Red Pill TheoryMen aren't "intimidated" by a sluts "sexual experience." They're disgusted. (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by [deleted]

I've heard many times that men are intimidated by women who have a lot of sex, or the woman's number makes them feel inadequate and then angry that the woman has had more "experience" than they have. People say stuff like, "He's afraid he'll never be as good as the other dicks," etc. This is all a bunch of bullshit, which tries to convince men what they're actually upset at is something different than what they think they're upset at.

It instead has to do with men's disgust at a woman devaluing herself for potential long-term relationships by showing she's prone to fuck losers on a whim. When a guy finds out that the girl he thought was loyal, loving and good for a long-term relationship actually sucked and fucked whatever moved, he feels upset, but his first thoughts aren't "Wow, I'm not sure I'm good enough for her anymore, look at all the guys she's fucked" It's closer to "I'm angry because I'm not sure I can have a long-term relationship with this girl. She's not virtuous, it's risky, and I can't really see her as the mother of my kids anymore." And his instincts are dead on. The caveman certainly wasn't intimidated by the cave-whore. She was the lowest of the low, and he's not going to dedicate himself to a long-term relationship with a huge risk, not when he's got girls who will dedicate themselves to him and only him.

If you're not feeling inadequate to a virtuous girl whom you value more. You're certainly not feeling inadequate to a slut whom you value less.

[–][deleted] 334 points334 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]2niczar 38 points39 points  (15 children)

Girls don't just fuck losers. They fuck the highest quality men they can get

Women fuck what evolution associated with high social value.

For example, bartenders have supernormal apparent social value (everyone appears to be looking up to them) yet their actual social value is often (though admittedly not necessarily) quite low.

[–]meekwai 8 points9 points  (14 children)

I always wondered why bartenders have such a high apparent social value. It is obvious they aren't doing anything particularly complicated, nor getting paid much.

[–]zephyrprime 20 points21 points  (4 children)

It's just the context dude. It's all about the actual physical social context. People at the bar are situationally lower status than the bartender. They have to go to him and seek his attention and give him something valuable to get anything out of him. There are tons of people vying for his attention. Mating instincts are basically brainless and primitive as fuck and can't tell the difference between what's in front of their eyes and real reality. As soon as he leaves the bar and is on a level playing field, his status plummets.

[–]2niczar 7 points8 points  (6 children)

They have all the appearances of being the boss.

[–]meekwai 2 points3 points  (5 children)

But they're only the boss of a beer tap... and that fact is not masked/hidden in any way.

[–]elchoma90 7 points8 points  (3 children)

They're usually good looking and well groomed and know how to have a conversation and/or handle people. Also: tips. It comes down to that I believe.

[–][deleted] 6 points6 points

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Can't count all the times when I was bartending that some honey would ask what time I was off and that she'd wait until I was done and we'd have a good time.

Then she'd be gone before I finished stocking the beer fridge.

No free drinks, just too drunk and horny to wait.

[–]2niczar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you trying to reason with the female animal instinct?

[–]squishles 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Forget the exchange of money part, social abstraction, hind brain doesn't give two shits about it.

They sit at the center, everyone talks to them, and talking to them gains drinks.

[–]DanReggins 71 points72 points  (56 children)

Be honest for a second. Girls don't just fuck losers.

Remember Michael's Story in the sidebar?

It hurt me to watch these girls go out of their way to pursue and spread their legs for complete losers. COMPLETE LOSERS. I’m talking: Hi I work in a carnival part time, I’m covered in tattoos, I have no job, I failed my minimum wage drug test and I’m in a band. These guys were losers.

I, too, am originally from So Cal and his experiences are not unique in any way to that region. I've lived other places, but So Cal was uniquely bad in that particular aspect.

My impression is that sluts there try to outdo their friends by competing with each other for the baddest boy they're fucking.

Upvote though because the rest of your post was very good.

[–]Dr_Acu1a 72 points73 points  (24 children)

I suppose loser in the male perspective and female perspective are two different things. Girls will fuck a guy that might be seen traditionally as a loser by other men i.e. no job, drug problems, etc. They won't fuck a guy that's seen as a loser by women.

[–]DanReggins 41 points42 points  (21 children)

"Dr_Acu1a is a nerdy med student. He spends his time studying and at the gym and doesn't even snort coke."

"OMG like what a dork! He can like, pay for the kid 10 years from now when I get knocked up by Tyrone tonight."

[–]FreshGold 40 points41 points  (7 children)

I am a nerdy med student that gyms 5+ times a week

Still in the anger phase I think after having my own mum call me 'husband material'

Just hoping that by the time I graduate and start working I will have internalised RP enough to never become the beta bucks a lot of women will see me as

[–]DanReggins 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I'm sure you'll be fine.

I'd much rather have my mum call me "husband material" than "alpha stud."

Christ, even my best friends wouldn't ever let me live that down.

"Whatever, bitch! My mom thinks I'm an alpha stud"

[–]Dr_Acu1a 16 points17 points  (2 children)

I like to dangle the med student thing in front of a slutty girl's face, kind of like, "you will never get this, but if you fuck me well enough, maybe I'll rethink it." Works well enough.

[–][deleted] 48 points49 points  (0 children)

But one day he break out of cage and he get this and we all laugh, high five!

[–]199639 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah it works really well. I'm young enough that most women are still just out riding the CC like their life depended on it, but when they hear that line they still see Beta Buck$$$$ print out in their eyes. You can be the unicorn- the alpha with buck$ they tamed.

[–][deleted] 6 points6 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]FusionPhysics 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just curious, what's wrong with nurses?

[–]FreshGold 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sounds like a good shout. I never usually mention what I study unless asked directly. The reaction is typically the same, and I haven't figured out a way to capitalise on the 'ooh, that must be hard' thing. Any advice?

[–]gopher_glitz 10 points11 points  (3 children)

snort coke

I think this is key. All the times I've witnessed beautiful girls with lots of potential dating 'loser' drug dealer types is because....well he was their dealer and hes got loads of cash....and coke for her to snort.

[–]a_nus 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm not kidding one of my plate's friends just said "omg I hooked up with Kyle last night. We chilled at his place and did coke."

