317,196 posts

Final Warning: Keep Your Damn Morals To Yourself

by null on /r/TheRedPill
21 June 2015 03:35 PM UTC
Reddit View

Due to observations by /u/Aerobus and a few others, this post from over the summer is being re-stickied as a reminder to keep your damn morals to yourself.


The Red Pill is nothing more than a working set of keys to a shiny new car. How and where one man chooses to drive it is his business, not your business. If he decides to take it off-roading and gets stuck in the mud (i.e., fuck women in relationships), rather than keeping it to the safer highways and backroads (not fucking women in relationships), that's his decision to make and his alone. Therefore, the consequences are his and his alone. We don't need you, Captain Moral-Bro, coming along with your white super-knight cape, and your wagging finger of shame and judgment, and starting moral-bicker-fights in the hallowed halls of TRP.

I will treat this the same way the cops do when they break up a mob fight; toss everybody in jail, sort it out later. Or in this context, ban everyone involved, assess the length of sentence later.

Keep the bro-shaming to yourselves. It has no place here; never has, never will. If you wanna go be PC Principal, go do it somewhere else. AskMen, AskWomen, and 2XC are always auditioning for new Guardian Saviors of the Gynocratic Order of Be-Slutted Wives.

Shaming is the tool of feminists, SJWs, and Blue Pillers.

I know we have a whole slew of new members. 117,000 subs, compared to the 8,000 when I first came around. Remarkable. This place has grown beyond any of our wildest dreams. However, as with any forum, club, organization, or fraternity, more voices means more deviation and more static. The mod team, led by /u/redpillschool, continues to walk a fine line between keeping the message on track, whilst also trying not to be too "censor happy". When we remove too much, we are told we are "censoring". When we allow borderline posts to stand, we are told we aren't doing our jobs.

I say that to say this: there is one subject, that periodically rears it's ugly head, that we invariably end up dealing with, and that subject is morality.

If you want an in depth explanation of morality vs. Machiavellianism, please check out our very own /u/IllimitableMan's blog on the subject.


But the reason for this post is as follows:


This thread:


has invariably given rise to this thread:


And a whole bunch of moral lecturing.

I understand that, among a large swath of you, fucking married women is outside your wheelhouse. I get it. God is going to send you to hell, you have inhibitions about being a home wrecker, inhibitions about your personal fee fees, etc. Whatever. Shame language about "low hanging fruit", etc, "what bro, you can't get single chicks so you fuck married women, etc etc..." It's been said time and time again.

Some see no problem with fucking married women. Others see it as worse than God flooding the Earth in the Old Testament. I'm here to tell you that your moral judgements have no place here. If a man posts about fucking a married woman, that's his own prerogative, not yours. This sub is about discussion of sexual strategy in culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.

These "morality" bicker fights never go anywhere, they devolve into bullshit that we have to sort out, and quite frankly, we're sick of it.

How one man chooses to use TRP knowledge is up to him. Not you. So, I'm going to link my post from back in December 2014:


And as a final reminder, keep your damn morals to yourself. Any shaming language from one man to another is going to trigger my ban-hammer. This is fair warning.

Shaming is the tool of feminists and blue pillers. It has no place here.

Happy Sunday.

Want to download the post?
Similar Posts


216 upvotesCopperFox3c4 years ago

Gotta agree with the mods on this one.

It's one thing to say I don't agree with this, and here's why, it's an entirely different thing to say What you are doing is wrong, and you are an evil person. The first is rational discourse ... the second is shaming language.

If you don't understand the difference you shouldn't be on this board.

46 upvotesmy_redpill_account4 years ago

Getting your jimmies rustled by the way someone else (that you don't know, or will ever meet in real life) lives their life, is a classic case of losing frame.

People are different, even if you don't agree with their choices, you can still learn from them.

i agree with you, and the mods wholeheartedly. Observe don't react.

28 upvotesmeet_me_at_high_noon4 years ago

I don't generally comment on threads where people talk about having sex with someone else's wife. I don't think it's right though and here's why:

There's a lot of discussion on this board about how modern society is destroying the family and humanity's best qualities in general. This I agree with.

So when you on one hand say "well modern society is all fucked up and we are paying the price" and then turn around and have sex with someone elses wife, you are in fact part of the problem. You factor in that this couple may have kids, and that you are participating in an event that may ruin those kids lives, I don't think it's wrong to say that you may be a hypocrite. Now, do I say that usually? No. Why? Because it's not going to change someone's mind usually. Are you evil for doing this? No.

But for me, it seems like if you know part of what is ailing the world, and you are participating in it, you are partly responsible. Everything is connected. Sometimes, people forget that.

8 upvoteschangshuaidiao4 years ago

It's "The Tragedy of The Commons" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

7 upvotesrp_valiant4 years ago

Yep. The actual underlying problem is that so many wives are placing themselves in the realm of "the commons", i.e. accessible to outside men.

12 upvotesoverreactor4 years ago

Here's where I disagree with you: you're not a part of the problem. The problem is already there, full fledged, and no amount of you participating with make the problem better or worse. It's the woman's responsability to not cheat on her husband, not yours. If you decide not to fuck her, someone else will, and what have you gained from that? Nothing. A clean conscience, you would say. But a clean conscience about what? About not having 'destroyed that kids lives'? Again: if you don't fuck her, someone else will, the problem is and always will be there.

All said, I understand where you are coming from, I just think you're passing perfectly good sex trying to protect 'society' or 'some dudes family' and that its not your role, because you wont be able to do it, even if you could.

15 upvotesmeet_me_at_high_noon4 years ago

That makes sense. There was a comment further down about how the red pill is about being good at being a man, not being a good man. I think that's the most fair minded comment I've seen. Because at least you aren't saying "im a good man, I just have sex with other peoples wives." Youre acknowledging "IDGAF" and moving on. Fine. Just don't piss on me and tell me it's rain haha.

Again, I want to emphasize (because I don't want to be banned here) that I don't generally comment on those threads. I think it's wrong, but I don't like telling others how to live their lives. There's a fine line between having a healthy discussion about the merits of having sex with a married woman and shaming. For me, I come here for the self improvement. I don't really invest in threads about sex and chasing tail (I found the pill after getting into a LTR and having a kid, some of this stuff doesn't do me much good now) but I love the threads about self improvement. If you don't like what you read in a thread, just avoid it. That's what a free society does. Don't like the weather in Arizona move north.

14 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

because I don't want to be banned here)

Discussion on this level in this context is fine here. We're only looking to get rid of the morality shaming.

3 upvotesmryddlin4 years ago

I just think you're passing perfectly good sex trying to protect 'society' or 'some dudes family' and that its not your role, because you wont be able to do it, even if you could.

I don't bother, not because of any moral reason, just because I find them a pain in the ass to deal with.

As you state someone else will, if it works for me I'll engage but general I just find cheaters to be a PITA to deal with.

5 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

To you it seems hypocritical, but it's actually not. Here's an analogy. You know how every once in a while there's a rich guy who says people in his own income bracket should be taxed more, and some smartass replies that he should just write the government a bigger check? It's like that. One dude (or even 1,000) writing a bigger check won't make a noticeable difference, and furthermore would unfairly handicap him versus everyone else.

All he's saying is that either everyone should pay more or nobody should pay more, not some unfair situation where only a few are paying more. Volunteering to pay more would result in that latter, least desirable situation.

3 upvotesmy_redpill_account4 years ago

I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying there's no point in getting upset with what some other dude is doing. Regardless of how you personally feel about it.

If someone wants to bang other dudes wives they can, I don't think they should but it's not my place to tell them anything.

Me? I won't do it, I'm not going to continue to encourage the bad behavior of women. It won't stop her from riding someone else's dick, but I know I did what I felt was right. If other dudes do it? That's on them. I don't agree, but I won't tell them they can/can't/shouldn't.

While you may agree/disagree, you can also still learn from what they have to say.

1 upvotesLuckyluke234 years ago

I get your point man. you shouldn't do it...

but when you are 25,live in a city of only 2.4 million people ( yeah it sound like a lot? new york has 8 million), you see all your friends getting married at 25, dudes i know got kids n shit... I'm still learning game. so I'm BOUND to have sex with a married chick or someone with a boyfriend, knowing or not.

1 upvotesAntibuddy4 years ago

I did it. I wanted her for myself, too.

If you really subscribe to TRP tenets then you must acknowledge that your cheating wife is your responsibility. You fucked up. You either married a whore who jumps on alpha dick with minimal coaxing, or you were so goddamn boring that she went for dick elsewhere.

