TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

44

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/women-who-stray/201812/feminists-think-sexist-men-are-sexier-woke-men

Women like bad boys. At least, that’s the story. And there’s lots of writing and anecdotal experience to back that up. Men frequently complain about being “friendzoned,” the idea being that men who are respectful toward their female interests get placed into the role of friend, rather than potential boyfriend. The “pickup artist” community has embraced this concept, teaching men how to behave in assertive, dominant ways that, allegedly, are more successful with women. Many of these concepts and dynamics themselves have been called sexist and misogynistic, reflecting underlying beliefs that women “owe” men sex. The “incel” community, a group of online males who complain bitterly, violently, and angrily about being “involuntary celibates” attack women for choosing “Alpha males” rather than softer, kinder men. . . like themselves

These are complex, highly politicized dynamics that foster conflicts and finger pointing between the genders. Unfortunately, research suggests that women do in fact find sexist men attractive. Gul and Kupfer recently published research where they conducted multiple experiments, testing women’s attraction to different types of men, and teasing out women’s motivations.

Benevolent sexism is a concept describing a form of sexism which is overtly less hostile and misogynistic, and are beliefs that I was taught, as a man from the US South. Benevolent sexism includes beliefs that:

Women should be “put on a pedestal”

Women should be cherished and protected by men

Men should be willing to sacrifice to provide for women

Women are more virtuous than men

Women are more refined and pure, compared to men.

Despite aspects of benevolent sexism appearing chivalrous and romantic, previous research has found that women who endorse these beliefs often demonstrate approval of restrictions on women’s freedoms, independence and autonomy, and may impact women’s support for gender egalitarianism.

Even in men who were not being scoped out as potential intimate partners, women were more likely to see sexist men as more attractive. Women who were both more and less feminist displayed similar levels of attraction to sexist men, so this effect isn’t the result of women not being “woke” enough.

Women who find sexist men attractive are not being traitors to other women, nor are they naïve women who don’t understand their choices. Instead, they are women who are making rational decisions, accepting tradeoffs. They are women who recognize that it may be more beneficial to have a partner who is committed to them and willing to sacrifice for them and their family, than it is to have a “woke” feminist man who wants them to be independent.

Considering it is "toxic masculinity" day again, I thought it would be appropriate to post this article for discussion. Remember that toxic masculinity is defined as “a practice that legitimizes men's dominant position in society and justifies the subordination of women, and other marginalized ways of being a man." Benevolent sexism includes the idea that women should be protected and provided for and therefore be subordinate. So when someone says women don’t like “toxic masculinity” you can link this thread. Benevolent sexism fits the very definition of toxic masculinity.

TLDR: Paternalistic providers are more attractive than woke sycophants. This places male feminists lower in the male-attraction hierarchy than BetaBux. Article tries to skirt around the obvious reality that Dark-Triad Chad still reigns supreme, but at least we now know for certain male feminists have the worst reproductive strategy on Earth.

Discuss


[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.29 points30 points  (41 children) | Copy Link

Seems a little black and white. Like I can say the male archetype I am most familiar with among my peer group and living in the south perpetuates both things: pro feminist in that they are pro women achieving, pro female leadership, independence, etc. But they still also engage in benevolent sexism behaviors. Won’t let you pay, won’t let you open the door first, etc.

Many of them are still provider types towards the women they care about and are married, romantically successful, etc, but they still fully embrace the whole go women thing too.

[–]flamingoinghome 1 points [recovered]  (26 children) | Copy Link

the male archetype I am most familiar with among my peer group and living in the south perpetuates both things: pro feminist in that they are pro women achieving, pro female leadership, independence, etc. But they still also engage in benevolent sexism behaviors. Won’t let you pay, won’t let you open the door first, etc.

I live in a large city in Europe and that's what most of the guys me and my friends date are like too. I'd also add that a lot of the research done on benevolent sexism is REALLY flawed, in that the studies I've seen don't differentiate between, e.g. a man who holds doors for women or a man who holds doors for you.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.2 points3 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

Why would they need to differentiate that in the studies though?

[–]flamingoinghome 1 points [recovered]  (15 children) | Copy Link

Because one is clearly benevolent sexism (doing things for women because they're women) while the other is an expression of personal interest (doing things for you because they like you). Perceiving someone as sexier because they pay you attention and act like they like you is a very different thing than liking "benevolent sexism".

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.7 points8 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Oh i see, ok, makes sense. There's also factors related to age, perceived status, etc. So for example when I say men won't let me pay it's also a factor that I'm not the boss/partner and a lot of the men who won't let me pay are, they feel it is like their obligation to not let the "underlings" pay (which goes for male underlings too).

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

So for example when I say men won't let me pay it's also a factor that I'm not the boss/partner and a lot of the men who won't let me pay are, they feel it is like their obligation to not let the "underlings" pay (which goes for male underlings too).

Exactly! If I'm out to coffee with a senior professor, they (man or woman) will treat, because it's bad form to let the grad students pay. It's not always a gender thing.

Edit; I'm a grad student, dammit!

[–]wekacuckLife is settling.3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

That's a very good point. Difficult to control for, though. Would a woman who's interested in a guy know the difference?

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Would a woman who's interested in a guy know the difference?

Speaking as A Woman, I have OBSESSED over whether it's one or the other. Any group of women will have the endless discussion of "does he like me?" and figuring out whether someone is just doing x, y, or z for etiquette/ benevolent sexism reasons, or out of personal interest will very, very often come into that.

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

it's always because he likes you.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS2 points3 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Because one is clearly benevolent sexism (doing things for women because they're women) while the other is an expression of personal interest (doing things for you because they like you).

Still sexist, because women generally don't do that shit for men, even if they're totally into them.

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat4 points5 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

No, they do different shit. Are they being sexist towards the men?

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Is the shit they do patronizing like benevolent sexism is? Then yes, it’s sexist.

[–]aretournerPPD = mimophant party2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

patronizing

Hmmmm. This sounds like something you've just assumed - that holding the door for a woman (male version of benevolent sexism) is somehow patronizing - i.e. that it's an implied commentary. "You're such a weak and frail little lady I guess I should help you with this big heavy door here!"

You're not the only one who makes that assumption. But, actually, I don't think it's entirely the annoying feminist faction who does it, either (to be clear I am acknowledging that there IS a faction of women, almost certainly smaller than anyone here thinks, that would get buttmad about having doors held for her).

