TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

139

As a divorce attorney I have the privilege of seeing (1) why most marriages fall apart; and (2) how different family and parenting structures function in the context of the new relationships of my clients and opposing parties. As to the first point, that's why I'm at TRP/MRP - it's just plain truth, and I can't imagine a single male divorce attorney who would deny it (female attorneys have stronger hamsters, so I rarely trust them).

As for family structures that work, I've developed the theory I call "biological step-mother." It is based on this one infallible law of divorce and custody cases:

Men don't get custody after marriage because they don't live like they have sole, exclusive custody during the marriage. (Shared parenting is a conversation for another day). Men must develop subliminal custody of their children in their wives' minds.


LEGAL CONTEXT

Although laws are changing, custody matters always involve judicial discretion. This will never change. Period. That judicial discretion will always tilt slightly toward mothers, regardless of what the statute says. Why?

  • Judges inherently respect history, even when it has been overruled. History dictates that mothers are default custodial parents. Many judges have been in the profession since before the law change and can't get the old ways out of their heads.

  • The law still (and always will) assume default custody to a mother simply because the baby came out of her belly, whereas men can't know for sure who the father is (no matter how faithful she says she's been) until that DNA test comes back. Divorce law is slightly different from custody law in that it presumes shared parenting, but the legal bias from juvenile law is still subconsciously present because most DR (divorce) judges are also the JV (juvenile/never-marrieds) judges.

  • Abortion law implies that children are the property of the mother. It's her body, so she can decide whether the child lives or dies. When the child is born, there is a slight change, but the legal context of "she decides what happens to her baby" subliminally carries over to DR/JV law.

  • Most DR/JV judges are women. As to the few male ones, they are virtually always closet betas who put women on a pedestal. They act alpha because it's their courtroom and they have positional authority, but they have no internally radiating authority. They still crack jokes from the bench: "You're here because you didn't do the dishes like she told you, right?"

Can dads win custody? Absolutely, I do it all the time. But women don't believe this until it actually happens. This is key. Women make decisions based on their perceptions, not actuality.


Here are the two parenting structures that often result in stressed marriages.

TRADITIONAL BIOLOGICAL MOTHER

The biological mother has a unique and unashamed relationship with her children. She carries them in her womb, nurses them when they're young, and often takes primary responsibility for their basic growth and development. For all practical purposes, they are her kids. This is especially true for SAHMs.

You, as the father, are involved to the degree that she finds your involvement advantageous to the development of the children. If you start doing things she doesn't like, she throws a hissy fit or just leaves. More significantly, she will undermine your relationship with the children in any number of ways.

TRADITIONAL STEP-MOTHER

Step-mothers respect the fact that her husband is the ultimate authority figure over the child. If the relationship went sour, she accepts the fact that she will have no custodial rights in the child. As a result, she does not take personal responsibility for the growth and development of the child, giving it to her husband. By placing him in charge, she sees herself as a helper who comes alongside him to assist in raising the child.

Unfortunately, step-mothers often maintain a subconscious emotional detachment. This is because of the custody issue. They don't want to form a close bond with someone when there is a possibility that they may never see that person again. I've heard it said many times: a woman's greatest fear is abandonment. In this case, instead of a romantic abandonment, it's a parent-child relationship that's lost. For women, this is too close a bond to risk, so step-mothers remain subliminally detached and allow their husbands (the birth fathers) to be the final authority and emotional rock for the children.


BIOLOGICAL STEP-MOTHER

This is a relatively rare phenomenon, but I find it often occurring when divorced or nearly divorced couples decide to reunite - particularly when the father has demonstrated that he is likely to get custody of the children, or at least shared parenting and that she would not be the default custodian. To be clear, if the father convinces the mother of this through emotional abuse ("You'd better never leave me or I'll take the kids" and she believes him), a different maternal structure develops that is distinct from the biological step-mother. I won't go into that here, but suffice it to say that it is harmful and usually results in unruly kids. The biological step-mother is when the woman respects the father's authority, rather than fears it.

When the traditional biological mother finally acknowledges that she does not have exclusive ownership of her children they become "our children." Many traditional biological mothers will use this lingo, but do not actually feel or experience this until it's concretely rooted in their heads: The law won't back you up. I have a distinct advantage here, being a divorce attorney. My wife knows that I will not position myself in a way where she would get custody and I know how to break through false accusations. For non-divorce-attorneys, the key in developing this frame of mind is to convince her this: YOU, the father, are the PRIMARY CAREGIVER of the children, NOT HER.

The perception of the "primary caregiver" is the overwhelming majority of custody law, even in states (like mine) where that phrase has been uprooted out of the statutes. Traditional biological mothers subconsciously rely on the default assumption that women are primary caregivers when they develop their approach to parenting. When custody is at risk, if they want to preserve the marital relationship their approach to parenting issues changes drastically.

This is when the biological mother takes on specific traits of a step-mother without losing the important value of the traditional biological mother connection either:

  • She shifts parenting responsibility back to the father, accepting that he is an authority figure over the children [because he has subliminal custody].