My stint with adultery came from a case of Refined WhoreTM . From what I put together she had an exciting time before meeting her husband-to-be. Then she decided to settle down. The week before her FIRST wedding anniversary, she started her affair with me, in which I railed her for hours a day, multiple times. Affair ended, she's moved off with him to continue their life, and he's none the wiser. No real damage done.

Look man. I get it. I have the same fears. I became my own worst nightmare in doing this. Yes. But doesn't relying on some other man to do the right thing because your woman can't just bother you? That's what your request comes down to. In your mind, having a society of drug-craving fiends is okay as long as they don't have access to drugs? That's so plastic.

I would want the same thing...to know some stranger is looking out for me. But they're not. My advice for those of us who will get married: love her fully and cheat freely.

1 upvotesnzgs4 years ago

What your opinion completely fails to acknowledge is that the adulter is the WOMAN and more importantly if it wasn't dude A fucking his wife, it will be dude B or dude C. Women are the gatekeepers of sex and blaming her lover for her adultery not only denies this truth, but absolves her of responsibility (which is what feminists try to do).

Other men are under no obligation to respect a marriage, it is YOUR responsibility and yours only. Responsibility is a theme that runs throughout TRP, and the attitude of deferring one's own responsibility to others, or to the state, does not belong here.

1 upvotesmeet_me_at_high_noon4 years ago

Well I never absolved the wife of responsibility but thanks.

9 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

dumb people will often use the "what you are doing is wrong, and you are an evil person" type of argument and claim it is free speech. "shaming language" is literally the opposite of free speech. it's used to stifle free speech. it has no argument. it's used when a person can't use logic to back up his opinion, so he has to resort to emotion.

3 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

All speech is free speech. We're free to say insulting things, and we're even free to talk about limiting free speech.

1 upvotesMagneticJohnson4 years ago

The point of free speech is about having an opinion that you can back up with an argument. It might have devolved into something where it's "technically free speech" to shout over someone saying something, but that wasn't the point of it.

So basically you're free to respond to this however you want (if you're so inclined), but I'd apreciate it if you can argue your point.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

The point of free speech is primarily about being able to speak against the government. It's not about having well informed arguments.

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

It is not the opposite of free speech. It is free speech. The notion of "shaming language" is pathetic. If you believe what you are doing is correct, refuse to be shamed.

The opposite of free speech is less speech not more speech. Shaming language is additional speech and therefore not a restriction.

5 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

it's free speech with the intent to limit free speech. like the people at the tucker max event. every thirty seconds someone would start shouting just to interrupt. just noise, random words. is that free speech? someone presents facts in a sensitive case and are labeled misogynist/racist/whatever just to shut them up. is that free speech?

do you honestly believe that you're above being affected by shaming language? I agree that the term sounds pathetic, but if you're in ANY WAY withholding your opinions because of the pc standard you're affected by shaming.

The opposite of free speech is less speech not more speech. Shaming language is additional speech and therefore not a restriction.

restriction is EXACTLY what shaming language does, dumbass.

6 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Fines restrict speech. Losing your job restricts speech. Being put in jail restricts. To a lesser degree, being shouted over restricts speech. However, the comparison between someone commenting in a "shaming" manner and being shouted over at an event, is not apt. If you lack the courage of conviction necessary to stand my your opinions in the face of "shaming", thats on you, bruh.

The real world is different that reddit. Outside of your comment being deleted by a mod or you being banned by a mod, no one on reddit can exercise any real coercion over you as a result of your speech. The comparisons just don't hold.

4 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Fines restrict speech. Losing your job restricts speech.

shaming language has caused all of that. calling someone's employer and saying their employee is a racist technically is "free speech". but it's not the point of free speech. it's the opposite. "look, someone' thinks differently and we don't have a good argument against it. let's shut him down". free speech...?

there's a saying that goes "think as you like, behave like others". if you think that's unnecessary I wish you good luck in your endeavors.

3 upvotesCowardlyPetrov4 years ago

I think what you are doing is wrong and evil, and here is why.

Does that still work? I would think so. I liked your explanation.

4 upvotesJigsus4 years ago

At the same time I want to encourage rational discourse. We are here to debate this sort of thing to better ourselves.

12 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

shaming language

while i agree stfu about the morals, lets not get all 'tumblr crybaby' here

42 upvotesMeto11834 years ago

The point wasn't that he's hurt by the shaming, he's saying its a worthless tool with the sole purpose of making people feel worse (I.e. has no place in rational dicussions). It's a tumblr crybaby tool...he's not the tumblr crybaby

204 upvotesRPSigmaStigma4 years ago

People just don't understand the difference between "amoral" and "immoral". Amorality is the practice of objectively and dispassionately analyzing facts. Immorality is behaving in ways that run counter to ones own, or society's, ethical standards. TRP is amoral in the same way that science is amoral.

51 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago


Knowledge of SMP dynamics is about as moral as knowing how to tie your shoes: it has FUCK-ALL to do with morality. Its just knowledge. Knowledge is amoral.

Its how you choose to apply your knowledge that determines whether or not you are behaving in a manner consistent with your own personal ideas of right and wrong.

TL;DR: TRP knowledge is amoral. Applying TRP knowledge can be either moral OR immoral OR amoral, depending on your personal definition of morality.

I like talking about the abstract idea of morality as a concept, and I think there is value in doing so. However, there's no real point discussing our own personal definitions of morality or attempting to impose them on others... Because that is retarded and unproductive. (Like OP is pointing out).

If we open up a free-for-all discussion of our personal moral codes, we've gotten so far away from the original point of our sub (discussing sexual strategy) that we'd need a different sub.

That conversation (the morality free-for-all) is so subjective, free-ranging, and all encompassing that it will go on forever, resolving nothing.... Like it has for the last 3000 years.

3 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Guns are amoral. In some sense this is like a gun subreddit where some people talk about willful acts of murder (blatant hyperbole).

2 upvotesspectrum_924 years ago

Amorality is the practice of objectively and dispassionately analyzing facts.

No, it's not, and i have no idea where you got that definition from. Amorality means 'not involving questions of right or wrong; without moral quality; neither moral nor immoral'.

An amoral person doesn't 'objectively and dispassionately analyse [facts]', they just simply don't care whether something is right or wrong, it either doesn't occur to them or they have no interest in it.

If you think sleeping with another man's wife isn't immoral, that doesn't necessarily make you amoral, because it is of itself a moral judgement to say that adultery is not immoral. But really it's just male hamstering, because everyone on this sub decries women who cheat as bad people.

3 upvotesDrQuaid4 years ago

they aren't bad people, they just aren't LTR material.

3 upvotesRPSigmaStigma4 years ago

You would be absolutely correct if we were applying the adjective amoral to a person. But we're not. We're applying it to a subject of study. Hence "TRP is amoral", not "TRPers are amoral".

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Oh jesus.... stop with that. It sounds profoundly retarded.

Now let me get back to my lab. I'm breeding child sex slaves from cambodia with monkeys to see what happens... because you know... science is amoral according to the guy who has likely NEVER actually worked as a scientist and probably has no idea what an IRB review is and clearly does not understand what amoral actually means.

Source: I'm a scientist. Really. A real live one that works in genetics and bio bioinformatics. I'm even published in several journals.

1 upvotestroll_bends_fir4 years ago

The fact that your experiments are immoral doesn't make your findings wrong or immoral.

The fact that we as a civilization decided to impose ethical standards on science has nothing to do with the scientific method.

Knowing the kind of unethical - but sound - experiments that were performed on innocent, unwitting individuals I'm glad that we do, though.

1 upvotesmeet_me_at_high_noon4 years ago

Okay, so why don't we amorally analyze what happens when you have sex with someone else's wife.

You have sex with said wife. Her husbands finds out. They get divorced, and lets say they have kids (because most married couples do). Well, the science shows that kids from divorced homes have a harder time in life. They are more prone to criminal activity and to take from society rather than contribute (which everyone here seems to hate). So by having sex with someone elses wife, you are creating a potential problem for the rest of society. Now does that make you evil? Of course not. But it is fair to point out the potential pain you are causing. Why is it not okay to say "hey dude, you do you, but I hope you've considered that you may be causing others harm."?

2 upvotesIVIaskerade4 years ago

Why is it not okay to say "hey dude, you do you, but I hope you've considered that you may be causing others harm."?

It is ok to say that.