There are ways for men to interpret the female version of benevolent sexism too, you know. For example, I make lunch for my bf on most days. I find that I very much enjoy making lunch for him and for reasons I have talked about before here - it's an overtly female, caretaking role. I take actual pride in making sure these lunches are healthy and delicious and nutritionally complete. They often come with a small, loving lecture on his inability to feed himself properly if I'm not doing it for him. He enjoys these lectures, as I enjoy giving them. He thinks my lunchmaking is funny and North American and a lot of effort when he could just get something at a cafe. But he also fucking loves it. A lot of men and women, including some very progressive types, either secretly or not so secretly enjoy these interactions in their relationships. But the male version of the "OMG! did you hold the door for me because you think I'M TOO WEAK TO DO IT MYSELF?!" lady exists. I've dated him. He gets buttmad about the lunches and the loving lectures because he thinks he's being called stupid, he thinks it's about being patronized rather than cared for. He's not able to appreciate a loving, gendered/sex role-y gesture.

Which is fine. If people feel patronized by stuff like that then I guess don't get into relationships with people who like it. But the 'patronizing' part is definitely in the eye of the beholder. Not everyone feels it. I don't.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That’s not what I assumed, that’s what the study shows. The study shows that benevolent sexist attitudes feel patronizing. Read the study

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Women can't be sexist towards men, and what different things do they do?

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Disagree that women can't be sexist towards men. But ANYWAY,

Usually make them stuff--food or weird little crafts. Plan shit for them. Sort of fret over them.

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

I am just going by what feminists say when it comes to sexism. And don't least some men make food for women and more so aren't men still today expected by women to plan dates? I give you the craft thing, but I really don't think the different shit if you will here is really that different but in fact largely the same. Now you can say how its done or what have you is different. Like I can see a woman baking a cake while a man would cook a steak for dinner type of thing.

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

And don't least some men make food for women and more so aren't men still today expected by women to plan dates?

None of that happens before they're dating, though. Women will do that stuff for a guy they aren't actually dating to show that they like them. She'll bake her "guy friend" muffins or something. The planning thing isn't even like dates--it's like, remembering stuff the guy likes/needs to do, and encouraging him to do it, not necessarily with her.

And most feminists will agree that women can enforce toxic masculinity, which is being sexist against men.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

That’s not necessary to differentiate.

Also, why would women want to give up privileges granted to them via benevolent sexism?

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat6 points7 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

It's ABSOLUTELY necessary to differentiate! It's the difference between someone doing stuff for you because of how they view your identity group vs someone doing stuff for you because they like you!

And because the "privileges" have strings attached.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I’m not sure how you would even control for that lol he could be the paying for your dinner because he likes you AND he thinks it’s the gentlemanly thing to do. Those aren’t mutually exclusive concepts.

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

I’m not sure how you would even control for that

The experiments in question involved writing those little hypothetical scenarios--usually involving two different male acquaintances, or coworkers. A decent writer could control for it easily just by adding another female character or two into the situation.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

They do though. The man who pays even in a coworker scenario is still deemed more attractive. The woman paying has no influence on how men view how attractive she is.

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's not what I meant--I meant they could introduce another female character who this guy is also helping carry heavy suitcases or something, to make it clear this is a benevolent sexism situation, not doing someone a favor because you like them.

[–]HumanSockPuppetEqual-Opportunity Oppressor1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Those pesky strings. It's no fun when people are allowed to have expectations of you.

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Again, if you don't like the price of a "privilege", it's perfectly valid to say you don't WANT it. I can carry my own suitcase if you'll take me seriously when I make a suggestion at work.

[–]HumanSockPuppetEqual-Opportunity Oppressor6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

For privileges written on piece of paper, maybe. We're talking about privileges written on your chromosomes.

I hope you never have to endure this, but if you ever find yourself in a sudden, life-threatening emergency pay attention to who gets more unsolicited help - you or the male bystander next to you.

We don't get to decide this stuff. This stuff IS us.

[–]SerpentCypher6 points7 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Honestly this describes most men in the west, even the ones that wouldn't describe themselves as "pro feminist".

I've never actually met a guy that is against women achieving, or female leadership. I've only seen people argue against it being forced, because they are pro meritocracy.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, it very well might. Which is another reason why it's not that black and white.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Openly showing such attitudes gets you fired that's why you dont see it

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women should be “put on a pedestal”

Women should be cherished and protected by men

Men should be willing to sacrifice to provide for women

Women are more virtuous than men

Women are more refined and pure, compared to men.

These are all things I've heard feminists say. Feminism is supremacist movement. Benevolent sexism (female privilege) is beneficial to women, it's why the pussypass is a thing. Feminists use it when they call for men to 'stand up for women' or talk about how women are 'less violent' or emotionally or morally superior to men.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Who would have thought being sexist as a man would get you fired from your job.

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

Hot take

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

you never met my husband

[–]Whodunnit88Survivied Purge Week 20182 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

god, is there anything not sexist nowadays?

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

But they still also engage in benevolent sexism behaviors.

Why do feminists can't admit women are privilege?

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Why do you keep following me around asking asinine questions of me nemo? Do you think I have some answer for you? Do you think I’m the “feminist spokesperson”? Did you think I wrote that comment to defend feminists who according to you won’t admit “women are privileged”?

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

The question wasn't so much directed you but in general. Your comment was top of the chain so I put it there so it could be seen.

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

Sounds like the perfect slave.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Nobody is enslaving them god could you be more dramatic

[–]Salty-Bastard0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's the standard in my neck of the woods too.

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil21 points22 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

Everyone is sexier than "woke" men.

Woke men aren't even woke, they just make the mistake of listening to what vocal women say they want, and believing its what women want, when what most of those vocal women want is a strong man.

Most woke guys are just trying a very bad strategy to get laid.

[–]BaiKinguUltraviolet Demon Witch3 points4 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Not everything a man does is to get laid.

Personally, I find if a man isn't ''woke'' on a topic such as feminism, they'll act obnoxious, aggressive and reactionary. ''Lol feminists are angry, ugly women and beta men who wanna get laid''.

Instant turn off for me, which is why I won't even bring anything related to the topic up, especially if i'm looking for something casual. Men have plenty of ways to ruin their own attractiveness in my eyes, I'm not gonna give them another one.

[–]mwait6 points7 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Personally, I find if a man isn't ''woke'' on a topic such as feminism, they'll act obnoxious, aggressive and reactionary. ''Lol feminists are angry, ugly women and beta men who wanna get laid''.

I don't see how sharing their honest opinion could be construed as reactionary. You may find it obnoxious, but they likely feel the same about you... So no harm no foul.

[–]BaiKinguUltraviolet Demon Witch1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

You don't see how sharing an opinion COULD be obnoxious if they act a certain way? ''I don't agree with feminism'' is a lot different from ''Feminists are stupid man hating bitches and they just need a good dicking''. Something more similar to the latter is more common, even if you don't bring up the subject at all.

