610
611

Red Pill Theoryfeminine and masculine. (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by projectself

alpha.. beta.. sigma.. omega. what a load of crap.

 

here it is in simple form.

 

There is feminine and masculine.

A masculine man will attract a feminine woman.

A masculine woman will repel a masculine man like two north poles of a set of magnets.

 

At their core, about 80% of women are feminine and about 80% of men are masculine. Bad messaging and cultural programming has a lot of folks trying to be something they are not - and generally making a lot of them quite unhappy in their relationships.

 

If you are a masculine man, and you have paired with a feminine woman, she will want to trust you. Once you earn that trust, she will want to yield to you as long as she feels your strengths. She will nurture you and rebuild your energy.

 

If you are a masculine man, and have paired with a masculine woman, she will endlessly shit test you, compete with you, drone on about other men she dealt with that day, and will drain you of your energy.

 

If you are a feminine man, this post is not for you.

 

edit- to add this comment from below:

Also, a feminine man will repel a feminine woman but he will be attracted to a feminine woman. Men are attracted to feminine women, women are attracted to masculine men.

But in the end, the masculine women will always end up with the feminine man. Even if a feminine woman does end up with a feminine man, she will become more masculine (controlling, dominant, aggressive) to make up for his lack of masculinity.

 

What are these traits?

-----

 

These are masculine traits:

-----

   

Freedom - a yearning to not be tied down, freedom as in celebrating when a running back breaks through a defensive line to run free, freedom as in not being a slave. not a slave to your emotions, your possessions, the day to day successes and failures, and especially not a slave to your woman.

 

Direction - a mission. Something that you can give the world. Something that drives you. What gift do you have to give the world?

 

Logic - you are not slave to your emotions, and can analyze the situations life places in front of you.

 

Focus - you can disassociate yourself from distractions when necessary to pursue your mission.

 

Integrity - your word is your balls. You do not break either of them for anyone if at all possible.

 

Stability - you are secure in yourself. financially, career, emotionally. You do not have a new job or a new "love" every 3 months. When a woman get's emotional, you are the 100 year old oak tree that has seen a million storms and know that this one too will soon pass.

 

Passion - this means to be present. pay the fuck attention and be present. passion about your job, your hobbies, and your women. Fuck them all with the intensity of a thousand suns.

 

Independence - "I love a man on welfare" .. said no [feminine] woman ever.
Alternately, "I love a man who texts me 15 times a day" said no [feminine] woman ever.

 

Discipline - this means doing the right things even when you do not want to. It means leg day no matter if your calf is cramping. It means fuck motivation (which comes and goes), it means you do something because it is what you need to be doing.

 

Confidence - self esteem is knowing that you can handle challenges and be ok, that no matter what happens.. fundamentally - you will handle it and things will be ok. self worth is knowing that you deserve good things and do things to keep bad shit out of your life and welcome good things. Confidence is having both and the competence to do something. The knowledge that no matter what happens - things will be fine - paired with a deep self belief that you deserve good things and will pursue them.

 

Aware - you watch what's going on around you. When you enter a new place you pay attention to who is in the room with you. Women, men, bitches, cows, thugs, liars, whatever. You are aware of the internal politics at work and know what's what. You are aware of our global financial and political situation.

 

Strength - This is strength of body, strength of will, and strength of mind. This mean you push yourself.

 

-----

 

Now, to contrast the above - let's discuss feminine traits.

 

-----

 

Surrender - she knows that in order to be dominated, she must surrender. Not just to anyone of course, only to a man worthy of dominating her.

 

Receptivity - I have never met a single woman in my life over the age of 25 with a true hobby of their own. Every "hobby" they mention is something they know almost nothing about - because it was the hobby of a man she was paired with before. A feminine woman is receptive and acts like water, taking whatever shape of the vessel containing them. I have seen women completely change music preferences and hobbies, seen them change friends. On the other side, I have seen women become strung out drug addicts because their "man" molded them into it.

 

Empathy - There are two varieties of empathy. The first is the obvious, she can feel your frustrations and pain. She emotionally reacts to sad stories on the news and facebook. She has the capability to feel what others feel. The second half of this is the power of empath - to intuitively know by facial expressions, body language what other people are feeling. To just intuitively "know".

 

edit - down below are some challenges to the empathy claim. I wrote what I wrote based on my own experience but I see their point and want to re-think how to word what I was trying to say. For now, I'll defer to the comments below, which are more interesting than the 4 lines I wrote originally.

 

Radiance - I do not know how to describe this, but every man knows what this is. The woman who just radiates energy and sexuality even when the conversation is mundane. She has something about her that just positively charges you to be around. In some ways, it is like how being at a quiet lake at sunrise can radiate calm and just surround you in it, a radiant woman is a true treasure to be around.

 

Flow - Like clouds across the sky - like a ballet dancer. Like a tinder date that shows up in a corset and ballet shoes and glides across your hardwood floors. Grace.

 

Sensuality - People mistake this one a lot. Sensuality is not the same thing as sexuality. The root word of sensuality is to be in touch with your senses. Taste, she will kiss and suck on you, delight in chocolate and red wine. Lamb and peaches. Smell, she will like the way you stink - want to steal your t-shirts to sleep in them, Hearing - she will listen to how you breathe at night, obsess over the tone in your voice when you said you had shit to do to try to figure out if her status has changed. Touch - if you cannot make her come with 2 fingers and 60 seconds, or with your dick in 10 minutes, you need to work on it. A sensual woman loves to orgasm.

 

Nurturing - not in a mommy way, but yes. A feminine woman is nurturing to the man she loves and respects. As long as he maintains that respect that is.

 

Affection - if a woman is into you, she will rearrange her entire life to be with you. She will lie to her husband, single moms will find a sitter, young professional women will come home from work to nap so that when you text her at 2am, she can jet over and still be up for work the next day. A woman in love/lust will damn near crawl through broken glass and barb wire to fuck the man they want to be with.

 

Sharing - this is such a simple thing, like when you are sitting down to dinner together and she takes a bite of her entree, says it's good and cuts off a piece to give you.

 

Loving - yes, the "L" word. She has the capacity for love. To give it and accept it. To crave it. Women who cannot love are broken women.

 

-----

 

The most rewarding relationship is a masculine man providing strength to a loving woman.
It is rewarding for both sides.

 

-----

In order to get a loving woman, you will need to elevate yourself to her polar opposite.

