TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

48

Disclaimer: I'm schlurpin' the purple but want to spit out the red, so bluepillers welcome, but I have a lot of red in me, so don't expect to turn me easily.

Repost/adapted from

http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/35pi8u/so_why_do_you_hate_women/

I don't hate women at all [see original post to convince yourself of my platonic affections/respect because it's not relevant here] However, I think that they've been socially conditioned and hold biological incentive to hamster about their hypergamous expectations in modern Western dating. I've become incredibly frustrated by the trials and tribulations one has to undertake to reach peak SMV as a man, while women just sit around and reject or dump. I'm even more frustrated by the fact it is next to impossible to get either a sympathetic yet honest response. [sic] Generally they are very defensive and keen to project blame back onto men. Feedback falls under a handful of banners:

  1. Sentimental pick-me-ups yet ultimately trite non-advice which completely fails to understand that men are not chased but the chasers, if you're passive then you're fucked, and at the end of the day women are the gatekeepers. E.g. 'just be yourself' 'be more confident' 'you're going to make a lucky girl very happy one day' 'she'll come to you when the time is right' blabla
  1. Angry feminist comes in to get me to check my privilege

a) https://exposingfeminism.wordpress.com/shaming-tactics/

b) Nice Guy/Friendzone straw man (ironically ties into attraction is amoral). It is also worth noting that most Kill Nice Guy with Fire arguments are a collection of the feminist shaming tactics linked above, so please do read for your own awareness.

c) One of the most common shaming tactics, Code Gray [Charge of Unreasonable Generalisation/Stereotype] '"we're not all like that" "if you stopped generalising with sexist views maybe you'd have a chance" etc.

d) Another common one which one respondent has just used against me bless their soul: Code Gold {Charge of Superficiality] I.e."lower your standards" " stop being so shallow". Ironic because most women don't, and lately are somewhat proud of being openly as equally shallow as men. Also really fucking annoying, because it's not like I'm shooting for Adriana Lima, I'm shooting for someone who I thought was objectively, across-the-board on the same attractiveness level as me…and she still goes for the hotter older guy. (Disclaimer: By 'I am' I actually mean the collective 'men are') I dislike the HB scale but if we must use it, typically it's a 6/10 dude getting knocked back by another 6/10 girl for an 8 or 9/10 man. Ergo, hypergamy

Extension: Hypergamy and male SMV is culturally sensitive, whereas women typically hamster this through the straw man to "stop shooting for the cheer-leader". This is annoying because again, a nerd knows he has no chance with a model. But you would think he would have a chance with the cute girl at his local comic book club. Nope, she's still dating a high-status dude in geek culture. Full argument here; please note how the woman in question had a shitty time as less attractive girl in high school, but met someone who married her pretty quickly at Uni http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/39wlbm/cmv_women_have_it_easier_in_the_dating_arena_and/cs74equ

e) Retarded logic like "women have it worse because we have to reject many fugly and boring guys :'("

added f) various hypocritical calls about 'have some empathy' when often lacking it themselves to the guys asking the questions. Great example of this [sorry Lucia, when you grew up you gave some quality advice but here smh] http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2185313&page=3

3a) Red pill advice: 'man up' 'stop feeling sorry for yourself' 'stop whining and improve yourself' etc.

added b) Literally list a bunch of things that turn them on which denote alpha status, yet call alpha/beta paradigm and usage of alpha/beta terminology childish lolwat.

E.g. the PC way for a woman to admit to hypergamy is to mention "ambition". Say something like "I want a man who has ambitions, I ain't dating no scrub". This is incredibly common for high school and college girls, and why they have such an attraction towards older, financially stable men once they've got over the "let's fuck a hot guy" part of the cock carousel (disclaimer: NAWALT re: cock carousel ofc)

But let us be honest. 'Ambitions' mean jack shit until they materialise of can be reasonably foreseen materialising. I have 'ambitions' to post a song cover onto my Facebook and SoundCloud once a month for my new year's resolution. Yes I suppose I'm quite talented, and my friends say aww well done Xemnas I liked it! as good friends do. But it's delusional to believe that this would give me an equal chance as if I was an established rock star or even unsigned artist. The act of posting on SoundCloud or being in a garage band has not attracted women since I was fucking 17 (I'm now 22), it is at best cute, at worst pitiful. What can be concluded from this? That the most attractive thing about what I'm doing is the potential status/SMV (and possibly money) involved, as well as the illusion of not putting pussy on a pedestal and frankly having a life that does not revolve around fapping to porn (remember part of the Nice Guy/friendzone shaming is to straw man that nice guys have no real life)

  1. and the unspoken reality that even asking lowers your SMV [see: women want a natural alpha]

[sic] where I sympathise:

  • as citizens, they (women) face a lot of shit, like risk of rape, street harassment and objectification, which is more physically threatening than the shit than men face-although men obviously face a lot of shit unacknowledged by society, as any MRA will tell you.

  • I would never wish domestic or emotional abuse on anyone, man or woman.

  • And obviously, there is the risk of getting knocked up, abandoned and left unexpectedly a single mom before you're 21, like what happened to my poor sister. So I can sympathise with that fear of commitment.

  • Men enjoy various other privileges outside of dating

Another take on Disney Princess syndrome

  • When I am not too red, I can sort of see that the reason women shoot for Prince Charming, is not so much because they think they deserve him, but also because of insecurities. The flip side of the immature Disney princess fairytale is that society demands that they be perfect, to be perfect you have to have perfect, every good woman is the hero of her own story, gets a Prince Charming and a happily ever after/comfy life, and if you don't have a perfect partner or easy life, what does that say about you? This is crucial, every Disney princess has a good heart which helps them to win the Prince or Hero.

  • In this way, it's not just about not being pretty enough or sexy enough; it's about being a good person and having karma on your side. If you don't get a smoking hot guy at the end of the day, you're playing Life wrong and may even be evil. Remember even Belle was rewarded for being good enough not to be shallow…by getting to marry the Beast's true form, a hunky prince. Although most women would laugh hard at this notion since they were 16 or so, and plenty will be aware of the just world fallacy (part of my fear of women is because they are intelligent)...unconsciously it likely frames their relationship narratives and insecurities well into their 20s. (Unless they have some serious thirdworldproblems to put these firstworldproblems into perspective, like growing up in a war zone/military dictatorship/utter poverty/survivor of natural disaster, in which case they probably would not give a shit about modern dating arena issues anyway.)

  • So before a lot of women yell at me for using a Disney straw man, well here's the flip side straw man for men: every boy has been brought up with the Hero's Tale as well. This states that a boy will grow up by facing great tragedy, develop inner strength (often manifesting later in outer strength), and if he works hard enough, is brave enough, is strong enough…he can overcome any problem, crush his inner demons, defeat any dark forces of injustice in his life, and thus be respected as a Great Man in the annals of history. And the way that he knows for sure that he has completed this rite of passage and earned society's respect…is that women want to bed him and marry him. I mean this is the fucking Lion King people! TRP is partly framed off this fucked-up narrative, Feminism does a lot to try (see Nice Guy rhetoric) and remind men of the just world fallacy, but why not remind women too?

The Issue with the 'Where Have all the Good Men Gone?' argument

So occasionally a woman will say "fine, yes, it's easier for us to get laid. So what? It's just as hard to find an actual boyfriend/partner to share my life with." A valid point, but a crucial one that I need to add: if it's easier for them to get casual sex, they evidently have more options, they could probably get a good portion of those guys to get serious with them too. So the problem is that women across the board don't have (perceived) quality, relationship/marriage material options. Whereas men generally have less options getting their foot in the door, period.

I compare it to the difference between someone getting invited to the interview stage of job recruitment after a networking event, because the boss sees potential in them but is a little wary all the same so needs to cross-reference and test their mettle…and not getting the email to the networking event in the first place.

Where I cannot sympathise:

"Women actually have it harder in modern dating"

CMV

N.B. I do deliberately use the term 'arena" because I think that modern dating is largely adversarial, and promotes constant anxiety/insecurity about the competition. While I do think that divorce laws were necessary as I don't want women to be tied to abusive partners, this competition anxiety is very obviously a bi-product of divorce becoming the norm, and the feminist "never settle for less than what you're worth" mantras.

Disclaimer: I do note hate women, I'm just very frustrated by the leaps of logic and brutality when it comes to dating

edit: Can I thank you all for bringing me at long last, briefly out of negative karma after my first emotionally unstable period learning about TRP last summer!


[–]annoying_thought42 points43 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

my own experience

I have 3 examples of how easy it is for even ugly women to get laid.

1 - I love my sister but she has no idea how good she has it compared to me. Recently she bemoaned to me how she hasn't been in a relationship for a few years. I pointed out that I hadn't had one in triple that time. You see she's medically obese, doesn't shave her top lip, has bpd (was going to ruin a guy she like's life before he apologised for her tantrum, has agro phobia, is bitter and plays cod for 10 hours a day (hasn't worked for 10 years, got a place from the government). I'm 5'11, due to a barrel chest I look athletic, been told by many people I'm very funny (fat kid once) and been told I'm quite attractive (always by women in relationships).

She regularly gets 5-10 fb invites and 20+ xbox invites a day. Recently she's fucked 5 guys this year, that's 3 more than I have in 2 years.

If she was a guy she'd be fucked

2 - her friend is even worse (which I could post a picture but I'd hate to embarrass her), she's 26 but looks early 40's, yellow brown teeth, vastly over weight but she has fucked almost every male friend on her fb (some guys way out of her league), hell even I almost slept with her (couldn't get erect). Maybe she has a great personality? No, mentally very childish (high school musical, 1d etc). Every weekend she meets someone off a dating site.

3 - met this pretty cool hippie chick at work, a little thick round the edges, glasses, big nose, dyed hair, the works. She confided I me that she fancied the romanian heartthrob we worked with (he had his pick of women) even tho she had a long term bf. Long story short he fucked her behind some bins because his gf was at home. She cried when she told me this but it didn't stop her from answering every booty call.

I wish I had one tenth of this ease but because I'm a little shy I'm fucked (or not)

Like Jim Jeffries said "To be a stud you need to be witty, charming, well dressed, have nice shoes and a fake job.

To be a slut you just have to be…. there.”

[–]Quintus_PillusA danger to society19 points20 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Adding my own as a reply to this post, as it's about personal experiences and I'll write mine, because it helped me to sink very low and then get red pilled.

I had a one year long relationship with a woman few years older than me (she was 31 then). Attractive physically, but chronically depressed (fucked up childhood), no ambition, very little self-control with money, no education, working just part time (but enough to survive). The relationship was very hard for both, needy people, very immature, we really got the worst of each other, we both ended the relationship in a sorry state.

During the next two years, I had a grand total of two dates, while she had around half a dozen FWBs (to call it somehow), a one year relationship with a handsome fella and then, at the two years mark (that's why I chose this number), she started a relationship with a 35 years old businessman that allows her to be a housewife (he has a kid from a past marriage) and they travel around the globe every few months.

I know all this because we remained somehow friends, but the entire thing made me very bitter. Sometimes she was so depressed that she couldn't get out of bed, while I was working, studying, working out, etc. but I became invisible to women due to my bad emotional state. It made swallowing the red pill easier.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS16 points17 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Me too, me too! Three different versions.

  1. The undatable woman who nevertheless gets relationships: A friend with whom I went way back (we lost contact in our mid 20s and had known each other for over 20 years at that point). She was... well, you had to be used to her antics. She wasn't a bad person, but very immature (basically she didn't really mature mentally past 15), overly sensitive, extremely prone to crying, had a strong annoying streak, very dependent, and more or less asexual. What would have made her practically undatable and a forever alone-type had she been a guy didn't keep her from getting dates and relationships - all she did was being receptive when she was hit on online. And it's not as if the guys pumped and dumped her - no, they stuck around quite for some time, regardless of her... less endearing qualities. So whenever a woman who isn't completely ugly says that no guys ever ask her out/approach her, or that the guys who profess an interest in her only want sex, I suspect that her choice in men is to blame and she simply chooses to ignore the others.

  2. The non-stellar woman who gets relationships with ease: Another friend with whom I went way back. Hypochondriac, also a crybaby, extremely spoiled, self-centered streak, at times exhausting, looks slightly below average. Well, she's very intelligent, educated and overall pretty dependable, but that doesn't nullify her shortcomings - which, again, would be a severe downside if she was a guy. Didn't prevent her from being almost constantly in lasting relationships with (actually mostly decent) guys since the age of 14. And again, it's not as if she had to work for it - the guys approached her.

  3. The unattractive woman who gets sex all the time: A woman I know is pretty much like this, including her love life - only that she's entitled, demanding, self-centered and very uninteresting on top of that.

Yeah, this ease would really be great. Those girls I know who didn't have that ease usually had two shortcomings: extreme pickiness and being overall so unreceptive that most men bailed. But if they're just remotely realistic of what they can get from an individual guy and don't treat them like intruders, things should work out for a woman.