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

Both statements are sharing an opinion. Would you find women saying men are trash obnoxious? As seems to me a matter of perception here.

[–]BaiKinguUltraviolet Demon Witch0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Right... and the way you share your opinion matters. Yes, if a woman is the same context says men are trash it's obnoxious.

[–]mwait0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

It's almost as if you didn't read my comment.

[–]BaiKinguUltraviolet Demon Witch0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's seems like you are socially unaware of the use of language in face to face context.

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil9 points10 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Don't you find it interesting how many "woke" men have been accused of sexual crimes lately? Few men just willing give up their balls without compensation and many of these supposed woke folk are just looking to get laid like any other man.

Its just not attractive to most women. In a way I was like this when I was first dating in my late teens. I thought women wanted these sensitive blah blah guys, I got absolutely no where. I started treating them "Like shit" which really wasn't like shit, but acting like I didn't care if they were part of my life or not and suddenly I'm in demand.

Funny thing is once I figured this out, I was talking to a group (4 guys one woman) about my discovery (this was pre-PUA by about a year or two) and the woman said I was wrong blah blah. Later that night she comes up to me and says I was right but she didn't want the guys I was talking to know as its bad for women, I never quite understood how but its like she didn't want them knowing "the secret".

Strong men are sexier than weak men, news at 11.

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

Later that night she comes up to me and says I was right but she didn't want the guys I was talking to know as its bad for women, I never quite understood how but its like she didn't want them knowing "the secret"

Oh how convenient

[–]couldbemage2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lots of women have said this to me, often with others around. Of course all the ones I've dated, because duh. But also others.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Personally, I find if a man isn't ''woke'' on a topic such as feminism, they'll act obnoxious, aggressive and reactionary.

I don't think you see the irony here.

Instant turn off for me, which is why I won't even bring anything related to the topic up, especially if i'm looking for something casual. Men have plenty of ways to ruin their own attractiveness in my eyes, I'm not gonna give them another one.

You can always date women.

[–]sketch16200032 points33 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

These are complex, highly politicized dynamics that foster conflicts and finger pointing between the genders. Unfortunately, research suggests that women do in fact find sexist men attractive.

"Unfortunately."

Because it turns out that women in the dating market are often not as enlightened or progressive as feminists would have you believe. The horror!

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women who were both more and less feminist displayed similar levels of attraction to sexist men, so this effect isn’t the result of women not being “woke” enough.

Feminists. The feminists want benevolent sexists.

It's because they pretend benevolent sexism is bad for women, when in fact it benefits them and they know that. Benevolent sexism is just female privilege. It's what makes white knights and beta cucks do the bidding of women, let women get special treatment and priority over men, and it's why the r/pussypass exists. Feminism was and is a supremacist movement. They pretend they're against benevolent sexism, but in practice they love it. They love when men do all the grunt work and sacrifice themselves. HeforShe, that's why they called it that.

The vast majority of humanity are asshats who view women as intrinsically better than men. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_are_wonderful_effect

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

''enlightened'' and ''progressive'' means, they are buying the feminists shit?

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

They're talking about benevolently sexist men, not the type of sexist men this sub would regard as most attractive i.e. aggressive "alpha" males. In fact, the beliefs they describe as making these men more attractive sound an awful lot like the beliefs of the people TRP likes to make fun of, like pedestalizing women.

Also, isn't the typical accusation that male feminists are just feminists because they're trying to get laid? Now we should stop being feminist so... we can get laid? How would that be any better, it'd still mean having your political views be decided by whether it is more likely to get your dick wet. I've got better things to determine my views on than the question "will this make women like me more?".

[–]wekacuckLife is settling.1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Yes, benevolent sexism seems to be one of the horseshoe topics where TRP/MRA and feminists are mostly in agreement.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I only see feminists being against it in the following scenarios:

  1. They're confronted with expectations that come with benevolent sexism (BS), which usually take the form of men expecting women to also conform to their ideal that leads to them being BS in the first place. But all the freebies women get because of BS? I rarely see feminists having a problem with that.
  2. They need something to complain about; or they refer to BS when they attempt to gaslight men who are pointing at all the upsides of being a woman.

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

In practice feminists perpetuate and really cultivate benevolent sexism among their male helots.

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

Feminists give it lip service, but in practice they use benevolent sexism. They're a supremacist movement. They don't actually want men to stop protecting and coddling them or giving them priority.

[–]Currycell928 points9 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

Dear bluepilled male allies,

Take note.

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

This study showed that feminist women prefer men that place women on the pedestal, that offer them help and that are willing to provide for them.

The study says that feminists prefer benevolent sexist men, but benevolent sexism is the dictionary definition of blue pill.

So the only joke here is that you didn't even read the article and went with the click bait title.

[–]Currycell922 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

benevolent sexism is the dictionary definition of blue pill

Woah, careful there. Competing for the gymnastics gold in the next Olympics are well? Benevolent sexism belongs with the gender role conforming trad types, not the male feminists ones.

[–]prostate-apostatespectacle beta-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I have never heard anybody refer to themselves as an ally .

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

I say it all the time and all the bloops deny it. TRP is basically a guide for bagging all the feminists you can fuck. Douchebag game does not work on trad women with brains

[–]passepar2t12 points13 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Show me a woman who identifies as a feminist and I'll show you a woman who can't come unless you slap, choke or restrain her during sex.

[–]allweknowisD0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

You realise being a feminist doesn’t mean you can’t like these things in bed, right? Why are people incapable of separating sex life with private life?

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

Because they're not separate.

[–]allweknowisD1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Say that to all the business men that like being used by dominatrixes

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Douche game doesn't work on trad women with brains. But aloof and amused mastery game works on all women, and conventional attractiveness works on all women.

[–]SweeterPicklesLet's Get Physical, Physical1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I honestly don’t think I’ve agreed more with anything here, and i don’t agree with most of the things you write.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

but the traits said to be found attractive by women are things trp actively advocates against. a lot of "benevolent sexism" is putting women on a pedestal lmao

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia2 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Read the article and not just the title.

They aren't talking about RP-sexism. They are talking about benevolent sexism, which is the opposite of TRP.

They are saying that feminists like pedestalizing betas that are willing to provide, commit and invest.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I can tell no one is reading. Also why is it called Benevolent Sexism? Sexism that helps Men and not Women isn't benevolent, why is this?

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Also why is it called Benevolent Sexism? Sexism that helps Men and not Women isn't benevolent, why is this?

