TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

63

Hi my name is Lydia. I'm 15 and in Utah. I'm fairly new to red pill. I do LD debate and I love philosophy and politics. I'm a former feminist but I've come to realize the flaws in feminism. I was introduced to red pill by the guys in my debate club. I've taken it upon myself to get the female perspective and understand red pill further. I am quite confident, I want an ambitious job, and co-dependency or sole dependency is not what I want in a relationship. Is there a way to maintain this and date or be complimentary to an alpha within red pill and not be just a submissive house wife? Thank you for taking the time to this!


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

To some extent RPW is about submission. This is less about "women being inferior" or similar, and more about understanding men, and understanding yourself.

The prevalent lie is that men want sex. Men are very big fans of sex of course, and think it's a great hobby, and some are even slaves to it, like others are to heroin.

But at the end of the day, if all you can offer a dude is sex, then one of three things will happen:

  1. he'll stay because he doesn't think he can do any better. Woo hoo.
  2. he'll realize that wait a minute, there are lots of attractive women out there, and they keep making new ones!
  3. he'll never approach you in the first place.

The things that men actually want, that they will fight and murder and work and protect and plan and die for, are respect and loyalty. These are not fashionable terms these days; do not assume you know what they mean. They are both easier and harder to give than you might think.

Warren Farrell said that men are often regarded as "human doings" rather than "human beings." That is---they are only valued inasmuch as they can produce/perform. That's a good life if they're performing well---it's a bad one if they're not. Even in high school, a boy who finds a sport where he can perform at a high level will find his stock rising, and suddenly he'll get female attention where he didn't before.

A natural consequence of women and girls focusing on high-status, high-performing men is what you might have heard called the apex fallacy, in which women think (maybe only implicitly) that all mens' lives mirror those of the men they admire, associate with, and sleep with. Who can we see, after all, but those we're looking at?

The thing is, though: male status and performance are variable. Today's alpha is tomorrow's beta, and vice versa. The washed-up high school jock is a cliche, as is the unassuming beta who later finds fame and fortune.

What happens to a man when he goes through one of those transitions? Pretty much the same thing that happens when a woman loses/gains a lot of weight, and learns to take care of herself/let herself go: the opposite sex starts acting very differently toward them than before.

That sort of thing can make a man very cynical. Just as women might see men as shallow and appearance-focused, men might see women as fair-weather and two-faced.

Into this bitter mental stalemate strides The Believer.

The Believer believes in him. She thinks he's the best thing since sliced bread. When he's up, she knew it all along and for that matter it's been too long coming. When he's down, she's certain it's unjust or temporary.

That is the kind of woman that attracts, or inspires a man into becoming, a bullet-taking, hard-working, keen-planning, joke-making, constantly-horny badass. It might even scare her what he would do for her if necessary.

It's not easy to be the Believer. It's easy to believe in a man who's doing well: it's right in front of your eyes! It's another thing altogether if he's doing poorly, or is sick, or addicted, or fearful, or ___. Believing then is an act of faith, an act of will. It means staying precisely when you're scared and want to run away.

It's a gift, and an act of trust. Sure, a bit of the magic here is that men are people too and can sometimes be unsure of themselves, and a cheerleader can encourage them forward. But another, and probably stronger, aspect is that men take acts of trust very, very seriously. Men live and die on respect, so trust is seen as a gift, and one that deserves and even demands repayment. Repaying that trust is an act of justice, which (again) men take very seriously.

This works in the reverse as well---men take distrust very personally. This explains a lot of the divide over #MeToo, with women saying, "I'm scared of you," and men saying, "Then fuck you!" with both sexes hurting the other more deeply with their words than they think they are.

Here's the thing: you don't know that you want an ambitious job, because you've never had one. You want something in your head that you've called "an ambitious job," but you don't know whether that corresponds with reality, and you don't know what the alternatives are. This isn't meant to be condescending, but rather cautionary. It's OK to be undecided, and learn.

[–]AbysswalkerGuts17 points18 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This post should be stickied

[–]ManguZa1 Star7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Great post, thx.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's not easy to be the Believer. It's easy to believe in a man who's doing well: it's right in front of your eyes! It's another thing altogether if he's doing poorly, or is sick, or addicted, or fearful, or ___________. Believing then is an act of faith, an act of will. It means staying precisely when you're scared and want to run away.

