TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

48

To me, both sides have pretty obvious points and their base tenants are not necessarily opposed.

Red Pill believes women like:

- Fit Built guys (confirmed in many studies)

- Men with attractive faces (pretty obv)

- Men with status/money (pretty obv)

- Men who are socially fluent (pretty obv)

How do you really contest any of the above points? At the same time "Blue Pill" will usually suggest that women generally like

- genuine guys (pretty obv)

- likable guys (pretty obv)

- friendly guys (pretty obv)

- empathetic guys (pretty obv)

Again, how do you really contest these points?

I've never met a woman who has said they want an asshole boyfriend that treats them like shit but is attractive and has money and power.

I've also never met a woman who has said they just want a nice genuine out of shape guy in poverty who has no spine who has no idea how to fit in at dinner parties.

The only real debate imo would be is if women had to choose, what traits would they prefer. I think generally speaking that's a pretty subjective thing that is very context-dependent.


[–]ohheyhi99Conflicted Feminist Man, No Pill28 points29 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

The debate is about which traits take priority. As a non-RPer, I think most women prefer nice men, but will take more shit from a guy or set double standards in his favor if he’s attractive. Ditto for dudes with attractive women, but everyone knows this. People who tell guys that the traits you listed under BP are just as crucial to attraction as the traits that you listed under RP (especially looks) are setting them up for failure and frustration.

[–]OGHuggles[S] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Why wouldn't security always take priority? Maslow's hierarchy of needs exists for a reason. Of course generally speaking if your dude is letting you spend money on designer shit and furniture you're going to tolerate a lot more from him than a mate who doesn't provide that much. And a partner that is strong and fit is just an even more primitive form of security.

This kind of also explains why higher status women generally speaking take a lot less shit from dudes. Because they don't need security from them.

[–]XtoDoubtMen Do It Too10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women have the provisioning side of their mating strategy covered. They either make their own money or rely on the state. That's why TRP emphasizes the alpha side so much. She gets most of the beta side on her own. The 85-15 rule for Alpha/Beta mix is probably ideal for most men.

[–]ohheyhi99Conflicted Feminist Man, No Pill4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Security can be a draw, but I think attractiveness is a more powerful trait for a man to have these days. Sex and relationships used to be much more utilitarian, but these days, raw desire plays a larger role.

“This kind of also explains why higher status women generally speaking take a lot less shit from dudes. Because they don't need security from them.”

True, but let that dude be attractive and security probably won’t be as important.

[–]Mulkvistee🌮🧃👻36 points37 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

They don't contradict more often than not in the real world. Online it's convenient to act like attractive traits NEVER occur within an attractive person to illustrate some point about evil Stacy or asshole Chad.

[–]neubiiAUT9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You can never trust what a woman says, only what she does. Most all women claim they want a nice caring guy, who doesnt have to be a Chad in looks. Nevertheless they date and go for the assholes and chads, get used, pumped and dumped and say all men are assholes. They say they want a romance as protraied in movies and yet if someone does it, they get put off as needy and cringey. Women are emotional and only judgable in their choices they made. I can always claim i am a CEO, stacking cash and actually work at mcdonalds.

[–]slytherluneA broken lass on a Halifax pier19 points20 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You're right. I'd no more go for someone unattractive who nevertheless was a nice guy than I would someone totally attractive who wasn't. So... there's no real choice to be made, for me you have to be some of both.

Walking stereotypes of either are equally a turnoff. Bleh.

[–]sometimespredictable11 points12 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Blue pill doesn't disagree that girls like fit, good looking guys with money and status. That is obvious. They say that girls like a fit, high status guy who is also friendly and compassionate.

Red pill says that, well they only look at how fit, hot and high status you are and they don't care for your compassion and friendliness at all. I mean, they obviously want a friendly compassionate provider to settle with. But those traits don't arouse them, don't make them attracted, they don't factor into how they select a mate.

[–]LeJacquelopeHaving a son is child abuse1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Red pill says that, well they only look at how fit, hot and high status you are and they don't care for your compassion and friendliness at all.

Well, I mean look how many women married Donald Trump.

[–]TheseAcadia5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Basically:

Nice Chad > Asshole Chad > Mixed Beta > Nice Beta

[–]Pontifex_Lucious-II15 points16 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

Because the BP categories only matter if the RP categories are satisfied.

“Niceness” means nothing if you’re weak. It means quite a lot if you’re strong.

