470
471
472

Red Pill TheoryThe single biggest misunderstanding between men and women. How to go from a Beta mindset to an Alpha mindset in minutes. (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by [deleted]x2

I'm still running into guys on some of the posts here who don't understand that there is no unconditional love from women. This is rule numero uno of TRP. Women will never "love" you like you want them to. They just don't have the ability to.

You know how men have a long history of self-sacrifice for the good of their families? Throughout history men have jumped on grenades, thrown themselves in front of bullets, and faced certain death in the hope that they would save their women/children. As a man, you have that capacity for your woman and your kids. Women have it only for their kids.

And that's where all the misunderstanding comes from. You can love a girl to the point of taking a bullet for her, but she can't love you in the same way! Don't you see what this means? It means that many men's ideal "lived happily ever after" woman does not exist. In the real world, women do not have the capacity to love you like you love them. We all ought to ingrain that into the thick of our skulls, because it's the single biggest cause of the misunderstanding between men and women and the biggest difference between an alpha and a beta. The difference between and alpha and a beta is that the alpha knows this and a beta doesn't. The alpha doesn't resent a woman who doesn't "love" him in that elusive way. He knows that she can't. He knows she can dump him at the drop of a hat, and get over him within a week, and find someone else within a few days. That's why he knows that he needs to be on top of his shit all day, every day or else she WILL leave. That's why he doesn't take rejection personally. That's why he doesn't put pressure on a woman to tell him that she "loves" him. There is NO unconditional love when it comes to women! None!

A woman will never take a bullet for you. She'll never put herself in harms way to save your life. In fact, she expects YOU to do these things! You're totally dispensable! You always will be because you have a cock and she has a cunt. That's the way this works folks, men can die for their kids + women, women can die for their kids and only their kids. Thus why men can love unconditionally, and women can't.


[–]_whistler 133 points134 points  (26 children)

The alpha doesn't resent a woman who doesn't "love" him in that elusive way. He knows that she can't. He knows she can dump him at the drop of a hat, and get over him within a week, and find someone else within a few days. That's why he knows that he needs to be on top of his shit all day, every day or else she WILL leave. That's why he doesn't take rejection personally. That's why he doesn't put pressure on a woman to tell him that she "loves" him. There is NO unconditional love when it comes to women! None!

Right on. This is truth.

I've been a member of this community for a while. Made some posts, had some good discussions. I've been in a LTR with a girl for about a year, and been pretty happy with the Captain/First Officer dynamic. Three days ago, she ended it.

It means that many men's ideal "lived happily ever after" woman does not exist.

I know this. I've known this for a while. But even knowing this, I've decided that the life I want includes a woman to be my First Officer and the mother of my children one day. I entered into the LTR understanding it could end in emotional pain. Easy to say here, in this sub. Harder to endure when it happens, especially through the lense of TRP. If I just accepted the blue-pill bullshit that "we weren't right for each other," it'd be easier. But the truth is: I fucked up somewhere. I got lazy, I showed weakness, I wasn't the best man I could be. And this is the price I pay.

I'm gonna cut this short, because I'll probably make a longer post about this once the wounds have healed a bit more. Right now, I'm doubling down on making myself the most admirable man I can be.

[–][deleted] 49 points50 points  (3 children)

I fucked up somewhere.

At least you can own it now and hopefully not repeat your mistakes with the next one. BP-you would've done the same thing over and over again, thinking you just had to find "the one". Hopefully you can take some solace from that.

[–]nugget359 12 points13 points  (0 children)

This is all too familiar man. Before, i would have blamed previous break ups on circumstance, her being crazy, having issues, etc. Now I realize that when i got into relationships I would become total BP, putting her needs before mine and would generally cater to her. Issues would always arise when money got tight too. Now it all makes sense

[–]JoshtheAspie 24 points24 points [recovered]

I think this would be a good RP blog post for you to read.

http://illimitablemen.com/2014/08/17/the-three-rs-romanticisation-realisation-responsibility/

In particular:

You’re only inherently responsible for how well you objectively govern, not any affront to your governance. If you lead well but she objects to follow, that’s not your fault. It is implied a good leader will not lose influence over their subordinates, but that is not necessarily so. If someone thinks there are better alternatives to you or is simply delusional, they will leave or otherwise rebel against you. In your endeavour to embody all things masculine, placate your ego to realise that you cannot control everything. You can merely stack the deck in your favour. It’s as simple as that. I’ll give you an example: say you manage a company and despite meeting all your quotas and ensuring the staff are looked after and have their grievances met, one member of staff persists in disliking you. Is it your fault that this particular member of staff doesn’t like you? Are you going to blame yourself for not having read “How to Win Friends and Influence People?” Or is this person simply influenced by extraneous factors outside of your control? You wouldn’t blame yourself when one of your employees disliked you despite great leadership so why blame yourself when things fuck up with your woman and you played your cards right? Men in love lose cognitive clarity, even the most masculine of men burdened by the responsibility of romantic leadership blame themselves for any mishaps that occur whilst the woman is all too happy to kick back and agree. Romanticism seems to profoundly cloud otherwise lucid reasoning within men. This is the delusion I see with some of the guys in the acceptance stage: total indiscriminate hyperagency, rather than the faculty to hold women to account for their shortcomings. This is a blue pill error that even the most seasonably masculine man will make, and it is something that will come to kick you in the ass with the precedent that “always taking the blame” sets.

It's important to lead, to be responsible, and to hold your frame, but there are two sentient creatures in the relationship making choices. Sometimes the woman is to blame, or sometimes she's affected by factors outside of your control (particularly given the American culture).

Or, to put it another way: In your interactions with other human beings, your choices and actions have an effect, but do not allow you 100% control over your outcomes.

[–]_whistler 12 points13 points  (14 children)

There's definitely some truth to this. But it's a useless line of thought in the aftermath of a break-up.

If I go down this mental path, what do I accomplish? I just end up blaming her. This is bullshit, and doesn't benefit me in anyway.

If I choose to blame myself, what do I accomplish? Everything. I analyze myself. I improve myself. I build myself into a better version by owning my faults and becoming stronger.

Crying on the sofa because I want to believe she's a heartless bitch who didn't know what she had - WAAAAH! - gets me nowhere. Being a man and taking responsibility for the entire outcome, even if I may have only played a part in it, is far more productive.

[–]JoshtheAspie 9 points9 points [recovered]

Oi. I'm not saying to cry on the sofa. I'm saying that it is important to understand the limitations of your action within any system, how to best operate within them, and how to expand those limitations.