Some unknown percentage of attraction is the balance of feminine to masculine. You do not have to be 100% masculine, because guess what - she will not be 100% feminine. However, if she is into you - you can exercise masculine behavior and she will soften and yield to your lead. She will relish in allowing her guard down with someone she trusts to lead her.

 

If you break frame too much, if you are a big ole faker and are lying, or if you decide to change this dynamic in the middle of your relationship - she will react to your softening by becoming more masculine to offset the polarity. If she does not trust you, she will not let you lead her.

 

Everyone who has ever been in a long term relationship or marriage will tell you - "Relationships are work". And it is true. It really is, however what is so often suggested is that the "work" needs to be more communication, more understanding, more respect. That's a load of shit. The "work" is holding up your end of the deal to be the man in the relationship. It means have a job, don't be a drunk, or a video game addict. It means be the man in the relationship. It means be present and be conscious. That is the work, and the best thing is you don't even have to do it perfect - you just have to do it.

 

edit- Back to my opening statement, "alpha.. beta.. sigma.. omega. what a load of crap." I would like to clarify my stance on alpha and beta verbiage.

My reference point on this is that I see these terms thrown about way to often and used in a context which is sometimes incorrect, but far more often just flat out unhelpful. The post over the weekend about how to be a better sigma, by pairing with an alpha and augmenting him. uhh.. what? Or by the "that's so beta" comments. Or the "I am an alpha" comments. Those are dynamically changing concepts, and at any point in the day people will react to the situations differently. The overuse of those terms does not contribute to the dialog in my opinion. Being a better man does not mean you ask yourself, "what would an alpha do?". It is far better to ask yourself, "what are my options and what is my best choice". Chasing the dichotomy of alpha for the sake of alpha does not benefit most individuals. That is the way I see this terminology used most frequently and I am offering an alternative view.

I would also say I am not disputing the concepts of social structure being represented as alpha/beta/omega/etc as much as saying it simply is not that helpful to the conversation. That by focusing on masculinity instead of the overused concept of super alpha, you can recognize things in a simpler construct. You also can remove the "men do this" and "women do this" mindset and polarizing view. There are no shortage of "men" who act just like the irrational women we discuss. Feminine and emotional and completely lacking in responsibility or accountability.

 

edit- In the comments there are even reference to .."well this and this".. assuming that because the gender of a person is female that in some way she is a feminine woman. There are plenty of masculine woman out there, and they eat up feminine men left and right. These traits are not gender based, they are character based.

 

edit- if any of the above concepts interest you, consider reading "The Way of The Superior Man". I do not agree with everything he states. Some of it is just too watered down, but the concepts are well defined and laid out. More to the point, forget reading a book. Look at your life, and the relationships you have personally had.


[–]OrangeCub 29 points30 points  (1 child)

The good ol' yin-yang. Thanks for the detailed reminder OP. I'd like to add that this dynamic isn't static. Masculine and feminine roles might vary in degree depending on the situation, the task at hand. It's sometimes beneficial for a masculine energy to get into its feminine and vice versa. It's disastrous if one were to only stick to one side of the pole, there's good stuff in both sides when balanced and applied wisely.

[–]Redasshole -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Some unknown percentage of attraction is the balance of feminine to masculine. You do not have to be 100% masculine, because guess what - she will not be 100% feminine.

It's sometimes beneficial for a masculine energy to get into its feminine and vice versa.

I have a problem with this. The myth states that men and women are both yin and yang and that according to the situation, each one of them can switch between yin and yang. For instance, some guys likes to be dominated in bed.

This myth has been used wildly to convince men it's OK to be feminine because no one is feminine 100% of the time and no one is masculine 100% of the time.

I've been practicing Chinese martial arts for a long time now, and I've studied a little bit Chinese culture. Here is what the yin&yang symbol really means when applied to men/women and masculine/feminine:

  • men are yang (masculine) and women are yin (feminine)

  • there are men who are less masculine (and thus more feminine) than other men. However, all men are still more masculine than any women.

  • Similarly, some women are less feminine (and thus more masculine) than other women, but all women are still more feminine than any man.

This last conclusion seems to be in contradiction with what one can witness today. However, one could argue that the women who are considered very masculine only put up a show. Either way, that's what the yin&yang symbol really means when applied to men/women, masculinity/feminity and not "you are both feminine and masculine so get in touch with your feminine side". There are shades of yang and shades of yin. Some men are less yang and thus less maculine (but actually not more feminine) but they are still yang by nature.

[–]BrunoOh 71 points72 points  (5 children)

A masculine man will repel masculine women like two north poles of a set of magnets.

She'll repel you more than you repel her, because she'll still want a masculine man.

Everyone who has ever been in a long term relationship or marriage will tell you - "Relationships are work". And it is true. It really is, however what is so often suggested is that the "work" needs to be more communication, more understanding, more respect. That's a load of shit. The "work" is holding up your end of the deal to be the man in the relationship. It means have a job, don't be a drunk, or a video game addict. It means be the man in the relationship. It means be present and be conscious. That is the work, and the best thing is you don't even have to do it perfect - just do it.

To put it succinctly, whenever we talk about having to "earn" sex, or that you need to put in work or spend effort, this is what that means.

Beta effort (showing how good of a boyfriend you are, doing nice things to earn her affection, being the shoulder to cry on) = Bad, or neutral at best.

Alpha effort (hitting the gym, upgrading your wardrobe, practicing game) = Good

[–]projectself[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

A masculine man will repel masculine women like two north poles of a set of magnets.

A masculine man will repel masculine women like two north poles of a set of magnets.

She'll repel you more than she repels you, because she'll still want a masculine man.

Thank you, I agree, and have corrected the above sentence.

[–]leinaD-Backwards 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I don't really get this post. What is wrong if you're a bloke who ticks all these boxes but also takes pride in emotionally supporting their gf/wife.

I have a good job, volunteer manual labor as a tree surgeon, hit the gym on the reg, run, shop well and have a male group of pub buds but I also like to buy her spa gifts and mean genuine romance.

Wheres the problem in that unless i'm missing something in this sub that says love as a real emotion between two consenting parties does not exist?

I know the game theories in this sub but your thread is bang next to another one saying it's a ok to keylog your girl and track her GPS.

What is going on here...

[–]BrunoOh 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Because the issues most men face is that they're not alpha enough. In this society, no man needs help being nicer or more sensitive.

Those things you listed do make you a "better person" and more of a prospect for a relationship, but it doesn't arouse women.