What is not ok is saying “Hey dude, you do you, but you might be causing others harm and that is wrong" or “Hey dude, how low can you get?"

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Science isn't amoral, pretty much every experiment with moral implications has to pass an ethics board. Every action with consequence is subject to morality. Amoral is just a word people use here to skirt past the shittyness of their actions.

9 upvotesRPSigmaStigma4 years ago

Did you read the link? The principle of science is amoral. If someone did an immoral experiment, the immorality of it doesn't preclude us from being able to learn from it. If it was of sound methodology and had reasonable controls, we could still learn from it. That's what amorality means. You might have ethical objections to some of the posts here, but we can all learn from them, and your moralizing of the posts is irrelevant to that goal, so STFU or go bitch about it on another sub.

0 upvotesfrozengiblet4 years ago

So RP subscribers are like David Attenborough, but where he interacts with nature?

3 upvotessouthernmost4 years ago

You don't think hypergamy is nature in one of its most raw forms?

1 upvotesIVIaskerade4 years ago

Complete with velvety British accents.

-10 upvotesElodrian4 years ago

Whatever values you happen to hold, those values will give rise to goals. If you think reducing the suffering of sentient creatures is a worthy value, your goal will be to reduce suffering. If you think gingers are a blight on the world's financial system, your goal will be to exterminate all the gingers in Europe. Whatever your values and whatever goals result from holding those values, everyone will agree that accomplishing their own goals is objectively better than not accomplishing their own goals. Science is the accumulation of human knowledge. Science is the process of determining truth from falsehood. Science is a means of determining what works and what doesn't. Whatever values and goals you have, science will help you achieve them. For this reason, knowledge/science is of value to all people, irrespective of what other values and goals they hold.
Increasing our knowledge is an objectively good goal, because it facilitates obtaining all subsequent goals. To say something is "objectively good" is identical with saying it is "moral".

96 upvotesRedBigMan4 years ago

If dudes want to fuck married women then they should go ahead.

I just caution fucking married women because it could lead to a man catching a beating or worse. Blue pill men can and will engage in extreme mate guarding behavior which may include force feeding your body some lead pills instead of red pills. You may think you're doing a man a favor by boning his wife to show him what a slut she is and how beta doesn't work but until the husband is ready to swallow the red pill it wont help worth a damn if his wife is fucking railed by 100 Chad's in a single night.

25 upvotesaguy014 years ago

I like the way some guy worded it in a post a few weeks ago. "Your friend isn't red pill, he's dead pill." Still makes me laugh.

63 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

That's my point. Let each man assess the costs of his own decisions, rather than devolving into shaming like feminists.

60 upvotesRedPillDad4 years ago

devolving into shaming like feminists.

I get a sense that some pro-feminists are already in our midsts, probing for weaknesses. Morality is an angle they're trying to leverage.

119 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

I get the same feeling. I'm going to root them out, one way or another. I will not let the best sub on Reddit be co-opted by feminists in sheep's clothing. This place has had too much positive impact on my own life for me to let that happen.

26 upvotesTheDon8354 years ago

I don't post or comment very much, but I read a lot. Thanks for your best efforts to keep the steady flow of good, solid info.

13 upvotesFrogTrainer4 years ago

I feel like it should be "feminist in wolf's clothing" lol.

5 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Cougars in sheep's clothing

2 upvotesSir_Shitlord_focker4 years ago

Purge the unclean, pacify the infidel, Blessed is the mind too small for doubt. ;)

21 upvotescocaine_face4 years ago

Trying to use shaming arguments is all people who disagree with us have, because our philosophy is essentially, "We want to be the best Girl Science engineers around". If someone flipped a magic switch and suddenly "blue pill" behavior worked perfectly, we'd be discussing the best way to display provider behaviors and how many clingy texts per hour to send.

7 upvotesmryddlin4 years ago

OK it's not just me either then.

Sub felt weird this last week but I haven't been around that long.

1 upvotesMomo_dollar4 years ago

Post something about Hitler/Fascist etc and their power/influence techniques , something rational and inoffensive, that usually draws them out.

-9 upvotesSwoLean4 years ago

As one of the men who made a comment that seems to go against the grain, I'm not a feminist. I also believe the mods post and replies here are utter bullshit and its irony at best.

Sure shaming should be looked down on, but closing the discourse out right is ridiculous.

You don't lead men with fear, threats, or intimidation.

17 upvotesRedPillDad4 years ago

The mods have to wade through shit, and the last thing they want is morality police infesting every conversation. Your earlier post was reasonable, but a few circle-jerk boys probably dogpiled it. No biggie.

Keep commenting. Your voice is appreciated even if the votes don't show it yet.

1 upvotesabsolucion4 years ago

They did state (somewhere; I'm on mobile right now so I'll let you hunt it down if you're interested) that TRP isn't a democracy. "Closing the discourse" is well within their right. If you don't like it, you don't have to participate.

I also don't see how anyone here is being lead by fear, threats, or intimidation. I feel as the though the mods here are far more transparent than on any other sub. Heck, compare this with what happened with the "offensive" subs that were banned not too long ago. Some praised the Reddit admins for their "transparency" yet there was zero rhyme or reason behind their action.

1 upvotesSir_Shitlord_focker4 years ago

I disagree completely. Better to ban 1000 innocents than let one feminist escape our righteous hammer.

Also you can recreate an new account in 3 seconds flat.

1 upvotesSwoLean4 years ago

A majority of those innocents won't come back. The feminists or SJWs are the ones who will continue to pop up like a case of herpes from Paris Hilton again and again. Feel me?

1 upvotestruchisoft4 years ago

You do, I mean that is the whole way of men, since ancient times, if you have a disagreement with some other tribe-member, the one who wins in a fist fight is right, no matter if he is really right or not, he is right in the sense that you have to accept his point of view, or continue to receive a pounding from him.

We men instinctively know this since birth, and that is why we have a different code of conduct than females, we know that if we disagree enough, the argument is resolved via violence, and the one who wins the fight wins the argument.

Back to point, if you lead a pack of men, you lead them by respect, respect has parts of fear, intimidation and threats, the fear of intimidation to kick your ass, or be kicked by someone supporting the leader.

8 upvotesSwoLean4 years ago

There's a way of doing it, and doing it well without coming out and stating the intentions. Remember the whole "power talk" thing in the wiki/side bar? In corporate culture I can't going around being intimidating. The fact that I'm a man, taller and build larger than the average guy, with a deep voice than normal, carry myself with confidence, etc is enough to intimidate people (I know this from numerous discussions with my companies femnazi HR department who I'm on a first name basis with).

Now, as a former military guy, the way I would lead my troops is entirely different. Why? The game is different as are the players. A mistake in the field can result in the loss of life an/or resources, so I can choose to use force or threats.

I don't believe that is needed here. At times I wonder if the forum is filled with and run by angsty dude bros with a fucking superiority complex and massive insecurities. It's like a constant dick measuring contest without the ability to punch someone in the face. There is a lot of good material in here to help men who need it, or to remind us of some tool that we may have forgotten about. But then there is some really poisonous shit that happens also.

I see a lot of "this is the way it is, conform to us" bullshit, as evidence from the above mods post and replies. I'm gonna disagree with you and if you don't like it, well tough shit. You can ban me, but that will only reinforce my thoughts about your insecurities. Or maybe we should just fight it out like this dude pointed out?

1 upvotesThe-Pussy-Whisperer4 years ago

It's one thing to have an open and honest discussion on how morals guide your decisions, and another to purposefully force your broken and out of date morals on others.

1 upvotesSwoLean4 years ago

Who are you to decide what's broken and out of date?

14 upvoteswhatsazipper4 years ago

In reality, the men who fuck married women typically get away with it. Maybe it's where I live but personal safety is hardly an issue unless you're dumb enough to fuck at their place.

It's more beta-toughguy revenge talk than anything else. It sounds nice, but most men simply fall apart, not dish out violence.

13 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

My inbox flooded with hate mail from betafags since I posted the original. Its hilarious

3 upvotesBloody_Anal_Leakage4 years ago

Honest question, how is a married alpha supposed to respond in that situation?

I know, stoicism, AWALT, oneitis, but primal instinct is a force to be reckoned with.

Snap a picture for the divorce lawyer?

5 upvotesIVIaskerade4 years ago

If you catch them in the act, absolutely take pictures.

Afterwards or otherwise, as little contact as possible, start rebuilding elsewhere. Lawyer up and bunker down.

1 upvotesNightGod4 years ago

Be a good enough man to not have it happen in the first place.