[–]199639 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you're around those substances you see it pretty often. I mean it makes sense- people who love coke LOVE coke.

[–]Dr_Acu1a 6 points7 points  (6 children)

This is why you don't admit to being a med student until you've charmed them a little bit.

[–]blazingcopper 10 points11 points  (0 children)

And protect the hell out of your sperm

[–]1KyfhoMyoba 6 points7 points  (4 children)

Never, ever initially present as K selected. It's way hard to go from K to r, but not so hard to go from r to K.

[–]Dr_Acu1a 2 points3 points  (3 children)

What do the letters stand for?

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]nomadicwilk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

see what happens to tyrone in hopsin's: i can't decide


[–]Endorsed ContributorNiftyDolphin 5 points6 points  (0 children)

One is entertaining to talk about, one is not.

Our value, when provisioning is not an issue, is the entertainment we provide them. Either through discussing us to their friends(and the resultant status they gleen from entertaining their friends,) or the experiences/feeling we give them directly.

[–]Psycho_Delic 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Can confirm. Been the mostly unemployed, drug addict, pot dealer for most of my life.

Always swam in pussy. Decided I wanted the family man thing. Settled down a little bit. Changed my look. Pussy couldn't have been harder to find.

Shave my head again, grow out my beard. Now they all come flocking back. It's hilarious. Too bad I actually do love my gf right now. Hell, I've been very obviously hit on by 3 women since yesterday. And one of them... I say this with complete honesty. Blew me away with how beautiful, smart, and down to earth she was. But if I don't have my virtues, I don't have anything. So I just turn my head and walk away.

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 8 points9 points  (3 children)

I guess the term "loser" is equivalent to what these bad boys would call a "victim" in real life - scrawny, awkward nerds or uptight bores.

[–]DanReggins 7 points8 points  (2 children)

It's interesting you mention that. Now that I think back, a lot of the douchebags I particularly resented all had strong victim cards that they played.

"I'm oppressed because I'm a native american" (said the white guy who refused to listen to his parents and dropped out of high school because of muh white oppression.)

"My poor baby is out because he didn't get to have his meth fix today!" :'(

As some would say -- all of that was 3edgy5me.

[–]zephyrprime 13 points14 points  (1 child)

If you ever spend any time with criminals and ex-cons, you would know that they all have a huge victim complex. They pretend to be victims the same as girls do for the same reason - to manipulate people and get preferential treatment.

[–]blinkyone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is why he have preemptive aggression/rage/hostility towards almost everyone.

[–]1sam_ba_lam 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It is a paradox but exemplifies the natural order. Thus, the more you care, the less they do. Which is not saying to treat others with an element of disdain, but with an air which is fluid and able to move in a way which old learnings have no province.

[–]zephyrprime 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's true. Chicks love losers - why doesn't Shady_Mother_Fucker know this?

[–]Niemamnick 53 points54 points  (29 children)

Girls don't just fuck losers.

That's exactly why drug dealers, gang members and low-lives get more poon than nerdy students who will make good money in the future.

I'm sorry, but the women who've slept with me on a matress on the floor didn't care about me not having any money or a career. In 6 years they will care about those things, when ironically their looks start to fade and they have nothing to offer but used up vaginas.

[–][deleted] 24 points24 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]rotten_eye_joe 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, and the past men's best traits accumulate, so if she's fucked skydivers and soldiers and ballet dancers, you now need to be a skydiving balletdancing mercenary to get her wet.

[–]Endorsed ContributorFLFTW16 36 points37 points  (25 children)

You think a drug dealer is a loser because... why? You think a gang banger is a loser because... why?

A man that openly breaks the law, thumbs his nose at authority because he is authority. He must have a lot of testosterone. Any woman that mates with him might have a son that also has lots of T and spread his seed far and wide, winning the mating game.

[–]reason_is_why 4 points5 points  (23 children)

Drug dealers and gang bangers end up in jail or dead. These are not the outcomes most women would want for their children. There is a difference between being a criminal and being a man.

[–]Endorsed ContributorDownvoteToDisagree 53 points54 points  (1 child)

You're presuming too much rationality. The women who fuck the criminals are driven by their hamsters and tingles, not a clear minded assessment of long term income potential, etc.

[–]vaker 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Women's SMV detector is extremely localized both in space and in time preference. Who is the surviving alpha male around the camp fire tonight? Who is the alpha male within 15 yards in the bar tonight?

Whether the 'local alpha' will be a brain surgeon or a death-row inmate in ten years doesn't matter tingle-wise tonight. If the future death-row inmate looks tough tonight, the tingles are for him.

[–]Endorsed ContributorFLFTW16 30 points31 points  (4 children)

Drug dealers and gang bangers end up in jail or dead. These are not the outcomes most women would want for their children. There is a difference between being a criminal and being a man.

In general I don't disagree with you but you have to remember that our species is ~200,000 years old and agriculture based civilization has been around for ~5,000 years.

The idea that written laws matter is a recent novelty. What gets a woman's vagina moist and what helps to prop up a recent novelty in our 200k history can be very different things.

Drug dealers and gang bangers do end up becoming the most powerful men. They often become the government. They gain legitimacy through history and propaganda. The Emperors of Rome were pirates and murderers. Kim Jong Un and his father and grandfather were gang bangers. etc etc etc. Take a giant step back and look at what raw power actually is. A drug dealer and a gang banger is a U.S. President allowing the CIA to traffick drugs in order to sell arms.... etc etc.

[–][deleted] 7 points7 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]vaker 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Here is the link (again) to the sexy son hypothesis.

[–]Azzmo 0 points1 point  (3 children)

This statement has absolutely zero relevance in the evolutionary context. His assertion is that those characteristics tickle her monkey brain, which is what ultimately matters if pursuing easy sex.

[–]reason_is_why 0 points1 point  (2 children)

There are trade offs to spreading seed and not sticking around to tend the crop. Such offspring are at a disadvantage. There are advantages to staying out of prison and staying alive, evolutionarily and otherwise.

[–]Azzmo 0 points1 point  (1 child)

What can you tell me about the prison systems in 100,000 BC and also 10,000 BC when our species' emotional wiring was being created? As far as I know it didn't exist and the daily situation likely encouraged males to be somewhat aggressive.

