RELATIONSHIPSTemptation (self.RedPillWomen)

submitted by loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor

One of the fundamental differences between RP and BP thinking is that TRP understands human nature and it's nuances and works to use this knowledge to improve our lives. TBP likes to paint things as black and white, lumping as much as we can into this giant "equal" bliss (read misery).

Men and women are fundamentally different in almost every way. We are two - opposite - halves of one whole called humanity. More specifically, we're two halves of one whole that is a married couple. We're a team. We can and should compliment each other on an individual and societal level. To do so we need to overcome certain base temptations and instincts that may cause us to be at odds with one another.


Biologically, a man can father many children with many women simultaneously. A woman however, can usually only carry one baby at a time. Twins are an anomaly, triplets are even more rare and more than that is super rare. Even a woman who carries several babies at once, cannot come close to a man who can sire dozens of babies at once.

Likewise, male sexual desire is for quantity, to have as much sex as possible with as many women as possible. Female sexual desire is to select one single mate of the highest quality possible/available.


It's natural to be tempted to cheat. This is true for men and women for different reasons and in different ways.

A man who commits to one single woman, is denying his biological drive to spread his seed to as many women as possible. Therefore, it's only natural for him to be tempted to have sex with every sexually appealing woman he'll ever encounter. He may choose not to act on this temptation for a multitude of reasons, but the temptation is there nonetheless. If your husband says he only has eyes for you, he means that he diverts his attention away from women who pique his sexual interest as to not get fought up in temptation. Or, he's saying that to keep your insecurities at bay.

A woman who commits to a single man is fulfilling her biological drive to choose a single mate with whom to procreate. Branch swinging only exists when she thinks she encountered a better mate or when she's unhappy with her current mate and seeks out a better mate.

Another differentiation is how men and women view sex. For men, sex is a need. For women, sex is at the core of her existence as a woman. Men do sex, women are sex. This idea is discussed more in depth in the linked post. I'll just point out one example where this can be seen. A woman being raped is treated as a more horrible act than a man being beaten to a pulp. Why? Because sex is at the core of womanhood. Taking sex from a woman touches a lot deeper than being beaten for a man, no matter how severe.

Therefore, cheating is different for men and women. Men have an urge to cheat that is a lot less threatening to the marriage. A man can cheat for years without compromising his marriage. In fact, men often cheat as a way of getting their sexual needs met so they don't have to break up the marriage! Women OTOH, cheat because they have one foot out the door. Women cheat as a form of branch swinging.


When committing to a single partner, men deny their biology and women fulfill theirs. Therefore, a man will have much more temptation to cheat than a woman can comprehend. OTOH, when a woman is tempted to cheat it's a lot stronger because her temptation is fuelled by her desire to branch swing.

When a man has extramarital sex, it doesn't break the marriage. When a woman has extramarital sex, it does break the marriage.

Before the brigades swarm in I'd like to reiterate that this post is about understanding human nature. At no point did I excuse cheating nor did I imply that it's a good or moral thing to do


[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (1 child)

Yep. Have your upvote. Enjoy getting flamed over this one.

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you.

I'm sure I'll get flamed sooner or later.

[–]shneakypete 21 points22 points  (10 children)

"The Red Queen" states that men and women both stand to gain biologically from cheating. A man can fertilize another man's woman and his genetics will spread with no effort to him. A woman benefits from cheating by committing to a single man and using him for his resources while she mates with high value males. She can have her pick of the gene pool and use one particular man's resources to raise her child.

[–]ivegotsomequestions0 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Yup. The dual strategy is RP 101.

So, a man's cheating doesn't break the marriage because it doesn't make him want to leave, and it actually makes it easier for him to stay. Good — as long as we're leaving morality out of the question, I will say that the same is true of a woman cuckolding her husband, getting pregnant with another man's baby, and raising it with her husband. This strategy removes her desire to leave and reproduce with a hotter guy, and it gives her more incentive than ever to stay with her husband.

Is it time to put morality back in the picture yet?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (7 children)

There was a programme on the BBC iPlayer that said this ages ago.

It was about sex. They did tests for example a woman wore an undershirt to sleep in two nights in a row, as did men. Then they had to smell them and describe them. Men and women picked 'nice smelling' ones, that complimented the others genetics meaning the baby would have had a stronger immune system.

Interestingly, they went to a nightclub and watched women dance. The more sexual they danced was correlated to how fertile they were (in what part of the cycle they were). This also correlated to finding more chizzled men, stronger jawbones, bigger muscles, more attractive. They found more feminine looking men more attractive when they werent as fertile.

