63
64

THEORYBack to the basic - value (self.RedPillWomen)

submitted by loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor

Today I'll be starting a series of posts called back to the basics. Each post will focus on a concept of RP theory. If it goes well, more posts will be added more frequently. Today's post will be about value.

What is value?

The basic meaning of value is when someone or something is meaningful in some way. Everything that exists has value to someone, not everything has value to you.

The biblical idea that "man is created in the image of God" means that every human being has intrinsic value and we therefore may not murder them (or cause unnecessary harm to them). Not all societies placed intrinsic value on every human life but that's a separate discussion.

Even if you agree that every human life has intrinsic value in the eyes of God, it's still true that not every person is valuable to you. Even among those who are valuable to you, you value some more than others.

Sexual and relationship value

In the search for a suitable mate, one must ask themselves - does this person bring value to my life? How much value? What kind of value? What value do I add to their life? The answer will depend on what you're looking for.

Generally speaking, men and women value different things. Thus, men need sex, love, intimacy and a soft supportive landing from women. Women need sustenance, stability, commitment, leadership and bug squashing from men. (Partial lists here). Men and women each offer to the other, what the other needs. Thus, we complete each other. That's how it works when things are balanced and therefore working well.

There are some things that have value sexually but have no value or are detrimental to a relationship and vice versa. Therefore, when looking to start a LTR, attention must be given to balance your own conflicting needs with each other to find a happy medium.

Some examples of sexual value

Men are generally attracted to young, slim (but not stick thin) women who have curves (but aren't fat), who smell nice and are pleasant to be around. Who are receptive, open to their advances and less complicated. Of course there are exceptions, but this is generally the case.

Women are generally attracted to men who are better than themselves. Taller, stronger, smarter and wealthier are just some examples. Men who are fun, spontaneous and witty. Dangerous but protective of her. Women tend to be more picky and particular about what they sexually desire in a man.

Having more qualities that are valuable to the opposite sex, makes you a higher value potential sexual partner. You'll therefore be considered sexy by a greater number of members of the opposite sex.

Examples of relationship value

Men generally want a woman who's respectful and yielding, supportive and uplifting, and pleasant to be around. A woman who can create a soft landing spot for him, a cozy home to dwell in. A woman who can cook and keep house and not need his guidance on every detail. A woman who's frugal and appreciates what he does for her. A woman who will be a good mother if children are desired. A woman who's honest, kindhearted and pleasant to be around.

Women generally want a man who has stability of income, who can support them financially and emotionally, who will accept their emotional turbulence and who will be their rock. A man who will take on challenges that face the family whether big or small. A man who will lead and who is decisive. A man who will give her children and help her raise them (if children are wanted).

Conflicting values

This is really worthy of its own post and perhaps another post will be written on the matter. But in short - some values conflict with others. For example the female sexual desire for a fun, spontaneous and witty man might be in direct conflict with her relationship desire for a stable, steady and responsible man. Finding the perfect balance in the same man is almost impossible and a highly unrealistic goal to set. These conflicting desires need reconciliation and a degree of compromise is absolutely necessary to have a sustainable marriage.

Conclusion

Everything has some sort of value, but only some things have value to you. The question is - what's valuable to you and how will you compromise to reconcile between conflicting internal values.

Cheers!


[–]riseoftherice 10 points11 points  (2 children)

Do you think you'll write on improving RMV? Or maybe different ways RMV traits can manifest?

Great post! Hope to see your next one soon.

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 8 points9 points  (1 child)

I haven't decided what to write next. I can write about that or anything else. I'm definitely open to suggestions.

I decided to start this series because it seems that many of the basic concepts need to be discussed again. Of course, we can't fit everything into one post. This post focused on what value actually is. Subsequent posts might delve further into specifics such as what you mentioned.

Thank you for your input, I'm glad you enjoyed reading.

[–]miomayorga 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yes that would be great!! ( I mean about the series) We need more positive posts on how to improve as RPW. Really enjoyed, and liked this post, very informative to.

[–]cryptohobo 4 points5 points  (5 children)

Could you number them? Would like to keep track (gonna save and read them later).

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Good question.

If all goes well, there will be many posts on a variety of subjects. Some subjects will have more than one post and that's when I'll be numbering them. For example, if the next post is more specifically about specific types of "value", it would be - back to the basics - value part two. Likewise, if I come back to the topic of "value" after a few other posts, that post will be value part two (with a link to the first one).