[–]reason_is_why 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As far as I know, early man did not have a functioning correctional system. By 10,000 BC, however, slavery and death were fairly common ways of dealing with prisoners. Rampant aggression is not rewarded in human society.

Some aggression, yes. But the sociopath, the psychopath,and the narcissist? No.

The juvenile male without a mate and the bachelor are both threats to social stability. These are the lowest ranking people in the social structure, after the children, the women and the married men.

Should they also be malignant then they are definitely at an evolutionary disadvantage.

[–]SupALupRT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

gang bangers are losers, drug dealers depends.

[–]blinkyone 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Drug dealers are always "in the moment" and communicate with implicit and explicit intent with everyone.

[–]Endorsed ContributorWe_Are_Legion 10 points11 points  (1 child)

♂ Well put and strikingly visceral. Lets make you more visible. Have a mars.

[–]Upvote Me!trpbot[M] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Confirmed: 1 point awarded to /u/Shady_Mother_Fucker by We_Are_Legion. [History]

[This is an Automated Message]

[–]DaphneDK 40 points41 points  (13 children)

It's why nonchalant use of phrases like "boy friend material" or "He'd make a good husband" are so infuriating. They don't even lie to themselves about the fact that some men are for fucking and some men are for long term financial security. Point that shit out though and watch their hamsters go super sonic.

Some girls are wifey-material, others are just good for sex. How's that different?

[–]RedPillRally 47 points48 points  (3 children)

When a man refers to a woman as "wife material" he is saying she is superior to other women.

When a woman refers to a man as "husband material" she is resigning him to the idea that he is a provider for her leeching.

[–]reason_is_why 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Society is for mothers and children. It is a breeding colony. Men have no function outside of protecting and providing for this colony.

When a woman refers to a man as "husband material" she is bestowing upon him the right to join this colony completely. It is her colony. They are her children.

Men without wives are a threat to this colony. They prey upon the females without concern for outcomes. They are likely to take rather than earn. They destabilize society.

[–][deleted] 5 points5 points

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 86 points87 points  (2 children)

I agree it is not worth getting upset with how girls do that, but there is a minor difference.

Wifey-material is basically the "alpha" equivalent of female (beautiful, not too crazy, well managed hamster, responsible, feminine, sexual). Basically what a woman should aspire to be - when we call a girl wife material, it's a compliment of highest order.

When a guy is called BF material or husband material, it's calling him low value and beta. It's straight up saying "I don't really respect you as a man that turns women on and as a desirable person, but I think you're sweet and would cater to my logistical needs."

Now of course, if you hear girls calling you this, you shouldn't get mad at them because you earned it for yourself by being a chump. Appreciate the warning that you're in beta territory and make a change.

But it definitely is different; there is great condescension in calling a guy "BF material" or "husband material" and for one of these betas who constantly gets friendzoned, it's basically rubbing his face in it. Whereas calling a girl Wife material is saying that she is awesome enough to risk your 50% of your net worth for.

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Whereas calling a girl Wife material is saying that she is awesome enough to risk your 50% of your net worth for.

And willingly spending the rest of your life with her, gladly forego any other women for her, and have children with her.

Thought this should be mentioned as well.

[–]1kingofpoplives 11 points12 points  (0 children)

When a guy is called BF material or husband material, it's calling him low value and beta.

This is not entirely true. If a girl says this about a guy she isn't interested in fucking, then yes, she is calling him a beta. If she says that about a guy she is fucking, or badly wants to fuck, it can mean the man embodies alpha as well as provider traits. There is a whole matrix of charisma/sex appeal and provider traits and the man who has high levels of both is the male unicorn.

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Some girls are wifey-material, others are just good for sex. How's that different?

Because of the lopsided dynamics of the hookup culture.

For women, commitment is more "expensive" in sexual market currency than sex, which means that a woman usually can't "afford" genuine commitment from a man who is more attractive (not just physically, but overall) than she is - however, it's a lot more likely that she can "afford" sex with him. Because for the former, she has to be the most attractive woman that man can reasonably expect to get, but for the latter, it's enough if she's just "attractive enough" in his eyes. Women who are prone to try to trap guys into commitment by having sex with them are also a lot more likely to pull out every trick in the book to give them the best experience ever; though in the end, most of them arguably fail at that and have to settle for a less impressive guy - someone they can actually "afford" to make commit (simply because there are fewer very attractive men out there than women who spend their best years exclusively going for them). For that reason the guy they're settling with also tends to get worse sex than the other guys before him.

For men, it's the inverse - sex is more expensive in sexual market currency than commitment, which means that they usually can't afford no-strings-attached-sex with women who are equally or more attractive than themselves. The result is that when it comes to casual sex, men are willing to "date down" (in terms of overall attractiveness, not status), while they only offer genuine long term-commitment for women they consider good enough to make them pass over all other opportunites that may present themselves in the present and future. How good/attractive/young/whatever/baggage-free that woman actually is varies depending on the attractiveness of the guy.

This is also the reason why the amount of affection felt towards the partner is so lopsided in many relationships when an allegedly formerly promiscuous woman is involved - because while she had loads of sexual encounters with men who were more attractive than the one she finally had to settle with, a man tends to wife up a woman who at least compares favorably to his former partners and almost certainly is more attractive than those women he only had sex with (if he was able to get casual sex, that is).

[–]logi_thebear 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Because wifey material is still good for sex. Men don't "settle down" (at least the smart ones don't), they find a woman who they like a lot and are attracted to.

[–]evilassaultweapon 7 points8 points  (0 children)

It's classic feminist clap trap, identify problem, blame men for problem, continue with actions that create problems.

That's some top shelf shit right there.

[–]Incubuns 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Come on, let's get this guy a delta for fuck's sake.

[–]2 Senior Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ride the scooter till death? Well she can ride his wallet like that, if you think she will stay with her BB if something better pops up, you're mistaken. She's out of there like a kernel of corn ensconced in diarrhea.

[–]Entrefut 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On the fucking spot... Damn

[–]chachachaaaa 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They don't even lie to themselves about the fact that some men are for fucking and some men are for long term financial security.

Is this really any different from the TRP philosophy of "fuck vs marry", though? It's almost as though men and women are two sides of the same coin.

