Red Pill TheoryThe Parable of Mark and Lauren (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by ∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt

Looking for a community of like-minded individuals? Head on over to The Fraternity and apply now! New members are being accepted, but that window closes soon!

Looks like the blog has been taken down, but thankfully there's an archive of it here.

Lauren is happy. Last night, her boyfriend Mark finally told her he loved her. She had been wanting that ever since they started seeing each other four months ago. She had been having sex with him, and it had been pleasurable for sure, but she was doing so hoping it would turn into something more: love.

Mark had been aloof and slow to give away his emotions. Lauren didn’t mind this, she even preferred it. It meant that she had to work for his love, and by the time he said it, she felt she had earned it and that it really meant something to him.

Lauren set up an excited brunch with her friends Stina, Terri and Lisa. They hadn’t seen each other in four months, in fact none of them knew she was dating Mark. Right away, she starts telling them the good news.

“Wow” said Stina, “I didn’t even know you were dating a new guy! That’s great.”

“Yeah”, said Terri, “what is the guy’s name?”

“Mark Smith”, said Lauren. A hush immediately fell over her support group as they began to give each other awkward looks.

“Uhhhh, Lauren”, said Lisa, “Mark Smith has loved a lot of girls.”

“Yeah”, said Stina, “He told Jackie Valenti he loved her.”

“Okay” said Lauren, “But she probably fucked his brains out, right? Like, he was definitely getting sex from her?”

Stina cringes. ”No” she says, “They never even kissed. He went over to her place drunk one night and professed his love for her. She never even let him in her bedroom.”

“Alright but that’s only one girl. That’s okay.” Said Lauren, getting nervous.

“Well there’s also Andrea Tedesco. He told her he loved her after two casual dates.” said Terri, “She was bragging that she kept him around for a while, getting ‘good morning beautiful’ texts from him and other indications of love whenever she needed it, and she only stopped accepting his love when he started to want sex. He still writes on her facebook wall.”

Lauren felt a deep pit in her stomach.

Lisa continues: “Mark told Angelica Messina he loved her the first night he met her. She said he was REALLY into it, looking her right in the eyes when he said it, getting down on his knees in front of her just to kiss her hand, and he even recited poetry for her. She gave him one of those awkward one arm hugs and that was it.”

He never did that freaky stuff with me, thought Lauren. If he does that stuff, then why did I just get a plain old “I love you”?

Plus Angelica is the biggest cocktease in the city, thought Lauren. How could Mark fall for her bullshit? What an idiot. Now she thought Mark was stupid as well as loose with his love.

Stina says, apologetically, “I don’t want to tell you this, but I heard Mark met a girl in a club and dragged her into the bathroom to tell her she was beautiful, then he gave her twenty dollars. She never even touched him.”

“Okay, please stop” said Lauren. She was growing sicker by the second, her world crushed.

Later, she confronts Mark with her new knowledge. Did he really love all those girls without getting sex from them? She demands to know.

“Well yeah but I didn’t really WANT sex from them”, Mark lies, possibly even to himself, “I wanted to give them love, that’s all. I wasn’t ready for sex at that point in my life.”

“Uggggghhhhh” says Lauren, “Don’t you know that guys who give girls love and attention without getting sex are LOSERS??? The girls getting the love and attention don’t actually respect them, they are just using them!”

“No way, guys can want love without sex, too”, claims Mark.

“Well I heard you told Shirley Thompson from my building you loved her and I have to look at her every day. Plus she’s really pretty, there’s no way she was going to fuck you! Why did you love her?” says Lauren.

“Is that what this is about”, Mark says, “You are just insecure because I have more experience with love than you. You think you can’t measure up to all the beautiful girls I’ve loved in the past.”

“Just how many girls did you tell you loved?” asks Lauren

“I don’t know, about 30″ says Mark

This hits Lauren like a brick in the stomach. “30! That is insane, you are a loser!”

“Can’t you see that my past doesn’t matter, and you are giving me sex now and that’s all that matters?” says Mark, “I love the sex we have and that’s something I didn’t get from the other girls.”