Because it's specifically about sexism that seems (superficially) positive for women:

Benevolent sexism is a concept describing a form of sexism which is overtly less hostile and misogynistic, and are beliefs that I was taught, as a man from the US South. Benevolent sexism includes beliefs that:

Women should be “put on a pedestal”

Women should be cherished and protected by men

Men should be willing to sacrifice to provide for women

Women are more virtuous than men.

Women are more refined and pure, compared to men.

You are a benevolent sexist if you hold doors open for women because you think that's what a gentleman is supposed to be.

It's benevolent because you are trying to be helpful, but it's sexist because you wouldn't help men in the same way and because these ideas are usually based on the belief that women are in need of protection, leadership and help.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

The holding doors thing is so fucking stupid. Who doesnt hold doors open for men etc?

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

How many people go out of their way to open a door for a woman compared to a man?

Like if you order a taxi as a man you usually have to open the car door yourself. If a woman does it the driver might get out, walk around the car and open the door for her.

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

I dont go out of my way for either. If they're close enough I hold it if not nah I dont care who it is. That's just common courtesy. I've noticed 30s and down women are way less likely to say thanks which is always funny

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

Lol, i never see that. Most people just hold the door for the person (man or woman) behind them

[–]DixonCheese5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

yeah but the woke, balding male feminist gets to fight slut shaming and misogyny in exchange for reddit upvotes from women, and maybe a resentful handjob once a month.

[–]Diekgo1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Hahahaha... That was funny, and I believe that it's true too, sad, but funny.

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

Women love toxic masculinity? I'm shocked, absolutely shocked.

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Actually the conclusion of this study was that feminists are attracted to pedestalizing blue pill betas.

No one has ever called a willingness to help women carry heavy stuff, to offer them a coat on a cold date night or to be willing to provide for their family "toxic masculinity".

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew2 points3 points  (18 children) | Copy Link

Even in men who were not being scoped out as potential intimate partners, women were more likely to see sexist men as more attractive. Women who were both more and less feminist displayed similar levels of attraction to sexist men, so this effect isn’t the result of women not being “woke” enough.

so, just WOMEN then, not "feminists"

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 2 points3 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

I think the pin the authors were making was that these actions are attractive regardless of feminist beliefs.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew1 point2 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

feminism doesnt discuss or address what women should be sexually attracted to

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 4 points5 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

That’s not true. There are lots of branches of feminist that critiques what women are attracted to.

Also that wasn’t my point. The point being that feminist leanings seem to have no affect on those women preferring sexist men.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew1 point2 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

There are lots of branches of feminist that critiques what women are attracted to.

point me to these branches of Feminism with links

The point being that feminist leanings seem to have no affect on those women preferring sexist men.

the clickbait headline was "Feminists Think Sexist Men Are Sexier than "Woke" Men"

the actual content was "self proclaimed feminism has little or no effect on what women find attractive"

pure dishonesty

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 1 point2 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

Also to your first bit, I’m not going to post links to feminists who have critiqued marriage (something women are attracted to).

I understand you are well aware of their existence.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew3 points4 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

I’m not going to post links to feminists who have critiqued marriage

goalposts, shifted

always a pleasure smoogs

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (10 children) | Copy Link

Did you think I was talking about height and strength? Within the context of this OP, we are talking about men who are good providers and protectors.

Plus there are plenty of feminists who believe that all PIV sex is rape.

[–]aznphenix1 point2 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Plus there are plenty of feminists who believe that all PIV sex is rape.

How is that correlated to talking about what women are attracted to?

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy Link

Is the claim “women aren’t attracted to sex” the hill you want to die on?

Because women are certainly attracted to PIV sex.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The headline is still accurate. Feminists still think that sexist men are sexier than “woke” men.

[–]Forgotten_FuRyan2 points3 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

Ahahahaha! They also find malevolent sexism attractive, but will rarely admit to that fact. Either way, women are hurting for men to marry and give them children and financial stability. At 23% single motherhood is the most popular arrangement and 70% of American men ages 20-34 aren't married, while women lose 90% of their eggs by the age of 30. This is fueled, at least in part; by only men being required by law to register for Selective Service or become felons, be fined and lose voting rights. Additionally, since women are hypergamous by both nature and nurture; the aforementioned is also intensified by only caucasian men (the largest male demographic) not receiving Affirmative Action university admissions, scholarships and government or privately mandated hiring. All together, to say nothing of anti-male laws, divorce rates etcetera; it's arguably a great atmosphere for short term relationships, but a poor one for otherwise. L8R! Nikola Tesla — 'If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.'

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man0 points1 point  (11 children) | Copy Link

This is fueled, at least in part; by only men being required by law to register for Selective Service or become felons, be fined and lose voting rights.

lol wtf does selective service have to do with single mothers

[–]Forgotten_FuRyan2 points3 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

What does a female voting majority, that can't be drafted; who votes mostly for Democrat Party socialists and increased welfare and public service spending, have to do with single mothers? The question, as I put it, practically answers itself. The more something is subsidized, the more it grows.

"...Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat."

-- Then First Lady: Hillary Rodham Clinton, D.V. Speech In El Salvador (Nov. 17 1989)

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man2 points3 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

bro you might have some good points, but focusing on the selective service registration makes you seem like a nutjob. yeah its discrimination against men, but it's irrelevant. there hasn't been an actual draft in like 40+ years, and there won't be one anytime soon. the US has been at war since 2001 and hasn't needed a draft.

it's just a pointless thing to worry about

[–]Forgotten_FuRyan0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

Yet you took the time to hush me. I see you.

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

it's still retarded bro. don't be a pussy, just register for the draft

[–]Forgotten_FuRyan1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I did register for Selective Service or I'd become a felon, be fined and lose voting rights. You're willing to let women run the country, without any responsibility or consequences should things go wrong. No wonder we're in demographic winter, at 23% single motherhood is the most popular arrangement, 17.1% of women and 15.9% of men are cohabiting [The CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) 2018] and 70% of American men ages 20-34 aren't married, while the United States of America has 210 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities. Our female voting majority has bankrupted us at the government store. Your blind deference to females is a large part of the problem. Man the fuck up. Additionally, you're engaged in psychological projection. My last fistfight was with around a dozen men armed with full and empty beer bottles and a gun. I won. You're the pussy. Psychological projection is a defence mechanism in which the human ego defends itself against unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting.

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

none of that has anything to do with registering for selective service. also you're not persuasive at all, you actually hurt your cause by seeming like you're a crazy weirdo.

My last fistfight was with around a dozen men armed with full and empty beer bottles and a gun. I won. You're the pussy.

oh wow we got a badass over here. lol no one is impressed when people bullshit like this on the internet.

