8
9

New Subreddit Rules**MOD NEWS** (self.RedPillWomen)

redpillschool~30, LTR 2.5 Years が 投稿 - stickied post

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]SkylarWyte 6ポイント7ポイント  (15子コメント)

Do not give advice to women which is primarily intended to benefit men, or is based around male desires without considerations for women's desires or goals. Male users will be scrutinized more closely for compliance, but this rule applies to both sexes.

Great. So are you going to show us that this is true and we can feel safe in this space and supported by you and the mods by deleting Whisper's comment here, where he tells women they have no choice but to be plates? ('The question isn't the whether you are ever a plate... that's unavoidable.')

That is obviously not true, as many of the women around here, myself included, have never been plates. I'm LDS, and sex before marriage was not an option for me or my husband, so saying being a plate is 'unavoidable' is simply factually inaccurate, and spreading ideas like that around only serves to help men who want to trick women into being plates by telling them it is the only way to get commitment. What possible benefit could lying to them about how being a plate is 'unavoidable' provide to women? Absolutely none. It's advice designed to benefit men at the cost of women.

I really hope you will prove to us that you actually have our best interest at heart by taking action on this matter. Whisper's advice hurts women. We see those studies about how much harder it is for high number women to pair bond. He is lying to women and saying they must do that to themselves, ruin their bonding ability, because there is "no other way." Frankly it's shameful.

[–]redpillschool~30, LTR 2.5 Years[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm away from my computer at the moment so I'll weigh in tomorrow, haven't had a chance to read this thread you linked to.

The short answer is I agree, being a plate is neither advantageous nor inevitable.

I'll follow up tomorrow.

[–]SkylarWyte 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thank you. I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to consider the issue :)

[–]CrazyHorseInvincibleTRP MOD[M] -2ポイント-1ポイント  (12子コメント)

"I don't like this."

is not the same as

"This is damaging."

I've read the linked article, and it's clear that two of you are using different definitions of the same terms. Now, the term "plate" might rub you the wrong way, but when he says

Even if he wants a relationship as badly as you do, it takes time to build.

and then says:

So, at risk of arguing semantics, "plate" isn't a status you avoid altogether. It's a danger zone you get out of as quickly and irreversibly as you can.

and then says:

Now, deliberately staying a plate, well, that's insane. Women who do that are working against their own long-term happiness, and it doesn't make any sense to discuss that here, any more than it makes sense to discuss tactics for how to shoot yourself in the foot.

He is clearly talking about something different than being content to be a fuckbuddy.

His language may not have gone over well with people, but I am not comfortable removing stuff based on tone when it is neither a personal insult directed at anyone, nor an insult directed at anyone in the community. The problem with censoring tone is that not only does it remove things that shouldn't be removed, it also causes people to self-censor, because they fear rubbing someone the wrong way.

We are here to stop people from giving advice in bad faith, not from having disagreements or arguing semantics.

Feel to state your disagreement with him, and/or downvote.

[–]SkylarWyte 8ポイント9ポイント  (11子コメント)

His language may not have gone over well with people, but I am not comfortable removing stuff based on tone when it is neither a personal insult directed at anyone, nor an insult directed at anyone in the community. The problem with censoring tone is that not only does it remove things that shouldn't be removed, it also causes people to self-censor, because they fear rubbing someone the wrong way.

"Lie" is a not a "tone." Whisper presented being a plate as a necessary step to building a relationship that all women must endure. And that is simply untrue. If it were true, my marriage wouldn't exist because we never went through a "casual no strings attached sex" phase.

Even if he wants a relationship as badly as you do, it takes time to build.

So, at risk of arguing semantics, "plate" isn't a status you avoid altogether. It's a danger zone you get out of as quickly and irreversibly as you can.

Now, deliberately staying a plate, well, that's insane.

I didn't think he meant women should aspire to be plates. What he is saying is very clear... There is no way to build a relationship without being a plate for some period of time. It takes time to get to know a man, and build a bond, and during that time you must be having sex with him. That's not true. Nor does it help the female sexual strategy to spread that lie around. It helps the male sexual strategy, because women will submit to being plates out of a false belief they have no other options.

[–]LuckyLittleStarLil'Star 0ポイント1ポイント  (8子コメント)

What he is saying is very clear... There is no way to build a relationship without being a plate for some period of time.

Even if he is saying that, I don't think it is against the rules. If you read the linked article it states:

Although commitment-free sex for women does not require much in the way of strategy, commitment-free sex may very well be part of a strategy.

Plate theory is allowed, as long as it with the intent of serving a long term goal. If Whisper's comment was:

There is no way to build a relationship without being a plate for some period of time.

He is saying in order to get a relationship, you must be a plate first. If you disagree with him, you are free to rebuttal this, using logic and rational thinking. If you disagree that this is an appropriate strategy, tell him, so that other users can be well informed. This is now a place where there is an exchange of ideas, and disagreement isn't silenced, but rather discussed. The intent of this is to foster a learning environment, so people can be presented with both arguments.

[–]SkylarWyte 6ポイント7ポイント  (7子コメント)

He is saying in order to get a relationship, you must be a plate first.

Exactly. He's using his respected position of authority to tell women there is no way for them to avoid being plates, which is promoting male sexual strategy to the detriment of the women here because what he is saying is simply not true.

There is no need for logic or rational thinking to refute the claim that all women must be plates to secure a partner, just eyes! There are so many women here, myself included, who have never been plated. Unless you are trying to say that on my wedding night I was my husband's plate, lol.