[–]LotBuilder5 points6 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

All the BP traits don’t matter if they can’t get in a position for them to matter. Same with girls. You have to be physically attractive enough to get the one on one time needed for the other positive traits to surface.

[–]Pontifex_Lucious-II1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Yea. Girls just need to be hot

[–]PMmeYourHopes-Dreams2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Many women need to be more than hot to get the relationships they want.

[–]Pontifex_Lucious-II2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Sure, but not to attract men.

[–]EpikYummehLurker2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Most dudes will put up with a boring woman to have a woman.

[–]FalseBuddhaSomething borrowed, something Blue6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Most dudes will put up with a boring woman to have a woman get laid.

[–]Pontifex_Lucious-II-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yea. The male’s goal

[–]OGHuggles[S] 1 point2 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

The way I see it is simply that "red pill" attributes are simply much more primitive and fundamental whereas "blue pill" attributes are more socialized.

[–]Pontifex_Lucious-II6 points7 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

That’s what we call naïveté

[–]OGHuggles[S] 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

explain

[–]Pontifex_Lucious-II9 points10 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

If you possess no recourse for vengeance or damage, who cares if you’re nice?

Is the fly nice to the spider by letting it consume it?

True altruism or “niceness” is when one has the option to damage but restrains oneself.

RP beliefs tell men to strengthen themselves.

BP beliefs just tells them “to be nice and empathetic”. Empathy without utility is useless.

[–]OGHuggles[S] 3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

How does that contradict what I said?

[–]Pontifex_Lucious-II6 points7 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Because guys can possess all the BP traits you outlined and still be useless and unattractive.

[–]OGHuggles[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

> The way I see it is simply that "red pill" attributes are simply much more primitive and fundamental whereas "blue pill" attributes are more socialized.

[–]Pontifex_Lucious-II6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The focus isn’t RP is “primitive”, it’s without RP qualities BP qualities amount to horseshit.

[–]BeIatrix1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You need to sociallize ur primitivity, if there is no primitivity there is nothing to sociallize, You need to know that you are capable of doing very bad things and decide to do good, not to be "good" bc ur incapable of doing bad things... :))

[–]Truedemocracy53 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Agree on this. Many nice people simply have no choice. Generosity with nothing to give is worthless

[–]AggravatingTartlet0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Because the BP categories only matter if the RP categories are satisfied.

But RP believes that women like assholes and criminals and men who don't treat women well and men who spin plates and cheat on them. Which makes the second set of beliefs null and void for RP.

[–]Pontifex_Lucious-II3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

No it just means they aren’t necessary for attracting women

[–]AggravatingTartlet0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

No it just means they aren’t necessary for attracting women

Do you mean attracting women in the first instance (in the second they first see a man) or for a relationship?

[–]Pontifex_Lucious-II0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Attracting women for sex.

[–]TheJim66Red God-Emperor of Slut Country0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Some of them have some value but only in the later stages of a relationship and always tempered.

[–]Dora_Bowl2 + 2 = 4 is a sexist statement10 points11 points  (63 children) | Copy Link

What Red Pill users make the mistake of in this case is thinking that being an “asshole”, “jerk” etc. Is attractive to women, but they fail to realize that women are more likely to put up with that behavior from attractive people. They use it to justify their misogynistic attitudes or bitterness towards women I think. Everything you listed above as a “Red Pill” belief about attraction I doubt any significant number of Blue Pill users deny it. The controversial part of the Red Pill is not the dating advice, but it is the politics of it.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here9 points10 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Idk I often see women describe a dude she’s pinning over as an asshole for making her wait and not texting back immediately along with a range of other behaviors. Whether or not that constitutes asshole behavior is besides the point.

Hear me out: we can’t really discount the idea that what women describe as asshole behavior actually makes them more interested. It’s entirely possible that what she considers asshole behavior is just men engaging in an abundance mentality and not putting her first or making himself out to be desperate.

We can’t discount the fact that asshole behavior is not universal, certainly subjective and oftentimes mislabeled. It’s entirely possible, and what I’ve personally experienced to be the case, that women do in fact become more interested by these behaviors they often describe as “asshole behaviors.” Not all women of course, but especially the ones prone to casual sex.