Your analysis is indeed important, but it needs to be based on reality, otherwise you're "improving" towards a delusion as surely as is a nice guy who thinks he just needs to get nicer, and the girls will fall into his bed.

[–]_whistler 2 points3 points  (7 children)

Your analysis is indeed important, but it needs to be based on reality

I fail to see where we disagree here. The reality is that I achieve the most benefit from bearing the responsibility. This doesn't mean the girl is faultless. But there is no benefit to examining her faults, because they do not affect me anymore.

I'm only interested in the things that I can use to keep moving forward. If there is no benefit, it isn't worth considering.

[–]JoshtheAspie 13 points13 points [recovered]

My point is that you are insisting on bearing all the blame, and this may be a delusion. Making adjustments based on delusion is not the same thing as actual improvement.

There are 3 steps here.

  1. Identify what problems you actually caused.
  2. Identify how to correct those problems.
  3. Act on step 2.

Skipping step 1 can be as problematic in achieving optimal results as skipping step 2 or step 3.

To paraphrase one of my martial arts instructors: "You have to know where your hand is coming from, before I show you how to correctly move it to execute the move. Otherwise the end results will be wrong."

Take responsibility, yes. But I argue that you will achieve optimum results by taking responsibility for the problems you actually caused.

If, in your self-knowledge, you know that skipping step 1 is the only way you can maintain motivation to complete step 3, then maybe you need to skip step 1. But it's not as ideal as doing all 3 steps.

[–]surgeon_general 1 point2 points  (3 children)

I'm with you 100%. Less than a year ago I found a girl that I thought was amazing. I was around her enough where I felt she got a really good idea of me. And she wasn't interested in me.

I understand that it's just one girl. But to me, there is a huge difference between getting shut down by a girl in a bar who is judging you on absolute basics, who might be mentally unavailable anyways, and getting shut down by an available girl who gets a really good idea of you.

She was the judge in my trial, and I was found guilty (of not being good enough for her.) Granted, this was a top of the line bitch. But you know what I did about it? The exact opposite of going on a rampage shooting people. I have been on absolute fire lately working out, building my finances, writing a book, learning Spanish, masturbating less, eating better, playing my guitar, shit.

Next time, I will leave no doubt! =)

[–]bluedrygrass 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not all black and white. The choice is not between taking her responsabilities OR giving her yours. If you don't keep a woman accountable for her actions, she will inevitably escalate just for the sake of it. After all, it will all be "your fault".

[–]Saul-One 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Good job bro. A lot of men spiral downward for years in your situation

[–]CanWeGetSeven 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I fucked up somewhere. I got lazy, I showed weakness, I wasn't the best man I could be. And this is the price I pay.

Learning this after ending a 3 year LTR two months ago. Good job, fellow man.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]LibertarianLibertine 185 points186 points  (26 children)

Continuous fucking creates hormonal connections to that person that we perceive as 'love'.

For the male, this love means he will die for her and her children, which are -probably- his(he is after all disposable).

For the female, this love means she will show him some affection to ensure he provides her and her children with food.

We are simple animals.

[–]PlanB_pedofile 51 points52 points  (6 children)

Lust is often confused with love. Sex can blind the red flags. LTRs seem great till the sex dries up and suddenly you see her as what she really is and it's not worth it.

This is why dead bedrooms happen first followed by divorce. Without sex, the man finds little value in his girl and when she is lacking sex, she has no other clue how to show affection.

[–]platinum_peter 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is spot on. I was in an 18 month relationship that started out very physical. All the red flags didn't matter because the sex was amazing. Eventually the sex got boring, we got bored with each other overall, and tired of dealing with each others shit. We weren't a good match at all, but that sex, it was fucking great.

[–]MSoftHarem 6 points7 points  (6 children)

http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1qb7mi/she_doesnt_love_you/

http://c.feministvictims.com/6

http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/201w35/awaltamalt_whether_youre_brand_new_or_a_veteran/

Relationships require their own type of game, and mate selection is huge. Each RP man must determine if the juice is worth the squeeze, but never forget your mission is always #1.

[–]CyricYourGod 10 points11 points  (5 children)

Exactly, always keep number one in mind. Never do anything that hurts number one. One of the most fatal siren calls is the one that asks you to compromise yourself for the siren. "Call in sick and stay with me babe who cares if this hurts your performance.". "Don't go to the gym, what's it if you skip a day for me." "Stop working on your car and watch Netflix with me.". Do not let the siren tell you to do something you don't want to do or know you shouldn't do.

[–]funkyourself 0 points1 point  (4 children)

What about compromise? "I need to get this done for me-- which means you also benefit. When I do what I need to do, I can do what you want me to do." Not saying that in words, but through actions. Showing that you hold your own needs as number one, but also showing value in her needs because the two of you are in a relationship.

Legitimate question. I'm new here.

[–]MSoftHarem 4 points5 points  (2 children)

When dealing with women in any situation, but especially in relationships we have but one rule for this situation. Reward good behavior, and do it because you want to, not because you feel you have to. There is nothing wrong with protecting and providing for a woman given this context. Women have a dualistic mating strategy that we shorten to AF:BB. Alpha Fucks, Beta Bucks. She craves both, so be both, but on your terms.

[–]funkyourself 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Cool. Thanks for the response, those were my feelings about it. I've been in a relationship where I did things I didn't want to do because I felt obligated to my girlfriend and that relationship sucked the life out of me. But the last thing I want to do is go to the other end of that spectrum because they both seem to be motivated by fear. I have no time for fear anymore.

[–]MSoftHarem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right, being an extremist in anything will lead to dysfunction. Calibrate your frame according to your personality, her personality, and the Captain/First Mate framework of the relationship. Then, err a little more on the side of dominance.

[–]Ostrich_Eggs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Evolutionary speaking, this would be quite advantageous to the continuation of the species in general to say the least. It's just the way things are.

[–]TRP Vanguard: "Dark Triad Expert"IllimitableMan 12 points13 points  (1 child)

That's the way this works folks, men can die for their kids + women, women can die for their kids and only their kids. Thus why men can love unconditionally, and women can't.

I put this in the red pill anti biotic nuke, they reposted it on /r/redpillwomen and the chicks there were all disputing this point. Not even they want to admit it/believe it. Women don't want to believe they're incapable of agape for men because the combination of their love that is eros and philia just makes them feel so good for loving you like that. It feels so good to them that they believe it is the ultimate form of love, that there couldn't possibly be a higher form of love than that and to admit there is would be to vitiate their ability to love. Of course there is a higher form of love and it's what women can only comprehend from the perspective of how they feel about their children - agape. That's how emotionally committed men love their women (LTRs.) It's also how a man can no longer be sexually attracted to a woman but still love her/sacrifice for her, whilst the reverse is not true. The bitch stops getting tingles and she's off into the sunset/friendzoning you. "I'm in love with you but I'm not IN LOVE with you" kinda bullshit.