I love this! Beautifully phrased.

[–]Popeman794 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Holy shit this is spot on. You understand men perfectly.

Please keep on teaching.

[–]NeatWhiskeyThief1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thank you for this. It explains a lot about my own relationship dynamic and how my husband responds when I get anxious and express “doubts” about things.

[–]Ihatemoi1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Good job for inspiring these kind of female values and perspectives. I am a newly converted RP male and just came over to see what was going on in here, and I must say, this is beautiful.

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

That’s very true, at the end of the day I can work for an ambitious job and end up loving it. Then I can pinpoint the sacrifices and I’ll decide if it’s worth it. If I end up hating it I can always change directions. Is it possible to have that believer aspect go both ways. Like believe in each other and encourage and validate one another?

[–]Saigunx0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

This was mind blowing, thank you.

[–]videlachkadua0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Love it. Respect is key for man.:)

[–]DeIphinium5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

What happened to the post? I was in the middle of reading it, but couldn't finish because I had class :((

[–]LuckyLittleStarModerator | Lil'Star[M] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

OP deleted it.

[–]rookebay1 Star29 points30 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I think that “submissive” as a bad word is the overwhelming problem I’ve had with feminism. (College student where radical feminism is at every corner). I also think feminism has little to do with celebrating femininity and that it actually does a disservice to women (and men) to devalue our incredibly powerful feminine energy.

I think if you look through the rpw “strategies” in community info you will find that submission does not mean codependency or that a woman is unequal in value to a partner (or men in general). Just different? Like yin and yang.

Applying rpw concepts to my life has actually made me feel more competent and confident in my own abilities. It’s also made me feel enriched and more valuable in life and in my relationship.

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

Alright I’ll take a look, thank you!

[–]girlwithabikeEndorsed Contributor11 points12 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

A lot of teens are ambitious. It is an age where you plan to change the world, or at least your own part of it.

This is the idealism of youth but most people do not have a career that fulfills all of their needs. Even if you like your job (and I like mine) there will be drudgery, people you don't like, stress, monotony. Unlike school, the people you work with aren't your friends (even if you get along or have a friend or two). You may progress quickly at times but there will be years where you are settled into a particular job and company. And at a some point, a lot of people look and say "ok, what else is there".

For some, "what else" does come in the form of career moves. However many woman (and men!) eventually decide they want a partner and kids to round out their lives.

You can have a career or a job that you love. I'd simply caution you not to put all your eggs in that basket. If you are somehow extraordinary, and have the ability to do extraordinary things with your life, then maybe a career can be sufficiently fulfilling. Most of us are average. Even those who are above average are still not extraordinary. My husband filed 6 patents over 2 years, he's an actual rocket scientist. His job is still paperwork and people he doesn't care for, tedious tasks with some really interesting work thrown in.

RPW comes in because what we talk about here gives you a tactical advantage with men. Submission is a strategy that works. It's not about equality or being better or less. We consider what men want and how being a good partner means giving your partner what they need.

I'd say most of the women on RPW either work or have worked at some point. Yes, there are some stay at home moms or wives, but that's not really what RPW is about. There are plenty of bachelors and advanced degrees. I think you'd be surprised by the women here. Your perception of us is based on what feminism has told you. You are still working to shake off a lot of that.

Can you find the man you want combined with the career you want... that is all on you. As a rule, women do not date someone lower status than themselves. As a rule, if you are focusing on your career, you are likely to not go looking for a partner until later in the game. These things will make it more difficult. Nothing is impossible. Learn what men are looking for and cultivate those parts of yourself. Just as you have expectations of a masculine alpha type and that is ok, most men have expectations of a soft feminine woman to come home to and that is ok.

Set some realistic expectations for yourself. Shadow someone in your chosen field if you can. Learn what your day to day life would look like at 30 and then decide what level of focus you should give to a career and what level of focus you should give to finding a partner then cultivating and maintaining the relationship.

Finally, don't be sure that 16 year old you knows what 26 or 36 or 46 year old you will want.

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

Oh 100%, I definitely see the value in considering all options and not blocking any off. Thank you!

[–]Wolfssenger38 points39 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Well, let's start by recognizing that you're sixteen. To assert that you're mentally matured enough to correctly judge what you will want out of life is generous at best and dangerous at worst.

That being said, it is possible to find an alpha as a career woman, but much more difficult to maintain.

