This is probably going to be a long post attempting to write out all of my beliefs RP has caused me.

I have tried to get rid of my RP-ways but I find it very challenging. It is not that I do not want to - because I really do. It is more a case of evidence than anything else. I do not believe in disregarding evidence because I do not personally like it - even though I wish for reality to be different than what it is. As far as I can tell all evidence points to a lot of the claims that RP and MGTOW for that matter claims.

From the basic truism that women file for what 70%(?) of divorces, men take break-ups harder than women, cross-cultural studies prove that status is important to women and does not mean shit to men, sperm is cheap and eggs are expensive to women being primarily interested in men because of resources and status. Reflected in theories as beauty-status-exchange which you do not have to look far to confirm. We have all seen it. The old polymath-billionaires with the 20-something model. I have not found a shred of evidence that is based in empirical data that counter this. I have tried looking at feminist theories that try to explain this but I do not find them very satisfying. The arguments usually boils down to "insert claim" this is misogynistic (does not make it less true) and a complete rejection of findings in biology, and cross-cultural studies which confirm the same findings. For example that women will rate a man higher in attractiveness the higher his salary is (signs of social status). To top it of studies confirm that women are more sensitive to economic differences in their partners than men are. And in regards to resources, money and status is a case of more is always better (hypergamy).

Sexual economics theory is probably one of the theories that got me the most fucked up the first time I read it. It simply states that male sexuality is not worth a dime but female sexuality is. Male sexuality is not inherently valuable and the penis will always be less worth than the vagina, biologically and in society. Males want sex more than women do therefore women have the upper hand in controlling access to it. It is the basic idea of buyers and sellers. The women simply trades sex for other resources which the man has. You probably heard the phrase that women are sex-objects and men are status-objects. Basically women are the ones who control the market. Why are men seeking status, money and fame - yup, to get sex from women. Do women have to achieve the same to get laid - not at all.

Sexual marketplaces take the shape they do because nature has biologically built a disadvantage into men: a huge desire for sex that makes men dependent on women. Men’s greater desire puts them at a disadvantage, just as when two parties are negotiating a possible sale or deal, the one who is more eager to make the deal is in a weaker position than the one who is willing to walk away without the deal. Women certainly desire sex too — but as long as most women desire it less than most men, women have a collective advantage, and social roles and interactions will follow scripts that give women greater power than men (Baumeister et al.2001).

We have even concluded that the cultural suppression of female sexuality throughout much of history and across many different cultures has largely had its roots in the quest for marketplace advantage (see Baumeister and Twenge 2002). Women have often sustained their advantage over men by putting pressure on each other to restrict the supply of sex available to men. As with any monopoly or cartel, restricting the supply leads to a higher price…the evidence overwhelmingly indicated that the cultural suppression of female sexuality is propagated and sustained by women (Baumeister and Twenge 2002).

AF/BB seems to be the natural state if we did not introduce the social construct of marriage and monogamy to lessen this effect. In societies where hierarchies could form more freely and naturally I think the 80/20 pareto principle would hold true. I have read an interesting study that showed that a large proportion of males in history never got to reproduce. Of course this has been dealt with because this creates a lot of angry and frustrated males. But in natural circumstances women would rather share a top male than being stuck with a low-status one. A higher instance of bisexuality in women could actually help support this notion. One could imagine that when one male has a lot of women it would be advantageous for the women to be bisexual.

So I find it hard to shake these RP thoughts. I find it hard to be open and honest with women and showing my emotions. The evidence in favour of RP is massive. When you read studies about how men who seem less interested, aloof, men who engage in non-verbal dominant behaviour like being distant and appear more attractive, men who use less positive language while texting is considered more attractive - how are you supposed to not be discouraged?

I can not for the life of me understand the narrative that women are the supposed romantic gender. It seems absolutely flat out false. Several articles states that men take break-ups a lot worse than women. Where they simply end up having to "move on" as opposed to "getting over" the ex. Hell, even in popular culture almost all love songs are made by men. Usually when I hear a break-up song from a women it is about going out and celebrating that they are single. Coupled with the fact that almost all cases of divorce are filed by women it makes a depressing reality.

All over the place, yup.