Like Jim Jeffries said "To be a stud you need to be witty, charming, well dressed, have nice shoes and a fake job.

To be a slut you just have to be…. there.”

This. Bluepillers love to come with the caricature of the entitled nice guy who is an unattractive slob but only wants the most gorgeous of women (I mean, seriously, is that sort of man that common? The only guy I know who fits that description visually has probably the lowest standards I've ever seen when it comes to women).

However, what they usually ignore is that you can have a woman who fits that description (only in female) to a tee but she actually does get interest from the opposite sex.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 13 points14 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I am very reluctant to discuss RP with my sister too, because when she was younger she slept around and dated a rich guy, a model and a 30-something man when she was 20. She was a pretty dancer, not stunning though I love her but certainly attractive. Whereas I'm still a virgin and had 2 non-reships then 1 BP reship which got destroyed by my failure to account for a hotter guy coming into the picture, among other things, despite having been obsessed with self-improvement for the past 8 years...

The thing which prevents me doing it now is my conscience, now that she's been cheated on just for becoming fat, I realise I still have some empathy for women

[–]annoying_thought3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh so do I, it's not nice to see anyone hurt, particularly my sister but if she was a guy, she'd die a very bitter person.

Despite her failings she posted this on FB 'I'm sick of guys under 25 asking me out'. If you saw her you wouldn't believe it.

On xbox she's constantly hit on

[–]ruminajaali0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

But, like the previous comment by OP, women have it easier getting laid, but who cares? It's not the be all and end all, and although men put a lot of emphasis on "on getting laid", it's not the same type of priority for ladies. So, ya, women can get laid more. But, it doesn't mean it's any easier dating. Unless dating is synonymous with getting laid (which it's not).

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The implication of women have it easier getting laid is that women have it easier walking, women have to attain lower SMV to reach their dating goals, and women can be more hypergamous at will. Effectively women have a baseline higher passive Dread game than men

[–]ruminajaali0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Haha I like that: higher passive dread game. Well put.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas11 points12 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

there is the risk of getting knocked up, abandoned and left unexpectedly a single mom before you're 21, like what happened to my poor sister. So I can sympathise with that fear of commitment.

This is why abortion is legal. Also. birth control. These can be a pain in the confederate/flyover states, but most Americans live on the coasts.

So the problem is that women across the board don't have (perceived) quality, relationship/marriage material options. Whereas men generally have less options getting their foot in the door, period.

Nail on the head.

Great post OP, especially the "Another take on the disney princess" section.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks, anything I can do to help and share my thoughts in a safe space!

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

Heres my take, everything you've said is correct, however the difficulty starts to change around age 30. If you as a man did the bare minimum of either getting a job and climbing the ladder, getting a good education, or getting into some skilled trade in your 20s, you'll be set. You can finally date women of equal attractiveness to you, and if you have other good qualities even higher! But if you just sat around playing video games, working dead-end jobs or being unemployed, you'll still be unattractive and sexless.

For women, their ease with getting sex continues until around mid 30s, but they will have to start being less hypergamous around age 27 or so. Mainly because they fear getting old and decrepit, and thus if the ruin a good relationship the chances of finding another good one start to diminsh. The smart ones realize this earlier than the dumb washed up wannabe bimbos you find so many of at many sordid clubs and bars.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah of course it's correct, dat Wall man. I'm familiar with the RP precepts and imagine most people on this board are too. Anyone who isn't can get their straw men pulled apart pretty easily.

However I'd still say this means women have it easier, since basically

Men under 30-Have to work very hard to get women's interest

Men over 30-Have to have worked very hard when young and continue working hard to get women's interest

Women under 30-Get men's interest purely by breathing

Women over 30-Have to work a little to get men's interest

[–]dfaer5 18 points18 points [recovered] | Copy Link

The problem with this question is that it conflates two entirely different problems. Most men struggle to get anything at all, while women only struggle to get the top tier men. When you ask who has it 'easier', men think that it refers to getting average women, while women think that it refers to getting high status men, completely ignoring the bottom 80% of men.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 14 points15 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I.e. women are oblivious to their dating privileges, the implication of my title.

I don't see where we disagree?

[–]dfaer5 5 points5 points [recovered] | Copy Link

I guess it's a matter of semantics. Having it 'easy' in this sense is only a privilege from the perspective of men. Women don't see it as a a privilege at all, only as the expected default, since they consider the bottom 80% of men to be utter garbage.

Look at it this way: any man could theoretically have sex with a $5 crack whore (no offense to crack whores). But do we see it as a viable prospect? Probably not. It's the same with women and the bottom 80% of men. The prospect certainly exists, but it doesn't connect with them as being meaningful in any way, unless there are obvious extenuating circumstances (resources, etc.).

[–]Xemnas81[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I refer you to my above argument that subjective hardship does not disqualify objective privilege and my analogy comparing my dating problems to Anne Frank's life-or-death problems

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

It's all subjective and could be argued against all day n night.

[–][deleted] 27 points28 points  (127 children) | Copy Link

"Easier" is just a subjective statement so we could argue about this all day and all night.

The fact most of us will agree with is women have more access to casual sex than men, but generally they want commitment. So from a male perspective it seems easy to say they have an easier time because they can more easily get what males want. But if you want commitment then the fact it's easier to have casual sex is of little benefit or comfort to you.

I have a male friend who's gay and he's talked about this exact problem, he wants a relationship but most guys just want to fuck around. He can easily have casual sex but he doesn't care. He wants a relationship and it's very difficult for him to come by.

[–]Aspiring_HoboNo Pills Necessary16 points17 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

The fact most of us will agree with is women have more access to casual sex than men, but generally they want commitment

Yes this is true, but the difference between men and women is that man have to make themselves better to get what they want (sex) while women get to sit and complain. Women aren't taught to make themselves suitable girlfriends / wives at all.

For instance, if you ask a woman what would make her a good gf / wife, she starts naming traits that are good to her i.e "I'm smart and nice. I like to read. etc"

What about what I (the guy) want? What if I want a dumb girl? What if I want a woman who is a little bit messy like me? The point is that women date by just scratching the lottery. All they do is get pretty, hope a guy who fits their template approaches them, fuck him (or sometimes don't even fuck him), and hope he stays. There's no skill in that. That's why it's hard to empathize. Gorgeous women and uglier women all do the same thing btw. This is why they have the same results, whereas guys who do make themselves better and become winners can be better with women than low level guys. Because there is skill in what men do.

Honestly I see stuff like this here a lot but I don't see any evidence of it in real life. Not as many women are gold diggers as RP claims

It's not just about having more money. It's about who's better in the relationship. Women want a guy who is better than they are and money is one of the most basic measures of that. No woman will be satisfied with a guy she thinks she's better than. Women need to need men. Men need to want women. If a woman is better than a guy, she won't feel she needs him. If that's the case, she won't be with him.

[–]ruminajaali1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

The skill involved is keeping the man in a committed, mutually benefiting and satisfying relationship.

[–]Aspiring_HoboNo Pills Necessary0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

True, it's the woman's job to keep a man around, but that's usually accomplished by just sticking it out through his nonsense. If she can do that, and just...not get on his nerves (which isn't hard for most guys) they'll be happy.

[–]ruminajaali1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Hmm I'm feeling hopeful now.

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

Girls have traits they look for in partners too, you realise that yes? Not just more money like you seem to think, but personality traits like the ones you listed you're looking for yourself. That's why they don't just blindly say yes to anyone who approaches them, not if they're looking for LTRs.

[–]Aspiring_HoboNo Pills Necessary11 points12 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Of course, that's why I said

It's not just about having more money...

The difference is that men have to go and create their own happiness. Women just wait until the right guy approaches them and for him to make them happy. Men don't have that luxury. If a girl meets a guy who doesn't fit her template: the looks, personality, etc that she wants, she gets rid of him and waits for the next guy to approach her. It may not be frequent, but she'll just sit and wait.

But if a guy meets a girl who isn't necessarily "perfect" for him, but she's still workable, he can stay and try to make something out of it if he chooses. Girls don't think that way ; girls have checklists. Guys just have women they would and wouldn't fuck. Then that's where the deliberation of personality and "trying to make it work if it's worth it" thing comes in.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I don't think that way either as a guy, if a girl isn't right for me I will absolutely end it and find someone else. Yeah I'm more likely to have to do the approaching next time but that doesn't mean I'll just settle for something that isn't making me happy, what's the point of that?

I think any guy who would just stay in a relationship he's not actually happy to be in is probably low value or beta or whatever.

[–]Aspiring_HoboNo Pills Necessary7 points8 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

No, no I agree with you here. I'm not saying a guy will or should purposefully be in a miserable relationship. I mean that a guy can make his woman better. Like, guys can bring a girl up from where she used to be, whether it be financially, or just lifestyle wise. You know, giving her guidance and everything. Women aren't looking to grow with a guy. They want a guy who is already established and they can then become a part of his life and make it theirs.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Same can happen the other way around though, it's just people willing to put that kind of effort in are rare in both genders, and people who are tend to be more pushovers, they make it easier to be taken advantage of when they take on the burden of someone else's problems.

[–]DietyzPurple Pill4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Idk about that, ever hear the phrase "i dont wanna be your mom"

As a man it is your job to be more experienced in general, at least for the large majority of women.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ex used this all the time

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

No, if a woman is established it makes her even more attractive than just a pretty face.

If a man is not established he may as well be dead. And this isn't just a dry spell thing this a literally disposable member of society thing. Hence why so many men become depressed when made unemployed. because they know their life is over and they're invisible until they sort it out.

The result is women esp. young immature and attractive women feel entitled to an attractive established man, while they often subconsciously have myriad excuses for why they are not established, which society is all too keen to throw at them anyway. Experience this enough and you start feeling that you're a special snowflake for behaving like a adult, and not hamstering is a privilege you bestow on men for their high SMV and frame.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The checklist pisses me off so much. The amount of rage which comes from women when a guy presents a checklist, how often he is called shallow entitled and immature, is formidable-yet women get a pussy pass for the check list all the damn time.

[–]ruminajaali0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Men's "checklist" comes after sex, women's before. That's the difference.

[–]Aspiring_HoboNo Pills Necessary0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Men don't have a checklist after sex. The main thing is that a girl doesn't get on a guy's nerves. And for most guys, it's not hard to not piss them off. If she just shuts her face, lets him watch the game and stays pretty, most guys wouldn't have a problem with their women at all. That's all it takes.

[–]CyraleaRedPill Vanguard20 points21 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Women have it easier both obtaining commitment and sex. You seem to think men can get into relationships with the ease with which women can get sex, which is patently false.

Having sex as leverage by definition gives you easier access to commitment. It's something that men intrinsically want, and some percentage of the population will commit to you just to keep it coming. Men have no such devices intrinsically.

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

In my experience it's not difficult to get a girlfriend so I'm just going by that. Maybe I'm just lucky or better at this shit than I think or there's differences in culture or something.

[–]CyraleaRedPill Vanguard8 points9 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Or you're well above average looks. Or you're dating significantly less attractive women. Just getting commitment on its own isn't too telling.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

Just getting commitment on its own isn't too telling.

But that's exactly what I'm trying to say.

[–]CyraleaRedPill Vanguard10 points11 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

I meant to say, for you to have gotten into committed relationships isn't too telling.

Looking at it large-scale, you can see that there are far more men that struggle with getting into any relationship at all than there are women. Especially when you look at the 25+ bracket.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

As I said in the other comment I don't think internet dating is a reliable indicator of this if that's your basis for this conclusion. People using internet dating usually have problems that stop them finding someone IRL. That's not representative of the overall population.

[–]Arahkne1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

What is?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Nothing that can provide reliable data, that's why we're all debating it. There's no solid data for this kind of shit.

[–]Arahkne4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Then why discount online dating?

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

"Easier" is just a subjective statement so we could argue about this all day and all night.

bullshit. who's responsibility is it to approach their potential partner, ask them out, arrange the date/encounter, and make sure they have a good time, do the majority of the legwork in the relationship?

men.

doesn't matter if it's a fwb or the person you're going to marry. the man still has to do all the legwork.

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'll give you approaching for sure but the rest of it is not the sole responsibility of men no.

And the fact this thread now has 215 comments and counting proves me right:

we could argue about this all day and all night.

:)

[–]Ultramegasaurus31 points32 points  (48 children) | Copy Link

Lowering your standards would still be a viable way for women to secure commitment more often, think, for example, female academics who wouldn't give a tradesman the time of the day. Men however are already near the rock bottom at lowering their standards for casual sex.

[–]ruminajaali1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Casual sex is just casual sex. We've established women can get casual sex easier.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (46 children) | Copy Link

female academics who wouldn't give a tradesman the time of the day

Honestly I see stuff like this here a lot but I don't see any evidence of it in real life. Not as many women are gold diggers as RP claims.