How I see it is all these women want agape but at best you'll get eros/philia in return, without the unconditionality she always has more freedom to walk whilst you don't. Plating chicks is the equivalent of just saying "you're only worth eros too, you're not getting my agape." And they can't stand that.

In case you're confused reading this, they're greek words that more accurately define different types of love: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_words_for_love

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

Agape, I think, is truly reserved for the experience of integration a man has when he knowingly shapes the projection of his Anima in accord with his sublimation of masculinity.

I don't think women are capable of receiving agape from men, at most, logos.

I think you nailed agape for women: their children.

Eros and Logos are baser but rooted in the projection. Agape (the man's) is, then, a self-love that women wish to possess (but never can, only make you think they do) in order to maintain control of the archetype.

[–]1ThumpNuts 10 points11 points  (3 children)

Newsflash: Women don't love a man the same way a man loves a woman.

Newsflash 2: Men don't love women the same way a woman loves a man.

Kudos to you for defining it.

There are several things to keep in mind:

He knows she can dump him at the drop of a hat, and get over him within a week, and find someone else within a few days.

A man could just as easily leave a woman and move on the same day. I think this is a manly trait ONLY. Alpha males can "next" a girl fairly easily.

It is certainly the trait of a woman [or a beta male] to live in the past and romanticize the past relationship and pine over their former lover... which is why so many women bounce back to their ex. These feelings are unreasonable and are a product of an immature emotional IQ.

That's why he knows that he needs to be on top of his shit all day, every day or else she WILL leave. That's why he doesn't take rejection personally.

A Lion does not concern himself with the opinion of sheep. An ALPHA male is not concerned that his woman will leave him. That is the psychology of a woman [or Beta male... see a pattern developing?] A woman fears "dread game." You should be on top of your game FOR YOU. Be all you can be because of ALL the benefits self improvement bestow. Because you are a better man for it... and women DESIRE a better man. Period.

Good for you for pursuing a LTR, but make sure it's on YOUR terms from the beginning... and make sure you never lose sight of your true self - your BETTER SELF and that you strive to get a little bit better every day.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]Casual_Tits 14 points15 points  (1 child)

That's why he knows that he needs to be on top of his shit all day, every day or else she WILL leave.

In my previous relationship, I didn't do this. At the time, I couldn't for the life of me understand why her interest in me fluctuated so much. When she wasn't into me, I blamed her for these inconsistencies, complained, whined, got jealous, etc. In reality though, it was my fault...because a woman's love is conditional - the conditions of the relationship for her (my words and behavior) reflected her love for me.

Because of TRP, I know now more than ever that I need to always put myself first, keep them off the pedestal, and understand how quickly their emotional states can change - which results in the need to maintain frame constantly.

[–]Dreamtrain 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Also a mistake I did too much with all my ex's. I couldn't get why they left for dark triad guys, I listened, I always made time for her, almost every morning on waking up I'd send "good morning beautiful :)" texts, when I wasn't busy I'd keep thinking of new ways to her laugh, small little details, I did these all out of my own and never immediately expected something in return, the only thing I expected was that she would value me as a partner, but they never did.

Well, we all know by now why I was wrong back then.

[–]deadgod1 76 points77 points  (17 children)

When a rich nigga want ya

And your nigga can't do nothing for ya

These hoes ain't loyal

These hoes ain't loyal

Yeah, yeah, let me see

  • Chris Brown

[–]FraughtWithPeril 41 points42 points  (5 children)

"I wasn't born last night I know these hoes ain't right"

The west version is the best.

[–]GIFtoGasm 14 points15 points  (3 children)

Oooooo nigga that's that nerve.

[–]clone9786 30 points31 points  (2 children)

Why give a Bitch your heart if shed rather have a purse

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (1 child)

Why give a bitch an inch when she rather have nine

[–]learningBen 4 points5 points  (4 children)

Chris Brown: One of The Red Pill's finest examples.

[–]optimumone 14 points15 points  (2 children)

So... insanely...... true.

(Not a fan), but somewhere I read that there are EMTs at his concerts for the women (GROWN MIDDLE AGE) who pass out during his concert.

This is , of course, after he hit that women.

another RP data point

[–]1R_E_D_1 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Yeah. he beat the shit out of Rihanna and he's just as, if not more popular than ever, with women of all demographics. And let's not forget the women tweeting that he could beat them if he wanted to. By the way, he and Rihanna still hang out from time to time. A woman would rather get beat to death than be bored. I don't remember who said that shit, but it's gospel.

[–]gimmieareason 5 points6 points  (12 children)

If this really IS true, and I'm really starting to think it is. Why the fuck would I put all my time and energy into a woman when I know she will just fuck me over if I start to slip? Why should I invest all my time and effort to becoming the best I can be for her, when she doesn't return shit to me. What kind of a deal is that?

[–]Apollo1982 2 points3 points  (10 children)

1) Women can bare your children 2) If you want children, your spawn will need a nuclear family to prosper...

1 can now be overcome by renting a surrogate and buying the eggs of a 20 year old 5'10", Harvard Graduate...

I see no other way to provide #2 other than making a woman fall in love with you and then keeping her there while your kids grow. It's a direct sacrifice if your time and effort to bring your kids up right. Once they're grown you can let up some, but if you married their mother , you'll be on the hook for alimony.

[–]gimmieareason 0 points1 point  (8 children)

I don't want kids. Why should I get a girlfriend when I'm never getting married to her, and we are just going to break up? I don't want to go down that path. Is there nothing else a man can do with his life that is respectable, other then settling down?

[–]Apollo1982 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Just enjoy women for what they offer; companionship (not an emotional two-way street...), sex, status (with other men), etc.

If you don't want kids, there is no reason to spend more than 6 months with any given woman if the LTR is your thing. Also, don't move in with her. The (apparent at first) readily available sex is never worth the drama and compromises you'll have to make.

Also, some professions require you demonstrate some level of stability by having a LTR... Politics, management etc

[–]RPL23 1 points1 points [recovered]

Also, some professions require you demonstrate some level of stability by having a LTR... Politics, management etc

young guy here. mind if you would explain this to me? i dont see why that should matter.

[–]Apollo1982 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I'm convinced that the more conservative a company, the more valuable you appear as a good worker drone if you are happily tied down by a woman. They can't outright ask you during interviewing, but if you have a wedding ring on, you will be able to join the beta club and are seen as less of a threat in many ways. Depends on the job of course... if you're going into cutthroat sales you might appear more aggressive without a wedding band and that is beneficial. I'm an engineer... companies like their engineers settled, docile and hungry for a paycheck so that they can exploit them.