Biologically speaking, in evolutionary terms, as unpolitically correct as all this is, it makes perfect scientific sense.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (6 children)

While the immune research has been replicated many times, modern science has repeatedly failed to correlate a woman's sexual selection with her ovulation cycle.


[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

So the documentary I watched on the BBC iPlayer was wrong?

But there is a number of factors to this, I suppose. If a more feminine man matched the womans immune system then at that time of the month would she find him more interesting out of the health of the babies immune system, or the guy who'd likely produce a stronger male offspring.

Then add love into the equation.

Theres a lot of question marks to this. I wonder if race even plays a part in immune system compatibility, as taboo as it is to question that.

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

Yes. Unfortunately, documentaries aren't a great source (which is why we have documentaries like What The Health based on absolutely no facts).

The immune system study has been replicated but is based on genetics, not ovulation. I would be willing to bet that race is a factor- I would predict that men and women would prefer an interracial partner. The goal was to get a partner with very different genes for the immune system.

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

modern science has repeatedly failed to correlate a woman's sexual selection with her ovulation cycle.

Your link's claim doesn't fully support your own claim because it only takes into account women who already have attractive partners.

For example, UCLA found that partnered women were more likely to find conventionally attractive (ie: genetically promising) men more attractive leading up to ovulation if and only if they didn't find their own partners particularly attractive.

A different UCLA study found women are more likely to fantasize about "conventionally attractive" men leading up to ovulation, but if and only if they don't find their own partners particularly attractive.

I can't find the sources offhand, but there have also been at least two studies by similar-tier schools that have shown women are more likely to cheat in the week leading up to their period if they aren't emotionally satisfied, which suggests that the other half of the equation is important too, just not when they are fertile.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

My link was a meta-analysis of all of the studies on the subject (58 of them).

It included every study ever done on sexual choice and ovulation.

Because it is a meta-analysis, its results trump individual studies.

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

You seemed to have failed to have actually read the analysis and/or misunderstood what it was claiming. It spells it out pretty clearly in the abstract:

Specifically, fertile women did not especially desire sex in short-term relationships with men purported to be of high genetic quality (i.e., high testosterone, masculinity, dominance, symmetry).

Emphasis mine to point out the extremely narrow conditions that were included in the analysis' assertion, which is a small minority of women and a small minority of relationships under particular conditions that would support your conclusion that you're trying to extend into a generalization of the entire population.

I'll repeat what I said above: Your link's claim doesn't fully support your own claim because it only takes into account women who already have attractive partners. Their conclusion is only for this demographic, and that does not extend to all women.

Additionally, it did not cover every study on the subject, only 58 of them. Moreover, a meta-analysis does not trump individual studies, especially when they aren't even included in the analysis itself.

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

Is it customary for meta analysis to cite unpublished studies? I'd think that using non peer reviewed sources would call into question the validity of the study.

[–]ElfFey 17 points18 points  (5 children)

True but I still don't want a guy who cheats lol

Just like I wouldn't branch swing I don't want a guy to cheat. People have to behave as moral creatures and rise above their base desires.

[–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor 6 points7 points  (3 children)

I think we first have to acknowledge what some of our core programming is before we can rise above it. Pretending this stuff isn't true doesn't help anything.

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

But the OP doesn't say that this is true and we can move above it. He says that men can cheat and not destroy a marriage.

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

Well I think there are two circumstances under which we would consider the information.

  1. No cheating has occurred - the information has value because knowledge is valuable and understanding ourselves and our partners is valuable. We can't be better than our base instincts if we don't recognize they exist. My comment here was made with this lens

  2. Cheating has occurred - the information has value in considering what to do next. Everyone may come to different conclusions, but I believe that understanding our natures helps us to decide on the next steps. I think this is the lens through which the OP made the statement

men can cheat and not destroy a marriage

I have seen this be true. It's certainly not true in all and maybe even most cases but I have seen it be true. That doesn't make it ok or respectable. No one wants a guy who is going to cheat but my point here was that if we close our eyes and pretend the entirety of OP's theory/post isn't true, then we don't have the tools to deal with situation 1 or 2.

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Of course.

[–]SouthernAthenaEndorsed Contributor 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Harsh truths. Men and women are different. Double-standards exist for a reason. That doesn't make cheating acceptable (remember, TRP is amoral), but it does mean we have to understand why those differences are there.

[–]RubyWooToo3 Stars 18 points19 points  (9 children)

Sorry, but I'm not buying that this is somehow a reality check and not an apologia for men who cheat on their wives. You wrote another post on this subject, so at this point, it really does feel like you're trying to force the view down our throats that we should look the other way if our husbands cheat or maintain an impossible standards of perfection in order to keep their interest.