This lies in that you're going to be reducing your pool of eligible men to an infinitesimal size as women only date up, and being a proper career woman will necessarily make you less feminine as to be truly successful in a business sense not only must you work constantly, but you must be in and act out a masculine state of mind. I say this because it will invariably lower your rmv. As I say to many women "the last thing a man wants to come home to after a grueling day of fighting tooth and nail with other men is a woman emulating a man". You can certainly try to switch modes, but you can't switch everything off that is ingrained in you daily.

Furthermore, any kids you want to have will be raised by nannies and are highly likely to subconsciously resent their absentee parents. It's a physical impossibility to be a competitive career woman with an equally or more competitive husband and have enough time to spend with your children.

TRP is simply an extension of nature, and evolution has shaped us efficiently for specific roles. Thanks to liberalism, you can be a man if you really want to(pursue a career/status/etc.), but you're not going to find any tools beyond anecdote for making that work, and there's a sizeable portion of satisfaction statistics that suggest nothing other than that it's a bad idea for most if not all but the most anomalous women.

Lastly, I'd like to address the phrase "just a house wife". This is not a path you should precede with "merely". Modern women have lost sight of what makes them valuable aside from their reproductive capability and poor emulation of men. The keeping of homes, communities, families and relationships is vital to the survival of humanity and society. Without somewhere to return to, men are forced to fight to and die in exhaustion battling the chaos that surrounds us. It is the duty of women to consolidate and cultivate that conquered territory into something that is beautiful, ordered and rejuvenating. I think a lack of this is what serves to breed much of the chaos in modern society, as well as the wariness and resentment a lot of men feel towards women.

It may just be that you are the 0.1% and are truly suited to act as a man. If you believe so and can amply support that claim, so be it. But if not, society already has enough men, but we're in a drought of real women. If you're anything but that tiny percentage, a more traditionally feminine path will likely leave you happier and benefit society and the community around you more. It doesn't necessitate you be a SAHM, but perhaps codependency or a part time/work from home job, or even just working in a field or manner that does not necessitate you become a man for 14 hours out of the day is a better future than you think.

[–]nowyougotdryballs7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Kinda nailed it right here

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

Wow, thank you for taking the time to respond. I realize my error in the way I used house wife. I meant more as something I don’t want to be as I don’t exhibit many of the qualities of one but it’s totally fine if someone else wants to. I was curious about why I should change my goals based off of the over abundance of men or people filling traditional male rolls in society(I tend to agree with individualism). As far as kids go, if I decided not to have kids or maybe only one, then wouldn’t that solve the problem. One more question, why is it presumed that said man would either come home to arguing or I’d have to almost switch personas. Why isn’t there a natural switch between personal and professional life regardless of gender. Thank you again btw.

[–]Wolfssenger5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Regarding the change, it's because who you are fundamentally doesn't change. You might be able to force it with some conditioning, but if you're not going to put up with stupid ideas being put forward at work(critical to success), then you're not going to put up with what you think are stupid ideas at home. A lot of other things can follow the same strain. You can certainly try to condition yourself to do so, but I can't speak to the success of that and suspect some congitive dissonance may result.

If you're committing to this kind of life I'd urge you not to have children. If you're not going to be around to raise them, it's better they not come into the world at all than come in emotionally crippled.

Yes, I realize classical liberalism and individualism is all the rage. Do whatever you want and all that. I agree to an extent. But it's important you realize what you're aiming at.

This path is that of sacrificing relationships besides maybe a childless romantic relationship with little time spent in it due to work to attain stature, wealth, recognition and perhaps if you're really dedicated, a contribution to humanity. These are fine goals, but know that they will come at the cost of 80-90 hour work weeks, and no one but your partner to keep you in old age, as well as no lineage or kids(unless you opt to bring emotionally damaged and inevitably distant ones into the world).

You must understand that I am cautious because I cannot operate under the assumption that you are part of an infinitesimal minority. You mentioned yourself you're an ex feminist and part of the dogma is to brainwash young women into wanting to be men. As such, I see it as reasonably probable this is a residual effect. Doubly so considering you are so young, and young minds are woefully susceptible to moulding.

My advice to you would be to compile evidence both for and against the notion that you are part of the small subset of women who are essentially men in temperament and desire. If you can assess somewhat objectively that you are likely to be in that group, continue down your path. Though I'd urge you to check again every few years. You're very young, you will change as well as your mind. Ultimately, follow whatever path will bring you the most satisfaction whilst contributing to society. And yes, both masculine and feminine paths contribute greatly.