[–]ASK_ABOUT_MY_SPECIAL 110 points110 points [recovered]

True. As they say, we avoid stepping on dog shit because it's dirty, not because we're afraid of it.

[–]MarriedRP 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Damn that is a great piece of wisdom.

[–]Modredpillschool 8 points9 points  (1 child)

As they say, we avoid stepping on dog shit because it's dirty, not because we're afraid of it.

[–]Upvote Me!trpbot[M] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Confirmed: 1 point awarded to /u/ASK_ABOUT_MY_SPECIAL by redpillschool. [History]

[This is an Automated Message]

[–][deleted] 27 points28 points  (5 children)

It's not intimidation, it's an instinctive aversion, similar to how you might feel about carrion; even if you're hungry, something inside your head sets off warning bells saying "don't do it". Why? quite simply, you're worse off in the long term. It also explains why we love sluts for short term flings, but relationship material? No fucking way.

In our caveman days, a slut meant you could end up raising some other guy's offspring. The reason behind why we are averse to sluts does not seem mysterious to me, and it does not have anything to do with being "intimidated".

[–]Incubuns 6 points7 points  (4 children)

Not just in cave man days. No one knows for sure what proportion of pregnancy are a result of cuckolding, but it's a lot more than any man with self respect should be comfortable with.

[–]TRP VanguardCyralea 4 points5 points  (3 children)

Between 4-10% of children are raised by non-biological fathers today. Imagine what the prevalence was before DNA testing and contraception.

[–]meekwai 5 points6 points  (2 children)

what the prevalence was before DNA testing

Difficult to guess whether it was higher or lower. Strong societal shaming of female promiscuity surely was a counterweight.

[–]back_in_towns 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Oh no, it was much higher. Men today actually have it much better, which is the crazy thing. That number ranged up to 1/3 of all children ever born in some studies.

[–]meekwai 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Would you mind posting a link? Not doubting you, just want to read more on the subject.

[–]TH0UGHTP0LICE2 28 points29 points  (3 children)

There's a thread in 2xchromosomes right now where some slut can't figure out why her man is acting different after she told him she had fucked 73 guys by age 22

SEVENTY THREE COCKS by 22 years of age.

Assuming she started at 16 that's a new cock, every single month, for 6 years straight.

Sorry ladies, but if your pussy lips have carpet burn...you arent "liberated" you are a disgusting whore

[–]Redpiller456 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Holy shit.....73.

I remember sleeping with a girl that said her count was around there. She pressed me for a relationship and I just ignored her texts and calls. Thanks, but no thanks babe. This was a girl that was tired of riding the carousel and magically decided she wanted a relationship. Feel bad for the dude that gets tied down to that.

[–]VegasHostTre 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Man I wish you had the link to that.

[–]TH0UGHTP0LICE2 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just go look for that post. I dont wanna link it and violate a rule and piss off the mods.

[–]Endorsed ContributorUsherai 72 points73 points  (14 children)

True. The exact same thing applies for "career" or "intelligence". Those things generally mean A. She'll never place you or her family as a priority and B. She's an obnoxious cunt who always thinks she knows better than you. It's not intimidation, it's that those traits aren't desirable for a woman in an LTR.

Of course, it's so much easier and self-assuaging to just blame men being intimidated, especially with a horde of white knights to validate that idea.

[–]1cover20 39 points40 points  (10 children)

If she has high SAT or GRE scores, like really high, OK I'll say she's intelligent.

If she is just an expert at women's studies or has lots of "experience", I won't call her intelligent.

[–]Endorsed ContributorUsherai 24 points25 points  (9 children)

And none of those will ever "intimidate" you.

[–]Endorsed ContributorAFPJ 23 points24 points  (4 children)

If she has high SAT or GRE scores, like really high, OK I'll say she's intelligent.

This wouldn't intimidate me, in fact I'd say having smart kids would be great.

If she is just an expert at women's studies or has lots of "experience",

The thought of inserting my penis into this, on the other hand, scares me shit-less. Some deep, dark evolutionary drive compels me to die of thirst before letting my genetic code mix with that of a thing fitting this description.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (3 children)

I'm intimidated, a little bit, by higher SAT scores than mine were, but that's because only 7% of people had higher SAT scores than me, and 6% of women, and most of those went to elite prep schools and are probably outside any circles I'd end up in.

Mostly I'd be more INTERESTED in a truly intelligent girl. Most people that think they're 'intelligent' are not.

Getting into anything but the top 50 colleges (US) is mostly just a sign that your Upbringing wasn't shit. Getting a 3.X in English just means you were a good student. Getting a 4.0 in women studies means you're a robot. I spent 4 years learning twisted fucked up lies! The appeal of Women's Studies is how easy the ideas are to grasp, and still be applicable for yourself. I'm genderqueer! That's just code for, "I've never fit in with the pretty girls, and so I feel awkward and different, but now instead of just being ostracized I can relabel my pain as being due to my Special Snowflakeitis."

[–]Redpiller456 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I wouldn't put much stock into a SAT or GRE score. It's easy to prepare for and it doesn't test something that is inherently difficult. I mean honestly, basic algebra, some trigonometry, and simple questions about percentages that a high school student is trained for. The english part of the exam? Basic reading comprehension and some drills in, "Hey, did you memorize these words that you will never use in your life again?'

A truly intelligent person, in my mind, is a woman (or man) that has excelled in a difficult major. This person doesn't just get "good grades" but knows how to solve a problem that is scientific in nature (making an observation, developing a hypothesis, and drawing upon scientific literature you read months ago to make an important connection). It's those types of individuals that are intelligent and stand apart from the rest.

[–]Endorsed ContributorWe_Are_Legion 7 points8 points  (1 child)

On the one hand, I don't fault any man choosing not to prioritize those qualities. Simply because not only do they not add to attraction but in the present culture, only make an already difficult job of control harder.

On the other hand, counter-argument time: The second caveat is what needs a solution. The problems you listed are symptoms, with the disease being: You are less of a prize for her hypergamy when she is educated.

The answer obviously, is to maintain your lead, if not in education, in some other way(even emotional maturity counts). Be better. Confidence, success, experience, game.