Telling a guy that he'd do better with women if only he would be nicer and take them on expensive dates is like telling a woman that she'd get hot men to swoon over her if only she got a better paying job. Ironically, our society tells both.

[–]marty2k 5 points6 points  (1 child)

A masculine man will repel masculine women like two north poles of a set of magnets.

She'll repel you more than you repel her, because she'll still want a masculine man.

Also, a feminine man will repel a feminine woman but he will be attracted to a feminine woman. Men are attracted to feminine women, women are attracted to masculine men.

But in the end, the masculine women will always end up with the feminine man. Even if a feminine woman does end up with a feminine man, she will become more masculine (controlling, dominant, aggressive) to make up for his lack of masculinity.

[–]_the_shape_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

But in the end, the masculine women will always end up with the feminine man.

"Live by the sword (of feminism), die by the sword"

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[deleted]

[–]kwollner 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is so on. As a 21 year-old college student at the University of Minnesota, all I hear people do is complain about equality, particularly on social media venues like Yik Yak. And I hear it from both men (complain about "gold diggers") and women (complain about things like slut shaming, etc.). Women are definitely much more vocal, though. And the thing is, I'm an engineering major--I really don't care about stuff like this. But I can't stand how people are constantly complaining about equality (rather than arguing for equity, which is theoretically always balanced between the two sexes). And as soon as you say something akin to "the most rewarding relationships are..." they flip out

[–]everystone 10 points11 points  (1 child)

When a woman get's emotional, you are the 100 year old oak tree that has seen a million storms and know that this one too will soon pass.

I have no Idea what this sub is, but my god I can relate to this.

[–]NameOfAction 35 points36 points  (15 children)

Youre a student of Deida, arent you? Good stuff. I've been bringing him up in comments for a long time, cant get anyone to bite. Good post.

[–]GoingTheHardWay 11 points12 points  (2 children)

I was going to say, this reads like a summary of "Way of the Superior Man".

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's what I was thinking also.

[–]jimmyharbrah 3 points4 points  (11 children)

You got any recommendations for literature?

[–]NameOfAction 6 points7 points  (10 children)

I'd link if I wasn't in my mobile. Enlightened sex manual and the way of The superior man are both good. More written for ltr but there is stuff relevant to pua also. Either way theyre filled with rp truth, even if its a bit new agey. It helps If you have a good working undrstanding of budism and daoism. I wouldn't recommend for anyone who's still angry.

[–]chainlinks 9 points10 points  (8 children)

The Way of The Superior Man is worth it's weight in gold.

[–]NameOfAction 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It is. And Enlightened Sex Manual is a strong companion, worth it's weight in silver.

[–]Redasshole 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's a purple pill book, though.

[–]hb8only 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Superior

the biggest "problem" is that, as is written in the book, when you go for a girl - you have already "lost" because you want her. I think that you should be only with a girls who are going for you and it is not very positive

[–]chainlinks 11 points12 points  (4 children)

This is true only if you're attached to the outcome.

I'm starting to figure out something I call "detached desire," where I'll pursue a beautiful woman with no attachment to the outcome. By really internalizing this, my advances convey more of a playful offer instead of coming off as a sales pitch.

It's not perfect, but for the most part, I don't give a shit if my advances don't work because I can always try again with the next girl I meet.

[–]eccentricrealist 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Any way I can practice this? That's more or less the mindset I'm trying for

[–]chainlinks 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Step 1: Be smooth enough to get girl interested in you.

Step 2: Be unconfident enough to blow it when it's getting close to sexy time.

Step 3: Be pissed.

Step 4: Learn to find your failures amusing and laugh at yourself and don't make the same mistake nextime.

Step 5: Go back to Step 1.

Eventually your skills get better, you start winning a few and hence, are less nervous during the interaction and less attached to the outcome.

I guess if there were a "trick," it would be Step 4. Learning to laugh at your stumbles lessens the blow.

[–]timmy2trashed 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Outcome independence. Sidebar. Read it all. Come on guys, you're better than this.

[–]Manospherian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, gotta read the sidebar

[–]jimmyharbrah 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm downloading those. I appreciate it. Thanks.

[–]chechechecheahahahah 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This is why I subscribe to TRP. Nicely done OP.

[–]TRP Vanguard: "Dark Triad Expert"IllimitableMan 13 points14 points  (3 children)

alpha.. beta.. sigma.. omega. what a load of crap.

Not at all, they describe men of different dispositions and levels of social dominance in the hierarchy of men. Each varies in how masculine they are, how they channel their masculinity and how well they do sexually and socially.

Other than the alpha/beta division which effectively is used as a classifier for whether a man is dominant or submissive, nobody really needs to know all these different subtypes, it's not integral to sorting out your life, so if by "what a load of crap" you mean "knowing about these things is not necessary to being a complete man" then we agree. But if you mean "these archetypes pertaining to different men don't exist" then that's where we would disagree.

It actually goes more complex than simply alpha/beta etc as there's a positive and negative version of each variant, for example a positive alpha is a patriarch with a family, your general good guy who behaves dominantly despite retaining a classically religious morality; this is a leader who believes in honour, virtue, protecting the weak and bla bla yet doesn't needlessly exploit people, would only use Machiavellianism for defence etc. It's virtue from strength without giving into romantic idealism, a rare mixture but it does exist.

Whereas the negative alpha is the gangster/dark triad/hood guy subtype. Fucks lots of different women, doesn't believe in honour, virtue or a duty to protect the week, will exploit people, will use Machiavellianism to attack etc. This is more common than the former and more easily employed as we live in a period of decline and thus the environment is more conducive to a negative rather than positive alpha personality type.

Already without fully going into each category, I've effectively disproven your dismissal of these ideas being a bunch of crap, because they're observable phenomenon.

I question your endorsement when you so glibly dismiss pre-established concepts without presenting a compelling counter-argument which accurately deconstructs the falsity of these ideas. If you're going to dispute something, at least come up with a counter-argument for it, that would give a moment for pause.

Is your thread meant to be a counter argument for why these classifications are useless? Because it isn't a counter-argument purely on the basis you fail to explain why any of these ideas are untrue or incorrect. You dismiss these classifications before writing out a thread that basically goes into the nuance of yin & yang, so to someone looking at the logic of your post your dismissal and subsequent espoused ideas seem completely disjointed. Basically, what you're saying is not mutually exclusive from the behavioural classifications of different men, both are true.

