60
61

THEORYPassion (self.RedPillWomen)

submitted by WhisperTRP Founder

  • Men want women with a low (ideally zero) partner count.

  • Men want women to leap into bed with them as soon as possible.

We know both of these things to be true because we see them every day. And when we see both, we are confused. Surely men make no sense at all! Aren't these two things contradictory?

And our whole society is caught in a war between two cultures.

The tradcon side, which is slowly losing, says

  • "Men, you must give up the desire for a woman to sexually surrender quickly... instead, you must invest time and resources in her, make her promises you cannot easily break, before she will give you what you desire."

  • "Women, you must restrain your desires and be calculating. It is your job to test a man's commitment to you and make him jump through many hoops (ideally on fire) before he gets access to your precious lady parts."

The liberal side, which is slowly winning, says

  • "Men, you must give up your desire not to marry the town bicycle. You must learn to cherish women who were ploughed bny the entire football team at the same drunken party, and that was just the begining. Women own their own sexuality... they also own your reaction to what they just did; make sure it's the approved one."

  • "Women, do whatever you want. We'll make sure the men are docile and obedient."

The tiny, unnoticed redpill side rolls its eyes, and says:

  • You cannot tell men to "give up" this or that desire. Desire is not a choice. Desire cannot be negotiated. If men want both these things, then the girl who achieves the most of both will have the most desireable men.

  • And here's a long complicated explanation of why these things can coexist, which lots of people will read and not understand.

So the liberal and tradcon answers are just plain wrong.

And the red pill answer has too much boring math.

Time to simplify.

Why do men want low-count women? Why do men want sexually eager women?

Passion. Men want women who are passionate about them.

A woman who is passionate about a man does not consult her girlfriends about what an "acceptable" amount of time to "make him wait" is. A woman who is passionate about a man does not bargain the promise of her body for a wedding, like some jaded whore negotiating a "session". A woman who is passionate about a man will find a way to reach his bed. She will fly across the country, crawl under barbed wire, climb in through his second story window, do everything he desires, and wait patiently inside his closet if his wife comes home early from work.

Women do not withhold sex from men they are passionate about. A woman is not passionate about a man if she withholds sex from him. Unless she is seriously physically ill, or on fire at that very moment, she is ready when he is.

Similarly, a woman who has tasted a hundred men over her thirty years of life is not going to be enthralled by the hundred and first. Not only is the experience far from new or unique, he is unlikely to be the best or most attractive man she has had, since she was younger, more beautiful, and more innocent before, and could command the attention of a better variety of man.

Women are generally the most passionate about their first partner, and gradually less so with each new one. This is not their first rodeo.

Now we understand how these two male desires are NOT contradictory. They are actually the SAME desire... the desire to be both loved, and lusted after, passionately, utterly, and completely.

When a woman has a high partner count, a man asks himself "None of them kept her... why should I?".

When a woman delays, withholds, and asks for promises or time, a man says "She is cool-headed enough about me to negotiate. To enforce a policy. She regards sex with me as a price to pay for what she wants... not a joy she urgently desires."

In fact, if a woman delays sex to avoid risk to her partner count, because a low count makes her more attractive, just who is this low count making her more attractive to?

It makes her more attractive to other men. It does nothing for him. He of course expects to increase her count by one, because he wishes to be that one. If she hedges, then she is saying to him "I don't want to risk being less sexy, or less commitment-worthy, to the next guy."

She is already looking past him and the relationship hasn't even started yet. She is not "all in" with him, and he knows that.

Why would he be committed to her, when she is not committed to him?

But what is a woman to do about all this? How can she be passionate, and unrestrained, with men, without destroying her value from an accumulation of failures?

This, I will discuss in Part Two.


[–][deleted] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I never waited for sex because I was afraid of racking up an N-count. I waited because unless a man really cares, he's worthless to me beyond his general social utility.