0 upvotesSdom14 years ago

A wife cheating on her alpha husband, or even a husband that's not a pussy, is unlikely. I'm sure it happens occasionally, but it's nothing I worry about. Plus, let's face it, when a woman cheats it is pretty easy to see it coming. They tend to exhibit very specific telltale behaviors, and generally not the ones talked about in women's magazines (31 ways to know he's cheating, etc).

I know if my wife cheated on me, I would be hurt by it. As for what I would do about it? I would just be done with her. I'd do everything I could to ensure the divorce went smoothly, and then I'd get on with my life. Believe me, the absolute WORST thing you can do to a woman in a breakup, except for murdering her, is to thrive without her, i.e. have more fun with hotter women.

And let's face it, killing her for fucking Chad Thundercock, besides making you a monster who needs to be locked away, says that you gave her WAY too much power over you.

The only exception to this is if I caught them in the act - then I'd mollywhop the dude and then cast her out to be with her lover I just made into a beta right before her eyes.

3 upvotesSir_Shitlord_focker4 years ago

Excellent point, a good number of murders occur due to infidelity. Fucking married women can be high risk.

70 upvotesGayLubeOil4 years ago

All western sociology classes are infested with Critical Theory. The 22 year olds of TRP are being trained to talk about their feelz and identify problematic aspects. If they do this then their overweight SJW Teacher Assistant will give them participation points.

Then they go on TRP and read GayLubeOils literary masterpiece :Getting a Woman to Cheat is Like Getting a Duck to Eat Bread. They flip balls and then begin writing 200 word thought response as if they were still in class.

8 upvotesPlanB_pedofile4 years ago

There's a line drawn between "could" and "should" but when it comes to these I'll keep my mouth shut.

I'm old school on being hands off with another man's wife.

6 upvotesSir_Shitlord_focker4 years ago

that's a funny username there...

7 upvotesmryddlin4 years ago

First sign of a SJW is the 16 page post for a one line point.

It's like they get marks for being extraordinarily long winded.

This is all going to blow up a few years from now. The financial crisis happening in this EU is not going to stay there. The dose of reality that is coming with hard times is going, hopefully, be a massive wake up call.

Not holding my breath, I'd recommend people learn about bitcoin before the puck drops

4 upvotesAntixD4 years ago

why the mention of bitcoin,care to explain further,please?

1 upvotesmryddlin4 years ago

I'd love too :)

It's a hedge against inflation/deflation of a currency (re: think Greece right now).

Bitcoin has three main features, strongest to weakest, which is a payment network for sending and receiving money (visa/interac), a store of value (stocks/gold), and a currency (USD, all FIAT money).

The benefit of moving funds into BTC for short term holding is if things go into the shitter. For example with Greece, as the value of the euro drops, moving euros over to btc or greenbacks, allows you to buy back your euros after stability is reached without any loss of value to your assets.

Why BTC over other investments in a crisis?

because no one can stop you from making those transactions , it is a P2P public ledger. If you are setup before a crisis comes, you will be able to take advantage of it and make a pile of money.

Take a look at Argentina right now for an example of this working in production.

Edit: I'm not advocating BTC for investing, I recommend people look at it and learn it's features.

3 upvotesSir_Shitlord_focker4 years ago

"It's a hedge against inflation/deflation of a currency"

Really ? Because the variance on Bitcoin to gold over the last 3 years is about 100'000'000 times the variance on the USD to gold...

I swear some people latch on to any bogus claim like it's a godsend truth.

The only advantage of bitcoin it's the anonymity, if what you're doing is 100% legal it's still fun to speculate on it. But it's a lousy currency that you can't spend almost anywhere and goes from 1400$ per BC to 300-400$ per BC today...

0 upvotesmryddlin4 years ago

Because the variance on Bitcoin to gold over the last 3 years is about 100'000'000 times the variance on the USD to gold...

absolutely, it's only useful when greenbacks are not available but that is one of it's core features.

i.e. to circumvent capitial controls, just look at Greece and Argentina for use cases. I'm not saying it's the better option, I clearly said it's not an investment.

It does provide a technically superiour product when it comes to the Payment Network and has significant potential as a store of value. There is a ton of money that has been invested into the technology, it's brand new compared to Gold hence I don't really recommend people do more than get educated on it.

It has three core features and currency is it's weakest right now.

For the record I use it to pay for a ton of stuff and have made a bunch of cash off it but never forget it's just a tool, not some holy financial grail.

I full expect to see Nation states start to upgrade their central banks away from paper notes to a cryptocurrency. The code is open source and there is zero reason why the Federal Reserve can't fork that code and upgrade the USD.

Blockchain technology is here to stay and is incredible useful.


That application alone is worthwhile to the people in this sub trying to legally protect themselves.

It's also been stable in the $225-$250 USD band for I over 180 days, the early stuff (which is all public now) was pure market manipulation.

Not that I'm crying about that, I made a ton of money off the Chinese.

1 upvotesAntixD4 years ago

any good resources for noobs such as myself?

2 upvotesmryddlin4 years ago

Bitcoin Primer

Bitcoin Main Site:


Bitcoin Whitepaper by Satoshi Nakamoto


Basic overview of bitcoin


Detailed video presentation on how bitcoin works


Wired presentation on the underlying blockchain technology


Legal perspective on the future of decentralized blockchain based technologies and services

Decentralized Blockchain Technology and the Rise of Lex Cryptographia

New technologies based on the blockchain https://bitmessage.org/wiki/Main_Page - P2P encrypted mail system

https://openbazaar.org/ - open source market for goods and services using bitcoin

http://storj.io/ - decentralized cloud storage Diffie-Hellman Key Exchange - Public Key Infrastructure

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEBfamv-_do - public/private key exchange explained. excellent video for an intro in how PKI works.

Blockchain technology is similar to the early internet with the opportunity to build new services on a decentralized open source platform, moving away from centralized services.

Overview Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Um63OQz3bjo - from the horses mouth, the bitcoin developers overview video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx9zgZCMqXE - high level technical overview

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZp7UGgBR0I - contains current issues with the development.

64 upvotesiBrokeRSA4 years ago

Good stuff. It's one thing to say "fucking married women is usually a bad idea because the husband might snap and get the idea to stab your shit up" or "bad idea to fuck your friends girl if he adds more value to your life than 20 minutes of pussy."

It's another to say "you are causing the downfall of western civilization by fucking married women you lowlife coward blah blah blah degeneracy blah blah blah"

If you've read The Way of Men, you'll note that Jack Donovan makes a key distinction between Being a Good Man -- traditional honour and moral virtue and Being good at being a man -- alpha characteristics that show strength, tenacity and ability regardless of moral inclination.

TRP isn't about being a good man. It's about being good at being a man. That's why people say TRP is amoral.

11 upvotesHellbillyDeluxe4 years ago

In my opinion that distinction is bullshit. When you say there is a distinction between being a good man, and being good at being a man what comes to mind is a football player that is very individually skilled but is a shitty teammate. He can smash people and make spectacular plays, but he shows up late, causes drama with teammates, gets bad publicity, hurts the teams performance because he can't be a role player when needed, etc. Would you consider that person a GOOD player? I would not, despite their skilled technique. Would you want them on your team? I certainly don't, I want folks who are complete players in my camp. I suppose many people would say they think those types of bad teammates are good GOOD players when only their technique is looked at. But what about the total picture? Who is the better player Pacman Jones or Peyton Manning? I know who I would rather play with, and who I respect more. You can fake it and you might get pretty far like ol Pacman Jones, but to me you're not really good at being a man because you're not a good man at all in the total scheme of that paradigm. You're half the picture, a castle built on sand. To me you can't be good at being a man without being a good man, because only good men are truly good at being men.

Edit: In my opinion it's easy to do whatever it takes to get ahead, fuck over whoever you need to, take more than you give, etc. It's a hell of alot harder to rise above the selfish base instincts we all have and stand for something more. If you wanna fuck married women, screw over people at work, and be a dick to everyone you meet to "get yours" in life hey more power to you that's your choice, but I would not want to associate with you and certainly would not think you were good at being a man. In the end it's all opinions and different outlooks but I don't think it is a good idea like this post suggest to say only certain opinions and outlooks are worth discussion. The first OP had a right to fuck that woman, but the second OP also had a right to point out why he would not have.

3 upvotesfreebytes4 years ago

As long as the discussion adds value and is rational. One issue is that people will say, "This is wrong because... I say so."

1 upvotesjdgalt4 years ago

Those two views do have a place, but only one of them is RP.

