101
102

Red Pill ExampleLet's Talk Facts (self.TheRedPill)

rp_phoenix が 投稿

I enjoy theories as much as the next guy, but I like facts and stats. There's some common themes that TRP and the mainstream media follow (they differ obviously), so I'll let the facts speak for themselves.

Marriage

Never Get Married. Commonly preached on TRP. At best, it's the likeliest way to ensure monogamy and stability for your child. At worst, she's left with half your income and primary custody of your child. This article/study goes into good detail about the realities of marriage. The science can be found here. Here are the big takeaways:

Two-thirds of divorces are initiated by women," said William Doherty, a marriage therapist and professor of family social science at University of Minnesota, "so when you're talking about changes in divorce rates, in many ways you're talking about changes in women's expectations.

AKA Hypergamy. There's no need for her to settle with the BB for long, now that feminism has made chronic divorce and riding the CC socially acceptable. She can marry, pop out a kid before The Wall really hits, then leave with his resources and have guys have at it for whatever she has left. Back to the article:

In the United States, researchers estimate that 40%–50% of all rst marriages will end in divorce or permanent separation.56 e risk of divorce is even higher for second marriages, about 60%.

So the odds are slightly in your favor that your first marriage will work out. If you believe that it's worth spending tens of thousands of dollars on a ring, wedding, cost of living together, etc., that's your choice. I'm just presenting the realities of it.

Attraction

I think even cavemen knew that women don't even know what they want. So when Men's Health conducted a survey about what women really want, I was skeptical. However, there are some hoof fundamentals to take away. You can read the full results here. Below are what women found most physically attractive:

  1. Sense of Style 2. Handsome Face 3. Height 4. Muscular Build 5. Fitness

Nothing groundbreaking here if you've read the sidebar and been here long enough. Below is some interesting commentary though.

Women rated traits relating to character and personality much higher than they scored those reflecting physical attractiveness. For example, only 13 percent of women included muscular build as a requisite for hotness, while 66 percent placed moral integrity as a "make me quiver" characteristic.

Yeah ok. If this was true then all the "nice guys" would be drowning in pussy. Again women don't really know what they want. Logically they want a nice guy who'll commit, but they get feelz for the hot guy who's less likely to commit. You guys know this firsthand.

Conclusion

I tried to keep this as brief as possible, but quite simply, TRP is right for the most part. We don't spout this for shits and giggles. Facts back up the conclusions we've come to. Take it for what it's worth.

全 112 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]MisterMisogyny 83ポイント84ポイント  (20子コメント)

For example, only 13 percent of women included muscular build as a requisite for hotness, while 66 percent placed moral integrity as a "make me quiver" characteristic.
while 66 percent placed moral integrity as a "make me quiver" characteristic.

Women only see the top 20% of men. They want a 20% man that has "moral integrity". They want a 20% man (who is already muscular), so they dont need someone who has more muscles than the average top 20% guy. The other 80% dont even exist to them. A non-muscular man does not exist to them, so they dont need more muscles than the top 20% already has.

Just like guys who want a woman that doesnt wear a lot of makeup. They mean that they want a woman who is already beautiful AND doesnt wear a lot of makeup.

[–]1DRMMR76 8ポイント9ポイント  (17子コメント)

How the fuck did this get downvoted?? The 80/20 rule is well established fact on TRP and is backed up by everything from survey and dating site data down to the human genetic record. Roughly 20% of men get the lion's share of the pussy. The top 20% to be exact. This has been true in every period and place in human history where it has been allowed to play out. The only times and places where this has not been true are the few times where legal or social rules made it undesirable to act on.

[–]Kyle2166 1ポイント2ポイント  (15子コメント)

40% of men pass on their genes. 80/20 is wrong, clearly. Even mathematically it doesn't check out. It's more like 60/40. Where the guys below the top 20% but above statistically average are getting some action, but not frequently. Men have on average 6 sex partners. That alone disproves 80/20.

[–]raisins3142 4ポイント5ポイント  (14子コメント)

Even if 40% of men pass on their genes, this does not indicate whom is having the most sex with different women. It only takes a few times having sex to get someone pregnant. Also, what you said does not account for number of kids.

[–]Kyle2166 4ポイント5ポイント  (13子コメント)

80% of women may want to fuck the top 20%, but they clearly aren't if even the statistically average guy is fucking 6 different women in his life. 80/20 just makes no sense, and is frankly an excuse. It's easy to blame your failures on the fact women supposedly only want the alpha chads. They don't, they want above average guys. But above average doesn't mean top 20%.

