Initial note: this argument is made from a RP frame of reference, but with the genders reversed (i.e. men being judged based upon a RP-like mindset rather than women).

It is commonly argued that high-n women are “riskier” for LTRs/marriage than low-n women, and there is some research which corroborates a correlation between high-n women and “marriage stability”. Setting aside the fact I do not have any fun graphs I can point to, I would argue that certain RP principles/concepts support the idea that a “RP man”—knowing no other facts about him—would similarly raise red flags as simply knowing a woman’s n count. If AWALT leads to the (cautious) conclusion that high n in women = red flag, ARPALT similarly leads to the (also cautious but perhaps even more practical) conclusion that men who identify as “Red pilled’ = red flag. The following list are generalizations about “red pill” beliefs and what we can extrapolate from them, they are not requirements to being “red pill”, but nevertheless central concepts promoted among self-identified “red pillers”.

  • Red pillers do not value marriage or monogamy. They instead promote a sexual strategy of “plating” multiple women at once, low investment in those women and ideally have them on a “rotation.” This is contrary to what an LTR-minded monogamous woman would want or accept.

  • Red pillers believe in promoting “abundance mentality” and “nexting” women who show signs of [insert disobedience or disrespect or opposition/hesitation to what they want or like]. They are “the prize”, women are replaceable, “oneitis” is death. Similar to the above paragraph, this is not reflective of values that would indicate a LTR-minded man who actually wants to treat a SO as valuable and worthwhile of his commitment, attention, monogamy, affection or compromise. This instead promotes the idea of having to constantly prove yourself to your RP man, which sounds absolutely exhausting.

  • Red pillers seem to approach women they are dating with a Pavlovian approach, i.e., she is “rewarded” for doing things he wants, she may even be promoted from “plate” status to something higher. OTOH, there is support for the idea that she should be “punished” for doing something they do not like or want, hence you see support for the idea of a LTR being demoted to “plate” status. This is not indicative of a man who is interested in valuing an LTR with an LTR-minded partner and working through potential differences, he is instead interested in ensuring his needs are met and hers do not matter or certainly matter less. He is ready to jump or punish at a minimal level of discontent or unsatisfaction with a specific issue or behavior.

  • Red pillers want casual, low investment sex with multiple women. Thus, just as the complaints about high-n woman, you could presume they a) may have an STD; b) don’t value sex as a pair-bonding experience; c) are more likely to validate parts of their identity with large amounts of casual sex with multiple women; d) are going to compare you to past partners; and e) could have attributes like the need for novelty, which may be a signal they might cheat.

  • Red pillers subscribe to evo-psych principles that men are polygamous and women are hypergamous. Red pillers therefore believe male cheating is less problematic or destructive than female cheating. They are more likely to rationalize their own cheating as biological or necessary to their sexuality. Hence, they are more likely to cheat and/or justify cheating through no fault of their own.

  • Red pillers believe in concepts like stoicism, A&A, withholding affection if your needs are not being met and dread game (including active dread when they deem it necessary). Everything in the relationship is about control. Hence, they are more likely to resort to using passive aggressive techniques at getting what they want.

  • Red pillers may have pasts wherein they were either bad with women or were hurt by women. They may be resentful and bitter due to that. They may be "damaged". Perhaps their past signifies they could not get any woman to stay for very long. Or it could simply point to the idea they themselves can’t/won’t stay in a relationship for a significant amount of time.

  • Red pillers do not believe women bring much to the table quite often. These types tend to believe women are inferior in the ways they value. They are therefore more likely to underappreciate your efforts/traits and overappreciate theirs.

So, CMV, from an ARPALT/generalization perspective, why are “red pilled men” not giant red flags for LTR-minded women? Are they more prone to red-flags than high n women? Why or why not?