DISCUSSIONWhat do men want? - positive masculinity in relationships (self.RedPillWomen)

submitted by RedPillWomenRPW Writing Team

Please read the post fully for the question.

As you might have seen, the quarantine included an addition to the sidebar on TRP. Reddit is now defining positive masculinity for our men. We know these sources are questionable at best so today's question for men is this:


What masculine qualities are undervalued in modern relationships? What do you as men bring to the table that you wish we as women understood? What is "positive masculinity" in your view?

This thread is not meant to be specific, actionable advice; rather it is a peek into the male psyche.

Men: Typically we tell men that their personal preferences are not advice but this discussion is all about your personal preferences. Give us insight into your ideas and motivations. Let us know approximately how old you are and your relationship status. Good thoughtful answers are best and one liners with no explanation won't fly.

Ladies: Remember that no single answer should be given too much weight. Instead take it all in and balance it against the RP theory that you know. This holds true in life as well as on the sub. The post: personal preferences are not advice is good to review as a guide in your day to day interactions with advice-giving male friends and acquaintances.

[–]LateralThinker133 Stars 38 points39 points  (0 children)

Give us insight into your ideas and motivations.

I am motivated to be a partner to my wife. I am her rock, her confidante, her cheerleader, her mentor, and her lover. She in turn is my kitten, my life partner, my fellow explorer, and my student (she's 27, I'm 44). Much of my current mission in life is to get us to where we can have a successful business that we can pursue together. I run the finances, she manages our social circle. She encourages (if not embraces) my hobbies and is very supportive, while having her own rich inner life. She takes care of my needs, as I do hers, and we don't begrudge those that we can't/won't provide to the other being fulfilled elsewhere.

Let us know approximately how old you are and your relationship status.

44M. Married to a RPW for 2 years. Before that, married to an abusive feminist for 11.

What masculine qualities are undervalued in modern relationships?

Stability. So much media/culture encourages excitement and novelty in your partner. Well, that's all good, but a man who is stable, sane, and productive is worthwhile from a LTR perspective. It won't carry a relationship, but ignoring it or deprioritizing it will make it more likely your relationship will fail.

What do you as men bring to the table that you wish we as women understood?

Sacrifice. Oh, don't get me wrong. Women understand sacrifice in terms of their children. But men sacrifice everything for their partners. Time, hobbies, friends, interests, passions - we make decisions based in part or in whole on your desires. Even though you say you don't want us to. Because you do.

What is "positive masculinity" in your view?

Integrity. Honesty. Earned strength. Competence. Forthrightness. Bravery. Endurance of pain and suffering. Sacrifice. Nobility. Ambition. Willingness to be Confrontational. Knowing when to compromise and when to fight.

[–]ManguZa1 Star 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Leadership - Men are supposed to handle responsabilities and the mental load but women are rarely grateful for that and even throw tantrum when you don't decide things like they would want.

[–]md8716 10 points11 points  (7 children)

Edited because I answered the wrong question:

States: mid 30s, married 5 years, 2 kids

The most undervalued quality that men bring to the table is true confidence and leadership. Like, real leadership, not the corporate BS "leadership" you read about in books. Imagine if you were flying on an airplane and there was an emergency, and the captain had no idea what to do. This guy has your life in his hands, and even he doesn't know what he's doing. That feeling of insecurity is one of the most dreadful feelings ever.

But a strong, confident leader is someone who makes you proud of what you're doing and brings out the best in you. You want to make them proud of you. It makes you feel like you're a part of something. Even if the damn plane catches on fire you are 100% sure you're going to get out of it alive because this dude is rock solid.

Too often, women marry or date men based on a laundry list of "requirements". But leadership goes overlooked, which is one of the most powerful aspects of masculinity.

[–]pearlsandstilettosModerator | Pearl 0 points1 point  (2 children)

The question is not specifically what men want. It is:

What masculine qualities are undervalued in modern relationships? What do you as men bring to the table that you wish we as women understood? What is "positive masculinity" in your view?