The non-redpill comfort answer would be to pick a dumb woman. But then you are trading an interesting existence with an interesting partner and your own self-improvement and success well, for the illusion of loyalty(because just face it, if you're a prize to her, count on the fact that there are others on the social ladder much higher than you, including in game). A man who picks an idiot in an effort to choose the easy road to avoiding problems is likely to have it backfire. Idiots are more likely than informed people to listen to solely their emotions. They really have fewer other voices in their head. They're going to cheat, they're going to be needy, need maintenance, they're going to be crazy as a norm... just a world of unpleasantness.

Women's studies teaches drivel. But a girl who's passed a respectable level of education (at least a respectable bachelors) will strike you as a for more tolerable presence in your life than the kind of bitch who does nothing with her life.

[–]reigntastic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I tend to prefer smart women. If they've got a huge ego, then it's a waste of time, but it helps to have some substance worth talking to on occasion.

[–]1cover20 59 points60 points  (12 children)

It's also true that a woman who has had so many dicks has lost the bonding mechanism that should operate after having sex with a man. It's chemically induced in her by the action of oxytocin. But if she's overcome that 10 or more times, she is no longer controlled by it (obviously) and she won't bond to you either.

If they want to call that "strong" and me "intimidated" they can do so. I would call them "damaged" and me "reasonable" to avoid them for LTR.

[–]squishles 1 point2 points  (0 children)

lost the bonding mechanism

You're mixing correlation with causality, someone with a high bonding tendency would be be less likely to divorce in the first place. And no such fucking thing, that really just amounts to desire for stability. There's no actual mechanism specific to it, bet your ass given a safe shot, she'd check to see what another dick that makes her tingle tastes like =/

[–]Spookybear_ 4 points5 points  (10 children)

Loosing the bonding mechanism? Do you have a source on that? Men have the same mechanism, do they not?

[–]Patriarchysaurus 31 points32 points  (7 children)


"The results presented in this article replicate findings from previous research: Women who cohabit prior to marriage or who have premarital sex have an increased likelihood of marital disruption. Considering the joint effects of premarital cohabitation and premarital sex, as well as histories of premarital relationships, extends previous research. The most salient finding from this analysis is that women whose intimate premarital relationships are limited to their husbands—either premarital sex alone or premarital cohabitation—do not experience an increased risk of divorce. It is only women who have more than one intimate premarital relationship who have an elevated risk of marital disruption. This effect is strongest for women who have multiple premarital coresidental unions. These findings are consistent with the notion that premarital sex and cohabitation have become part of the normal courtship pattern in the United States. They do not indicate selectivity on characteristics linked to the risk of divorce and do not provide couples with experiences that lessen the stability of marriage."

The blog contains data from (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00444.x/abstract)

[–]Spookybear_ -1 points0 points  (6 children)

The data does prove fucking around increases risk of fucking around again. I'm interested in the specifics of the bonding mechanism being present, then no longer being present. Although I suppose such a study would be hard to conduct "Only taking virgins. Need to fuck 20 guys"

[–]Redpiller456 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the context is important to. The data above does not distinguish between sex that is casual and in a relationship. I think women who relate sex = love and only have sex in a committed relationship, even if they had 1 or 2 sexual partners, is an excellent candidate for wife material.

[–]TRP VanguardCyralea 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Men are far less impacted by it. Women regret casual sex far more than men do, whereas men regret missing sexual opportunities more than women.

The innate aversion to sluts is something that exists in all men to a degree, this is partly responsible.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (2 children)

Yup. Had a girl I was fucking ask how many I've fucked, I answered honestly cause I didn't give a fuck what she thought (13 at the time) and she said she had done more. With a smarmy little smile as if to say she had done better, I promptly left and didn't talk to her again.

[–]gg_s 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Iron Rule of Tomassi # 2

NEVER, under pain of death, honestly or dishonestly reveal the number of women you’ve slept with or explain any detail of your sexual experiences with them to a current lover.


[–]1kick6 12 points13 points  (0 children)

tries to convince men what they're actually upset at is something different than what they think they're upset at.

This is called "gaslighting" and it's what the blue pill is in it's entirety: trying to convince you that what you're observing with your own senses is wrong. Because it's so pervasive...its pretty goddamn effective. So effective, that blue pillers build their ego around what they're told they're seeing, and get mad if you try to show them the truth.

[–]Endorsed Contributorleftajar 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The fundamental problem with female sluttery is this: many more men will fuck a particular woman than wife her. As a result, women can fuck a higher caliber of man than she can get to stick around.

And this makes total sense. To a guy, there are three levels of female quality. In ascending order: Wouldn't fuck, would fuck, and would seriously date.

Sluts are content to be a "category 2" women for very many men. The problem is solipsism. They don't understand those three categories. So they traipse around the countryside, fucking every alpha in sight, getting accustomed to that level of guy. When they're ready to settle down, what quality of guy do they want? The same they are used to.

This is what women secretly mean when they wail, "where are all the good men?" What they are really lamenting, is their inability to get peak SMV guys to settle with them. But, like everything else, they put responsibility on men for not being "good" enough.

Sluts aren't only harming their future beta husbands, they're harming themselves.

[–]2jagrmeister721 27 points28 points  (0 children)

High cock count isn't just an indicator of future infidelity; it also suggests massive psychological issues in a woman. That's a lifelong headache no man wants to invite into his life. If avoiding something out of common sense is being "intimidated" by it, then I'm intimidated by products on Amazon with negative reviews, intimidated by restaurants that are completely empty, and intimidated by Justin Bieber albums.

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

I'd agree men are not intimidated by a high count. Most experienced men know that an unusually high partner count usually indicates other issues lurking just below the surface.

[–]2Overkillengine 39 points40 points  (8 children)

It's just another shaming tactic.

The sheer majority of men won't be remotely intimidated by an "experienced" woman. In actuality the reaction is varying ratios of disgust, disinterest, or amusement at their insistence that you should be falling all over yourself to pursue them.

Why the hell would any rational man want sloppy 32nds?

[–]Boss_Monkey 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This is pure projection from the females. they may be intimidated by men who have a lot of experience, but the reverse is disgust.