[–]bonekeeper 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

Just google what "average male" looks like according to OkCupid's statistical analysis of women's rating of men's looks. To women in OKC, only the top >= 20% of males are "average looking or better than average" - the bottom 80% are "below average". Now THAT is a mathematical impossibility... but women.

[–]KV-n 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

Now THAT is a mathematical impossibility

Its absolutely mathematically possible that 99% of something is below average.

[–]Kyle2166 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

OKC and basing conclusions about real life on that site is flawed in of itself. The guys on there very well be uglier if they're resorting to a dating site because of their lack of pussy. The chicks may be uglier too, but I'm sure the thirsty males won't rate them that way.

Also consider the number of men who can't write good bios and can't take good pictures. Women are well trained at taking selfies and pictures with friends. Men? Not so much.

[–]raisins3142 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Want for relationships (actually "want" here means willing to settle for because they can't get the commitment of the best guy they can bed).

Want for casual sex? Women know they can "punch above their weight" by fucking hot guys. However, they can't get these same guys to commit (women used to realize this).

I don't know what planet you are on where you think that slightly above average men are regularly having casual sex and it is common for them to be in friend's with benefits situations. It is uncommon. For most men, their best shot they think is to get in a relationship.

So, they are having sex with a limited number of women.

What often bothers these men is that their girlfriends or wives usually have had sex with many more people than they have.

So, you're just wrong.

As others have pointed out, the average woman find the average men ugly, but the average man finds the average woman attractive.

[–]Kyle2166 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I never said that slightly above average guys (6s) are going to be fucking random chicks regularly. I said they will be getting some pussy, more than 6+ partners. Not to mention that they will also most likely be in relationships where they're getting pussy from the same chick.

If you're a 6, don't expect to be fucking lots and lots of chicks casually. But you can get laid at least semi regularly, it may just be more difficult. 6, btw, is strictly a looks rating.

Hypergamy. Women are less visual though, and if you're a 6 but have good frame, you'll appeal to at least some women.

[–]1ToSeeAndToHear 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

Yes it does, women don't rate men on a bell curve. They don't perceive you as above average until the 80th percentile.

[–]Kyle2166 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

Any evidence of this that doesn't involve an OKC study?

If even the average male is having 6 sexual partners, you can't convince me that women don't notice you until you're in the top 20%. That's simply wrong.

[–]1ToSeeAndToHear 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Everyone who argues the 80/20 split agrees that you still get laid some in the bottom 80%. Just way less often and with way less enthusiasm.

[–]Kyle2166 -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

You literally said "they don't perceive you until the 80th percentile".

[–]matthew8367 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

40% of men pass on their genes. 80/20 is wrong, clearly. Even mathematically it doesn't check out. It's more like 60/40. Where the guys below the top 20% but above statistically average are getting some action, but not frequently. Men have on average 6 sex partners. That alone disproves 80/20.

The difference between the top 20% and the 40% who procreate are that the two have different goals. Chads don't want kids, they don't want marriage, they want casual sex. The 40% likely consist of betas married to post-wall women who just want financial security and Chads who had a hole in their condom. That's where the differences comes from, they're entirely different demographics.

80% of women may want to fuck the top 20%, but they clearly aren't if even the statistically average guy is fucking 6 different women in his life. 80/20 just makes no sense, and is frankly an excuse. It's easy to blame your failures on the fact women supposedly only want the alpha chads. They don't, they want above average guys. But above average doesn't mean top 20%.

For the 6 partner average, take 3 Chads, and 9 betas. Collectively, the Chads have had 68 sexual encounters and the betas have had 4. The average of that is 6 (72 encounters between 12 guys is 6 per guy.). That's what TRP means by 20/80, the top 20% of guys get the top 80% of women, not the top 20% of men procreate with 80% of women.

If even the average male is having 6 sexual partners, you can't convince me that women don't notice you until you're in the top 20%. That's simply wrong.

For a guy to be in the top 20%, you have to more than physically attractive, you're not reading deep enough. After the initial attraction, women will subject you to shit tests (among other things), if you can't pass them, you're not in the top 20%, even if you're the best looking guy the world will ever know. At that point, you're just another beta who doesn't know how to give women what they want. That said, if the opposite is true, you'll never get noticed and even if you can pass shit test after shit test with ease and grace, but you're a fat neckbeard, you'll get dismissed as a creep.