However, if the next post is back to the basics - hypergamy, it won't be numbered. I think this is the least confusing way to do multiple posts about multiple topics.

What do you think?

[–]cryptohobo 1 point2 points  (3 children)

For some reason I got it in my head that this would be a 5 part series, and I reread and see no mention of that, so it’s been a really long day for me lol.

I suppose that could work, however maybe if you label them as being part of a series (no matter how many there will be) it’ll just be easier to spot. Or, once you’re done with the very last post, you can write out all the titles of the previous posts in case others join later and want to start from the beginning. You could also paste those titles here too once you’re all done so that people can follow along.

Now I hope I’m also making sense!

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I hear what you're saying, but I'll be doing it as described above for the reasons mentioned above and because I don't have a mapped out plan of how this series will develop. I'll be writing the next post based on the idea that is in my head that day, which is often influenced by the posts and comments.

I don't think the titles can be changed, if that was possible I'd edit the typo in the title of this post where I accidentally wrote basic instead of basics 😁

[–]cryptohobo 2 points3 points  (1 child)

No worries! I am fairly new to commenting and stuff, so I’m still getting the hang of how things work. Perhaps when you’re done (or think it’s “the end”?) then you could comment in that post all the other posts that precede it.

Thanks in advance for taking on such an educational feat for all of us!

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're welcome.

[–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Finding the perfect balance in the same man is almost impossible and a highly unrealistic goal to set.

I'm hearing you say that we might have to ::gasp:: settle for a man who is less than our ideal.

Hmm I wonder if you have to compromise more as more people start to pair off leaving fewer potential partners in the dating pool.

In all seriousness though, this is a great breakdown of a term that gets thrown around a lot. I suspect I will link to it many times going forward. Touching on intrinsic value is great because I think this is where a lot of newbies (and people who haven't quite swallowed the pill) get all twisted up. I'm comfortable saying every life has value. However, your intrinsic value means jack in the dating market. And honestly, it doesn't mean much once you've secured the relationship either.

We cannot talk about practical matter of strategy without putting aside the idea of intrinsic value because it's simply unhelpful. If everyone has that level of value, then it's a wash and we need to move on and discuss the other things we bring to the table.

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hmm I wonder if you have to compromise more as more people start to pair off leaving fewer potential partners in the dating pool.

🤔

Sad thing is, many people (particularly women) become even more picky as the dating market narrows. Best indicator that said individual is driven entirely by impulsive instinct and does not operate with much guidance of the conscious thought process. I personally don't usually like people like this in any setting.

I'm happy you liked it 😀. I wrote it because I see people getting twisted up about this all the time. It comes from the conflating of different ideas of value. You're intrinsic value as a person has zero value in a relationship. This fact does not diminish your intrinsic value as a person in any way shape or form.

To put that into crass terms - if you weigh 400 lbs and have an attitude that's just as big, you'll have very little sexual value to most men. This doesn't mean that you have no right to exist (as many such people protest).

[–]Lenuit 1 point2 points  (2 children)

How important is the cooking part? My bf takes pride on his cooking skills. When I compliment his food I get a genuine smile. We both work at home. Can I compensate with something else? Thanks for the series.

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Generally speaking, it's very important for women to cook for their men if they plan on keeping their men happy. However, there are exceptions to every rule. If him cooking works for both of you, do that. If alternating cooking works for you, do that.

I know many men who love to cook (including myself) and several male chefs too. Every single one of them wants his wife to be in charge of the kitchen even though they're happy to help or take over when necessary. As a rule though, every man I know wants it this way. Not all of them have it that way because many modern women don't/can't/won't cook....

[–]Lenuit 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your honesty. I'll show interest in learning to cook and see how it goes . Maybe he isn't that into cooking as he is into receiving the compliment for the meal at the end. Thanks again!

[–]happyinsummer 1 point2 points  (9 children)

Thanks for the enjoyable read! I have a couple of issues (not with your post) and I'd like to hear your comment on them:

  1. As a person who believes that she is valuable, I've never wanted to compromise on what is valuable in men (especially height!) I've been called shallow for having such a view but I don't see why I should 'settle' for someone whose values I won't truly appreciate.

  2. How can I come across as someone of value to others in everyday life?

Thanks (:

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (8 children)

You're welcome.