  • She lives as if she is a helper whose job is to implement the leadership decisions her husband [the subliminal custodial parent] makes, as they pertain to the children.

  • Her lifestyle around the house changes. She enjoys the comfort of living in his home rather than her home or their home [because he has subliminal custody and her parenting time is in his home on his terms].

  • She still has the same loving bond with her children that traditional biological mothers have, but she does not use that as a motivation to draw authority away from the father. [She won't disrespect the subliminal custody arrangement, but will still love and long for her kids all the same.]

  • The children are lovingly bonded with mom, but now are able to develop both a love and respect for their father, which the mother fosters rather than undermines [because the children also subliminally understand that dad has custody - and side bonus, if you do get divorced, guess who they want to live with now?].


YOU DON'T HAVE TO BATTLE CUSTODY TO GET THERE

This is where OYS is extremely vital. If the father doesn't follow OYS principles, the mother will never respect him as an authority figure over the children. He is essentially saying, I want you to do all the responsibility stuff of a custodial parent, but I still want to have the positional authority. Per John Maxwell, leadership is influence, not position.

The father/husband must take the following attitude, regardless of whether or not it makes legal sense to do so (remember: women do things that don't make a lot of sense too):

  • It's my house. I have provided a place for my children to live and thrive. I've invited her to live here with me because that's what I want. I'm going to take care of the house as if it's my responsibility, just as I would if we were dating and she just came over a lot.

    • NOT: It's our house and we both have equal responsibilities to care for it. She'd better hold up her end.
  • My time is my time, which I invest in raising our children. I invite her to enjoy my time alongside me because I like having her around. I'm going to use my time in a way that balances efficiency, productivity, and enjoyment for our family. As my wife, I am inviting her to participate in that efficiency, productivity, and enjoyment (with a few boundaries), but she does not rule my time.

    • NOT: We're married. We both have obligations to each other. We must allocate our time in a way that meets these mutual obligations.
  • It's my money, which I invest in our children's upbringing. I set the household budget. Even if she's working, it's because I am leading her in her fulfillment of that role instead of her maintaining a SAHM role. I allow her to spend money within the confines of the budget that I have set for the family because it is helpful to me and builds trust for her.

    • NOT: We can each do whatever we want with our own income. Or, we each contribute to the marriage in different ways, so we both have a say in how the finances are spent.

CHANGING BRAIN PATTERNS

As a matter of fact, these assertions would not stand up in court if you were to get divorced. But remember, women don't want to feel like wives; they want to feel like the hot girl who's dating the bachelor who has it all together. That's why they felt all tingly before they were your wife and stopped when you started treating them like a wife (in the modern cultural context of how wives are understood, of course).

The stable husband mentality is, essentially, to live as if you are a single dad with sole custody of his kids dating a hottie who you like having around. It says: "I have an established life, but I'm inviting you into my life. You are an outsider, but I want you here anyway. As you respect the fact that I am inviting you into my life, you will learn to enjoy the safety and comfort that my life has to offer you. I respect that you have independent wants and desires, but they will be exercised within the boundaries I establish for your participation in my life."

The above mindset establishes step-mother thinking in her. Step-mothers often accept the fact that they are joining in on a pre-established system. They do so because they like that system. If the guy is beta, he'll let her change the system, but often she doesn't like what she makes it become, hence repeated divorces and remarriages. As has been often said before: Women don't know what they want. When they think they do and try to get it, they are often disappointed. If their husband tells them what they should want and then fulfills it for them, one of two things can happen:

  • She finds that he's right and respects him for knowing her so well and making her happy; or

  • He's wrong, but she chalks it up to her husband trying something and it didn't work; it's his fault she's not happy, not hers. Incidentally, she's happy that she can blame someone else for her unhappiness.

    • This is unconscious salvation from the alternative: she fails to make herself happy, causing a mini-crisis because happiness becomes an elusive concept that is always beyond her reach. Take away her control over her own happiness and, ironically, she will be much happier.

PERSISTENTLY UNHAPPY WIVES AND FOOTBALL-LOVING GUYS

Some people complain that nothing they do makes their wives happy. They're just always sour. To them, I say: Keep up the stable husband mentality. Even if his method fails to make her happy repeatedly, she eventually learns to love his system anyway - not only because it gives her an excuse for her own internalized emotional ignorance, but also because she will feel fulfilled contributing to something beyond herself.

It's like when a man is happy that his favorite sports team wins a game. He experiences happiness vicariously through the players. His life has not actually improved in any way, but his emotional state does because their emotional state does. By developing an emotional commitment to that team, he has entered their system and allowed his emotional state to be tied to their successes and failures. Your wife does the same thing with you.