Those classifications are just psychological tools used to better understand the varying personalities of men as measured by social dominance, morality, level of intellect and sociability. Men are far more diverse in both aptitude and behaviour than women by merit of our wider IQ variability (which affects behaviour INTIMATELY in all manner of ways)

Otherwise good post rehashing the basics, but be clear this is in no way a cogent refutation of why "alpha, beta, omega" and all the other classifications used to describe different male stereotypes are in any way untrue, false or useless.

[–]projectself[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Thank you for your well thought out reply.

Other than the alpha/beta division which effectively is used as a classifier for whether a man is dominant or submissive, nobody really needs to know all these different subtypes, it's not integral to sorting out your life, so if by "what a load of crap" you mean "knowing about these things is not necessary to being a complete man" then we agree. But if you mean "these archetypes pertaining to different men don't exist" then that's where we would disagree.

My reference point on this is that I see these terms thrown about way to often and used in a context which is sometimes incorrect, but far more often just flat out unhelpful. The post over the weekend about how to be a better sigma, by pairing with an alpha and augmenting him. uhh.. what? Or by the "that's so beta" comments. Or the "I am an alpha" comments. Those are dynamically changing concepts, and at any point in the day people will react to the situations differently. The overuse of those terms does not contribute to the dialog in my opinion. Being a better man does not mean you ask yourself, "what would an alpha do?". It is far better to ask yourself, "what are my options and what is my best choice". Chasing the dichotomy of alpha for the sake of alpha does not benefit most individuals.

Telling a man who has been married for a decade that his wife cheated on him because he was "a beta bitch" is not really that helpful to him where he is.

That is the way I see this terminology used most frequently and I am offering an alternative view.

It actually goes more complex than simply alpha/beta etc as there's a positive and negative version of each variant, for example a positive alpha is a religious patriarch with a family, your general good guy who behaves dominantly despite retaining a classically religious morality. A leader who believes in honour, virtue, protecting the weak and bla bla yet doesn't needlessly exploit people, would only use Machiavellianism for defence etc.

Whereas the negative alpha is the gangster/dark triad subtype. Fucks lot of different women, doesn't believe in honour, virtue or a duty to protect the week, will exploit people, will use Machiavellianism to attack etc.

Sure, I get that. One of the strongest traits of masculinity is protection of your own. It is inate in us, just as it is in nature. Your patriarch of the family example is exactly in line with that, just as gangsters have heirachy. And they do protect their own, and they avenge their own as well. They also discipline their own and keep them in line. But when someone else does that you will see a fierce protective response. It is a masculine trait, regardless of how used.

Just as redpill does not tell men how to act, or what to want from life, or how to live their life. It states facts, and it is up to each man to use that information to get what he wants out of life. Masculinity can be used in a positive or negative manner. Both of which are attractive, because the dynamics do not really change.

If you're going to dispute something, at least come up with a counter-argument.

I would say I am not disputing it as much as saying it simply is not that helpful to the conversation. That by focusing on masculinity instead of the overused concept of super alpha, you can recognize things in a simpler construct. You also can remove the "men do this" and "women do this" mindset and polarizing view. There are no shortage of "men" who act just like the irrational women we discuss. Feminine and emotional and completely lacking in responsibility or accountability.

Your post is effectively talking about yin and yang, which has only tangential relevance to the different archetypes that make up the spectrum of man.

agreed.

Otherwise good post which just seems like plain common sense to me, but is in no way a coherent refutation of why "alpha, beta, omega" and all the other classifications used to describe different male stereotypes are in any way untrue.

Just a different view on the same basic idea.

[–]TRP Vanguard: "Dark Triad Expert"IllimitableMan 5 points6 points  (0 children)

My reference point on this is that I see these terms thrown about way to often and used in a context which is sometimes incorrect, but far more often just flat out unhelpful.

Agreed. Too many people who don't know what they're talking about are opening their mouths on the forum nowadays.

The post over the weekend about how to be a better sigma, by pairing with an alpha and augmenting him. uhh.. what? Or by the "that's so beta" comments. Or the "I am an alpha" comments.

Agreed, didn't see topics, sounds pathetic.

The overuse of those terms does not contribute to the dialog in my opinion. Being a better man does not mean you ask yourself, "what would an alpha do?". It is far better to ask yourself, "what are my options and what is my best choice".

Agreed.

Chasing the dichotomy of alpha for the sake of alpha does not benefit most individuals. That is the way I see this terminology used most frequently and I am offering an alternative view.

Ok things get fuzzy here, is your point "don't get caught up with being alpha, just be more masculine" ?? If so, agree - although it was unclear from your thread that this was the point. It looked like you were going to pen a dismissal only to veer off onto something else entirely, hence my rebuttal.

I would say I am not disputing it as much as saying it simply is not that helpful to the conversation. That by focusing on masculinity instead of the overused concept of super alpha, you can recognize things in a simpler construct. You also can remove the "men do this" and "women do this" mindset and polarizing view. There are no shortage of "men" who act just like the irrational women we discuss. Feminine and emotional and completely lacking in responsibility or accountability.

Going for spectrally nuanced rather than categorically binary explanation, that's great - higher level of thinking. People forget inside yin there's a little yang, and vice versa (you can even see it in the picture, a little black circle in the white, and a little white in the black) - it wasn't clear to me from reading your post that this was your goal, but now you have defended your ideas it is - OP would be a long stronger if augmented by our discussion here.

Thank you for your clarification.

[–]melbournebrah -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Have to agree with Illimitableman, no offence OP but this thread is a load of shit. All it does is rehash the same concepts which have been posted on here and other forums a billion times, but with different terminology. Although I do agree it's annoying when the terms alpha and beta are thrown around too frequently.

[–]1PantsonFire1234 5 points6 points  (3 children)

Allot of insecure women end up being masculine women. You know, the angry at the world type that just wants to cause harm and throw down. She'll still want a man to toss her around but no man can because she's to heavy.

Now some questions if you have the time to answer them I would appreciate that greatly OP.

Focus - Would you say that focus needs to be constant? There are moments in life and situations where a distraction presents itself and takes priority. Emergencies and such.

Stability - A very long relationship in my opinion isn't always a sign of a men. Very dependent betas end up in faux LTR's because they can't be alone. To have the ability to stand on your own two feet emotionally and walk away when needed seems way better. Also short relationships in today's dating climate are way more fun. Is having fun consider non-masculine?

Independence - Independence is nice but if you're a student for example you have very little financial independence. How would you describe this trait for younger people who work part time hours?