Waiting isn't "tradcon" or something hinging upon superstition. It's a function of biology---intuitively I don't want to risk pregnancy with a man who will be useless in terms of provisioning for the time-consuming and helpless humanoid children that result. Functionally, I don't want to have sex with a man who doesn't make me feel special and ensure my pleasure.

His gametes are pennies, mine are 401(k)s. My actions result from that, not religious tradition (which I was raised without). Now if a man is my superior, in strength, provisioning ability, and sound mind, then I will submit to him as such, because it is to my benefit, and my offspring.

[–]Violet_kitty 14 points15 points  (18 children)

Wow, this post reminds me of a quote from The Sound of Music, "Nothing is more irresistible to a man than a woman who is in love with him."

I do have some questions, though! What about women who are saving sex for marriage? Is there any hope for them? Is there a way to show passion without comprising their values/morals?

[–]LindenMairead 12 points13 points  (16 children)

That's all well and good until you hear about guys upset that a girl is "clingy" or "needy". Having been heartbroken by guys in the past who I had huge overwhelming feelings for and was doing everything in my power to please, it's not that easy. Trying too hard is, unfortunately, not irresistible.

[–]WhisperTRP Founder[S] 6 points7 points  (5 children)

Clingy and needy doesn't mean "too passionate". It means "too demanding".

Demanding = passionate + selfish.

Selfish is unattractive to men.

[–]Themimose 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Funny thing is is that our male counterpart subreditt dictates that they should do this to us

[–]LindenMairead 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I don't agree, like in the cases I'm talking about. When I wasn't asking for anything in return, but courting like a "beta male" and then deemed annoying for effusive shows of affection. Guys are just as capable of being turned off by overeagerness as women are. You're not going to be able to convince me that I was right when I was obsessively planning all of these sweet romantic gestures to try to impress a guy, when that strategy has failed on numerous occasions.

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[removed]

    [–]WhisperTRP Founder[S] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    Parable of the sower. Keep in mind that I don't really have any particular need for this or that woman to learn anything.

    That's up to them.

    They can either learn what men like, and have husbands, or rationalize and have cats.

    I'm just here to say what I have to say, and it don't make no nevermind to me.

    [–]GeminiEngine 1 point2 points  (8 children)

    I have to disagree with trying too hard is resistable.

    Try everything that is acceptable to your morals to keep him but learn from each attempt. Don't do something because you ought to, do it because you earned from him a look or some attention. Do you know what he values in every circumstance? No. No man will care how much thought you put into each item of grocery shopping, but he will care if you say I believe I covered for or alleviated problem X.

    Personal example. I could care less about you asking how may day went but if I come home and get straight to work on something (home/work) get me something to drink, usually my attention is broken in a way I enjoy. My partner remembering my physical comfort means more than any exchange of words.

    [–]LindenMairead 2 points3 points  (7 children)

    You've never thought a girl was clingy or annoying because she had a huge crush on you and constantly did nice things for you? Getting doors, baking you cookies, buying you little gifts, offering help whenever you talk about a problem? Before I knew better, I was the paragon of "beta guy" behavior, supplicating and overly-invested. It drives men away like nothing else.

    [–]WhisperTRP Founder[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

    It drives men away like nothing else.

    I disagree. In fact, the reason beta male orbiters behave like beta male orbiters is because they are doing for her what is attractive to them... because they are unaware of the highly different psychology of the sexes.

    [–]BrunoOh 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    It drives men away like nothing else.

    Things like these are only "needy" and "unattractive" if her feelings aren't reciprocated (and if they're within reason - don't bring homebaked cookies on your first date).

    You need to escalate these things just as guys need to escalate intimacy. If she recoils when you touch her hand, you don't touch her leg. Similarly, if a guy isn't eager to talk with you, don't bring him cookies.

    It's just like how when Billy gives flowers to a girl it's creepy, but if Brad Pitt does it, it's nice and attentive.