Men however are already near the rock bottom at lowering their standards for casual sex.

Only if they're unattractive.

Also, men are more careful about commitment due to a disadvantageous legal and financial situation whereas women

It's true men should be more careful because of these things, but it doesn't seem like many are to me. When they want to commit they don't seem to take this angle into account. It just takes longer for them to feel like committing is worthwhile.

[–]Ultramegasaurus28 points29 points  (44 children) | Copy Link

Honestly I see stuff like this here a lot but I don't see any evidence of it in real life. Not as many women are gold diggers as RP claims.

It's not about gold diggers but about women's inclination to refuse to settle down with men of lower income and prestige. As far as proof goes, I could only find data for my home country Germany. There, not even 10% of women have got a higher degree than their partner.

Only if they're unattractive.

Even attractive men often sleep with unattractive women.

[–]mr_one_linerOld School8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

> Even attractive men often sleep with unattractive women.

Confirmed. ;)

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (42 children) | Copy Link

There, not even 10% of women have got a higher degree than their partner.

The majority of people don't have a masters or PhD in the first place. Most people who go to uni only get a bachelor's degree unless they want to work in academia or do a very high level specialised field like medicine.

Even attractive men often sleep with unattractive women.

Often? I would disagree that happens often.

[–]CyraleaRedPill Vanguard15 points16 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

Often? I would disagree that happens often

You would be wrong.

Example 2
Example 3

You literally could not do that with the genders swapped.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

And you just trust the OP of a Bodybuilding.com thread totally? You realise how easy it is to fake screenshots?

[–]CyraleaRedPill Vanguard20 points21 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

It's something that has been reproduced hundreds of times. Someone tried it on OKCupid to disprove the notion that women had it easy. Instead, they found that guys were willing to deal with the shittiest human imaginable just for a chance to get laid.

You really don't seem to understand how men work.

[–]sexypleurisy0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

You don't want someone who will pull out your teeth and then sue you for child support

I love that this is a thing that needs to be said.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

I would also add that anyone using internet dating seriously is probably having trouble getting what they want in real life which usually suggests they have problems. Every time I met a girl from the internet she's pretty much been the textbook definition of personality disorder. Same is probably true for the guys too.

[–]CyraleaRedPill Vanguard9 points10 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

There's likely some skew, but there are a lot of people using online dating now. Last I heard, it overtook traditional dating in a most major cities in the West.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 10 points11 points  (25 children) | Copy Link

It's becoming increasingly normal for women to pursue higher education such as masters or phDs. If hypergamy is real it'd follow that these women would massively reduce their dating pool and only be dealing with MENSA/esteemed professor level of academically qualified men. To rub salt in the wound feminism has made it so that most of the support through the primary to tertiary tiers of education goes to women, while boys are taught either to man up or given some Ritalin for alleged behavioural problems.

[–]Kill_Your_Ego15 points16 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

The majority of women I know who go to college are actually thinking, deep down in their hamster, that getting a degree somehow ensures that they'll be dating a man with at least that degree.

On one of my reddit alts I was talking to this girl who has turned 29, was good looking, thin, had a masters degree and a decent job and was saving money for a house. She was complaining to me that she can't find a guy worth trying to extract commitment from. She just wanted a guy who was at least as good looking as her, in "at least" as good of physical shape, and at least as educated, and with at least as much money.

She told me that she thought this wasn't too much to ask. She deserved these things, she felt, in her inferior feelings based hamster run brain. She was entitled to it, you see.

Women do not seem to be aware of their own hypergamous instincts. And they are actively taught to be selfish and entitled. I deserve this. I've earned that. My feeble woman brain tells me so. I mean, I'm a victim and everyone owes me, right?

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The majority of women I know who go to college are actually thinking, deep down in their hamster, that getting a degree somehow ensures that they'll be dating a man with at least that degree.

100% on point. I'd add its the same with a lot of career women moving up the ladder.

[–]MamaTR2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I know a few guys that are the same exact way about the women they date. They want a women that is at least at attractive, at least as physically fit, and are just as financially stable as they are. They don't find many women that meet all their standards but they are fine with waiting. Me on the other hand will settle just so I have someone, while I look for someone that I think is worth a LTR. It just goes to show, some people settle, some people only reach.

[–]Kill_Your_Ego12 points13 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Don't fall into the apex fallacy here guy. The majority of men want an attractive thin woman who isn't bitchy and controlling, who can cook, and who has fun energy. I don't give the slightest fuck about a woman's degree or job unless she leaves her job happy and tells me fun stories. Most men would be happy with just a thin woman. It's so easy to see this in action just by looking through some men's and women's dating profiles. It's women who have their princess checklists. Even fat ugly horrible beasts do this.

Ugh and sometimes these fat disgusting things, usually with at least one bastard in tow, will actually send you a message. So insulting.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas11 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Most men would be happy with just a thin woman.

More sad, brutal truth.

[–]ERockEfreedom0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

How hot was that girl?

[–]Kill_Your_Ego0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

I'd say she was a solid 7.

[–]ERockEfreedom1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Well then I don't see what's wrong with her wanting or expecting a 7 or above guy. Makes sense, right?

[–]Xemnas81[S] -1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Not sure if strong RP or satire

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Xemnas81[S] 5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It's possible. But there are a lot of young women who get quite snobby about stuff like this too.

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

My girlfriends and I all got a degree because we know that there are 51 women to every 49 men, and we need to support ourselves rather than waiting for a man to pay our way or living on minimum wage. Attracting a man doesn't come into it.

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

I feel forced to repeat: all women have propensities to be and are actively encouraged by feminism to raise their standards, all the time. "Never settle" is the motto for everything from Cosmo to Zooey Deschanel.

By contrast men are actively shamed into lowering their standards via feminist shaming tactics laid out above

[–]ERockEfreedom0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

I only really disagree with one small part of what you said. Men are not shamed into lowering their standards via "feminist shaming tactics"... whatever those are.

It's not even shaming that makes men lower their standards. The truth is, if a man can't attract a conventionally hot girl, but he wants to have sex, he simply must lower his standards in order to do so. It's a fact.

No one is shaming or forcing him into lowering his standards, except for his biology. If he wants to have sex, he must choose by himself to lower his standards... or get more attractive.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I honestly don't think women who have PhDs will only settle for guys who also have them though. They'd have a preference for them certainly but I don't think it's a solid requirement as such. They'd probably have to be an "intellectual" type though and there's no shortage of those.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Perhaps not phD, but certainly of equal if not greater status as an "intellectual" (which reminds me to add the way hypergamy is indirectly referred to)

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism14 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Honestly I see stuff like this here a lot but I don't see any evidence of it in real life. Not as many women are gold diggers as RP claims.

He didn't talk about gold diggers. It's about women wanting someone of at least equal status, in this case a phd.

Only if they're unattractive.

Not really, even attractive guys will have sex with fuglies. Top notch guys not.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS12 points13 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

The fact most of us will agree with is women have more access to casual sex than men, but generally they want commitment.

Yeah, but Xemnas is still right when he argues that women have an easier time getting commitment as well. My take on the "men as gatekeepers of commitment"-dynamic.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Have you linked to that comment before? I feel like I've read it several times now, either way its great and I saved it.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, I always link my own stuff, because I know when a topic will come up again and needs linking.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

You seem to be conflating desire to mate with desire for a relationship. I think these are related but separate ideas. While women on average have lower sex drives I think they tend to have an increased drive for companionship, which is the core of what makes the "gatekeeper" idea work.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS15 points16 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

You seem to be conflating desire to mate with desire for a relationship.

Because for many men it actually is quite the same. Again, because it seems to be so outlandish for many here at PPD: some guys for whatever reason don't want ONSs. I for example constantly exposed to the idea all the time that wanting "just sex" (even from your own partner) was fundamentally wrong and objectifying and men who did this were outright bad people; so after internalizing that just having sex made me a bad person it was off the menu for me. No, I wasn't raised religious, but feminism in Germany was just pretty sex-negative and their interpretation of sex as something men "do" to women had permeated the mainstream in more low-key forms. The only way to reconcile your desire to keep your self-image as a decent person and also have sex is by restricting your attention to girls you want a relationship with. Which also has the side-effect of lowering your standards quite a bit.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I was also raised on various Nice Guy shit, slightly sexually repressed by Christian upbringing, so I feel you dude. I think the most damaging for me was that people will love you for what's on the inside. Ehhhh wrong

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

Because for many men it actually is quite the same.

I don't believe it's the same thing for women though.

some guys for whatever reason don't want ONSs.

Nah I get that, I prefer having at least some kind of connection with my sexual partners. I'd go for FWB over ONS any day. But I think that's the view of the minority. Most guys don't give a shit.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 17 points18 points  (25 children) | Copy Link

Valid point, but a crucial one that I need to add: if it's easier for them to get casual sex, they evidently have more options, they could probably get a good portion of those guys to get serious with them too. So the problem is that women across the board don't have (perceived) quality, relationship/marriage material options. Whereas men generally have less options period.

I compare it to the difference between someone getting invited to the interview stage of job recruitment after a networking event, because the boss sees potential in them but is a little wary all the same so needs to cross-reference and test their mettle…and not getting the email to the networking event in the first place.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (24 children) | Copy Link

they could probably get a good portion of those guys to get serious with them too.

I would disagree with that. Guys on average are a lot less likely to jump into committed relationships. If a woman can easily get any guy to enter into a relationship she'd have to be special in some way, like 10/10 looks or a celebrity or something.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 17 points18 points  (23 children) | Copy Link

Lolwat? I'm not sure where you are, but where I've been, any woman 6/10 or above with no obvious red flags (read: Gone Girl) could bag any non-celebrity status guy in her social circle that she wanted for an LTR

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

LTR? Really? Casual relationship maybe, but I find LTR hard to believe.

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism14 points15 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

I wanted to reply the same thing, but thought that maybe it's just a local thing. But ye guys join relationships very fast. It's hard to find single girls here.

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

Maybe depends on age too. For reference I'm in my 20's in the UK. Most girls I know seem to be only doing casual shit.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 9 points10 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Most girls I know seem to be only doing casual shit

I thought you said they wanted more than this

I'm also in my (early) 20s

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

They may want to do more than this but the guys don't, so they can't.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I would warrant that a hefty number of guys do want more, they're just in the friend zone (much as I hate the term)

And so we have a classic whine from both genders that there are no good people for commitment left when they mutually settle for people who only want to hook up because they're good-looking, until they hit the Wall. (Cos guys hit a hormonal wall when their testosterone starts to drop in the 30s)

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I bet a lot of this is dependent on location. E.g. the dating market here on the West Coast (god forbid you're a guy in Silicon Valley especially) or in the plains states is terrible for men while the dating market in the BosWash area is likely bad for women. Perhaps UK is bad as well for women?

[–]Xemnas81[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The UK is starting to mirror America in its treatment of Tinder etc., give it about 3 years and at this rate we'll be in the same shit

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

Yep I agree, location probably has a lot to do with it. If you're into going out and clubbing you can easily have ONS in the UK.

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

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

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS10 points11 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Honestly, a decent-looking girl can easily bag a guy who doesn't have a lot of relationship experience even if her personality sucks balls. If she doesn't have that problem, even guys with relationship experience may be willing to pick up the tab.

Let's be honest: those guys who steer away from relationships are those who, well, get their needs met even though they're single. This isn't the norm for guys.

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

You're not wrong, I just think you're underestimating how many guys are fairly high value, or high value enough to have ONS anyway. They're very common in my social circle at least. If you are extroverted it is very easy to have ONS with an attractive girl (not necessarily top-tier but certainly at the same level of attractiveness as the male at least).

[–]Xemnas81[S] 11 points12 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I just think you're underestimating how many guys are fairly high-value

that's the point though, according to most women these days, men are much lower value than they used to be and ought to be, except for the top 20%

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

What is this based on?

[–]Xemnas81[S] 11 points12 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

edit: amended to avoid link to sub

If you browse

  • r/ TwoXC

  • some of r/ AskWomen

  • the last site I frequented (The Student Room)

  • various feminist blogs such as Jezebel and Salon

  • many high-ish level media sources such as HuffPo or the New Atlantic (full broadsheets would not condescend to bother themselves with the liberal firstworldproblems of the sexual marketplace, but will detail the rising divorce rate etc.)