[–]carlton87 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Six is SUPER low, at least in my social circle.

[–]Kyle2166 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Maybe, but it still debunks the claim women don't even look at anyone who isn't a 6'3 top 20% alpha male

[–]360_no_scope_upvote 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

How's it being downvoted? Easy, betas that come here and still don't understand the red pill even though they're here

[–]aanarchist 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

this is why you don't treat women like human beings.

[–]iLLprincipLeS 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

If only that would be the reason, or the main reason. But put simply, women are just inferior to men. Women never evolved, they are emotional creatures, not more than dogs or bonobos.. on a rational level.

[–]Endorsed ContributorVasiliyZaitzev 57ポイント58ポイント  (7子コメント)

Two-thirds of divorces are initiated by women

I think that's low. And if both people have university degrees, female-initiated divorce supposedly rises to 90%.

If this was true then all the "nice guys" would be drowning in pussy.

I repeat, reiterate and say again: "I can't believe she dumped me for that NICE GUY!!"--said no Outlaw Biker or Escaped Mental Patient, EVER.

[–]rp_phoenix[S] 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yep. If you go the Bureau of Labor Statistics, you can see a full breakdown, and you are correct. Here's a link if anybody is interested.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2013/article/marriage-and-divorce-patterns-by-gender-race-and-educational-attainment.htm

[–]raisins3142 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

That would be interesting: plot % of divorces initiated by women against female income.

[–]Endorsed ContributorVasiliyZaitzev 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

IIRC, this was, at one point, done when the EITC was introduced. More $ in the door from a "capturable" source led to a bump in the number of divorces.

[–]vagbutters -2ポイント-1ポイント  (3子コメント)

The only time a woman swings branches is when there's a better opportunity-- either better dick, better money, or she's just tired of the same guy. Still, what you say holds true-- women never want some fat/scrawny effeminate beta loser.

[–]Endorsed ContributorVasiliyZaitzev 16ポイント17ポイント  (1子コメント)

Women do all sorts of crazy shit for no reason. They dump hubby because they remember their young, carefree days of slutting it up with lots of dick chasing them...only to discover that the world at 37 ain't the world when they were 17.

[–]QuietlyLearning 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

the world at 37 ain't the world when they were 17

But the world is the same. The women who don't see how they have changed, through aging and lack of self care, and how their lower beauty won't compete with natural youth and those that do care for themselves.

It always blows my mind when I see groups of older women (35+) and can spot out those who have taken care of their bodies and skin alongside those who have done the opposite.

The ones who tend to take care of themselves also tend to have fulfilling marriages/relationships, more quality material goods, less sexual partners, and a more sound emotional base. This is almost the complete opposite in the women who don't maintain themselves well.

It is almost as if the women who don't value themselves or get caught up in the modern day culture become "feral". They allow their want of enjoyment and novelty to override long term thinking and quality enjoyment.

Quality over quantity. Ask any man who has had lots of women which ones were most enjoyable and odds are the majority will be those who value quality experiences.

[–]Swole_is_life 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's a probability thing. She's not very likely to branch swing when it will leave her in a worse position, but there are never any guarantees.

The best way to put it is that as the positive difference between current guy and possible guy increases, the probability of a branch swing approaches 1.

[–]Endorsed ContributorMattyAnon 36ポイント37ポイント  (9子コメント)

Do Not Marry

The 70% female initiated divorce is on the low side, because women get men to do things for them. Women will make a relationship worse to get the man to initiate the divorce so that she doesn't have to. I'd bet 85% of divorce is really caused by women emotionally checking out.

Asking women why they get divorced is pointless and listening to their answers is stupid. Women only powertalk. What they say is designed to make them feel good, NOT to convey information.

[–]The__Tren__Train 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

Shit this is so true.. A number of my lady friends have literally told me that they started acting differently (became insufferable) because they didn't want to do the breaking up..

Of course they were already totally checked out of the relationship, and were already dating other guys..

Moral or the story? I have no fucking clue, but women can be pretty strange lol

[–]Endorsed ContributorMattyAnon 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Moral [of] the story?

Moral of the story is that the statistics lie, and we can work out in which direction through simple application of "this is the kind of thing that happens".

[–]yourmommysnightmare 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

women get men to do things for them. Women will make a relationship worse to get the man to initiate the divorce

never put 2+2 together on that one

Also, 70% is the overall number; for educated couples (I forget the source) divorce is 90% initiated by the woman.