[–]newtonnes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I guess the independence problem with students ties into the Focus aspect he elaborated on. They're focused on achieving their mission (financial stability and independence) and work hard to reach there. At least, this is my interpretation of the situation.

[–]projectself[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Allot of insecure women end up being masculine women. You know, the angry at the world type that just wants to cause harm and throw down. She'll still want a man to toss her around but no man can because she's to heavy.

I think this is a fantastic point, but I did not want to get off on the tangent above. Consider a healthy, attractive young woman. Top of the charts in sexual market place value as is the common way to describe them here. She can be feminine, but as she ages.. and hits that "wall" where she no longer gets the attention she once did, she will harden. Think of the endless line of jaded single moms out there - each more masculine than the next. Now consider your "cougars" .. even more masculine. As the youth wears away, so does that softness because now they are paying bills, working, doing things from the masculine list. As they become more masculine it is only natural that they attract a more feminine man. You know, the beta bucks she settles for after the wall as it is so often described here. It is not so much a conscious thought of settling (although it certainly can be), it is a natural order to the polarity of the yin and the yang. A masculine woman attracts a feminine man. Most relationships are somewhere in the middle.

Focus - Would you say that focus needs to be constant? There are moments in life and situations where a distraction presents itself and takes priority. Emergencies and such.

Of course, dynamics change and no person will be the same thing every day all day. This is not a 100% thing, it is a trait.

Stability - A very long relationship in my opinion isn't always a sign of a men. Very dependent betas end up in faux LTR's because they can't be alone. To have the ability to stand on your own two feet emotionally and walk away when needed seems way better. Also short relationships in today's dating climate are way more fun. Is having fun consider non-masculine?

Of course not, desire for freedom and options is a true masculine trait. Stability means not having your life flipped upside down and sideways every 3 months because you are rearranging your life all the time.

Independence - Independence is nice but if you're a student for example you have very little financial independence. How would you describe this trait for younger people who work part time hours?

It is not necessarily a financial concept. It also applies to relationships well, convey a lack of neediness and a lack of clingyness. Wanting but not needing a woman conveys this. In practice it means you give her just a bit less than she gives you. In general it means that you can handle setbacks in life and handle them as they come to you.

[–]1PantsonFire1234 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeh that makes sense (about the traits).

As they become more masculine it is only natural that they attract a more feminine man.

Are we talking purely personality wise or also physically (for both men and women). And wouldn't a feminine man quickly break? This might work for post wall women that look for a beta. But what about younger girls, they still desire an alpha a.k.a masculine guy. No matter how unstable the relationship gets.

[–]ShounenEgo 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Receptivity - I have never met a single woman in my life over the age of 25 with a true hobby of their own. Every "hobby" they mention is something they know almost nothing about - because it was the hobby of a man she was paired with before. A feminine woman is receptive and acts like water, taking whatever shape of the vessel containing them. I have seen women completely change music preferences and hobbies, seen them change friends. On the other side, I have seen women become strung out drug addicts because their "man" molded them into it.

I remember my deep blue pill self trying to fit into the hobbies of my oneitis by emphasizing how similar our taste is. Guess what happened: She was the one who changed her taste to adapt to the next masculine guy she wanted, and she was "advertising" how variable her taste suddenly became. And the even better part: That "tomboyish" oneitis I had showed every sign of submission when she was talking to him, as if she was 2 different people.

But to stay on topic: I can 100% attest your claims with my personal anecdotes. I've been a feminine nerd who was attracted to "tommy boys" and feminine women for a long time, without reciprocation. You know when I noticed a difference? When one day, as I was out with a group of people and a girl I was genuine friends with (I didn't wanted to fuck her) something happened and I instinctively pulled her towards me to protect her from taking a hit (she was next to me). 10 minutes later she was admitting that what I did turned her on, and I said "yeah... get real, idiot" to her.

That was a very long time ago.

[–]arcticshqip 27 points28 points  (9 children)

I actually have to agree with you on this one. I am not usually ready to be submissive or obey every man just because they are men but my man is my sun when I can only be the moon reflecting his shine and he is the lion and I am the jungle that is all his and his alone.

I do admit that it gives pleasure to be caring and submissive to someone who feels like he is your positive opposite that completes you.

[–]Code_Bordeauxx 14 points15 points  (1 child)

I am not usually ready to be submissive or obey every man just because they are men

Nor should you ever. You get to choose to whom you give your trust and dedicate yourself to. That will only be totally the case for one man and at most partially for a select group of other good friends. Once you have chosen (as you seem to have done already) it is adviced to go all in, as holding back will create suspicions of distrust. If all goes well the trusting bond will last a lifetime and will only continue to grow. If it takes a huge blow to the point that it breaks, you have to face the reality that the relationship has broken beyond repair as well.

[–]arcticshqip 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I feel like if I give myself or I show submission to anyone else, especially to someone who is not in my eyes in the same level than the man I have "chosen" it would be sort of demeaning to him.

To go all in... I will do whatever he allows me to do. That is why I put "chosen" in quotation marks because it was just an epiphany that he just happens to be the one to hold keys to my heart and lust.

[–]LauraXVII 5 points6 points  (15 children)

Very well put! I think this post would go down well in RedPillWomen as well, a lot of the women on there don't tend to read TRP but it's definitely a beneficial post. Although maybe minus the "be the man in the relationship" bit at the end!!

[–]Theophagist 7 points8 points  (2 children)

leg day no matter if your calf is cramping

Actually don't. This is the other side of discipline - knowing when to shut off.

[–]logicalthinker1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly right. No one will be impressed by you "pushing through it" They'll call you a dumbass and rightfully so. The best body builders in the world take off days and rest fatigued muscles. They know what the fuck they're doing.

[–]melbournebrah 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OP is a phaggot. Have fun with your injuries and elevated cortisol levels

[–]NeoreactionSafe 18 points19 points  (2 children)

Darn... I was just about to post the end of my Natural Laws series of posts:

NATURAL LAWS : “Gender is within everything; everything has its masculine and its feminine principles; gender manifests on all planes.”

This is a good post and I'm going to refer people to it.

Makes me take a different direction on mine because you just covered in great detail the very truth I was going to write about.

 

[–]eccentricrealist 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I'm looking forward to seeing your perspective, you tend to have a pretty clear idea of things.

[–]NeoreactionSafe 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It came and went.

My alternative topic didn't gain traction.

This post was excellent so I'm just going to leave this as is.

It doesn't matter who speaks the truth, just that someone does.