    [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I think it's more like there is a difference from being overbearing/smothering and having an incredibly strong desire to please. the only comparison i can think of is a server at a restaurant (most of my friends are). Personally I'm impressed when my server is attentive and thoughtful like refilling my drink without me having to ask and little things like that. If a server is constantly stopping me to ask me how my food is, what he/she could get me, refilling my drink when i don't need to, hovering, etc. I get annoyed

    if you make someone feel like you are hovering over them making little gifts while you wait for the chance to jump in and "make their day" i think its a step in the wrong direction. Be available as much as possible, be thoughtful, and be supportive but never center your day and life around that person so much that your actions do the opposite of what you want. There are many reasons both men and woman dislike the beta type but i find that the most popular reason is that beta types feel too dependent and no one wants a significant other who can't function without you. Everyone wants to be invested in but rarely do people wanna be your only investment for a happy life.

    [–]GeminiEngine 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    E: Cowards with the down vote and no response why! Damn, it really is a wall of text... I'll shorten it. No point in the examples when they all mean/say the same thing. See child comment for removed content.

    I define clingy as she is pushing the relationship. Trying to talk to much about the future, it is one topic I believe the man should lead on. But this does not mean she cannot ask what he is thinking about it. Her responses in either situation should be respectful and short to avoid appearing clingy, she can let her emotions show so long as she abides the former.

    A woman who is being annoyingly attentive is one who expects reciprocity from favors that never interested the man. This applies for both genders, actually. I don't like desserts/sweets, so cookies are not going to change something. If you don't like power tools, why would a bandsaw improve you disposition towards me? Just pay attention to the mannerisms of your partner when you attempt to do something nice, adjust your actions based off the partner's reactions.

    [–]GeminiEngine 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Using your examples:

    Such as if you open doors for a man you need to be mindful of his response. Some may not care, equality of the sexes, some may be humiliated that a women is doing a man's social responsibility. I would think she believes my time is valuable and wants to put on a public show for me and I am encouraged to get her outfits that compliment me and show her off how I want.

    Baking me cookies? Well it has been long said the fastest way to a man's heart is through his stomach, I would be grateful the first few times but I would make a comment about a low-carb-bread/breadless multi-meat and veggie sandwich is preferred. The questions remains, are you attentive of his responses and adjusting accordingly. Cookies, sandwich, protein shake, are you making that because he wants that?

    Gifts are a hard thing to do for women in my experience. Man or woman, I get tools, and I don't mean screwdrivers and drills. A couple of women became single mothers at the same time in my life, so I looked up pot/pan combos for cooking with lots of options. I picked up 3 of the same $45 deep well/layered skillet pot, it was good for frying, cooking sauces, and some boiling, and huge at a 1 gallon capacity. Everyone of them called me sexist pig, but all of them with in a year thanked me for it because they needed no other pan and only a large pot for boiling, they got compliments from other women and men about the utility of their kitchen. I don't do pretties as gifts, especially for men, we are very picky about what decoration is pleasing but will always appreciate tools.

    As for women helping with a problem, it is not your fault specifically but it is women's. Unless I know a woman has spent time learning and studying something I second guess her about everything, as do the alpha/RP men I know. Women feel their way through a situation and can miss important facts, such as when advising someone to go get help from an agency but not fully aware of the approval process, she feels the problems are similar and assumes they handle it. My big topic is basic physics, none of the women where I live can apply one circumstance to another, i.e. use the tip of my sharp knife to cut meat like a hot knife through butter and then get pissed when they cut, not prick, their finger to see if it is sharp.

    Men share there excess with those in their life, their investment. I think women should too, a woman who keeps her life together first and then gives me everything else is desirable, she demonstrates abilities beyond sex.

    All of these can be trying hard in a good way so long as you take note of the situation and his reaction and then adjust accordingly the next time? Except helping with problems. Anymore all I want is are you there to take my blues away.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]GeminiEngine 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      A lot of watching others mostly and myself where doing something nice just did not work out. I usually can learn from watching another guy pee on an electric fence.

      [–]aanarchist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      you can do all the things you would do minus the sex, it's not hard to show off your love and passion in ways other than grinding your ass into his crotch.