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

That’s very good advice and things I’ll definitely keep in mind. Thank you!

[–]yungboi342 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Completely agree about not viewing a housewife as a negative. Great response

[–]nowyougotdryballs5 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

What is it about feminism that ultimately turned you off?

[–]lydia_cat_lady[S] 31 points32 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

The technical definition doesn't bug me rather than the moment as a whole. I don't like the unwillingness to except and address men's issues and the misinterpretations of pay gap statistics. I definitely like aspects of feminism and I'm not anti women by any regards but the Amy Shumers of the world have given me enough reason to not want feminist as a title.

[–]succulove293726j18 points19 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Word sister. It’s kinda hard being in the 25 age bracket right now. Almost every girl is a feminist just because they literally think it means “I support woman”. It’s hard to bring up the problems within the group without getting looked at and sometimes the setting isn’t right for me to get all political on them so I just shrug and move on.

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

Oh for sure! I'm so thankful for my debate friends who actually understand the issues but my non debate friends immediate reactions are just oh why do you hate your gender when that's so far from the truth. If you don't mind me asking what are your major reasons for not calling yourself a feminist?

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

Guy here. Please feel free to take my opinion with a pinch of salt. My opinion is that we should be egalitarian, not feminist. Care about the causes of the all the down trodden and the humans who may have a tricky time in certain circumstances. It's a human, rather than gender-biased cause.

[–]pearlsandstilettosModerator | Pearl[M] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Do not announce your gender...From now on, men will be issued an automatic 2 day ban if they fail to follow the rules. It is cumbersome for moderators to repeat the same instruction throughout the day.

[–]Kara__El4 Stars11 points12 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Many of us have fulfilling careers and advanced degrees. I, myself, have a master's degree and work full time as a teen librarian. Honestly, being so on top of things at work all of the time, makes it even more pleasing to hand over some of the control when I get home. You don't have to choose between one extreme or the other. You can take the middle ground. If something here makes sense for you, that's wonderful, and if something else doesn't, you don't have to scrap the rest.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Adding to this - I all have a master's degree and work in an school environment with other men with advanced degrees. After RPW, I realized that I don't have to keep up in certain ways (because my position is with the children's department, theirs are with the high school students).

I am respected as the nurturing sweet educator (who still achieves!), while the men know that they are much more disciplinarian, authoritarian, competitive in their goals. I am also the one that manages for our specific department - the one who schedules, coordinates, liaisons - I keep everything running tightly. The men are the ones setting goals, directions and enforcing standards.

This is an example of having complementary skills and demeanors, and this is all in the workplace.

[–]Kara__El4 Stars0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

I actually stepped down from a management position, at which I was apparently awesome, because I hated it and found myself on a path to one day be a branch manager. If I didn't leave, I might not have been able to leave. I realized that you can be too ambitious.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I realized that you can be too ambitious.

I completely agree, and I have an interesting story about this.

My former department head (who left last year) was a slim, petite woman who was extremely well-mannered and well-manicured. Feminine in appearance, wore business skirts, heels, polished her fingernails, articulate in speech. She was organized, diplomatic, courteous, soft-spoken, but she couldn't get her way, often, with the male managers at work and with our male supervisor. She also had a difficult time managing our male staff.

Our new department head is the complete opposite in every way. She's extremely obese (not just slight padding, but BMI 40), has zero sense of feminine appearance, swears in front of everyone, is boyish in her speech, quick to lash out in anger, lacks manners in certain areas. HOWEVER, she is doing a magnificent job leading the team. The men listen to her, they treat her like one of the guys. And I really wonder if it's because she understands exactly how to achieve her ambitions, but with those achievements come certain mannerisms - aggression, hostility, initiation - very masculine mannerisms, but also that they are not physically attracted to her in the least.

I respect her as a person and a department head, but she's also 42 and single. So I can also witness what happens when you continue along the path of high ambition and aggression.

Women have to choose. Choose to either be competitive in the workplace and lose your sense of femininity. Choose to be feminine and accept that you may not climb as high as you would like.