[–]md8716 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Oh, sorry. The OP was kinda asking multiple questions, and I probably keyed in on the wrong one.

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

Yes. I think it needs to be rephrased. Will work on clarifying.

[–][deleted]  (3 children)


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

    Use the report button and leave moderating to the mods.

    [–]md8716 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Uh, do you have me confused with someone else? My relationship is most definitely not 50/50. And we have a pretty healthy sex life, even after kids.

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

    Damnit! I did reply to the wrong person. My bad.

    Gonna delete it since it no longer serves a purpose.

    [–]WhisperTRP Founder 20 points21 points  (9 children)

    It's good to discuss just what definition of masculinity /u/spez would like to cram down our throats, but this question, as you have asked it, misses the larger issue.

    TRP defines a notion of a positive masculine identity. The feminists and genocide advocates at the link target have another definition altogether. The key difference between these two notions is the question of "positive for whom?".

    TRP begins with the assumption that men are people, and that what is good for men is an end, not a means to someone else's good. Therefore, the sort of masculinity it teaches is centered around notions of competence, power, and effectiveness... around the ability for men to achieve their own ends for their own sake.

    Feminists do not see men as an end, but as a means to an end. This is why all of their definitions of "positive" masculinity center around what they believe men can and should do for the sake of women. They center around notions of giving and of self-sacrifice.

    To ask what men "bring to the table" is missing the point, because it is once again defining masculinity in terms of what it "brings to the table" for women to enjoy. To define masculinity in these terms is to tacitly agree with the Naomi Wolf and Michael Kimmel's fundamental assumption... that men are not people.

    For me, the choice between these two definitions is simply a question of whether I wish to be seen, and to treat myself, as a person... or not.

    If I want to be a person, and regard my own benefit as an end unto itself, I must choose TRP over Naomi Wolf.

    So the question of what I can do for you ladies must remain unanswered here, at this moment, because that's not what masculinity is for me, nor is it the purpose of my life. There's plenty I can do for those who do for me, but that's not the meaning of my existence, and it's not what it means to be a man.

    [–]pearlsandstilettosModerator | Pearl 3 points4 points  (8 children)

    Is there a way that you would suggest rephrasing the question to get at the idea: in the context of a relationship, what do women tend to undervalue about men and masculinity (in the eyes of men)?

    [–]WhisperTRP Founder 18 points19 points  (6 children)

    I'm not sure. I'm actually glad this question was asked the way it was, because it gives me the opportunity to say what I said.

    The reason that this question sees men as a means, rather than an end, is not that RPW agrees, in any real sense, with feminism, but instead that RPW is a women's group, and women will always see men as a means rather than an end.

    This is acceptable, because, in the same way, men can also reasonably see women as a means, rather than an end. This is simply the self-interested nature of every living organism.

    What feminism does, however, is demand that men see women as an end, and themselves as a means. What TRP attempts to do is deprogram this.

    Therefore the key difference between RPW and feminism is not what it expects women to do, because the answer is, in both cases "seek their own advantage" (albeit with different tactics). The difference is that RPW expects that men will also seek their own advantage, and any tactics for dealing with them must take this into account... while feminism persists in stomping its tiny foot and being outraged that men won't get with the program.

    [–]Taliahood 0 points1 point  (5 children)

    I think your response is really interesting because it touches on a little mentioned truth that RPW teaches valuable lessons in relationship harmony but often the focus is how we can produce the results we want by means of our own good behaviour. Maybe too often I see that women are praising themselves for said results. Being new at this it does rather feel quite magical and akin to witchcraft how my husband is suddenly being so kind and affectionate to me and I know it's because I've altered my behaviour. And of course, yes, the reason I am doing this is for what I can get out of it. How it benefits me. In all honesty it would probably do me good to find a way to alter my mindset to "I'm doing this because it is right." So as to not be subconsciously still giving myself all the credit for my husbands position at the head of my household. And I guess that's why it attracts many with trad/con values because it is probably more sincere when you feel that it's what God would want of you.

