Framemaxxing is Retarded | TheRedPill

The term Frame gets thrown around a lot in manosphere and game – and to no one’s surprise – a lot of newbies miss the point of what Frame is and is not, especially in the era where every influencer and his pet monkey have his own hot take on how to hAVe fRaME.

From Rollo’s article Frame

Iron Rule of Tomassi #1:

Frame is an often subconscious, mutually acknowledged personal narrative under which [guidance] people will be influenced … are all influenced and biased by the psychological narrative ‘Framework’ under which we are most apt to accept as normalcy [sic].

Further, Rollo describes what Frame is NOT:

Frame is NOT power … the concept of Frame is who’s ‘reality’ in which you choose to operate in relation to a woman … you are either operating in your own Frame or you’re operating in hers. Also understand that the balance of Frame often shifts. Frame is fluid and will find its own level when will is applied to change it [sic].

Rollo’s essay gives a good overview of relationship Frame, so check it out if you’ve never seen it. This current article is not about relationship Frame per se, but rather the misapplication of ‘Frame’ that many newbies and influencers seem to propagate into manosphere spaces.

Now, as Rollo asserts, Frame is fluid and can change hands. I would argue that an appropriate way to describe the intensity of Frame is how solid one’s Frame is rather than how much Frame one has. This isn’t an argument against Rollo’s description of Frame fluidity, but rather an addition to the discussion in so far as how Frame could conceivably be measured.

The problem is that a lot of guys misunderstand what Frame is and what Frame is not – and rather than viewing Frame as a binary state (having it or not) – they view Frame as something that can be lost or gained as if Frame could be scored on a continuum. Look at enough personal advice question posts and you will see men say:

“How badly did I lose Frame bro??”
“How much Frame did I lose bro?”
“Can I recover the Frame I lost bro?”

Now, you would be apt to notice that often these guys describe Frame as a sliding scale where Frame is some continuum and if they do XYZ they can “get some Frame back.” Many of these men go so far as to suggest they should "dread" her or ignore her for a few days for no reason whatsoever to “recover” their Frame, further demonstrating that they do not know what Frame is.

As mentioned already, you either have Frame or you do not. If you do happen to lose the hand of Frame of which both of you operate from, you can get it back. But it isn’t a sliding scale or an amount of Frame, it is a state of Frame control in which you either have or don’t.

A fallacious misunderstanding of Frame as a scoreboard in which every time you “hold Frame” you gain XP orbs of sorts brings us to a more pervasive problem: what men are willing to tolerate in the name of ‘Frame’ because they view Frame as a scoreboard instead of a state, and they misapply Frame as some form of numb stoicism.

A numb stoicism – mind you – that means that they have to tolerate unpleasant or unideal scenarios – and the more of these unpleasant situations they endure, the more ‘Frame’ they have. The more battles they win (usually blatant or subtle disrespect) and still gets an outcome from in the end, the more “Frame” they have demonstrated (supposedly).

In other words, you could call this Framemaxxing, and it is retarded:

Putting up with chicks on dates that won’t shut their piehole about “hawt” men throughout the date
Passing an incessant stream of excessive shit tests from the same woman no matter how well he passed the first ones and otherwise demonstrates value
Dealing with a woman who constantly disrespects him but sleeps with him so long as he ‘holds Frame’ long enough every day

Because if you actually had the Frame control, the woman wouldn’t be doing these things to you in the first place (for the most part) – because if she were in your Frame (and solidly so) she would know that those behaviors were too unacceptable to engage in at all.

Whereas to Framemaxxers, Frame is merely not being bothered by the smell of shit after they dive around in the sewer and that they need to pretend it doesn’t stink as well - and the more times they sewer dive while holding their nose the more they prove they can 'Hold Frame.' Well, if they had Frame – actual Frame – they wouldn’t be swimming in the sewer in the first place, nor would they tolerate the stench of shit.

You either have Frame, or you do not. She is either in your Frame, or you are in hers. There isn’t an amount, there is ONLY how solid and how firm that Frame is, if you even have it at all. The more solidly that she is in your Frame, the less she will question anything and vice-a-versa. The more fluid that Frame is, the more it is subject to being tested and questioned.

So there is absolutely no good reason to demonstrate that you 'have Frame bro' in countless garbage situations just for faux clout.

Afterall, what person would charge straight into a boulder? They wouldn’t. It would hurt. Such a foolish decision would be unwise, because boulders are very hard and even trying to test the resolve of a boulder would make it abundantly clear that you cannot move it.