WRT politics... well from my readings, if you don't have a wife it opens you up to attack for scandals and the public won't trust you as much. Plus you miss out on any connections she brings into the picture (family, business, whatever).

[–]Canwang 2 points2 points [recovered]

This thread and your comment especially summarizes my apprehensions with trp since I've recently been digesting a lot of these ideas. Of course, I came out of a brutal relationship in the past two months and I've been trying to make sense of how things really are, because honestly, a lot of what I thought about relationships was completely wrong.

However, to believe that no woman can ever love you as you love them, that they can only have unconditional love for their children is such a depressing thought. If that's the case, as you've said, what's the fucking point of any of this. I'd rather just hang with my boys and fuck a fleshlight than deal with any female garbage. It's exhausting to be set in some of these RP mind frames all the time. I'm only two months in though, so maybe some more practice and theory will finally show me some sort of light.

[–]visibleinvisible 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If that's the case, as you've said, what's the fucking point of any of this. I'd rather just hang with my boys and fuck a fleshlight than deal with any female garbage.

This is an altogether sensible response, and not at all uncommon in these discussions. Your current emotion comprises one of the four stages of grief, and essentially strangling and burying the hopes of one's entire life (Disney happiness) is truly something to grieve.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grief

[–]bluedrygrass 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Trp teaches that as soon as you'll be chasing the woman, she'll flee. So you'll maintain in an LTR the same points you have outside it. Wich totally exclude sacrificing things for the woman and putting her on a pedestal. Childs or not, that will only ruin the relationship.

The point is that you must be ready to dump her even during a childhood.

[–]2alisonstone 17 points18 points  (1 child)

When a guy and a girl dates, the guy is being interviewed to be the CEO. To be the captain. To be the leader, role model, and protector of the next generation. For whatever reason, many guys don't know this and they act like a bitch during the interview, and they are surprised that they don't get hired.

On the other side, for LTRs, the woman is being interviewed to be a suitable mother and matriarch for the next generation. She needs to be young and healthy enough to produce offspring. She needs to demonstrate that she is responsible enough and capable of raising the offspring. There is some overlap in that she needs to be a leader and role model for the offspring too. Some women don't get this and they go to the interview showing off that they can chug a bucket of cum. Guys would be impressed that someone can do that, but they will also reject her as a candidate for an LTR. That is why some women can build rapport with many guys (i.e. she is "one of the guys" who can chug beer, cuss, and is covered in tattoos, etc) but is always disqualified as an LTR.

You have to know what your job is. Some guys get confused because they are always "interviewing" women for wife-qualities, that they mix it up and think they are applying for a job to be a wife. He knows what he wants and he thinks that is what the woman wants too because he heard "equality" too many times. Some women screw this up too and think that men care about her career more than her decaying eggs.

[–][deleted] 31 points31 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]iab_mabden 14 points15 points  (0 children)

"I finally informed him that I can not guide the ship & make a sandwich at the same time."

I love this line.

[–]redpillshadow 8 points9 points  (2 children)

I don't get the RPW advice on these issues.

A RP tenet is that women want men to "just get it". Women don't want to tell the man what he has to get cause that nullifies the whole situation. Yet on RPW the advice gets handed out to tell him and talk to him.

There is only so much they can do without leading. Voicing exactly what they want is leading and that leads to bad results. They can't talk their beta into an alpha.

[–]TRP VanguardCyralea 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Understand that women will be women, even RPW. Their recourse is to talk. It's their go-to solution for any conflict.

[–]trplurker 37 points37 points [recovered]

There is some pretty solid evolutionary explanations behind this difference. The current norm of monogamy and lifetime partnership is not normal. Before we learned how to speak we lived in small tribes / packs where the women just fucked the top 20% of males and those males kept small harems. The women would frequently "cheat" by fucking a different male whenever her current one was asleep or away, provided the second male was of equal or higher status and was available. This resulted in the males rarely knowing which children where theirs but the women always knowing which children were theirs. And as such men, with some small exception, evolved the instinct to protect all the women / children in the tribe while the women only needed to protect their own children. So because both the males and females fuck around so much, the males had to protect every women / child because he couldn't be sure which ones were his and which ones weren't. Women never had this requirement and so only protected their own children.

And thus we have the unequal basis that formed the "patriarchy" that feminists hate so much.

[–]james5342 5 points6 points  (0 children)

For anyone who is interested, you can read about this (amongst other things) in "Sperm Wars".

[–][deleted] 9 points9 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]trplurker 11 points11 points [recovered]

Yep it's all projection, ignorant males assume females must think the same way they do and thus guys assume women have the same emotion setup, and they don't. Women will only "love" you as long as your providing something to them that nobody else can, the moment they can get a better deal elsewhere they will "lose" that feeling and invent some bullshit excuse for it.

[–]1kick6 2 points3 points  (0 children)

otherwise known as Briffault's Law

[–]Precocious_Kid 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Women will only "love" you as long as your providing something to them that nobody else can, the moment they can get a better deal elsewhere they will "lose" that feeling and invent some bullshit excuse for it.

Does that not work both ways?

[–]1kick6 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Part of the unstated right of passage to become a man is to demonstrate honor and integrity. In earlier times, you weren't allowed to breed until you had.

The rite of passage to become a woman is to start bleeding from the crotch.

So no...it doesn't go both ways. We have expected men to honor their charges, and never expected the same from women, so women have not developed the ability as well.

[–]Gami_Lon 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I agree with what you posted.

But I also think that divorce law plays a factor here.

For instance, if it was 1964 a couple would go through a series of stages:

  • Stage one: In this stage, the couple is in their 20s. The woman has many options, because she is young and fertile. The man has fewer options because he is young and broke.
  • Stage two: In this stage, the couple is in their 30s. The womans options are declining, because her fertility is declining. The man's options are rising because his income is rising.
  • Stage three: In this final stage, the woman's role as a caregiver will become more prominent. Someone like Reagan is a good example of this; his wife has lived over two decades longer than he has, and she has the ability to care for a man who's health is waning.

But here's the thing:

Divorce law jams a short circuit into that path.

Basically the woman can bail at any point, but particularly if she bails after ten years the man will be expected to provide for her for as long as she lives (via alimony) while the woman is required to provide NOTHING in return.

I really enjoy 'the law of unintended consequences' and I find it interesting that this 'short circuit' has actually wound up boomeranging on women. Because women now find that it's very VERY hard to get a man to commit.