[–]well-ok-then 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I filed 6 months after she moved out. We went to a couples retreat attempting to reconcile, and left in the middle of it, yelling that it was truly over and she never wanted to see me again. She was never going file paperwork to separate our finances.

[–]Sawagurumi 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

for educated couples... divorce is 90% initiated by the woman.

Perhaps so, but the divorce rate itself is down for college graduates, yes? From the source that OP gave in the comments (http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2013/article/marriage-and-divorce-patterns-by-gender-race-and-educational-attainment.htm)

The probability of divorce for those with a college degree was lower compared with those without a college degree. College graduates were 10 percentage points less likely to divorce.

(the above talking about a 2007 study)

In addition, though the rate of divorce rose to 44.8 percent in the NLSY79 cohort compared with 40.8 percent in the 1950–1955 cohort, the rate of divorce among college graduates fell from 34.8 percent to 29.7 percent.

(talking about the change between the 2007 study and the current one). Note that both studies were about boomers, it would be instructive to now whether GenX/Y are different, but marriage rates certainly are well down and getting lower http://national.deseretnews.com/article/4535/us-marriage-rate-hits-new-low-and-may-continue-to-decline.html and https://realtruth.org/news/070302-002-societylifestyles.html which suggests that men are wising up to the poor deal that marriage now represents, particularly when women want to put off marriage until their 30s, at which point they have lost most of their value.

[–]Sawagurumi 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Almost, it was 90% (in the US). The female initiated rate was 70%, but a study (don't have to hand, will try to find it) found that a further 20%, although initiated by the man, was actually brought about by the woman, by nagging and bitching, by cheating, by abusive behaviour, etc. But then, women are rewarded for getting a divorce, no matter what they did, so why wouldn't they?

[–]Endorsed ContributorMattyAnon 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

But then, women are rewarded for getting a divorce, no matter what they did, so why wouldn't they?

This is the state of marriage today. She is paid to get married, and paid even more to end it.

It's now all a scam run by the marriage and the divorce industry for the benefit of lawyers, venue providers, the church, the state, women and everyone who believe men should be forced to work and to pay for other people.

Count me out.

[–]TheReformist94 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

This sub may want to reconsider whether men rele are the gatekeepers of commitment and if women rele want relationships and commitment. Women are not designed for monogamy.just short term "monogamy" in 1-2 year stretches at best,for provisioning (not sexual attraction) whilst getting alpha cock on the side. It's the female Coolidge effect setting in and the itch that can only be scratched by a new man

[–]Submissively_yours 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is just senseless woman-hating, not based in Red Pill theory. It is established that a woman's ideal is to have a mate that exhibits the correct blend of Alpha and Beta traits. Feminism has fucked up a lot of the balance, glorifying hypergamy among women and beta traits among men. It was not-too-long-ago that a woman would be shamed for having meaningless sex. Now anyone trying to shame her is the immoral one.

The female imperative is commitment because the Wall comes for every woman eventually. Feminism has confused men and women- their roles have almost switched in many cases.

[–]Road2idgaf 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

"Marriage is buying a house for someone you hate"

[–]DoubleTappp 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

"The odds are in your favor that your first marriage will work out".

This doesn't really tell us anything because how many of those marriages that "work out" are actually fulfilling and fruitful? Besides my own anecdotal experience I can't speak to actual numbers but I'm sure out of that percentages of marriages that "last", a significant portion of those are not all they appear to be.

How many high value guys get married and then "stick it out" for no other reason than society has told them it is their responsibility. Being married =/= happiness.

[–]makechangegreatagain 6ポイント7ポイント  (5子コメント)

Women do know deep down what they find attractive but society shames them from expressing it. If a girl expresses they wanna fuck good looking hawt guyz, they get called "shallow" "slut" "whore" etc.. So they express that they desire essentially a guy who is a good moral christian family man type.. Leaving all that other stuff about being good looking and making money out of it.

I think that society does this to prevent most women from being alpha widowed (AKA emotionally ruined and incapable of marriage). All women want to fuck hot dudes, but only the top % will be able to keep the commitment of the alpha.

Society does the same shit to guys too. We're called "shallow" if we express that we want to fuck good looking women who don't look like beached whales. This is because a good looking women will emotionally and more than likely financially ruin the average beta bob in white new balance sneakers. Thus ruining his confidence because he'll never win a woman as good as her again.. Only the top percentile of alpha men have the game and resources to wife up a hot HB9 piece of ass. Because that guy can get any HB9 piece of ass he wants.