  • Psychology Today [note Psychology is a hyper-feminist slash misandrist institution]

  • 20something blogs such as Thought Catalog and my current favourite to rage against is Elite Daily

  • and of course Tinder, OKC, PoF, Instagram et. al.

then you'll see a couple of things

  • on the dating sites, most average women swipe away those pesky unattractive beta males and only shoot for the hottest guys, who they will invariably Match with by virtue of putting a picture up

  • the difference between a guy putting a picture up on Instagram/Facebook and a girl doing it is night and day. A cute guy can get 10-20 Likes for his closest to a model impression or funny joke whereas a cute girl can get over 100 for a duck-face

  • when younger, they (girls) will complain about every guy being an asshole or abuser in the making, or conversely being a pussy/having no balls etc. (TC/Elite Daily) and occasionally flat-out say "these beta males dare hit on me? How dare they insult me"

  • high school and early college the Nice Guy/friendzone accusation is thrown at any guy who talks about his issues dating, often out of context

  • when older, they (women) tend to call their ex-boyfriend/husbands emotionally unstable, controlling, abusive, misogynists, or just general man-children (Psychology Today, Salon etc.)

Then observe the rising divorce rate, and changing dynamic of the dating field IRL where more and more people are opting for ONSes. In particular note the discourse of "strong independent women don't need no man" and "who run the world? girls" in pop-culture. The mantra is "never settle, you're better than that"

What can we conclude from this? An over-riding belief by women that Men as a collective are poor boyfriend/marriage material, with stunted emotional maturity-if still men at all. Presumably from the cognitive dissonance that has arisen from women receiving the messages of both 3rd wave feminism and classical patriarchy. (This is covered in detail in Chapter 2 of No More Mr. Nice Guy)

And please don't bother straw manning me as a man-child, I'm doing the dirty work for PPD so that the guys with jobs don't have to.

[–]SabineLavine0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

This has been my experience, for the most part. In my single days, I found it a little weird that most guys seemed ready to jump into a relationship after two dates.

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

You get commitment with the promise of sex. Yes, it's super easy for women as well.

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Valid, however if subjectively the privileged party thinks they have it harder, then objectively they are unreasonable, ergo objectively men have it harder, women think they have it harder [in dating, before you come at me with more check yur privelege]

It is the same as [to cite Godwin's Law] me saying my life was harder than Anne Frank. No it was not. Just get out no it was not. I can think it was harder alll I want but when push comes to shove I'm not the one about to get thrown in a gas chamber.

And of course I'm aware that women can quite easily use this argument against me to say how women's life is objectively more difficult which is an entirely diferent kettle of fish hence I reiterate men have it harder in the dating scene kthxbai

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

That literally makes no sense.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 3 points3 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

And again, all this shows is women's perception of everything since the 3rd wave is from a victim mentality. Yet ironically they project all the tangible problems of toxic masculinity as men being the only ones self-victimising. It'd be funny if it weren't so damaging.

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

Same is true of men tho.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

The fact that in the end, a victory for both sexes is when they get together in a permanent relationship, to me, shows that it's equally hard, because both of those people had to wait that long to get into a permanent relationship.

The issue I think is that while that girl and that guy were single before they met eachother, it's relatively harder to be a single guy than it is to be a single girl. the girl needs to deal with loneliness and rejecting guys. the guy needs to deal with more sexual frustration, loneliness, and being rejected.

That's as objective and straightforward as I can put it.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS9 points10 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

a victory for both sexes is when they get together in a permanent relationship, to me, shows that it's equally hard, because both of those people had to wait that long to get into a permanent relationship.

That makes no sense.

  1. Who says both had to wait equally long before finding one another? Most stories I hear from more average males is that their GFs have more relationship history than they do. Sure, every once in a while you'll find a shy introverted girl who doesn't have that and will probably be less experienced than a moderately successful guy; but that's not the norm.
  2. Men have to put in the work, women have to wait until a sufficiently adequate suitor arrives. If she's sufficiently desirable, she'll have multiple ones.

Just because the amount of men and women is roughly equal doesn't mean that they're having it equally difficult.

[–]OfSpock0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

This kind of assumes that women are extroverted and enjoy waiting. I'm quite introverted and don't like small talk that much. I do like spending time with friends but the making of friends is quite tedious. However I knew I didn't have much chance of finding someone while staying home. I used to drag myself out to social events every weekend and force myself to talk to people.

It worked and now we get to spend our weekends at home or with friends which is much nicer. Glad not to be dating anymore.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This makes no sense. If you are not extroverted i.e. introverted, you will hate the pressure of being the one forced to initiate, therefore by default enjoy waiting.

Good on you for making some effort all the same. Just be aware that you still had a30% chance of striking lucky on the dating apps or from a guy friend/friend of a guy friend/colleague. Dudes who do this have <5%

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

What /u/xemnas81 said.

Believe me, I can relate perfectly well to what you just said. And I certainly don't deny that the dating game is harsher on introverted women than on extroverted ones, but guess what? It's faaaaaaaar worse for introverted guys.

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

your point #2 is what I already said.

As for point #1, whenever a girl is in a relationship, a guy is in a relationship with her.

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

The fact that in the end, a victory for both sexes is when they get together in a permanent relationship

That's not a fact on an individual level. Many don't want permanent relationships. If we're talking about evolution sure you're right but that's a different discussion to one about the dating game.

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

Generally speaking, it's true most of the time. Though I agree that men might be a few percentage more likely to prefer polygamy while women less. However, I think the societal belief that men are all polygamous dogs relative to women is much overblown.

[–]annoying_thought8 points9 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

the most honest answer this thread could hope for is "yeah, us women may have the monopoly on dating but we have to wade through a sea of dickwads (like men have to too)"

[–]Ultramegasaurus10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

*perceived dickwads

The "unattractive guys are horrible/boring people" is, to me, one of the most annoying and insulting forms of common female thought. Just think the "nice guy" strawman: all nice guys are boring non-persons with no interests on their own.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

and I wouldn't disagree.

[–]AmericanHistoryAFBBI'm Back2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I can attest to unattractive women obtaining sex easier than men. The other day I slept with a farm girl I'm not physically attracted too. Some might call these land whales. Some times, a guy just wants to bust a nut.

Women are a lot more picky about who gets to bust that nut.

[–]mr_one_linerOld School5 points6 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I would add that it is only so right now. Women are overvalued in the dating world currently. We are out of balance, but it is not and will not always be so.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Really? Seems awfully idealist for RP. When do you foresee a sudden change in this dating climate then?

[–]mr_one_linerOld School1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I believe the most likely outcome will be that the imbalance will revert when more traditional societies outbreed us. However, there is always room for trends to reverse before that happens, reverting a lot of the imbalance. For example, no-fault divorces could be removed as a possibility again, or the business of marriage is removed entirely from the governing body's intrusion (as some US states are threatening to do).

More broadly, there will come an equilibrium. men are starting to go their own way, and women are starting to realize that men will not necessarily make the first move, or any move at all. A new deal will be struck eventually. This sort of progress is being delayed by confounding factors (thought policing, atomization of society due to smartphones), but the potential is still there.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

So you see MGTOW as the only hope of reversing this?

[–]mr_one_linerOld School2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I couldn't say if MGTOW was the only hope of reversing it. Maybe activism would work? Perhaps a true political movement, such as feminism, could fight back against overly oppressive policies?

My point is, I believe that men will eventually fight back against what they believe is unfairness. I wouldn't exactly know how though.

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

Women have it easier in the dating arena and are largely oblivious to it or in denial.

Is anyone arguing that women have it easier when dating online? i'm not sure that many women who have ever internet-dated think women are oblivious or in denial about it. Women can keep their photos private and only share with the men they choose to contact.

Men might request ages of women wildly younger than themselves on their profiles and seek beautiful women, but in reality, their chances of getting what they want are slim. Unless they have a lot going for them.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I would say indirectly, yes, since whenever you make a statement "men have it hard in X", the first response you get from a feminist is "here is why you're wrong". This constant effort to prove why men have it easier than they make out, indirectly implies that women have it harder than made out, despite any evidence supporting the male perspective.

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

First of all, I think that today's society is over-sexualized and that high school and college dating is overrated. I believe that the time for love and dating is after your education.

But maybe that's because I did not have a B.F. during high school and it was kind of a mental taboo for me. When you are a student you are still very young and should not even think about it, because it will destroy your future to marry young or to get pregnant out of wedlock.

In today's economy I feel there needs to be a return to a lower sex drive. People need to control their animal spirits and stop rutting like pig-dogs. I think PUA and SlutWalk both have it all backwards.

Also some guys need to realize that some women, even though they seem liberal, are not interested in dating until after college. This could be due to strict immigrant parents or just due to a focus on work, and is common in all ethnicities.

Women raised like this sometimes don't even know how to pick up when a guy likes them. So like, how can they recognize a male-female discrepancy in the dating scene?

In hindsight, one boy did hit on me before, but I thought he was aware that: I lived with my parents at the time which = no dating. I thought he was attracted to music albums I'd amassed over the years.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

My ex was like you. British-Asian, strict Asian parents, devout Hindu, I'm the first and possibly last guy she dated. So I suppose in that sense I must have been pretty high SMV to her. She also has a curfew. Can I ask, are you Asian?

But she still had hypergamy in her veins, unconsciously.

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

Well it's not just exclusive to people from an immigrant background. I've met people of all ethnicities (incl. white or black) who were raised that way. And people of all backgrounds who were raised with looser attitudes toward dating.

I mean it's more expected when the girl is Asian / immigrant background but you'd be surprised how strict some parents are. I think the idea that Eastern culture is less corrupt than Western culture is a major misconception.

[–]thisismyinnocentface1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

As a woman, I fully agree with you, we definitely have it easier. If I was looking for a casual fling, I could have it as easy as inviting some guy friends over to try the jello shots I made, then taking my pick of the litter. I do not envy men or their lot in life, it must suck but being a woman is fantastic if you don't count reproductive issues (periods suck, being pregnant sucks, etc.)

Another example of female privilege, my bf once ran out of gas and had to walk the full 6 mies home (didn't have his cell phone on him). I once walked voluntarily to the gas station ad back (maybe 3 miles total) and was offered a ride 8 separate times...

Most women are completely oblivious to our advantage, but I'm glad I was born a woman in non- Texas (or equally conservative states) US.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Although I worry you're an RP sock puppet for being so damn honest, thank you for your honesty.

[–]H8CourtshipALot2171 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

well I believe there are far more male late bloomers than female late bloomers in the world of dating, relationships, and sex, or maybe women are just less vocal about it than men are, because whenever you hear of a person who is 25+ years of age and still a virgin, never had a relationship before, it's almost always guys you hear of.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

That's because women have the power of their youth and looks in their 20s, men catch up in their 30s when they've built confidence and established themselves.

[–]H8CourtshipALot2171 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

and women are on the receiving end of sexual attention, dating requests, women are not dealt with the burden that men have in having to take the lead, do the leading, making the first move and asking out, approaching, etc.

As a man I resent those cards I was dealt with for having a penis, unfortuneately I have no choice but to accept and deal with it if I want to have success with women.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

OK so from the sounds of it you agree with me on the facts, you just don't like the whining

[–]H8CourtshipALot2170 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I just hate how people think men have it easier when women ultimately have the final say

[–]caesarfecitPurple Pill Man4 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I beg to differ. I think women currently have it harder and have no one to blame for it but themselves (via feminism).

  1. It's a lot easier to get someone to sleep with you than it is to get someone to commit. To get laid, all you really need is to be decent looking and capable of not sabotaging yourself for a night. To get into a relationship with someone worthwhile, you need to be a halfway decent person with some things going for you.

  2. Feminism has actually exacerbated rather than helped most women's biggest problem with dating: passivity and an external locus of control. This feeds back into problem 1.

  3. No man in their right mind gets married today, unless they're willing to stake basically their life and sanity on it. Add this to problem #2 and you have a ton of women giving up on getting married and staying married.

  4. Just as there's not a lot of relationship-grade women out there, there's even fewer men. The top 5 % of women will still find their romantic goals at an affordable price, while the top 20 % of men can basically corner the pussy market, which also reduces the number of quality men overall (because 40 % of guys just aren't getting laid at all, and nothing kills game like loneliness), and it means many girls have to put out quickly to have any chance of making an impression.

  5. And because the competition for quality guys is more cutthroat than ever, girls have a an even harder time finding decent friends that won't backstab, shut shame, or "clam-block" them.

To be a romatically/sexually successful guy, all you need to do is basically read Models, find your balls and get out there, get your life sorted, and slowly rack up experience until your eye and game for high quality women is good.

To be a romantically successful woman, you have to get yourself in as good shape as possible as quickly as possible, develop a halfway decent personality while resisting the urge to sleepwalk your way into temporary male attention and lackluster relationships, get your social circle game on point, develop something resembling a career, and then find and lock down a guy before your child bearing years are done.

Feminism was supposed to liberate women, and instead all its done is make them more lonely than ever.

The thing I think some Redpillers don't get is this.

AF:BB comes about because girls are settling. They have to. The kind of guys they want are in short supply, and many girls just don't have a chance with them. So they fuck the guy who gets them wet and only really does that for them, and try to find a guy who can supply the emotional intimacy and financial support and try not to totally break his heart in the process. It's a maladaptive and immature coping mechanism to a very real problem.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I'll attempt to answer this.