There's a lot to unpack in this post, but I'll just address this:

A man can cheat for years without compromising his marriage.

Tell that to women who have contracted STDs from their husbands.

Tell that to a child who was born with an STD that their father transmitted to their mother while she was pregnant.

Tell that to a woman who has to deal with the fact that their husband got another woman pregnant.

Tell that to wives who have discovered how marital funds have been siphoned off to finance affairs.

Tell that to a woman who feels like she's losing her mind because she routinely subjected to lies, manipulation and gaslighting, when she knows something is wrong.

Tell that to a family who feels the absence of a husband/father because he's always working late <cough cough> or texting or leaving the room with his phone <cough cough>, or just always seems distracted.

No affair-- whether conducted by a man or a woman-- is a harmless excursion.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

No affair-- whether conducted by a man or a woman-- is a harmless excursion.

No truer words on this thread

[–]cakelitpancakes 4 points5 points  (0 children)

hands up in worship AMEN

[–][deleted]  (3 children)


    [–]Willow-girl 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    I disagree. A cheating man is still cheating his wife out of time, energy, attention and resources that rightfully belong in the marriage. (A woman who cheats does the same.)

    [–]RubyWooToo3 Stars 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    The outcome is just harmful, regardless of the intentions.

    [–][deleted]  (2 children)


      [–]RubyWooToo3 Stars 8 points9 points  (0 children)

      I'm not being hysterical and there's no need for patronizing tone.

      You weren't just saying that this is why cheating happens; you were stating your opinion that men cheating is somehow less detrimental to a relationship's health and survival than a woman's cheating and therefore implied that men cheating is somehow more excusable than if women cheat.

      I'm respectfully disagreeing with you on that point.

      [–]LuckyLittleStarModerator | Lil'Star[M] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Please be more polite. Thanks.

      [–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor 18 points19 points  (14 children)

      Succinct, and well said!

      Porn is a safe outlet for monogamous men to indulge their natural urges. I've always considered this a healthy compromise. Yet many women either disapprove of, or outright forbid, their men to enjoy porn.

      [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 11 points12 points  (5 children)

      Very good point.

      Women who feel threatened by porn want to have their cake and eat it too. It's an irrational fear that porn = sex with prostitutes. That porn is a gateway drug of sorts.

      Thing is, attitudes like that just alienate their men, this doesn't help the marriage.

      [–]Spazzy19 3 points4 points  (3 children)

      I have no problem with pornography and occasionally look at it myself. I'm not a woman who will freak out if a guy looks at it either, and believe it can be a tool to improve relations as well.

      However, you're naive if you think women are being irrational about being concerned about it. My marriage literally fell apart because my ex husband was legitimately addicted to it, could not respond to my frequent advances, and had to constantly be seeking new material to satisfy the urge.

      If your partner is willing and accessible, then it's a slap in the face to her, and the rejection creates deep scars to the heart and soul. To freak out because you just don't like it and catch your man looking at it when you're not in the mood or able to is a bit much, but it can very much cause significant pain depending on the circumstances.

      [–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor 2 points3 points  (2 children)

      I read recently that men who look at porn have less attraction to their wives. I might be getting the exact fact wrong but there are some (science based) reasons out there that porn overall may not be so great. I suspect the conservatives aren't totally off base on their porn negativity. It's not something I personally care about... but it's not all roses and sunshine, so I don't think we should be too quick to judge women who are fully against it. Anything that can be addictive is a cause for concern.

      [–]Jikira 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      True, I tell my SO he can look at porn I really don't care. However, he says that porn just kind of loses its appeal to him when we got together. Lately, I am starting to appreciate that honestly. You can't want what you don't know paradox. It kinda like how I don't go out to clubs or get drunk with the girls, because I respect my SO and don't want to compromise our relationship. I guess he feels the same way about porn he respects me and doesn't want to open up temptation I guess.

      [–]Spazzy19 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      This can absolutely be true because wives/SOs are unable to compete with the image and constant novelty that porn provides. On top of that, porn is an easy release. It doesn't require wooing, foreplay, or any other type of effort. Why go the more difficult route when you have instant pleasure?

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

      I think a lot of that comes from so many women being raised to revile porn and find it immoral. Just another reason we need comprehensive sex ed.

      [–][deleted]  (2 children)


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

        especially for teenage boys

        My statement applies to a marriage/LTR between grown adults. I'm not sure how teenage boys are applicable in this context.