[–]OneLifeSucks 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Hey don't knock the NB shoes bro. They're called frat cruisers for a reason; meaning plenty of chicks have been fucked by dudes who rock white New Balance. I even own a pair.

[–]playingwithfyre 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

NB is basically the male equivalent of blue hair and a nose ring. Worn by autists, slubs and literal retards. They're pussy repellent.

[–]AcidMal 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

What the fuck society do you live in? Nobodys got shame about anything anymore.

[–]hb8only 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is because a good looking women will emotionally and more than likely financially ruin the average beta bob in white new balance sneakers.

ha ha ha.. there is NO difference between UGLY and HOT girl - both are pain in the ass after time, HOT is just great to have :)

[–]Iappreci8thegr8r8m8 16ポイント17ポイント  (22子コメント)

When they think "muscular build" they think bulky roided bodybuilder.

The sculpted physique: abs, pecs, and nice cut arms are "average" to them. Less than otter mode or built-fat is just too thin, too fat, or too out of shape.

[–]rp_phoenix[S] 11ポイント12ポイント  (5子コメント)

Well now that half of America is overweight and a third of Americans are obese, just a year of serious lifting and dieting will put you ahead of I'd say 90% of guys.

[–]antariusz 3ポイント4ポイント  (4子コメント)

Eh, I'd argue that it's only enough to get you into the top 80% of guys... But that's still enough to get laid regularly. After almost 3 years of lifting though, I do feel like things are getting so much easier. (full disclosure, as of recently I'm no longer "natty" and it made a huge difference) Where as after a year of lifting, I was bragging about getting a new girl every month... After 3 years of lifting, I am getting closer to a new girl every week on average.

[–]Kyle2166 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Tread carefully with steroids bro, and certainly don't do it just for pussy

[–]360_no_scope_upvote 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Getting a new girl every week is more down to attitude than it is physique, 5 years ago I was in full ottermode and i was pulling everyday purely because I was in the mindset to pull

[–]Moolg86 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

what's your current stack brah?

[–]antariusz 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm doing my second cycle of m1a. I also tried a cycle of 1-andro with Epi-andro but I didn't feel like it was a good enough to make it worth the cost/effort, although probably my dosage was just too low.

[–]istealalbums 7ポイント8ポイント  (15子コメント)

Nah, women may admire that but they don't necessarily see it as an ideal body type. Probably because it's not the healthiest, especially with the steroids. There's a reason the "Brad Pitt / Fight Club" body type is tossed around—it seems to be the preferred body for women. Take that link with a grain of salt; it's just a simple survey, but I think it's more or less true.

That body also takes discipline. Low body fat, muscle, and close attention to your diet and how your body works.

[–]topapito 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

There is no scientific proof that steroids are not healthy. Abuse of steroids has side effects but those using usually have plenty of knowledge about them and know what to watch out for.

The older you get the more steroids help. If you have any medical study proving me wrong I would like to see it.

As well, in just one night, I can prove to you how women lie about what they like and don't like. They all want to fuck the Arnold, they all want to live with Brad. There has never been an instant when I have seen myself proven wrong on this. But I will gladly accept I am wrong if you can prove it.

[–]FuckOffDoxxers 8ポイント9ポイント  (2子コメント)

moral integrity

Frame? Integrity is simply being the same person no matter which angle you're viewed from. So maybe this survey almost glimpsed the truth. Through a blue lens, sure, but it's a glimpse nonetheless. Downvote me into oblivion if I'm wrong.

[–]rp_phoenix[S] 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

No I think this is a good point. Frame ultimately is what makes or breaks the relationship. I definitely think women would value a guy who stuck by his principles, instead of giving into her every whim because he's "nice".

[–]playingwithfyre 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

No, just a classic example of watch what they do and ignore what they say.

It was listed as a "makes me quiver." I mean, rofl, come on.

[–]RedditAdminsSuck_88 9ポイント10ポイント  (3子コメント)

Yeah ok. If this was true then all the "nice guys" would be drowning in pussy.

It's absolutely true, its just that women want moral integrity as a characteristic from Chad.

They are repulsed when betas are nice guys. But they love it when Chad is a nice guy. Women want the Chads who pump and dump them to be nice guys because they are tired of being pumped and dumped by them.