      [–]DebatePony 5 points6 points  (2 children)

      If a guy is unwilling to offer a commitment to a women before demanding sex then he clearly is already looking past her on to the next girl. Why should she put herself out there by partaking in risky behavior without a commitment?

      Passion is all well and good, however throwing yourself at a man unwilling to commit because you aren't willing to have sex with him first is silly and shortsighted. And I'm not saying that marriage or even engagement has to be on the table, I'm talking about exclusivity.

      This just seems like advice a man would give to a woman who wants easy lays and little risk of being "forced" into a commitment.

      [–]Zselda 3 points4 points  (1 child)

      I agree. The advice doesn't work like that IRL. Also when women decline sex immediately it's not to seem less sexy to the hypothetical next partner. It's because the man himself can lose respect if he got what he wanted easily.

      [–]DebatePony 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      Exactly, I can't imagine a RP man (or any man) respecting let alone dating in a serious manner a woman who slept with him quickly. I mean isn't that kinda one of the tenets of the pill? Good enough to plate but not to form a relationship with? I find that just gross.

      [–]denszil 7 points8 points  (1 child)

      In fact, if a woman delays sex to avoid risk to her partner count, because a low count makes her more attractive, just who is this low count making her more attractive to?

      "I don't want to risk being less sexy, or less commitment-worthy, to the next guy."

      I found this particular perspective really interesting! Never thought of it like that.

      But being "all in" without commitment is a surefire way to get, as I've seen on TRP, "pumped and dumped" (I feel dirty saying that). There are certainly some terms and conditions to this.

      Also, maybe this is just my own perspective, but I don't think a woman's passion necessarily declines with the more partners she has. Because we have that "light switch effect", when the switch is on, its on. Or does it supposedly become dimmer with each partner or encounter?

      But this was a good read, I'm looking forward to part two.

      [–]WhisperTRP Founder[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

      But being "all in" without commitment is a surefire way to get, as I've seen on TRP, "pumped and dumped" (I feel dirty saying that).

      It carries some of that risk. But the opposite approach has risks as well... putting the brakes on carries the risk of making a man think "she's just not that into me".

      And if he thinks that, he doesn't always dump you right away. Sometimes he does, but sometimes he perseveres until he gets to sex, but then is less invested in you afterwards. Which leads to being dumped.

      Also, maybe this is just my own perspective, but I don't think a woman's passion necessarily declines with the more partners she has. Because we have that "light switch effect", when the switch is on, its on.

      In my experience (I'm a man who has had a lot of partners), women with lower counts seem to flip that light switch on more readily, more brightly, and it's less easy for them to turn it back off again.

      Also, keep in mind that what's important is not exactly how true this is (totally, somewhat, slightly, etc), but how much men believe it to be true. (A lot.)

      Because this is about how into him he thinks you are. If he's your first, and you tell him you want him to be your last, he'll believe you, right off the bat. If he's your fifth, he won't believe you when you say it, but if your actions bear it out, consistently, over time, you can convince him. If he's your twentieth, he's going to think, "Yeah, right, girl, suuuuuuuuure. How many other men have you said that to?"

      But this was a good read, I'm looking forward to part two.

      I'll discuss ways to mitigate risk when going "all in", how to maximize your appearance of being "all in", and how to avoid going "all in" in the wrong situation and setting yourself up for failure.

      [–]Ihatemost 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      Very interesting perspective. I've noticed with this that my problem in relationships is actually holding back too much, even though I'm really into the guy. This came with its sets of problems, where even months later I end up showing my love in every way I can, the guy doesn't entirely believe it. I'm looking forward to part 2!

      [–]redpillschoolModerator Extraordinaire 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      It makes her more attractive to other men. It does nothing for him. He of course expects to increase her count by one, because he wishes to be that one. If she hedges, then she is saying to him "I don't want to risk being less sexy, or less commitment-worthy, to the next guy."