 

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (8 children)

Empathy - There are two varieties of empathy. The first is the obvious, she can feel your frustrations and pain. She emotionally reacts to sad stories on the news and facebook. She has the capability to feel what others feel. The second half of this is the power of empath - to intuitively know by facial expressions, body language what other people are feeling. To just intuitively "know".

gonna put a big no on this one, you're confusing it with emotional intelligence. Empathy is knowing that other people aren't extentions of your own ID. emotional Intelligence is knowing what expressions mean what emotions the person is feeling.

The former is the oppositte of solipsism, the latter is Machiavellian. Women most certainly do not have empathy, and I put that squarely in the masculine realm

[–]chainlinks 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Yes, OP was a bit misguided on Empathy.

There aren't two forms of empathy. There is empathy and sympathy.

Empathy - Understanding what others are feeling because you have experienced it yourself or can put yourself in their shoes.

Sympathy - Acknowledging another person's emotional hardships and providing comfort and assurance.

Sticking to the yin-yang theme empathy would be a masculine trait and sympathy a feminine one.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I would take it one step further.

The appearance of sympathy.

Lets face it, anyone can 'feel bad' when someone is wronged, but I don't see many women able to turn that into action, lots of guys do, it's even perverted at the extremes into 'white knighting' e.g.

I equate it to putting an american flag on your car, or praying to help people with cancer. It's great at giving the impression that you care, but when you get down to it, it's really not sympathy on any functional level, requires no resources on your part, and generally tries to get the medal without actually running in the race.

And to continue on the empathy path, I'm surprised OP has read anything TRP. Every example OMG(old married guys) have passed onto the manosphere, every sidebar reading, shows that women are completely incapable of truly empathizing with others. I'm sure there are exceptions, but a large enough minority/majority exists that is incapable of understanding it. Cheating guys know that it hurts their partner, whether they do or not. Women who have cucked their men tend to rationalize it as his fault, not actually cheating. People don't act in their own best interests, it's literally 'that bitch susan is purposefully doing this to me'. Any guy with any amount of female experience sees examples every day

They go a long way to insulate themselves from empathy. Having it be a femenine trait would be akin to looking for a unicorn.

And don't get me wrong, this isn't your usual college kid rant about 'women ain't shit' at all. It's just the way it is, and I am neither happy or sad with it, any more than I get mad at gravity for spilling my coffee when I'm clumbsy

[–]scithion 5 points6 points  (3 children)

You're getting lost with an ineffective and obscure concept-definition of empathy, and you're borderline moralizing. Here's a discussion of different possible models of the relationship between cognitive empathy, generally the interpretation of others' feelings, and affective empathy, the predilection to align to with interpreted feelings.

Normally we discuss cognitive empathy as a form of intelligence and emotional empathy as something more involuntary, but that can be misleading.

Although cognitive empathy is a very interesting cluster of things that may be a kind of intelligence, in practice it is optimized for speedy processing to an extent that may reduce its reliability, and it is not checkable (and cannot be turned off); so although it is partially learned it also fits the profile of a sense (like taste, touch etc), and like many other senses, it can be oversensitive. It may be interchangeable with emotional intelligence, and oversensitivity in emotional intelligence here would be a tendency to pick up signals where none necessarily exist (such as detecting fear in a facial expression where it's just a behavioral noise). Cognitive empathy, as a presumed signal transmission system, can trigger emotions that have nothing to do with affective empathy (for example, by indicating danger), and if it transmits information that is incorrect you wouldn't know.

In research literature the term cognitive empathy is routinely switched back and forth between a high-level concept, an ability to understand feelings, and a presumed actual biological apparatus beneath it; this is confusing (and rather non-trivial poor practice) but you'll have to get used to it. The same thing applies to affective ("emotional") empathy. Make your peace with this ambiguity, among others, and don't bother to stickle on the definitions. There's enough room in the ordinary understandings of the words 'empathy' and 'sympathy' to include both affective and cognitive empathy.

For various reasons, women generally have 'better' cognitive and affective empathy than men.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Look how many words it took to explain all that? Had to change the definition of the word even. I'm impressed.

Tell you what, continue using the cognitive empathic aparatus beneath the affective, emotional empathy, as a cluster to human interaction for the flux capacitor.

I'll continue to rely on the hamster doing what it does best, and plan my life accordingly.

Lets check back after 5 years, We will compare your popsci paper on my stories of the good life. Let time judge us

[–]scithion 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Think what you will, but I posted it as an antidote to popsci.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

no one has all the answers man

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm reading Emotional Intelligence right now for professional development. It doesn't really help me because I don't know how deal with emotions. I can read them very, very well in real time. However, how to deal with them? No fucking idea. I just lock up

[–]Fulp_Piction 2 points3 points  (0 children)

All great points, well laid out and easy to understand.

I would emphasize however that whenever you cultivate your masculinity it becomes natural. It's pure instinct. It's not about forcing yourself to be a man, it's about not being afraid of your unbridled testosterone. Also, empathy is useful, I wouldn't discourage it as a feminine trait to be avoided. Whether you want to manipulate people or form meaningful relationships with men or women, you need to be able to understand the feelings of another person.

[–]Endorsed ContributorProtoPill 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Project, I like how you identified two masculine traits which our members often conflate: freedom and stability. One can be both free and stable. This is a wise post.

[–]fuckmylife1616 2 points3 points  (7 children)

so weird the girl i like looks masculine (strong cheekbones, smokes, ego, looks older than her age, beautiful) and the thing that bothers me is that im justin bieberish looking...to be honest kinda feminine i try adjusting my personality and hit the gym but i dont think i'll really start looking manly until im older (im 17 now..she is also 17) i known her for a long time. im trying to look for a goal in my life, something that will keep me busy..something that will give an identity.

[–][deleted]  (6 children)

[removed]

    [–]fuckmylife1616 2 points3 points  (4 children)

    how old are you? and i given up..again on gym i cant seem to gain weight because i cant grow muscles im 5'9 and weight 57kg and im trying to gain weight before working out again.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [removed]

      [–]fuckmylife1616 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      alright thank you for the advice.

      [–]JustDoinThings 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      i cant seem to gain weight

      Diet.

      20-24 I was in the gym constantly and got nothing out of it because I ate 100% carbs. At 30 my diet was good - I hit the gym for 4 months doing the big four and was already close to the top 20% of men.

      Could be testosterone levels as well - nothing wrong with asking a doctor about working out during your physical.