For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude.

so i guess that means that a person who accuses others of being a pussy is probably really a pussy himself....

[–]Forgotten_FuRyan0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, you are that person. That's what I wrote. Smh..... Listen, you know nothing about Selective Service or you'd know the penalties for not registering and who must register or who's exempt. Are you even serious right now?! As for my anecdote, there were and are several witnesses and I made a cringy YouTube video about the fight and something tangential to said subject. Apparently, wanting the equality, that so many pretend to want, makes me a radical nut job. Weak: most of you are that. My video: https://youtu.be/7kKZ07wYsJo Selective Service website: https://www.sss.gov/Registration/Why-Register

"My rage is derived from eyes so sharp they see through the idiocy being passed off as sophistication. Under the cloak of universal themes and terms such as freedom, change and acceptance, madness ensues, being readily welcomed by those whose mind's eye questions nothing." -- Justin K. McFarlane Beau

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

ahahahaha omg that video

but bro seriously i think you may have some kind of mental illness you should go to a doctor and get checked out. and quit watching anime that shit rots your brain

[–]Forgotten_FuRyan0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Bro, broly.....broseph......the phrase: "...or become felons, be fined and Lose Voting Rights" seems 2b lost on you. We have a female voting majority, yes? What does arm waving your fundamental rights as a citizen, say about you, hmmmm?

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

it says that i'm not a dumbass wasting energy worrying about pointless shit.

it's bullshit but so are a million other things that we have to deal with living in the modern world. there's not going to be a draft and if there was a draft pretty much everyone would dodge it.

worry about something that matters, like how fathers get treated in divorce battles or stupid affirmative action that gives jobs to unqualified women instead of qualified men. those things actually have a real world impact on people, unlike selective service

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

I think it's fine if they like bad boys, but don't expect us who aren't bad boys to clean up their mistakes and their mess afterwards, and that's where feminists and women in general get angry about it.

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia5 points6 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Women like bad boys

That's really funny considering that they later follow it up with:

Given that in our current society the division of labor and access to financial resources still favors men, it makes sense that even feminists would like a man who shows willingness to act as the provider.

Women find BS men attractive because BS attitudes and behaviors signal that a man is willing to invest. Five studies showed that women prefer men with BS attitudes (Studies 1a, 1b, and 3) and behaviors (Studies 2a and 2b), especially in mating contexts, because BS mates are perceived as willing to invest (protect, provide, and commit)

I didn't know that a willingness to act as a provider, to invest and commit was known as "bad boy" behaviour.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 4 points5 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

It’s toxic masculine behavior according to your very definition.

[–]the_calibre_cat1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Literally toxic masculinity according to BiggerD's oft-posted links

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

He hasn’t responded to this ever and yet he still posts toxic masculinity shit weekly.

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I didn't think it was worth a reply because it seemed like such a poor attempt at a gotcha.

You can't tell me that asking a woman on a cold date night if she wants to wear his coat, being willing to provide for your kids and family or offering help if she walks with heavy boxes is the dictionary definition of toxic masculinity.

But go ahead and quote me where I said that those specific things are toxic masculinity.

And I also don't understand how your opinion piece made the connection to Bad Boys here, because a willingness to invest, commit and provide isn't bad boy behavior at all and also not the first thing people think of when they hear "sexist".

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It is because benevolent sexism is included in the definition of toxic masculinity. I gave you the definition of toxic masculinity that you have linked before. Benevolent sexism is justified subordination of women. It’s by definition toxic masculinity.

I think the bad boys bit was just an introductory paragraph. Not the whole thing.

[–]BiggerDthanYouBluetopia-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Actually no.

One of my most commonly cited ones is this one:

The term toxic masculinity is useful in discussions about gender and forms of masculinity because it delineates those aspects of hegemonic masculinity that are socially destructive, such as misogyny, homophobia, greed, and violent domination; and those that are culturally accepted and valued (Kupers, 2001). After all, there is nothing especially toxic in a man’s pride in his ability to win at sports, to maintain solidarity with a friend, to succeed at work, or to provide for his family. These positive pursuits are aspects of hegemonic masculinity, too, but they are hardly toxic.

You can't tell me that asking a woman on a cold date night if she wants his coat or offering help if she walks with heavy boxes is the dictionary definition.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegemonic_masculinity

Anything that justifies the subordination of women is toxic masculinity of which benevolent sexism absolutely does.

And benevolent sexism is sexist. Now you’re going to claim that sexism isn’t misogyny? Because benevolent sexism is certainly ingrained prejudice. The definition of misogyny. Even to your definition you just linked, benevolent sexism is toxic masculinity.

[–]the_calibre_cat1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Isn't "toxic masculinity", quote, "stereotypically masculine gender roles that restrict the kinds of emotions allowable for boys and men to express, including social expectations that men seek to be dominant (the "alpha male") and limit their emotional range primarily to expressions of anger"?

I guess when the gender role is "provider" it's not toxic, we just get to keep that one. Funny, that. Neat.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It should be "women find BS men attractive want BS men because BS attitudes and behaviors signal that a man is willing to invest and submit to being used and manipulated.

It shouldn't be controversial at all anymore that women are sexually attracted to sexist, douchey behavior; and that women want (but are not sexually attracted to) benevolent "sexist" pedestalizers and supplicators for provisioning and utility.

[–]LukeVTruthRed Pill Man0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. All this article confirms is that women want a beta bux for a long term partner.

[–]Electra_CuteChristian, Flat Earther, Anti-Vaxxer, Astrologer2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Women like bad boys

Into:

Feminists Think Sexist Men Are Sexier than "Woke" Men

Just another day of defining saying that feminism is all women saying things.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

The study looked at self-reported feminist attitudes and found it had no affect on desiring BS men.

[–]tiposkSerial divorce rapist2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

BS=/=bad boy. BS is more similar to beta bucks.

[–]tiposkSerial divorce rapist2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Electra Cute was referring to the PT article that says women like bad boys, but offers no evidence of this.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Read the tldr

[–]tiposkSerial divorce rapist1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I would like to see what would be the results in a speed dating scenario as well as long term partnerships.

The original study was self-reported and the flaws of this method are already well known although not always acknowledged by those conducting the research.

There have been several studies reporting that women find DT men more attractive and that men prefer agreeable women. When these same studies were taken to a speed dating event, male DT (except for narcissism) and female agreeableness weren't correlated to attractiveness, nor was narcissism after controlling for grooming.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

seems contradictory.

bad boys and benevolent sexism are both thought to be sexist. who is "woke" here?

also not all women are feminists and not all feminists are women.

the TLDR isn't correct at all.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 2 points3 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

The tldr is correct. The article isn’t talking about bad boys. Only the introductory sentence mentions them.