Women basically fantasize about taming a bad boy Chad and Chad becoming a nice guy for her. If you have seen the movie Cruel Intentions, that is what women fantasize about. Ryan Phillipe's character was a pump and dump Chad who was tamed by Reese Witherspoon and he became a nice guy for her.

[–]jzekyllandhyde 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

Eventually they'll tire of him and look for another Chad to tame

[–]RedditAdminsSuck_88 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

She tames a Chad, he becomes a nice guy and stays that way because he heard the non-stop propaganda about how women want a nice guy, and then she gets bored because he is no longer exciting. She has to get back out there to find a new Chad to satisfy the tingles.

[–]McLarenX 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

moral integrity

What that really means is a dude who will complete his life's mission regardless of anything going on around him. Women don't give a fuck about "morals". Charles Manson and the nightstalker Richard Ramirez get thousands of letters a year from dripping female admirers.

[–]i4mn30 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Women rated traits relating to character and personality much higher than they scored those reflecting physical attractiveness. For example, only 13 percent of women included muscular build as a requisite for hotness, while 66 percent placed moral integrity as a "make me quiver" characteristic.

The bullshit in this is that the pretentious women will never say the morally incorrect thing, to tarnish their image. Ofcourse they will always say that bullshit about "moral integrity" and "turned on by intelligence, smartness" (aka sapiosexual in a lot of chicks' profiles), or "stable job, honest hard working person" in a survey. They don't want to be seen as sluts who will ride a chad-thundercock™ if they so much as say that they are looking for bad boys with ripped muscles and thick dongs, exclusively.

[–]CasualCocaine 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

In my opinion true moral integrity is being a man and sticking to your own principals / code of honour. Rather than succumbing to the moral integrity imposed onto you by society. Perhaps thats what the women meant by moral integrity. Im probably wrong though. The type of women that answered these questions were probably afraid of being perceived as amoral if they actually answered truthfully. Sticking to the status quo is harmful for both sexes, since it creates a buffer in-between what would have otherwise been honest communication.

[–]Ray_817 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I believe their answers were a small part of what they actually like in men, the majority of influence of their answers comes from their peers think... they have a hive mentality and answered accordingly to the over all wellbeing of the status quo of the male/female dynamic. simply put they put the answer they thought would be the right answer as if a feminist nazi beached whale of woman was standing over her looking at her answers. remember they have to be guided and told what to do, what narrative do they cling to? feminist movement! more power for them! I don't know if this is the right subject to approach but idgaf it's the same in every aspect of a womans life they need to be told what to wear, eat(for the love of god if a woman ever actually knew where she wanted to go eat hell might freeze over) , and yes what to think about. hive mentality so all the survey answers are basically what each woman thought everyone else would be answering.

sorry for the rant it's just mind boggling how much they must be guided to do anything. I wish we could just throw a collar and leash on em maybe even a muzzle, wait scratch the muzzle, how bout a shock collar that buzzed them every time they complained about something lol joking of course, but one can surely dream.

[–]throw17453 4ポイント5ポイント  (4子コメント)

The moral integrity thing is a lie, girls may want someone who causes them attraction to have moral integrity - and value that as a characteristic. But at no time has a girl ever felt desire from a guys moral integrity, in fact often quite the reverse.

[–]raisins3142 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Same as intelligence. An attractive guy that is smart is a plus, but nearly no women get wet over smarts.

[–]ImTheMVPBRAH 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Moral integrity is pretty much having frame I.e not letting her be your overlord commander like Nice Guys™ tend to do.

[–]inspiron3000 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It could be possible to interpret 'moral integrity' to mean not putting up with women's immoral behaviour, as in, not being a nice guy.

The strength to put up with women's bullshit and games is respected, by women - as long as you look good, though.

[–]topapito -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ok, let me be clear. Really clear. Women lie about everything. I don't give a fuck if they are talking about the color of the moon, they are telling you either what they think you want to hear or sticking to their made up story. I've never done it up the ass is at the top of the list.

They let Chad fuck them with everything including someone else's dick. But BB has to just wish. ALL BULLSHIT.

[–]Wallstreet3 5ポイント6ポイント  (5子コメント)

"If this was true then all the "nice guys" would be drowning in pussy. "

Nice guys do not equal moral integrity. Nice guys are wishy-washy. Nice guys are manipulative.

[–]Algernoq 13ポイント14ポイント  (3子コメント)

Fuck you, you antisocial yuppie. Your kind will be the first against the wall when civilization collapses.