TLDR: I think things were better off before. Divorce laws don't just fuck men over, they fuck women over too because the good men won't commit. The only winner is the lawyers.

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

Say what? Reagan died nine years ago...

[–]Dreamtrain 2 points3 points  (1 child)

If you're gonna bring up historical context, I'd like to see sources or documentation, otherwise, as much as I agree with RP, I can't personally take this as face value. I could just as well say we are like this because of aliens and it would have the same validity. Just scrutiny, nothing personal.

[–]Dream4eva 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I could just as well say we are like this because of aliens and it would have the same validity.

Not really, his is more theory based of the conditions that were present in the era where humans lived in tribes.

[–]zephyrprime 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Although I believe what you say about our ancient past, it has nothing to do with women not unconditionally loving men. Everything you described only purports to explain why men and women treat children differently. It says absolutely nothing about why men and women love each other differently. What's more, I don't think it is even true in modern times. Women love all children (but their own a lot more). Men only love their own children and have no consideration for other children. Just look at how women go goo goo over anyone's baby that they meet whereins men don't care.

[–]1kick6 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Women love all children (but their own a lot more).

My personal experience hasn't borne this out at all.

[–]s0nicfreak 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Throw a woman in front of a bus with her own kid and someone else's kid and see which one she tries to save. I'll bet you anything a woman would grab her own kid with both hands while a man would try to grab both.

Some women like all babies/children (and some hate all but their own) but they only love their own. How we act i society is not always in accordance with our natural instincts; Women making googoo eyes and men ignoring children are learned behaviors, not natural instincts.

[–]MagicGainbow 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Commented on it, she was expecting instant results and is now giving up after two months, despite realizing before that it wouldn't be a quick or easy problem, also she's 19 so yeah.

[–]1kick6 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I don't know what science has to say about any of this, only that I believe it without a hint of doubt now.

Evo-psych suggests (though can't conclusively prove) that these traits were selected-for traits.

Men have ALWAYS been disposable, and a woman that "couldn't get over" her children's father that was mauled to death by a saber tooth tiger exposed her chlidren to a higher likelihood of also being killed for lack of a man's protection. A woman who could monkey branch to provide this protection was evolutionarily selected for.

[–]elevul 0 points1 point  (1 child)

On another side, women would take a bullet for their child, so it's not like they're completely uncapable of loving unconditionally.

[–]1kick6 1 point2 points  (0 children)

the OP addresses this: women do love their children unconditionally, they can't love you - a man - in the same manner.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (2 children)

This is good to have repeated over and over as, to me, it's the entire basis for trp. You tell me this a year ago I would have made fun of you. I figured this all out on my own and it was terrifying to try to fully realize. It still is. But it's the cold hard truth. If my life experiences hadn't clearly demonstrated this to me I never would have believed it. Tomassi is on the side bar for a reason. Telling people about trp actively basically violates the laws of power and they don't want to know. It's comfortable to believe the lie. I didn't even realize I've spent the last year taking the pill until a few days ago. It's still a struggle but that's the thing. It's always been a struggle. I'm just more aware of it now and I'm playing on the same field without my eyes closed. Your mom will hopefully love you but nobody else will ever even be capable of that kind of love for you. Realize it and realize that no matter what you believe you are playing the game. Closing your eyes and sticking your fingers in your ears just makes you vulnerable it doesn't help. Good to read this again. And again and again.

[–]zephyrprime 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Nobody wants to believe it because it's so horrible. That's why there are so few people who swallow TRP. Also, you're right about the bit about your mom. Nobody will ever love you more than your mom did.

[–]Endorsed Contributorbicepsblastingstud 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Throughout history men have jumped on grenades, thrown themselves in front of bullets, and faced certain death in the hope that they would save their women/children.

http://www.history.army.mil/moh/iraq.html

Indeed.

"Although only he could have escaped the blast, Petty Officer Monsoor chose instead to protect his teammates. Instantly and without regard for his own safety, he threw himself onto the grenade to absorb the force of the explosion with his body, saving the lives of his two teammates."

[–]heist_of_saint_graft 8 points9 points  (3 children)

From the sidebar:

Briffault's Law: Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.

Women don't take bullets for their men because men are survival-enhancers for women. Once a woman decides she's getting less out of the equation than she's putting in, she begins to look for another man to help her survive better.

[–]jd_coud9 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fuckin' a man. This describes my experiences perfectly.

[–]aBitClearer 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Glad you made this point. Just this weekend, I was beaten to the break-up by my ex-GF. Her stated reason was that she thought my communication with her would improve, but it had not, so it just wasn't going to work out for her.

The real reason she moved on? Briffault's Law. I made it clear to her that she was not moving in with me, and I was never going to get married, two things she wanted from early on in our nearly one year relationship. She is in debt, 50 yo, fit and thin, but O/A a 6 on her best day, and therefore has very LSMV. She needs a WK, and I refused to be that for her.

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

As a young man I was sucked into a relationship where marriage was expected, after a month I came out and told her I never wanted to marry or have kids. We broke up two months later.

What's funny though is she still tries to cheat on her "providers" with me. It's an interesting dichotomy!

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

As the great Bruce Wayne once said, "Women used to throw themselves at my feet."

When asked what he did in response, he said, "I stepped over them."

[–]kanaduhisfruityeh 12 points13 points  (2 children)

Men may be more loyal than women within the context of serious relationships. But men can place conditions on women before they commit them in the first place.

Men choose which women they will commit to seriously and take a bullet for, just like women choose which men they want to let stick penis inside of them.

I wouldn't take a bullet for a woman who didn't meet my standards and requirements because I would have never entered into a serious, committed relationship with her in the first place.

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]TheRationalMale.comRollo-Tomassi 6 points7 points  (0 children)

As a man, you have that capacity for your woman and your kids. Women have it only for their kids.

I go into more detail on this in the Intersexual Hierarchies series:

http://therationalmale.com/2014/05/06/intersexual-hierarchies-part-i/

http://therationalmale.com/2014/05/13/intersexual-hierarchies-part-ii/

[–]bluedrygrass 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I'm new to RP, so i wouldn't be surprised if i make mistakes, but the consequences of that rule, IF true, are DRASTIC.

I can't love a woman that don't love me, i simply can't.

Provide, be a leader, be right, etc., all this i understand and accept, BUT there must be something coming back from the other side.

I would never, ever die for a woman. And why in the entire hell should i? Women are substantially the last human category to die for. Take a bullet for your woman? Nope. Since she would never take one for me.

How can i be loyal to someone who isn't loyal to me? Conditional loyalty is not loyalty. Is just convenience. Loyalty is by definition inconditional.