Mark can’t see why this only makes Lauren madder. Why should she be the one who has to pay by putting her valuable eggs at risk by taking his sperm in order to get the love and attention that the other girls got so easily.

“Well if you give away love so easily, why did you make me wait?” says Lauren, “Was I not as good as the other girls?”

“Well I saw the chance for sex with you and I didn’t want to mess that up by giving away love too soon”, says Mark.

Lauren dumped Mark.

She had to.

Someone so loose with their emotions is not a good person to give sex to.

What if they have a son who turns out to be easily manipulated by a pretty face, like Mark?

What if a pretty girl in need bats her eyelashes at him and he gives her money that their family needs?

What if she just wants a man’s love all to herself and that can’t happen with Mark?

Even beyond that, on a very visceral, base level that she couldn’t explain, she found Mark repulsive. It was as if she had been wired biologically to feel disgust and lack of attraction for guys who allow themselves to get friendzoned. There was no way she could fuck him again.

Yup, it was as clear as day, thought Lauren. Guys who give away love easily are definitely not worthy of sex.

[–]foomfoomfoom 41 points42 points  (7 children)

Putting this in the collection with the Patrice O'Neil's thought experiment on giving all men $10k daily and women got it by having sex.

[–]ClarityOfLife 8 points9 points  (4 children)

would like a link to that. i have never heard this specific Patrice bite, but it sounds good

[–]GuideGhost 13 points13 points [recovered]

[–]ClarityOfLife 0 points1 point  (0 children)

:O anon delivered!

great clip, thanks so much!

[–]reel_nikkas_dot_com 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm on episode 5, such gold

[–]cutegirlsthrowaway 146 points147 points  (9 children)


Months later Lauren is cleaning out the basement and finds an old cd labeled "Mark's Love Tape". Curious, she puts it in a CD player and takes a listen. What she hears makes her absolutely sick to her stomach.

"Baby I love you like a flower loves the sun. I need you like a fish needs water. There's no one on heaven or earth as perfect as you Michelle."

Eyes filled with tears she confronts Mark and asks him why he's never said those things to her. Doesn't he love her too after all?

"Baby I would just feel ridiculous saying those things today. I said those things a long time ago and I'm just not interested in saying them again. Honestly I'm ashamed I was ever like that and I'm sorry you found out but understand I'm not that guy anymore."

"But don't you love me? Why would you say those things to another woman and not me? Did you love her more than me?"

Mark cannot get Lauren to understand and ultimately they just cannot get past this.

[–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt[S] 33 points34 points  (1 child)

That is a brilliant addition!

[–]cutegirlsthrowaway 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks man. I'm a big fan of your article in TRP handbook about goals and how to attain them. It's very well-written and I've found it incredibly helpful in setting new goals for myself. Thanks for writing that up

[–]DreamBoatGuy25 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Haha, the perfect ending! Well done!

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

Perfected an Already perfect analogy/"parable"

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

Someone give this man a male symbol thing

[–]87GNX 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I fucking love this fucking shit right here.

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

What about the guys who AREA Mark in real life? What do they do when a girl finds out he was a beta

[–][deleted] 109 points110 points  (14 children)

Men who give away love easily are definitely not worthy of sex.

Women who give away sex easily are definitely not worthy of love.

[–]grass_cutter 2 points3 points  (8 children)

Okay I'm brand new to the red pill (have been studying "pickup" for about 8 years though, so I'm pretty sure I've been 'unplugged' for quite a while).

I honestly cannot understand this parable. It's obviously a reversal of sex and love (and a tortured one, because it sounded like Mark was loving one-sided-ly, not exactly possible with physical intercourse).

Also, the red pill legitimately believes women shouldn't give away sex easily?

That's a confusing statement, since supposedly this subreddit (and r/seduction) are intended to INCREASE women's positive attitude towards sex, fast sex, or what-have you.

I thought the "condemning loose women" was a Disney/ Bible attitude.

Unless I missed some sarcasm or irony somewhere. I mean, I get the "traditional" logic --- if something is easily attained, you don't feel as good as acquiring it --- but I think that's just ego, jealousy, the myth of purity, madonna/whore complex --- the list goes on --- fuck, these are the attitudes we're fighting in the Middle East.