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (5 children)

Yup. People can stick their fingers in their ears and cry that # doesn't matter and that years of casual sex "doesn't change a girl at all".

Every man who has sampled from both groups can attest, there is a massive difference in personality between girls under 5 guys and girls over 10 guys. And then a big difference in personality again from 10 to 30.

Occasionally a girl with 5 past dicks will act like a girl with 30 past dicks in her sentiment and behavior. But no girl under the sun with 30 past dicks has the ability to be like a girl of 5 dicks in sentiment and behavior, it is simply not possible. That's the key difference; a girl can be lower value than her # count implies, but she can never be higher value than her # count.

I've seen men get this confused too. They see a chick who is not at all slutty, but still crazy and hypergamous (perhaps she had 3 relationships only, but she swung hard from each one whenever she had a slightly higher value guy in the picture). So they infer "well, I guess # count doesn't matter, since this chaste girl is as crazy as the slut girl."

What kind of logic is that; yes the chaste girl might be like the slut, but she might also be a fairly RP woman. Whereas the slut is already confirmed as that, she has no potential of being a fairly RP woman, it is a dead end.

[–]reason_is_why 4 points5 points  (4 children)

The counting of dicks seems technically difficult. How does anyone know these numbers?

Believe her?


[–][deleted] 19 points20 points  (3 children)

It is very, very simple actually. Just act like you're down with the whole "sluts are empowered" nonsense and like it's no big deal. Use the fact that women want info about you badly to get answers out of her. Act a little impressed, like "damn you're a cool chick" whenever she confesses something. She will start to brag up all of her exploits, because deep down women crave having their pasts validated. As soon as they meet that "nonjudgmental guy" they start to blab, they cannot help it, they love feeling accepted for whatever they have done.

When you combine this will a bit of experience, you can easily detect when she's trickle-truthing, when there's more to a story, and so on. You will know what range she is in if you are crafty.

No one said to ask her though. That is the best way for her to lie once, and then focus on having to maintain that lie and not drop her guard. Mine information through her responses to various stimuli, once you know how to read women, they can fudge the number to a minor degree, say 11 versus 14, but they cannot fudge the ballpark at all.

[–]username1153 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Some times you can even get it out one of her friends. If you play your cards right, are fairly red pill, and gain the respect of her friends, sometimes one of them might catch a crush on you which you can use to your advantage. Usually girls are not very loyal and have some kind competition between them, and in order to gain an upper hand they might slip and and blurt out little secrets about each other. Again, it's easier if done under the guise that your are down with the "sluts are empowered" idea.

[–]1KyfhoMyoba 4 points5 points  (0 children)

And then after this remember: In vino veritas.

[–]reason_is_why 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These methods may yield data, but I'm not so sure it is good data. You can't be too careful when it comes to quality of data. It is too easy to delude yourself into believing what you want to believe.

[–]TheYellowPill 24 points25 points  (1 child)

Men are intimidated by sexually experienced sluts as much as women are intimidated by intelligent nerds.

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 11 points12 points  (0 children)

That's actually an apt comparison.

Stupid women will be intimidated by nerds but hamster their inferiority complex as the guy being "nerdy", "a neckbeard", or "arrogant" (think of Penny in TBBT), smart women who can actually hold a candle to the guy in question just think he's awkward and socially inept.

On the other hand, sexually inexperienced guys will go sour grapes on sluts and call them out on it, while confident (and sufficiently smart) guys will probably not be as outspoken about what they're thinking, but nevertheless abstain from putting a ring on it.

[–]VegasHostTre 23 points24 points  (3 children)

"He's afraid he'll never be as good as the other dicks"

In a way, there right about this. I'm afraid your an Alpha Widow, who's standards I can never live up to for whatever reason the hamster spins. Thus in an LTR, you will belittle me to no end for my perceived beta behavior, so I respectfully decline a relationship of any kind with you.

[–]trialByException 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Exactly, a woman's past affects her view of the relationship.

Most women are not capable of loving and respecting a man they thought was their equal. They will ONLY truly respect someone who they believe:

  • is more experienced than them.
  • is more knowledgeable than them.

Whether a woman knows as much as the man or not, if a woman BELIEVES she knows as much as him, she will not respect him.

So even if smart man wants a woman who will respect him in life and in the bedroom, no matter how much he has to offer, he seeks out one who is way less experienced than him.

[–]Endorsed Contributor30303030303030 5 points6 points  (3 children)

When a guy finds out that the girl he thought was loyal, loving and good for a long-term relationship actually sucked and fucked whatever moved

"if" he finds out

unfortunately majority of men never will

[–]LasherDeviance 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I automagically assume, in the door, with 90% of hoes, that they were/are rampant cock-gobblers. Usually how they fuck, and how quickly they fuck you from baseline is a good indicator.

Also, it can be assumed that if a chick uses any kind of mind altering substances regularly, especially weed or coke, that she's a Class-1 turboslut.

[–]Endorsed Contributor30303030303030 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I automagically assume, in the door, with 90% of hoes, that they were/are rampant cock-gobblers

And you are right, but you are one of 66k, that's a drop in the sea.

[–]VegasHostTre 1 point2 points  (0 children)

90% is 9.99999 percentage points too low my man. They are all whores to some extent.

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (2 children)

It's the truth, isn't it?

Here's the issue.

Should women be allowed to fuck whoever they want as much as they want? Yes, of course.

Are women bad people for doing this? No, I mean I do think there is a high correlation of low self-esteem and other mental problems when you're a woman and sleep with a lot of men, despite what feminists might try to push on us.

But, here's the disconnect. Are men going to be naturally turned off by a girl that sleeps with a lot of other guys? Are they going to be naturally disgusted? YES.

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

And furthermore, they are entitled to do what they'd like, and we are entitled to hold our own preferences/orientation. For many of us, this means not engaging in LTR/marriage with sluts or "reformed sluts".

[–]TRP VanguardCyralea 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Intimidation is the wrong word. I'm not intimidated by a fat slob who's pining for my dick, I'm disgusted. I'm not intimidated by a woman who's seen more cocks than a poultry farmer, I'm disgusted.

They use 'intimidated' because it absolves them of blame and shifts the fault to men. Typical feminist shaming techniques.