        It seems to me that masturbation and some level of porn per couple is ok but I am very leery of consistent use of internet pornography, especially with young boys to raise.

        I fully agree with the need for a healthy balance, moderation, and self-control/discipline.

        [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (4 children)

        I don't think that this is a good idea.

        More and more research coming out lately suggest that porn is more stimulating than sex thus is quite very addictive, your mate will basically favor porn over you i.e. cheat on you with porn.

        Browse here for reference: https://yourbrainonporn.com/

        [–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor 3 points4 points  (3 children)

        Addiction to porn is a symptom of a problem: either a personal issue, or a relationship issue, or both.

        Blaming porn is like blaming alcohol for making shitty people do shitty things. Alcohol simply lowers a person's inhibitions, it doesn't make a good person suddenly turn "bad".

        Here's a recently published research by Mormons, regarding porn addiction

        If you are religious, you probably shouldn’t watch porn. It is likely to lead to you feeling that you’re addicted, and then developing shame around your identity and your porn use. That shame and anxiety is going to cause you problems in your life and in your relationships. But pornography is not a "superstimulus" that has an effect on everybody and anybody. The effects vary, by person, based on things such as their religiousness, history of porn use, history of sexuality, and relationship experience.

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

        No. drinking alcohol is bad, it is regarded medically as a poison when consumed orally, cognitive inhibition will certainly lead to negative results, minor or major, thus it is bad.

        Same thing with porn and masturbation, here you find some reasons on why you should give porn the (bad) label:

        Addiction Research and Articles About Research

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

        Both my husband and I are non-drinkers, and I have nothing good to say about alcohol as far as health is concerned, so I completely agree on the "poison" part :p

        However, what I meant is using alcohol as an excuse ("But I was drunk!"), to avoid being held responsible. Just my opinion: whatever a person does when they have low inhibitions says a lot about what kind of person they really are.

        Blaming porn is often the same excuse a person uses to avoid responsibility.

        The issue with the articles you've linked is that they're lumping "porn use" and "porn addiction" in the same category.

        The difference is moderation and control. Drinking too much water is bad for your health, too.

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

        You can not moderate using porn, it is too much always.

        What appears to me is that women do not comprehend the severity of sexual desire experienced by men by just looking, I can speak from my experience as a person who is not usually exposed to sexual stimulus that a young healthy male aged 18 to 24 years who witnesses an attractive half naked woman would be effected by her so greatly that he might think of that scene for days. The desire and lust men have for women and the stimulation felt is so strong that people have stole, killed, fought wars because if it, it is already too much.

        Now take that and multiply it by 10, every second of porn the human brain is dealing with 10 times the stimulation he would regularly have with normal sexual behavior, the brain now is dealing with an access to unlimited supply of naked women of all shapes and sizes doing all kinds of things, i don't know if you can see this the way i see it, but it is crazy to say the least.

        i do occasionally compare porn being a super-stimulus for a man to having multiple orbiters as a woman, too much dopamine is not a good idea.

        [–][deleted]  (42 children)


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

        Totally agree. I'm terrified of ending up with a man who thinks women "are" sex. or many of the other TRP "truths"

        [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (38 children)

        Care to elaborate?

        [–]Cardiscappa 17 points18 points  (37 children)

        Women are chided both here and TRP for AWALT. Men are excused both here and TRP.

        [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (30 children)

        Women are chided both here and TRP for AWALT. Men are excused both here and TRP.

        Interesting you say that, because nowhere in the post or anywhere else did I excuse bad behavior. I challenge you to quote my words where I did.

        Either you're a troll or you lack reading comprehension skills.

        [–][deleted]  (21 children)


          [–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

          Completely agree. Here, if your husband cheats everyone asks if you've put on weight, how much sex were you having, how often do you do your hair ect.

          At TRP if your wife cheats, AWALT!

          I often think of them as two totally separate movements. The type of women that most ladies here at RPW are looking for won't be found on TRP.

          [–][deleted]  (2 children)


            [–]Atomicbebe 11 points12 points  (0 children)

            Red pill for me makes me love and understand myself and men. Red pill for men made them hate and try to take advantage of women. Interesting reactions for sure. The two subs are so different. If your soul oozes hate and non understanding of women you will have no chance of getting a nice girlfriend/wife.

            [–]Ezreal3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            you act like this is some big social movement

            [–][deleted]  (4 children)


              [–]Cardiscappa 4 points5 points  (0 children)

              Thank you. I'm not knocking TRP or the anxiousness that goes on in there. It's part of the growing process - however, I worry that there's no growth (posted in the forum) beyond that. I worry that there's no men like you, loneliness-inc or Hunter or Roosh posting there to guide from the anger phase. MRP is even more depressing.