I >DO< agree that Mark was a moron, but not because he "loved" easily --- I don't know if I call infatuation, doting on a woman who you have a crush on, going shopping with them, as love. More of stupidity, desperation, immaturity, infatuation, oneitis, etc, and I hate to use the word -- "beta." Having lots of sex? Meh -- not the same in my book. I would be a hypocrite --- I have sex with hot women at the drop of a hat. Sure, it's more difficult for me to find sexual partners than a woman --- but still. I turn down less sex from attractive people than any women has --- zero times, to date.

[–]Dude219 7 points8 points  (7 children)

Well I'm fairly new to TRP as well, but I believe what redpillers agree on is that women with a lot of past sexual partners are good to keep around as friends with benefits but are not the kind that you want in a committed relationship, because those women are known to have less self-control and are more prone to cheat.

The story is meant to point out how ridiculous former/"reformed" sluts are for thinking that they could fuck as many alphas as possible and then still be trusted in a LTR, let alone be considered marriage material, all while withholding the sex they so easily gave away before.

Party girls are fun for the night. Good girls with traditional values are the ones you marry.

[–]grass_cutter -2 points-1 points  (6 children)

Yes we can sum it down to your last line.

No, I get that logic. It's just, that's the outdated logic. That's the logic they believe in the Middle East, India, the Catholic Church, and Disney Movies.

All girls have sex drives, to various levels. You ideally want a girl with a sex drive that matches yours --- so if you have a high sex drive, you want a girl with a high sex drive. And low if you have a low sex drive.

But anyway, who cares if a girl acts on her sex drive because she wants to, or if she artificially restrains herself due to her mother, the Bible, and social mores. What does that prove, exactly? Waiting 3 days or 6 months to have sex with a guy? It's kind of artificial and fake.

I've had sex with girls in less than an hour. Doesn't mean I have low standards.

I think it's just a false dichotomy/ myth of purity. Your monogamous, low-drive, Christian girlfriend is just as likely to get bored and eventually get rid of you as some girl who has tons of previous partners.

[–]NakorZ 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Your monogamous, low-drive, Christian girlfriend is just as likely to get bored and eventually get rid of you as some girl who has tons of previous partners.

That's not what studies show. http://socialpathology.blogspot.com.au/2010/09/virgin-bride.html

Know which marriages are most likely to survive, long term? Those with virgin brides. Moreover, there's a strong correlation between divorce rate and # of sexual partners a women has had previous to marriage. The women who have slept around the most, get divorced the most. One can easily extend these same conclusions to LTRs, except it is probably even worse there since there's less of an official/legal commitment.

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

Well, studies can show and do show just about anything.

But I don't know ---- again, I don't turn down one night stands with healthy, attractive women. It would make me a complete hypocrite.

[–]NakorZ 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I wouldn't either. But it isn't hypocritical to turn down those same women if you want to pursue a long-term committed relationship.

Call me crazy, but somehow the thought of my future wife being that girl I had blowing me within a half hour of our first date doesn't inspire gamuts of confidence in her future virtue.

[–]grass_cutter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I suppose, although I did have a ONS in college that lasted into a long-term relationship. Crazy stuff does happen --- depends on the exact context, too --- if it's some trashy late night bar, then ... well it's possible you found a diamond in the rough, but not likely. But I think there's more to it then simply how long you waited until sex.

[–]redpillstate 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think a big part of the OP is a reference to the fact that many women will be sexually adventurous while riding the CC, but once they find a "nice guy to settle down with" they don't want to do things with him that they did with their past partners. This can be compared to the woman in the story asking why the man won't tell her he loves her in creative ways like he did for other women (might be in the "continued" part someone added). The women say they've changed, aren't like that any note, etc...leaving the man to wonder, why would she blow her ex but not me? Why would she do things for him but not me if she loves ME? Many women blow this off or act offended that you'd bring it up. So this post shows an interesting reversal and in an ideal world, would open some women's eyes to this problem.