Water on the other hand is fluid – albeit with some tension and resistance – and you can wade - even charge - through it without injury. Water moves with any attempts to move into it lest it be cascading at the time. For the most part, if your Frame is fluid, it will be waded through by anyone who wishes to try.

When you realize this, and when you realize that Framemaxxing is retarded, you will stop putting yourself in undesirable and unpleasant situations because why would someone subject themselves to those things if they had Frame? They wouldn’t.

If you understand this, you will start becoming more preoccupied with having a solid Frame and having Frame at all in the first place instead of maxxing it out in one shitty situation after another while you get disrespected – like a retard.

You won’t freak out about every slight second you “lose Frame” because you will understand that – or at least you should have – cultivated a solid Frame to begin with and have an incentive to keep it that way even if it breaks or bends here and there.

You are also just not going to have Frame in every situation of your life, but you can have the best Frame you can have for the hands your are dealt.

You’re allowed to not have 100% continuous moments of Frame, you are a human being, not a literal emotionless boulder on a cliffside. You can mess up a little bit and not freak out about it and catch yourself for next time if you have a solid Frame instead of 'maxxed out' Frame – which is a delusion.

There isn’t an amount [of Frame], there is ONLY how solid and how firm that Frame is, if you even have it at all.

And realizing this will incentivize you to have and keep a solid Frame. You will surround yourself with people and situations that are good for your mental health and soul as a man, so that your Frame isn’t built on a pile of maxxed out and misapplied faux 'stoicism' and holding your nose as you sewer dive for ‘Frame’ points.

You are either operating in your own Frame or you’re operating in hers. So, have Frame in the first place and make it solid as can be.

~Vermillion

Permalink

First-light 2 20h ago

I agree with almost all of what you have written except the absoluteness of the statement you put in bold.

"You are either operating in your own Frame or you’re operating in hers. So, have Frame in the first place and make it solid as can be."

The reality is that we live many different narratives at the same time. PUAs actually spend most of their time conforming to women's frames just to get a few minutes of the woman inside their frame.

I think that the most powerful thing Key Master of MGTOW.com ever said was that PUAs are actually just giving women what they want. They are actually part of the problem of gynocentrism -serving women by handing out the easy lays slutty women crave to be given permission to enjoy. All they need is a guy they consider high value who is acting exciting and interested in them and will give them no consequences for slutting. Maybe this dynamic of stay in her frame long enough to get her acting enthusiastic in bed is the way to go for casual sex but for real relationships you actually need to share frame.

Of course you want to sell her your world view and get her to want to make a good chunk of it her own. Women generally appreciate a good helping of leadership -a woman generally goes to live in her husband's world but actually you will have to compromise a bit and give her some things she wants -some of the things she needs to feel happy with normal, the things that are her frame. The ideal goal is to be in the same frame as much as you two can without losing sight of what you individually want in life. That cannot be all your frame. A relationship creates a new normal of what is tolerated as normal life.

Where I take issue with Tomassi is when he starts talking like a guru who has rules. This makes his advice brittle and weak.

If you think that she has to be in your frame all the time then you are a fearful man with control issues.

You are the man. Your job is to lead but most of the time in a relationship there is no leading or following but a couple getting on with life. The domestic sphere is very important for women to be happy. You live in the domestic sphere a lot of your time,. You will have to be in her frame here for her to be happy. This is OK. It won't make your dick shrink or wither.

What we are really saying is that you need to be firm about your boundaries. You will have to compromise some of them but a lot of one way traffic is not compromise it is surrender. Never misunderstand what women mean by submission. They do not mean surrender -except to being carried away by positive feelings and experiences in the moment. They mean you taking care of them so they do not have to think -particularly worry- for themselves. When you do this you are guess what -bang in her frame. Get used to it. As ever Briffault's law always wins. The only way to avoid sending most of your time in your woman's frame is very careful selection to start -finding a woman who can compromise but actually has a fair amount of shared vision.

Vermillion-Rx Admin 18h ago

Even in the PUA scenario you described, are you not in her frame? Isn't the guy still in her frame and in one of the shitty situations I described?

Two people simultaneously cannot be in each other's frame in the grand scheme of things.

Where I take issue with Tomassi is when he starts talking like a guru who has rules. This makes his advice brittle and weak.

Right, it just so happened to be that his essay on Frame happened to included 'Iron Rule #1' so like any good author I gave a proper citation from the page to avoid plagiarsim, his rules aren't a focus of the post

If you think that she has to be in your frame all the time then you are a fearful man with control issues.