Nice guys work for the common good, and are righteously angry when they are not paid. "Nice guys are manipulative" is feminist powertalk. In my nice-guy days I legitimately tried to figure out what would maximize total happiness, then did that. (Failed most of the time since people lied about what they want...but I genuinely tried, and had read enough philosophy in my ample sexless free time to try thoughtfully.)

The "nice guys" I know are genuinely trying to do the right thing, and have no idea how badly they are losing.

If I am to be called immoral and manipulative despite decades of self-sacrifice, then immoral and manipulative I shall be. I will find a legal way to cause the deaths of at least 10 million poor people, and it will feel empowering, which APPARENTLY makes it OK.

Also, your username + this comment is one more reason I hate finance bros and the blue-blooded subhumans who employ them.

[–]Wallstreet3 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

A little salty bro? Still in red pill rage? Been there done that.

[–]Algernoq 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

My sexual redpilling led into alt-right redpilling. I'm too old for this shit, but there's no better way.

[–]Handsome_Stud 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

You meant to say Nice guys are bad manipulators.

[–]rodger_mexico 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Two-thirds of divorces are initiated by women,"

Let's talk facts, but not mention the realistic possibility that a solid percentage of the the women who initiated divorce did so because the guy really let himself go or turned into a real piece of shit.

[–]Rooster1111 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That is definitely true. But you must also look at the fact that lesbians have the highest divorce rate of all gender, class and ethnic combinations. So even when they marry each other they still aren't staying.

The biggest myth today is that men are running from marriage. Women are doing the same, except they get a payout when they do.

[–]Orbiter42 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

in reguards to the first article. i'd seen that, but please help me here, it seems to celebrate something, that just isn't true. less divorce, but about 1/3 as many new marriages, (24% now compaired to 70% 40 years ago,) amounts to about half as many people enjoying a long term marriage, so the lower divorce rate isn't really something to celebrate

[–]playingwithfyre 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sense of Style 2. Handsome Face 3. Height 4. Muscular Build 5. Fitness

while 66 percent placed moral integrity as a "make me quiver" characteristic.

Don't listen to what they say.

[–]corsega 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm consistently disappointed that for a subreddit that tries to predict and draw conclusions from human behavior, there are very few facts or studies cited here.

Even when studies are referenced, it's usually something like "I think there was this study where..." or "If I remember from reading [x] study..."

We should be better as a community about citing research that confirms Red Pill theories.

[–]topapito 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Much like marijuana, RP is not going to be studied. So we are left with studies that somehow almost indirectly prove our points. A poll is bullshit because everybody lies. Nobody tells the truth. I know one girl who tells the truth and then even she lies.

The only scientific study that can be conducted is statistical ones and this is exactly what OP has brought to the table today. It's pretty much all we have.

[–]BluestBlackBalls 0ポイント1ポイント  (6子コメント)

  • Never get married is a Beta's trope.

Either founded in a lack of Game and failing to understand the maintenance of Frame long term.

Case and point is the taming of Chad, elucidated elsewhere. Essentially, Chad broke frame by becoming Mr. Nice guy.

  • Never get married is a Beta's trope.

This is either your hamster hampering you from leaning Game and the Maintenance of Frame, and thus you constantly dread over potential loss of resources via marriage.

A man well versed in the Mechanisms of Money need not fear Inflation and Taxation, for they know how to play the game.

  • I make no comment for or against marriage; but don't let the statistics prevent you from the practical application of Red Pill Rhetoric.

[–]topapito 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

Hiding and or securing wealth is much tougher than you might think. Every man should know how to do it but there just isn't enough information out there to put all of it together for free.

But just for some shits and giggles. I usually tell men to never buy a house. What I mean is never own a house in your name. By all means, buy a house, but there are countless ways to do it and never lose it. It can be done.

How? Form a corporation and buy the house. Let mom dad, someone you trust own a very large share of the corp. Whoever you do this with, make sure you have papers signed that they owe you much more than the house is worth and they guarantee the debt with that house. You then have a tool you can use later if they get too smart.

You lease the house for your marriage and never speak about the owner, ever. If the company can be offshore all the better.

Money? Cash? Pay your taxes then take it offshore. Trust me, pay your taxes now or pay later, usually better now. You want to avoid taxes? You're in the wrong country or tax bracket. Move!

All of you nodding your head will never do this. It's a bold step. I bought my ex a house, mortgaged it. When I wanted to sell it I had a fight with the mortgage company and stopped paying them. It was in her name the mortgage. She begged me to sell it.