[–]Kara__El4 Stars0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

That's a great example of having to choose. I think I'm in a pretty unique field, in that you can move up and still be pretty feminine and non-aggressive, but certainly not as a branch manager. If you're too adorable, no one will take you seriously. Is that fair? Not really. Do I want to risk making my life a failed example to change the system? Definitely not.

[–]vanBeethovenLudwigEndorsed Contributor0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

If you're too adorable, no one will take you seriously.

That was EXACTLY the problem with my former boss and also my own problems at work. I certainly assert myself in a different way but to many people, I'm not strong enough. And compared to my male colleagues, I don't seem as qualified because I'm always smiling and I have a baby face.

Is that fair? Not really. Do I want to risk making my life a failed example to change the system? Definitely not.

I also don't think it's fair but it's what life is. Both men AND women who are good looking are treated well all the time simply because they're good looking, others who lack in that area must make it up through personality or wit. And women have to acknowledge they have to choose, as we agreed earlier. Choose to be competitive, aggressive, the winner, or choose to be cute and sweet and a good companion, the soft spot.

I will say, though, as someone who has continuously been seen as "the cute adorable one," you can still use it to your advantage. Since we cannot assert ourselves like others, we learn to do so in other subconscious, passive methods. Is it manipulation? Sure, but manipulation is simply another way of aggression and achieving goals - you simply cannot see it as clearly. Use your sweets to your advantage. I make the guys at work do things for me all the time, without yelling or swearing at them.

[–]Kara__El4 Stars1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Since we cannot assert ourselves like others, we learn to do so in other subconscious, passive methods.

Passive? I cry to get out of tickets every time. I'm the local librarian and I'm crying. No cop is going to fine me. Will that work for my husband? Definitely not. Everyone has their strengths and weaknesses.

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

That's a really good point. Thanks!

[–]lensneko11 points12 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

I'm also the same age as you and I used to be a feminazi. It is possible to be RP and have a successful career. I have barely stepped into the real world but my mom is an example of aforementioned type of woman that you seem to achieve. Throughout her life, she has had a successful career while also being humble about it. Being RP is not about your profession but rather your personality traits. Guys aren't looking to marry your degree or achievements, but rather want to marry a pleasant woman who is cooperative.

Seeing that you have debate skills, don't argue with him too much. In a relationship, both parties, since the beginning, have agreed to make each others' lives easier, but it end when one of them taints it with their bad attitude. (kind went off track but okay)

[–]biglybiglytremendous2 points3 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Arguing =/= debate. Telling a woman not to use her skills is extremely harmful, not in a “feminazi” way as you are calling it, but in a self-actualizing way. If you can’t indulge in your pleasures with a partner AND be yourself completely, your relationship is going to suffer, perhaps not at first but at some point down the line, because you will grow to resent not being or becoming who you are inside.

[–]ManguZa1 Star3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

You don't have to share all your hobbies/skills with your SO. If your husband is a boxer, would you tell him that's harmful if he don't do boxe with you?

[–]biglybiglytremendous1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Boxing is not the same as having thoughts, ideas, and opinions to discuss with your partner. Just agreeing with everything he says is ridiculous and only breeds contempt.

[–]lensneko0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

Arguing does not belong in a relationship but a civilized discussion does. If she wants to use her debate skill to her fullest, she should pursue a career that utilizes those abilities.

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

Again, arguing is not the same as discussion, as demonstrated in my previous post. A debate is not an argument. Having a discussion in which one party enthusiastically defends their position with logical and coherent claims—why, that is called a debate! I don’t know any man who would turn down a woman who wanted to debate the merits of a UFC win or loss, debate the reason why their marriage or partnership is better than anyone else’s they know, or, hell, debate why X beer is better than Y beer. These are all debates—“civilized discussions”—and not arguments, which is, again, what I was making clear in my above post and allowing you to understand that suggesting anyone merely agree fully with their mate is harmful and grounds for resentment later on. Anyone who feels like they can’t even remotely express their opinions in a good natured way will ultimately end up hating their partner and not self actualize. Suggesting that someone should not debate is indeed harmful.

[–]lensneko0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

If the relationship involves a lot of debate over petty things, both parties aren't compatible with each other anyways. That shouldn't belong in a relationship. If a woman wanted to express her opinion and thoughts, she should be straightfoward and tell her partner about it. A man seeing his partner is winning a debate most of the time, it could be emasculating for him and according to RPW, it's a recipe for a disastrous relationship.