[–][deleted] 10 points10 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]TRP VanguardCyralea 7 points8 points  (1 child)

They're the same women, just at different points in life. Former carousel riders are the ones that end up destroying homes and divorce-raping men when they get bored.

Plating up sluts is not the issue, it's trying to find a quality woman in the midst of the slut-parade that's difficult.

[–]2Overkillengine 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Applicable lyrics:

> Now this this is one of them occasions
> Where the homies not doin' it right
> I mean he found him a hoe that he like
> But you can't make a hoe a housewife
> And when it all boils down you gonna find in the end
> A bitch is a bitch, but a dog is a man's best friend
> So what you found you a hoe that you like
> But you can't make a hoe a housewife

[–]1 Endorsed Contributormordanus 7 points8 points  (9 children)

I honestly cant think of anything in a woman that would make her intimidating.

[–]rotten_eye_joe 0 points1 point  (2 children)

If she was a trained fighter, that might be a little intimidating.

[–]1 Endorsed Contributormordanus 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Not really. The best female trained fighters can barely compete with decently trained males. They just lack in so many areas in fighting.

[–]rotten_eye_joe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I personally would only be intimidated because I'm not trained as a fighter. Still, I have worked out with female fighters and didn't find them intimidating in the gym setting.

[–]GSpotAssassin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I once met an ex-gf's previous fuck buddy not long after I started dating her and I was turned off not by the fact that he was a fuck buddy or that she had one but by the fact that he seemed like a total loser. Like, you'd let that creature get up in there? (Seriously, he was dumb and had fucked up teeth and chain smoked, and she looked like a shorter version of the actress Elisabeth Shue...)

I've met other women's exes and when they're intimidating, that is hot.

Social proof is a bitch

Anyway, that relationship didn't last long

[–]Bababooey87 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Wow... just made me realize that I was a loser that this girl wanted to fuck.

It seemed way too easy to get her, and I thought she was out of my league.

She did have some issues though.. Not sure if her being a former heroin addict, raver, and huge player in "the game" had anything to do it....also had 3 kids and was ten years older than me

[–]FallenHighSchoolJock 6 points7 points  (46 children)

To be honest I am intimidated. I know it's easy for women to rack up a ton of partners but it makes me feel immature. Not the most alpha sentiment and I'd never show it but it's true.

[–]beltwaytr 19 points20 points  (15 children)

You need to understand women are able to rack up partners because society has raised generations of vagina worshiping males. As much as it pains me to say it our gender can't seem to grasp the concept of saying no to pussy.

Almost 99.9% of what we do is to "get" the girl. Only those that practice TRP teachings really understand whats going on. Even then there are guys here that won't turn down vagina. Once you get the fact society raised men to chase vagina relentlessly, then you won't be intimidated by a chick who can "get any man she wants".

[–]reason_is_why 3 points4 points  (3 children)

Female hypergamy/promiscuity is not because "society has raised generations of vagina worshiping males" nor is it because "society raised males to chase vagina". It is a biological truth that males are programmed by nature to spread their seed. Likewise, the deceptive strategies employed by females are crucial to the fitness of the species.

[–]beltwaytr 1 point2 points  (1 child)

While we do have a biological need to reproduce you can't sit their with a straight face and tell me most men haven't been bred to worship the "all mighty ass". There are way too many examples of this in today's society.

[–]JackPallino 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Regardless of the truth of that statement, men would still choose to fuck as much as they could. You don't need to respect women to fuck them. In fact, the absence of respect makes it entirely easier.

[–]FallenHighSchoolJock 1 point2 points  (5 children)

I know all of that, I just can't help feeling the way I do.

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Almost 99.9% of what we do is to "get" the girl.

That's also the reason why boys and girls are, or rather were, raised the way they are.

Classic gender roles said that boys should go out, butt heads with each other, and excel in classes and sports, while women were expected to be pretty, kind, and keep their legs closed.

That kind of child rearing got a lot of flak in the last 40-50 years for pidgeonholing children into stereotypical gender roles, but what it ultimately did was preparing children to have the highest SMV possible for their according age when they were expected to get married.

[–]beltwaytr 1 point2 points  (0 children)

True and the new gender roles are in no way better. Boys are demonized and no longer taught to excel in school or sports, while woman are raised to be narcissistic, manipulative, and promiscuous.

It's literally killed marriage, high SMV of women, and has even managed to nearly kill masculinity. If I had to choose the lesser of two evils...

[–]vaker 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That kind of child rearing got a lot of flak

Through thousands of years human societies have converged on certain traditions because those created and sustained societies that were evolutionarily successful. Then a bunch of dumbass progressives decided 'they know better' and proceeded to destroy the highest technical civilization on Earth.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (6 children)

You need to fix by getting your experience up. Be the cock carousel rather than be bitter and bothered by women riding the carousel. This is where the self-help component of TRP comes in; you are honest enough with yourself to identify a beta trait and you know you have to change it.

The only way to do it is to take women off the pedestal. Men and women are just animals thrown into the same fishbowl; of course they are going to fuck constantly. To internalize this reality, however, you have to be someone who's fucking frequently as well. It stops bothering you when you know their little black book isn't shit compared to yours.

[–]whitey_male 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am similar. I don't want to be rejected by a slut knowing that scumbags have gone through her. Sometimes girls do this just to exercise power and piss you off. Knowing how much damage it might do to your self esteem. That the scumbag got to fuck the shit out of her and now shes forcing you back to redtube. I am much happier to be rejected by someone with genuine standards.

I certainly learned that the hard way. Obviously the idea is to use pua and tread more carefully.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (21 children)

Why does it make you feel immature? Like, not fully developed/experienced sexually enough to keep up?

[–]FallenHighSchoolJock 2 points3 points  (9 children)

Pretty much yeah. I never said it was reasonable but that is how it makes me feel.

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

I was just trying to understand what you meant. It seems like a common thing to be "jealous" about the amount of hookups, etc. You see/hear it all over.

[–]Patriarchysaurus 5 points5 points [recovered]

To be honest here: I totally get this.

I've only slept with 8 women at 22 years old, and though I know I could have slept with more (women hit on me a lot), poor self esteem and desire for true companionship over sex took a big toll on ability to get with women who provided no comfort. Fucking someone you don't even like as a person is just awkward IMO.