1 upvotesdocbloodmoney4 years ago

The Way of Men is required reading, everybody who hasn't picked it up should do so

0 upvotesCode_Bordeauxx4 years ago

So where would you propose we draw the line? The only differences between 'better not sleep with the married chick or you might get stabbed' and 'better not cuckold other men because you would then help society go to shit' are that in the latter the negative consequences hit you indirectly and they affect more people. Unless you were to think you are not dependent on society like everyone else. In my view good or bad has nothing to do with it, I agree shaming or moral judgement has no place on this forum. But I consider both situations you mention a matter of warning for bad outcome.

53 upvotesIllimitableMan4 years ago

Simplest way to put this:

If someone thinks what you're advocating means they couldn't trust you if they knew you, then it's immoral to them.

If you are loyal to nobody, will betray when you need to, feel no empathy and you know of a guy who is just like you, you will think he is badass but you won't trust him. DTs don't trust DTs because they know themselves. To most people this lack of trust constitutes "immorality."

If someone can't trust you, you automatically become immoral to them (even if you help the environment.)

If you sound like you enjoy others pain, others rightfully assume you would enjoy their pain too, so they distrust you and then again, you're deemed immoral by that person.

Fuck ethics for a second, just go along with this basic premise: if you betray them, they think you're immoral. That's it. No elaborate codes or commandments, simply a "can they trust you?" question. No? What's that? You like fucking people's wives and they happen to be married or want to get married one day? Right, then they think you're immoral.

There's a reason these discussions are had ON THE INTERNET where you feel anonymous. Because in real life this shit would ruin your reputation. Why? Because people wouldn't trust you and that means they'd think you're immoral. Reputation is everything. And reputation is built on EXPERTISE and TRUST. If someone can't trust you, you're immoral to them. You could be the most cunning guy alive, if someone trusted you, they'd think your moral.

Sadism is deemed immoral by the vast majority. That's why when someone posts a thread saying "I fucked his wife and his sister and his mother and I laughed as he watched crying" you're wise to delete that just as much as you should delete the idiot questioning the morality of strategy (strategy is amoral - pointless to discuss it.) But when people tell stories, they don't hear strategy discussion, they hear something they relate to and they will inject their morals into that.

People can't and won't not inject their morals into stories. Even a psychopath does this, he'll think "why did he not just fuck the wife when she came over and flirted?" And then call the guy who doesn't fuck a married woman a faggot for not doing it. Most people judge you for being too sadistic, a psychopath judges you for being too altruistic (why do you care how this affects other people? It's good for you.)

If you don't delete the threads with guys talking about adultery, you will always get bro knighting. ALWAYS. Why? Because lots of people have empathy and they don't want to hear about how people who have little to no empathy will do whatever it takes to get what they want and don't give a shit about the consequences or collateral.

That will always wind people up. And if you start banning the empathic majority so the psychopathic minority can discuss optimal strategies, you're going to lose A LOT of people in the sub. I'm starting up a dark triad sub soon to discuss such things, but it's going to be private PRECISELY BECAUSE I know that kind of discussion isn't meant to be had out in the open, but with people who can cast morals to the side and speak PURELY ABOUT THE STRATEGY FOR THE SAKE OF REFINING IT. Regardless of my morals, I can do that. But this is not something most people can do, because their personality (usually religious morality) infects all their judgements.

IMO, ban the threads that sound overly sadistic and ban the threads that sound overly whiny and are all "should we really do this to people though?" and then you won't get any drama.

But when you let altruism or sadism shape any message, you're always going to have sadists call altruists ineffectual pussies, and altruists call sadists evil, demonic, or whatever. And that's a fucking shit show. That's what a lack of shared values does.

5 upvotestrphardmode4 years ago

DTs don't trust DTs because they know themselves.

I find that DTs will trust other rational DTs (and intelligent machiavellian stoics) with aligned interests about as much as they can trust anyone who isn't under their direct emotional influence. Unstable/irrational/incompetent DTs are among the least trustworthy people in existence though

3 upvotesIllimitableMan4 years ago

Great nuanced perspective

I find that DTs will trust other rational DTs (and intelligent machiavellian stoics) with aligned interests

But only if they believe interests are aligned, and only in relation to the shared goal, otherwise, distrust.

about as much as they can trust anyone who isn't under their direct emotional influence.

That's not very much. But I agree.

Unstable/irrational/incompetent DTs are among the least trustworthy people in existence though

Don't have to tell me twice. Haha.

2 upvotesjames-watson4 years ago

DTs trust no one, and for good reason. They know trust doesn't exist.

Incentives exist. Incentivize the behavior you want, but never expect it to happen all the time or when you need it most.

Now, the illusion of trust, just like the illusion of free will, the illusion of democracy, the illusion of morality, and the illusion of happily ever after, exist. These illusions are vital for bending society to the will of a few very cunning DTs. But only a fool believes these illusions.

The majority of people are fools.

1 upvotesfreebytes4 years ago

How would someone get an invite to your new sub? What is the criteria?

As for the main topic of your post, you are saying that all stories should basically be banned if drama is to be eliminated because morals will always be injected into stories. Therefore, the only effective method to avoid drama is to discuss strategy and only strategy. However, this eliminates anecdotal evidence that validates the techniques. "This worked for me!" posts are good validation for individuals that are new to the subject.

1 upvotesIllimitableMan4 years ago

How would someone get an invite to your new sub? What is the criteria?

$5+ Patrons or people I think will add value and are suited to the discussion of power. If you don't know much about power or strategy, and can't help build it, or don't already have some sort of reputation, that won't include you. Effectively, there's a $5 subscription for the clueless (or people who just want to support get a free invite anyway, should they want it) and it's a free invite to people who can teach the subject matter (people I trust/recognise.) I will post exclusive content there and be available for rudimentary strategy advice, as will the rest of the community.

It's going to be very selective. If it's not selective, the community will tank. I'll even go so far to kick people out for causing trouble, even if they're a patron. The money won't make anyone immune to the rules, $5 isn't worth the disruption a person can cause should they be that way inclined. Naturally, I operate on the assumption that if someone I haven't vetted is willing to invest a little money to get in, then they're going to make the effort to be decent members of the community.

However, this eliminates anecdotal evidence that validates the techniques. "This worked for me!" posts are good validation for individuals that are new to the subject.

Good point, I agree, I still retain my previous argument, however. In light of that, it seems whatever course of action is taken, something will be sacrificed.

1 upvotesAntibuddy4 years ago

You have MANY assumptions for the motivations of the "immoral." Affairs are usually more complicated than what you've painted, as are the outcomes.

I fucked a married girl for 2 months. Now it's over, she's moved away with her hubs, and they are going to try to start a family. He never suspected a thing. Who is losing? Who lost? If you think that's an easy answer, then you're not thinking.

Your trust angle doesn't fly either. We all have different codes of conduct reserved for strangers vs. friends, AKA, those in your social circle vs. those outside it. I would NEVER bang a friend's wife, and my friends know that. Even when their wives flirt with me in front of them (because a single, trustworthy best friend is as safe to act like a whore around as a gay best friend), I intentionally act beta AF and shy JUST to make sure my friends know nothing is or will ever happen.

So don't try to break things down into empathy-lords vs. psychopaths, because human emotion has many more gradations than that. Being empathetic means you also have to identify with people you don't like. The morality police often forget that point. And this is why I consider morality police just as bankrupt as me or anyone else. But at least I can be honest with myself.

3 upvotesIllimitableMan4 years ago

It's not a perfect explanation. It is simply a way to understand how people perceive morality. Her husband wouldn't trust you and would think you are immoral even though you wouldn't do that to your friends. You wouldn't care, any sense of morality you possess you would not extend to that husband because you don't know him. You are proving my point.

If you are a psychopath any sense of altruistic morality would not even extend to your allies/friends because a psychopath's morality is completely utilitarianist. The majority apply their code of ethics to their ingroup and exploit the outgroup. The fool applies his set of ethics to everyone, the psychopath, no one.

So don't try to break things down into empathy-lords vs. psychopaths, because human emotion has many more gradations than that.

Everything is on a spectrum. This should be assumed, will you now insist on an exact decimal measurement of where you fall on the spectrum in order to concur with a valid idea or will you continue to miss the forest for the trees, not realising that what I have stated is a maxim rather than an axiom? Nevermind.

10 upvotesEchelon644 years ago

Any shaming language from one man to another is going to trigger my ban-hammer

10/10, I feel triggered by your puns.