The study reported on woman’s self-reported feminist ideals.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (12 children) | Copy Link

no, it's only talking about sexist men the td"lr is incorrect. the title is clickbaity as well.

overall it's a contradictory mess. with no justification for the title or the td"lr

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (11 children) | Copy Link

No the tldr is correct. The article states that women are more attracted to benevolently sexist men who protect and provide regardless of feminist leaning - known as beta bucks here.

Aka feminists are attracted to sexist men.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (10 children) | Copy Link

you're just repeating yourself and you're still incorrect. if you want to be more convincing then make a proper citation.

that's more convincing then a stubborn insistence that you're right.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (9 children) | Copy Link

You haven’t even made a claim lmao

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy Link

no citation then.

k

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

Show me your sources on why it’s incorrect.

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

what you quoted in OP does not substantiate your claim. i explained why. i didn't make a claim, you did.

if you want to convince people that you are right, you might try citations. stubborn repetitions of the same sentence aren't very convincing to me.

you don't have to. you can keep repeating yourself, but then my opinion about your td"lr won't change and i'll think you're a tad weird for not even attempting.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

You didn’t explain why at all. Women are attracted to men who are benevolently sexist because it signals parental investment. That’s what the tldr states, that beta bux is still more attractive than male sycophants.

[–]wub12341 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women are attracted to men they find attractive.

It mostly comes from physical appearance.

You can compensate to some extent with SES, social status more when you're young, and economic status when you're older.

Connection is also important to women.

Women are not more attracted to bad boys, rather they give bad boys more leeway if they're attractive. Equally, women give nice guys more leeway if they're attractive.

What women find attractive is more diverse than what men find physically attractive, but we can identify archetypal characteristics.

We can go round and round and round in circles, discussing the same things over and over and over again, but nothing will change this.

[–]iceicle9991 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Western women are hypocrites, go figure. Women are lucky that we are just supposed to accept and accommodate regarding everything they do. When women don't get the male validation they want, they go on the internet to start their crusade. A lot of men do it too, quite crudely I may add, the difference there is that one group is seen as oppressed victims for not getting what they want and the other is seen as pieces of shit.

[–]AutoModeratorMarried to Littleknownfacts[M] 0 points1 point  (2 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.

[–]StunningLaughScrooge did nothing wrong0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

"Woke" is the gayest thing ever. It's domesticated Blacks trying to act White.

[–]darudeboysandstormSoup on the stove, bread rising, apple pie0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

You know for everyones clamoring, the only real way to get those sweet dark triads is to grow up in a fucked up household so screw it.

[–]GradualDecomp0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Most men are both

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

ill never understand this “women like bad boy”

i never did , i find them tragically sad

damaged people like other damaged people , not an entire gender thing

[–]Whodunnit88Survivied Purge Week 20180 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

could it to do with confidence? "woke" men don't seem that confident to me tbh, more like unsure of themselves and their place in the world.

[–]RustyPines 1 points [recovered]  (13 children) | Copy Link

Idk man. My SO is incredibly masculine, quick to defend my "honor" so to speak, always has a knife on hand, would truly fight for what he believes in/cares about even if he'd end up in jail, does not tolerate ANY kind of disrespect, has classic big dick energy and all that but he's a feminist as FUCK and stands up for women even when its inconvenient. He's also super gentle with animals and sweet to me, treats me like a equal while still doing things for me (even though I'd never ask for this), cares about the things I'm passionate about and we both compromise to spend time doing what the other person likes to do. Truly, he treats me like an equal, he would never let me get away with any bullshit stuff that redpill complains women do (stupid fights etc) and having open communication instead of passive aggressive bullshit.

He's definitely a "bad boy", but he's also super left leaning politically and stands up for women's rights; likely because he values respect above all things and believes not only men should receive that respect.

I've never been attracted to anyone in my entire life like I'm attracted to this man. I love him so completely and actually would prefer to have MORE sex with him if I could. I'm becoming a better partner because of him and I have no resentment toward him or anything about him I'd want to change. I support him in everything and would fight for him like he'd fight for me. We've fought before but it's never made me think he'd leave me, and vice versa.

To many with RP/BP/incel beliefs, his political beliefs and his intense feminism would absolutely categorize him as a "soy boy", but I cannot give an example of another man that is as much of an alpha as he is. He is masculine in all the ways that are not toxic, and my attraction to him grows stronger every day.

This article is bullshit fam

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 2 points3 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

Much like your boyfriend, a man can be leftist and be benevolently sexist. He is quick to defend your honor because he feels like it’s his duty considering you are weaker.

It is what it is.

Also, many many reds here are liberals.

[–]RustyPines 1 points [recovered]  (11 children) | Copy Link

But he's not benevolently sexist, is my point. I would defend his honor just as much as he'd defend mine and he knows that as I've proven that to him on multiple occasions. Also he's made it clear he doesn't do it out of "duty" to me, he would do it because he wants to.

He also has caught me being mean to a girl or something a couple times and checks me on it, asking me if that was a progressive, kind thing to say, asks me if I'm lifting other women up with my behavior or tearing them down.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Those things aren’t mutually exclusive. You can do a duty that you want to.

[–]RustyPines 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

But he doesn't see it as a duty. In fact, if he felt he had to, he wouldn't.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Okay I feel happy for you and your BF lmao

Your anecdote means little though.

[–]Forgotten_FuRyan0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

Mr_Smoogs is correct. I agitate people like your man often; if someone flips you off for fun or reverse-pickpockets you, it's probably me. I'm a malevolent sexist and I've never seen a woman physically defend her man, even with me on top of him. Yes, women and less masculine men are more likely to carry and use weapons and statistics back up that assertion. They need them. Furthermore, mate guarding behaviors and lower testosterone are positively correlated. Nonetheless, Briffault's Law is in effect and you're happy, so it's all good. Oh, personal note: I have a top 2% wang and most cocky guys are overconfident. I still wish you both the best and I hope that you do put out more. The statistics on the matter indicate an average of 4-6 times less than my own masturbation schedule. (Although I'm on 90 day nofap r/n.) 'The monks of Wudang spend their lives trying to achieve true emptiness. For only when the sage can overcome the self does he enter into the Tao.' -- One Hundred Eyes, Marco Polo

[–]RustyPines 1 points [recovered]  (5 children) | Copy Link

You're assuming he'd be upset by little things like that. You don't matter to him if he doesn't know you fam you're not even worth his energy, he wouldn't give a second thought to you, likely not even notice you in the first place 🤦‍♀️

I've physically defended him against his ex and others, but he's never been in a fight in front of me, else I'd fight the fucker tryna hit him no question.