And I should sacrifice something for someone who is just waiting for some trivial shit to decide she's had enough?

Women are the disposable ones.

They're all the same, they operate all under the same principles, they aren't original, unique or anything. Not as much as males are, for sure.

So, if there's one always expendable in a relationship, that's the woman.

Caring for someone that don't care for you is the definition of blue pill, submissive, dependant. That's the female role, not the male one.

If there's one that would end up sleeping on the couch, or blocked outside MY house, that's the female. Everything else is submissive, blue pill.

Women are the dependant gender. I ain't gonna feel anything for a bitch that for her nature can't feel love (if, and it's a big if, it's true). Even a pregnant bitch is only a bitch, and nothing special really. Love, a bound, free loyalty from her could make me somewhat interested in her beyond the superficial and momentary interests.

Do you think a dark triade subject would ever take a bullet or lose something for his woman? And do you think his woman don't know that?

[–]brestbay 8 points9 points  (17 children)

i think what you said within the paragraph is mostly true

but the title is completely misleading, i dont think that many beta mindsets stem from this particular delusion

will probably get downvoted for going against the grain

But i have to disagree, that last paragraph is mostly bullshit in my opinion

[–][deleted] 9 points9 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]brestbay 7 points8 points  (12 children)

yeah but what about all the kids with self esteem issues, i feel like your strategy lowers females to bellow that of the individual rather that raising the individual to above them

i think these can have toxic adverse results

also i dont think we will ever agree, i subscribe to this sub for the mens rights but i also consider myself a romantic. i believe women have loved me for who i am and your view of women is very black and white

becoming apha can be reached through power, charisma, looks or wealth. i think you would have to talk to me in person to convince me that what your saying is the real issue.

because i just dont see it, both in experience and in your text

[–][deleted] 6 points6 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]zephyrprime 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Believing in romance is really a big part of BP. I'm sure you're not surprised that there are many guys like ticklemynuts out there.

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

Romance can be fun and should be there but you can't forget the main tenets. Which is she simply can not love you the way you can love her. She can love you in a different way. You can watch Disney movies and still see the truth behind the scenes. You can watch a romance movie and still see hypergamy at work. You can learn from everything if you're paying enough attention.

[–]brestbay 3 points4 points  (5 children)

We're not going to agree because I don't believe one iota in romance. The second I do the whole picture crumbles to pieces. Romance has no place in reality and if it does, it doesn't need to be there for the picture to work.

dude i think thats really sad, i really hope your happy living like that because such a world seems so lifeless and pointless. i believe happyness stems from ones relationships with people and treating women like some biological robot is going to leave you emotionally hollow

[–]Endorsed ContributorBluepillProfessor 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Nobody is saying women are 'robots' cuz then you could just input the commands and sit back for the blowjobs.

We are saying that women are NOT the romantics. MEN are the romantics as proven again by your post.

I agree, a world without LOVE is lifeless and pointless.

The problem is OUR definition of love is different than theirs. They love you for what you do for them (or what you could possibly do for them in the future). We love them unconditionally in that final thrust when our seed shoots into their bodies. They love us for the feewings we can induce in them. Men rarely file for divorce because their wife is depressed, or loses a job. Women routinely file for divorce when their man becomes depressed or loses his job.

Open your eyes. I know it hurts because you have never used them but try to look at the real world and ignore the Disney programming.

[–]Nicolay77 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Life itself is pointless. It only looks for its own continuous existence.

The point of your own particular life is whatever you want it to be.

[–]textualintercourse[🍰] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

If you are cool to invest emotional capital into these feminine relationships and are content with seeing her fuck other men since you will not be getting any in that situation, good on ya. Enjoy that.

[–]brestbay 3 points4 points  (1 child)

lol dont get me wrong, if my girl cheated on me her ass is done i believe you can be alpha but still love i consider it more alpha than a player

[–]textualintercourse[🍰] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This has nothing to do with her cheating since you will not be dating them in the first place. You will however be put in the friendzone and be that 'friend' they cry to over problems and their drama. All of the BS with none of the benefits.

[–]rubycando 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Man ... some BP'ers WANT to be such things. Stop saving them. You know it's pointless right ?

[–]zephyrprime 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Let me pose a question to you about romance. During real physical incidents of romance in the past in your own life, who created the romance and who received it? You or her? There is the truth about romance.

[–]brestbay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

im not sure what you mean, i initiate it most times because i dont wait around for people but i find whatever feelings i invest in a girl they seem to give back two fold which is why i have a history of messy breakups

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

You can get more then sex out of a woman. It's just riskier because you are playing a deeper level of game where you may forget that even if you stop playing she isn't going to. And why would you want her to? Who wants a fat wife?

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

Every time you see a fertile chick you should be going through the motions of arousal.

Do you think men and women can be friends? I have women who are platonic friends. The idea that women are meant only for fucking seems strange.

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

According to Chris Rock(take this with a grain of salt) "Female friends are just women you haven't fucked yet"

[–][deleted] 8 points8 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]zephyrprime 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good post. What you're talking about is one of the foundational facts about TRP. It is the reason underlying soo much of how TRP treats women differently than how BP treats women.

[–]nothere_ 1 point2 points  (1 child)

That's why he knows that he needs to be on top of his shit all day, every day or else she WILL leave

but please do not be on top of your shit just so you can keep/get a woman,satisfy your needs complete your objectives and score goals for you and your legacy first before you dedicate that to a woman.

[–]chirry8 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure that this reflects a woman's inability to love a man entirely. I think that we (as men) protect loved ones who are more vulnerable than us, thus due to men generally being the stronger, we protect our more vulnerable loved ones (ie. wife, parents, children) whilst a woman expects to be protected by her husband and will in turn protect her children as they are her more vulnerable loved ones.

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

RP TRUTH from Drake: "Got some game from my dad, though She might say she loves me, She don't love me like she says she loves me."

[–]CornyHoosier 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All love is conditional for both men and women. We are intelligent (enough) creatures to learn new information and make a judgement. I find the concept of unconditional love is be inherently impossible.

That said, I believe men are conditioned from a young age to see themselves as disposable. Young boys are often told to keep their feelings bottled up, told to "walk off" injury and often encounter more potentially dangerous situations will less support.

[–]reason_is_why 1 point2 points  (0 children)

“A man doesn't grow old because he has lived a certain number of years. A man grows old when he deserts his ideal. The years may wrinkle his skin, but deserting his ideal wrinkles his soul.” - Brennan Manning

[–]Andress1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is there unconditional love from anyone,even men?I dont think so. The thing is that the tolerance threshold for women is much lower than men's.