Edit: as for the issue of promiscuity...I think its closely tied to what I just said above. You don't want to "settle down" with a girl who banged a bunch of dudes and is now done being sexually adventurous. Its a fast ticket to a dead bedroom. To compare it to the OP, its like settling down with a man who did a whole bunch of romantic things for previous partners and is now bored of it, or "he isn't like that anymore."

[–]Dude219 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, I agree. I was just summing up the general beliefs of the community. I'm fine with dating girls who were promiscuous to a degree in the long term. To a degree being the key phrase. The girl who fucked the entire college football team probably isn't girlfriend material. Girls with a history of cheating are definitely not dating material. It's about moderation, like anything. Girls who have a higher number of sexual partners but have never cheated on a guy they've dated long term are fine in my book also.

What I think most guys here want in a LTR is a girl with a low number of sexual partners, preferably none, who previously had a low sex drive but once she starts dating her redpill man she wants to have sex with him all the time. Not really a realistic expectation, but it does happen at times.

[–]brotherjustincrowe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Women use sex to get love, men use love to get sex" -Jeff Foxworthy, who I'm learning may have been more alpha than he's let on these years. Good ol' Southern boy.

[–]walruskingofsweden 15 points16 points  (0 children)

This is quite possibly the best thing I've read on here

[–]Abadalt 69 points70 points  (0 children)

You know what's funny? After running into the red pill, I now agree with this story. Both sides of it.

[–]ConfidenceMatters 84 points85 points  (8 children)

Sidebar this so that sluts can understand why no one wants to have more than a quick fling/FWB with a girl with so many past partners.

[–]GRRMkills 46 points46 points [recovered]

Implying that irrational people are really going to read and comprehend the sidebar items

[–]ConfidenceMatters 14 points15 points  (0 children)

At least it will be a resource for the new guy who is wonders if he should just next wonderful little Sarah's slutty past or if he should just accept her because "da past is da past"

[–]brotherjustincrowe 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I wonder if sluttishness would go down if it was considered a grievous sin for a girl to lose her virginity before 21 (when you're old enough to understand decisions have consequences) so she could make her choice to bargain her future over 10-15 years of wild partying that she'd be paying off for the rest of her life.

RP men could easily take back the SMP, sow our wild oats among the carousel riders and start looking into settling down with one of the good girls if the urge strikes us (or, y'know, whatever). AF/BB in reverse. Bad-girl flings, good-girl rings?

[–]ConfidenceMatters 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bad-girl flings, good-girl rings

Next to #NoHymenNoDiamond, that is one of the greatest things I've ever read.

[–]Manuel_S 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This should be sidebared. Its brilliant in concept.

Not so sluts can understand anything, though, think of it as a red appetizer.

[–][deleted] -1 points-1 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]northsidefugitive 8 points9 points  (11 children)

If I suddenly found out the girl I chased away with my clingy variety of love after a few months of dating and no sex had been lying about her virginity, I would fucking explode. To be fair, she gave great head, but fuck.

[–][deleted] 11 points11 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]boxofcookies101 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It usually takes about a month of regular head plus a night of researching methods.

[–]northsidefugitive 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Sorry, let me clarify, it took this girl 2 months of practice, and then she gave really great head.

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

Virgins tend to suck at sucking unless they're hiding a significant amount of experience

[–]the10thrider 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Don't underestimate BJ advise.

My first flat out told me that I must be a player if I could make her cum with just my tongue so quickly.

I learned that shit from a TV show.

[–]BlackHeart89 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've been with a few chicks that had been around and gave subpar head and sex. Another chick gave ok head. The next time, she increased her skills a good bit. I think she just felt more comfortable. After that, she was pretty damn good. Quick learner or she was pretending. Who knows. Women are great actors.

In my experience, the women that talk the most about it end up being the biggest disappointment. The quiet ones that give hints are usually the better ones.

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

Giving head = not a virgin anymore. "Technical virginity" is bullshit. If a girl sucked 200 dicks but never let one into her pussy, would you not still be disgusted?

[–]northsidefugitive 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Yeah, well great, another virginity under my belt then.

[–]CumForJesus 104 points104 points [recovered]

Took me time to understand what this story was about. 10/10

[–]Kunichi 48 points49 points  (2 children)

Swap sex with love and Mark with Lauren.