If he were saying something like that a woman who has already given herself to a stadium full of guys before she finds the pill might have to work her way up from plate, and providing her with tools to do that, that would be discussing plates in a way that is beneficial to women. Claiming that all women MUST start as plates is not that. It's a lie, that promotes male sexual goals to the detriment of young women. That is damaging to them. Because of what I already said, about pair bonding. It's taking a woman who has not already given herself to too many men, and convincing her she must if she wants love. A really old, sad trick.

[–]redpillschool~30, LTR 2.5 Years[S] -1ポイント0ポイント  (5子コメント)

Claiming that all women MUST start as plates is not that.

I think the miscommunication here is suggesting that he's prescribing platehood rather than analyzing the beginning of relationships. Perhaps there's a better word for it than "plate." Early-relationship risk is what he's describing.

I understand your position and I tend to agree, if there is a way to secure commitment without having sex, this is a valid and less risky approach. It obviously worked well for you, and for many others. This approach puts more risk on the man than the women. (which an optimized sexual strategy for women should do).

The reason there's even a conversation taking place is that there is some debate here about how much of the risk will need to start to shift from men to women as the market changes, and I think that's what Whisper is getting at, certainly he is not saying women should strive to become plates- nor would that topic be allowed on this forum.

That is damaging to them. Because of what I already said, about pair bonding. It's taking a woman who has not already given herself to too many men, and convincing her she must if she wants love. A really old, sad trick.

This is absolutely why there's such a risk involved. I agree entirely.

I'm going to make it clear here and now that Whisper's approach is clearly more about asking the questions than it is actionable advice right now, and that as a subreddit we don't have an official position on what he's saying, rather we're welcoming him to continue the discussion so that some answers can be found.

The lesson we learned on /r/theredpill was that sexual strategies of years past no longer work today. What worked for our fathers don't work for their sons. What worked even ten years ago seems to have changed. Feminism is changing the landscape in ways we can't completely measure today.

Sex without commitment is risky and a bad idea for women.

To compare to the male side, a majority of our options are risky and bad ideas for men. Increasingly so compared to the options of our fathers. The discussion must continue to evolve.

We're learning now what needs to be compromised to find success, and what doesn't.

[–]SkylarWyte 2ポイント3ポイント  (4子コメント)

I'm going to make it clear here and now that Whisper's approach is clearly more about asking the questions than it is actionable advice right now, and that as a subreddit we don't have an official position on what he's saying, rather we're welcoming him to continue the discussion so that some answers can be found.

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I appreciate that. I think I would have more faith in this if he seemed to be listening and adapting his opinion based on what the women in that thread are telling him, but he's not. I decided to look through his contributions to this sub more last night, because CrazyHorseInvincible said Whisper has "known intentions, with heavy investment in the community" and I thought maybe knowing more about Whisper would change my mind and help me understand his true intentions towards us. What I found did not make me feel any better. Specifically, here he says:

"Keep in mind that I don't really have any particular need for this or that woman to learn anything.

That's up to them.

They can either learn what men like, and have husbands, or rationalize and have cats.

I'm just here to say what I have to say, and it don't make no nevermind to me.

It's very hard for me to believe we are really trying to find some answers when he is convinced his path for women is right, and he simply dismisses any disagreement.

I think that maybe with my religious beliefs this community is just no longer a good fit for me and that's OK! No hard feelings. It's the nature of change :-) I do believe that both an examination of the hard facts of what works out well for women, and my religious beliefs align, but with this direction towards letting men come in and say being a plate is unavoidable... They just don't anymore. But I do sincerely appreciate you taking the time to look into the issue I put forward, thank you.

[–]redpillschool~30, LTR 2.5 Years[S,M] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think it's a bit of a stretch to expect a forum that welcomes both religious and non-religious views to be discussed to cater strictly to only one of those views. Your views are more than welcome, but we won't be silencing people who don't break the rules simply because you disagree.

I'm sorry if you feel that means you should go. For the record, anybody else reading this- her views and viewpoint are more than welcome and should surely be discussed.

[–]SkylarWyte 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think it's a bit of a stretch to expect a forum that welcomes both religious and non-religious views to be discussed to cater strictly to only one of those views.

Oh yes, of course! Sorry if you felt I was saying the community should change for my religion, I absolutely do not believe that.

[–]fernandflower28 | Married | 7 years[M] 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think that maybe with my religious beliefs this community is just no longer a good fit for me and that's OK! No hard feelings. It's the nature of change :-) I do believe that both an examination of the hard facts of what works out well for women, and my religious beliefs align, but with this direction towards letting men come in and say being a plate is unavoidable... They just don't anymore.

There's a difference between allowing men to post here, and endorsing what they say. In this case, Whisper is not an Endorsed RPW contributor, so his contributions should not be considered an official stance of the sub.

The widening of acceptable content for this forum gives us many interesting avenues for discussion and exploration, and I hope you'll continue to share your thoughts here :0)

[–]SkylarWyte 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

In this case, Whisper is not an Endorsed RPW contributor, so his contributions should not be considered an official stance of the sub.

I understand, thank you. That is good to know.

[–]CrazyHorseInvincibleTRP MOD[M] -8ポイント-7ポイント  (0子コメント)

"Lie" is a not a "tone."

Now that borders on personal insult of another user. Be polite.

Whisper presented being a plate as a necessary step to building a relationship that all women must endure.

You interpret what he wrote as "You must provide NSA sex, then build a relationship."

It can also be interpreted as "when you are in a new sexual relationship, the level of attachment is low, and this is platelike, regardless of what both people call it".

I come to this conclusion by reading his other comments in context.

I'm not comfortable removing material from a user of known intentions, with heavy investment in the community, because there is a possible negative interpretation of what he said. I am not looking to turn into the old mod team, banning people for unorthodoxy. There would have no reasonable positive interpretation of what he said for me to do that.

I am NOT going to assume someone is acting in bad faith just because he has a penis.