              So I think the hard core guys that post regularly are stuck in a rut and are nothing more than tales of caution for the males passing through. So in that sense it serves a purpose.

              That's a good way of looking at it.

              [–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points  (2 children)

              I will add, I think many men like myself drop by TRP and then lurk for a while and then leave once we’ve picked up the truth from the trash.

              Maybe this is a part of the problem? I like that TRP has a 'path' to take and a reading list. There seems to be a program of sorts to put yourself through and that is really valuable. But once you go through the program - if all the men who 'get it' (or are moderate in any sense) get sick of the community and leave once they've taken from it what they can - well then I can see why that might lead to stagnation.

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

              Yes but I've tried a little and watched others try.. and any differing opinions other than the "women are flesh to be used" narrative is shouted down.

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

              Good point!

              [–]SouthernAthenaEndorsed Contributor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

              The men at TRP don't say "well, if she branch swung, you need to up your game and get fit/be a better man."

              That's because the TRP forum is very anti-relationship. They have different goals, and this is we always say not to go over there, because men are usually in the "bitter, pill-swallowing" phase over there and haven't come around to the point of seeking how to have a good LTR. They don't represent all RP thinking.

              You do, however, find many posts on that subject (upping your game to keep a LTR) on Return of Kings, a red pill blog that I like reading a lot more than TRP. If you want to see what more seasoned RP male thought is like, go over there instead.

              [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (9 children)

              Yes, I understand the anger phase

              It seems like you don't empathize with it.

              There's no growth

              It depends how you define growth. Obviously, you consider growth to be anything that brings a person closer to a good marriage. However, if you're a man who's been burned before or you realize how others have been burned, why would you want to play the game altogether? Especially since the laws and society are stacked against men in marriage.

              Look, I personally agree with what you're saying. This is why I hang out here and not on TRP. I even wrote a post on RPW vs TRP and how we differ in the application of the same principles. But I think you don't really grasp just how badly the modern man has been burned.

              [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (7 children)

              if you're a man who's been burned before or you realize how others have been burned, why would you want to play the game altogether?

              You act like women have never been burned, have never been rejected, or didn't get the same bad information from society before RP. And yet women figure it out....

              [–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points  (6 children)

              Not all women do. There are plenty of bitter women out there and plenty who have a baggage from being burned. If you don't believe that, go on Tinder as a guy at some point and see what women's profiles look like.

              [–][deleted]  (5 children)


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

                None of us do well to live in anger. The reason we accept it from TRP is because through RP we open our eyes and see how damaging our culture has been to men over the last several decades. The feminist movement has made it's strides and women can now work in any profession they choose (no laws prevent this), divorce laws are in our favor which weigh marriage in our favor, we can vote to name a few. Instead of packing up and going home, the feminist movement keeps pushing the bar farther and farther. This is very often at the expense of men. I HIGHLY recommend that you watch the documentary The Red Pill if you doubt the systemic problems that our culture has caused men. Women's anger is at individual men who they have interacted with. Men's anger is at individual women AND society as a whole. They are waking up and seeing how FUCKED UP their lot in life is. Yes, pardon my language but it expresses my feeling here.

                To say "hmmm it's very interesting that men are angrier than women" is concern trolling and not insightful. Additionally, it's indicative of gender differences that we all claim to believe. If men are more aggressive then they are going to be more angry. So what. It's really the wrong forum for any of us to complain that "oh the men are like this so we should be able to be too" No! We're not aiming for that sort of equality. We're aiming to understand their anger and meet it with our feminine compassion and graces.

                [–]Cardiscappa 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                It depends how you define growth.

                Good catch. I see growth as becoming the best version that you can be, male or female. Growth doesn't necessarily end in marriage. However, a well rounded person is a better person than a bitter person who believes the m/p atriarchy is keeping him down. I also think if no one sees the growth beyond the bitterness phase, it does harm to the movement. This is probably why Cassie Jaye had such a difficult time with The Red Pill because how reactionary people are because they only see TRP as bitter misogynist men.

                But I think you don't really grasp just how badly the modern man has been burned.

                I do and I speak out about this in real life, not just some Internet forum where my identity is hidden.

                [–][deleted]  (1 child)


                  [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  Thank you for the feedback, I'm working on it but obviously still have a lot more work to do in brushing up on my delivery.

                  OTOH, I did state quite clearly that this is about understanding the nature and that I don't condone or excuse bad behavior. You're familiar with my past posts so I'm sure you've seen this in past posts as well. It baffles me how people can still accuse me of condoning or excusing bad behavior even when I'm clear as day on it. Can we discuss human nature and why people might do XYZ without excusing it?