The problem is that if you've been failing for too long, she stops believing the victories matter. I grew up in Cleveland. Nobody really gets excited when the Browns win a game. There's a half-hearted cheer, but at the end of the day, they all know they're not going to the super bowl. But when the Cavs won the NBA championship and the Indians made it to the world series, now those are teams we can get excited about, even when they lose a few. Why? Because the potential victory is there. If your wife sees that you could be a super bowl champion kind of dad and husband, her emotional satisfaction will latch on to your victories, even if they're small ones, like the first couple games in a season.

It's also worth noting, if you see a team of fat and/or scrawny video game/porn addicts romping out on that football field, even if they win the super bowl by some miracle, you're not all that excited for the win, and you have no confidence in them for next season. You chalk up the victory to a fluke. That's why fitness is key: she has to believe you're a consistent winner, not a fluke-winner.

REGAINING THE STABLE HUSBAND MENTALITY

I'm not going to say much here other than to follow most of the rest of the advice on this sub and do the required readings. I'm done with the "course prerequisites" and will be starting the 101 series after developing my ability to apply the material from the prerequisites first.

But from what I see, the most important factor in regaining the stable husband mentality is simply to take over. Act like you're a single dad dating a hottie and you invited her to live with you. Even if you don't think she's hot, treat her like she is anyway. When she feels sexy, she'll try harder to be sexier. I started this process a few months ago (officially discovering TRP/MRP about two weeks ago) and am already seeing tremendous results.

  • I consolidated calendars so I'm the one scheduling the kids' doctors appointments, birthday parties, swim lessons, etc. She sees that I am the lead parent and she helps implement my plan.

  • I started organizing the crap shelf that's had mail and who-knows-what items sitting on it for the past month. She sees that where she brushed responsibility aside, I get stuff done.

  • I straightened out the garage so it's an actual part of the home again, not the aftermath of a tornado. I fixed the floor of the deck that caved in a week and a half ago. She sees that her rule threatened our shelter [read: biological necessity] and mine restores and bolsters it.

  • I keep my car clean, whereas hers is a mess (even though I do most of the driving with the kids). She sees that her life is chaotic, but I bring order in those exact same issues under harsher environments. Next up: clean out her car too.

SUMMARY: Every woman looks at the rest of the world and thinks, "They have it all together. Why can't I have it all together too? I wish my life was like theirs." This is how cheating starts - desiring things outside the home. You want her to think: "My husband has it all together. I wish my life was like his." Now she is desiring you inside the home. She sees your system (which I now see is just another word for "frame") and genuinely can't resist wanting to attach herself to your life. She will still feel like an outsider for some time, but that's okay - you want to foster that a little. If she sees you as an outsider [Edit: assuming no other psychological barriers]:

  • She will respect your decisions.

  • She will let you parent your children and not undermine you with her emotional connection to them. Bonus points: when she sees you as the primary caregiver of the children, she internally realizes that her legal basis for custody is whimpering away, making her less likely to do anything that would instigate divorce.

  • She will be happier because she is no longer responsible when things go wrong (it's not our mess; it's his mess).

  • She will desire you. A simple note on this: ever wonder why people think marriage commitment sucks the life out of sex? Because she's no longer the outsider operating within your system; she sees herself as your co-equal peer. You don't even need dread for this to work (though it certainly helps). [Edit: Desire doesn't always mean sex or action conformity. Women desire things but don't do anything about it all the time. All you're doing is fostering a psychological condition in her that opens doors for active conformity and puts shiny things on the other side; she still has to choose to walk through, and women don't always make the logical choice.]

Best wishes guys.


[–]screechhaterMRP APPROVED20 points21 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

sidebar quality material.... calling all mods

[–]beta_no_mo6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed. Flair this man

[–]redditJ54 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Upvote

[–]zayelionFluent in Retard2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Someone add this to the side bar please!

[–]Alpha_Engineer9914 points15 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Fucking awesome post. "the most important factor in regaining the stable husbandmentality is simply to take over." - GOLD

I realized actually this after 10 fucking years of misery in a dead bedroom. I read MMSLP and it felt like I got hit in the face with a 2x4.. That's when I envisioned the flux capacitor, which makes time travel possible and pussy wet....

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I envisioned the flux capacitor, which makes time travel possible and pussy wet....

the real reason men invent

[–]DanceMonkeeDanceMRP APPROVED0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I time travel for the wet pussy.

[–]yallapapi10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Best post I've read on here in a while. Hope to see more. Definitely interested to hear from the perspective of a divorce lawyer. Would love to read more about that. 5/5

[–]MentORPHEUSTRP Endorsed Contributor10 points11 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

ECs and Vanguards sometimes discuss the phenomenon of becoming so familiar with Red Pill concepts after a few years that it becomes uncommon to encounter fresh approaches or new insights to these topics.

This is definitely one of those refreshing new perspective posts! ♂


They act alpha because it's their courtroom and they have positional authority, but they have no internally radiating authority. They still crack jokes from the bench: "You're here because you didn't do the dishes like she told you, right?"

