47
48

THEORYMalleability and You (self.RedPillWomen)

submitted by girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor

Women are resilient. Evolution has shaped us to endure life's harsh realities and continue on. As a result, women are more likely to identifying with an abuser but recover more quickly from traumatic events.

You may be asking yourself: How does this relate to sexual strategy?

Understanding the elements of masculinity and femininity is important in the relationship context because a relationship flourishes when the masculine and feminine elements are complementary rather than competing.

You combine with your partner to amplify each other's qualities whereas opposites cancel each other out. It is women's malleability that allows this combination to occur.

Masculinity is an active, creative force with femininity it's nurturing receptive complement. While RP men are encouraged to create a vision for their life, RP women are encouraged to create themselves in a manner that supports their men.

A man who has fully embraced his masculinity would only consider a woman relationship-worthy if she's able to complement his goals. This can mean she must be willing to transform herself in a manner that allows her to enter into his life seamlessly, joining him on his path.

Feminine energy is fluid — like water: a "soft landing", yielding, receptive, graceful, adaptable, restorative, and life-giving. Feminine traits men say they love:

  • Submissive, pleasant

  • Sexually enthusiastic

  • Childlike qualities (vulnerable, trusting, innocence, wonder)

All these traits are considered desirable because of implied malleability. A woman with these traits can follow her man's lead, adapting her focus towards him and his goals. Women who demonstrate feminine traits without adaptability (ie: holding back, refusing to change), are only appealing in the short term, or not at all.

The more masculine the man, the more he will feel an innate need to shape his woman, guiding her and raising her up to walk his path with him. A woman's willingness to transform gives her the power to calm his volatile nature and allow them as a couple to create the stable foundation for a thriving relationship.


This is something that I worked on awhile back with /u/durtyknees (who has not seen the final version). She gets credit for like 85% of this if you like it and if you hate it, I'll take the blame :-)


[–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor 18 points19 points  (6 children)

Women who demonstrate feminine traits without adaptability (ie: holding back, refusing to change)

Women often bend over backwards to gain the approval of their friends (we especially get assimilated by our "best friend" :p) and family, and most mothers are willing to bend over backwards to accommodate their children's needs (which is understandable and not wrong, as long as they're not over-indulgent).

But tell women they should make an effort to please their man, and the response is always: "Well, he should please me first!" or "He should accept me as I am, because I love myself." ..

[–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor[S] 13 points14 points  (5 children)

But tell women they should make an effort to please their man, and the response is always: "Well, he should please me first!" or "He should accept me as I am, because I love myself."

Once upon a time I told (outsiders might call it 'yelling') Husband: "I feel like I'm not good enough and you are always trying to change me".

Being a smart man, he deflected that fight at the time. Retrospectively of course he was trying to change me. I was all aimless raw material when we got together. Among other things, his nudges over the years helped me finish my degree, become a better driver, learn to shoot (and therefore to protect myself in his absence), fix my hormonal imbalance, exercise and stop behaving like my crazy mother

Not a single friend has ever pulled me in as positive a direction.

You pick a man you respect so that as you adapt to his life, you become a woman you respect.

[–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor 6 points7 points  (4 children)

You pick a man you respect so that as you adapt to his life, you become a woman you respect.

The man-picker would be quite shitty, as long as the self-respect module isn't properly installed yet.

"Self-respect" is an important topic for women that's not mentioned often enough in this sub, imo. Since men interpret the concept of "respect" differently from women, there's often some confusion when it's mentioned too.

[–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor[S] 4 points5 points  (3 children)

Yes, well someone created a very long outline of these topics that I'm working off of ;-). TBH I skipped over the self-respect/self-esteem topic as a starting point because of Whisper's recent post.

It may be unwise, but I start with the premise that women reading are fully developed humans. It's not adapting when you have no substance to begin with. Submission is not the same as blind obedience.

A woman who doesn't respect herself should be taking time away from dating to fix that problem first. So much is tied into that initial self respect. It allows you to vet well because you don't accept anyone who gives you attention. I don't see how you can trust anyone else if you can't trust yourself and that is tied in with self-respect. And I think submission is most effective / powerful / meaningful when you are capable but choose to step aside and defer to him. If you are an empty doormat then there is no where to step aside to, you are already on the floor taking whatever is given to you.

[–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor 6 points7 points  (2 children)

start with the premise that women reading are fully developed humans

Maybe this is just me (because of my crappy family background), but it took me a long time to figure things out on my own --- and I wouldn't consider myself "fully developed" before I reached my mid 20s (or even late 20s, until just before I married).

However, I also happily adapted to every single guy I dated in my long string of serial relationships, and was arguably a very different person after every relationship ended lol

For me, it's useful to not get hung up about my "self" or "identity" until I've collected enough relationship experience to feel more confident in making any permanent life-changing decisions like marriage.

[–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor[S] 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Maybe "fully developed" isn't quite what I am trying to get at because I don't think we actually become adults until around 25 anyway but....