[–]biglybiglytremendous0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Good luck to you if you follow this template for a long term relationship as you continue to grow and change. I do not think most men are looking for a woman to be a doormat, which is what you seem to be insinuating here. Most healthy, engaging men love a woman to, in good faith, have a lively debate with them about “petty things,” as you call it. This is called banter, idea exchange, and ultimately can work as flirtation. Emasculation would only happen if you are super serious about “winning” and turn every good natured debate into a tournament/championship—which walks the murky path of argument and “no fun” anymore.

I’ve dated every type of man under the sun, and those who did not want me to have my own say and/or felt emasculated by me were flimsy, mentally unstimulated men who were pretending to be something they were not: healthy, secure, confident men.

You do you, but I highly encourage you not to be a doormat; I highly encourage you to entreat yourself with the highest possible achievement level for your mind and body and not let anyone steal your thunder just because you’re afraid you’re going to lose them as a partner or friend or emasculate them for some odd reason. If they are emasculated by a woman sharing her enthusiasm in a good natured conversation, it simply means they were parading to begin with.

[–]JJ33142 Star-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Good luck to you if you follow this template for a long term relationship as you continue to grow and change. I do not think most men are looking for a woman to be a doormat, which is what you seem to be insinuating here.

The person you responded to advocated against "lots of debate over petty things," while at the same time advocating a woman being straightforward in her opinions. I don't see how this equates to a woman being a doormat.

[–]biglybiglytremendous0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

If you are too concerned with emasculating your partner for “winning debates,” I’m sure you’re going to be concerned with how emasculated he feels while giving “straightforward opinions.”

[–]cocodecoca2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

You don't have to totally embrace one thing and reject the other.

I read quite a lot of books about feminism and I've learnt it's ok to be a critic of feminism without throwing the baby out with the bath water. There are some points of feminism I reject and some I embrace.

While I have chosen to start a family in the traditional way, I support that a lot of women want to screw around/focus on their careers until their mid thirties, because that's freedom - freedom to make bad decisions.

You can also support issues that apply to both men and women.

The internet is very polarizing, you don't need to pick a team, you're 16.

You can also have a career and a traditional family. My career has gone better than most of my peers, but it's not as good as it could be because my kids take up so much time. But you can get far enough with kids. There is a cap on how much pressure each individual can take and you might not want to get to the TOP top anyway.

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

For sure! I hate the current climate of picking sides. That’s really cool that you are able to do both. Do you ever feel cheated or like it’s unfair that you can’t put as much effort into your career as your husband if you don’t mind me asking?

[–]cocodecoca0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I do feel like certain things about the modern workplace need to be changed in order to give women a bit of a break, like longer paternity leave (here it's two weeks) and things like guys taking time off work if the kid is sick, not just women. They're entitled to but they often don't.

But let's be real here, this is red pill. My little baby boy needs me to be with him the majority of the time. I can't bear to be away from him for too long. My husband is an active and loving father but he (and a lot of men he knows) go to work to get AWAY from the kids! He spends a lot of time with the baby on weekends and after that he is done. Where as I can't get enough of my bubba. I see it as a natural thing that I'm the one doing the child care. Even though my career has taken a hit, I'm honestly doing better than some men who don't even have a family. When I die I'll feel most fulfilled about my role as a mother, not my role as a business woman. The only reason I work hard is to provide for my son. I want him to have everything he needs. I guess my husband feels that way about me.

Can't imagine how stressed my husband would be if he had to spend all day at home cleaning and looking after babies while I was at work!!

[–]curious_historian7 points8 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I've looked trough your post and you've gotten a lot of good advice. Just keep in mind that you're 16, of course you don't want kids, at this age. Of course you don't feel like housewifing at this age and may see that "career" as failing or undesirable. Thats not only normal, but you should feel that way at your age.

There are however things you should keep in mind for the future. Our desires, goals and more change as we age. A woman in her early 20's may only want to party, have fun and enjoy life to it's fullest, but in late 30's she's panicking over not being married and not having kids, issues she didn't even think relevant or cared for at her younger age.

Take life at your pace and how you want it, but make sure you don't close off your options for good. Building up a reputation as a fun girl may not be that good for finding a proper mate later, there are millions of women out there that a good man can pick from. I understand that being an Ex Mormon all of this may sound alarming to you since you probably left to escape such order of things but don't let the domineering religious feelings get in the way of life.