31 upvotesSarcasticus4 years ago

Morals are an individuals interpretation of the world filtered through his values. Not everyone has the same values and therefore not everyone has the same morals.

While its fine for me to express my opinion on why, for example, I think sleeping with married women is wrong. It is not my place to tell someone else they are wrong if they choose to do so.

I think new readers need to grasp the idea that it's up to each man to decide how he wants to live his life. There is no one path to happiness and success that will work for everyone. Feel free to give advice on what works for you.

But don't presume to think you know enough to tell someone else how to live their life.

21 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Some people think taking steroids to fast-track their muscle building is wrong. Tell that to /u/GayLubeOil.

48 upvotesGayLubeOil4 years ago

Jesus christ dude. Thats another fucking beehive.

Hey guys I have a question. How do I look like this guy who is on 250 Test Prop, 400 Mast, 300 Tren Acetate and 50 miligrams of winstrol a day without taking steroids. I want to be natural. Also how much sugary whey protein powder should I drink?

Thats basically every fitness question ever.

13 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

You just made my point. And shaming men for doing so isn't going to stop them.

48 upvotesGayLubeOil4 years ago

Hey guys how do I fuck as many women as the dude who cock blasts wives and girlfriends without cockblasting wives and girlfriends?

21 upvotesWhisper4 years ago

Haeee Guize, how I get grlfrind to respect me without standing up to her? Don't want conflict. Thx!

20 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

That's pretty much the sub lately. That's what we're trying to clean up.

1 upvotesAntixD4 years ago

suggestion:Do an elaborate post on fitness and steroids

-19 upvotesomnipedia4 years ago

It's not fine. If you express that you think it will be wrong you will be banned. That's what this post is about.

In the other thread everyone who disagreed was deleted and only one opinion-which had a lot of shaming language including calling people faggots and Bly pill like the OP mod here did-remained.

Political correctness has arrived!

16 upvotesCopperFox3c4 years ago

It's one thing to say I don't agree with this, it's an entirely different thing to say What you are doing is wrong, and you are an evil person. The first is rational discourse ... the second is shaming language.

If you don't understand the difference you shouldn't be on this board.

10 upvotesGayLubeOil4 years ago

Wrong by whose standard you realize TRP is international as fuck? I had a skype call with a guy from Nigeria this week and im going to have one with a dude in Japan next week. This group of people will never agree on a set of moral values.

3 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Even without going international, I'd love to know the standards any individual opinion's got. Just by swallowing the red pill, you've kissed off the morals of 99% of people. If one of the driving forces of your life is seen in the same light as neonaziism, who are you trying to impress with your morals? Any standard you could point at is already disgusted by your existence.

2 upvotesCopperFox3c4 years ago

My point exactly ... well said GLO.

9 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

My god you're a moron.

36 upvotesreddishman4 years ago

I am going to fuck your girlfriend

I am going to fuck your girlfriend because I don't know you nor do I owe you any loyalty.

I am going to fuck your girlfriend because you let yourself go and she can't get her tingles from you anymore.

I am going to fuck your girlfriend because she's here drinking with me alone.

I am going to fuck your girlfriend because she's an adult and she can make her own decisions.

I am going to fuck your girlfriend because she values the feeling of my penis in her vagina over whatever it is she gets from associating with you.

I am going to fuck your girlfriend because you didn't next her like you should have.

Did I miss anything?

(This is verbatim from an old post on TRP from my notes. After reading this post I dropped all my morals on the topic. Life is better now)

22 upvotesKill_Your_Ego4 years ago

I'm going to fuck your girl because she found out I was single and started sending me messages telling me all about how you two were separated and she sleeps in the other room. And then reminding me about all those loads I busted in her mouth all those years ago.

I'm going to fuck your girl because she found out I was single and told me, straight up, "I can help with your libido after I get off of work." Ok I didn't fuck her because she's fat.

I'm going to fuck your girl because I didn't even know you existed until you called the whore while she was naked in my bed at 3am.

I'm going to fuck your girl because I didn't even know you existed, nor your three children, until she sent me a copy of the book she wrote and she talks about her "wonderful husband and three children" in the jacket.

Really who blames the other man? My ex-wife thought I was going to somehow blame the other men, multiple men, she was fucking. As if there is some lack of men who will fuck a hot slut whose DTF. She honestly thought I was going to go track them down and fuck them up. I didn't understand back then but I didn't realize how fucking pathetic the white knight manginas are. I do understand, now, and much more importantly I understand why she thought I was one of them.

Neither of us are confused about that anymore.

9 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Im with you guy-- Women are not loyal to me so why the fuck should I be loyal to them. And what do I "owe" to a bro? The "bros" never spared me when they fucked "my" women....

5 upvotesOlipyr4 years ago

This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy. It was created to help protect users from doxing, stalking, and harassment.

If you would also like to protect yourself, add the Chrome extension TamperMonkey, or the Firefox extension GreaseMonkey and add this open source script.

Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, scroll down as far as possibe (hint:use RES), and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.

Also, please consider using an alternative to Reddit - political censorship is unacceptable.

6 upvotesIupvoteforknowledge4 years ago

Man, the whole not knowing the guy exists until he calls. And then she talks all cutesy to him saying she is just staying the night with Alice, telling him I love you, miss you after she slobbed on my knob. Happens all too often and reminds me to never trust women.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

I am going to fuck your girlfriend because I simply want to.

-3 upvoteswhatsazipper4 years ago

N-n-n-no you w-w-won't! I'm g-g-going to sh-sh-shoot you!

Scurries away like a defeated beta.

Lots of internet toughguy talk regarding this issue; dreams of exacting revenge that never come to fruition. The reality: Most guys defeated remain defeated and adopt the behavior of the defeated.

Keep your bitch in line and have some others around too. Never surrender your ability to hunt. Then, you won't have this problem.

40 upvotesredpilled-by-design4 years ago

This sort of shit doesn't (and rightfully so) fly in r/theredpill, we are about lifting each other up, and being the best version of ourselves. I would go so far as to argue that people who use shame tactics are in fact still VERY BP. After all, attacking another man because of his sexual choices? Sounds like a white knight to me...

43 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Exactly. TRP is about maximizing male sexual strategy, recognizing the decline, and enjoying it. We are not trying to change the world.

7 upvotesThe-Pussy-Whisperer4 years ago

And now in come the feminists crying redpill support of adultery.

I'm ok with that. (Both them coming in and our (implied) support)

5 upvotespissoutofmyass4 years ago

Which is hilarious because feminists defend a woman's "right" to screw whoever she wants whenever she wants regardless of her relationship status because "men don't own women."

They're so full of shit.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Words. That's all they have.

-1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

2 upvotesmy_redpill_account4 years ago

It is losing frame, and they don't even realize it.

-7 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

why do you guys use so much beta logic? Shame tactics? lifting each other up?

who honestly gives a fuck what someone on reddit says about what you do? are some of you guys that mentally weak that you feel shame from a comment online?

grow up, and if you are fucking a girl in a relationship (which is fine) but then you can't handle that someone online says "omg tahts bad", you really are just beta...

trp shouldn't be a circlejerk to empower each other like some feminism subreddit, it's supposed to be a kick in the nuts. like "hey faggot, you've been fucking up your whole life. here's what you've done wrong, here's what to do now. now gtfo the internet and go do it"

7 upvotesfortifiedoranges4 years ago

It's just annoying to have some faggot derail a thread because they just realized their girl was cheating. It's not about hurt feelings.

2 upvotesmaahhkus4 years ago

Wouldn't a better approach then be to encourage discipline among TRP true believers not to let their threads be derailed by moralizing BP'ers? A thread can only be derailed if these comments are responded to. Just downvote and move on, I say.

I realize there is a tension between the free flow of information and the quality of content on a given forum, but I am always interested in approaches that avoid outright censorship as much as possible, just because of the precedent it sets, in the form of arbitrary control by mods.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

0 upvotesmaahhkus4 years ago

The problem is deciding what is bullshit and what qualifies as good information. leaving that up to a unilateral decision by a mod kind of kills the whole point of being on reddit

3 upvotesredpilled-by-design4 years ago

Listen, I get it, but think of it this way; After getting your balls stomped, wouldn't you like someone to help explain WHY you got kicked in the nuts, and HOW to avoid being a fuckin idiot and suffering another round of testicular piñata?

To me, that's what TRP is, none of that faggy "u go gurl! <3" bullshit.