      Damn, that cuts right through the bullshit there.

      [–]coffeedynamics 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      I agreed with the "red pill answer" that you linked. Partner count is a metric to judge a person's ability to maintain a relationship. The more you dump the other person, or are dumped yourself, the higher your relationship turn over rate. The higher your turn over rate, the higher your N count. In fact, I believe that a low N count in men should be something women look for as well, especially since they are primarily looking for LTR's. (BTW there was not enough math! Don't think you are going to bore us.)

      When a woman has a high partner count, a man asks himself "None of them kept her... why should I?"

      Interesting. This almost seems like a male version of pre-selection. What if the woman has always been the one to break up with the guy though?

      Women are generally the most passionate about their first partner, and gradually less so with each new one. This is not their first rodeo.

      I agree somewhat, but there are a few things to keep in mind. One, it probably won't make much a difference unless her number is quite high. Secondly, the quality of man the more important factor. My first was a homeless guy with ED and a meth addiction. He was just the first guy to ask me out, I was never that pasionate about him. There is a lot more to be passionate about with my current guy. Obviously women won't help themselves by sleeping with a new bar guy every week, but I also think that the benefits of shopping around outweigh any loss of youthful passion.

      [–]Themimose 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      gold gold gold gold

      [–]delores_rose 0 points1 point  (5 children)

      A woman who is passionate about a man does not consult her girlfriends about what an "acceptable" amount of time to "make him wait" is. A woman who is passionate about a man does not bargain the promise of her body for a wedding, like some jaded whore negotiating a "session". A woman who is passionate about a man will find a way to reach his bed. She will fly across the country, crawl under barbed wire, climb in through his second story window, do everything he desires...

      SO TRUE! I had personally never experienced this type of passion until I met my ex who was my 5th LTR. I could feel fat that day, tired, annoyed with him, etc. but I just loved pleasing him (and he cared about my pleasure as well). I remember one time I even dragged him to a bedroom in his mom's house for a quick BJ. She knocked on the door asking if he was ok and he tried to stop me but I didn't let him and took off my shirt and shoved it in his mouth haha . He couldn't stop smiling all day long, and I loved that I gave him that happiness.

      [–]WhisperTRP Founder[S] 11 points12 points  (1 child)

      He couldn't stop smiling all day long

      Precisely. It wasn't just sex (although presumably sex generally put a smile on his face as well), it was the feeling of being wanted that much, that you were willing, no, eager, to risk embarrassment to please him.

      Men don't usually get catcalled. Men don't usually get pursued. Men don't usually get chatted up in public places. Men don't usually get upvotes on "gonewild". You get the point. This means that women often have a good deal of difficulty understanding just how rare it is for men to be told they are desired, even if they are among the most attractive of men.

      [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      Men don't usually get catcalled. Men don't usually get pursued. Men don't usually get chatted up in public places. Men don't usually get upvotes on "gonewild". You get the point. This means that women often have a good deal of difficulty understanding just how rare it is for men to be told they are desired, even if they are among the most attractive of men.

      This is an extremely great point! Personally, I believe that my boyfriend and I are generally on the same level of attractive however, because I'm a girl I often get lots of attention when I'm all dressed up for a night out. I know he isn't bothered but I go out of my way to always tell him how great he looks and my friends will jump in for good measure.

      I often go to clubs with my friends and you will NEVER see a man approached by a woman it's always vice versa. Then, rejection is almost instant in a lot of cases which I can imagine kills confidence in your looks after a while.

      [–][deleted]  (2 children)

      [removed]

        [–]delores_rose 7 points8 points  (1 child)

        Yeah...would never sleep with a married man. That's disgusting.

        [–]WhisperTRP Founder[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        Having sex with someone else's husband is actually a terrible idea for any woman who wants commitment. In fact, there are few worse strategies.

        That's kind of the point. Examples of things women wouldn't normally do.

        [–]Thirtysomethink 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Excellent post, thank you. Looking forward to the follow-up.