Jesus, I'd hate to proceed with having this person make binding life decisions affecting myself and my kids in the minutes after this. Would it be beneficial to the individual, as well as apply feedback to the system, to immediately request the case be heard by a different judge?


if the father convinces the mother of this through emotional abuse ("You'd better never leave me or I'll take the kids" and she believes him), a different maternal structure develops that is distinct from the biological step-mother.

When you have time it would be interesting to see this expanded to go with the other categories you've covered.

When I read the title, I expected this to be about yet another wife/mother archetype; the biological mother who is really phoning in the work of mothering, doing the bare minimum if even that while probably complaining about what hard work it is being a mother. They don't seem to have a normal bond with their own children, like a crummy step-parent. Do you see these cases in divorce court, or do you think they dissolve the bonds by forfeiting upon branch-swinging, thus aren't seen much in your day to day court work?

[–]Red-Curious[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Would it be beneficial to the individual, as well as apply feedback to the system, to immediately request the case be heard by a different judge?

This is pretty much holding a gun to the head of your case and pulling the trigger. Clients request this periodically, but there is no worse decision you can possibly make.

  • No judge voluntarily recuses himself from a case unless there is an ethical conflict of interests. It is an inappropriate abdication of responsibility and can get them in trouble with the state supreme court.

  • Asking them to recuse themselves is taken as a joke. "I don't like how you think. Can I reroll and get someone better?"

  • The other side always opposes it because if you want to switch judges there must be a reason that would help them.

  • Once you insult the judge that way, he's going to ruin the rest of your case, taking it out on you personally in some way.

  • It's professional suicide for the attorney who has to practice before that judge in future cases.

I've only once ever gotten the job done, and that judge now holds a vendetta against me (I only did it because it's a county I rarely go to). I went for it because it was a bullet-proof case and I could have gotten the judge disbarred if he didn't recuse himself. Your evidence has to be bullet-proof.

father convinces the mother of this through emotional abuse ... different maternal structure develops

interesting to see this expanded to go with the other categories you've covered

It's really not as interesting as it sounds, and is exactly what you'd expect. The mother sees the husband/father as a threat and becomes a protector over the children. Rather than her being attracted to his display of authority, she's repulsed by his being a douche. As a result, she doesn't respect him, he doesn't get sex, the relationship falls apart. Although women cheat on men more than the other way around (at least in my cases, it's 60%W to 40%M), this is the one scenario where guys end up cheating about 80% of the time because mom's too afraid that if she gets caught dad will get angry and carry out his threats of stealing the kids. The threats are believable because dad is so charming (that's how he swept her off her feet in the first place) that she believes he can manipulate the courts, and so does he. Dad is so psychologically aggressive and manipulative that mom feels trapped with no way out ... until ...

After his infidelity the woman thinks she has more leverage in the divorce because courts will look down on him for it. She's sorely mistaken because the courts don't give a crap who anyone screws, but she ends up with custody anyway because dad's a douche and everyone can see it. 9 times out of 10 these dads can't keep their mouths shut, so there are clear text message and e-mail logs of them cussing mom out or belittling her. Even if dad is a charmer and smart enough not to leave evidence behind, mom eventually wises up (through legal counsel) and starts audio/video recording him, saving his voicemails, recording phone conversations, etc. all without him knowing, which is legal in my state.

Long story short, these moms become incredibly defensive and withdrawn. They passively-aggressively start building evidence until they can take the guy down, sometimes even intentionally starting fights and arguments to manipulate him into saying dumb stuff to make herself look sweet and innocent to the courts, playing the victim card. It works.

There's no point going into how these men can re-ignite passion with their wives because they don't want passion in the first place; they want fear and control, and they already have it. Sex is all a power play for them, and not about expressing inner desire.

They don't seem to have a normal bond with their own children ... Do you see these cases in divorce court, or do you think they dissolve the bonds by forfeiting upon branch-swinging, thus aren't seen much in your day to day court work?

Being that I deal almost exclusively in cases that involve psychological issues, I see this literally every single day. What you're describing is a woman with either borderline or histrionic personality disorder (or possibly a combination). These women also often have a mood disorder of some type, usually with depressive features. This combination of the mood dysregulation (i.e. inability to control mood swings, illogical mood patterns not grounded in reality) creates a positive feedback loop with the histrionic personality disorder (essentially: addicted to drama), whereby the mood disorder creates drama, the histrionic personality plays off of that drama to cause chaos in their lives, the chaos further disrupts their mood, etc., etc., etc.

The reason I mention borderline personality disorder in there is because borderlines are detached from reality altogether with much of their lives. They almost literally experience life as if they are a phantom in the astral plane looking down at their bodies watching the show with a bucket of popcorn. Most borderlines have been severely abused as children and develop this reality detachment as a defense/coping mechanism, but later on in life it impairs their judgments and prevents them from being able to develop sustainable meaningful relationships, even with their children, and they're often the first to give up their kids in favor of the latest fling in their lives. I have a case right now against a mother doing just that - she abandoned the kids to a schizophrenic father, and I'm representing that father's parents (i.e. the child's paternal grandparents) in getting custody back from the mom.