    [–]WhisperTRP Founder 1 point2 points  (4 children)

    The whole reason we created TRP was that fear of being criticized on moral grounds ruined /r/seduction as an effective forum for discussing what worked. ("Misogyny!", etc).

    So TRP came into being as "moral-free zone", where no discussion of moral imperatives was allowed. This extends to RPW.

    That doesn't mean you don't have morals, of course. It simply means that discussion here happens from a tactical standpoint, not a moral one. RPW endorses submissive behaviour because it is the best way to get treated well by men, not because it is right, or good, or what some religion demands. All of those might or might not be true, but what's definitely true is that it works better.

    However, the thing about tactics, or what we call "game", is that it works regardless of your motives. You can treat your husband well because you want him to treat you well, because it's what you think god wants, or because you love him and you just want him to be happy. Your motives are your business and your business alone... the same actions will produce the same results regardless.

    This policy also allows some very different people with very different values to focus here on the subset of those values that they share, and to get along. This is how you can have harmonious and productive discussions here between very, very religious tradcon women, and hardcore BDSM girls, and everything in between. What they all share is not a lifestyle, a set of values, or a worldview, but a way of relating to men.

    [–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Your motives are your business and your business alone... the same actions will produce the same results regardless.

    This policy also allows some very different people with very different values to focus here on the subset of those values that they share, and to get along. This is how you can have harmonious and productive discussions here between very, very religious tradcon women, and hardcore BDSM girls, and everything in between. What they all share is not a lifestyle, a set of values, or a worldview, but a way of relating to men.

    This^ explanation (or something similar) would be far more useful on the sidebar, compared to the trad-con-leaning description currently there:

    This community was created as a harbor for RP women that share common goals. We explore the female RP sexual strategy in an objective, realistic, and compassionate manner. All theories and conversations spring from a traditional, evolutionary psychology, or anti-feminist foundation. We focus on long term relationships, marriage, and building families.

    [–]Taliahood 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    Ahh okay that makes much more sense then and I'm glad to know that because there have been certain things I've been afraid to discuss for fear of being attacked by more religious types. Thank you for that explanation.

    [–]WhisperTRP Founder 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    Yes. At one point we did have an issue with the mod team being rather heavily weighted towards tradcons who didn't want to let other girls participate, and had developed a heavy "mean girls" vibe. But the TRP leadership stepped in and dealt with that problem when we became aware of it.

    If you are taking moral criticism for any lifestyle choices, hit that report button, and our mod team will deal with it.

    [–]Taliahood 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I remember that time. I had a different account then. Definitely a mean girls vibe. It's a totally different community now. Way more relatable.

    [–]Rian_StoneEndorsed Contributer 5 points6 points  (0 children)


    The undervaluing comes with value that's given away, instead of used as a reward.


    A guy takes his girl out to dinner, regardless of how well the relationship is going. That he takes her out is seen as an obligation, undervalued.


    The guy who makes his presence conditional to his girl providing value (however you define it). Those dinners out become a reward for good behaviour, or in a natural way, when he feels good, he has the mental attitude that he should spread his good nature onto others he cares for.

    TLDR; they undervalue what we give away. In my bro-brain, it's a powerful narrative. I know you got my back, so I'll get yours. It's the narrative that convinces guys to join the military, and put up with so much nonsense, and I don't see it as much different in a relationship

    Oh yeah, in my 30s, girl is 8 years younger than me, Common law marriage, about a decade now.

    Give us insight into your ideas and motivations

    As for the OG question. Risk tolerance. the amount of DNGAF and often sabotage when seeing a guy taking risks boggles the mind.

    [–]Guywithgirlwithabike2 Stars 8 points9 points  (0 children)

    Preface: this is not directed at u/girlwithabike, who values my abilities, but at earlier romantic partners, some of whom are still watching Chelsea Handler and Rachel Maddow in their studio apartments.