  1. Yes, as a guy. See my above answer, pretty much any decent looking and not evidently unstable college girl or 20something woman could get a guy to hook up with her long term. Certainly any high school girl. Now whether she'd be pumped and dumped is another matter, as is the duration. But most guys do not get the opportunity to even get that far.

  2. Valid, however, feminism's legitimising passivity and external locus of control has basically given a free pass for the rationalisation hamster (absolving responsibility for one's actions). The result is that various diatribes can be espoused shaming men for not being good enough, for the way women behave. Again feminist dating lit is a constant form of passive dread. Women can if they want to get away with gas-lighting or cheating and come out as victim in couples counselling, not to mention the bias of the divorce courts.

  3. Absolutely: so what do women do instead? Hate on men until the betas have been shamed out of the dating game, and the alphas shamed into it. Marriage is less of a necessity for women, now that they are financially independent for the most part.

  4. Perhaps, but I still posit that a woman's baseline SMV has to be lower than a man's for her both get laid and an LTR. Whether she'll be satisfied with that is her problem. And imo if she only wants the top 20% and she's not in the top 30, and com pains of loneliness, well I suppose that's her problem. That's what we men are told all the time, anyway.

  5. Ah, very valid point, worth noting that married women also bitch on each other and face affairs too.

To be romantically successful as a man, all you need to do is read Models

…yeah, don't follow this. I mean, what's recommended in the book is more or less what women have to do to be successful, if not more. I mean, what you post here about women could also be paraphrased as

get your life sorted

You make it sound easy. It's not. That's why betas gon beta

Feminism was supposed to liberate women, and instead all it's done is make them more lonely than ever.

Ah, so you appeal to the notion that women subjectively have it "harder" because it feels less happy than it used to be?

AF: BB comes about because girls are settling. They have to. The lkind of guys they want are in short supply, and many girls just don't have a chance with them

Yes. The Ryan Goslings and Channing Tatums of the world. Meanwhile I want Adriana Lima and Nina Dobrev. Cry me a fucking river.

So they fuck the guys who gets them wet and only really does that for them, and try to find guy who can supply the emotional intimacy and financial support and try not to totally break his heart in the process. It's a maladaptive and immature coping mechanism to a very real problem

…true, but a problem which ultimately men are primarily blamed for. And again, you make out like women have it sooo hazard because they don't get fucking Prince Charming on a platter. That is as much maladaptive and immature coping mechanism for reality as AF: BB. Of course NAWALT

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

Truth. What I don't understand, is that everyone can see the destruction of family and relationships all around us. Things just keep getting worse and worse yet Feminists just continue to double down on the lies and histrionics. How much cognitive dissonance can take place before women start to abandon the movement?

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Eastern European women already are abandoning it, judging by the threads of my last catch of oneitis

[–]colucci3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I don't think you can compare female dating and male dating. You can make comparaison inside the two demographics (ex - "Women in America who try to date have it easier than women in Russia" or "White men in Japan have it easier trying to date than Asian Men in Japan"), but you cannot make cross-demographic examination of what is 'easier' because the goal of dating for the two sexes is radically different.

You've already established that women can get into a relationship easily, and I agree with you on this point. However, the point is to find a guy that can give you a good relationship. Which I think is far more difficult. A guy finding a good looking slut is more likely than a girl finding a guy that is good enough to be in a relationship with. And even when you do find a bf, there's a chance that he's committing only so he can get a free, reliable source of pussy. This is quite common with a lot of guys I've known.

So yes, I agree with you, insofar that by 'having it easier in the dating arena', you are referring to obtaining casual sex or commitment from a low value male.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

A guy finding a good looking slut is more likely than a girl finding a guy that is good enough to be in a relationship with

Disregarding my reservations of calling a hot girl a slut…if they both have it hard in different ways, why do only men get shat on for explaining how it's hard for them?

I've also covered my sympathies for the fear of commitment in OP. What I do not sympathise as much with, is rejection of 'low value males', given how often women tell us to lower our standards and how we're shallow and entitled. And if they will do that, then they should just admit that dating is in general is easier for them.

I sense however we both define 'low value' in different ways?

[–]colucci0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

why do only men get shat on for explaining how it's hard for them?

Because men are seen as the strong, courageous gender. A guy who complains is deemed a pussy. Women are the weak, delicate gender so they can complain and bitch without much whiplash. At least, that's how it seems to be.

I've also covered my sympathies for the fear of commitment in OP.

Well, it's the main problem for women in the dating world. If you're disregarding the fact that obtaining commitment is hard, you're essentially putting aside the bulk of the challenges females have to go through when dating. If we reverse the genders, it'd sound like "I sympathize with guys that cannot get casual sex readily, but guys have it easier". Well sure guys have it easier when you overlook the fact that most of the guys have trouble getting casual sex. I don't think I'm fully clear in what I mean in this paragraph, but I hope you get the gist of it.

What I do not sympathise as much with, is rejection of 'low value males', given how often women tell us to lower our standards and how we're shallow and entitled.

Why are you listening to these bitches anyway? Retards who tell you to 'lower your standards' and date below your league are not worthy of your time. Do whatever the fuck you wanna do and disregard retards, man.

But anyway, saying that women have it way easier than men in the dating sphere is vastly different from saying that women have hyperinflated perception of their own social value. I completely agree with the statement that women perceive their value as greater to what it actually is, hence them trying to date unreasonably above their league.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

-> Yes, and women expect this too (due to internalised misogyny/misandry re: benevolent paternalism) Although women can now choose to be either 'weak' damsel in distress re: patriarchy, or strong and independent re: feminism-men just have to be strong. It's not attractive for men to be weak, at all. Yet either alpha OR beta behaviour from a woman can be attractive depending on context

-> I'm not disregarding the importance of women's fear of commitment, hence it's covered in the OP, I just don't want to repeat as I'm tired and have a near-200 comment long thread plus WOT as it is bro

-> The point is that this response "lower your standards" is not the behaviour of "bitches" this is the behaviour of the vast majority of women who would be otherwise reasonable in any context bar dating and relationships. Which suggests that they have a socially and biologically conditioned hostility to men re: this issue

-> I'd agree about hyper-inflated perception of social value i.e. hypergamy. The problem is women don't. They see themselves as often shooting below their league-and then tell the men they're rejecting to shoot even lower again. Feminism also hamsters to them that what they're doing is just not settling for someone who's not worth it. It began as a reason not to settle for someone abusive who takes advantage of you; it's now just become a reason to tread up.

[–]Vornnash2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Solipsism, from your perspective yes, from theirs, no, because both genders are after different things, sex and commitment.

[–]Arahkne0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

Except if the roles were switched (as in: men get loads of attention from women, women have to work for attention) men would be overjoyed whereas women wouldn't be able to cope.

[–]Vornnash2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Attention without sex?

[–]Arahkne-1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Attention as in potential for both sex and relationships.

[–]Vornnash2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I don't think you comprehend. Neither sex has it 'easier.' Women get used for sex (pump and dumps). So yes, they get attention, but they have to sacrifice emotional investment for the chance of a real relationship every time they accept someone's interest.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Valid, however women have for at least the past 10 years had Feminism as a safe space to file pump and dump under Danger Zone: Emotional Abuse/Misogyny Ahead! Many guys sympathise with this. Even some RPers, like myself. I seek an LTR with a unicorn at all odds.

Men just get told to shut up as soon as they speak up.

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

It's entirely possible, and should be trivially simple, to screen potential partners to see if they want a real relationship or just want to jump your bones. And I think both sexes can agree that it's better to have a lot of sex and relatively fewer real relationships than nothing at all, regardless of "sacrificed emotional investment".

[–]Vornnash2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

They apparently find it hard enough to complain often.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I notice no-one has called me out on the Disney princess mentality re-hash, any reason for that?

[–]RichardPalma2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women have it easier to date than men because they don't have to do anything, the man initiates and follows through..

Men have it way easier to get what they want out of dating because the man initiates and follows through.

The fact that women have more "feet in the door" really doesn't matter when all doors go somewhere they don't want to go. A man doesn't need all these, because he picks a door and walks through. If it's locked, he picks another door, but because he is choosing, if the door opens, it goes where he wants.

[–]bubbleki2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy.

If you would like to do the same, add the browser extension GreaseMonkey to Firefox and add this open source script.

Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The over-riding complaint in these debates seems to be that men complain they can't get any, women complain they can't get an actual boyfriend. Personally getting a girlfriend would be more emotionally fulfilling to me than just sex too

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

Sex without emotion for women is like sex with a hand for men

No. Many women don't need any emotion to enjoy sex.

[–]bubbleki0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy.

If you would like to do the same, add the browser extension GreaseMonkey to Firefox and add this open source script.

Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.

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

Do you require emotion during your masturbating?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

I also think women are OK if they do not pair bond. We have friends, we have family...the drive, I hate to say it, isn't there anymore. It's been replaced by a new goal. IF someone happens to come along that we like, we might let them in...but it's easier this way.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

As in women don't give a shit about boyfriends anymore?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Pretty much. With school/working, I don't have time, nor the interest. If my SO wasn't egalitarian...I wouldn't be dating him. I am not going to pick up after him when I get home from work, nty.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Hold on. You seem to assume every guy who can't get a date is a misogynistic traditionalist

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

No not all. I am just saying some women just don't date anymore. It's not worth it.

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

this saddens me

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

It is what it is. I like it because people are free to be who they want. If they want to date, date. If not, they don't have to.

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

Well, it's only a matter of time until there is no more family. Just single mothers and old spinsters. Yay Feminism!

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (14 children) | Copy Link

Yay Feminism!

Agreed! So happy for feminism. I wasn't forced to marry some old fart. Thank feminism!

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

That was accomplished in the first wave.

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

So what? I am grateful for feminism.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (11 children) | Copy Link

What have they done for you lately?

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

They are helping poor and vulnerable persons. I do not benefit from feminism now...but I'd be foolish to think other people.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (9 children) | Copy Link

Well, this may be where you and I do not see eye to eye. I think the type of "help" feminists provide to "poor and vulnerable" people is only hindering them in the long run. I think that the opportunity is there for just about anyone in the U.S. to become a healthy independent person.

What exactly does feminism do to help the poor and vulnerable people in the U.S.?

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

Well the U.S. is one messed up place now for women. I am from Canada.

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

Well, some people say that it's a messed up place for men to live. In reality, we are all doing alright. Most people have food, shelter, clothing and all the essentials in life. We have no immediate threats to our life to fight. Through hard work, responsibility and perseverance most of us can etch out a comfortable existence. Most importantly, we all have equal rights and equal opportunities even if we don't start from the same spot or reach the same outcomes.

So how exactly is it messed up for women?

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial4 points5 points  (79 children) | Copy Link

Dating is brutal. For everyone bar Suzi Cheerleader or Brad Quarterback. I was a skinny, gangly, tall awkward girl and young woman. I preferred shooting hoops to makeup and idolised Stephen Hawking. Boys didn't look sideways at me. They were too busy mooning over the cute, curvy airhead gigglers and complaining that none of them would put out.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (20 children) | Copy Link

I was a skinny, gangly, tall awkward girl and young woman.

Is there a success story behind it? Did you change and have a better dating life now? What did you do?

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial2 points3 points  (19 children) | Copy Link

I found a male unicorn, lol. I was married at 21.

[–][deleted] 26 points27 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

Congrats. : )

Doesn't sound like you had to put lots of effort in though and confirms OP's point of view in my opinion.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male14 points15 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Doesn't sound like you had to put lots of effort in though and confirms OP's point of view

hehe. This was beautifully executed.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Didn't actually try to catch her or anything. I am a sucker for success stories.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male20 points21 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Well, it's still funny to me.

Her: life is so hard, you just don't understand!!

You: how's your life been?

Her: oh, my life was easy.

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

If you liked that, here is another funny anecdote just for you.

I was talking with a female friend and we found out that we both had been socially awkward and had been bullied when we were younger. We both aren't socially awkward anymore. At all. She is an intelligent woman and she has less misconceptions about dating than most. Gives great red pill advice. But she sometimes falls for "men and women have it equally difficult", too.

So we were talking about how we overcame our socially awkward outsider phase.

Me: "I started with martial arts and put in a lot of work. Gained a lot of confidence and wasn't bullied anymore just because of body language and because I was willing to fight. I did jobs after school to get better with people and built confidence. Playing guitar and overcoming stagefright helped me a lot. I forced myself to talk to people more. I started to chat with women online a lot to lose my nervousness around them. I kept a journal with my goals (many of them related to how I wanted to be socially) and updated it daily with things I had done to come closer. Motivated me to get out of my comfort zone. What did you do to get out of the loser phase?"

"I got boobs."

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, at least she's realistic.

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

Yeah, but not "at least". This stuff makes me really like her. She understands that life was easy for her in this regard.

She gives great red pill advice.