Here's the thing, bipolar women are usually (1) extremely good looking, and (2) extremely passionate. (1) Because their history of abuse caused them to believe that their body is what everyone wants, so they take care of it and flaunt it. (2) Because, frankly, they're crazy. Because they are incapable of developing long-term relational connections, all of their emotional and relational energies get concentrated in short bursts. These are a serious, serious problem for RP guys because they're exactly what most RP men are looking for: hot and incredibly passionate in bed, usually into all the kinky stuff. They're dream girls for the first few months. But when the depressive mood disorder sets in or she swings away from a passion phase, they'll key your car and screw Chad for no reason at all. Despite much of RP thinking, some of these girls go to Chad not because he's alpha, but because she's literally crazy and incapable of sticking it out with any one guy for too long. Besides, the histrionic nature can't handle the reality of daily obligations in a stable, safe environment.

Not sure if that's what you were looking for, but that's the word-vomit that came up when musing your question :p

[–]briareos_uk8 points9 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

This post is excellent. Saving this and probably printing it out and reading it every single day forever. Good writing sir.

[–]Red-Curious[S] 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Thanks :) It's my first non-question post here, so I'm glad I can finally contribute back with things I've learned.

[–]redditJ51 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Your vantage point and view point from where you work is priceless.

Can you tell which men are totally BP?

[–]Red-Curious[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Being a divorce/custody attorney really doesn't give me any super-power of discerning RP/BP guys from each other. To be perfectly honest, until a couple months ago because of how I interact in my professional life I assumed I was an alpha guy. After reading NMMNG I realized just a few weeks ago that in my marriage I was waaaay more BP than I thought.

Interestingly, my wife asked me what I was reading the other day (WISNIFG) and I answered, "Just a book on how to be more assertive and a family leader." Her response was, "You of all people don't need to be more assertive, and you're a great leader." So, I opened up the first chapter of NMMNG for her, read the list of 11 traits of the "Nice Guy Syndrome" and she acknowledged, "I guess you do do a lot of that."

So, as of a few months ago I was a BP guy trying to become RP for a wife who already thought I was alpha. Interestingly, we had a DB marriage for the last 6 or 7 years (an entire year and a half with no sex at all, mostly because I was too bitter to initiate). This proves to me that a wife is attracted to actual alpha, not her perception of alpha. So, even though I had my wife convinced I was RP, she subconsciously was not attracted because I was actually BP in disguise. Now that I'm actually growing in my RP-ness, she's getting tingles again.

Sorry, that's a long answer to your question: I didn't even know I myself was BP, so no, I didn't see RP/BP distinctions in my clients until I discovered TRP/MRP a couple weeks ago (before that I took a Bible-based approach, distinguishing authoritative v. passive men, which is very similar, but not quite the same).

[–]platewrecked6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Outstanding post. Best and most accurate description of divorce court I've ever read in 20 years of practicing law. Well done.

[–]beta_no_mo5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I wish I'd seen this two years ago before my marriage crumbled under the weight of her fucking another dude while I was out of the country.

This is basically MRP101 with the legal implications of such a mindset. Excellent, excellent post.

[–]TonkaXcranK4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Adding this to my weekly required refresher. Damn good!

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Really brilliant insight thanks great post

[–]MrTippy2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Props, man. This is excellent.

[–]phunyphukr2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This is the best post I've read on MRP. I had an empathetic and capable lawyer. He was instrumental in the judgement of full custody in my favor. I was in law school at the time and spent a fortune on custody to avoid my daughter ending up like her mother. This is really empowering and useful information.

Thank you.

[–]wtf_is_taken1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

very interesting perspective, gj op

[–]ilfj1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Woman are the same across the continent.

I had a friend who went through the domestic violence case by his wife. His lawyer being a lady always took the wife's side and literally killed him. The lawyer also charged him a hefty amount.

Being naive he was taken advantage by his lawyer and his wife. He lost a lot of his hard earned money to these two ladies.

"Take Over" is the very strong and important key word. Which needs to be implemented in every man on earth.

[–][deleted] points points [recovered] | Copy Link

What else will she do if I do all these things?

[–]Red-Curious[S] 4 points5 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

That's the illusion. You're really not doing a ton of extra stuff ... maybe a few extra things in the beginning because you don't yet know how to own your own life (i.e. you forget what needs to be done and everything you forget is on you).

All you're really doing is shifting responsibility for which of you comes up with the list of things that need to be done each day. Even when you delegate back to her the exact things she was doing everyday already she will end up doing them without stress even though her daily activities have not changed.

Why? Because thinking about what needed to be done is what gave her stress. It trapped her in the comparison game against an impossible standard. Women love checking boxes off lists (it gives them a sense of accomplishment) ... they just can't handle making the list.

