ago

her "unconditional" love of Chad is conditional on him being Chad (i.e., the hottest guy).. she's trying to find the guy with the best genes/memes/character/attitude/reputation/etc that satisfies her base-instincts - just like how men search for the woman that best satisfies his beauty standards and traits that make a woman desirable to him. this post makes no sense brah.

largepaycheckaddict 2y ago

I think most guys are more than willing to commit to a woman who’s not the hottest piece of ass on the block but treats him well and has mother / wife potential.

I don’t doubt it’s similar for women but when Chad has tight game he can convince her to cheat or leave him. Whereas hot bitches will only pull this when they want to take you away from a woman to satiate her ego.

In greek mythology this dynamic is expressed through the siren.

yomo86 2y ago

Yup. We all witnessed Chads getting replaced with Changs or Tyrones or other Chads. The bottom lines is just Chad does not fuck Stacy anymore but he bangs Ashley instead. Chads live in an equilibrium of pussy gain and pussy loss. This is what makes it so easy to be Chad. Abundance.

[deleted]

red_philosopher 2y ago

This is a fallacious argument.

What makes a man sexually attractive to a woman? Just looks?

No, it's the whole damn package.

Benefit doesn't have to be purely social or financial. It's best when it's all 3.

controversyonly 2y ago

Sexually attractive? Like what makes her pussy wet? Only looks and game do that. And if by status, you mean preselection then yeah that too. But not status as in you being a high profile doctor or lawyer, or money. Money and status will NEVER make a woman’s pussy wet. It’s not the whole package, it’s looks and game

-2

4ktx 2y ago

nah bro. I've seen 2 girls drooling for a guy hanging off his shoulder "because he owns land". I actually have the clip of it on my phone. They where actually sexually attracted to him because of the dread game (2 girls competing).

Once u become certain value it, you don't have to do shit and you act like you don't have to do shit because you have options.

Having high RMV, you can easily drag her through the mud.

Girls want 1 thing. And that's what other girls want.

MattyAnon Admin 2y ago

Women can exhibit "male love" that is "unconditional" too if they are sexaully attracted to their partner.

Unconditional, but conditional on attraction.... that makes no sense.

What this whole article misses is that male sexual attractiveness (being in the top 10%) is OF BENEFIT TO THE FEMALE.

Thus Briffault's Law holds true.

4ktx 2y ago

Yes. Doesn't always mean she is using you to extract resources. Girls loves chads because they make her look better.

controversyonly 2y ago

thats why I put unconditional in quotes. People on here say women are loved unconditionally by men, but it's conditional on a male being sexually attracted to them

ChrimsonChin988 2y ago

I think you misunderstood because you are thinking too black/white. First off, there is not something such as 'unconditional love'.

The difference between males and females is that females love is 'more' conditional so to speak.

I don't think there is anything factually wrong with what you are saying but you are mixing together certain concepts such as AF and BB while you should keep them separate. You cannot mix these two concepts and compare the dynamics in one to the other.

controversyonly 2y ago

Men with looks and game versus men who use money and status to compensate for their lack there of is the real AF/BB

SeasonedRP 2y ago

Yes, but male sexual attraction is a low standard. A horny married man will fuck his wife no matter how she looks (within reason). Marriages rarely fail because the male loses sexual attraction. It's the other way around.

[deleted]

ItsDantesWorld 2y ago

Top 10% of the world? Of the city? Of the block?

What are the parameters here dude...

MattyAnon Admin 2y ago

of men she has access to

ItsDantesWorld 2y ago

I see. And are you going off the "whole package" deal, or, just looks? Or etc.

MattyAnon Admin 2y ago

Depends...... how much can she see?

ItsDantesWorld 2y ago

That's a great perspective. Thanks.

AutoModerator 2y ago

Visit our new off-site forum: Forums.red

Browse our tribes and forums, or create your own today on https://www.trp.red free!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Linkinsuave 2y ago

I tried deriving sense from your post and if taken apart piece by piece, sure they make sense. But somewhere in the middle, your ideas meld together into distorted beliefs which from what I see you are trying to preach. One example where this happens is “The flaw of the betabux...”. All in all, I tried understanding what you were trying to say but that is only because I understand the pieces myself. Work on your faculty to be able to better articulate ideas from such pieces and you will find success in relaying your points across.

ChrimsonChin988 2y ago

He's trying to mix together AF and BB and have principles of one apply to the other. But it doesn't work that way, the two should be viewed as separately.

Just like with cooking, some ingredients are not meant to be mixed together

DareyFathom 2y ago

A woman's love is probably MORE unconditional than a man's if she is sexually attracted to you.

You realize that is a contradictory statement right?

controversyonly 2y ago

thats why I put unconditional in quotes. People on here say women are loved unconditionally by men, but it's conditional on a male being sexually attracted to them

acos12 2y ago

You have no idea how Value works.

controversyonly 2y ago

Being high value and being sexually attractive are not the same thing

[deleted]

Karastilov 2y ago

I have bunch of frends who dont work are lazy af but they are hot and their girls still do everything for them fam paying food vacations phones etc

[deleted]

magnificent18 2y ago

This is blackpill, which i indeed agree with. Life is a mix of black and redpill. Either you are good looking and it makes girls go crazy or you try to get in the best shape as possible in the other areas and also try to get girls (dressing, getting shape, money, status).

At the end of the day looks is #1 to the point where if you are hot enough you can get away with cheating, but if you only have those other qualities, she might still leave you. Thats my perception.

Ive seen dudes who are financially okay but hot do way better than average guys who had to work hard and get money.

I-respect-females 2y ago

Very good article, I'm surprised people are confused by it while I'm thinking it should be in the side bar, its very accurate information!

controversyonly 2y ago

They wanna cope with money and status and “muh maintain frame bro”. If you tell most men the truth, that all the money and status in the world will only make them a betabux, then the world would no longer function due to lack of male labor.

They don’t realize that Chris Hemsworth or Michael B Jordan with no status will still slay pretty hot girls, even if they’re homeless. Whereas Woody Allen or 42 Dugg without status is no one

SpeakLessActMore 2y ago

People aren't confused by it. It's simply poorly written and of little value to anyone but the writer. The central premise expressed in the title is patently false and OP doesn't even write more than two paragraphs before contradicting his own title. Even calling Briffault's law an "obscure internet law" demonstrates the writer's pathetic lack of research.

I would go on, but given OP's butthurt response to you, I sincerely doubt any criticism would be taken gracefully. At least the content was formatted well.