But even she doesn't understand some of the differences for men and women on the dating scene and can be solipsistic. I'll never understand why.

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Once I got out of high school. As I said up thread, I thought the post was about high school.

[–]nicethingyoucanthaveRed Pill Male5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Please accept that I can find the exchange funny without it being too harsh a criticism of you personally - because I certainly didn't mean it that way. In fact, I'm glad of your honesty and willingness to participate here.

But it was funny to me.

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I should have read more closely.

Having said that, I was the first of my girlfriends to settle down and breed by a good 10 years. Early to mid 30s was the standard. Several are still single and not looking, and most have no children.

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial-1 points0 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I thought he was talking about high school.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I think he wasn't, but I agree that everything is different in highschool.

[–]IramadanceRed Pill Man3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Really? The people I meet in bars still act like high schoolers.

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

Oh yeah, definitely. Not only in bars. I am convinced that people don't change much.

But surroundings play a big role on how everybody behaves and feels. And highschool surroundings seem to screw with peoples' brains more than anything.

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I should have read more closely.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Can confirm I did not even know about TRP in high school, my knowledge of the red pill then extended to 'waa girls want hot guys best stop eating so many Mars bars and start running sigh-> PROFIT [ish, still virgin]'

Speaking now as an early graduate

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Married at 21?

You didn't even live in this sexual marketplace. You experienced almost none of it. WADR, your opinions are just above totally meaningless.

[–]annoying_thought3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

those 5 years must have been hell meanwhile in the male dominated foreveralone sub...

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

6 years in my country. I thought the op was about younger people.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 20 points21 points  (51 children) | Copy Link

I sympathise with that, and have been there, but I honestly don't think nerdy girls have no chance outside of high school. With all due respect, I see that you're (perhaps unconsciously) appealing to a

(Code Gold) – The All-That-Glitters Charge

edit: I've retrospectively extended my original answer for reference of fellow PPDers

Discussion: The charge of superficiality is usually hurled at men with regard to their mating preferences. Examples:

“If you didn’t go after bimbos, then …” “How can you be so shallow and turn down a single mother?”

[see Feminist Shaming Tactics at the top]

I really doubt that the only guys who pined for for you were Brad Quarterback or Todd McStudMuffin.

Let me elaborate on the current social/cultural context of this answer. There is a massive mainstream wave of "geeky is sexy" that's been going on for the last 5-10 years. By geeky I am including superheroes, the supernatural, sci-fi, fantasy etc. The turning point for this began with the international success of Peter Jackson's LOTR adaptation, the Harry Potter and Twilight adaptations, and has been consolidated by the Avengers/Marvel Cinematic Universe and the Hunger Games. But superhuman beauty/strength/intelligence has been integral to geek culture for decades. I mean look at how many hot guys there are representing geek culture now. Benedict Cumberbatch. The entire fucking MCU. Brian Cox is a hot older guy with a brain. Christ the dude who played young Stephen Hawking was cute. So "unattractive" nerdy girls may not appeal to the jocks, but I am pretty sure many of them (attractive yet geeky/more introverted/non-jock guys) would be gagging for you.

Whereas now, imo the standard for nerdy girls across the board is Brian Cox (dat brain/status and still good-looking) or fucking Chris Hemsworth (have you seen those biceps and that jawline?!) Why? Because gamer and D&D dudes have been across the board stereotyped for decades as latent misogynists complaining about the Friendzone, cheetos on an XXL polo that hasn't been washed in a week, at or approaching obesity, living in their mom's basement, with a Peter Pan complex. They are one of the most ridiculed groups in society that it's socially acceptable to take a pass at without it being deemed hate speech. #Gamergate and Anita Sarkeesian has not helped to fix the rift between the genders in this sub-culture. When working off such a straw man, it is easy to talk about you having an entitlement complex or being superficial while putting nothing on the table. But the majority of us are not such layabouts. In fact,we have more incentive now, having had pop-culture say "see, you can be a geek and smoking hot too!" This is a blessing and a curse. Whereas before I could at least say "oh well, Brad Quarterback won't watch Netflix marathons of Buffy with her!"-well, now there are plenty of hot guys to watch it with who do not assign themselves to the stereotypical jock or sport culture. Part of the MCU's appeal, let's not lie, is fulfilling the male power fantasy of perfect body/peak physical fitness and perfect mind.

How have women been left off the hook re: the dating game? Because Zooey Deschanel and others are making a concerted effort, as representatives of geek chic culture, to boost your confidence including self image in a positive way. A way which frankly does not exist for men. It has good intentions, don't get me wrong, including to prevent disordered eating and Body Dysmorphic Disorder-induced depression in young teenage girls, as well as insecure or naive girls getting trapped in abusive relationships. I support all of this. But it has got out of hand and now been taken as an example of how patriarchy keeps triggering muh triggers therefore fuck societal pressure to be attractive I deserve hotties for nothing too.

The closest I get to a benevolent male tutor is DocNerdLove, who I do like and helps to give me a healthy dose of blue occasionally. But he is still working off the assumption that men must be conditioned towards feminism's definition of alpha, which includes not using societal injustices in the dating arena as an excuse not to improve yourself. This is good, alpha advice-but in stark contrast to that which is given to women; "you're not at fault, society pressures you too much to be perfect!" A double standard re: accountability for one's actions. The most obvious example of this, not in a is #fuckthatdresscodegirls which is on Zooey's FB page every other fucking day

In fact, DNL (being ex-PUA) basically says "women want the man of highest status according to their value system/social circle, it is what it is, work with it or get over it". He doesn't try and argue it's unreasonable or unfair, he just says Do It. So in this sense he is a little misandrist/anti-beta. That part about "social circles" is what's crucial; typically women say "I just want a decent guy not some Brad Quarterback", but if they're a nerd, they're still shooting for the Brian Cox or Tom Hiddleston of their dating pool really.

Ergo, hypergamy is culturally sensitive but still present, which the charge of superficiality frequently misses. Because I am not going for the cute bimbo/cheerleader, I am going for say, Izzy Hale (no not actually as hot as Izzy hale in my fucking dreams hahaha but you get the gist, I like cute Goth/metal girls, but they want guys who front national bands-the Brad Quarterback of my own sub-culture).

I'm yet to see this mini-essay covered by PPD, but it [Code Gold] is a shaming tactic that often crops up, so may make this my next thread.

At risk of being inevitably stereotyped as a gamer whining about said friend zone and being a Nice Guy I shall stop there.

As an aside: you shoot hoops? That's sexy. No I'm not white-knighting, objectively fitness/athleticism is attractive, I'm confused why this'd be such a turn-off except in a straw man high school land? I've been out of university for a year, and my argument still seems to get repeated across dating sites, from my friends etc.

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial1 point2 points  (50 children) | Copy Link

I was in high school before nerdy became mainstream. No boys pined for me. No boys wanted me as anything but a friend. Not even a friend with benefits. Not the nerdy guys. Not the sporty boys. Not any boys. Boys don't make passes at girls who wear glasses.

I met my now husband at uni through mutual friends. I wasn't his usual type and he went out with me when my friend bet him he was too chicken to date a girl who raced cars.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 11 points12 points  (49 children) | Copy Link

I'm sorry to hear that. Again I'll refer you to the OP about my sister getting cheated on (she, frankly, got fat when pregnant and didn't lose the baby weight). I didn't say the red pill was fair on everyone.

I would have to state that the fact your luck changed at Uni, you are now married, and yet these guys responding are well into their 20s if not 30s, is still evidence that in general, men have a harder time dating at this age.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (30 children) | Copy Link

I agree with her that it's different in high-school for nerdy and outsider girls.

But it seems to change for them after high-school without any conscious effort on their part.

It's very different for boys. If they struggled with dating in high-school they will struggle immensely after and have to put serious effort in to change their life.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 8 points9 points  (20 children) | Copy Link

It's really weird why. The only explanations I can think of right now are

a) that the pill increasingly favours women towards their early 20s, and peaks at around 25-which happens to be the age of pretty much every stunning young model/celebrity/singer/actress etc.

After that women who retain SMV tend to have a 'classy' vibe to them as well as being in alright shape

b) non-aesthetic related aspects of SMV such as Game, social skills, wealth and status become more important for men's SMV post-high school

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (18 children) | Copy Link

Good points.

I think that the main reasons why some girls have an unsuccessful dating life in highschool is confusion. Confused boys and girls. Boys and girls who have no experience and can't assess their options on the dating market.

An example would be what a former female friend of mine told me. She had always been obese. Not only overweight but really big. Her memories of highschool:

"I was always insecure and an outsider. Boys weren't interested in me and I was a virgin. Then I met another fat girl. She had lots of sex with totally hot guys. I talked with her about it and soon after I had lots of sex, too."

She was confused before about her sexual value. Seeing and talking to another fat girl was enough to suddenly have lots of sex with hot guys.

Beta boys are equally confused. But they seem to over-estimate their options. Not as in "I am totally hot and deserve a hot girl", but as in "some day a hot girl will love me for my personality" and this will hold them back from dating the outsider nerdy girl which is really ironic.

Another problem is that highschool is full of people in their physical prime. You always have hot girls around you. That completely changes after highschool when most people stop doing sports and put on a lot of weight. So at highschool everyone is kind of spoiled and this makes guys overlook the outsider nerdy girls. I know that I was. If I could turn back time and visit highschool again I would probably fall for 75% of the girls with my now lowered standards.

Back to topic, the difference is that it wouldn't be enough for those beta guys to just have a revelation like the above mentioned obese girl and suddenly be able to pull hot girls. Which would confirm your "girls have it easier".

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Beta boys are equally confused. But they seem to over-estimate their options. Not as in "I am totally hot and deserve a hot girl", but as in "some day a hot girl will love me for my personality" and this will hold them back from dating the outsider nerdy girl which is really ironic.

Brilliant point. Exactly what happened to me, several times. Beta boys (and deltas, and gammas) truly believe this. Because they are specifically told this is what will happen. Everyone tells them they are far more sexually valuable than they really are.

"Those girls are just stupid. Someday, after they are done dating the quarterbacks and the thugs, they will see what a great guy you are, and they will love you and date you just for who you are."

It's all BS.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah. I don't blame them for being confused. If only there was more guidance for everyone.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Exactly what happened to me, several times. Beta boys (and deltas, and gammas) truly believe this. Because they are specifically told this is what will happen. Everyone tells them they are far more sexually valuable than they really are.

Also, everyone tells them girls are far less sexually valuable than they actually are.

The dating scene is always presented as if girls were struggling as hard as men and don't have it any better. And women with their tendency to whine all the time about how their soulmates aren't into them only exacerbates that perception.

If guys got just a few cold harsh truths along their way ("a woman your age will always have more options without having to work for them. That you're a guy means that you have to put in most of the work. Women won't do the approaching themselves because they don't have to - if you don't do it or wait for a sign from her, there are several others who will do the job for you. Even if you're average, you aren't as desirable to the average girl as she is to you - you have to hope that one of them is for some occult reason into you, and until then, you have to approach, approach, approach."), they would certainly be more jaded, but at least know the odds.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I wonder which would be a good age for fathers to privately initiate their sons into this discourse. That seems the safest way. Unfortunately many RPers are recovering Nice Guys, doing this in reaction to the ruin that was their Nice Guy father.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I believe I've covered this under trite non-advice in OP. I can extend it if you feel it's a pressing issue.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

a) for women: you said that a fat girl realised she could have sex with hot guys

b) for men: you somewhat hamster that a guy should lower his standards and hit on the nerdy girl

Double standards? edit: so I see you're a guy and read the last part

Disclaimer: I'd hit on the nerdy girls anyway because I'm terrified of narcissists and super-hot girls seem to have that in abundance

c) Plenty of people at uni seemed also to be in physical prime

the difference is that it wouldn't be enough for those beta guys to just have a revelation like the above mentioned obese girl and suddenly be able t pull hot girls

Well yes, because feminism would call us crazy shallow and entitled for that (see above). Ergo Nice Guy rhetoric legitimises hypergamy

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

a) for women: you said that a fat girl realised she could have sex with hot guys

Yeah. Proving your point, because I agree wholeheartely that girls and women have it easier on the dating market.

b) for men: you somewhat hamster that a guy should lower his standards and hit on the nerdy girl

Please don't ever accuse me of hamstering. Call me a serial rapist or child molester or wimp or hitler for all I care, but don't assume I am hamstering. If at any time you think I am hamstering in a comment, read my comment again and you'll see that I am not.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

a) Cool, glad we agree :)

b) Apologies, thought edit withdrew that statement :/

[–]lorispoison0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

Please don't ever accuse me of hamstering. Call me a serial rapist or child molester or wimp or hitler for all I care, but don't assume I am hamstering. If at any time you think I am hamstering in a comment, read my comment again and you'll see that I am not.

Hahahahaha oh my god you guys are priceless. This is satire, right? Oh man it's gotta be. Too good.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's really weird why.