[–][deleted] points points [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm not critiquing the strategy. I will be right beside you telling men to live like she died yesterday, and you have 100% of the house, and everyone under it in your care. It gives you the ability to cull the dead weight, and gain value from the rest.

e.g. if the wife isn't fucking you on the regular, and isn't handling shit domestically, then what need is there for her to be there?

I also love the legal strategies for men to stop fearing losing their children, the #1 reason men stick around with shitty women, because they cannot emotionally handle the idea of being separated from, and weaponzed by their children. It's been batted around here, and I was hoping to find the articles a few years back by the red pilled single dads out there. They laugh at how easy it is to schedule their children, with a just a little bit of planning and patience.

This comment is drawing attention to the horrible mental model created here with your second half:

If you do this, she WILL love you the way you want her to love you.

This is setting up a massive covert contract, where guys will choreplay the hell out of things, then sit there with their hand out, waiting for respect and pussy. Also, expecting that a woman wanting a divorce won't fight tooth and nail, because they did all the dishes. This hasn't jived with any experience I've had, seen, or read about. Here, and in my IRL.

Do this shit because you want a good outcome. You want to raise a bunch of useful kids, you don't want to have them weaponized, forcing you to pay ex wife through the nose for the pleasure of not having to work, while fucking chad. You do this because giving your wife the reigns will fuck things up.

Sure as shit DONT do it because you will turn her into a respectful sex kitten. Women can smell that validation seeking behavior a mile away, and will take full advantage of it. And the best part? While you are taking all the grey matter, and purposefully owning your shit? She is largely running on autopilot. guess who breaks first.

If anything, you made a solid case for Chad dad getting his way. All he needed was the self awareness to know how to calibrate with a little comfort now and again, and to know when his wife pulls a WigglyCharlie, and:

starts audio/video recording him, saving his voicemails, recording phone conversations, etc. all without him knowing, which is legal in my state.

Yeah, how she responds to all this is irrelevant IMO. Whats relevant is that you are in the best position you can be, regardless of what she does. If she decides to start 'acting right', getting a decent job, helping around the house, fucking you well and often, then great. If not, you'll easily find her replacement.

[–]Red-Curious[S] 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I was confused for a while because I thought this conversation was in the other thread (I was on mobile when I read and responded to you at first). Regardless, thanks for keeping me in check on this. I don't think I ever correlated our actions to her actions in the way most covert contracts work, but I probably did leave that impression and have made two edits as a result. In my summary, I clarified:

[Edit: assuming no other psychological barriers]

[Edit: Desire doesn't always mean sex or action conformity. Women desire things but don't do anything about it all the time. All you're doing is fostering a psychological condition in her that opens doors for active conformity and puts shiny things on the other side; she still has to choose to walk through, and women don't always make the logical choice.]

That said, cultivating psychological conditions is almost purely reactionary. Athol Kay does this a billion times in MMSLP. Whether or not she acts on that psychological conditioning is a different story. As has often been said, women don't always follow logic. So, you can put a pot of gold in front of her and there's always that chance that she might walk away from it for otherwise incomprehensible reasons. To that end, I feel confident in the "this for that" of how you can cause a woman to perceive you, but assuming they will adjust their actions to align with their perceptions is a fantasy that cannot be controlled. That doesn't mean we're without hope, though, or should just ignore her actions and response altogether. This is where probability and statistical methodology comes in.

Lawyer job aside, math and statistics are ingrained in my education and lifestyle. So, where the absoluteness of a legal contract doesn't apply, probabilities and confidence intervals take their place. This is actually true even in the legal world as well, which is why we have contempt of court actions when people break contracts - all we can do is foster a condition where they are likely to act the way we want. If I put a piece of cake on one end of the table and broccoli on the other end, then point my kid at the table, I have created a high probability that he will move toward the side of the table with the cake. The fact that I'm showing him cake (something he naturally desires) is not a covert contract, just like the fact that you expressing yourself to your wife in a way that she naturally desires is not a covert contract, and there's nothing wrong with expecting her to desire you when you act consistently with what she desires. It only becomes a contract when we build an expectation of action into the mix. Those expectations are never contractual obligations (and it ruins it if they become that); but establishing high probability both maintains the fun when you do get what you want, while also keeping you grounded in the possibility that condition does not always produce action.

This prompts me that it might be a good idea to do a post on confidence intervals. They work something like this. There is a normal distribution curve with the "mean" or median (depending on which model you use) being the peak. This represents how all people act within a given system. There are certain outliers on both ends, but the majority of people will fall right within the middle. A confidence interval is the % degree of confidence someone can have that a particular data point will conform to a specific range from the mean. Establishing a psychological setting shifts the mean up or down the scale to get it where you want it. So, on a scale of 1-100, given a certain set of conditions that I have established for my process, I can say, "I am 95% confident that the result will be between 76 and 84." As we widen the range to, say, 70-90, my confidence level increases because I now have an easier target (i.e. the CI might be 98%). If we narrow the range, our CI drops because it's a harder target.