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

Oh for sure and yeah it’s important that I realize the diff between mormon relationships and red pill. Often the same conclusion but diff evidence. Thank you!

[–]TheSelfGoverned2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Yes. Just make it clear that you aren't submissive in conversation and with your body language. You may turn off some men, but i guarantee you will find some who enjoy your confidence. Just make sure it doesnt bleed over into dominance or control over time, because that will ruin your relationship.

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

That’s a very good point. Thank you!

[–]5400123 1 points [recovered]  (9 children) | Copy Link

Men want a strong life partner they can trust with a briefcase full of money. It's not about being a submissive housewife but a strong life partner. They just don't want to risk marrying a woman who is gonna demascluinize their sons or fly off the handle one night and divorce them because Rachel Maddow so and so insert outrage divorce your husbands fight the patriarchy!!

[–]lydia_cat_lady[S] 1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Ok that makes sense, thank you!

[–]54001234 points5 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I guess the mods here don't like me hinting at a political tangent: but let me clarify what I mean:

If you look up the Oedipus Complex, it's not a hard science thing, but insofar as it is based on a myth it represents something pretty profound about the human mind, particularly the male mind.

Babies are born knowing that their mothers body represents their survival. Their mother is literally the most important thing in their entire psychic domain. This is why if a baby chick sees you when it first opens its eyes it thinks you are mama

But for human males, there comes a time when they realize - not only is mothers body = life, but holy shit... it's actually a woman's body too. So we know people prototype their relationships often around their opposite sex parent, right?

So, for a certain stage in life, and really somewhat ongoing, a male realizes he is competing for mamas attention with dad

Which is sort of the basis for the myth of Oedipus, who ends up killing his father

Now to spare some words I'll just jump to the end here: in order to safely navigate this developmental stage and have a healthy relationship with his masculinity, a young boy needs to realize HOW dad wins moms attention.

A GOOD father does this by displaying that fulfilling ones responsibilities, being caring, generous, etc. He models the archetype of the alpha male and shows his son what it takes , what is REQUIRED to win the love and affection of a woman. Most importantly this means the father MUST win the "competition" for mamas attention, consistently

Men who are weak father figures actually start to feel insecure , needy, and alienated during this phase. These sort of men actually enter into a quasi-sexual power struggle with their own sons. It's the ultimate display of insecurity really and does a huge disservice to the developing boy. More often than not though - this is because the woman herself is giving the kids the power to do this. She harbors resentment against him for something, or fears his influence, or fears he is too hard, or etc.

So what I'm saying here isn't anything "toxic" or bigoted about "having a masculine son."

I'm not just pulling it out of thin air, there is plenty of humanist literature about the Oedipus complex and observation on it. Granted the dynamics of it are somewhat more obscure if you start looking at it from a queer standpoint, but that's not really the point.

Queer or straight, the stereotype of a woman who uses her kids as leverage against her husband is everywhere.

So obviously most men aren't read into developmental psyche and this is mostly subconscious stuff I am talking about. In the same way you wouldn't want to give a child to a man who is aggressive, overbearing, super strict etc - men don't want to have a child with a woman who is going to monopolize his ability to have a man-to-man relationship with their son, or put herself in the middle of everything, or constantly feed into the idea that the young boy can access her attention (and by extension, relate to women) without first proving himself responsible, capable, etc.

I know you aren't like inquiring about uh... starting a family... but these are the sorts of things men think about long term, even if only subconsciously, and I felt like I should explain it given the potential for misunderstanding my comments.

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

No that makes sense thank you for explaining that. Do you think there are alpha men who don’t want kids?

[–]Tjaard09 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

Plenty of people don't want kids, if that's important to you make it clear early on in a relationship. Some men choose to not have kids because it's not for them (childfree), others see divorce laws as financially risky and choose not to primarily because of the laws (mgtow), a lot find a girl they are willing to take that risk with.

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

That’s true, thank you.

[–]LateralThinker133 Stars1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

More than there are strong women who don't want kids. Men don't have the same biological clock as women. Men eventually feel the urge to settle down with a woman; women eventually feel the urge to have kids.

Both of those clocks can be loud or soft, ring early or late, but they generally are present.

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

Alright thanks!

[–]LuckyLittleStarModerator | Lil'Star[M] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Keep your gender in your pants.

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

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