Regarding guys - not really. When you're in HS, everyone is awkward as fuck when dating. Being a loser is the norm. When you're 5-10 years older, being awkward as fuck is the exception. Basically, if you wait to long, lack of success only begets further lack of success.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Want to hear a solipsistic anecdote? I was not supposed to date in high school and had a terrible time when I tried to ask boys out after college. I was called creepy as well as friendzoned. I had friends, wasn't an outsider, and was successful in other aspects of my life.

I actually thought makeup was a natural part of other women's faces and that I was innately homely. My mom considered herself a plain Jane and didn't wear makeup. Reading SJW literature confused me because I would hear these rants that makeup, spanx, dieting was self hatred or giving in to the man etc.

I didn't know that Kim Kardashian wore a corset. I thought that "hot" people were constitutionally different from normal people in terms of genetic makeup.

But in terms of my looks, that wasn't even something I thought about because I was encouraged to think of myself as a child, whose main duty was study and getting a job, until around age 23. I only wore makeup because I heard it was part of business professional dress.

I didn't "date" until around age 24 and never "dated" but was instead, rejected all the time. My boyfriend is no playboy or stud muffin and I'm happy about that because if he were high SMV I would be nervous about losing him. It helps to date people who are around the same SMV as you.

I didn't know how to groom myself properly until post wall, age 28 or so, when I started hanging out on forums like Skincare Talk, Essential Day-Spa, dieting sites, and started shopping at a beauty supply store to upgrade my style since I wanted to pursue the music industry as an avocation.

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

Want to hear a solipsistic anecdote?

Why is this a solipsistic anecdote? It's a success story and I salute you for improving your life. And for coping with rejection.

I didn't "date" until around age 24 and never "dated" but was instead, rejected all the time. I didn't know how to groom myself properly until my late 20s when I started hanging out on Skincare Talk, Essential Day-Spa and heard about "contouring" on Instagram.

Was grooming the only thing you did to change your dating experience?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Well I started being upfront about having Aspergers and would discuss my issues upfront.

The boy I previously tried to date was a low talker and I couldn't make hide nor hair of what he was saying even though he was not foreign born, it wasn't an accent issue, it was just low talkerism. He became frustrated that I didn't pick up when he was trying to insinuate stuff.

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

Well I started being upfront about having Aspergers and would discuss my issues upfront.

That takes courage. Glad you figured out how to deal with it.

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

What is low talking?

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

Like when someone mumbles and you can't hear what they're saying, even when you tell them to speak up. It was lampooned on an episode of Seinfeld.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Reading SJW literature confused me because I would hear these rants that makeup, spanx, dieting was self hatred or giving in to the man etc.

I have an easy time believing that. If you ask me, girls being confused about the realities of the dating market is in no small part due to feminist/progressive wishful thinking the same as it is with guys. I see it far more often in men than in women, though.

Want to hear a solipsistic anecdote?

Solipsism (as we use it) is something different.

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial2 points3 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

I have given birth several times. Losing baby weight takes a while. You don't just snap back like the women on magazine covers. 9 months on and 9 months off on the rule of thumb by sports scientists, if you are breastfeeding, or you will compromise your milk supply and damage your joints and tendons due to residual pregnancy hormone softening them.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 7 points8 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Oh absolutely. The health risk is huge. I didn't say my sis' ex wasn't an absolute fucking asshole for what he did.

But with that said, men don't suddenly become these crazily hot high-status beings either. Yet women talk about "just get over it, stop whining and improve yourself": like it's easy to reach the standard they are talking about. And only women can complain, which has always frustrated me.

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial-1 points0 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Dadbods. Would a woman dare do the same? She'd be torn to shreds if she did.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 1 point2 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Fucking lol. Dadbods is a desperate attempt by LAD culture and fringe feminist movements to pander to political correctness after the rightful backlash that the new objectification double standard favouring women has created, and is already getting ridiculed

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

Feminists created dadbods?

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

No. One faction of feminists e.g. Zooey Deschanel tries to end body shaming for both genders. The other faction actively encourages double standards

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Huh? How is this relevant to the thread topic?

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Relates to "girls only want pretty guys" straw man. Filed under Cold Gold: Charge of Superficiality against Nice Guys (see above, and OP)

With all due respect to her, she then admits she's married by the end of university, which makes me lose some sympathy given the average age of men who frequent this sub

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

With all due respect to her, she then admits she's married by the end of university, which makes me lose some sympathy given the average age of men who frequent this sub

Right very few of us are lucky enough to marry young.

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I thought the men here were mostly under 21.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That would be a terrifying degree of bitterness and cynicism for a group barely having reached manhood.

I'm a resident paranoid so I'm an exception to this

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

If we exclude the weight of the baby and the excess fluids you don't have to gain more than 10 pounds with pregnancy. Women who get fat during pregnancy just eat way too much. You only need 500 extra calories a day during the third trimester and even less for the first and second.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS6 points7 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Pro Tip for young women: If you want guys mooning over you as a girl, pick some non-girly hobby - I don't know any woman who f.ex. is into nerdy stuff like P&P or Metal and is still single (and most of them could easily replace their guy with another one if they felt inclined to do so).

Of course if you want a Quarterback, this might not be the best option.

[–]APlaceInsideMyHeadRed Pill Man3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Honestly still waiting to meet a chick who likes metal. I'm gonna have to start going to concerts when I get to college.

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

I would have loved someone to rock out to Pantera with. They all friendzoned me.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

If they don't give you respect. Walk.

; )

[–]Nazrath2112Blood Splatter Red1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

My favorite respect walk video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igXoUVBQZi4

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

Great, thx. I like it except for the final stomp. Could have shattered the guy's throat.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

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

I guess a lot depends on what you mean by "easier". Different, yes, and perhaps easier too, but that's harder to quantify.

Personal example:

I've only used plenty of fish one time, and had to shut my account down in less than ten days, as I received over 400 emails in that time. The first hundred rolled in before I put my picture up, and the final 300 were all received within a couple of days.

Sounds great, doesn't it?

If number of contacts is your measure, then I was vastly more successful than the average guy. But number of contacts isn't a rational measure, as a lot of those emails were overtly harassing and some of them threatening.

So we're back to the concept of easier. Is it really easier if I have to read death/assault threats, and sift through sexually overt muck and mindless dreck to get to the point where I interact with a single sane, well-intentioned man?

Anecdotes aren't particularly useful, but this happens to be a nearly universal anecdote by women on dating sites, so I'd argue for utility.

Also, I'd like to point out that the argument that the sheer volume of guys looking for casual sex doesn't translate to an increase in the number of guys looking for LTRs. There's a fairly distinct separation there, even if we're ignoring the fallout associated with women engaging in this.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS4 points5 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Is it really easier if I have to read death/assault threats, and sift through sexually overt muck and mindless dreck to get to the point where I interact with a single sane, well-intentioned man?

Yes. If only 0.1% of men who approach you are datable and serious about you, this means that (extrapolating) after a month you would have established contact with a decent man. You don't need to qualify yourself, you don't need to jump through hoops - all you need is to delete the mails from the 999 other guys and forget about them.

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

I can't possibly get to the point of establishing what's what without reading the offending emails to begin with. And doing so takes hours, and reduces the interest in engaging at all, especially after threats begin rolling in.

And you haven't stated how this makes dating easier for women at all. When the bar for success is set at open season on women, that unambiguously has deleterious effects, both on the women using the site, and on the genuine men as well.

Leaving systems of harassment in place is negative for all.

Edit: and I wanted to add this, because it's demonstrative of how ridiculous it's become. I eventually set my preferences to PhD's only, not that I care about academic accomplishments per se, but because it pared down the asinine attacks and detritus. Ridiculous, and clearly bad for the men on that site.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I see how going through offensive messages could be off-putting.

Have you tried a different approach? Ignoring your inbox and writing to guys yourself? This would get you closer to the male experience. You'd simulate the empty male inbox and the privilege to choose who you want to contact.

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

Heh. Most of the men I've dated from online sources have come this way, and I would absolutely agree that in that case, women definitely have it easier. The vast majority of men I contact directly will respond, enthusiastically at that, which isn't the norm for guys at all.

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

Props to you for actually doing it!

Out of curiosity for me as a man who tries online dating from time to time, did you wade through the messages to find the few interesting ones or did you stop at some point and exclusively messenged men you were interested in?

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

When I hit a point of saturation, I cancelled the account, but I did continue to wade up until that point. I can tell you directly that it made me a lot less patient with men who waited to get back in touch or were vague with their answers.

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

Thx!

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well I only suppose most guys who go on those replies have took being 'forward' too literally and are a bit desperate. This does reek of straw men a little.

Can I ask a semi-personal question, are you then a reasonable attractive woman?

Also, I'd like to point out that the argument that the sheer volume of guys looking for casual sex doesn't translate to an increase in the number of guys looking for LTRs

you do mean a decrease in guys looking for LTRs, right?

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

I don't think it's desperation, I think it's trolling by misogynists. Anyone who sends you an email telling you they'll rape you if you don't put out on the first date isn't likely expecting a response. FWIW, most responses weren't like that, most were just one-word emails. "Hi" or "Sexy" or whatnot. Wouldn't say those were misogynistic, but I also wouldn't say they're expecting a response.

Semi-personal answer: I consider myself normal looking, but in the top half. Maybe a 6 at baseline, and a 7 with effort.

And no, I meant increase. What I'm saying there is that the guys that approach you with a ONS request aren't the same guys who are open to LTRs. So an increase in ONS requests doesn't mean an increase in LTR potential.

[–]OfSpock2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I love that you're getting downvoted. Are red pillers doubting what you say? Would they like to receive the same messages from men?

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

Childish, right? Almost 100% of my downvotes on reddit come from men throwing tantrums when I produce facts in a conversation.

To be totally fair, occasionally it's from people who don't like my wording, as I can get abrasive when people get willfully stupid.

[–][deleted] 3 points3 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]CyraleaRedPill Vanguard11 points12 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Not really, I think you're being a tad solipsistic there. In all likelihood you're well above-average looks but have strong beta behaviours. Commitment seems easy to you because you're naturally in the top 20% for looks, but when women find out your beta qualities they bounce.

That's not at all the experience of men in the bottom 80%.

[–][deleted] -1 points-1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]CyraleaRedPill Vanguard11 points12 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm just a regular guy

Who doesn't understand the moving parts around him. Just because you can't see the system doesn't mean it's not there, just like someone who naturally speaks English not truly understanding grammatical rules and structure.

I happen to be in the upper percentile for looks, and I ran into the exact issue I described. I also thought I was a "regular" guy, but then I learned how attraction actually works.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm going to be honest I think I might have this problem. I think due to my anxiety I probably out my SMV down more than it actually is, especially aesthetically (given history of eating disorder) However I am wary of becoming this emasculated delusional schmuck that the rehab clinic tried to turn me into, that it's OK to be heavy etc.

[–]MagicGainbowKeepin' it real, havin' a feel1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I also thought I was a "regular" guy, but then I learned how attraction actually works.

Same, I realized that getting the girl for sex/ons was easy enough but they never stuck around, so from this I can speculative that my looks are not the problem it's my attitude.

Also thanks dad for the based genetics he passed on to me from his old man, there's a portrait of him as a younger man, if you switch the order it looks like an age progression going, me, granddad and dad.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 6 points7 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

It really boils down to the individual

…and how attractive they are?

Seriously your details were so vague that it's impossible to draw conclusions from it

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Xemnas81[S] 6 points7 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

So you basically listed Game/social skills/social proof which is integral to SMV, and the part most PUAs focus on. RP is unique in accepting that LMS is equally important outside of the club scene.

I'm sure you have…but you were so damn vague about those experiences, including your own attractiveness, that there is no way of telling whether those rejections were because they were men, because they were unattractive or whatever. Can you tell me a bit about yourself?

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

With all due respect, you've basically said you're bi or bi-curious, you have nice hobbies, you've likely slept with some guys, and you may or may not have slept with/be attractive to women but hold (delusion ally, as a defence mechanism against the insecurities of modern dating for beta males?) high confidence in yourself

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe4 points5 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

I've approached potential partners, and I've been approached myself (which, interestingly enough, makes me feel picky).

Yeah and you're totally representative of men cause normal men totally get approached all the time. https://cdn.psychologytoday.com/sites/default/files/styles/image-article_inline_full/public/blogs/54311/2011/04/62434-52958.png?itok=MBIrZqpn

[–]Xemnas81[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah, excellent. Example of Psychology Today and Psych. as a whole being misandrist

http://www.avoiceformen.com/series/tom-goldens-mental-health-misandry/misandry-in-psychology-part-one/

[–][deleted] -1 points-1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe10 points11 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

So your response to a thread about how average men have it harder than average women is for average men to become top men?