Thing is, most of those women had double digits under their notch-belts--so the entire time I could only focus on performing and feeling like I was operating under the façade of their assumptions (they usually think me a player, while in actuality I was lacking their field-playing experience and resented their easy-mode sexual conga line).

As an aside: What do you guys do when a girl just lays there in the sack? I've noticed that women with options often don't even feel a need to perform, they just let you take the reins from the start to the sex and expect you to pull all the moves. I've tried joking--"How boring, you just gonna lay there?" type stuff, but that often just backfires and provides them with faux-emotional shit-test fodder.

[–]Senior Contributorexit_sandman 14 points15 points  (4 children)

I've only slept with 8 women at 22 years old

If you think that's a low number, you actually do have a problem.

[–]scrubzor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I slept with 2 women at 22 years old. 1 time each... so yeah.

[–]JackPallino 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wouldn't say that's an inherent problem, just high standards set for himself.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

On the extreme end you could just literally end it, mid session. Otherwise, tell them what to do and if they aren't responsive, why bother continuing? Sounds more pleasing to get myself off than to deal with that shit.

[–]u_fukn_wot_m8_ 2 points3 points  (1 child)

bro, girls that just lay there are some of the best ones, because you can basically do whatever you want. Next time take it as an opportunity to do some stuff you don't normally do, like put it in her ass

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

So? By the time I was 22 I had only slept with like 6 women. Granted the fact that I used to be a lot fatter and uglier and I generally only banged decent women(7 and 8s), I don't feel any shame. Before I even found theredpill I didn't have much trouble getting laid but with it I understand all the relationship dynamics going on.

[–]LasherDeviance 4 points5 points  (0 children)

ITT: A Blue Pill invasion of dudes who see nothing wrong with dating/wifing-up sluts.

[–]MajorStyles 12 points13 points  (6 children)

Ditto. Some attractive girl I work with was yammering on yesterday about her love for a certain porn star. It was a major turn off. Women should not be "fans" of porn.

Ladies, have some fucking virtue. It's your most important asset.

These cultural parasites over at "Sex in the City" are partially to blame. They spent a decade convincing women that it was empowering to fuck like men. Newsflash. You're not men. Stop it already.

The challenging of gender roles is like the arrival of a ship, filled with plague infested rats.

[–]reason_is_why 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It isn't pretty, but all of us have branch swinging, cock hopping sluts in our family trees. We are all the product of generations of female sexual strategy. Cum dumpsters and sluts are our mothers and also our daughters. Women always have and always will experiment and adjust their sexual strategies to fit the environment.

[–]Patriarchysaurus 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Incredibly, young women are now chatting openly about their number of "conquests" ala stereotypical fratstar "misogynist", cackling in their circles about their sexual partners' dick size and ranking, etc. ad nauseum. What has been deemed objectifying for men to do is now unapologetically practiced by women.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)


If slutshaming was a real thing, women and girls would not brag all the time with their numbers and ons stories.

[–]TRP VanguardCyralea 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The fact that Sex and the City is even socially acceptable is mind-blowing. It's essentially hypergamy porn. Imagine if they had actual porn playing weekly at prime time.

[–]juanqunt 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Feminists, failing out of economics and math courses and switching to gender studies major since day 1.

[–]noteventrying 7 points8 points  (1 child)

For me a "slut" isn't disgusting.

When having slept with lots of guys is seen as some sort of achievement or it is compared to a man sleeping with lots of women is when I raise my eyebrows and wonder if the people around me would even entertain the idea that it actually isn't the least bit impressive for a woman to have had sex with lots of men and that it compares in no way to a man's having bedded many women.

[–]aazav 1 point2 points  (0 children)

by a slut's* sexual experience

[–]gopher_glitz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it's funny how some women will say that they are intimidated by high earning women. I'm not intimidated, it's just kinda bullshit if she is making 2-3x my paycheck, she spends like it and then expects me to pay for everything on her level.

"Oh well I only stay in 5 star hotels" "I eat out everyday because I'm too busy and important to cook at home" etc etc.

Then expect you to foot the bill for everything because tradition blah blah you don't care about me blah blah...

[–]foyamoon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

cave-whore sounds pretty sexy

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

I'm afraid of snakes and cornered men with nothing to lose. The last thing I'm afraid of is a droopy cunt.

[–]human_bean_ 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm intimidated by "powerful" women with a lot of "sexual experience" the same way I am with drunk hobos.

[–]james_bell 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Dante: "37! My girlfriend's sucked 37 dicks!" ... Dante: "Hey, try not to suck any dick on the way through the parking lot!

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 5 points5 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]RedPillWisdom 8 points9 points  (3 children)

Betting half your shit on the virtue of a carouseler is suicide. Better to take half your stuff, make a pile, and set it on fire. Less trauma, no kids as hostages.

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

or just enjoy the carouseler and exchange her with a upgraded model as better models enter the market?

[–]RedPillWisdom 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I married a virgin. Swallowed the Red Pill after many years of marriage. Got a much more compliant and submissive wife in the bargain. Cannot imagine sharing a cab, let alone my bed, with the liberated multi-score of cocks type some of the posters are raving about. The thought makes me ill.

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

You got lucky, there aren't all that many options for most of us. So we do the best with what is on offer(kinda like doing grocery shopping on mondays)

[–]RedPillWisdom 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How is it anything but a sign of good judgement not to want to fuck a filthy skank. And since many of her semen dumpers were likely worthless (knowing women's ability to make logical choices), why would I be intimidated? If she has had fifty cocks, and I rate seventh out of fifty, between the guy she had a threesome which when high on ecstasy and the guy she fucked behind the dumpster at Applebee's, who's issue is it really, mine or the filthy whore's?

Sluts, as defined as having had a cock prior to me, are worthless for a LTR. I married a virgin and she was enough grief (prior to The Red Pill). Imagine a veteran carousel rider with forty cocks to her credit. Repulsive.

[–]PartytimeEscape 3 points4 points  (0 children)

A key that unlocks many locks is a master key. A lock that can be opened by many keys is a shitty lock.

load more comments (65 replies)