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

After getting your balls stomped

no, because as a beta you never had balls to begin with. that's the mistake you guys are all making in your thinking

if you really need some internet strangers to coddle you so you can feel alpha, you're not alpha. you're just gonna end up as a beta as soon as you step back in to reality.

and HOW to avoid being a fuckin idiot and suffering another round of testicular piñata?

trp info, at least before people get really wordy and all in to madeup theories, is about "here. here's the info you need. read it, figure out how you fucked up in your particular situation, and figure out how to improve"

i get why your comment is so upvoted, and from a site that has mostly weak minds like reddit it makes sense that most of the people would like to have their hand held and told "no buddy you can be strong if you want to xd", but really that shits just beta as fuck

as a man, a basic thing we have to learn and do is figure shit out on our own and learn in the process, and learn from our mistakes. i think when trp gets too beta and the gurl power bs like you said, the people who think they are being helped are really being hurt long term, because once they are outside of trp they will go back to being beta

1 upvotesredpilled-by-design4 years ago

I think we are in agreement, but I could have worded my argument better.

here. here's the info you need. read it, figure out how you fucked up in your particular situation, and figure out how to improve"

This is exactly what I think this community is about. No handholding and no childish shit. I am simply saying that we are here to point others in the direction of information. Like you said, it is each man's job to apply that information, and no one else's, lest they become beta once again.

1 upvotesPorqueChop4 years ago

We do care about what is being said. We care about the quality. Its not that anyone is butthurt by morality or shaming language (what you are doing) , its that it is pollution of the discourse. Do you understand what signal to noise ratio is?

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

shaming language (what you are doing

oh god... to think that a grown man would feel shame over something someone typed to him online...

just wow, and even more that you felt shame over my post. wow

12 upvotesmalkovic4 years ago

Honest question here:

By extrapolation, will users who mock others for being religious/have morals also be banned?

3 upvotesRedSovereign4 years ago

Depends on the nature of the discussion. If it produces non-constructive or flame-bait commentary we'll likely remove it. Follows our general principle of maintaining a high signal-to-noise ratio in here.

2 upvotesmalkovic4 years ago

ahh got it. just thought I'd make sure the rule goes both ways.

0 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

If you want to see that, you can find that ON ANY MAJOR SUBREDDIT OTHER THAN THIS.

I for one do not want to have "equality" here. And neither did anyone else when we were not 120k... let us guess why...

18 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

-3 upvoteswhatsazipper4 years ago

Incels ought to shut up when they have no idea what they're talking about. It clogs the tubes. They're free to read the sidebar or move to a different subreddit.

5 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

-1 upvoteswhatsazipper4 years ago

I never said chasing pussy was the number one priority in life.

What makes you think MGTOWs are involuntarily celibate?

The words that they type.

-3 upvotesYouDislikeMyOpinion4 years ago

What percentage of MGTOWs do you think have the ability to bed 9s and dimes on the regular?

Edit: Downvote me and come at me with a reply, I'll be waiting.

3 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

-1 upvotesYouDislikeMyOpinion4 years ago

You're not comparing this to any other group of men. You're comparing it to TRP.

And what is bedding 9s a measure of, anyways?

The opportunity cost.

"I am voluntarily celibate at the cost of being able to fuck [insert here]"

The [insert here] is the most important part of that equation.

If gaylubeoil goes celibate, I'd certainly love to hear his exact reasoning. On the other hand, I couldn't care less about some other Joe going celibate.

4 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

-2 upvotesYouDislikeMyOpinion4 years ago

Almost none of you.

You'd be surprised at what a lot of the men on this sub can accomplish.

As for your second paragraph, my comments were posed to be directed towards the incel category of MGTOWs or otherwise low SMV men. There are certain areas of discussion where they are at a natural disadvantage in terms of knowledge and understanding stemming from a lack of experience and ability. In many of these discussions, their additions detract from the value of the discussion.

Entertaining their advice or reasoning would have had detrimental effects on the quality of my life. I would likewise highly advise men to learn to spot them and ignore them.

As far as I can tell, most MGTOW are not celibate which means most of them are not involuntarily celibate.

There is a scale. It goes from incel to a very high demand male. When we get to the higher end of that scale, there is a supply of whatever you're looking for (within reason). A girl can come over, cook for you, blow you, fuck you, and leave. Or if that's not what you're looking for, then you can use your imagination and set something else up.

What this does is reduce the incentive for celibacy. If you know anyone at that level who chooses celibacy, then please educate me as to their exact reasons for choosing that path. I would be very interested in hearing them.

Going back to your second paragraph, I was asking the OP of the parent comment that question to ascertain his mindset. I don't do pussy-centric personal attacks. My end point in a discussion with him would have been exactly what I wrote in this comment. The conclusion that I make being that the subset of MGTOWs that are high SMV is rather small due to the reasons discussed above.

And on a final note:

You know there's more to life than chasing pussy, right?

Sometimes it serves itself on a silver platter.

2 upvotesSir_Shitlord_focker4 years ago

I do. got pictures to prove it. MGTOW, pros and the occasional very hot chick which I dump after one or two fucks. Some men accept the nature of women as "that's just nature". Some men figure they want nothing to do with these bitches. That's me.

2 upvotesYouDislikeMyOpinion4 years ago

Great, I have no qualm with you.

What percentage of MGTOWs do you think have the ability to bed 9s and dimes on the regular?

1 upvotesSir_Shitlord_focker4 years ago

Can't be both incel and MGTOW. If you're MGTOW your celibate is voluntary by definition. You need to brush up on your syllabus buddy.

1 upvoteswhatsazipper4 years ago

Rebranding an inadequacy does not negate it. If MGTOWs removed the incels they'd be fine; unfortunately, however, the incels seem like the majority. I'd stick to the RP label.

1 upvotesSir_Shitlord_focker4 years ago

Look we both swallowed the red pill, from there on, some people say (like me) that the truth about women turned them off women for good.

I'm still attracted to their bodies but I'm not spending a minute of my life that I don't have to speaking to them. That's for my own well being.

I literally pump and dump.

69 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Aren't you worried that our refusal to discuss morality is actually indicative of a gaping flaw in our consideration of these issues and we all essentially have our heads buried in the sand, refusing to acknowledge that maybe our claims that this is all amoral is just us trying to avoid having to deal with the moral implications of our behavior, which might requires us to admit some fault, which would result in fewer books sold and blog hits for the people with tags next to their names?

18 upvotesGayLubeOil4 years ago

What you need to understand is being an Alpha is inherently immoral. An Alpha is first and foremost a parasite he fucks other men's women and lives off of the labor of betas. If you want to live like a king you have to take a disproportionatly larger amount then you give or create.

If you want to fuck tons of women some if them are going to have to be the women of other men. If you want to live a very high standard of living you have to get there on tge backs of other men. If you want to be the best you have to be willing to do anything in your power to get there.

So to answer your question yes me mouthfucking a married woman in the handicap stall of my laws school bathroom was imoral. Its immoral because the disabled need that bathroom for poops and its not there for Russian mouth invasions. I get it.

But you moral fagging on Reddit is not going to stop me. The only thing you are doing is discouraging valuable discussion. There are men like me in this world and you are well served knowing this fact. I will take everything I want from this world. Know this and prepare for it.

17 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Something that so many of these newbies will never, ever understand is that the truly hot girls are rarely, if ever, actually "single". All of the hot ones are usually in some stage of a relationship with one penis owner or another. They call it "branch swinging" and not "branch jumping" for a reason.

Most girls who can get dick on the regular are not going to officially leave an old dick until they've got their hands and mouth firmly wrapped around another dick. So to be the new dick, sometimes usually you are going to have to black knight the current "bro".

In short, and to cite a very old cliché, these shame-happy mother fuckers need to stop hating the player and start hating, or playing, the Game.

5 upvotesYouDislikeMyOpinion4 years ago

If you want to live a very high standard of living you have to get there on tge backs of other men

Funny how every time I read something by someone I respect I find that they share very similar views at their core.

I agree, you're literally stepping on people's heads to get ahead.

1 upvotesGayLubeOil4 years ago

notice the upset betafags

3 upvotesTheHeroReditDeserves4 years ago

GayLube your a cartoon character

-1 upvotesGayLubeOil4 years ago

Post pics of yourself and lets find out what you are. Because im willing to bet money its pebdantic reddit faggot.

1 upvotesTheHeroReditDeserves4 years ago

srry bugs not really interested but your super a cartoon character now whats next you want me to fight you IRL

1 upvotesjames-watson4 years ago

You forgot the lamentations of their women.