So, as men, we have to decide the range of acceptable outcomes and adjust our system so that we develop an acceptable degree of confidence (usually 90% or higher; sometimes 95% if you want to go by most business standards) that our setting will produce a result within that range. Sure, the 10% or 5% chance might actually happen with our wives, and we build that into the system. But this is a case-by-case basis and not a person-by-person basis. So, out of 20 attempts, my wife might deviate from my expectations 1 or 2 times if my CI is accurate, but certainly not 7 or 8 times. If she does deviate 7 or 8 times, then there is a missing variable that I have not accounted for and it's back to the drawing board. In the midst of all of this, men should continue to be OI in how they proceed, but that doesn't mean we can't be intelligent about how we foster probability. We just can't be upset when we set up a 95% confidence condition and she chooses the 5%.

For the most part, OYS, passing tests, getting fit, and the other good advice here are all of the primary variables. But every individual woman has additional variables that only her husband will know about - they're her unique quirks. For example, my wife hates the word "juicy." So, although I may do everything else right, if I say in the middle of dinner, "This steak is so juicy," that's going to push her to become an outlier, increasing her probability of deviating from the mean and defying the confidence interval. So, I have to start accounting for that in future interactions, whereas men and women who just meet (i.e. TRP people instead of MRP) can't account for these things, giving married men an advantage if they have actually paid attention to their wives even only a little bit throughout the relationship.

I'm not sure how much of that you agree with, and I know math and formulas can't explain everything, but this is how my world functions and I'm finding it to be reliable on a consistent basis. It also explains concepts we see a lot like, "If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got" - because the same formula always produces the same data points. To be clear, it's not about setting up a covert contract; it's about fostering probability.

how she responds to all this is irrelevant IMO

In a perfect world, I would agree. Unfortunately, this is TRP thinking and not my interpretation of MRP thinking. If men treated wives like plates, where they just drop and replace her when she doesn't conform, there would be no point of MRP in the first place - everyone would just keep using TRP. The fact of being at MRP presumes that men want to preserve their marriage in some way. So, "you'll easily find her replacement" might be true and a nice preparatory mentality, but it's not what most of us actually want.

This is where men have more variables than TRP accounts for, because there is value in the LTR that often gets undermined. This value causes us to seek to bolster our marital relationships and restore them to their former glory rather than "ditch and replace." To that end, my wife's response does, in fact, matter - just not to my plan for improving and securing my life. I interpret OI meaning that I will keep improving regardless of whether or not my wife responds. It doesn't mean I create an emotional or biological (i.e. sex-drive) detachment to her responses, which would just be a sucky way to live. Even to that end, the "ditch and replace" model actually says the same thing: you are so emotionally and biologically attached to her responses that if she's not meeting that emotional need with her responses you need to find someone else who will.

Legal consequences of divorce alone are enough to prove this. If you're in a 25 year marriage and your wife rejects sex all the time, you can't just say, "What she does is irrelevant; I'll just keep being awesome." At that point you have to accept the sexless life, which will have an impact on you whether you like it or not; or you can fool around on her, she divorces you, and you're stuck paying spousal support for life ... which will have an impact on you whether you like it or not. No matter what, her actions will impact you in some way. She can't control your emotions, but her response to your actions does impact your life condition. This is a reality best not left ignored.

[–]2gunsgetsomeMRP APPROVED1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Red-Curious[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Hah, I do now. I started my RP journey 6 months before finding RP (discovered the principles from other sources). By the time I actually found RP, it was like turning the power on to an electrical relay that I had just spent the last 6 months building. I saw no progress for those 6 months, then BAM! All at once, there it is. Here I am about two weeks later and happy as can be. So, I'll keep trying to give back to the RP community, as it has helped me, even in the relatively short time I've been here. In the meantime, I'll keep dealing with all the haters who think I shouldn't post anything because I'm so "noob."

[–]triclops410 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

A discussion of evaluating probabilistically would be very useful for MRP, and something pretty much everyone needs to do more of.

It is part of becoming outcome independent. If you do things the right way, you aren't guaranteed to win every game, but you have put yourself in the best position to do so.

If you do this, she WILL love you the way you want her to love you. replace "she WILL..." with "you have put yourself in the best position to be loved the way men desire"

how she responds to all this is irrelevant IMO

With a probabilistic clarification that her response, especially from a small sample size, should never be a priority for evaluating your behavior, these don't need to be in conflict.

[–]Red-Curious[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Already working on a post about this ... should be up soon.

[–]drty_prMRP APPROVED1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Solid post man. I can't wait for the second post in this series on split custody.

[–]alphabeta49MRP APPROVED0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

I like the advice, but it is different than other advice I've gotten from lawyers in my city. Granted, the two that I got the most in-depth consults from were both women.