                  In the quote you quoted, I was explaining the effects of cheating and how this differs between men and women. We aren't the same, our sexuality is different and therefore the effects of cheating are different. Do I have to make the disclaimer in every paragraph or can I just do it once per post as I've been doing?

                  [–][deleted]  (5 children)


                    [–][deleted]  (4 children)


                      [–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor 6 points7 points  (3 children)

                      OP tends to fall apart when he has to address the women's side of things. From what I've seen in the past, he has an good understanding of the theory and a strong understanding of male behavior and thought processes. As soon as he makes statements about women, we become essentialized cardboard cut outs.

                      While I find it irritating, it also tends to bring people out to respond and get discussions going.

                      [–][deleted]  (2 children)


                        [–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                        I've seen advice on askMRP that worries me for this very reason.

                        [–][deleted]  (4 children)


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

                          Feminism, and women are given special status socially while men and masculinity are reviled.

                          I think this is why AWALT but not AMALT . Socially, it's been accepted for at least my lifetime (or the parts of it I have been old enough to be aware of) that ... "like ... ugh men are just LIKE that." Feminism (or social change or whatever) has made it difficult to discuss any fault in women's nature but that isn't true for men.

                          As a result, we are more lenient towards men out of a sense of compassion because their natures have been scorned for decades now. But beyond that, we want masculine men. We want it because men build the world. We want it because two parent families are generally better. We want it because we're attracted to masculine men.

                          And because we have been the ones propped up all these years, it's time to turn the compassion on men and propping them up.

                          [–]Cardiscappa 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                          Women are not being 'short changed' we are being given a wake up call. The most privileged and protected creature on earth is a woman in any first world country.

                          Do you look at my post history? Why do you continually project these feelings of yours onto me?

                          [–]etf42 7 points8 points  (4 children)

                          indefinite monogamy is not natural. "Marriage" is a social construct. The true nature of men and women can not be changed. Humans are generally not naturally indefinitely monogamous. Men are polygamous, women are hypergamous.

                          [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

                          The true nature of men and women can not be changed.

                          It's true that it cannot be changed, but it's also true that it can be subdued.

                          [–]etf42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                          I completely agree. Sometimes it is necessary.

                          [–][deleted]  (1 child)


                            [–]etf42 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                            I completely agree, constructs can be good.

                            [–]HB3234 4 points5 points  (5 children)

                            Has anyone here read Esther Perel's "Mating in Captivity"? Parts of her writing definitely seem to suggest that it's women who bore of monogamy faster than men, and I'm curious if the interpretation here is that this because the men aren't fulfilling their role as high quality leader rather than an inherent desire for women to seek variety.

                            [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

                            I haven't read the book, therefore, no interpretation of the theory behind the book is being made here.

                            Can you explain why she says that women are more bored of monogamy?

                            [–]HB3234 4 points5 points  (3 children)

                            Her book outlines a handful of things, but it boils down to "women want novelty". She wrote the book in response to the trend of woman-initiated deadbedrooms, and the premise was basically that women lose lust for their partners because they want variety, that monogamy kills their libidos. She does offer solutions for those wanting to remain monogamous (like making sure she has a time and space to switch roles from mom/caretaker to woman with desire), but it's interesting because her writing proposes ideas that clash with the perception of men as the sole novelty seekers.

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

                            Interesting. I'd have to look into it further.

                            The way I see it - women want novelty that's better than what she has now. Branch swinging is about swinging to a higher branch. Men want novelty that's different than the one the have now and doing so doesn't mean they want to swing away at all. How many times have we heard women bemoaning their husbands infidelity with - she isn't even nearly as beautiful as me! Why would he choose her over me?!?! This is because to a woman, you choose one mate over another. To a man, you choose one mate in addition to another.

                            [–]HB3234 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                            Well, that's the crux of my question, isn't it? Branch swinging theory suggests (or as I'm interpreting it) that if you're the highest branch on the tree, she won't swing. Whereas Perel's work could be interpreted to suggest that, like the man who cheats with an uglier woman, women might swing to a different branch just because it is different and new. So it's that interpretation that I wanted opinions on.

                            If you do read it, please pm me! I'd be interested in hearing your take on it.

                            [–]Atomicbebe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                            This sounds really interesting and I think I agree with her idea, it's why we like flirting and romance books etc. I think women get turned on when they feel desirable and it takes, ourselves, husbands, other men and other women to make us feel this way. I'll have to look up this book now and have a read. I don't think it's because men aren't fulfilling their roles. I think that flirting for women fullfills the same kind of thing as looking at porn for men.