I assume that women have a sense of self. That they can bend into pretzels around the man of the hour and not lose the sense of self. And that women reading here are not stupid or weak so they are capable of thinking about the theory posts and the advice and forming their own decisions and applying it all to their lives in a healthy manner.

This may not be the case for every woman, but if I have to write with the starting premise that everyone here is stupid...

...well honestly, in that case they should attach themselves to a high value man and surrender their lives to him.... yup the advice works either way, just on different levels. :-P

and was arguably a very different person after every relationship ended

I knew after my first bf that I would fit my life to the man I was with. By the time my husband entered the picture, I liked him both for all his positive qualities AND because I thought I'd enjoy being a part of his life.

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

with the starting premise that everyone here is stupid

haha Not to the point of "stupid" :p, but more about "not set in their ways yet" (anything from "undecided" or "unsure", to "not developed resistance to making significant changes yet"). Being flexible from a lack of fixed preferences is also not "weak".

It's easy for more experienced women to say "know what you want" and "decide for yourself", but when you're experience-challenged, and all you have is untested theory (like having a map to a place you've never visited), sometimes mundane/basic details may help put everything in a clearer perspective --- like having a solid base/context to build ideas and advice on, so everyone's on the same page.

attach themselves to a high value man and surrender their lives to him

While I don't disagree (not really :p lol), this advice relies too much on luck/ flawless vetting skills, and imposes an amount of responsibility on the man ("some assembly required" :p).

The more factors you rely on working correctly, the higher the chances that theory may not turn out as expected in practice. Too many variables = devil in the details.

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor 10 points11 points  (2 children)

Masculinity is an active, creative force with femininity it's nurturing receptive complement.

Which also means that when there's an exchange, the masculine is generally the (active) giver while the feminine is the receiver. The masculine is active and the feminine is passive.

This can be observed in many areas of marriage (and life). Beginning from the man making the first move while the woman presents herself as available for the move to be made. The man earning the money while the woman "nurtures" what already exists into something better. She turns raw ingredients into nurturing food.

I think the most difficult part of this idea is that of independence. If the masculine creates and the feminine maintains, the masculine is far more able to be independent while the feminine is far more likely to be dependent. This rubs many people the wrong way.

This is when it's a good idea to review this post regarding the male need to provide.

u/girlwithabike and u/durtyknees - great post.

[–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor 9 points10 points  (1 child)

I think the most difficult part of this idea is that of independence.

Greater flexibility (a woman's true strength, imo --- both mentally and physically) also includes the power of persuasion ("seduction" in other words, but it's more about charm, and less about sex).

I mean, if I said my marriage was male-led, it would be an outright lie :p

From the point of view of any observer, my husband seemingly enjoys all the perks of being Master of the Universe in our marriage, but I actually do a lot of the "leading" myself, by providing him ideas and options (opening "doors" of opportunity that would otherwise be closed to him) for his consideration.

The point that seems to be lost on many people is: it's not a competition for control.

Making the best of innate strengths of opposite genders (a harmonious combination of those strengths) is the whole point of a relationship --- imo, anyway.

People, regardless of gender, would have better relationships if they didn't have "gender wars" as their relationship theme song.

[–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I mean, if I said my marriage was male-led, it would be an outright lie :p

Exactly.

The point that seems to be lost on many people is: it's not a competition for control.

That's right. If done correctly, it's a dance.

[–]carrotriver 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That second to last paragraph hit HOME. Me & my fiancè irl.

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

I enjoyed this read and the links, thank you.

[–]Redfox1972 9 points10 points  (16 children)

Do you see the irony in your post?

Woman are precisely the victims of abuse (Stockholm syndrome) bc they do just what you have advocated, "adapting her focus towards him and his goals," "transform herself in a manner that allows her to enter his life," and "the woman's malleability."

This passivity of femininity and compliance towards men attracts more self-centered and controlling men, which is the very foundation of abuse.

Submission is fine provided the man cares enough about her hobbies, her time, her interests, to the point where she doesn't lose herself in the process of loving and following her man.

[–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor[S] 12 points13 points  (6 children)

There is a reason that we recommend good vetting above all else. The point of referencing Stockholm syndrome and war brides is that this facet of femininity exists - we can fight against it (feminism) or use it to our benefit to create strong marriages and subsequently strong families.

There is nothing that says a woman shouldn't continue to have her own hobbies, job, interests. In any relationship both partners influence each other over the course of a lifetime. If we assume, as we do here, that male lead relationships are stronger and more fulfilling, then this is a component that allows that to work with a high value man. If you chose an aimless man, then he'll be willing to take a back seat to your goals. I also believe that accepting that you can adapt is one of the first steps in accepting submission. It remains a choice. As /u/durtyknees points out above - we adapt to our friends, our babies, our families...its' part of the social nature of women and on an evolutionary scale, this adaptability aided in the continuation of genes.