      [–]fuckmylife1616 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      20-24? damn.... i eat well and i keep track of my carbs but i just cant seen to gain weight at all, my weight wont go higher or lower than 57kg since 1.5 years. i worked out for 2 weeks but i kept losing energy and the weights kept getting heavier for me to lift so i just gave up..should start again tomorrow.

      [–]melbournebrah 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Haha, similar experience - 22, asian, also took me ~2 years to stabilise at a bodyfat that got rid of my babyface. Now people comment how different I look, it's amazing the difference it can make provided you have decent bone structure underneath. Added bonus, I believe it was lifting that helped me grow facial hair.

      [–]athenapp 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      more reasons to be grateful to our partners :) being feminine is visably easier than being masculine

      [–]endogenic 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Loving - yes, the "L" word. She has the capacity for love. To give it and accept it. To crave it. Women who cannot love are broken women.

      I do agree and have proof of its existence. But what is "love", exactly? How does it differ from "affection" which you so aptly described?

      Excellent work on your post.

      More to the point, forget reading a book. Look at your life, and the relationships you have personally had.

      Spot on.

      [–]tgeda 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      This is some strong fucking theory hot damn. Haven't seen a post this good in a long time.

      [–]pag_el 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Best post I've read in a loong time. Thanks for the post, OP.

      [–]lestratege 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      There is feminine and masculine. A masculine man will attract a feminine woman. A masculine woman will repel a masculine man like two north poles of a set of magnets.

      Otto Weininger wrote that, if you are interested...

      "The male aspect is active, productive, conscious and moral/logical, while the female aspect is passive, unproductive, unconscious and amoral/alogical. Weininger argues that emancipation should be reserved for the "masculine woman", e.g. some lesbians, and that the female life is consumed with the sexual function: both with the act, as a prostitute, and the product, as a mother."

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_Character

      [–]mfkrspeaksenglish 4 points5 points  (1 child)

      To maintain balance on the outside, you need to maintain balance within.

      To be masculine, you need to accept your feminine side.

      To be logical, you need to feel your own emotions, not repress them.

      There is always a downside. Become aware of it and accept it.

      [–]EmVito 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      This is exactly what I needed to get back on track again.

      [–]TinyCaveman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Best post ive seen in awhile. For more stuff like this i reccomend "the way of the superior man" great stuff to keep in mind. I'd also like to add that all of us have a natural amount of both of these energies masculine and feminine be your true self and confident in that, just understand what aspects are what about yourself, and look for a woman that balances that out for you. Honestly, fucking every hot dumb 22 yo bar skank you can gets old quick and its not very rewarding. finding a woman who complements you while you complete your mission "your mission is more important than anything" is a very wonderful luxury to add into your life and worth the side effort.

      [–]1StoicCrane 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      The terms Alpha, Beta, etc are being heavily strewn about lately. In essence, they're labels used to typify specific behavioral patterns to the point of distraction. It's necessary to look beyond the words and develop desirable qualities. All else is moot.

      [–]ahmedpie 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Holy shit

      I been going through a sense of depression cause i been going through short term flings where the girls opens her legs for me just cause of that "lust"

      This post has made me come to reality. A sense of clarity. I dont wanna fuck hoes anymore... I want to be free.

      [–]Luckyluke23 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      this is the greatest post i have ever read in the red pill.

      thanks so much for taking the time to post it man. I really need to be more masculine, this will help me achieve that thanks.

      [–]Trpidation 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      This is a fantastic read, I plan on studying this one in depth. Thank you for sharing. I've felt this way about gender relations for quite some time now, and though the alpha/beta dynamic is a useful one I think at base level the masculine/feminine is what it really all comes down to.

      Again, excellent read. Thanks for writing it.

      [–]MeatCurtainRod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      alpha.. beta.. sigma.. omega. what a load of crap.

      Love it! Couldn't agree more. Alpha = masculine, beta = feminine. No need to go further than that. Whenever someone tries to make a new definition, all they are accomplishing is putting something else up on a pedestal. Sad really. I'm just waiting for the day when they define all the letters up to T, at which point I reserve the right to call Tango's "the suicide man, mostly alpha, but sacrifices himself for other alphas when you're playing co-op call of duty." ROFL.

      [–]zue3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Yes! Thanks for this. I have always hated the whole alpha/beta bullshit in this sub. That only ever applies to the extremes of either case. Most of trp would have you believe that wanting to be a husband/father makes you a beta faggot regardless of everything else you do right.

      Your theory better puts into words what I try to take out of trp teachings. This should be stickied or something. Either way I'm bookmarking it. You should definitely write more from this outlook.

      [–]whisky1111 1 point2 points  (1 child)

      My only problem here is that, yet again, we are telling dudes to be "do the right thing" alpha guys. Not that there is anything wrong with that but as IllimitableMan said on down the comments, there is a place for the negative alpha in this environment. I wouldn't encourage any man to end up in prison but I also wouldn't encourage a man to go out of his way to be a "mighty oak tree" for a modern woman either. I have no doubt that true harmony is a steadfast alpha paired with a submissive female but take a look around you. This environment is about as toxic as it gets. AWALT! It's like reminding a person who walks to work everyday in a thick and toxic smog to eat their vegetables.

      [–]projectself[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      The thing is, I am not telling anyone to be anything. I am stating an observed perspective that by being feminine and pursuing and presenting feminine character traits - you will attract the polar opposite - a masculine female. That by being more assertive and stoic, more masculine, you will attract a more feminine woman.

      Most relationships are somewhere in the middle, with a softer man pairing with a woman who can think and function in society and have a job and do things. That by being closer to the middle, you will also pair with a woman closer to the middle. If you go to the other side and be more feminine than masculine - she will lose attraction with you and become more masculine in her actions.

      As for the comment about a negative alpha versus a positive alpha, I am stating that at each act the underlying characteristics are masculine. The flavor of masculinity does not change the polarity. The intensity of the action certainly may amplify the effect of it.

      Being a "mighty oak tree" means simply that you do not let her emotional roller coaster affect your own emotional state. When she comes home from work upset because someone said this and someone said that - your emotion does not change to match hers. You keep your own frame.

      [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

      I'm a masculine woman attracted to feminine and neutral men. I feel competitive towards men more masculine than myself. Is my case just rare or something?

      [–]projectself[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      That is exactly the concept being presented.

      Your situation may work for you, If your man is truly feminine it could be great. However, it will likely be very unfullfilling for a masculine man to pair with you. If he is suppressing his nature, as in trying to please you and change his true core - it will be a struggle.