[–]skimdit 59 points60 points  (0 children)


[–]JimiJons 65 points66 points  (6 children)

Really? I thought it was obvious less than a quarter of the way down.

It's still clever, but it's just an illustration of a concept we should all already be familiar with.

[–][deleted] 31 points32 points  (4 children)

Really? I thought it was obvious less than a quarter of the way down.

This is one of those stories where gender is swapped in order to illustrate a concept that would completely go over BP heads.

For those of us who are transitioning to red like me, it's a smack upside the head. I understood the concept already, but stories like this force me into seeing it from the female's perspective which I may still be struggling with a bit.

[–]let_terror_reign 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Yeah I was about halfway in before I realized it. Till then, I thought this was a betaschlub story

[–]apskidb 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I feel like I rode the beta-carousel and I'm now a reformed slut.

[–]Senior Contributor: "The Court Jester"GayLubeOil 42 points43 points  (4 children)

In the words of Borat: Very Nice!

[–]MrTulip 81 points82 points  (9 children)

merry xmas to you, too, you miserable fucks of trp.

[–]alpha_n3rd 35 points36 points  (7 children)

Yeah I'm so miserable... That sloppy xmas morning blowjob was really awful.

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (3 children)

Gotta love that family dog!

[–]alpha_n3rd 24 points25 points  (1 child)

don't talk that way about my wife

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

Your wife? What's her number?

[–]Day_C_Metrollin 13 points14 points  (1 child)

Followed by eggs, bacon, coffee and biscuits. Pretty good day so far.

[–]iiMSouperman 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I got an oven for my new flat, life is goooood

[–]BCFtrip 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I was so invested in the story the parallel didn't hit me until the "I don't know, about 30" part

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I've said it to one girl. Just one. She abused me. Mentally and emotionally. I haven't said it since. I feel like you shouldn't need to say it, showing it is better if you do it right. Let the spark in your eye say it. Women can tell me it but I don't want to say it again. Saying cheapens the word

[–]kymaleporid 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This was amazing! Bust up laughing in the middle of the airport and got a lot of weird looks. Worth every single one of em.

[–]Deaddpooll 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There's another side to this as well.You have to make her feel loved 'once' in a while.

Bottomline-mix it up.Be a playful asshole one day and a caring lover the other

[–]DreamBoatGuy25 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is seriously fantastic.

[–]malevola 5 points5 points [recovered]

Not sure if this analogy works. Mark's behavior would seem emotionally unstable regardless of whether it was coming from a woman or a man-- "love" generally implies a pre-existing relationship and a certain level of intimacy and commitment. In our culture, sex does not imply much of anything necessarily. The old saw, "women give sex to get love, men give love to get sex" originated in a time when women as a whole took sex more seriously than they seem to do today, and when horny men, in the absence of a socially condoned hook up scene, were consequently more often having to put on an act of feigned romantic adoration in order to trick women into screwing them. Most men today have more sexual options than they did in the past, and I'd venture to say that plenty of them are capable of loving women deeply without their love being characterized by sexual dependency (which has always been true-- men are every bit as deep and emotionally complex as women, and often more so). In the same way, women are capable of having sex without it being some masochistic act of self-sacrifice to the old gods of love, which has some unattractive results-- but the latter is what allows the former, unfortunately.

It's not necessary to tell these kinds of stories to justify one's own personal preferences. You're allowed to say, "I think sluts are gross" and to act on that preference without condemning sluts in the abstract or drawing grand conclusions about the fundamental nature of men and women to give your preferences some more profound credibility. I can understand the impulse to want to universalise your feelings and to outfit them with a certain logic, but ultimately it's a bit of a waste of time. A man who's sexually discriminating and unapologetic about it is always going to seem to have higher SMV than the sexually desperate guy who's willing to screw anything that breathes no matter how evil or repulsive, or the intellectual guy who needs to come up with elaborate explanations for why he's not the sexually desperate guy. "I don't like sluts, sluts are gross" is fine-- no need to go further than that.

[–]mercuryg 9 points9 points [recovered]

Oh but it is necessary to go further than that, because this post isn't about personal preference, nor is it about condemning sluts, it's just describing reality.