  1. You believe you're valuable, but are you valuable to men? How so?

  2. Of course you're shallow for having height as a requirement. So what? We're all shallow that way with regards to various aspects of life. The real question is - are you reasonable and realistic? (Settling might be the topic of a future post. I'm open to suggestions).

  3. How to meet people is a massive question with many answers. I'm afraid I can't give a short answer to this question. Perhaps this too can be a future topic.

[–]happyinsummer 1 point2 points  (7 children)

  1. I'm not sure if I'm valuabe to men specifically, but I've never been overweight, have high education levels and am good at housekeeping. I can't really vouch for the supportive side of things as I'm not in a relationship.

  2. If I go with someone who is taller than me, has better education than me, earns more than I will, and is fit...I think that narrows the pool a lot, not sure if any of those options are unrealistic...

  3. No worries, looking forward to your future posts!

[–]mytrpaway 3 points4 points  (3 children)

Just to put some numbers on this:

taller than me

90-95 % of men are taller than the median woman [0]

has better education than me

About 30% of men have a bachelor's degree. [1]

earns more than I will

15.8% of men earn 100k/year or more. This number probably over estimates the population of eligible men as the distribution is probably heavily skewed towards older men.[2]

and is fit

2.7% of people are fit, don't smoke and have a healthy diet [3]. While that is more restrictive than your exact requirement, it's probably not off by more than a factor of 3.


Of course, the money question is, how correlated are these values?

Completely correlated means you're going after the top 2.7% of men.

Completely uncorrelated means you're going after the top 0.12% of men.

[0] https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2010/compendia/statab/130ed/tables/11s0205.pdf

[1] https://www.census.gov/newsroom/pdf/women_workforce_slides_part9.pdf

[2] https://dqydj.com/female-and-male-income-percentile-calculator/

[3] https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/03/less-than-3-percent-of-americans-live-a-healthy-lifestyle/475065/

[–]happyinsummer 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Thanks for the interesting read!

Just felt that door slamming shut in my face 😂

[–]mytrpaway 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Just felt that door slamming shut in my face

This is part of the reason all of the RP subreddits really push fitness as the first thing, and (one of the) most important things to work on. If you assume that fit people mate assortatively, being fit gets you past one of the most restrictive filters in the modern dating scene.

[–]happyinsummer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm definitely starting to understand that. Before you can show anyone your personality and other merits you'd have to attract them first.

Although in my case you've shown me that my problem isn't even being attractive, it's actually having someone to attract in the first place!

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Obviously, I can't give you a personality assessment because I don't know you 😀 but I'll share a few points.

Not being overweight is good for your SMV. High education level doesn't have much value to men but it's also not devoid of value. It can have some degree of value for your RMV if you use it right. Housekeeping is definitely good for RMV. Practice being supportive with friends and relatives.

Wanting someone taller, smarter, more educated and wealthier is understandable but you may have to compromise a bit. Maybe try someone who's tall but not as tall as your ideal. Or someone who's short but smarter than you etc. Wanting it all is generally unrealistic.

[–]KittenLoves_Endorsed Contributor 1 point2 points  (1 child)

High education level doesn't have much value to men but it's also not devoid of value.

I'd say yes and no to this. I think the average man probably doesn't put a huge amount of value on whether or not their potential partner has a master's degree/PhD/law degree/whatever. But for a majority of men involved in academia (in grad school or working in higher education), finding a partner with a similar level of education is quite important. In fact, out of every man I've met involved in academia who was in a relationship, all of them had a partner who was, if not already as highly educated as him, then working towards it. I know we're talking about a rather select group of people, but for any woman in or entering grad school, I think the information is pretty important.

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good point.

In my observation - brilliant people cannot have a LTR with people who aren't intelligent. While they don't need to be at the same level of smarts, they do need to be within the same realm intellectually. They need to be able to have intelligent conversations to some degree and to consult with one another and respect each other's opinions etc.

I don't think having a degree of any kind is a hard requirement, it's just that you're more likely to find intelligent people in places of study because intelligent people generally like to study new things.

[–]LateralThinker133 Stars 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Some examples of sexual value

Would add Competence and Confidence to core desirable male values. You really can't have a desirable male without these.

Otherwise fantastic post.

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you!

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[removed]

[–]pearlsandstilettosModerator | Pearl[M] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Off topic and irrelevant.