    Conscious competence in bending the physical world to my will. I can (and have) cut down a tree in the forest, rough-cut it into boards, plane those boards down, fine-cut them to size, do all manner of joinery, sand them, assemble them into beautiful pieces of furniture your descendants will be able to drive a truck over without suffering damage, and finish them so exquisitely that they'll cause eyestrain if placed in direct sunlight.

    I don't require your constant input or micromanagement to pull this off either; the finished product will be better than anything you could have imagined, and that will not be accidental.

    The ability to assemble Ikea furniture is something most boys acquire before high school, but you wouldn't think so based upon depictions on sitcoms and in advertising.

    Edit: basic stats are a matter of public record here, but married 5 years, together 11 years this Friday, first child due in April.

    [–]JackSkell0255 5 points6 points  (2 children)

    Sex. Most of us want sex. We want an active participant who likes sex enough to be able to verbalize preferences, and be willing to try a variety of things (over time, while building trust), willingly. Most men who follow my self-invented rule (“get invited back”) like to give the maximum amount of pleasure possible to the woman to increase his chances of a repeat, and, for most of us, it is an ego builder to see a woman stagger off to the bathroom on shaky legs. I like to leave a woman sweaty, sleepy, and satisfied.

    This takes a couple things. In a relationship, be as healthy and fit as you can be. Don’t start feeling “secure” and start gaining weight. We have to continue to like seeing you naked for our, um, function, to work.

    Hygiene. An enthusiastic 6/7 who is clean, groomed, and takes care of all of her skin has always been a better time than the 8/9 that is a smelly mess. For me, this includes their place of residence, also, perhaps just because I’m old.

    Sex is the reason an unattached man starts a conversation with an unattached woman. In my opinion, it’s foundational to the start of a a relationship. Doesn’t mean that in 30 years it will still be number one, it may drop as far as number 3.

    Anecdotally, think about the men you know who have stayed in otherwise rotten relationships because they’re still getting sex. Then, think about the number of men who have stayed in rotten relationships withOUT getting sex.

    Apart from sex, good relationships will fit together like a jigsaw puzzle. For instance, I don’t care about interior decoration, she can do it, but I like my office and garage my way, and I will audit ideas strictly on function. (The sectional you want blocks the back door. There needs to be 3 towel racks in the bathroom, etc.). Paint everything frog green, she said. Ok.

    Unless she is paying for hers, I decide on the vehicles. I buy and maintain them.

    In my relationships, they earned enough to keep them in clothes, college, and car insurance/fuel, and when I was really lucky, part of the cell phone bill. When I was older, I set up their work insurance and retirement contributions with them.

    She can cook, I can cook, she cleans, I clean. It’s not hard if it’s balanced.

    My preferences have been about being enthusiastic about taking ownership of roles. It has to be an even trade for both people to be healthy. Sometimes, to outsiders, it doesn’t SEEM like a balanced relationship, but than again, they’re not privy to the mind-blowing sex.

    [–]pearlsandstilettosModerator | Pearl 8 points9 points  (0 children)

    This doesn't really answer the question of the post:

    What masculine qualities are undervalued in modern relationships? What do you as men bring to the table that you wish we as women understood? What is "positive masculinity" in your view?

    [–]MakeAmericaRichAgain -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

    I eagerly await the day when /u/spez quarantines bitter, cancerous, man-hating subreddits for "toxic femininity".

    "Toxic masculinity" idiots fail to realize that masculinity is the only thing keeping them in their (relatively) safe and comfortable houses without fear of robbery, murder, or other violent invasion and subsequent violation of their property. Simply put, good, trained men protect untrained men (and women) from other, more nefarious trained men. It's ironic, because it's almost always the same people who preach "toxic masculinity" that advocate for getting rid of guns. It's almost like they WANT people to not be able to defend themselves.

    If I provided nothing else for my wife, I at least provide her with the safety that she gets out of my protection from other, evil men.

    [–]SharpestMarbel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Don't forget protection from evil women physically and psychologically. Happily married women are usually the most resistant to mob hysteria that seems to flare up every decade or so. McMartin pre-school issues, Salem Witch trials, and recent incidents.