[–]newpoint619 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I dislike the premise that a man has to be on top of his game every day or else she will leave. That is a subservient role where the man continuously needs to maintain a woman's approval or else she will leave. That's not the right way to look at it. A man is on top of his game because that's who he is. He's hungry and he's the best and people seek his approval and want to be around him, fuck him, have his babies.

[–]raouldukeesq 5 points6 points  (8 children)

"I'm still running into guys on some of the posts here who don't understand that there is no unconditional love from women. This is rule numero uno of TRP. Women will never "love" you like you want them to. They just don't have the ability to."

The idea that only men can love is hilariously subjective and has no way of been objectively proved one way or the other. The correct statement would be: there is no unconditional love from anyone. And for TRP the only people of concern are women. Therefore, women will never "love" you like you want them to. They just don't have the ability to."

[–]Junahill 10 points11 points  (5 children)

I think it is funny that it is constantly claimed that "women would never take a bullet for you" but I had a girlfriend at gunpoint not reveal my location to a group of guys and she took a bullet to the leg for me. My example is anecdotal though.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]Aaron565 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If anything, history proves that men can love. Love is one of the main contributors in man's ability to sacrifice himself for the greater good. Or in other words, one of the reasons modern society exists in the first place.

[–]6footdeeponice 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thank you for this comment. The double standards are strong in OP.

[–]spikenigma 4 points4 points [recovered]

And Horse Shoe theory manifests itself yet again.

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/02/25/philadelphia-woman-gives-her-life-to-save-husband-from-drunk-driver/

Every woman that has looked after an infirmed husband for decades, or died within hours of her husband of 40 years or visa versa beg to differ.

Yes, modern feminsim sucks, "ZOMG my feels are more important than the facts you bigot" rules the day. But I thought this subreddit was supposed to be about reality and rationality, not generalising 3 billion people.

[–]aHangingChad 6 points7 points  (0 children)

There are many brave women out there. Many of them want to join the military and of those, some want to go into the infantry. I've spent days around these grunts and let me tell you what, it hasn't happened because of this reason. Research shows that an infantryman is more likely to try to save 1 woman from near certain death than 3 of his buddies who have a 50% chance of dying. But OP knows this and so does everyone else. We have clearly defined gender roles and for us as men, that's being fucking alpha and being the defender of the family against the world and its dangers.

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

Wow, neat article. 2 minutes of google searching couldn't bring up any other examples than this though.

The woman in this article is a unicorn, plain and simple.

[–]bhormaci 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Exceptions don't mean that we can't talk about the rule in a factual way.

This kind of PC bullshit does not belong here...if you want a unicorn, go find yourself one...the truth is you will never know until it happens...accepting the rule instead is the way to go.

[–]redeleven 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But I thought this subreddit was supposed to be about reality and rationality, not generalising 3 billion people.

You thought wrong. It's about both. And I quote:

Speaking in absolutes, generalizations, hyperbole, and analogy are all ways to communicate a basic set of concepts. The context of /r/theredpill already implies that generalizations are generalizations, we do not bother with or care for the standard disclaimers that make women studies majors and transgendered what-nots with bits and pieces of whatever fucked up sex they wanted feel fuzzy inside.

If you cannot read a piece and attempt to understand what the point was, then /r/theredpill is not the place for you. If you cannot comprehend the meaning, and instead get tripped up on tone and phrasing, /r/theredpill is not the place for you. If you cannot understand that generalizations and sexual strategy is probabilistic not deterministic, /r/theredpill is not for you.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]6footdeeponice -1 points0 points  (2 children)

Then why didn't you say generally in your post?

Your post was not a generalization, you stated as a fact. Everyone reading your post is judging you on the words you wrote, not the intention behind them, that only you know about.

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]AgentSmith27 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is no such thing as unconditional love, from anyone to anyone. Everything has conditions. I've seen parents throw their kids out of the house after their legal obligation for basically no reason. I've seen guys leave perfectly good girls, and I've seen girls leave perfectly good guys.

Nothing is permanent, everything is conditional, and everyone is mostly out for just themselves. To what degree this is true changes from person to person. "Good" people will actually consider how their actions effect others, and whether their behavior is "fair" and justifiable. Most people, however, don't even consider this unless it benefits them in some way.

[–]cooltrip 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I see it as a wrong theory supporting a right goal.

I would rather have used the form: "in order to be an alpha, behave as if your women could only love their children, but you could love both your women and your children, and so you were more capable of love".

[–]herropriest[🍰] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I think you're over-glorifying men. I don't disagree with your points on the nature of women, but in reality, what % of men in combat will actually throw themselves over a grenade? What % will flee so long as they can get away without getting outed for it? We're probably looking at a bell curve.

My point is that men's love is not unconditional either. Will you ever date a grotesque, physically-disabled woman? That's a condition, and there are others.

[–]bluedrygrass 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Op really flipped things upside down. What TRP teaches is that females are the disposable ones. And that you MUST dump a female that isn't loyal or generous to you.

[–]optimumone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"Throughout history men have jumped on grenades, thrown themselves in front of bullets, and faced certain death in the hope that they would save their women/children. Women do not do this."

Such actions ENSURE the survival of the species. We need the MEN to be dispensable NOT the women.

10 adult men and 200 adult women - we can rebuild our community, cult, country.. and fast. Double, triple our population in ADULTS in 20 years.

10 adult women and 200 adult men - the community is dead as the women can only produce one child every 9-10 months.

[–]matisseman 1 point2 points  (1 child)

To quote Drake:

Yeah, got some game from my Daddy

He said she might say she love me

She don't love me like she say she love me

Believe me, believe me

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]s0nicfreak 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Other than the chick who pushed her husband out of the way of the car but stayed in the way herself - you could say that most of them were only protecting themselves and maybe their kids by saving their provider. And heck the one where the guy shaved his head and cancer was noticed, his wife didn't even do anything!

Jumping on a man being beat up is not risking her life, because the assumption is that the perpetrators won't hit a woman (otherwise, she would try to fight them, not just lay on top of the guy).

[–]Jkobzen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

For those of you who needs to proof the mindset women have heres an article. It's about a woman realizing how her brain works, she sacrifices her boyfriend to save herself.

http://www.salon.com/2011/05/19/taxi_crash_revealed_true_me_open2011/

[–]RufusFlywheel -1 points0 points  (2 children)

Okay, men and women 'love' differently.

What are you going to do with this factoid?

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

don't have unreasonable expectations and keep it simple

[–]babyicanchange 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not get lazy and always put yourself first and foremost. This makes you less dependent which, in turn, will increase the potential success of any relationship with a female.