My article is about the overall frame you operate from, not microframe situations you might be too tired to care so you give in on something (Frame break). This is kind of the same framemaxxing critique I had in the post, where men view every single battle as a Frame encounter.

Someone can still be in your Frame and you give them concessions.

You are the man. Your job is to lead but most of the time in a relationship there is no leading or following but a couple getting on with life.

As Rollo states, you are supposed to avoid giving the impression they are in your Frame.

You can tell a couple is "just going on with life" when she is in his frame. When he is in her frame their marriage is tense and stressful. A man leading a chaotic household does not have frame. A man resorting to actual relationship control does not have frame, because if he had it she would be in it.

You will have to be in her frame here for her to be happy. This is OK. It won't make your dick shrink or wither.

Perhaps reread elements of my post? Who are are you arguing against? Me? Rollo? Because I certainly never wrote anything that would lend this to argument. I never even touched that argument

The only way to avoid sending most of your time in your woman's frame is very careful selection to start -finding a woman who can compromise but actually has a fair amount of shared vision.

I pretty much said this at the end of the post. When you are more concerned with genuine frame instead of numb stoicism you will find situations and people that favor your peace of mind

First-light 2 16h ago

What I mean is that it does not have to be ether or. It would be ideal if your frames had overlap, like a venn diagram and you could live as much as sensibly possible in that overlap.

Vermillion-Rx Admin 15h ago

It is either or.

You are overall in her frame or she is in yours

Overall this can change hands. But overall, you can tell who is in who's frame over all.

Making a concession to someone, caring about their happiness, and compromising isn't a Frame break unless it's detrimental to you or being disrespected.

If you have set parameters of what you are willing to tolerate and you allow all of those circumstances within those parameters into your life, you are not breaking Frame. None of what you described is breaking Frame

You are still either in hers or she is in yours, and they have deeply profound differences

First-light 2 54m ago

"You are overall in her frame or she is in yours"

It all sounds a bit of a doctrine of competition, where you must win the battle of the boundaries. Its worth going back to your statement about "A fallacious misunderstanding of Frame as a scoreboard..."

I think this that idea of frame competition may actually be detrimental to men in relationships. Men need to have a solid idea of what they will tolerate as normal, of their boundaries. That is actually much more important for men than for women but going beyond that to create an idea of competitive frame is probably unhelpful in the end. It is important to see that male frame and female frame are not competing mirror images.

Most relationship actions are actually in her frame. This is because of Briffault's law. This imbalance is why men need solid frame. They can tolerate her frame but they need boundaries.

Briffault's law says that the relationship exists because of value transfer. You can't escape that. Getting that value is the essential part of her frame. Its why women will usually drop most of their so called principles and boundaries for a high status man who has money or power. Its why the rules don't apply to Chad -in her eyes she an derive most value form being with him. This need for value transfer means that you are most of the time living in her frame. Its just the reality. In order to do that men need to be very firm on what they will tolerate as OK because women are an almost bottomless pit of wishes and men know they need to deliver value to get access to the pussy but if they say yes to all the wishes, they make themselves mules that are disrespected.

Lets see what men really want -a hot enough woman who turns up as agreed, is pleasant company and puts out. As the relationship grows, some nurturing will also be expected as will fidelity. A normal man's frame is actually remarkably flexible on the rest. He will tolerate all kinds of value loss, hoops to jump through, shit testing and time wasting just to get those things and most men will actually tolerate a scarcity or absence of some of these. These guys should have stronger frame. They should not tolerate the absence of these things as normal. Provided a man is firm on those things he can live happily enough in her frame.

Consider a standard date. At what point are the component of the date things that a man actually desires? Probably the only bit is where he (hopefully) gets inside the pussy at the end of all the hoops he has passed through and all the value loss he has endured. These were the things she would not tolerate the absence of and still put out. The date is actually pretty much all in her frame or she don't put out. The guy could be happy without dressing up, sitting in some wastefully expensive restaurant, dancing in some expensive noisy club, walking int he moonlight when he should be resting for work or training, spending the money he could keep for buying land or machines or guns or gold and so on. He would be happy with going round her house to fuck or better still her coming round to cook clean and fuck before going home again. That would not test his frame but it would shatter hers if it happened more than the odd time without value transfer.

Women are brittle complex creatures that suck up value. They have brittle complex frames that men dance around while dispensing value. That is the reality. We don't like to admit it but even when we are getting everything right and pulling in the girls, we are just well tailored for a woman's frame. Its a fallacy that you are either in hers or yours. You will be in hers most of the time you interact if the relationship is to exist, she just has to not break yours or you will be dispensing more value than is fair and she will likely disrespect you for it.