                            [–]Spazzy19 4 points5 points  (1 child)

                            I read a book last year called Sex at Dawn which explains sexuality biologically/socially and the evolution into modern day "monogamy." It was a fascinating read. It would actually argue against this societal construct, as women started becoming less promiscuous during the agricultural age when humans gave up the nomadic lifestyle because humans stopped clan-like living and raising children as a group since men want to know it's their child they're providing for... Then came religion to govern womens' behavior.

                            However, on a biological level, there's a reason women are more vocal during sex and can continue to last longer and have multiple orgasms in a short period of time compared to men... In order to copulate with more partners.

                            The book cites scientific evidence that a woman could have sex with 2-3 men back to back, but if I recall correctly, the shape of a man's penis will act almost like a hook and his sperm will overtake any of the previous partner's if it's inferior. In any case, biologically the strongest sperm will ultimately win no matter how many partners a woman has back to back. Monogamy serves more (on a biological level anyway) to ensure paternity for the male partner.

                            I don't disagree that a man has more opportunity/ability to reproduce with more women than the other way around, but I don't think that explains the fact that women are equally tempted or have sexual urges like men. We are also choosing to stay with a particular partner and not stray.

                            [–][deleted]  (17 children)


                            [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 6 points7 points  (4 children)

                            Thank you for your very good points.

                            This does not excuse male infidelity. It doesn't make cheating 'acceptable' or 'ideal' in any way. Just as women are prone to certain flaws, so to are men. Both are able to curtail those less favorable traits and rise above them. We are not slaves to our nature, but it is helpful to understand things.

                            I added the emphasis on that last phrase.

                            Anyone who looks through my posting history will find several posts and many comments where I take this stance. TRP is about understanding how human nature works, understanding why people do what they do does not mean you excuse said doing. People can choose right and wrong. We have instinctual urges, but we aren't compelled by them the way animals are.

                            It's also a very good point that we ought to not be callus about breaking up families. Children of single mothers are much more prone to just about every form of bad behavior in society. It's literally putting children at a disadvantage by separating the family. This shouldn't be taken lightly.

                            [–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor 3 points4 points  (1 child)

                            We have instinctual urges, but we aren't compelled by them the way animals are.

                            One of the keys to not being compelled is to understand the urges. This is the value of RP, this sub, open dialogue in the public sphere, etc etc.

                            I might meet a man who seems pretty great and develop feelings. If I understand hypergamy it's easier to consider those feelings and say "this is just my instinct. i chose my husband for good reasons. this is biology and i should choose to live above it." If I don't understand hypergamy it's just as easy to let the emotions sweep me up and destroy my marriage. And hey MAYBE I get a better guy out of the branch swinging but MAYBE quality men don't date married women (a thing I also understand better if I understand RP principles).

                            More importantly to this discussion (I think): If my husband cheats and I understand his sexuality I can think through the situation. I can decide if he let his biology get in the way of his rational mind. I can better judge if this is something that is likely to happen again. I can decide if it's something that is a threat to me and our marriage (ie: if he he ended up drunk at a party with some girl he barely knows that's a lot less of a threat to my marriage than if he falls in love with a woman he works with) and I can decide how that impacts the (hypothetical) kids. If I don't understand men's sexuality then I can just say "f you, you cheating bastard, you hurt my feelings get out" And if I chose that - I'm going to be out in the marketplace in my 30s, divorced and with (hypothetical) kids. And maybe that is still preferable to staying with him - but at least I'm using my reasoning not my gut to decide.

                            Understanding our instincts is key to being a rational person. Being a rational person is key to making good decisions for yourself and your family.

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

                            Very well said.

                            [–][deleted]  (1 child)


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



                              [–]SouthernAthenaEndorsed Contributor 6 points7 points  (6 children)

                              When it comes to vetting for a husband: infidelity should always be a deal breaker. When it comes to marriage: forgiving a husband and working to move past the incident with understanding, careful thought, patience, and compassion should always be given every possible effort.

                              This makes so much sense and I have never thought about it this way before. I have always been of the mind that cheating shouldn't always be a deal-breaker (that's way too simplistic), but I didn't know where to draw the line. Thanks for your comment!

                              [–][deleted]  (3 children)


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

                                Haha, absolute truth! I actually always like your comments.

                                [–]RedPillWonder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                                I don't seem to be a particularly popular person on this thread or another one...but I rather be thoughtful, detailed, and thorough than everyone's best friend. :)

                                I haven't been around in awhile, but from what I remember and from your recent ones, I like your comments. Keep up the great work!