There are women here in relationships that no one would call abusive who have allowed their men to shape them. I've seen it in my non-reddit life as well. These are stronger relationships than the ones where a woman goes her direction and the man goes his.

Psychopaths exist and can be found in any area of life. My gay BFF is a 6'3, masculine guy. When he was younger, his protective instinct was turned towards "saving the world" via participation in antifa. Petite young women told him that he needed to go out and fight the man on their behalf and he risked injury and prison for these women while they continued their educations unscathed. He didn't even have the promise of sex blinding him. These women tapped into instincts that he had an used them to their own benefit.

So sure, there will always be abusers in the world. We maintain friendships and family ties to protect against it. We vet well. We get out at the first signs of trouble. But most men are not abusive and are not psychopaths. You are arguing defensiveness against all men to protect from a few.

A small percentage of psychopaths does not mean that our natural instincts and abilities can't be used for the good of our relationships. This isn't to benefit men. Happy relationships make happy women.

[–]Elumamai 3 points4 points  (3 children)

we adapt to our friends, our babies, our families

Eh, reading things like this makes me feel kinda defective. I don't do this.

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[removed]

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [removed]

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

      I've reapproved it.

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [removed]

        [–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Your point is unclear to me, would you elaborate?

        [–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor 5 points6 points  (8 children)

        she doesn't loose herself in the process of loving and following her man.

        As much as I don't assume men are stupid, I'd like to think the majority of women aren't idiots, either.

        [–]Redfox1972 6 points7 points  (7 children)

        It's not that they are idiots but rather they get sucked in slowly and before they realize, the reality is that they have idealized the man to the point of forgetting who they are...hence the controlling relationship.

        Unfortunately, statistics speak volumes to the many cases of domestic abuse.

        [–]durtykneesEndorsed Contributor 8 points9 points  (0 children)

        they get sucked in slowly and before they realize

        You're not wrong.

        The first guy I dated (whom I almost married) was very similar to my abusive father, but I didn't recognize that fact until I brought that ex back for a visit to my hometown (I'm estranged from blood family, but I still love my hometown).

        Needless to say, I was so disturbed by the realization after that visit lol

        My ex wasn't a bad person at all, but the signs and potential were all there (rage problems especially, among many other things that I previously glossed over). Even if that ex never degenerate to the level of my father, I don't want to spend the rest of my life with a man (or anyone) who reminds me of my father.

        Ever since then, I'm a lot more critical of vetting potential partners, but I think many women fall into the trap of a vicious cycle of abuse, so it's definitely a problem.

        Women are now very fortunate to have easy access to a wealth of information to help them navigate relationships --- they just need to be smart to filter out the junk from good advice.

        [–]Guywithgirlwithabike2 Stars 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        Those statistics do speak volumes; unfortunately for the idealogues talking about domestic violence the statistics tend to contradict the mainstream narrative.

        According to a 2010 CDC study:

        26% of homosexual men have experienced domestic violence.

        29% of heterosexual men have experienced domestic violence.

        35% of heterosexual women have experienced domestic violence.

        44% of homosexual women have experienced domestic violence.

        So the experimentally-determined relationship seems to be:

        If you want to reduce domestic violence, reduce the number of women in a relationship and increase the number of men.

        If you want to increase domestic violence, reduce the number of men in a relationship and increase the number of women

        [–]loneliness-incEndorsed Contributor 3 points4 points  (4 children)

        Unfortunately, statistics speak volumes to the many cases of domestic abuse.

        Unfortunately, statistics of domestic abuse show that the percentage of who women abuse their husbands is very close to the percentage of men who abuse their wives.

        Moreover, women are more likely to physically hit their husbands than husbands hit their wives.

        Domestic violence is a very ugly thing and although the statistics for each gender varies (especially when you account for each specific type of abuse). Overall, men and women domestically abuse each other in similar numbers. Therefore, domestic abuse isn't a gendered issue. Please don't portray it as such.

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

        We need to be aware of the risks in all aspects of life but we can't not live because life is risky.

        The alternative is to be afraid of all men, hold ourselves back from even those we are closest to and live in neurotic fear of the world because some men hit their wives.

        [–]LateralThinker133 Stars 2 points3 points  (2 children)

        Overall, men and women domestically abuse each other in similar numbers.

        Yes and no. Currently in the US, when violence in a house is reciprocal, both men and women are about even in numbers. But when violence is NOT reciprocal (meaning one picks a violent fight and the other doesn't fight back) 2/3 of those fights are initiated by women.

        Women commit more DV currently than men do. Men are just better at it (testosterone for the... win?)

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

        I didn't know the exact statistics off hand so I was more general with them. What you say reinforces my point even more!

        Men are just better at it (testosterone for the... win?)

        One thing this shows is that men are better at regulating their emotions.

        [–]LateralThinker133 Stars 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        One thing this shows is that men are better at regulating their emotions.

        Well, they're certainly raised to do so. I like to recommend that people (generally women) read an old article on the subject called, "Your Feelings and Why They Don't Matter." (easy to find on Google)