[–]Dora_Bowl2 + 2 = 4 is a sexist statement3 points4 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Yes, and she is already “pinning over” him, which means he was already attractive.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

The “asshole” behavior still makes him more attractive

[–]villanelle23eve4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Honestly a lot of redpills are accomplished at being a****s, so why aren't they already attractive?

[–]wellhellotherefellas1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Apples?

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

They were wannabe assholes.

[–]poppy_bluBeware the freight train5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It’s entirely possible that what she considers asshole behavior is just men engaging in an abundance mentality and not putting her first or making himself out to be desperate.

Never thought Id say this to you Smoogs but this is dead on

[–]EpikYummehLurker0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Hear me out: we can’t really discount the idea that what women describe as asshole behavior actually makes them more interested. It’s entirely possible that what she considers asshole behavior is just men engaging in an abundance mentality and not putting her first or making himself out to be desperate.

Women want to chase, despite often being chased by suitors. Take away the mystery and frustration of not getting their way with a man, and they want more. They want to conquer him. But his behavior doesn't allow it. I think the term "asshole behavior" is a generally false classification, though it's apt because to most dudes it does seem like being an asshole.

[–]Truedemocracy5-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

If a woman ever calls you an asshole it means she wants to ride your dick hard

[–]ohheyhi99Conflicted Feminist Man, No Pill-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It’s a badge of honor.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

A lot of women are hooked on conflict, they thrive on drama and actually become more invested when guys disrespect them.

That's what's meant by "being a challenge". Clearly you're walking a tightrope here, you can't overdo it, but I'm sure you've seen this kind of behaviour if you open your eyes to it.

Exciting average guys > boring chads, for a lot of women. You know who you are

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect2 points3 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Exciting average guys > boring chads, for a lot of women.

Definitely not how it works for the vast majority of women. Why would I want a less attractive guy who treats me like crap and doesn't value me, if I could have a more attractive guy who loves me and treats me like a goddess?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Because you find conflict entertaining and suspenseful and get bored of being treated like a goddess. It's a bit like why you're arguing with me instead of looking at kitty photos on r/aww.

Majority or not... they're out there

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Personally can’t relate to that at all. I’ve been with my fiancée since I was 20 years old and haven’t gotten tired of being treated like a goddess yet. We literally never fight, and it’s bliss. Debate is entertaining, sure, but I’m not sexually aroused by it. And I wouldn’t want conflict beyond my control. I’m sure there are some women into any behavior you could describe, but I think it’s far fewer than you believe.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I never tried to put a % on it!

[–]LeJacquelopeHaving a son is child abuse0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

Why would I want a less attractive guy who treats me like crap and doesn't value me, if I could have a more attractive guy who loves me and treats me like a goddess?

Because that makes him a doormat and easily manipulated?

Oh wait...

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

How is he a doormat if I treat him like a king and he treats me like a queen? That's just equal and mutually beneficial partnership.

What, am I supposed to worship a man who treats me like dirt? Oh wait...

[–]LeJacquelopeHaving a son is child abuse0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

How is he a doormat if I treat him like a king and he treats me like a queen? That's just equal and mutually beneficial partnership.

Then that's a totally different, highly desirable and extremely rare situation.

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

I think it’s only rare because most people don’t know how to communicate efficiently or step out of their own shoes and focus on empathizing with their partner. My fiancée and I have been together for 5 years now and never so much as bicker. But we’re both good communicators and love each other, so... that makes a big difference.

[–]LeJacquelopeHaving a son is child abuse0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

We went a good 5 years that way. Then the kids started piling up (four of them)...

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Oof. Yeah, that can cause tension and conflict. I’ve seen it happen. Neither of us plans on having kids, though. We’re more on that DINK wavelength.

[–]LeJacquelopeHaving a son is child abuse0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not true, a very good looking nerd will trump an exciting average guy. The "women love nerds" fad going on today is entirely based on this.

[–]OGHuggles[S] 1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

I think there is a distinction between aggressive/dominant behavior and rude/assholish behavior, and it may be the case that a lot of people trying to be the former actually just employ the latter.

[–]eboy4hire2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

See, I actually see any dominant behavior as being an asshole. A friend says to me: "Come on, let's go." like I'm his dog or something, and I'm not going to like it. Idk why women like this.

[–]villanelle23eve0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

That's bossy, it comes off rude with a side of dismissiveness. What people mean when they say "dominant" or "aggressive" usually when it comes to men, is "confident", and "sexual". It's coded male, so of course you gotta bring hierarchy into it and change the words. It only confuses the issue even more.

[–]eboy4hire0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

I've said this many times but the word confident doesn't compute to me. Sexual is something I understand and can see how there are specific actions behind it.

It's coded male, so of course you gotta bring hierarchy into it and change the words. It only confuses the issue even more.

Are you just talking about the guy dictating the position during sex? Is that the extent of what's meant by dominance?

Are you saying of course I have to bring hierarchy into it or of course you in general have to bring hierarchy into it? Like are you saying it's necessary to bring hierarchy into it or are you saying my male brain can't comprehend the dominance without a hierarchy being involved?

[–]villanelle23eve0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

I've said this many times but the word confident doesn't compute to me.

Interesting. To me there's a clear difference between someone who is awkward and stuttering and glancing around himself all the time, and someone who feels free to walk around and cracks jokes with ease, and doesn't sputter around girls.

Sexual is something I understand and can see how there are specific actions behind it.

Yep!

Are you just talking about the guy dictating the position during sex? Is that the extent of what's meant by dominance?

No, I mean the claim to be higher than someone on the hierarchy, or be able, or entitled to control them. There's no reason to codify "confidence" with "dominance." I guess it sorta shows dominance over yourself, but other than that one word without potentially alienating connotations is enough.

Are you saying of course I have to bring hierarchy into it or of course you in general have to bring hierarchy into it? Like are you saying it's necessary to bring hierarchy into it or are you saying my male brain can't comprehend the dominance without a hierarchy being involved?

I'm saying that the English language, which grew up in a male dominated society based on patriarchal relationship dynamics over centuries, can't comprehend talking about interpersonal relationships between males and females without pigeonholing everything men do into the category of dominant, and everything women do into the category of submissive. It's in the words we use, and the ideas we construct.

[–]eboy4hire0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Interesting. To me there's a clear difference between someone who is awkward and stuttering and glancing around himself all the time, and someone who feels free to walk around and cracks jokes with ease, and doesn't sputter around girls.

It's definitely not black and white though. I have good days and bad days. Also I wouldn't say I am free flowing and crack jokes with women with ease, but if I put my mind to it I can talk to anyone I want. I'm not debilitatingly shy and I can rise up to any challenge when it comes to having the balls to do something. I don't usually enjoy talking to women for that long. Eventually I burn out, and that's usually when I get ghosted.

[–]villanelle23eve0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Well obviously ppl have entire lives when they're not interacting with a specific person. You can be confident in one moment, then walk around the corner and be awkward. I have to say tho it's not about how you feel inside, it's about the performance you put on

[–]eboy4hire1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I think really feeling it does make it more convincing though, but I could be wrong. The most recent time I got laid I really wasn't feeling it, but for some reason she was really interested in "seeing places I hang out" and I said "you can check out my apartment if you want", and we literally just went back there and had sex. lol

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Incorrect. There is not objective measure. Not sure why bloops assume as much.

[–]Truedemocracy50 points1 point  (11 children) | Copy Link

Wrongo. If a girl ever and I mean ever calls you a dick, douchebag, or asshole then it means she wants to fuck you

10 times out of 10. Those are insults given to someone in a position of relative power

Weird, creep, loser, etc are given to someone in a position of relative weakness

[–]Dora_Bowl2 + 2 = 4 is a sexist statement2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Why do you think this?

[–]Truedemocracy51 point2 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

a girl calling someone an ass hole or a douche means subconciously that she is putting him above herself and is vying for her approval. Every girl that's ever called me an asshole Ive slept with. It's a massive IOI

[–]Dora_Bowl2 + 2 = 4 is a sexist statement1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

How do you know this?

[–]Truedemocracy53 points4 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Fucking a mad amount of whores

[–]wellhellotherefellas1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Teach us how to be cool like you.

[–]Truedemocracy51 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

That’s why I’m here mate

[–]wellhellotherefellas1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Good stuff.

[–]villanelle23eve1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Truedemocracy51 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The bitch asked

[–]BeIatrix2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

m8, don't know where ur getting this things from but believe me, lots of girls calling me an asshole that didn't wanna fuck me, XD

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

Or you didn't know how to escalate and use to your own advantage

[–]Shadow_Of_Chad-Lite0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

What these bitter people need to adopt is unshakable confidence and not having to worry about being more tactful with women.

[–]Dora_Bowl2 + 2 = 4 is a sexist statement0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I do not think so, a lot of them seem to regard women as demons with great power.

[–]Shadow_Of_Chad-Lite1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

"All men are rape" lmao

[–]rus9384Misanthrope-1 points0 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

I have seen bloops finding it manipulative to make girls wait for a response. And yet, it's red pill dating advice (and it was PUA advice back then AFAIK).

[–]Dora_Bowl2 + 2 = 4 is a sexist statement-1 points0 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

It is manipulative, do you disagree? But it ultimately does not matter.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope-1 points0 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

The problem with bloops is that they are mixing morals with observations.

They would usually say girls don't fall for that trick, they'll just spot you are a player if you adopt that strategy, etc.

However, they don't bring evidence for that.

Nor red pillers bring evidence that making a woman wait works.

[–]Dora_Bowl2 + 2 = 4 is a sexist statement0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

What does that mean mixing morals with observations? Women can spot men who just want them for sex too, really easily actually.

[–]XtoDoubtMen Do It Too2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Women can spot men who just want them for sex too, really easily actually.

Tell that to every woman ever who's been pumped and dumped.

[–]Dora_Bowl2 + 2 = 4 is a sexist statement1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

That does happen, but I imagine the majority of the time it does not.

[–]XtoDoubtMen Do It Too0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I guess it's hard to measure attempted pump and dump to sniffed out pump and dump but the stories are ubiquitous across cultures and history.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

What does that mean mixing morals with observations?

E.g. just world fallacy.

Women can spot men who just want them for sex too, really easily actually.

So, they easily recognize that a man wants them only for sex when he makes them wait for a response?

[–]Dora_Bowl2 + 2 = 4 is a sexist statement0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Red Pill users use the just world fallacy a lot more(see discussions on sluts), not really sure why it matters or what that has to do with observations and morality.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

You mean, red pillers believe sluts end up on dump? That's BS.

[–]eboy4hire0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

If you're anything like me, technique doesn't really work. You might think you're getting somewhere with the responses you get from your behavior, but until it translates consistently to closing you can't really know how you're impacting the woman.

[–]BeIatrix0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Part of the reason for "the making her wait" is to fake/falsify ur "busyness" making her think that you have a demanding job, or work to do, or you are preocupied in anyway with ur personal life. Now, if you would actually have a life, there wouldn't be any need to falsify/fake it . . . So my advice would be to GET A LIFE. You could start marching towards that goal by making some friends in the ACTUAL world and get a hobbie, and start advancing ur career or job. Thing that would make you happy, SO YOU WILL BE HAPPY WITH URSELF, and you wouldn't have to fake that either

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Everyone has leisure time: you don't have to appear busy 24/7.

[–]sadomasochristnAWALT = Not red pilled-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Narcissism, arrogance and dominance are preferred traits in STR mate preference studies.

[–]Willow-girlProud 2 B an American farmer2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Men grow up with all the women in their lvies (mom, grandma, auntie) telling them how wonderful they are and to "Just be yourself" when it comes to finding a "nice girl"! Thus they're surprised when the horrible truth comes out.

Society doesn't lie to girls, because it doesn't want them to get pregnant, but traditionally parents didn't want a spinster daughter hanging around their house her whole life either. So women are told the truth, and operate under no illusions where male nature is concerned.

[–]HolgerHans1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

telling them how wonderful they are and to "Just be yourself"

Wut??? No man ever gets this bullcrap, that's entirely what parents tell their daughters. That's how you end up as Tinder sluts, when you've never learned to work for something social as a woman.

[–]Willow-girlProud 2 B an American farmer0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Nope. Moms (especially single moms) dote on their sons. Girls, on the other hand, face constant criticism about their weight, their fashion sense, behavior, etc. (This criticism is likely goaded by parental fears that a girl will either be too attractive, thus prone to an out-of-wedlock pregnancy, or not attractive enough to land a high-status partner who will take her off her parents' hands.)

Sons (unless they're rebellious) tend to be adored. I once had a small-town police chief tell me that if he jailed a young man over some mischief -- fighting or dealing drugs or some such -- the boy's mother, grandmother, aunt, sister, etc., would be in his office the next day protesting the unfairness of the action and insisting that the suspect is really a good boy. OTOH, he said he never once had a family member show up to plead a girl's case.

I found that telling.

[–]MrEctomy2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I've never met a woman who has said they want an asshole boyfriend that treats them like shit but is attractive and has money and power.

That's what they say. Now look at who they date.

[–]GayLubeOilTrue Red Pill2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The Females of team Blue Pill have chemically castrated themselves with hormonal birth control, obesity and antidepressants to the point where their endocrine systems don't function and they are no longer attracted to traditional markers of masculintity.

This can be substantiated by looking at pictures of them because they all basically look like this.

So Instead of looking for a fertile healthy male they are interested in finding a friendly empathetic genuine buddy which is coincidentally what prepubescent girls look for in a 6th grade boyfriend.

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

That's some good science right there homie!

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

when i look at the hottest women i know (19-21 yo models) who have their pick of the litter, the guys they date only really have one thing in common: social clout and esteem. literally everything else listed here is a toss up lol. (ESPECIALLY the "fit/bullt" body thing)

[–]ohheyhi99Conflicted Feminist Man, No Pill0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Interesting. Expected that “fit/built” wasn’t a huge deal, but the rest of what you wrote still surprises me.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Many young women (21-) are into boyish, twinky looking guys. Think skinny hot musicians, lanky models. Ofc you certainly can't be fat, but they aren't necessarily 'built', agree that's a toss up these days in particular. But yes, status, height, hot faces, and money above all. Of course, it won't last without some of the personality aspects, but it seems that trp doesn't care about that much.

[–]EpikYummehLurker0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

He/she is talking about the Instagram generation. People who care so much about how many likes and comments their photos get, and views on their stories. Gaining visibility ("social clout") through other "popular" people is a chase of its own, and a relationship is a means to that end, with ending up with a social figure who is also attractive simply being a bonus.

[–]poppy_bluBeware the freight train4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Red Pill believes women like: Fit Built guys (confirmed in many studies), Men with attractive faces (pretty obv), Men with status/money (pretty obv), Men who are socially fluent (pretty obv) Blue Pill" will usually suggest that women generally like: genuine guys (pretty obv), likable guys (pretty obv), friendly guys (pretty obv), empathetic guys (pretty obv

It's just asinine to believe that men can't display traits from both lists.

[–]EpikYummehLurker2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Agreed, but I don't think that's the point. OP's critiquing each pill's priorities, which is the reason for their separation.

[–]poppy_bluBeware the freight train-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

They. Are. Not. Separate. You’d be hard pressed to find a woman who’d say she doesn’t want a guy with traits from both.

You guys are so hell bent on seeing the world in black and white you don’t even make sense anymore.

[–]EpikYummehLurker0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

You don't even know me and from one comment you're making a grand assumption about my worldview. I never said those traits are mutually exclusive. I said they're separated by pill in OP's post to highlight the priorities of the two pills. I don't care about pills; never have, never will.

[–]Truedemocracy55 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Anything that could potentially hurt someone’s feelings in today’s world is to be masked and replaced with comfort. We are a coddled generation.

If a guy asks someone about a girl he likes the advice will never be “put on 15 pounds of muscle and start talking to other girls to make her jealous”

But go ahead and buy her those flowers chump

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

Exactly.. Nobody tells how it is except terps. And women hate it. And bloops hate the competition too since they can no longer be soft soy boys with fat rolls.

[–]Willow-girlProud 2 B an American farmer-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

We are a coddled generation.

You know, I was just thinking about that the other day. How so many products are marketed as "soothing" or "relaxing" or some such. As if the average consumer needs everything from their socks to their "skin calming" body wash to stroke their heads and go, "There, there, everything will be all right!" Is society suffering from a lack of mother-love? Strokes chin

[–]almaryl 1 points [recovered]  (3 children) | Copy Link

I think generally speaking that's a pretty subjective thing that is very context-dependent.

You have already answered your own question here.

[–]OGHuggles[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

But you definitely can't say that about everything. There is absolutely a set of objectively preferred characteristics and objective negatives. In so far as anything that isn't a hard science fact can be objective.

[–]almaryl 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

The title of your post is "Why is this topic controversial?" I assume that 'this topic' is the topic of what male characteristics female find attractive. I believe that it's controversial because it's subjective. If you asked ten different women, you would get ten different answers. However, :

There is absolutely a set of objectively preferred characteristics and objective negatives.

I agree with you on this one. We can talk about evolution and how it might be the cause of hypergamy etc. However, I don't think it's a place to discuss here. My point is preferences always differ among individuals, and it id context-dependent as well (use your own words here).

Let me give you some example. My close friend is a feeder and she loves BHM (big handsome men). One of the guys I'm seeing is lanky, the other one is shorter than me, while the last one is a chad. My grandma chose my then dirt-poor grandpa instead of a rich doctor, and they have been married for more than 60 years. I, on the other hand, would probably pick the doctor guy. Those three dudes somehow seriously chasing me when I started treating them like shit. I don't know what the world has become anymore.

Anyway, do I make sense? I think I drink too much coffee today.

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

I really don't know all of these terms, lmao.

But ye, that makes sense.

[–]HWGA_Gallifrey1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The same reason Oz yelled, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" it breaks the illusion.

[–]Punkybrewster11 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

My number one trait in men is brains. Intelligence doesn’t show up in either list?

[–]ArchonourSexist0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Sure brains. You wouldnt date an below average genious though. Or even better, a fat super smart guy.

[–]Punkybrewster10 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Personally, I would. Especially if he was confident.

[–]AndemanMan1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I've also never met a woman who has said they just want a nice genuine out of shape guy in poverty who has no spine who has no idea how to fit in at dinner parties.

Literally the other day I saw a Reddit post by a woman saying she wanted to meet a short, balding nerdy guy that makes her laugh. It's the Summer of George!

[–]Willow-girlProud 2 B an American farmer-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Can recommend, lol.

She can't have mine though. He's taken!

[–]Next_Flow11 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I've never met a woman who has said they want an asshole boyfriend that treats them like shit but is attractive and has money and power.

That's coincidental neither have I! On the other hand I know tons that date them, and guys who are shit heads who never have problems getting laid.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women say all kinds of things but their actions never lie. So here's that

[–]Shadow_Of_Chad-Lite1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The blue pill is wrong. I could be some cannibal psycho serial killer and I could still get a girl.

[–]LeJacquelopeHaving a son is child abuse0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Charles Manson would agree.

[–]FieldLine1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The only real debate imo would be is if women had to choose, what traits would they prefer.

We don't need to debate this at all. Just look at the data. What are they choosing?

I think generally speaking that's a pretty subjective thing that is very context-dependent.

It's not subjective at all. Look at the data.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

This is a ludicrous presentation of the red pill

Has the entire concept of Game disappeared from these discussions?

No shit theres nothing controversial about be fit and confident

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

Has the entire concept of Game disappeared from these discussions?

Yes. Only game mentioned now is inner game. Abundance mentality/you're the prize bullshit

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Has the entire concept of Game disappeared from these discussions?

The incels surgically extracted it from TRP. No point in learning game if all women care about is height, looks, and jawline.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Men with attractive faces (pretty obv)

TRP says explicitly women like masculine faces, which means for TRP masculine = attractive, while in the reality hypermasculinity is a thing and many women find that unattractive.

At the same time "Blue Pill" will usually suggest that women generally like

  • genuine guys (pretty obv)

  • likable guys (pretty obv)

  • friendly guys (pretty obv)

  • empathetic guys (pretty obv)

TRP claims women are not sexually aroused by that (and it tells pretty much the opposite), it does not claim women don't like these things at all.

Also, I don't think TRP says that being fun and smart, and etc. does not help with women. Quite the opposite.

I've never met a woman who has said they want an asshole boyfriend that treats them like shit but is attractive and has money and power.

Yes, women prefer the full package, especially for relationships. But if your goal is to spin plates it's silly to think that bad girls (typically, sluts are bad girls) usually are attracted to good guys.

[–]wellhellotherefellas0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

What's hypermasculinity?

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Too masculine looks.

[–]Tealllane 1 points [recovered]  (28 children) | Copy Link

Redpill guys are just incels in denial that aim to blame their lack of "success" on women.

[–]MrHerbSherman🤠 howdy0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Hi wildly successful came here hating red pill and realized it was true after I argued it for a bit AMA

[–]TealllaneNo Pill0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

All of the pills are nonsense.

[–]XtoDoubtMen Do It Too0 points1 point  (25 children) | Copy Link

This has to be bait. It just has to be.

[–]Tealllane 1 points [recovered]  (24 children) | Copy Link

Nah. I am convinced Redpiller, Mgtow, and Incels are all the same. Just a bunch of sorry sacks who can't own up to their own shit and want to blame society. Nothing but pathetic men who want desperately to play the victim card, but can't...so they seek out Echo Chambers where they can get some sort of false sense of comfort.

If some guy I was friends with started talking with their rhetoric they aren't coming out to the bars, clubs, or anywhere with me.

[–]XtoDoubt 1 points [recovered]  (23 children) | Copy Link

Probably for the best. You can buy a girl a drink and she can go home and bang him.

[–]Tealllane 1 points [recovered]  (22 children) | Copy Link

"Him" who? I found these little subgroups after getting suspended from Facebook, and I laugh at them with men and women. It is comedy gold how pathetic these dudes are.

Chads, Alphas, Betas, pills...all that shit is nonsense. And I show more and more "normies" the websites and subreddits regularly and they laugh.

People in the real world look down on and laugh at redpill, mgtow, and incels.

[–]XtoDoubt 1 points [recovered]  (21 children) | Copy Link

Of course they do. It's outside of the Overton window. Why would you expect it to be any different?

[–]Tealllane 1 points [recovered]  (20 children) | Copy Link

I don't expect different. I introduce them to those groups do we have something to laugh at.

[–]XtoDoubt 1 points [recovered]  (19 children) | Copy Link

Any other small niches you like to make fun of in your spare time?

[–]Tealllane 1 points [recovered]  (18 children) | Copy Link

I make fun of everyone.

[–]XtoDoubt 1 points [recovered]  (17 children) | Copy Link

You sound really cool.

[–]AggravatingTartlet1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The blue pill believes ALL those points, not just the second set. The red pill largely doesn't believe the second set.

That's where the conflict of beliefs come in.

[–]AutoModeratorBiased Against Humans[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Attention!

  • You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.

  • For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.

  • If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.

  • OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]grand_tiremasterjust curious0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I am red pilled, however I like a man that is a mixture of these characteristics. My boyfriend lifts but is a big softy. I need a man that is emotionally available and can be vulnerable with me.

[–]TheReformist940 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Because the cut off point I'd the top 5%. How long are we going to debate this

[–]LillthOfBabylon0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Because alot of Red pilled guys have a chip on their shoulder and never want to admit that its their personality thats the problem with his dating life. Hence, he thinks that women dont care about personality (because he doesnt care).

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

This is a good topic. I think the issue lies in how we prioritize these qualities. If we were going to build the most optimal man, what comes first? IMO, principles come first, then having a purpose, then self development, and somewhere far down the line comes niceness, humor and the blue pill traits. The thing with the blue pill traits is that they are not an imperitive, but a luxury. Being a strong, well developed man affords you the luxury of choosing to be kind and not get walked all over. Conversely, being nice but weak and misguided is a path to misery.

[–]LifterofThingsDelicate Feminine Flower0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Because when women say they "like" a man they mean "enjoy spending time with him, are comfortable with him, find his company pleasant".

What men mean when they say a woman "likes" a man, is that the woman wants to fuck the man.

Therein lies the discrepancy. Women don't want to be partners with a super-aggressive poon-hound alpha... but they're not overwhelmed with the animalistic urge to fuck sweet, non-threatening billy beta.

Ideally you get a relationship with some of both dynamics at different points in time.

[–]PPPPDAccount0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree that most people are ok talking about it in vague terms - oh, some women like this or that. The controversy comes in when TRP attempts to quantify these traits so they can copy naturally successful men. i.e. If you're only this attractive, you need to be x% alpha and y% beta. It feels like gaming the system to a lot of people, and people in general don't like cheaters.

[–]LeJacquelopeHaving a son is child abuse0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The issue is that muscular guys, men with attractive faces trump every other kind of man, ever. With notable exceptions. And Bloopers want to deny this basic fact.

[–]katymarxPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

How many traits do I get to choose from? Im down w a Build-A-Man SIM!

[–]jayval90PUAs are Blue Pilled2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It's called the "looking for" settings page on eHarmony.

[–]katymarxPurple Pill Woman1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Fuck eHarmony

[–]Dora_Bowl2 + 2 = 4 is a sexist statement-1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Do not really care about you just name dropping some study. Did you read through it yourself? If you did it should be easy for you to explain it.

[–]OGHuggles[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dora_Bowl2 + 2 = 4 is a sexist statement-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Okay, so you did not read it.

[–]OGHuggles[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

ye, the study is actually not about strength correlations and attractiveness, of course

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

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