He carries a weapon not to murder people, for self defense and utility mostly. It comes in handy when we are out hiking or whatever.

He's not guarding me lmfao he'd just defend me if he had to. If he was guarding me consistently like a damn porcelain doll I would be livid.

Also lol r/ihavesex with your wang comment nobody asked my dude.

My SO doesn't have to masturbate because he gets everything he needs from me, and I fuck him enough that he doesn't need to; we've even talked about this at length because I think it'd be healthy if he did but I digress. I could still use more, but I'm generally satisfied unless we go more than two days without it due to our schedules or whatever.

[–]Forgotten_FuRyan0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Mr. Smoogs is wrong, I'm wrong, it's okay for you to mention sexual things but not me, his knife (in your paraphrased words always in hand) is definitely for cutting bits of string and for self-defense (because it NOT needed), being progressive as he called it isn't showing deferral to women, not noticing other people isn't hipster-that was raised by a single mother-behavior. You and your man are the exception to every rule, okay, buttercup?

"Too much truth confuses the facts. Too much honesty makes you sound insincere."

-- Patrick Rothfuss, The Name of the Wind 

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

The difference is I'm not bragging about my vagina my friend. I wasnt referring you talking about masturbation, just bragging about your cock size.

Eh and fruit. And its needed for self defense as I live in a sketchy part of town 🤷‍♀️

I'm saying normal people have relationships, we aren't the exception to the rule, we exist everywhere. This is the majority of relationships, and shitty ones are the outliers. I'm also saying that attracting women by being a "bad boy" and being a feminist aren't mutually exclusive as this article seems to state, and that "bad boys" in general as you have stated then have low testosterone because they carry weapons, guard their women, etc.

[–]Forgotten_FuRyan0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, big dick energy isn't a big dick and that descriptor gets thrown around a lot, so I decided to clear the air. I'm a bad boy according to women, other men and a church pastor. I don't mate guard, I had a testosterone level of 2000 (ng/dL) in tenth grade and my last fistfight was with around a dozen men armed with full and empty beer bottles and a gun. Weapons are too risky for me to use, because I have a very difficult time not accidentally killing someone. Unlike, well, you know.....and you got it backwards; men with low testosterone are more likely to mate guard and carry weapons. Carrying weapons or mate guarding may or may not lower testosterone. As for your other statement on normality: Although cohabitation rates are rising, cohabiting couples account for only about 7 percent of the overall U.S. population and 4 percent of over-50s. Furthermore, 70% of American men ages 20-34 aren't married. I not financially stable, so I'm worthless as a man and women file 69-75% of all divorces; the strongest predicting factor for a divorce being whether or not the husband has a full time job. I'm a loser. You win, okay?

“Disaster, has its roots in happiness and happiness, lurks in disaster. Who knows when this cycle will end?”

– Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching Verse 58

[–]RustyPines1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well I knew I won a while ago, but you're definitely a loser bb 😘

[–]Forgotten_FuRyan0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

That hurt my feelings.

"We understand how dangerous a mask can be. We all become what we pretend to be."

-- Patrick Rothfuss, The Name of the Wind (The Kingkiller Chronicle, #1)

[–]Diekgo0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

In other words, women don't like men that are in favor of feminism, unless they're gay. Cause obviously, the guy will be almost always in the friendzone.

I know a few feminist women that only date guys that are very sexist, the only difference from the article, is that they don't stay in a long relationship, but they never cease to keep hooking up with the sexist ex boyfriend, and some even date the betas just to cheat behind their back.

As a man, I have been very neutral in all this in my social life, if I'm pro-women rights, I will definitely see the lack of interest of a woman, while when I just ignore wherever that a woman says and only play the stupid sport guy, I always get women coming to talk to me. That is very weird, I don't understand why most women dislike when a man is not pro-machismo.

[–]Five_DecadesKnows what women want. Knows he doesn't have it0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

They are women who recognize that it may be more beneficial to have a partner who is committed to them and willing to sacrifice for them and their family, than it is to have a “woke” feminist man who wants them to be independent

Is that really the trait of a sexist man, someone you can rely on to be a protector and provider?

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Yes. Treating women as people to be protected and provided for is sexist by the literal definition. It’s just not hostile sexism.

[–]Five_DecadesKnows what women want. Knows he doesn't have it2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Those aren't alpha 'bad boy' traits, those are beta traits (sacrificing for women).

I'm not sure how this article implies women like bad boys.

Bad boys are dark triad, dangerous men. Women like them for STR, but not LTR.

I'm sure women enjoy benevolently sexist men for LTRs though.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Right. Read the tldr. The tldr states that the article is talking about beta traits, not alpha.

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

Opinion articles are wack. I don't think it's that we go for sexist men but we go for men that aren't super woke because they usually are "woke" with the intention of pussy.

[–]EdwardBarnes19130 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

This is Red Pill 101.

Same as they pass over men who embody all their publicly stated desired qualities and get with someone who is the total opposite.

Mainly young women to be fair. They get a bit more human and interesting > 30 ;-)

[–]TriadFamilyTimesEverything I know I learned from group sex0 points1 point  (17 children) | Copy Link

This is the same benevolent sexism article rehashed again, the same exact argument that got shot to pieces.

When society itself is sexist and women have to fight for basic rights in legislative and judicial form, it is a result that all men are going to be a little sexist. Some more than others. Now, we have advanced, but we have not left that behind. So, a man who's sexism itself takes benevolent form is going to be preferable to a man who has no benevolence, or who's specific sexism isn't benevolent. That's pretty easy to suss out.

But also, benevolent sexism is how many male sexual icons are portrayed and there's a whole bunch of male power fantasy thrown in there. Someone asked in a thread i read a bit ago if Rambo is sexy. Rambo is entirely a male fantasy, but men are so out of touch with what the average woman wants that Rambo being what women want doesn't seem like a stupid concept. Benevolent sexism is present in a ton of the male characters in the media we consume. Every guy from Friends exhibits benevolent sexism towards the people they date or fuck pretty regularly. It's in everything.

And when that's what you've been told to look for, when that's what has been normalized, that's what people are going to tend towards.

53% of white women voted for Donald Trump. Lots of women are in too deep or are too objectively unintelligent to begin to undo the conditioning of society and it's gonna skew the statistics, hard.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (16 children) | Copy Link

Why are you saying it’s been shot to pieces and then claim that’s what women are going to trend towards desiring? If women trend towards preferring it then it doesn’t really matter why. It’s matter of fact that they prefer it.