I've been under the impression that she needs to be able to handle herself like an adult, so that if we get divorced she can't lay complete provision on me and rape my wallet. She's a SAHM. So little things I've been delegating to her, training her, watching her. Things like handling insurance questions for her braces, scheduling swim lessons for the kids, and keeping pressure on her to contribute financially with a 4-hr/wk, $50/hr job. She really can be quite the helpless child if I don't keep throwing these things at her. I'm always the boss, and this isn't used as an excuse for me to drop the ball. But I do delegate and observe.

I agree that your point is valid, that being the center of the family as the stable husband is attractive and helps your custody case because it appeals to her illogical senses. But how does her dependence on you affect other things like child support, alimony, etc.?

[–]Red-Curious[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

But I o delegate and observe

Yes. I addressed this in my "corollary" post titled, "Dealing with the stressed wife." I completely agree: Do not establish a lifestyle where she does nothing and you do everything. That will work out poorly for you.

For example, I once had a case where my client was in a deposition being asked about household responsibilities (they had no kids). He kept getting angry and I kept stopping him and trying to move the question along, but he eventually turned to me and said, "No, I want to make this clear on the record." Against my better judgment, I let him speak. He said, "I have done everything around here. I have produced all of the income, done all the house work, taken care of the yard, etc., etc. She sat on her butt for the last 30 years doing nothing but spending my money." The other lawyer smiled and said, "I'm glad you now understand the lifestyle expectation you have given my client, and the courts will be very interested to hear this." We still won that case on different grounds, but I now forewarn my clients the same thing: don't just do everything for her. Delegate. Make her do things, but you take the lead in how you do it.

Also, bear in mind that I did say in my post:

The father/husband must take the following attitude, regardless of whether or not it makes legal sense to do so

and

As a matter of fact, these assertions would not stand up in court if you were to get divorced

The point is that this mentality is what is required to restore the marriage and maximize your odds; not to ninja-dodge state statutes.

How does her dependence on you affect other things like child support, alimony, etc.?

Most of my clients say that custody and parenting time are the most important aspects of the case and that everything else is peripheral. So, I do emphasize the custody component.

That said, deferring to my other post, I do agree that delegating is essential. When a step-mother moves in she doesn't just lounge in luxury; she integrates. The difference between this and the biological mother mentality is that biological mothers assume co-equality and co-ownership of everything, whereas step-mothers presume it's all his and she's joining in on his system.

Incidentally, if a biological mother does develop this attitude toward her husband, if they are ignorant of the law (as 95% of women are), they may naturally assume that their rights in divorce aren't as strong as they actually are. If she's attracted enough to her husband because he has his act together, she may never get around to researching divorce in the first place, so she never wises up.

[–]alphabeta49MRP APPROVED0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I wrote this comment before reading your other post. Not sure I would have written it the same way. These sentences especially hit home:

That's why they felt all tingly before they were your wife and stopped when you started treating them like a wife

and

The stable husband mentality is, essentially, to live as if you are a single dad with sole custody of his kids dating a hottie who you like having around

I've been relying on my wife to pick up her slack too much. There are a few parts of my household that I'm still not involved in or aware of the details. This is a good reality check.

I commented on your other post too. You've got a good style here. Keep it up.

[–]Red-Curious[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

There are a few parts of my household that I'm still not involved in or aware of the details.

This is actually okay, over time. The captain has to be super hands-on when he hires his first-mate. Once he trusts his first-mate, the captain should be able to rest easy that there are some things he doesn't have to concern himself with anymore.

They key is that the captain trains the first mate to do the job the way he wants it, and only then does he stop overseeing that job. If he hired a first mate and just said, "That's your job, do it however you want," that wouldn't be a very good captain and it would create problems with other aspects of how the ship is run.

Otherwise, thanks for the feedback :)

[–]ReddJiveMRP APPROVED0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Very timely advice.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I wish I were gay.

I'm divorced and I no longer feel desire to be with women like you describe (and like my ex). Once I understood them like you explained, there is no appeal. I still like sex with my ex, but I can't see myself sharing a life with women as described here.

[–]Kiddynomite770 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

This might be the best post I've ever read on MRP, or maybe because it hits me at the right time. My wife is a SAHM and has been diagnosed with some borderline mental disorders (your comments nailed this issue as well). Dealing with her "absent queen" attitude brought me here to MRP six months ago. I'm just now getting past my anger phase I've been the primary homeschool educator of all of our kids for 15 yrs. while working, and I've been struggling with what could happen if this marriage blows up, custody battles, etc.. I had gone through that with one child from a previous teen relationship, and did not want to fight in court again decades later when I have more to lose relationally and financially. You've made me consider that I need to change my attitude and be more thankful that my kids see me as the oak in their lives and not mom (about the one area in my life I was RP, was in my parenting) because it could actually help me in court one day. Thanks a ton for taking the time to share your expertise.

[–]Red-Curious[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks for the feedback. I'm sorry to hear about your situation. If you want more input on how to deal with someone with a borderline personality disorder, I just made a decent write-up in this post over on r/RPChristians.

I also talk about BPD a bit in the end of this comment on this thread.

I hope that helps :)

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter