TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

74

DiscussionWomen as Reward (self.PurplePillDebate)

submitted by Mr_Smoogs

I've seen lots of women loath this idea that women are seen as a reward, but I can't get over the fact that this is how women frame sex to begin with. I'd like to unpack this dynamic and I want to gain some insight from everyone who is willing to participate.

From my experience, starting in HS, women framed their virginity like a sacred piece of them to be given only to the most worthy.

Later in life, the erotica and porn women consume is generally about creating a narrative in which the woman is felt desirable and sexy by the male protagonist.

It becomes obvious that female sexuality often manifests itself as a response to how a particular man makes her feel. This inherently frames successful male sexuality as a set of actions where the response is a woman feeling desired resulting in sex. Women frame romance, intimacy and sex within the context of a man acting upon her to make her feel wanted and desired. This inherently frames romance as a verb that men do, while being a noun that women consume. Sex is then inherently framed as a reward given to men with the correct set of characteristics and actions.

So, there's a disconnect between the women who loath this dynamic and the reality of female sexuality. And yeah, yeah, we shouldn't listen to the "world-flappings" of crazed women online and what they think the world should be, but I find it an interesting discussion nonetheless.

Do you agree with the premise and that women have a responsibility in creating this dynamic?


[–]SomeTurdInTheWind48 points49 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Well, the moment a man complains that he is failing to get a partner they tell him that "He is not working hard enough" or that "He needs to try other things" and "Try harder". Women are framed as rewards even by women themselves.

[–]TheBookOfSeilAn ounce of Snu Snu is worth a pound of cure14 points15 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

It’s okay because they’re objectifying themselves. If men do it, it’s wrong.

[–]toronto87 1 points [recovered]  (3 children) | Copy Link

Correction: If men they aren't attracted to do it, it's wrong.

[–]TheBookOfSeilAn ounce of Snu Snu is worth a pound of cure4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

You can become a “Nice Guy” at any point in time. Remember that.

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I would say it's quite likely that most men will be "nice guys" at multiple points in their lives.

[–]TheBookOfSeilAn ounce of Snu Snu is worth a pound of cure0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Of course, and to many different women.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, the moment a man complains that he is failing to get a partner they tell him that "He is not working hard enough" or that "He needs to try other things" and "Try harder". Women are framed as rewards even by women themselves.

Women can't win, can they?

If they say "You're fine as you are. You'll find someone", they're evil witches lying to men because they "don't want betas improving themselves or whatever". If they say "You could improve yourself", they're evil witches positioning themselves as rewards for men.

Fuck, get me off this planet. Women cannot say or do the right thing. The only right thing is to have sex with all the men all the time. But at the same time, save themselves for marriage. And don't talk.

[–]Currycell920 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Take sex with all the men all the time option, pretty please.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Take sex with all the men all the time option, pretty please.

10/10 people know you wouldn't like the results.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

What makes you think its not the reverse there?

[–]BirdManBrrrr24 points25 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Said differently, men need to meet or exceed a threshold of attractiveness in both looks and behavior in order for the woman to want to engage sexually. If he's below her threshold, she won't. It's all positive or negative reinforcement for sexually desirable traits at the end of the day:

Positive = rawr lets bang daddy

Negative = get away from me loser ew gross!

Do you agree with the premise and that women have a responsibility in creating this dynamic?

Does it matter? All the stuff like "eggs are expensive, sperm is cheap" and "man is the pursuer, woman the pursued." just outline reality of how things are in reality = women reward men with sex when men demonstrate the proper traits.

Saying "responsibility in creating" implies there is, can, or should be another model to sexuality that's attainable...which we can debate but to no logical conclusion. Human sexuality is what it is IMO.

[–]kkokk1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

"eggs are expensive, sperm is cheap"

It's not just that they're expensive, but that their resources drive evolutionary demand.

Because eggs are energetically expensive, the individuals who seek eggs will reproduce more than those who don't. And thus evolution mandates that all males pursue females.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Positive = rawr lets bang daddy

Negative = get away from me loser ew gross!

Have you considered how men reward women?? If we want to call it rewards, then rewards go both ways.

Positive = rawr let's bang mummy - I'm so good looking that I can get the best-looking girls who are into casual sex. Or, let's bang mummy and keep her around, maybe for life - she's that good.

Negative = get me away from her as soon as I nail her. Ugh gross

[–]BirdManBrrrr2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I don’t see how a reward the other way has an impact on women rewarding men with sex.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don’t see how a reward the other way has an impact on women rewarding men with sex.

The OP is posed as only women being rewards and not men.

[–]CainPrice39 points40 points  (74 children) | Copy Link

It's not nearly as complicated as you're making it out to be.

If you ask any woman on Earth, she will tell you that sex happened because she wanted to have sex and was in the mood to have it. Not because the guy made her feel like having sex through a series of words and actions.

If you ask her, "But don't you feel like having sex when a guy makes you feel sexy and desired?", she will respond "Of course. Duh."

If you ask her, "Well, then, aren't you rewarding the man who made you feel that way with sex?", she'll tell you that it wasn't about him at all, but about her and what she wanted.

Women aren't rewarding men. Women are doing what they feel like doing without caring whether or not they're pleasing or rewarding men when they do it. When a woman hooks up with you, it's not about you. It's not that you're really awesome and she wants to please you because you're that awesome. It's because she wants to have sex. She's getting what she wants. Rewarding you is the side effect. Yes, you put her in the mood, but she's not doing it to reward you.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 23 points24 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

Yes, you put her in the mood, but she's not doing it to reward you.

My view is not that she is doing it to reward you, but her actions are inherently rewarding of the male's actions.

[–]CainPrice27 points28 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

Well, that's kinda how life works.

I don't put my money in my savings account to reward the bank for being a good bank. I put my money in my savings account because I don't want to carry my life savings in my wallet and I like to be able to swipe my debit card to pay for shit. Putting my money in the bank gets me what I want. It's not about rewarding the bank.

I don't go to the coolest bar downtown because it's a great bar and I want to reward it for being a good bar. I go there to get the drink I want. They make a kickass martini. The fact that they're making money when I buy that martini isn't why I'm going.

I don't have sex with my girlfriend to reward her for being a good girlfriend. I have sex because I want to. But she gets off and enjoys it, too.

People do shit that benefits other people sometimes. That's just kinda how life is. Along those same lines, people do shit that they want and it sometimes operates to another person's detriment - but they weren't necessarily trying to screw that other person. They were just doing their own thing. That's how life goes sometimes, too.

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus6 points7 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

DO you understand marketing and competition at all?

I don't put my money in my savings account to reward the bank for being a good bank.

Really so you just select any bank? There offers and marketing rewards them with customers?

don't go to the coolest bar downtown because it's a great bar and I want to reward it for being a good bar.

Yes but if it wasn't the coolest or another bar made your martini drink, you would go to another bar instead. Being the coolest bar rewards them with customers. Why do you think they become the coolest bar, do you think they just want to be cool or is it because they want customers.

I don't have sex with my girlfriend to reward her for being a good girlfriend.I have sex because I want to.

So if she was a psychopathic munter and a shit girlfriend you would still want to?

Life is just one big marketing exercise. Market yourself badly you receive no rewards.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

DO you understand marketing and competition at all? Really so you just select any bank? There offers and marketing rewards them with customers?

This wasn't directed at me, but I'll answer it anyway. Because I'm rude like that.

In that case, men are rewarding women with sex, too. If he stays with her and keeps giving her sex, and only her, then he is rewarding her with his penis.

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes. If a woman presents a man with something he wants, he will reward her with something she wants. Be that sex/relationships/money/etc.

[–]CanadianAsshole11 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It's not hard for women to get sex, because men don't have the same high standards that they do.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's not hard for women to get sex,

It can be hard for her to get sex from the same man, continuously. If that's what she wants.

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

In that case, men are rewarding women with sex, too.

Rarely. Supply and demand. Women are rewarding men with sex far, faaaaaaaar more often than men are rewarding women with sex.

[–]TheBottomLineFactor 1 points [recovered]  (6 children) | Copy Link

There’s one thing I don’t understand, and that thing is every motherfucking word you just said. You should get off your computer and spend some time living in the real world and stop saying manosphere stuff like, “Life is just one big marketing exercise.”

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I have lived in the real world.

Everything I have done, I have had to compete to be my best and present my best self and why I should be the one selected.

Army experience, I was being assessed 100% of the time.

Jobs, my CV is compared to other CV's. Interviews I am competing with other interviewee's. Promotions, I am competing with my co-workers.

Dating, an attractive woman has a ton of other guys after her.

If I do not present myself well in any of these situations, I will lose. I need to be my best self and present my best self to get anywhere.

[–]orcscorper 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

Your inability to comprehend a concept is not evidence that the concept is invalid, just that you are unable to comprehend it.

I think you should get off your computer, and get fucked. Use your blue-pill magic to get laid, and post a field report here. Tell us all how much better your strategy is than Red Pill strategy, and why you think it works. I won't hold my breath.

[–]flyawaylittlebirdierabid feminist0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

This isn't related to the overall topic, but it is related to what you said. I'm curious what you'd think if I said that I broke up with what most on TRP would call an alpha, granted far more progressive and kind than what is the norm over there, outgoing, extroverted, social, ripped, so forth, for a guy who would probably would be called a beta, introverted, shy, skinny, nerdy, dorky, so forth. Like genuinely curious.

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

I have nothing to say.

I first have to imagine an alpha, but more progressive and kind than the alpha as portrayed on TRP, and then imagine a person I know nothing about dumping this hypothetical person for his antithesis. I can't imagine this thing.

You want me to picture a woman going against all of her instincts, trading in a man who gives her vaginey tingles for a good husband and provider. I'm sure it has happened, and occasionally even worked out for them both. It doesn't happen often. Color me skeptical.

[–]flyawaylittlebirdierabid feminist1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I mean, it isn't a hypothetical situation. I didn't even really think about it until I read your comment. TRP makes this seem like something someone will never experience. Something specifically you told someone just now couldn't happen. My biggest eyebrow raising moments with TRP come from the idea that somehow a man is less because he isn't the male definition of masculine. Most women don't give a shit about that as much as TRP makes it seem like. It only matters to the extent TRP makes it out to when a man has absolutely nothing else to offer. Mutual interests, being able to laugh at and with each other, to be able to sit in silence and enjoy every moment is so much more important to the compatibility of two people than their appearance and social abilities.

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't put my money in my savings account to reward the bank for being a good bank.

Doesn't matter what your intent is, banks love it when you put money in your savings account - then they have more deposits on-hand to loan out elsewhere. You are rewarding the bank. They want the thing you're giving to them, doesn't matter why you're giving it to them.

Replace "you" with "women" and "the bank" with "men."

I don't go to the coolest bar downtown because it's a great bar and I want to reward it for being a good bar. I go there to get the drink I want. They make a kickass martini. The fact that they're making money when I buy that martini isn't why I'm going.

But you're still rewarding them. They'll keep up that vibe and that atmosphere, and keep making that dank martini, because you literally just handed them money for doing so! Doesn't matter what you intended, you rewarded them!

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, that's kinda how life works.

Right, which is my point lol

I go there to get the drink I want. They make a kickass martini.

You are rewarding the business with your business because they make a kickass drink. It's how life works.

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well said

[–]Whodunnit88Survivied Purge Week 20183 points4 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

So basically women are selfish and have no empathy.

[–]CainPrice2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Yes. We'll, maybe not zero empathy, but very little for men.

[–]Whodunnit88Survivied Purge Week 20185 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's sad.

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

We just don’t have empathy for men who fail because they’re aiming way out of their league and then coming to Reddit to complain about how unfair the world is for men cuz a 700 pound wildebeast with no teeth and halitosis can snag Bradley Cooper with zero effort.

[–]kragshotDon't mind me...I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys....5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Okay, you made me laugh out loud with that.

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol I can understand that. Its no different to things like WAATGM.

Both men and women laugh at the opposite sex.

The thing with dating is unlike just about everything else in life, there are no laws or requirements so it comes down to the other person's (that you are interested in/attracted to) standards.

It never has been fair and never will be fair.

[–]RedPill-BlackLotusRed Pill Man1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Unchecked feminism is indinsquisible from narcissism.

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

Humans are selfish and have no empathy.

The sooner you learn to accept this the sooner you will understand people and live a better life.

[–]LeJacquelopeHaving a son is child abuse10 points11 points  (39 children) | Copy Link

Except that you're leaving out the mountain of effort that a woman expect a man to put out in order to become sexually desirable.

[–]CainPrice11 points12 points  (36 children) | Copy Link

Women don't see that. If they saw that, they'd know you're a try-hard guy who's faking it and cheating by doing stuff like going to the gym and learning cool hobbies to pretend to be cool for girls. Effort's not sexy. A guy who's 1000 percent awesome and looks like he doesn't even have to try - that's just innately who he is. That's sexy.

They don't want the guy who's making effort. They don't care about the effort. The just want to guy who's awesome and fun and interesting. And it's not about rewarding that guy with sex. It's about getting the sex she wants from that guy when she's in the mood.

[–]LeJacquelopeHaving a son is child abuse9 points10 points  (30 children) | Copy Link

Just because women don't see that doesn't make it untrue. What you're saying is that there is an extra layer of effort that many men need to make - that being, making it all look natural.

The worst part, of course, being that women need to put zero effort into getting a man.

[–]CatchPhrazeMaster Of Memeology9 points10 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

No, they put in effort they just also hide it.

Woman with bouncy hair and nice smooth skin and long eyelashes and a perky butt and neat eyebrows and plump lips. Most women do not have those natural traits. Woman spend much time and money being the most attractive version of themselves to avoid low value men. It's silly and speaks to how little you know about woman that you assume they just roll out if bed and go.

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

No matter how ugly you look, how broken you are, how much baggage you have, there will be a man somewhere who will not only have sex with you but will probably pay for it.

[–]CatchPhrazeMaster Of Memeology6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

to avoid low value men.

Did you miss this part? Sex with a man you don't want as a woman, is the same thing as sex with a man you dont want...as a man.

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

All unnecessary effort. Women can just roll out of bed and go. In most places she won't even get to her car before some dude is hitting on her, or wanting to hit on her.

[–]CainPrice10 points11 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

Women play a different game. If the only goal in life were to have casual sex, and that was the only objective, women would win at life easily, just for existing.

You have a lot of advantages over women. Just not when it comes to obtaining casual sex with minimal effort.

[–]LeJacquelopeHaving a son is child abuse3 points4 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

Oh yeah I have a lot of "advantages" over women - my life is expendable compared to hers, if I commit a crime I get punished more harshly than a woman who does the same thing, if I am a victim of domestic violence I get laughed at and arrested for reporting her to the cops, I as a man am less likely to have kids than she is...

I have all the advantages in things that don't matter worth JACK.

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

I as a man am less likely to have kids than she is

This one seems like a win to me.

[–]CainPrice1 point2 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

The grass is always greener over there.

Let's get real for a second: Are you in the military and deployed overseas currently? Do you work in a coal mine or as a mountaineer? How expendable is your life, for real? Probably not very. Women who drive cars from their air conditioned apartments to their office jobs are in just as much danger as you when you drive a car from your air conditioned apartment to your office job. If nobody is going to cry when you die, while lots of people will cry when your sister dies, you need to make more friends.

Are you a criminal? Are you so weak and scrawny that a wife or live-in girlfriend slapping you will send you running to the police? Are these actual significant disadvantages in your life? Do you lay awake at night unable to commit the crimes you would otherwise commit if you were a woman due to harsher sentencing? Do you lay awake at night afraid of women who might abuse you? Are these -seriously- disadvantages in your life?

You'd rather be a woman?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

I think this post is the most cancerous thing I've seen on the internet this year.

Are you in the military

Mandatory draft is for men only

Do you work in a coal mine or as a mountaineer?

plenty of men do while their wives and equivalent lead lives 1000x easier at home/desk jobs. This is quantified in plenty of research which is available just one google search away

How expendable is your life, for real?

tangibly more than a woman's

Women who drive cars from their air conditioned apartments to their office jobs are in just as much danger as you when you drive a car from your air conditioned apartment to your office job

that's cool, you managed to find a situation or two where this is true. Want a cookie?

Are you a criminal?

What's the point of this question? Anyone can get accused of anything and get put in front of a judge. Other than that, last I checked criminals are still classified as humans with rights. Women are treated vastly more lenient in front of judges.

Are you so weak and scrawny that a wife or live-in girlfriend slapping you will send you running to the police?

Women are capable of killing men with a naked fist. Disregarding that fact, why would anyone want to take any abuse whatsoever? Retaliation in any form against physical abuse coming from a woman results in jail, jail, or jail for the man.

[–]CainPrice1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Yes, ideologically some "men" under the right circumstances, could potentially have it worse than "women" as a whole.

You could get drafted, work in a coal mine, die tragically, and nobody will run a news story about it because dead women evoke a more emotional response from strangers.

Likewise, you could go on a murderous rampage, get the death sentence, and the media will have a heyday about the dangers men pose to society. And if a woman did the same thing, she'd get community service and the media would run an op-ed piece about how society needs to spend more money on women's mental health issues.

On an academic, ideological level, this amorphous entity called "society" holds this broad group called "men" to a higher and more difficult set of standards than this broad group called "women".

But you, specifically, are not disadvantaged. You live in an air conditioned apartment and drive to an office job, same as any woman. You don't commit crimes. You aren't being sentenced. The news isn't running stories about you. No woman is abusing you.

The biggest issue you have to complain about is that it's harder for men to find casual sex than it is for women.

You're an internet warrior fighting for "men" you don't know and have never met, that don't want you fighting for them and don't need your help. The actual "men" who are disadvantaged by this evil "society" while "women" have other advantages don't give a shit about "society" and pro-woman, feminist garbage. It's only middle class men in air conditioned apartments who aren't disadvantaged at all who care about this garbage.

And at the end of the day, you -still- wouldn't rather be a woman. Because men do all right, and we have our own pros and cons. Sure, casual sex is harder for those of us who are ugly or socially inept, and society expects us to work hard jobs, and we're more likely to be executed if we go on murderous rampages, but that doesn't affect you or me. Or most men.

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

Yes, ideologically some "men" under the right circumstances, could potentially have it worse than "women" as a whole.

lmao your post is not worth reading after I saw this. Maybe someone else will debunk your shitposting even further than I did if they feel like taking a bath in shit

[–]LeJacquelopeHaving a son is child abuse0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Yes, ideologically some "men" under the right circumstances, could potentially have it worse than "women" as a whole.

Translation: you know your entire post was full of crap but you want to downplay that from the get-go.

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

women need to put zero effort into getting a man.

This is another line that needs to die.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.7 points8 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

The worst part, of course, being that women need to put zero effort into getting a man.

That's not true at all.

[–]orcscorper..||. |.|.| ...|| .|.|| |..||3 points4 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Of course it's true. If you define "getting a man" as getting a high-value man to commit to you exclusively, then yes: putting zero effort into getting a man will fail to get you what you want. Welcome to the real world.

If you define "getting a man" as having a dick inside you tonight, even if you find the owner physically repulsive, then no. You need to put zero effort into it. Give it a try: go out with your only goal being to have a man inside of you before the clock strikes midnight. It will happen. All you need is a vagina, and a complete lack of standards.

[–]Wandos7naproxen sodium8 points9 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

If you define "getting a man" as having a dick inside you tonight, even if you find the owner physically repulsive

The thing is, men don't really want this either. You guys say men have no standards but there's all this screaming in here how obese women, old women, single mothers, etc. are disgusting and not worth dicking.

[–]kragshotDon't mind me...I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys....2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

But in regards to women's attractiveness as a "real-world" factor, while there is one guys who will say no to the above category of women, you will have four other guys that will quietly say; "Hmmm...okay...."

The truth of the damn thing is that society's perceptions influence our own tastes as to who we will fuck or hook up with. Men and women are both judgemental toward who their peers are hooking up with.

If we all could go through life without anyone else knowing or judging who we wanted to have sex with, everybody would be fucking everybody just because it was fun and feels good.

But I can illustrate the difference between men and women with this one joke:

"How are fat chicks and mopeds similar?"

"They're both fun to ride, but you don't want anyone to see you on one...."

Do you know why all guys laugh at that joke; because it's true.

When have you ever heard a woman admitting that she's cool with fucking a fat guy?

CMV!

[–]reluctantly_red2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

obese women

So long as they have a pretty face it doesn't really matter how fat they are -- I'm down!

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

There are still men that will fuck them

It is revolting though.

This is the problem with the SMP. Not so much women having high standards. But desperate thirsty simps that have no standards. Then there are BP men that happily go with Hamplanets due to their "Personality".

Water is shaped by its container.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I can't think of ever a time where anyone referred to women "getting a man" as simply getting laid.

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

True, but I wanted to go to the opposite extreme from "getting a high-value man to commit to you exclusively". Getting a low-value man to commit to you exclusively is almost as easy as getting laid; he has very few options.

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

It does seem that way though.

[–]RedPill-BlackLotusRed Pill Man0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

try-hard guy who's faking it and cheating by doing stuff like going to the gym and learning cool hobbies to pretend to be cool for girls. Effort's not sexy

That's a covert contract and the hallmark of the "nice guy".

Effort is sexy, just it has to be attached to ambition.

[–]CainPrice0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

It's more like effort is okay, not sexy, just okay. But only if it doesn't bother what the woman wants.

For example, a woman is okay if her guy goes to the gym. That's fine. But if he's at the gym more than she'd like him to be, to the point where he's less available to her, or if he's choosing to work out instead of doing something with her, or if he's one of those guys who's always talking about workouts and nutrition and reading about it on the internet, that's not sexy.

The ideal would be a guy who's naturally hot, but all of his efforts are completely invisible to her and she is completely unaffected by all of his behind the scene efforts. The second his fitness and dietary habits start to actually affect her, effort is not sexy. Not at all.

[–]deadsandsushi2 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

I find effort extremely sexy, and I love when men are knowledgeable about fitness and nutrition.

[–]CainPrice0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Every woman has her preferences. I think it's a fair statement that most women (and most men) can't stand those annoying gym rat guys who can't shut the hell up about working out.

Some women may soak through their blue jeans over guys who play Fantasy Football and Dungeons and Dragons in their mom's basement, but -most- women probably don't want their guy talking about that shit all night.

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Except that you're leaving out the mountain of effort that a woman expect a man to put out in order to become sexually desirable.

They dont want a guy who does these things for them. As it shows that the guy has no purpose in life other than her.

They want a guy who does these things for himself.

[–]TheBookOfSeilAn ounce of Snu Snu is worth a pound of cure1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The point was that you could cause these feelings and thought process to arise by doing specific actions at specific times. Almost like a puzzle game. Solve the puzzle, win a prize.

[–]tallwheelManosphere Unificationist1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

If you ask any woman on Earth

Oh yes, because we all know that women are experts at knowing what turns themselves on, right? /s

[–]CainPrice0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

You don't seriously believe that women consciously want sex, but unconsciously want to...please hot men?

And that entire thing about sex feeling good is just their body getting off at the joy of rewarding men?

[–]tallwheelManosphere Unificationist0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

It isn't only that, obviously. You don't understand nuance? And they call us reds spergs...

[–]------__------------6 points7 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Watch what women do not what they say. Women are liars

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

They are so good at lying because they have mastered the art of lying to themselves. They wholeheartedly believe things that are patently untrue, so they reapeat the lies with no "tells". The crazy things they say are believable because they truly believe them.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

If you ask any woman on Earth, she will tell you that sex happened because she wanted to have sex and was in the mood to have it.

Yes! This is what happens.

(Except in the case of sympathy sex in a married relationship. Women sometimes give this to men. Men are selfish and don't give it to women, though - even if they can't get it up they could still give her oral. But they don't. From the drunken words of my aunties, people)

[–]buarthaDelights in homosexuality6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I think there is a difference between 'winning a woman' and 'winning a woman over'. A lot of media criticisms of 'women are rewards' are of the former; women used as pawns in male competition with little to no autonomy (i.e. kill the dragon, win the princess.) That's very different to acting in a certain way that's attractive to a person or treating them a certain way to curry favour with them

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well the story would be boring if it went along the lines of

"The prince was unsure if he would get some, so he let the dragon eat the princess and fucked the maiden instead because she was a sure thing".

[–]Omelas74 1 points [recovered]  (23 children) | Copy Link

You're going off course with the "make them feel desired" bit. Women are not seduced into the bedroom by men they are not attracted to, no matter how much that man wants them and let's them know they are desired.

So while I agree with the OP you are missing the crucial elements of the man being of sufficient status that women reward him for his status in whatever form he has achieved it, not for making them feel wanted.

The most successful guys I've ever known when it came to women didn't give two shits about almost any of them, and if they did it was a passing affection at best. All those women knew they were not necessarily wanted, but they rewarded these guys with sex and attention as a means to make themselves feel sexy and wanted through sex with a high status male-it was not the male who made them feel that way with his actions but with his status and therefore wasn't his intention at all.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries6 points7 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

The most successful guys I've ever known when it came to women didn't give two shits about almost any of them, and if they did it was a passing affection at best. All those women knew they were not necessarily wanted, but they rewarded these guys with sex and attention as a means to make themselves feel sexy and wanted through sex with a high status male-it was not the male who made them feel that way with his actions but with his status and therefore wasn't his intention at all.

Only a small group of women are willing to do this. He will never have every woman he wants.

And women prefer this, whether they admit it or not. They don't like guys that are really into them and would rather have a 10 status male to fuck who doesn't care about them all day before a kind hearted and openly warm and loving 7... actually they would rather have a 7 status who doesn't care about them before a 7 status who does.

Bitter and untue.

[–]orcscorper..||. |.|.| ...|| .|.|| |..||8 points9 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Only a small group of women are willing to do this. He will never have every woman he wants.

How small is this group? Is itso small that there will likely be no attractive women in the group?

He will never have every woman he wants

Seriously. Name one person who ever lived who actually had every person he or she wanted. Name one person who ever existed, or even one fictional person, who had every man or woman he or she ever wanted. You can't. You can't do it, because it's an impossible standard.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Is itso small that there will likely be no attractive women in the group?

There will be lots of attractive women in the group.

Seriously. Name one person who ever lived who actually had every person he or she wanted. Name one person who ever existed, or even one fictional person, who had every man or woman he or she ever wanted. You can't. You can't do it, because it's an impossible standard.

For sure. Am just saying that looks & status are no guarantee. Whereas if it were purely a transaction in the way rp has it, and women are just a store of goods that men buy from, then such a man really could get any woman that he sees and desires.

[–]Omelas74 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

Am just saying that looks & status are no guarantee. Whereas if it were purely a transaction in the way rp has it, and women are just a store of goods that men buy from, then such a man really could get any woman that he sees and desires.

You're complete inability to understand what I was saying betrays how triggered you were by it... making you not only wrong but not even able to stay on topic.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

If it makes you feel better to say that I'm triggered rather than just debating you, then okay!

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Hugh Hefner?

[–]Omelas74 1 points [recovered]  (12 children) | Copy Link

Nothing really to say except you're wrong. Completely.

It never fails though, one or two women get all upset at my truth bombs and tell me I'm wrong, and then several of them send me pm's and say "my gawd you are so right it shocked me."

So throw around your bitter jabs all you want, the more truth being told the more passive aggressive insults get thrown at it.

You're just not a high status enough female to even have the chance to feed off the status of a high male because they never wanted you. That reality is a harsh one and certainly causes you to suppress it's truth, but that's all you're doing.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries4 points5 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

my truth bombs

lol

and then several of them send me pm's and say "my gawd you are so right it shocked me."

Pics or it didn't happen

Every high status female I've ever known, specifically attractive high status females, would read my post here and be like yup, spot on.

Double lol

[–]Omelas74 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

You're laughing at yourself, just an fyi. The fact that you were so triggered by my post tells me I am speaking to someone my comments resonated with so deeply they are in the throes of a reaction formation.

So yes, you are literally laughing at yourself.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Okay. If it makes you feel better.

[–]Omelas74 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

Genuine lol... I forget my psychology training makes it unfair of me to engage with the average fool on reddit and for that I apologize.

If you'd like to discuss this further pm me, seriously. I really don't mean to be such an ass but when one knows he is right about things it makes it hard sometimes not to come across that way.

The private pm discussion offer is very genuine and real.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

C'mon you're 16. Seriously. You're not fooling me.

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Every high status female I've ever known, specifically attractive high status females, would read my post here and be like yup, spot on.

You're 100% wrong.

[–]a_vanillaePurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

They don't like guys that are really into them and would rather have a 10 status male to fuck who doesn't care about them all day before a kind hearted and openly warm and loving 7... actually they would rather have a 7 status who doesn't care about them before a 7 status who does.

Oof. You know, I'd be willing to admit there is some truth to what you preach, especially at the instinctual level. Many if not most women are drawn to dominant men who have it together and have a purpose.

But why can't you see the nuance and understand we all have different ways of arriving at this conclusion--and different qualifiers--in spite of what our hindbrains tell us? The cerebrum is a huge, complex division of the brain. Experience is going to skew the message to a greater or lesser extent.

I'm conventionally attractive. Because of my experiences, it doesn't matter how sexy a man is. I have purposely avoided men who gave me the impression I'd only be a number and instead settled down with a solid 7 man when I was 21 (33 now).

He is high status and worthy of respect to me, but not for the reasons you've mentioned. To be fair, he role plays denigrating me sometimes because we both think it's fun. But at the end of the day, if something is causing me pain, he is going to do his best to fix or remove it.

The key is, if something were to happen to me, I'd want him to persist. I wouldn't want him to curl up and die, at least to make sure our kids made it through okay but preferably I'd want him to live a full life as well. I wouldn't be surprised if in a less self-aware woman that didn't manifest as "I want him to treat me like shit to show me he doesn't need me to survive".

[–]Omelas74 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

But why can't you see the nuance and understand we all have different ways of arriving at this conclusion--and different qualifiers--in spite of what our hindbrains tell us?

I never said this isn't the case, but you're taking it way deeper than my comment and then accusing me of saying that depth doesn't exist. You're making a false argument.

and instead settled down with a solid 7 man when I was 21 (33 now).

If this wasn't simply settling because you couldn't land the man you really wanted you are the exception that proves the rule.

The key is, if something were to happen to me, I'd want him to persist. I wouldn't want him to curl up and die, at least to make sure our kids made it through okay but preferably I'd want him to live a full life as well. I wouldn't be surprised if in a less self-aware woman that didn't manifest as "I want him to treat me like shit to show me he doesn't need me to survive".

That was an excellent statement, but again, goes WAY deeper than this OP or my post, which is fine, but simply because someone like me stays on the level of the OP or the vast majority of posters doesn't mean he isn't aware of the deeper levels involved, it's just a waste 99% of the time. The other problem is the men that can "persist" and are not as I described AND are really into their woman are so fucking rare it's ridiculous, so not really worth bringing up but that level is there I just don't know if it's worth talking about something so hard to find.

You also say you wouldn't want him to curl up and die... which means you don't know, which means he's not really the alpha you wanted.

Seriously though, this is one of the most astute responses I've ever seen around here so please don't think I'm trying to argue, just offer thoughts, and from what I read you did a darn good job of taking the best you had to offer, but it's still not the ideal women really want.

[–]a_vanillaePurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't really have much additional input, buuutt...

You also say you wouldn't want him to curl up and die... which means you don't know, which means he's not really the alpha you wanted. With the ideal male you KNOW, you don't hope.

I guess I didn't phrase this well. I was speaking from a selfish perspective: it is my wish that he not curl up and die. I'm also of the belief that he would not curl up and die if something happened to me.

End of the day though you know damn well you masturbate to the idea of getting hammered by the 10 who doesn't give a fuck about you more than you do your actual husband, and that's really what I'm talking about here.

So... let's say my perversions tend more toward, oh I don't know, the Greek pantheon. How do they rate on a 1-10 scale?

You're right that they probably don't give a fuck about me though.

[–]reluctantly_red1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

He will never have every woman he wants.

Of course not -- but he'll get more than enough.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Of course not -- but he'll get more than enough.

No. He won't. That's my point. An asshole will only ever get the kind of women who are attracted to assholes - airheads. There will come a time where he craves the kind of women who reject him.

[–]kandyapplezborn in '91 👸 💅15 points16 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

rewards don't get to choose for themselves who they are awarded to lol. that's why women don't like that rhetoric. women as rewards is an idea that men just need to achieve x or y and then they get the woman they feel they deserve. which is obviously bs. men say all the time that they thought if they got the right education and job and lived a decent life then a beautiful woman would just manifest.

[–]Gravel_RoadsJust a Pill7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This is all I’m hearing

[–]kragshotDon't mind me...I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys....1 point2 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

men say all the time that they thought if they got the right education and job and lived a decent life then a beautiful decent woman would just manifest.

That's because that what they were being taught within the old social compact. If you did everything like you were supposed to then you would be allowed access to decent women. Only the most fucked up of men failed to benefit from it (meaning men with an extreme physical or mental deficiency/deformity). In the Western world, even men with jobs that in other cultures had an "untouchable" classification were able to find wives because the old system recognized that somebody had to do these jobs and they had to be rewarded by society for doing them.

I'll be the first to admit that shit was unfair as fuck for women...but it was unfair for men as well because when said system fell apart, you now have an entire generation of men that are ignorant and left out in the cold when it comes to attracting a decent companion. The old system took into consideration the needs of lower-value males in keeping them supporting the status quo. Every society indulges in some sort of "match-making" that was meant to artificially guide the course of pair-bonding toward equal distribution for the benefit of lower-value males.

The system definitely needs to change; but said change has to be sure and take in the needs for everyone involved in it...or it's going to lead the dispossessed toward some form of social revolt (i.e. incel revolt).

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.10 points11 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

I can't understand what you mean by "system". I know of no intentional "system" here trying to keep certain men "out" (or which tried to keep all men "in" in the past). Regardless, I see no way the "system" can "take in the needs for everyone" the way you're describing without it somehow pushing women to be with men they aren't attracted to. If you can think of something else, lmk.

[–]reluctantly_red0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

I know of no intentional "system" here trying to keep certain men "out"

Its not that kind of system -- its not a machine designed by engineers (obviously, they're often the ones complaining) -- in this context system means a set of widely accepted social norms -- life is a lot easier if said norms support you -- infinitely harder if they exclude you.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.4 points5 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Obviously I’m trying to get him to explain since the idea of some “system that needs to account for everyone” makes no sense. There’s no “thing” here, there’s no overarching intentional design that used to exist to help all the men or whatever.

Maybe the closest thing would have been religion, idk. Also I pinged you the other day and you did not respond. Hurt my feelings.

[–]kragshotDon't mind me...I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys....0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

C'mon, Sublime...I've talked to you before and read your posts...you are definitely on-point enough to pick up what I'm talking about. The evidence of this is as colloquial as anything else out there existing today.

Of course there's no "overarching intentional design that used to exist to help all the men or whatever." There never was. The old social compact didn't benefit everyone exactly how they needed or wanted. Women were not allowed the freedom to choose the best males for themselves but had to settle for whoever "society deemed that would serve the best for the community." Society needed two things; men that would be willing to do whatever fucked up jobs that were necessary for it to move forward, and a steady population of people to do those jobs.

This system was put in place back in a time where there was no place for women in heavy industry or the other backbreaking, labor-intensive, jobs that had to be done in the name of progress. As I wrote above; every society has some sort of matchmaking system put in place...what other purpose could such a system have? While it wasn't exactly advantageous for men either, it really screwed over women. Look at fucking India; they are still doing arranged marriages and shit like that...even the ones that have emigrated to the US. I have five Indian friends (who openly discussed it with me) that were betrothed from childhood. Three of them broke out of the deal and the other two just said "fuck it" and went through with the marriages. I saw pictures of the proposed spouses of the three that broke wild and I completely understand why they did.

But, let's explain the set up with named examples and go from there.

Back in the day, "Ernie" with a sunken chest and big-ass ears wetted no panties whatsoever. But he's an engineer with a 190+ IQ, a high five-figure salary, and he went to church three days a week and twice on Sunday, so if they wanted to keep him producing, they made sure to find him a suitable mate. So some poor girl (let's call her "Doreen") was going to have to take one for the team, as it were.

Doreen wasn't happy with the arrangement; she had her heart set on marrying "Chadwick Cocksworth," but let's be honest...we all know that he wasn't going to get down with her with her bug-eyes and wash-board boobs (but at least, she had "good breeding hips"). So in the interests of her not having to live at home with her parents until she was in her 40s (Lord, please don't make me a spinster) and at the urging of said parents, she decided to marry "good, old, reliable, Ernie" because, well...at least she'll be comfortable.

As for Ernie...he certainly didn't want Doreen either. But, seeing as he was neither attractive or from old money, he certainly wasn't going to land a beauty like "Stacy Roundbottom of the Hampton Roundbottoms." And as the old saying goes; "Half a loaf is better than no bread," so when the people at the church suggested that he take Doreen out for ice cream (because that was the big thing back in the day), he agreed.

That was how the old system worked. It assured that only the absolute bottom-tier of men and women were left out of the pool of prospective mates. That way, society would continue to progress; those lower-tier couples had children to maintain the population and those lower-tier males had an incentive to work hard and keep producing for the community's benefit.

Again; I understand that there is no such thing as a perfect system. Nor am I trying to imply that we should go back to the old one. I am just pointing out the very glaringly obvious flaws of this "current setup" and what the most probable outcome of it continuing in its current direction.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Well that was creative. I don’t understand what makes you think lower tier people don’t continue to get with lower tier people though. Nor have you explained what you think the “answer” may be to help the incels or whatever.

[–]kragshotDon't mind me...I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys....0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I don’t understand what makes you think lower tier people don’t continue to get with lower tier people though.

Uh...where do you think all of these incels that are becoming unionized are coming from. Back in the past, they didn't have the time for all of this stuff because they were being funneled into jobs and their communities made sure to find them suitable wives. That stuff isn't happening anymore. High rates of young male unemployment and fewer young males finding solid careers is a thing. Combine that with the fact that you no longer see "community matchmaking" as a thing in western society (because women now have the freedom to opt out of such stuff), and you are finding that more and more of these men are not hooking up with women.

In short; lower tier women no longer have to settle/hook up with lower tier men. They have the freedom to go after whoever gets them in the mood (or at least as much as any woman will actively try to attract a man that they desire). Men almost always pursue women and it's up to said woman as to whether she will accept any given man's advances or not. Up until recently, social pressure "encouraged" women to accept lesser men for the sake of community weal. Now that is no longer the case.

Nor have you explained what you think the “answer” may be to help the incels or whatever.

What? I ain't "Incel Jesus." I never claimed to have the answer. I'll leave that to you all of you erstwhile social engineers in this sub. As the flair reads; "I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys...." Just because I watch the monkeys fuck and fling shit at each other, doesn't mean that it's my job to clean up said thrown shit....

All that I said is that whatever other social compact that we come up with to keep "The Roads Rolling Along (from the Robert Heinlein story "The Roads Must Roll")," has to make sure to include a solution to make sure that it includes something to keep them placated.

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

Lower tier people still get together with lower tier people though.....There may be more people opting out of this and remaining single, but that is their choice. There is not some proliferation of low-tier women taking all the high-tier men off the market....depending on what you mean by "high/low-tier". Lower class people still tend to pair up with lower class people, unattractive people still tend to pair up with unattractive people, and so on and so forth.

Incels are not even remotely a large percentage of men and you have to factor in the ones who call themselves this who are still kids, haven't tried, etc. Chances are by the time they are older most of them will be married or paired up like most everyone else.

I never claimed to have the answer.

You didn't you just said this new "system" needs to change to take into account the needs of everyone. So I assumed maybe that meant something?

[–]Eartherry1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The system definitely needs to change; but said change has to be sure and take in the needs for everyone involved in it...or it's going to lead the dispossessed toward some form of social revolt (i.e. incel revolt).

There's really no good way to make this happen. Men and women are directly opposed in what their ideals would be. The only thing the system can do is favor one or favor none.

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

Socialism doesn't work economically and it doesn't work sociologically either.

[–]kragshotDon't mind me...I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys....0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Didn't say that it did; I, for one am not a fan of "communist pussy (which is not to say that I wouldn't sleep with a woman just because she's a communist...rather I am not a fan of women being doled out to the proles for the sake of equality...which was kind of what the old system did anyway)."

As I said in another post; I'm just pointing out the rather glaring entropic flaw in this current system and how it's going to collapse, in comparison to the previous system, which while it wasn't perfect in any way, shape, or form; it did have one overreaching thing in its favor. It carried human civilization through the Dark Ages to our current sociological and technological period; in other words...up until now, it did what it was supposed to do.

All that I am saying is that whatever system that we adopt; we need to assure that it at least works as well as the previous system did. If that system incorporates "industrial bots" for the back-breaking labor and "sex-bots" to keep the incels happy; then so be it.

But what we are doing right now is not going to last. History has shown that when low-value males (not the bottom tier but above it) are feeling socially disenfranchised, if they aren't dealt with in some manner (either pacified or sent into war), you get coups/revolts/uprisings. These men are searching for an outlet for all of that misplaced passion and if they can't invest it in wives, they'll invest it in an ideology.

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

men say all the time that they thought if they got the right education and job and lived a decent life then a beautiful woman would just manifest.

That's not true. We just know that, our best and really only strategy for getting that woman... is to better ourselves. Physically, educationally, skillfully, financially, etc.

The only strategy that possibly works is bending the probabilities in our favor - a task that's pretty difficult, but not undoable.

[–]Regal_Newt 1 points [recovered]  (114 children) | Copy Link

No, it's not a reward. If you put her in a mood where she wants to have sex, she's having sex because she wants to have sex, not to reward you. If you feel like it's a reward, that's you reading into things. Not her sexual strategy. I have to turn my boyfriend on before he'll want to have sex sometimes, too.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 3 points4 points  (109 children) | Copy Link

I agree it's not necessarily the conscious strategy of the woman to reward the man. My view is not that she is doing it to reward him, but her actions are inherently rewarding or responsive of the male's actions. She is inherently framing it as a reward.

'Do X, Y, Z and receive sex' is inherently framing sex as a reward. It not being a conscious strategy doesn't negate the fact that she is framing it as a reward.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.6 points7 points  (32 children) | Copy Link

So men (some I guess) see it as a “reward” or something? I don’t think that means she is “inherently framing it as a reward.” You’re basically saying needing any effort from your partner to get turned on to want to have sex means you’re “inherently framing sex as a reward” - yes? If that’s the case I don’t really get it.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (31 children) | Copy Link

Birdman said it a little differently:

Said differently, men need to meet or exceed a threshold of attractiveness in both looks and behavior in order for the woman to want to engage sexually. If he's below her threshold, she won't. It's all positive or negative reinforcement for sexually desirable traits at the end of the day:

You are rewarded with what you desire though positive reinforcement by doing a particular set of actions. Just like women are rewarded with whatever benefit they receive from applying makeup. But in this case, men are rewarded with women by doing a specific set of actions.

You’re basically saying needing any effort from your partner to get turned on to want to have sex means you’re “inherently framing sex as a reward” - yes?

Essentially yes. If a woman requires a man to do a set of actions for sex (given he desires sex), then he is rewarded with what he desires by doing a series of actions.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.11 points12 points  (30 children) | Copy Link

It sounds like you're just calling what makes each gender want to sleep with someone as "inherently framing sex as a reward." Which is kindof weird. If a man wants to sleep with me because of the way I've made myself look, the behaviors I have shown to him and my actions, I would not say he's "inherently rewarding my behaviors with sex". Idk, seems like maybe this is just a male perspective thing or something. Or, if it's something else like he wants to commit to me I would also not say that he is inherently framing commitment as a reward.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries2 points3 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

It sounds like you're just calling what makes each gender want to sleep with someone as "inherently framing sex as a reward."

Exactly. What is it with red/purples here with needing to give something a name that forever casts men in a victim role?

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷3 points4 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Well, because you’re dealing with men for whom the concept of a woman actually wanting them is so foreign they have to break everything down into transactions to make sense of why some men get sex and they don’t. They think if they can master the transaction they can cheat the system and get sex.

[–]kragshotDon't mind me...I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys....1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Uh...yeah. When take all of the magical language out of the idea of dating and relationships, that is what you get. Human relationships are nothing more than a series of positive and negative experiences between two or more people, with positive experiences providing more positive reactions. It's is a transactional system, whether people want to admit it or not. Most of the distaste of looking at it in that manner is because it appears to ignore human determination and free will from the equation...but it doesn't. It's simply a way of allowing people to have a better chance at working through the statistics involved in dating. Everybody strikes out, but if you do "X, Y, and Z," you'll strike out less.

Everybody always tries to game whatever systems that they are invested in; that's human nature. Humans weren't built to fly by nature, but we as a species said "fuck nature; we want to get up in the air!" and look at us now.

But we had people basically saying:

"You shouldn't travel using airplanes. You should just keep throwing yourself into the air and hope that after one of those attempts, you actually land where you want to be...."

But men have always asked the question in regards to dating; "What is he doing to get the girls to like him, that I'm not?" Here's a Joe Weider fitness program ad from the 60s. That pretty much is nothing more than the whole "lift because chicks dig swole dudes" angle from RP. The only thing now is that the RP guys have figured out what could be the "Philosopher's Stone (as in the idea of being able to transform baser metals into gold)" of dating.

The fact here is that you are condemning somebody for using a repeatable formula to do something because for whatever instinctual reason, "you feel that the formula is unethical and they should just leave it to chance instead, just because...." Fact is that if somebody manages to come up with a recipe to consistently perform a task successfully, people are going to use it.

Like they say in Lazy Town:

"It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake...but you gotta do the cooking by the book!"

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Nice strawman

[–]kragshotDon't mind me...I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys....0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Yeah...I figured that you wouldn't come up with a better response than that.

And for the record and course of conversation, the strawman fallacy doesn't apply here.

You commented on how people that look at dating as transactional try to game the system.

In turn, I explained how that mindset worked for those people and that dating is actually not only transactional, but also formulaic and procedural.

Many other women on this particular forum have openly admitted that they were all but instinctively opposed to men using "artificial and derived means" to increase their SMV ("I don't want men that had to learn how to get it; I want one that naturally get's it.")

Following that, I pointed out the illogical idea of condemning the use of formulas and procedures to accomplish a goal by using examples; one of how human beings decided to deny nature's dictates and do something that we weren't "meant to do by nature's design." The other example is how men have always been working toward the goal that has been pretty much achieved by Red Pill thinking...which in of itself is a formulaic procedure for dating.

So...be a dear and point out these "straw-men" that you are seeing. Thanks in advance.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You hit the nail on the head. It's all about transactions for them. Someone has to be the buyer and someone has to be the seller.

Haven't they heard of free trade agreements? ;) ;)

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

How is receiving a reward victimizing? It maybe harder but it’s certainly more rewarding lmao

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

How is receiving a reward victimizing? It maybe harder but it’s certainly more rewarding lmao

EVERYTHING rp comes up with comes with a negative slant against women.

'Women reward asshole men with sex and then have their bastard spawn. If women would only have sex with betas, then betas would be a lot happier and women wouldn't be training men to be assholes."

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

You’re just moralizing. There’s not inherently wrong with women rewarding men or asshole men with sex.

If men want to change their strategy to sleep with more women then let them. Stop moralizing.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You’re just moralizing.

No. I'm paraphrasing rp.

There’s not inherently wrong with women rewarding men or asshole men with sex.

And nothing inherently true, either. We're debating something that doesn't exist. Except for a small number of women, it's not true.

If men want to change their strategy to sleep with more women then let them. Stop moralizing.

You cannot get up early enough in the morning to catch me out with a strawman like this ;)

[–]kragshotDon't mind me...I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys....2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That is a complete reversal of what is going on with the Red Pill.

What the Red Pill says is that "More women tend to want to have sex with alpha males than not. Here is what you can do to adopt/emulate those traits/characteristics associated with alpha males so you can take advantage of that statistic and in addition, these are things you need to know to reduce your susceptibility to emotional manipulation or bypass having to deal with it altogether, which in turn will improve your chances with women even further."

The Red Pill is all about male improvement to become more attractive to women.

What nobody knew is that apparently, women have a instinctive revulsion to the idea of men engineering a way to artificially increase their SMV. And the funny thing is that if the guy does it all correctly (or at least within the reasonable range of effect), then the woman will never know the difference. With that being said, we do know that there are a lot of guys out there doing it badly...but even then, they are only providing camouflage for the ones that are doing it right.

[–]adool999 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

Maybe it doesn't affect you and you lack empathy?

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Maybe it doesn't affect you and you lack empathy?

That's rich coming from the anyone who aligns themselves with the red pill. They have zero empathy for women. All women are to them are objects to stick dicks into and gain validation from.

[–]kragshotDon't mind me...I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys....0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

That is not exactly true. However, the Red Pill system is designed to subtract a large degree of emotional content from the dating process on the male side. But anything that is broken down to a systematic process will do that.

Again, people often (I think sometimes on purpose) forget that the Red Pill is nothing more than a toolbox. You can't judge the tools; only the person using them. If somebody grabs a hammer out of a toolbox, they can use it to either drive a nail into a board or bash someone's head in; the hammer itself, is surprisingly good for completing both tasks.

A gun can be used to get dinner by killing an elk or to get money by robbing somebody.

A guy can take the Red Pill and use what he learns to either throw dick like "Fred Garvin" or he can use what he learns to work through just meeting women until he finds the right one.

Things can be used for good or evil; true shit, CombatStacy!

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

Maybe it's my econ background showing? Something being weird doesn't make it incorrect though lol

As another commenter here said:

it's really hard to get past this whole reward structure no matter how the game is ultimately played.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.7 points8 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

It's not incorrect or correct because this isn't some fact, it's more like a perspective/opinion. Do you also think men then "inherently frame sex (or commitment or any positive thing I guess) as a reward"? Based on this perspective? I mean under this perspective almost anything positive that a person wants which is done by someone else to that particular person means they are "inherently framing (whatever it is) as a reward" - no? I don't get why this would be just a woman with sex thing I suppose.

[–]BirdManBrrrr0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't get why this would be just a woman with sex thing I suppose.

Are women not the gatekeepers of sex?

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

Something being weird doesn't make it an inaccurate perspective then.

Most things are framed as a reward system in a capitalist society.

I don't get why this would be just a woman with sex thing I suppose.

I already explained why.

It becomes obvious that female sexuality often manifests itself as a response to how a particular man makes her feel. This inherently frames successful male sexuality as a set of actions where the response is a woman feeling desired resulting in sex. Women frame romance, intimacy and sex within the context of a man acting upon her to make her feel wanted and desired. This inherently frames romance as a verb that men do, while being a noun that women consume. Sex is then inherently framed as a reward given to men with the correct set of characteristics and actions.

The same can't be said about men with regards to romance, intimacy and sex. Makeup and passive female sexuality is still an attempt to get a man to act upon her where she eventually gives consent to a man who is worthy enough and ticks all the right active boxes. So while makeup is still a reward structure, it's not the same in that it doesn't manifest itself as men being seen as a reward unlike the trope of women being a reward.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Inaccurate is a synonym for incorrect. Nobody said you're dead wrong or anything chill. I still think it's a weird way of looking at things. You'll have to just accept that I think it's weird.

I already explained why.

Not really, we all have to "show/do" things typically to get what we want from others, whether that's sex, love, affection, commitment friendship, whathaveyou. I don't understand what makes sex so different or men immune from being seen under this perspective as "inherently framing their (action that you want) as a reward" for her behaviors/actions. Under your logic.

You're trying to make some big difference between active/passive I guess. I don't see what the big distinction there is, men also decide whether they want to sleep with women because of how she "makes him feel" whether that's purely physical or otherwise. Men aren't robots, they too have emotions towards women which make them feel a certain way which inspires certain things or "rewards" as you've framed it.

But my sexuality has never been passive like that though, it seems to me a bigger trope that women just sit there doing basically nothing and all the men come to them.

Getting a man to love you or want to commit to you is not passive for example. You have to be attractive, flirtatious, open, active in seeking his attention, affectionate, etc. I still would not frame that as him "inherently framing his love/commitment/sex" as a reward.

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

Getting a man to love you or want to commit to you is not passive for example

Yes, I agree. And yes, I do perceive this as a man rewarding her with her commitment for a series of actions and shows of desirable appearance. (As an aside, lots of bloops disagree that men are the gatekeepers of sex, so it's interesting that you assume that is fact.)

When it comes to the act of sex, I would argue that men are rewarded for doing certain acts. When it comes to the act of commitment, then women are rewarded for certain acts (especially from high value men).

But in the context of this OP, we are talking about sex mostly, not commitment.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

So while makeup is still a reward structure, it's not the same in that it doesn't manifest itself as men being seen as a reward unlike the trope of women being a reward.

It's the same thing.

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

It’s the same concept. But the manifestation is different because makeup and female sexuality in general is passive.

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't see whats hard to grasp about it.

Its the same with anything in life. Its like work, we do our job we are rewarded with a wage.

What you put in = what you get out.

[–]Regal_Newt 1 points [recovered]  (67 children) | Copy Link

That's not exclusive to women. That's human sexuality. No sane man is going to sleep with me unless I make him feel like he is wanted by me and put in n the effort to make him feel so.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 8 points9 points  (48 children) | Copy Link

No sane man is going to sleep with me unless I make him feel like he is wanted by me and put in n the effort to make him feel so.

No lol download Tinder and write "only looking for one night stands" as your bio. Hundreds of sane men will show up at your door without you making them feel like he is special or wanted in some way.

[–]Regal_Newt 1 points [recovered]  (47 children) | Copy Link

Because in that scenario, a girl wanting to sleep with him who he finds attractive is sufficient in making him feel wanted and hot.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 12 points13 points  (46 children) | Copy Link

Your premise is false. Men don't typically sleep with women because she makes him feel wanted and hot. You're projecting female sexuality onto men.

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

That is not female sexuality. Women don't sleep with men because they make them feel sexy and wanted. They have sex with men because they want to have sex with men. Feeling sexy and wanted is simply necessary to go through with that. For both men and women. Feeling sexy and wanted is as simple as the person you like expressing interest back. I'm pretty sure that nobody would have sex with someone if they told that they don't find them attractive at all and that they're ugly but they just want an easy lay/ are doing it on a dare or something.

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

Feeling sexy and wanted is simply necessary to go through with that. For both men and women.

Wrong! Oh, so very, very wrong. Men don't need to feel sexy or wanted at all. In fact, we usually don't understand why women find us sexy. We are hairy and gross. Women finding us attractive is just evidence that women are insane. Most of us are so accustomed to rejection that we can't even figure out what we did right, when we were successful.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 4 points5 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

Women don't sleep with men because they make them feel sexy and wanted.

We are just going to disagree completely if that is the hill you are willing to die on. Women absolutely require men to make them feel sexy and desired to have sex. Even if they do want sex because they just want to have sex, men are still required to make them feel a certain way before the pants come off.

Feeling sexy and wanted is as simple as the person you like expressing interest back.

This is just baseline. There is no action required from women beyond expressing interest. The active responsibility for initiating, escalating, romance etc... is typically on men. You can't equate all those actions with women merely expressing interest. It's a false equivalence.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries-1 points0 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

Women absolutely require men to make them feel sexy and desired to have sex

hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Joke's on you if you believe that.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 1 point2 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

Think and say what you want. The porn women consume correlate my experiences 1:1. It’s all about how a man makes a woman feel.

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women don't sleep with men because they make them feel sexy and wanted. They have sex with men because they want to have sex with men.

So are you saying that feeling sexy and wanted does not contribute in you wanting to sex with a man? Cause and effect.

[–]LSTW1234 1 points [recovered]  (13 children) | Copy Link

Men typically sleep with women they find attractive. So if I make myself attractive - sexy outfit, makeup, etc - with the intention of attracting a man, is he rewarding me or am I rewarding him? Are we rewarding each other?

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

I commented about this down below, but yes. If you apply makeup and get the desired results, then you are receiving a reward for your efforts. It fits the literal definition of the word.

But with regards to heterosexual relationships, men are typically required to act in certain ways.

[–]LSTW1234 1 points [recovered]  (11 children) | Copy Link

So are women, it’s just different requirements. Sure some men will fuck literally anyone regardless of effort, but women do have to put in effort to attract men they want to attract. I’d never think of his attraction as a “reward,” I think of it as more of a response, but I get how one would perceive it as a reward.

I think what you’re missing though, is that when women object to the “sex as a reward” thing they are objecting to the idea that women intentionally use sex as a reward, not that men perceive it as such. Men often frame it as “women use sex as a reward,” which implies intent. The way you described it in the OP makes sense to me, it’s just not how it’s often framed.

Another thing you’re missing is that a woman doesn’t have insight into all the effort it might have taken a man to get sex. Often from her perspective they “just clicked.” And sometimes that’s the truth; not every man has to make as much effort as TRP men. Unless provided evidence to the contrary, women are going to assume he’s a natural.

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

I think of it as more of a response, but I get how one would perceive it as a reward.

The response is a desired result. It's literally a reward but sure.

the idea that women intentionally use sex as a reward, not that men perceive it as such.

I really, really beg to differ.

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/gvyaax/feminist-frequency-explores-the-gaming-trope-of-women-as-reward

Let's pretend we already played this game where you say that's not a real feminist then I give you 10 more examples. Or you say that's only one example and I give you 30 more of academic feminists complaining that men perceive sex as a reward. Let's pretend we played that game already and I won it because I've listed 100 feminists complaining that men perceive sex as a reward.

Unless provided evidence to the contrary, women are going to assume he’s a natural.

This is true. And the female perspective is what I am gaining here and from my gf. But just because the woman doesn't understand what she's doing, doesn't negate the fact that she's doing something.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries1 point2 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

Men don't typically sleep with women

because she makes him feel wanted and hot. You're projecting female sexuality onto men.

You're projecting your idea of female sexuality onto PPD.

Women don't sleep with men because they make her feel hot and wanted. That idea is laughable. You don't have the barest clue about female sexuality - except for the small group of women who are "red" in their viewpoint - which isn't most women.

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

No I’m not. I’m taking my experiences of women and a general idea of the porn women consume to come to the conclusion that women desire men who make them feel a certain way.

This idea of a man sweeping a woman off her feet is not only touted by RP women lmao

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries1 point2 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

So you're using the biased experiences of one human being. A human who is not a woman.

And you're using an idea of the porn woman consume? Er.... so you're using the idea that most western women are lesbian, sexually? Because here are the stats: https://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/what-porn-women-watch-2016-3

This idea of a man sweeping a woman off her feet is not only touted by RP women lmao

Men fall in love, too. That's what the sweeping feeling is.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

That’s why I am here for different perspectives. Of course I am using my experience here but it’s not only my opinion. Many social scientists mirror my own experiences.

In a 2000 article, Roy Baumeister proposed that women's sexuality fundamentally varies from that of men. Men, he suggested, have a fixed, biologically-determined sex drive that is relatively insensitive to context. Women, on the other hand, have a much more variable sex drive, far more responsive to the surrounding circumstances. He based these conclusions on a broad range of empirical findings. According to this research, women have greater variation both in the level of sexual activity and choice of gender over time. Moreover, women's sexuality is far more influenced by cultural factors, such as education, religion, and peer and parental attitudes.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/handy-psychology-answers/201102/does-sexuality-differ-men-and-women%3Famp

How many studies would you like to read tonight that suggest women have reactive sexualities?

Also, your link is online porn. Most porn women consume is erotica. And the obsession with lesbian porn is due to the fact that women are more sensual and romantic in lesbian porn, further proving my point.

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

There have been studies on this. The porn women consume have little correlation to their actual sexual preferences.

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

Lol it’s not just the porn women consume anyway. All romantic gestures women idolize are a man acting upon a woman.

Multiple research studies have been done to conclude that women have reactive sexualities. Look at the studies I listed in above.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/handy-psychology-answers/201102/does-sexuality-differ-men-and-women%3Famp

Here’s one.

[–]orcscorper..||. |.|.| ...|| .|.|| |..||1 point2 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

That's funny. You're funny. You are projecting female traits onto men, and imagining that this will give you some insight as to how men think and bahave. It will not.

Do you have a vagina? Are you not morbidly obese, old as fuck, or hideously deformed? Men will sleep with you (after they fuck you). If you want a high-quality man to want you, you have to be high quality yourself.

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

Can you read? I already addressed this.

[–]IMockRartedComments3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

CAn yOu rEaD? I aLrEaDy aDdReSsEd tHiS.

[–]IMockRartedComments1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

CAn yOu rEaD? I aLrEaDy aDdReSsEd tHiS.

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

Some top tier brilliance in this mind.

[–]BirdManBrrrr1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

lol its a bot

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you have a vagina? Are you not morbidly obese, old as fuck, or hideously deformed? Men will sleep with you (after they fuck you).

I don't know why you added this qualifier. Men will sleep with morbidly obese, old and likely even deformed women.

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus1 point2 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Either your super ugly or your implying that the majority of men are insane.

[–]Regal_Newt 1 points [recovered]  (8 children) | Copy Link

So if I, an attractive woman, were to go up to a guy and tell him that I don't find him attractive in the slightest and that he's an ugly POS, but that he looks low effort and I want dick, or that I was dared to go have sex with him, that a sane, self respecting man would go through with it? I'm not saying that I have to pull grand gestures in order to have sex. Most of the time someone you like being attracted to you is sufficient to make someone feel sexy and wanted.

[–]TwentyX4[🍰] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Calling him a POS is not the same thing as saying nothing. Further: lots of men PAY for sex. I can't imagine anything so devalidating as paying for sex. It makes you ask the question "this woman wouldn't sleep with me unless I paid her money to". Some of these prostitutes are ugly as sin, but still get paid for it.

Obviously, I wouldn't do it - mostly because I have too much pride, but there are plenty of men that would. I think you misunderstand the male sex drive.

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Try it and let me know.

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

I would, but I don't want to cheat on my boyfriend, and don't want a drink thrown in my face. If you'd accept, then you'd be correct in me placing you in the "not sane" category.

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

If you'd accept, then you'd be correct in me placing you in the "not sane" category.

How the hell do I know if I am sane or not?

I have only known one person who was definitely sane. As they had a stamped certificate following their release from being institutionalized.

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

Was it a document clearing him of all donkey brains?

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

If someone throws a drink in your face, they'll get kicked out, especially if they're a dude.

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

So if I, an attractive woman, were to go up to a guy and tell him that I don't find him attractive in the slightest and that he's an ugly POS, but that he looks low effort and I want dick, or that I was dared to go have sex with him, that a sane, self respecting man would go through with it?

Yeah, self-loathing male feminists and subs exist. I'd say between 12.5% and 50% of men would take you up on that offer.

I'm not saying that I have to pull grand gestures in order to have sex.

Of course you don't - you're a woman.

Most of the time someone you like being attracted to you is sufficient to make someone feel sexy and wanted.

...provided that someone you like is hot.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

but her actions are inherently rewarding or responsive of the male's actions. She is inherently framing it as a reward.

What if she just wanted to get it off with a hot-looking male? Is it his looks that are being rewarded?

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

Sure. But this is an unlikely occurrence in my experience. It’s far more likely that she wants the attractive male to make her feel desirable and sexy. It’s uncommon that an attractive male is suffice in and of himself. This is unlike an attractive woman. Most men, I think, can just jerk off at a still image of an attractive woman. Or in the very real sense, feel fulfilled by treating an actual woman as a mere physical object. Female sexuality just isn’t like that from my experience.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

It’s uncommon that an attractive male is suffice in and of himself.

It is suffice.

Most men, I think, can just jerk off at a still image of an attractive woman. Or in the very real sense, feel fulfilled by treating an actual woman as a mere physical object. Female sexuality just isn’t like that from my experience.

Because women have more interesting and restricted bodily features. Everyone wants women. Even women.

Men's bodies are not restricted - they're easy to access.

But women don't need a man or anything that a man does in order to feel sexy and jerk off.

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

No it’s not lol it is often not suffice to turn women on itself.

“Interesting” is subjective. Who’s relying on a single anecdotal opinion now? Lmao

[–]the_calibre_cat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I dunno. You can't reward a potted plant, you can only reward humans. And animals. Not parts of the human/animal, the sum of it's parts. The whole magilla.

Which is why TRP advocates being a slight douchebag, because if you have the looks to pull it off (i.e. are not super short, ugly, balding), it is an unambiguous boon.

[–]dottywineA Normal Person0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

But it's not "Do X Y Z to receive sex" because that implies that ANYONE can dod X Y Z and get sex. Doesn't work like that.

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

It’s not open to anyone to do X Y and Z. It’s just that X Y and Z is often a requirement to turn women on.

[–]dottywineA Normal Person0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Turning a woman on doesn’t mean she wants to or will have sex with you. And a woman can want to have sex with you, even if you didn’t do anything to turn her on. It’s just a choice. And how does a man identify exactly what x y z actions he did that made a woman open to being with him?

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

I have to turn my boyfriend on before he'll want to have sex sometimes, too.

Yet he has traits and behaviors that are sexually attractive to you in order for you to want to have sex with him in the first place. His attractiveness exceeds your threshold and thus you "reward" him with sex, regardless of any one interaction or arousal in the moment.

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

Yes, and he does the same with me. What you're describing isn't wrong, it's just not exclusive to women.

[–]BirdManBrrrr1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

it's just not exclusive to women

As an absolute, no. As a matter of degree...

Do you think women are--on average--more choosy about who they will have sex with than men?

[–]GayLubeOilTrue Red Pill5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Sexual Selection in all species is inherently discriminatory in one way or another. So in that sense Sex with the female choosing is a reward for completing the game.

Even if we switch over to asexual test tube baby reproduction, the procedure must still be funded so there still is a reward structure.

The only way out of this is a blind indescriminate orgy. But even then not everyone is invited so.

It's really hard to get past this whole reward structure no matter how the game is ultimately played.

Suggestions welcome.

[–]mega-unicorn7 points8 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

This is just all convoluted and wrong, and that starts in the second paragraph.

“Women frame their virginity like a sacred piece of them to be given only to the most worthy”

Women didn’t create that frame, I’ve never met a woman that feels that way. We are repeatedly told this by society, and misogynists everywhere; that our virginity is a gift - that we’re a prize.

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

Even if women are manipulated into thinking and acting that way, it’s still matter of fact that they act that way.

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

We weren't manipulated into thinking that way. Men see our virginity as a prize and we respond accordingly. We don't see sex as a reward, it's only men that see it that way.

[–]mega-unicorn0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Schrödinger's woman.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew11 points12 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

It becomes obvious that female sexuality often manifests itself as a response to how a particular man makes her feel. This inherently frames successful male sexuality as a set of actions where the response is a woman feeling desired resulting in sex.

weve had our differences but congratulations on beign the only man alive who understands female sexuality

[–]question494629 points10 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

If I slept with every man that makes me feel desired, I’d have an N count literally thousands of times higher.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

ok?

[–]legaladvicequest4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

It pokes a hole in OP's logic

[–]tallwheelManosphere Unificationist5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Not really. I don't remember him ever saying that women will sleep with every man who makes her feel desired.

[–]legaladvicequest1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

He says that women sleep with men who make them feel desired. If that's true, then why do men use "negging" as a sexual strategy?

[–]tallwheelManosphere Unificationist0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Negging is for hot, confident women who have tons of suitors for you to compete with. But even with such women, after you get her attention, you still have to make her feel desired. Not really a problem as long as you make your sexual intentions clear.

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Isn't desiring a woman just par for the course though? I suppose there's a difference between the woman feeling desired and you desiring her, and different ways of various effectiveness to express that desire, but to me that statement just sounds like 2+2=4. I like to feel desired too. Doesn't anyone?

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

No, because there is a desire that is objectification in which the individual woman herself senses that she doesn't particularly matter and there is the desire that players are very good at exhibiting that makes a woman feel like she is the individual and special object of desire

[–]_Neon_Shadow_2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

From my experience it's the opposite. They're not good at making her feel like a desired individual, they treat her like an object and she loves it.

For example, my best friend is a stereotypical Chad. He was messing around with a married woman for a while. He texts her to come over so he can fuck her face. She obliges enthusiastically. Afterwards he tells her to get the fuck out. Repeat.

Is that the desire women want?

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

weve had our differences but congratulations on beign the only man alive who understands female sexuality

Is this serious or a joke?

That is nothing like female sexuality. Women don't even need men to feel sexual. A man making a woman feel special is for relationships. Men also want to feel special in terms of the woman they're dating/married to.

[–]merel--9 points10 points  (45 children) | Copy Link

Is this a negative dynamic? I enjoy being 'swept away'. Nothing wrong with that.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 5 points6 points  (44 children) | Copy Link

I don't think so. I think it's only "negative" to certain women with particular political affiliations because it inherently frames hetero-relationships as women being 'won' or men being 'rewarded.'

[–]merel--2 points3 points  (43 children) | Copy Link

Uhmmm... You win women over but sex is not a reward. That sounds like girls don't enjoy it and 'give' it to guys because they are so masculine and alpha. That sounds a bit gross.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 9 points10 points  (36 children) | Copy Link

You can reward someone with something that is mutually beneficial. Your logic is off.

[–]merel--3 points4 points  (35 children) | Copy Link

Sex is not a reward.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 12 points13 points  (26 children) | Copy Link

You say that like you just didn't frame it as a reward for men sweeping you off your feet.

[–]merel--4 points5 points  (25 children) | Copy Link

No, because sex is not a reward. I can also take charge and seduce a man, would I then be rewarded with sex?

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 7 points8 points  (24 children) | Copy Link

I can also take charge and seduce a man, would I then be rewarded with sex?

Yes.

Reward: a thing given in recognition of one's service, effort, or achievement.

The man is giving sex in response to your effort.

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

When you say that, it seems like sex is this thing you get when you earn enough nice points. Something that one party is giving up and the other party is working towards earning. If you just want to be able to semantically call it a “reward” then go for it, but anybody in a normal relationship that’s healthy understands that it’s very mutual, and it’s not a prize in the sense that the man is working towards sex points and the woman only rewards sex when enough points are earned. It’s that kind of dynamic that men often think is the case when it’s really not.

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

Trust me, I’d rather it not be the case lol but alas, women frame sex as a reward for men making them feel desired.

[–]merel--3 points4 points  (19 children) | Copy Link

What if you both put in equal effort? Is it still a reward then?

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 2 points3 points  (18 children) | Copy Link

Then it's equally and mutually rewarding.

[–]Five_DecadesKnows what women want. Knows he doesn't have it3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It is an evolutionary reward.

Women find men who have the most and best traits that they wanted passed to offspring and 'reward' them with sex.

[–]DespisedByWomen 1 points [recovered]  (6 children) | Copy Link

From your previous comment:

You win women over

From this comment

Sex is not a reward

These two are mutually exclusive. If I have to "win" you, you are the reward. You are literally the thing I get for winning, you are a trophy, an achievement. These are your own words.

[–]merel--3 points4 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I do not think of sex this way. It's too transactional. Very easy to get into the realm of using sex as a bargaining chip.

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

Pretty much all human interaction is transactional, I seriously don't get why so many people seem to take issue with this.

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

If you dont think of sex this way then dont type words that frame sex in that way

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

Ughhhh. Oke let me rephrase. If you want to have sex with a girl she needs to be attracted to you, if you want to have sex with a guy he needs to be attracted to you.

Better?

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

Breaking news: water is wet. Story at eleven.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That over-simplifies heterosexual relationships to the point of uselessness.

Unpack the dynamic of a man “winning a woman over.”

[–]toronto87 1 points [recovered]  (5 children) | Copy Link

You women over by adopting the traits, physical appearance etc. that women select for, ergo sex is a 'reward' in that it influences the behavior of men as men seek to imitate the traits and appearance of those who are most successful. This is literally the reason for the existence of PUA and Red Pill.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries5 points6 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

You win women over by adopting the traits, physical appearance etc. that women select for, ergo sex is a 'reward' in that it influences the behavior of men as men seek to imitate the traits and appearance of those who are most successful. This is literally the reason for the existence of PUA and Red Pill.

Women win men by adopting the traits and physical appearance men select for, too.

[–]toronto87 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

Yes but only top percentile men get to be choosy.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Correct.

Same for women.

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes.

[–]AutoModeratorMarried to MRS_DRgree[M] 1 point2 points  (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.

[–]petrichordiummidsommar pill1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Whatta buncha weak beta shit. Bitch I AM the reward! As His Egomaniacal Excellency Kanye said in a more lucid year, “my presence is a present, kiss my ass.”

But no seriously, kandyapplez already made the point i came here to make, more succinctly and with fewer unnecessary personal anecdotes than i would have.

Women can accept most of the feelz framework and love of seduction you talk about but resent the idea that they are dependent variables without agency. The man may feel “rewarded” with sex, and the woman may or may NOT feel like she is rewarding him depending on her framework. But that’s not to say she is “a reward.” The distinction probably seems less semantic when you’re the one being reduced to a swag bag for participating in civilization at an adequate level.

[–]SkrattGoddess2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't know any women that think being a trophy is bad xD Where are you seeing this?

[–]Mr_White119811Hugh Mungus2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you agree with the premise and that women have a responsibility in creating this dynamic?

To me its not so much the women that create this dynamic. Its the fact that for every attractive woman, there are going to be loads of guys attracted, be they on tinder, in the venue, orbiters, etc, etc. So it does create this sort of competition dynamic where guys are competing. But I don't see it as competing for a prize. Its just her selecting me out of all of them, not because she is comparing me to them all but because I evoke the most emotions in her.

In regards to men fighting over women, I actually love it when that happens, its a great ice breaker for talking to another woman "Look at those two guys fighting over her, she must be the hottest woman in this venue" or "Those two guys are fighting over you, what makes you so special?"

Also, men need to build their won frame instead of buying into a womans fame. Why is the woman a prize? Why does a guy not view himself as the prize? The strongest frame always wins.

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

Huh. What am I rewarding when I totally hypothetically unintentionally knock him out with sex so I can finish watching Sabrina on Netflix in peace?

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Behavior that involves him bugging you again while you're watching Sabrina. ;)

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

No way! It's not a true KO unless he falls asleep so fast after that he snores for 10 minutes because his brain hasn't caught on he needs to choose between his nose or his mouth.

The whole notion of "reward" makes sense to me very narrowly. Like people only have sex in a very formulaic way. It doesn't account for a very broad spectrum of possibility in my mind. I will totally mouth "I will knock you tf out!" when my husband is in a mood that I can't get him out of or fix through the ever revered magic of communication. I'll follow through too, and it's not a grand romantic "reward" of an experience of the type I think the OP means. It's more like a nuke when talking is pointless. Or when I need to finish Sabrina!

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

> It becomes obvious that female sexuality often manifests itself as a response to how a particular man makes her feel. This inherently frames successful male sexuality as a set of actions where the response is a woman feeling desired resulting in sex. Women frame romance, intimacy and sex within the context of a man acting upon her to make her feel wanted and desired.

What the fuck?

No.

Maybe older women feel this way but they grew up in a different era, in which women weren't supposed to like sex.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I disagree. It’s been my experience that young women still desire to be swept off their feet by an active act of romance from a male.

[–]CombatStaceyBlue ovaries1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I disagree. It’s been my experience that young women still desire to be swept off their feet by an active act of romance from a male.

Yes, woman love romance and being swept off their feet. But this is the thing - they don't need this to want sex with a man.

Do you see my point? Love and sex and not the same thing in a woman's mind.

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

How women hamster is irrelevant. It’s the same for men.

[–]HumanSockPuppetEqual-Opportunity Oppressor0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you agree with the premise and that women have a responsibility in creating this dynamic?

No. Market forces create this dynamic. Women have holes for men to stick their penises inside (supply), and men want to stick their penises inside women (demand). Everything else is an attempt by actors within the market to maximize their "profit" (not necessarily money) in a given exchange.

[–]Pesky_GibbonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (12 children) | Copy Link

I agree with this premise, and I agree that we do have a responsibility in creating such a dynamic.

That said, I have never viewed myself as a reward.

And I have never given sex as a reward.

Maybe that's why I've never been in love, and why I've never had good sex.

Huh.

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

What do you think your largest shortcomings are?

[–]Pesky_GibbonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (10 children) | Copy Link

That I...uh... I dunno. Neuralink.

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

Elon musk?

[–]Pesky_GibbonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy Link

Who knows...... ...__...

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

What?

[–]Pesky_GibbonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, he's a short...um...hahahahahahahaha. One of many. That I have. Yep.

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

Please just explain to me what you are saying.

[–]Pesky_GibbonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

I have short sellings. They are men. I like them a lot. I wish they would get me out of here. But it is nice here. I guess.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

What makes you undesirable?

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

but I can't get over the fact that this is how women frame sex to begin with.

Some women do actively treat sex as a reward. If she's doing it intentionally, I can see your point.

From my experience, starting in HS, women framed their virginity like a sacred piece of them to be given only to the most worthy.

I don't believe this is a built in feature. Girls are (or at least were) taught to guard their virginity. Locks should only be opened with one key, why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free, etc.

Later in life, the erotica and porn women consume is generally about creating a narrative in which the woman is felt desirable and sexy by the male protagonist.

Sure. This is extremely common in male oriented porn as well, but it is a greater focus in female oriented material.

It becomes obvious that female sexuality often manifests itself as a response to how a particular man makes her feel.

This is more true than not, but I don't believe it's something most women have control over. Can anyone control what turns them on? We don't have the same levels of testosterone fueling our sex drives, so most of us are reactive.

Sex is then inherently framed as a reward given to men with the correct set of characteristics and actions.

I think intent is required for someone to "frame" anything in any particular way. Heterosexual interaction may objectively be a reward system, but it's pushing it to suggest women are responsible for that dynamic unless an individual woman has specific intent. Think sugar babies or the stereotypical entitled bratty gurl.

Do you agree with the premise and that women have a responsibility in creating this dynamic?

The women who intentionally participate in carrot and stick sexual interactions, yes.

I also think you should consider the importance of historical gender dynamics here. Women (sexually and otherwise) have, throughout history, been given as actual rewards for men. Pay the dowry, get the bride. Win the battle, take the women.

It's a deep seated and long standing dynamic that makes many women uncomfortable when extremes are considered. I'm fairly certain that's the "loathing" you're encountering.

[–]kragshotDon't mind me...I'm just studying all of you talking monkeys....0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I just brought that up in another discussion here. While women may not have been involved in creating that system, they are certainly complicit in maintaining it.

In the old social compact, access to women were used as a reward for average to lower-value men agreeing to exist in the confines of our reigning community structure. And we have definite evidence that both women and men as parents reinforced that idea in how they raised their children. This was especially prevalent in the periods leading up to the sixties and seventies, when it began to fall apart.

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

Even at the micro level, I’ve had numerous women confide in me that they would gladly be trophy wives if given the choice. That’s not only maintaining the system but creating their own in which they are the prize or trophy to be won.

[–]dottywineA Normal Person0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Their virginity is a sacred piece of them TO HER. It's sacred TO HER. Given to who she chooses. Not as a reward for winning the "Swoon me" game. It's not a game that can be won. It's just meeting someone you get along with well enough.

Check out the porn website for women, by women. It's not videos of being a sexy damsel in distress covetted by princes all across the land. You're thinking of something women consume when they are even older.

It's usually after age 45 that women start fantasizing about being sexually desired because society pretty much ignores women at that point.

The women that men see as a prize are not the women who want to be prized.

[–]Eartherry0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I agree with everything you've said, but not that women bear any responsibility. Only because a man's desire is inherent whether women want or are even aware of it. That shifts the undue responsibility for men's attraction to women.

There would some legitimacy to this argument if not for the fact that as men are capable of controlling their own urges, there's no justification, and even less urgency, as to why women should accept anything. Without justification, demands are obviously because of a lack of something one feels entitled to.

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

Accept as in... Somebody has to give them something? Hahaha

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

Women's role isn't explicitly passive (even though it kind of is by definition). In the romantic scenario, the women has to take on the role of the seductress. Not to dig on men, but I don't think they realize the vast majority of women have to sacrifice their personalities in some way or another so that they can find a man.

Having to look and present yourself as a sexual being 24/7 is hard work. Not just physically, but mentally.

[–]SpencerWS0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The way I see it, women have their own terms for when they are a man’s reward, and they get upset when a man views them as a reward on other terms than their own. I think the punchline here is that women generally have feelings that make some sense and deserve dignify, but not much rational awareness to see how things could be in another perspective. They operate in a consistent way, but they misunderstand what that way is all the time. Its not so different from men, but I do think it is different by degree. Thats what thinking through my experience with women and this issue tells me.

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

“Women frame” using frame as a verb suggests that women are consciously and deliberately presenting their vag as a trophy for men to win. We’re not. If you as a man see it that way, that is on YOU not us.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I disagree. Lots of women have confided in me that they would eagerly be a trophy wife if given the chance.

But anyways, inherently framing something doesn’t require intent.

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Yes it does that it the meaning of the word frame

“create or formulate (a concept, plan, or system).”

A deliberate action

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

You can create a system without the intention to create one lmao

[–]poppy_blublack midget wine mom 🍷1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Another one who wants to argue with the dictionary.

Why do you bother to post OPs under the guise of asking for people thoights and never consider anything that’s said you haven’t made up your mind about?

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Unintended consequences are a thing that exist. You can absolutely create a system when you have no intention to

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

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