Never put your name on anything. If the house you own is owned by a company you control and want to sell the house, sell the company! You pay less taxes and no closing because the house does not change ownership, just the company.

No, avoid getting married. If for any reason it's just stupid to do it. Avoid living together, ever. Avoid kids for as long as possible and have them yourself. Hire a womb, legal in the US. Your kid, your rules.

I'm tired. AMA if you like.

Edit: I hate my phone and its stupid fucking keyboard.

[–]BluestBlackBalls 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Agreed, especially on the firm, in my country, 1 person is needed to start a private company. If the company makes R 0 (Zero Rands) in profit — when leasing the house to yourself, you, the director, can pay yourself 100% of the rent — the corporate tax at the end of the year is R100 (roughly $10).

Gotta love limited liability.

As far as kids and the rest, also agreed. Though my reasons are based on a lack of interest in partaking in familial anything.

But I will state again, most of the Don't Get MARRIED advice is given out from a fear of heartbreak and a lost relationship.

Divorce and the rest of it are adlibed in an attempt to cover the emotional recoil from having to considering that we are still Blue Pill.

LTR Game & Frame is founded on getting into and maintaining LTR's.

DISCLAIMER:
I advise people to neither get married nor remain single.

[–]RedEyesBlueShades 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

"Never get married" is simply simply proper risk management.

I'll do you a deal. We flip a coin. Heads, you get $100, tails I get $10k. Do you wanna play? No? What a beta. Right?

Marriage is simply a non profitable proposition. That's why TRP advocates not to get married. It makes no economic sense. Everything else is hamsters racing.

[–]Johndoesmith67 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

If there is a company xyz. You know this company in recent years has failed. It is on a trajectory to fail. By the end of this year there is a 60% chance it won't be around next year. Would you invest in it...

Nope.

Marry someone from a south American or Eastern European country. Your odds probably double at success. Especially if you pull her from poverty.

[–]rodger_mexico 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The risk of divorce is not the same for everyone. They say 40-50% of couples divorce, but if you're part of the elite 10% SMV-wise, you're not as likely to divorce as a 4/10 beta loser who'll probably lose his job a few times in his lifetime, or get tired of eating healthy and going to the gym regularly at some point. The top 4 biggest tennis players of our era are all with the same girl they were when they were 20 (3 of them married and with children). Messi and Barcelona never divorced because they're the best player and the best club on the planet; they chose each other wisely, and have no reason to look somewhere else for anything better.

[–]BluestBlackBalls 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

"Never get married" is simply simply proper risk management.

Agreed. But I state again, the way this is tossed around here is indicative of our members essentially saying they have no Agency in ensuring Frame and Game are kept throughout a marriage.

This advice is given on the back of an emotional reaction, it's blind acceptance being us deciding to place out heads back in the sand. The reason for not getting married has to be greater than a fear of getting cucked. I am sure you have noted field reports of Red Pillers spinning plates only to be infuriated by said plates fucking other guys. Instead, make an objective argument.

I'll do you a deal. We flip a coin. Heads, you get $100, tails I get $10k. Do you wanna play? No? What a beta. Right?

Depends on the deal, if I have to foot the 10K, then obviously NO. Whereas of the money is from s third party, then yes. At worst I am as rich/poor as before and at best have increased my petty cash by $100.

Marriage is simply a non profitable proposition.

I have no opinion either for or against this statement.

That's why TRP advocates not to get married.

I disagree here. Red Pill Rhetoric seems to focus on two points:
1. The disillusionment of males.
2. The promotion of personal agency.

The stance on marriage and LTR are simple, best avoided, but beneficial for the man looking to raise children in a traditional family structure. The onus is on you, the male, to ensure the success of this venture.

Herein maxims such as:
- She will never love you like your mother
- Love flows from Man to Woman to Child
- No Body Cares
- Hypergamy dictates that a failing Alpha is left for an alternate Alpha
- NEVER BREAK FRAME

All that these do is arm you with the tools to make a decision based on you desires — read Life Goals. All the talk about Marriage 1.0 / 2.0 and such go towards disenchantment, such that any though of married is done with the knowledge of the poignancy that comes with the institution. If you decide against it, so be it, but please check your emotions at the door.

It makes no economic sense.

I have not opinion either for or against this.

FYI: My lack of an opinion is in truth a personal acknowledgement of my Beta state, essentially doubt that I could turn the Lead of which you speak into Gold. But Britania was not demolished on a day.