Don't take this story at face value, the characters are made up to illustrate a point, not to determine whether or not their behaviour is "emotionally unstable", they are caricatures. Yes, "love" generally implies a pre-existing relationship, but this story is about much more than just the fact that Mark said "i love you" to 30 girls.

It's about what that says about him, and how much less attractive he is in Laurens eyes when she found out. It's about the simple fact that men who give away love and commitment easily aren't attractive in the eyes of women. At the same time, it's about how women who give away sex easily aren't attractive in the eyes of men.

Personal preference don't apply to these facts.

[–]malevola 1 points1 points [recovered]

I don't know, man. Depends what you mean by "attractive", I guess. Guys spend their lives jerking it to women who make bank screwing on camera. I've known guys who've dated strippers and vocal sluts and seem to be aroused by the idea of female promiscuity. And women love male singers who write sappy lovey-dovey lyrics about pining away after a bunch different girls. You can't really talk about facts when you're talking about a bunch of people, I don't think. That's why sociology and psychology are the soft sciences. Even the people who spend their lives studying this stuff don't claim that their insights are hard facts.

[–]grass_cutter -1 points0 points  (1 child)

The parable is tortured in my opinion just because it's so unrealistic. Mark was infatuated, not in love, 30 times, presumably.

Emotionally invested is a better term, because love exists outside of heterosexual relationships. In reality a man who is loose and generous with his love to family, friends, and strangers is considered a saint. Or Jesus.

He seemed more immature, naive, socially inexperienced ... to allow himself to become infatuated that easily and that quickly. And, doing humiliating unrelated shit like giving $20 to a hot girl (for better shot at sex?). That's really why he seems weird. Not because he's the male analog to a slut. The male analog to a slut is a male who fucks anything with a hole. Actually, the definition of slut is vague --- is it that your standards are low, or that you're just quick to sex? Or put an artificial cap on the # new people / year? Would a women who only fucked A-list celebrities, but fucked 100 of them in one year, be a slut? By most insecure men's standards, probably yes.

Also, let's be honest, who the hell would know what Mark was doing in some club bathroom? Story rings hollow to me.

I do agree that Men who are desperate for a relationship, or become infatuated easily, or needy easily, are unattractive for a variety of reasons, and if you're that guy, for fuck's sake feign some disinterest and restraint. The slut-shaming, though? Shit --- leave the sluts alone. Guys like me have no problem with them. Many men hate sluts for a variety of complicated psychological reasons that make no logical sense, but are rooted in evolutionary instincts and emotions.

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points

[permanently deleted]

[–]1cover20 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well for one thing, I never went around telling girls I loved them. Even when I was an AFC and didn't know how to act, I wasn't subservient like that. Awkward as hell, yes. But not subservient.

If you were subservient like that, you may need a new social circle. Not too hard to find that. Girls also know that guys can change (moreso than girls can.) So a girl's past follows her, among guy and among other girls too. But a guy can evolve and be respected for it.

If the guy in this story had just say "I've changed" it might have worked better. Or not. If she wasn't really committed to this guy, he could have gotten nexted anyway, because he was SUCH a tool.

[–]NoHarmNoCry 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I might be thick, but I don't understand the point of the story. Could someone please spell it out for me?

(Not being sarcastic, I truly, earnestly want to understand what the point is that others are praising so that I might deepen my own understanding.)

[–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

It's a reversal of women giving up all kinds of sex to their alpha fucks, and only giving duty sex to beta bucks and making them wait for it to boot.



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

Actually it is because of Preselection that she thinks he is a loser. None of those girls saw him worthy genetically to fuck, so why should she?

[–]batfish55 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is fucking amazing. This needs to be on the sidebar!

[–]iwish4zombies -1 points0 points  (1 child)

So if mark got love and sex together with 30 girls, lauren wouldn't be mad? Or just sex without the love?...

[–]BlackHeart89 2 points3 points  (0 children)


Its a reverse scenario. Just replace "love" with "sex" and "sex with "love". And Replace "Mark" with "Lauren".

That should answer your question.