      [–]-Universe- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      This was great. Thanks a lot for this post.

      [–]rossiFan 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      I'm too lazy to look it up, but there was a study of why women are attracted to very feminine males such as Prince and Justin Beiber (sp?). Anyway, baffles my mind.

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Empathy as it applies to Briffault's Law, yes.

      [–]CraftingAmbition 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      Hey OP, I like your definition of confidence/self-esteem. (Self-efficacy meets self-respect) I'm guessing you're a fan of The 6th Pillars of Self-Esteem by Nathaniel Brandon?

      [–]projectself[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      I have never read it or heard of it.

      [–][deleted]  (4 children)

      [deleted]

      [–]tgeda 3 points4 points  (2 children)

      you must be low IQ. The traits the OP mentioned are not physical or outwardly visible, they are mental traits.

      Some of the best alphas in the world are metro. They combine masculine behavior with feminine sex appeal

      [–]AtlasAtlasAtlas 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      didn't read the post, i'm wrong.

      [–]david_kimba 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      60 seconds and 2 fingers for her to come? How? Play the Sweet Child o Mine Main Riff on guitar? Bitches love that riff.

      Please teach me of any other way.

      [–]projectself[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Reading Daniel Rose Sex God Method changed my life.

      [–]omolicious 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      Have you by chance read David Deida?

      [–]projectself[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Yes, this post is heavily influenced by his philosophy coupled with my own experiences.

      [–]TooMuchToDoo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I disagree with sharing. Every woman that I've been with (and others can very well attest to it as well) will want a bite of MY food, just because they think it's "cute" and it's their way of letting you know that they like what you like. That's not to say it isn't true, but your example detracts from the validity of your point.

      [–]phrostbyt -4 points-3 points  (14 children)

      Independence - "I love a man on welfare" .. said no woman ever.

      how about the blacks?

      [–]ihateyouguys 5 points6 points  (12 children)

      No. Nobody says that. Your casual racism isn't helping, dude.

      Even if it was a joke, the fact you made it hints at some deeper misunderstandings of RP truths.

      [–]2awalt_cupcake -1 points0 points  (0 children)

      casual racism din hurt no body cracker

      [–]phrostbyt -2 points-1 points  (10 children)

      actually i think it's relevant.. plenty of poor black dudes that are on welfare are getting tons of puss.. maybe you just never met any. where are you from? i'm from baltimore, btw

      [–]ihateyouguys 1 point2 points  (9 children)

      Oh I know that's true. It's in spite of the welfare though, not because of it.

      [–]phrostbyt -2 points-1 points  (8 children)

      i disagree. i think it's a big part of culture, the promotion of stupidity and gangster culture. it's cool to go to jail, not to school. black society has a lot of things that clash with general trp theory

      [–]projectself[S] 3 points4 points  (2 children)

      I think you will find plenty of white trailer park queens who love disability checks to. So I would say it has more to do with class than race.

      Now ask yourself, how feminine or masculine are these women you are referring to? What do they wear, how do they communicate, do they convey feminine traits?

      [–]phrostbyt -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

      there's certainly something to that. but i think race is a factor as well.. i think bling over education is a fairly afro-centric cultural trait to have

      [–]SlappaDaBayssMon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      i think bling over education is a fairly afro-centric cultural trait to have

      You're forgetting about the miles of cultural difference between American slave descendants and dark skinned people across the world.

      Slave descendants in America are a group of people who's predecessors literally had every bit of their own cultures beaten out of them. Quite literally, hundreds of thousands were taken from Africa, stripped of everything "African" about them and forced in to slave labor for generations, followed by decades of systemic prejudice, and even after that was ended with the Civil Rights Movement in the 60's you have entire communities being pushed aside and neglected.

      To say that niggas in the hood of Baltimore are some how representative of "afro-centric cultures" is a humongous leap in logic. These people have been living in a vacuum outside of all Afro culture for hundreds of years.

      I'm not saying any of this to excuse anybody's poor behavior, but when you realize we've got kids growing up today whose only example of what it means to be a successful man is the drug dealer on the corner with his nice car, jewelry, and the two finest women on the block you grow up with a warped sense of what it means to live a successful, fulfilling life.

      The problems that plague the black communities in America are myriad, but to say that they exist because they are somehow an inherent part of "being black" is some of the most racist shit I've read in a long time, and I'm pretty far on the spectrum from your modern white-guilt millennial hipster.

      Y'all need Jesus 2pac.

      [–]ihateyouguys 0 points1 point  (4 children)

      No man. Just remember there are dudes on death row pulling bitches. You're wanting me to believe it's because they're on death row?? The answer is no.

      [–]phrostbyt 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      i just said it's the culture though... so no?

      [–]ihateyouguys 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Nah, I'd say it's because the men are displaying highly masculine power traits that override their lack of future or ability to provide. It's kind of an ultimate alpha fucks situation. I'm not saying there are zero cultural factors, I just think they don't play anywhere near as important a role as baseline biological sexual strategy.

      [–]hores 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      dudes on welfare aren't pulling hoes because of being on welfare, that's for sure. if they are, they're demonstrating alpha traits in some shape or form, welfare not being one of them. being on welfare is for sure not a status marker.

      [–]hores -1 points0 points  (0 children)

      being on welfare isn't gonna pull any hoes by itself, whereas i'd disagree with you that being on death row would. death row is a status marker for typically hypermasculine violent men... which in general women are attracted to. if youre on welfare, and youre pulling hoes, you're displaying alpha traits in some capacity, welfare not being one of them. if youre on death row and pulling hoes, most of the time its exclusively because youve demonstrated a capacity to do violence. look at that fuckup mental case holmes, kid looks like an omega but bam, premeditated murder and all of a sudden he's got love letters being written to him. it happens to all of the notorious killers, and even the small-time unheard of ones.

      [–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (1 child)

      I disagree. Masculine and feminine has nothing to do with Red Pill. Red Pill is about self-control. Both men and women need it.

      What we think of as beta traits is really a lack of self-control. A beta does not have the self-control to hold onto frame.

      What we think of as a woman on the CC is really a lack of self-control, for obvious reasons.

      [–]juanappleseed 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      Redpill is about sexual strategy for men. Masculine and feminine descriptions couldn't be more relevant as knowing what's going on with the dynamics increases your ability to sexually strategize.

      I'm not sure why you said it's about self control. That's just one component that you use sometimes or often. There is no trait you express 100% of the time. Human beings, men included, are very dynamic depending on situation.