Facepalm

[–][deleted] -1 points-1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Xemnas81[S] 6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

So you agree that eventually, women will resort to 3a) red pill advice 'man up' rather than take accountability for their sometimes inflated and unreasonable expectations of men?

[–]annoying_thought1 point2 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Do you really know women who can't get laid for love nor money?

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

meaning women who can't get laid at all by any means possible

[–][deleted] -2 points-2 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I call straw man. I think prostitution has been disqualified from discussion of TRP because it is basically saying "I am so unattractive I will pay you to validate me by sleeping with me". And I know very, very few women who are either so unattractive that they must resort to a male prostitute, or support prostitution in the first place

[–]annoying_thought1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

have you seen the askwomen thread where a guy asked what they thought about men who used one (prostitute)? The all said it was rape and the guy would be a pervert (Russell Brand lost his v-card to to one but I can't imagine them turning him away)

[–]Xemnas81[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Nope, I'm banned from ask women lol. But that sounds about right. Although ask women advice have mostly been kind to me, and I have some friends/supportive people there

[–]MagicGainbowKeepin' it real, havin' a feel0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Russell Brand lost his v-card to to one but I can't imagine them turning him away

Historically this is more common than you think even up until relatively recently.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (17 children) | Copy Link

out of curiosity, how attractive are you and are you white?

[–][deleted] -2 points-2 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Arahkne4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Do you realize you're the exception, not the norm?

[–][deleted] -2 points-2 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Arahkne4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You're a funny guy. You should stick to making jokes and stay out of debates.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

that explains a lot

[–][deleted] -2 points-2 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

nah it's cool. I have "game" or whatever you call it when I want to. But being short and unattractive definitely means I need to work harder, and when good looking guys say "just be yourself", it's kind of a slap in the face, because they don't even know it's a different world.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

This

Natural alphas laugh at RP because it comes naturslly to them, no shit. TRP was set up by betas who haf the balls to play in the big leagues

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

I wouldn't say that. I have yet to meet a natural alpha who didn't have to stumble and pay his own dues. The main difference is that natural alphas pay their dues in their teenage years, and TRPers pay their dues in their 20s and 30s. I might be a little more hard core than many even in TRP, I've committed months of my life exclusively to pickup with people who consistently hook up with models and "10s". These are people who are very accomplished in their own careers so they aren't some pushover losers. All the best people have put in periods of work on this. There is no such thing as a natural. Maybe very good looking people without game who still get laid. But no such thing as a natural if you are taking sabot people who consistent hook up and date the most beautiful women.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I won't entirely disagree although this is fairly obvious as it just means they went through the rite of passage to manhood at a younger name.

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

The main difference isn't that it happened younger. It's that naturals learned how to be good with women at the same time period that their identity was forming. So their identity is stable and comfortable with women. Unnaturals even if they get good later, will always have that part of their identity that has internalized that they aren't good enough for women. It's a single but deep difference that shows up in your vibe and colors all your interactions

[–]LUClENSociology of Sex &Courtship0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

This may be a bit of a tangent, but who cares if women have it easier? Isn't part of masculinity overcoming adversity and completing difficult challenges?

[–]Xemnas81[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Unfortunately believe it or not but playing Mulan's Make a Man Out of You and Shia LaBeouf's 'motivational talk' on repeat does not actually cure the pain of 22 years of lonely incelibacy and rejection bro, though I have tried

[–]andrewisgoodYou are a fountain of misinformation0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm not gonna go through all that with work and such, so I'll go with the main response.

The answer is, ehh, yes and no. Though you probably got a bunch of these answers and I'm late to the party. Yes, they have it easier in that they get contacted by more people, they have more options, etc. The don't have it easier because they have to do with harassment, people not taking the hint that she's not interested, and of course, dick pics. I think I've told a story of like, I was with a girl, and during the after sex pillow talk, she was still on POF and she's like, hey, someone just sent me a dick pic and showed me. She apparently got a lot of them. When I would do online dating, I would ask about crazy experiences and weird guys because that stuff fascinated me.

So, it's a double edge sword. On one hand it's easy, and on another it's tough.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm making it my duty to respond to all worthy.

They don't have it easier because they have to do with harassment

covered that

[–]Bapteaser0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd like to add my two cents...I was in a 9 year relationship with the person I lost my virginity to. We just fought way too much, went for counselling, but in the end, we just were not happy living together so we broke up. We remained friends and though he went on after a 6 month period to date a girl who he just moved in with (she seems nice), and they are working toward a future together, I ended up in a series of "FWB" type relationships (though not MY preference). From a female perspective (especially now that I'm in my early 30s), it seems like a lot of guys are into the idea of dating (see: fucking) multiple women, but not wanting to settle. I'm not gunning for marriage, but I'm a one man kinda woman, and I'd like to be with somebody who has loyalty to me the way I will for him. It can be disillusioning to look around and see a bunch of people settling for momentary stimulation at the expense of real connections, but I think that's the sickness of our society. In chasing our wants, we actively resist the contentment that our souls long for. I do hope that in time, I'll find somebody who is up for the same thing that I am, but I've decided to take a time out from "dating" (fucking) because it just begins to seem so empty and pointless.

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

I think a lot of gals need to accept that guys often talk about gross topics like porn and masturbation. A lot of this shocks many women. One of my childhood friends (32/M) has a DVD of Dragon Ball XXX.

This doesn't mean that they're dogs if they behave like gentlemen in public.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Er…sort of valid but context please?

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

The context is that, I think some women use terms like pervert to disqualify good men because they don't understand male culture very well and why porn does not mean a guy is a philanderer.

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

RedPillers paint a reality, but reality is another. Nobody said it was easy and it's not easier for women. I don't think it's easier for men either. I feel peace when I stop making unnecessary differences between the genders, and I'm only hoping everyone else would as well.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Xemnas81[S] 6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Simpler in what way? That you know you're a loser unless you up your SMV?

[–]sohamster0 points1 point  (18 children) | Copy Link

I think both sexes have challenges in finding a good relationship. Sex is easy for both, with a modicum of effort. The people, that I personally know, having real issues in the 'arena' are making their own problems. I know a woman that spouts the 'no good men' line. She has ridiculous requirements for a mate. He must be a doctor or lawyer (no other profession). 6'2" to 6'5", blond wavy hair (not curly) , blue eyes. The list goes on. She has a caustic personality. She will stay alone. The man I personally know of: very nice looking but hates hygiene. He honestly has green plaque build up on his teeth. His friends ambushed him, got him cleaned up took him out to find a woman. Shock he got dates galore, then went back to his smelly ways and still cries about how shallow women are. My advice is simple. You run into a flake, or someone that is not treating you like a human MOVE ON.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 9 points10 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

Sex is easy for both, with a modicum of effort

Strongly disagree

The people, that I personally know, having real issues in the 'arena' are making their own problems

Are these the only 2 people? Well she'll probably find somebody to fuck soon enough. As for the guy, I think this is a straw man, as most guys complaining about the shallow-ness of women are not so inept as to not take a shower or brush their teeth before a date

My advice is simple. You run into a flake, or someone that is not reading you like a human MOVE ON

The quality of treatment of your partner in an reship is relative to the power differential in a relationship which is determined by projection of high value and tangible evidence of high value. Attraction is amoral, which does not mean I would condone treating someone like shit, but this is why it happens in the most rational terms

[–]sohamster2 points3 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

I know of no normal human that wants sex that is not having sex. Relationships are another story.

[–]Arahkne8 points9 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

You must have an extremely broad definition of "abnormal".

[–]sohamster0 points1 point  (14 children) | Copy Link

In what way?

[–]Arahkne8 points9 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

I'm having a hard time believing you're serious...

How do you reconcile your statement with the thousands of people on this very website - both those who agree with your political beliefs and those who do not - who find it difficult or impossible to have sex with another person?

Do you consider anyone who's in any way unattractive "abnormal"?

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

I know a lot of unattractive people having sex. I don't personally know any one that wants sex that is not having sex. I am not trying to be judgemental. Good relationships are harder, but I have never met anyone that couldn't have sex. Not all the people I know are that good looking.

[–]Arahkne9 points10 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

While your experience has value, it is hardly the end-all be-all of human interaction. I know plenty of men wanting sex (and relationships) who can't seem to find it, and those are just the men I know personally.

[–]sohamster0 points1 point  (10 children) | Copy Link

OK, these men. Do they have interests where women might be in attendance? Do they socialize? Do they actively seek out social connections? Is it that they can't have sex, or is it they can't have sex with the type of woman they fantasize about? Are they expecting a woman to initiate? Are they just shy? Being shy and introverted can be a factor?

[–]Arahkne7 points8 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Yes, yes, yes, the former, no, no. The traits of my particular social group aren't the issue here. I merely mentioned them as a counterexample to your previous claims.

Additionally, consider that you're basically stating that men need to... * have specialized interests * be outgoing and extroverted * have the will to initiate (and do the lion's share of the work) * not be shy just to be "normal" and have sex. Women face none of these requirements, making it de facto less easy for men.

[–]thereddespair0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

the more men put weight on a womans twat, the more they make it easier for the woman - applies and extends to the bigger picture.

[–][deleted] -1 points-1 points | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Xemnas81[S] 10 points11 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

And we have our first contender for 2d) lower your standards (please re-read the OP)

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Not 'lower them'. Just don't make them ridiculously high. Try not savagely attacking the physical imperfections of every single woman who can't meet the 'perfect 10' criteria.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 7 points8 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Self-evidently that's lowering them, because if I admitted to being rejected by 6/10s when I'm also a 6/10, you would tell me to hit a 5/10.

I can also tell you how my ex, who I was absolutely in love with warts and all, but objectively to outsiders would indeed probably be a 6-7/10, dread gamed me with her hot guy friend, an 8-9/10 in my books (lean muscles, cheekbones, hilarious, on target for a First degree, popular with women, etc.). I've plastered this all over Reddit, it made no sense for my ex to stay with me any longer in the face of an ostensibly better option so I broke frame and went full beta (I have an anxiety disorder and prone to depression so can't choose when I get paranoid, but RP is how I justified it) Result: dumped. Still talks to him, vehemently denied they were dating (she's got strict Asian parents which was her reason for dumping me and valid, I believe her there). Cute thing is she knows he has massive appeal to not just her but other girls around him, yet can't explain why. Internally raging and walked

Ergo hypergamy

I don't think I have ever made a move on a girl significantly out of my league, I've barely made a move on a woman at all

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Cute thing is she knows he has massive appeal to not just her but other girls around him, yet can't explain why.

If a 10/10 were flirting with you, would you turn it down? Even though you "know knows she has massive appeal to not just you but other guys around you?"

[–]Xemnas81[S] 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Fuck's sake. This is my ex's friend we're talking about. I know rationally you wouldn't but it still hurts man

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

You're trying to make a point about women, but the point applies to all humans. Of course she's irrationally attracted to the guy, just like men are irrationally attracted to hot girls who barely give them any attention.

I agree that women usually have it easier when it comes to getting attention, but I don't think they have it easier when it comes to getting what they want.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Haha yeah that's fine man, just trying to explain that's one of the most raw aspects of TRP for me. You don't swallow the red until you've felt it in your life, and that usually breaks your heart the first time…

Anyway, I think I've covered this above re: women still having more options for commitment

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

You're not functioning in the real world. You're living in an entirely artificial construct where you're assigning numeric values to everything and everyone.

[–]Xemnas81[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm tempted to call this out as either Code Brown (Subscription to Extremist Ideology) or Code White (You Have Issues).

Charge of Fanaticism (Code Brown) – The Brown Shirts Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of subscribing to an intolerant, extremist ideology or of being devoted to an ignorant viewpoint. Examples:

“You’re one of those right-wing wackos.” “You’re an extremist” “You sound like the KKK.” “… more anti-feminist zaniness”

Response: One should remember that the truth is not decided by the number of people subscribing to it. Whether or not certain ideas are “out of the mainstream” is besides the point. A correct conclusion is also not necessarily reached by embracing some middle ground between two opposing viewpoints (i.e., the logical fallacy of “False Compromise”).

Charge of Instability (Code White) – The White Padded Room Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of being emotionally or mentally unstable. Examples:

“You’re unstable.” “You have issues.” “You need therapy.” “Weirdo!”

Response: In response to this attack, one may point to peer-reviewed literature and then ask the accuser if the target’s mental and/or emotional condition can explain the existence of valid research on the matter.

So you are in part correct. It's not like I can objectively say, he is an 8, she is a 7. I can however objectively say:

  • more people deem him/her attractive than that guy/girl in the corner [do not straw man me about wallflowers pls]

  • s/he has had more relationships/dates/sexual partners than that other guy/girl

  • by society's standards, his/her looks/status/behaviour is deemed more attractive than that of him/her

  • ergo in the social/sexual market, we can conclude that many people would qualify him/her as 'objectively' higher value to said other guy/girl in regards to being an eligible bachelor/bachelorette

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

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