[–]ejpusa 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Actually my sister would gladly take a bullet, x 10 for her husband. Without a moments thought. Without a millisecond of hesitation. That's their relationship.

Think it's hard to generalize like this. Instead maybe say 99% of "women will never take a bullet for you." At least give yourself a bit of wiggle room. (IMHO)

[–]optimumone 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have to comment on the below quote.

This is the main reason a alpha man has HIS OWN.

Whether it is a PHD, a MD, or a dry cleaning business. You know what they are and you always protect yours and your will invariably keep them (women in general, and maybe in particular)

Want to go, want a divorce, want to leave - I am still a MD and have value in the marketplace. This will equate to women--- "working it out" and stayiny; accepting that their std of living may DROP if they leave(or you leave) OR you EASILY replacing them.

Men have to understand this.

A divorced man with power/ money is a catch.

Don't hate women for this. We would be the same way if we were the weaker sex.

Women feel a POWERFUL sense of relief once married. Most men - don't have the same feeling. Sometimes its a feeling of new responsibility.

TL;DR - women just trying to eat (and forge for food for their kids.) ""The alpha doesn't resent a woman who doesn't "love" him in that elusive way. He knows that she can't. He knows she can dump him at the drop of a hat, and get over him within a week, and find someone else within a few days. That's why he knows that he needs to be on top of his shit all day, every day or else she WILL leave. That's why he doesn't take rejection personally. That's why he doesn't put pressure on a woman to tell him that she "loves" him. There is NO unconditional love when it comes to women! None!"""

[–]SillyAmerican 0 points1 point  (0 children)

one of the most effective way to get a girl wet for you is to constantly remind her that you dont need her to love you. I tell that to girls all the time and they go super hamster trying to figure out what I mean. they try to read in between the lines etc, but dont understand I am being quite literal when i say, "I dont need your love." Convey that, and their love will pour like wine.

[–]cottonsweatpants 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I needed to hear this. Thank you.

[–]TheRabid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think that this is true of both sexes. We are expendable assets and everyone has a price.

[–]scramtek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most informative post I've read on TRP. Or at least to me at this point in time. In my hopefully constant journey of awakening.

And, despite all that being true to me, my thoughts sound corny as fuck. I'd as soon as say that to a women as tell her I love her.

[–]mmolessgoogle 0 points1 point  (1 child)

While I do enjoy reading TRP and agree with a lot of it, this is simply incorrect. You can't ascribe a characteristic like this to half the human race and be correct. There is just too much variability.

Do I think OP is correct that MOST women are like this? Yep. And you would do well to act as if this is a universal truth, until it is proven otherwise.

Do I think there are exceptions? Yep.

I can give an example of variability form my own experience - I used to run a division of riverboats on a firing range. We used 36' Bertram yachts for this, each with a crew of three. We had about 30 sailors in the div, usually about half women.

There was an fire on one of the boats while it was on the river. The guy on the radio gave us a play by play. It was him, a female sailor, and a male sailor she was involved with.

She was on watch (we had to make sure tourists / fishermen stayed out of the range area during gun testing). Smoke started billowing out of the hatch on the fantail - this meant that the engine room was a death trap.

This chick turned and RAN down to the main deck, threw open the hatch, and dropped into the engine room. She came out with the other guy in like 30 seconds.

He was not seriously injured, but we had him in the dispensary for smoke inhalation. There's no way to know if he would have made it out himself.

Granted, she was doing her job. But she showed a set of balls that day. Do I think she would take a bullet for someone she loved? You bet.


Actually I just remembered something else about this chick - not pertinent to the current discussion, but amusing.

Once the boats were on the river, there was no supervision. I couldn't see what they were up to. This girl would strip off her uniform and sun herself on the deck when she wasn't on watch.

It didn't help that she was hot as balls. So usually the male crew members would spend the day staring at her ass instead of watching the river.

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

Sounds like she was playing the crew...

[–]Quansau18 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we may not be as fundamentally different as we think...hear me out. I've run into this twice recently, married men, friends of mine, who's women have blimped out since having kids. Now the same societal pressures that tell a beta "be yourself" and "you're good enough as you" are on the other side of the table, it's the wives wondering why their men are so prudish suddenly. But think about it, we are animals and therefore attracted to a geneticly supreme individual displayed through factors like healthy weight. It's not that women are fundementally different, they just have different societal pressures and incentives to act in ways that appear to be insane at first glance. Really they just have all the chips with marriage, and prior to that are doing what we would given the chance (would you like a 5 or a 10?) they just have their options presented more frequently than we do, unless we alpha the fuck up and suddenly, oh shit, WE ARE FEELING WHAT ANY RANDOM CHICK FEELS ALL THE TIME FROM CONSTANT MALE ATTENTION/DISPOSABILITY.

[–]Graizur 0 points1 point  (0 children)

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

It makes sense in terms of biology, the number 1 thing for any animal is their children. It takes a long time for a child to be born and a womans health effects the newborn child much more than the fathers health. So of course the father is going to be protective of both while the mother only has to worry about the children.

[–]Rougepellet 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fuck that then. I'd rather take a bullet for a bro than some hoe

[–]RPthrowaway123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is so true, and it's probably been the hardest thing for me to accept

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

This should be on the fucking stone that Moses received on Mount Sinai.

Twice.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points

[permanently deleted]

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

They're literally the first 2 links in the sidebar.. Get your read on

http://therationalmale.com/2011/12/27/women-in-love/

http://therationalmale.com/2012/09/10/men-in-love/

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]timthetollman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He knows she can dump him at the drop of a hat, and get over him within a week, and find someone else within a few days.

I've seen this happen 3 times now. Once to me, once to a friend and once a girl I know did it to her BF.

[–]wheyapartment 0 points1 point  (1 child)

This is extremely bitter.... Men don't love unconditionally, either. If a woman changes her personality and becomes a bitch or gains a lot of weight would you still love her? No. So why take on this attitude?

This is why we have the ability to hand select who we want around us.

[–]TheSKSpecial 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It takes a concerted effort for a man to lose his love for a woman once he's given it to her. She has to actively change things about herself for the worse before he stops loving her. He may want to fuck other women, but he does not want to love them.

A woman will stop loving her man because it's Tuesday. She'll stop loving her man because a more attractive man spoke to her one time. A man could be the exact same person she fell in love with and she'll stop being in love with him because it's no longer enough for her.

[–]babybelly 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Throughout history men have jumped on grenades, thrown themselves in front of bullets, and faced certain death in the hope that they would save their women/children.

i love captain america. no homo

[–]retroshark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your hypothesis is pretty apt. Definitely real food for thought.

load more comments (46 replies)