                                Someday people will figure out that down voting a comment does not make it any less true.

                                Hope springs eternal.

                                [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                                I think cheating being a deal breaker is incredibly specific to the relationship. Cheating will always be a deal breaker for me. But I would never be so conceited as to claim that because it works that way for me, it will work that way for everyone.

                                [–]SouthernAthenaEndorsed Contributor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                                Sure, that makes sense.

                                [–]Rivkariver2 Star 0 points1 point  (4 children)

                                Sorry no, any kind of deception affects a marriage. It alters the relationship even if she never finds out. And it's usually obvious something is off. Disagree strongly.

                                [–][deleted]  (3 children)


                                  [–]Rivkariver2 Star 0 points1 point  (2 children)

                                  You know I meant serious deception like cheating, drugs etc. But even hearing someone say I look nice without makeup and then find out one day they were lying would be lame. The idea that people can't be hurt by what they don't know is false. Even ithiut guilt, the person acts differently in subtle or obvious ways. It's impossible not to. I know you don't want it to be true but it is.

                                  [–][deleted]  (1 child)


                                    [–]Rivkariver2 Star 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                                    That's not what I said. Have a nice day.

                                    [–][deleted]  (5 children)


                                    [–][deleted]  (4 children)


                                      [–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (2 children)

                                      If this place is full of women who are overcoming their basic tendencies, why would we possibly think it's acceptable for men to succumb to their basic tendencies?

                                      This is my biggest thing. On RPW we constantly are counseled to school our most basic instincts, while men on TRP are taught to embrace theirs and let the chips fall where they may. (Although that sentence could probably apply to most of human history lol)

                                      [–]Rivkariver2 Star 3 points4 points  (1 child)

                                      Very true. That's why there's a sidebar note here that RPW advises against going for the type of guy who acts like the TRP sub guys. A RPW is worth a lot in this society, and she deserves a man who also actively works to control his baser nature and grow as a person.

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

                                      I've learned a lot from RPW, but the biggest thing I've learned is that I don't want to date a guy who has ever read TRP lol

                                      [–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                                      Have you done more extensive reading on the topic (evolutionary biology). I am looking for additional books on the topic and would love recommendations! I've only checked out a couple of the obvious ones so far.

                                      [–]crankypants15 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                                      I agree with your generalizations, which shows a real trend among men and women.

                                      Likewise, male sexual desire is for quantity, to have as much sex as possible with as many women as possible.

                                      This is a real trend, but there are exceptions to this too. I was never about sleeping around. And the best partners I've had are steady partners.

                                      Biological drives are also tempered by individuality and society too. But for people to make decisions based on a minority of cases does not seem prudent.

                                      [–]WhySoOverHeated 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                                      Thanks for posting! I enjoyed reding your perspective, and what an interesting discussion that was opened up!

                                      [–]honorocagan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                                      Well said.

                                      [–]Willow-girl 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                                      Therefore, cheating is different for men and women. Men have an urge to cheat that is a lot less threatening to the marriage. A man can cheat for years without compromising his marriage. In fact, men often cheat as a way of getting their sexual needs met so they don't have to break up the marriage! Women OTOH, cheat because they have one foot out the door. Women cheat as a form of branch swinging.

                                      I disagree. Women also cheat with the intention of getting their sexual needs met, with no plan to leave their husband whom they may love otherwise. How do I know this? Because I did it, years ago in another relationship.

                                      [–]TheBunk_TB 0 points1 point  (2 children)

                                      Quantity due to quality control issues.

                                      [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                                      I don't understand your comment.

                                      [–]TheBunk_TB 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                                      My apologies. I often think many men might feel an urge to sample elsewhere due to the lack of quality in their (regretted) monogamous sexual relationship.

                                      [–][deleted]  (3 children)


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

                                      I agree. So many of TRP social theory posts require that men and women aren't truly sexual beings, just reproductive beings. Which just isn't true.

                                      [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                                      I don't think women are biologically driven to commit to a single partner for life though.

                                      I never said that they were. I did address branch swinging in my post.

                                      What I was saying is that women have it in their nature to bond with one man at a time and to seek out the highest man available. If that man remains the highest value male (which is impossible), she'd stay with him forever. If she finds a higher value male whom she can attract, she'd be tempted to branch swing, but her biology has her after one singular guy at a time.

                                      A man's biology would have him impregnate one woman in the morning and another in the evening and yet another tomorrow morning and so on and so forth.

                                      [–]1Pink1Stink -1 points0 points  (0 children)

                                      Great post