[–]TriadFamilyTimesEverything I know I learned from group sex0 points1 point  (15 children) | Copy Link

:smh: It doesn't matter why?

Yeah it does, because the preference for benevolent sexism is alot lower than it would have been if you studied it in the fifties. It is one data point at one point in time that is in flux and the why is important if you want to be aware of the world, where it's going, where it's come from, and why it's moving between those points.

It's been shot to pieces because the argument for benevolent sexism is that the preference is innate. If it was not innate there's no reason to argue for it, it is just something that women are conditioned to accept that they would not otherwise. You cannot make the argument that they prefer it in a vaccum, you are doing it in context where women are saying that men need to stop it. The argument is that no they don't, because lots of women enjoy benevolent sexism.

And the rebuttal to THAT argument is precisely what I said. That benevolent sexism is a thing that men have spent the last however many decades portraying themselves as having in media. Is it no surprise that men would imitate those traits and women would adopt them as those are the men being romanticized by their culture?

And I mean, this goes all the way back. Benevolent sexism exists in the bible. It has existed for as long as sexism and benevolence have separately. Is it any wonder in a sexist world where people still like benevolence that benevolent sexism would become a thing that people desire, however temporarily?

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (14 children) | Copy Link

Again, it doesn’t matter WHY. It’s matter of fact that women prefer it. WHY is a different thread.

If it’s matter of fact that women prefer it, then it is what it is. Women prefer it.

[–]TriadFamilyTimesEverything I know I learned from group sex0 points1 point  (13 children) | Copy Link

Well actually this thread said that feminists think that sexist men are sexier than woke men and that's wrong. The specific study is that women tend to somewhat (not a huge preference) prefer men who have benevolently sexist traits over men who do not have them and that this preference is widespread.

Here's the thing though. The study stated that the women involved had specific logical reasoning stated. That reasoning being that those men were seen as being more willing to commit or invest.

Which goes right back to what I said. Women have been conditioned to see benevolent sexism as a positive thing. Women are being conditioned that way less and less, but the fact is that the male population still exists and it is changing much more slowly overall than women are, especially among the straight population. Why it is preferred matters because it's not just a flat preference and you do not understand how personalities interact during dating I think.

Like, you don't get the evaluation being made there and the interplay and trade off of accepting sexism if it gets you commitment because commitment matters much more to you and finding a guy to commit is harder than finding a guy who isn't so sexist that you can't stand him or in time start telling him to shut up with the comments and grow up a little.

Women accept men as projects often and preferences do not exist in a vaccum.

Finally, that article was written by a guy in defense of benevolent sexism. His bias is pretty clear.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (12 children) | Copy Link

No the study also studied women who self-reported feminists beliefs. The preference for BS men was unaffected by feminist beliefs.

Again, you’re claiming that it’s because women have been socially conditioned to be this way. I disagree, but that’s not what this thread is about. Women prefer sexist men, regardless of feminist beliefs. Feminist women still prefer benevolently sexist men. It’s interesting because if it’s because of social conditioning then feminist women wouldn’t be attracted to it at the same rate. Unless you believe feminism as a social construct has no influence on desiring sexism. Which is a bold claim. Logically, feminist women would select against sexist men, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.

Women prefer benevolently sexist men. It is what it is. If you want to be the most sexually successful man, the best strategy is benevolent sexism over equality.

Again, it doesn’t matter WHY. If women are attracted to sexist men, the best advice for men is to be sexist.

[–]TriadFamilyTimesEverything I know I learned from group sex0 points1 point  (11 children) | Copy Link

Social conditioning isn't just about subconscious desire. It is also about active conscious perception. The studied included information about this. That the women's attraction was considered, involved a perception that the men would either be more willing to commit or more willing to provide.

Is it not suspect to you that so many women used the same logical concepts to define their attraction? Logic is not instinctual at all. Logic is 100% learned. Clearly this preference is learned.

If we understand that, why are feminists attracted at the same rate?

Because nothing about feminism changes what the average man is like, right now. Nothing about feminism changes the inundation of media representation for all of recorded history of benevolently sexist male protagonists. Nothing about feminism directly changes ingrained emotional responses and nothing about feminism directly changes women's perceptions about men currently existing and what benevolent sexism means in men right now.

Now that said, this was a study of straight women and initial attraction with focus placed on the presence or absence of benevolently sexist traits. The study directly mentioned that benevolent sexism was a sign of potential stability, either as a provider or as an emotional partner ready to emotionally invest.

So if you want to be sexually successful shouldn't you as a red piller be doing the opposite of proving that you are commitment worthy?

Which brings me around to, either your actual best strategy is to lie your ass off and pretend you are something you aren't to fuck girls who think you might commit, or to do something that doesn't have much to do with benevolent sexism.

It does matter why. What does the attraction mean? What are they willing to do about it? What kind of attraction is it? When does the attraction happen? What are mitigating circumstances? All important questions to someone who doesn't see dating as a spread sheet where they're trying to just get their probabilities higher.

People are getting laid while you treat dating like EVE online.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (10 children) | Copy Link

Again, feminism doesn’t need to control men. It is logical that it would condition women to select against sexist men. However, that hasnt shown to be the case.

Again, it doesnt matter why. Women still prefer sexist meN. If that’s the case, then the best advice to men is to be sexist.

This sub is all about being a spreadsheet to get their probabilities higher. It’s a dating advice debate sub. The whole point of TRP is to get laid more.

[–]TriadFamilyTimesEverything I know I learned from group sex0 points1 point  (9 children) | Copy Link

There's so little nuance to anything you say. "Women prefer sexist men, so men should be sexist"

Let's throw in the word benevolent twice to give you the benefit of the doubt.

The study, once again, only studied initial attraction. Sex is an outcome. There is no study at this point about benevolent sexism and the likelihood of getting laid. They only studied initial attraction to otherwise strangers they did not know based upon abstract theoretical perceptions about traits that they had no time to actually see in action or get to know. The entire thing was a hypothetical thought experiment in their heads with no chance to form or even experience real attraction with men in the same room. This study says basically nothing.

Tell me, how would you go about being benevolently sexist on purpose to get laid? What's the practical application side of this?

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy Link

I disagree that sex isn’t an outcome of attraction. That’s a dumb hill to try to die on.

It doesn’t matter WHY. If women are attracted to it, then that’s what they are attracted to.

The practical application is to be the man who embraces an attitude that is willing and able to protect and provide for her.

[–]HammockSwingin0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

All women want to be taken care of. It's one of the AWALT things I would agree with.

Feminists however, want to be taken care of but still have their freedom. So a masculine sexist man that still lets them be strong independent women when they want to be is going to be the most attractive option.

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

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