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

moral fagging

Language is such a funny thing. It exists to express meaning. Men think its most powerful use is to change meaning.

3 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

I will present you with a different idea and go ahead and downvote me like you downvoted GayLubeOil and RedPillWatchTower (by the way 100% justifying this entire post).

Have you endlessly smart and morally feeling JWs who so badly want to have the success of RP men but... without being so "bad", ever considered, that a "discussion on morality" leads to nothing?


We are bettering ourselves, one !measurable! step at a time. We want results grounded in REALITY. Lifting and gains are real. Pickup is real because it works. "Morality" of not having your way with married women doesnt work in any measurable way.

Or tell me, what do you want to discuss? And when you say discuss please actually discuss, instead of implying that people who sacrifice hours and hours and hours of their time to make posts for YOU, help YOU get chicks and solve YOUR problems are just out to make some pittance on blog hits... its honestly insulting.

1 upvotesAntibuddy4 years ago

I need that to not be a single sentence.

-14 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago


26 upvotestiny_warlock4 years ago

honestly I'm inclined to agree with calpurnia, even moreso after seeing the reactionary plugging of the ears and "nah nah nah can't hear you" attitude toward a simple criticism

-25 upvotesIupvoteforknowledge4 years ago

Why don't you fucks quit concern trolling?

28 upvotestiny_warlock4 years ago

is it considered trolling to try and have a discussion on this sub?

17 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

It's one of those things where the more you say "no morals get those darned stinkin' morals out of here this is totally amoral!" the more it just sounds like you don't want to talk about morals because you know you'd look bad and you're unqualified to have the discussion.

8 upvotesLeFlamel4 years ago

Well not exactly everyone here is a philosopher, but what I've noticed (or what appealed to me most about TRP) is that philosophically it seems to be rooted strongly in moral nihilism, which is itself a legitimate ethical position and one that nullifies most forms of moralizing. If you wish to have that discussion I'm game.

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

There is morality on TRP, but there is only one commandment to follow, and that is don't be blue pill. All else is anarchy which is guided by hedonistic desires and the best methods to sate them. It is a moral fault here to be led around by the whims of women, only to never have any of you desires be met. Save for that morality, none other exists.

0 upvotesalreadyredschool4 years ago

Your morals are your morals. We can discuss how to kill somebody, if you are going to do it is your decision, talking about the methods is not immoral or else many good authors would be really really bad people. Keep your morals to you, if you don't want to do something, don't do it. It is for others to decide if that is ok to them.

"B-But muh opinions, people NEED to hear them, I am important, look at MEEE."

That's right, your opinion, it has no place in a discussion about what works and doesn't work.


18 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

After reading through the comments, I have to agree with one thing. A lot of people here like to police comments through the same shaming mechanism. What is the ultimate red pill morality? To not be blue pill. I can't tell you how many times I have read you are so fucking blue pill in comments around here.

The truth is, it is intellectually lazy. Instead of making a rational argument, they would rather just call someone BP, spout off something they read somewhere else, and then move along feeling morally superior (or they can call it more alpha) than the guy they were bad mouthing.

It all feeds the same ego. I am rewarded by the community for reinforcing the supposedly "good" behaviors. The only difference is the scale of community. I wish there would be policing for the same mechanism, because it does nothing to help people realize what they might have been doing wrong by just saying "you're blue pill, fuck off".

If the goal is to keep the discussion on the merits, then let's actually do that. I agree that dogma should have no place here, so let's sanction it in all forms.

0 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

If the goal is to keep the discussion on the merits, then let's actually do that. I agree that dogma should have no place here, so let's sanction it in all forms.

Yes, lets let all the BPs feminists whiteknights SJWs of Reddit come in here and completely swarm us, for the sake of hearing their opinions....


I come here, to see something different.

No censoring sounds cool and all, until you realize that r/askreddit has MILLIONS of people. They have more actives than there are subscribers to r/theredpill. They can completely swarm the place so easily its not even funny.

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

If you reread what I said, I said that we should do more censoring. "You are so fucking blue pill" adds nothing to the discussion and deserves the same censorship as "You are such a fucking misogynist". There are too many idiots around here who just like to be part of the horde who add nothing intellectual to the debate.

1 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

in that case I am sorry, I may have misunderstood/interpreted you.

I still prefer the one kind of idiots to the other though.

5 upvotesShanksNes4 years ago

Good that we're back on track. TRP has increasingly acquired a lifestyle/moral flair, and deviated to what this is primarily about - Sexual strategy and frame. This is a good step.

4 upvotesBetterthanuatlife4 years ago

Morality is nothing but an invented concept.

3 upvotesDoctor_Mayhem4 years ago

I dare say... a social construct? HUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUEHUE

6 upvotesMAWL_SC4 years ago

Morality aside, I just want to say thank you to the mods and our top contributors for maintaining frame and dedicating their time to make this sub great.

Without strong handed and benevolent men to hold the wheel, this sub would have crashed and burned long ago.


13 upvoteshebola4lyfe4 years ago

I dont know why you guys havent noticed it yet.

This sub is getting flooded by fake users who disguise themselves as red pillers but are actual hardcore SJW, manginas, feminists, blue pillers and women .

The recent posts and threads shows this blatantly .

Everyone here is so proud to have achieved 117 k subscribers but most of these new comers are the aforementioned who are trying desperately to infiltrate among us.

3 upvotesteeelo4 years ago

Sad sad people.

If we're so wrong, then why not let us self destruct on our own?

9 upvotespha1114 years ago

There are just some retards out there who simply cannot comprehend the word "amoral". They can only think in terms a 3-year-old would understand: good, bad, nice, mean, payback. To them, "women are this way" is the same as "women women are bad because they are this way, should treat them badly as revenge". To them, the "is/ought" fallacy is their natural state. More to the point, "here is how to game women" is seen as an endorsement of the same. The dumber ones think that TRP should be responsible for policing the use of this new knowledge, and prevent the collapse by changing society or women somehow. They're too stupid to habe figured out that TRP is a small fraction of people who have figured out hypergamy. Us all volunteering to become tradcons and marry submissive women would do absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things.

3 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

prevent the collapse by changing society or women somehow.

This is the best part. They obviously have not understood evopsych at all.

10 upvotesvengefully_yours4 years ago

Fuck me, not that shit again. I do not give a fuck if the bitch is dating, taken, married, or anything other than willing.

Why? Simply because if the bitch is gonna cheat, it doesn't matter if it's me, you, or Chad that is knocking the bottom out of her, someone will be. She decides who she fucks we don't, so if you want to hold some moral high ground you're welcome to, and your bitch will gladly suck Chad dry while you remain ignorant. In this time , and sure as fuck in the USA, she can and will fuck anyone she wants to fuck, married or not, because she can and all she will hear is "You go girl" from her entire family and all her friends, meanwhile the state will reward her for it.

You're damn right I will fuck your wife if she wants to fuck me, and I won't think twice about it. Unless she is stupid, you'll never know, and she is probably fucking some other guy right now.

-2 upvotesRP154 years ago

This will probably get me banned, especially since I was one of the men that brought morality into the mix, but isn't it a moral judgement to exclude unwilling partners? If this sub is truly amoral, isn't it a viable sexual strategy to use force to obtain sex?

I just don't understand why one moral is acceptable and the other isn't. I am not a troll, I am not a blue pill, I am not a pussy, I am a contributing red pill man that is genuinely surprised at how quickly people here are to reject morality and then apply a standard of their own.

3 upvotestrphardmode4 years ago

isn't it a viable sexual strategy to use force to obtain sex?


I just don't understand why one moral is acceptable and the other isn't.

Both are acceptable to discuss, and one is clearly not a viable sexual strategy.

0 upvotesRP154 years ago


Excellent argument. My point is that the massive overreaction by the mods' reaction to a small debate, they have given the SJW's a gaping hole with which to attack us.

1 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

No, it's always been our policy. We reiterate it so newcomers can see.

2 upvotesNightGod4 years ago

I'd suppose it's from a desire to not have this sub openly support criminal acts, if nothing else.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Adultery is still technically illegal in many states, and can get you sued as a third party if you break up a marriage.

0 upvotesRP154 years ago

It's truly not. I love this sub and the last thing I want to see is a bunch of idiots talking about rape, but that is what the mods have opened up by insisting TRP is 100% amoral. Such a declaration opens the doors to all kinds of destructive conversations that will do this sub in.

The mods have allowed this debate when they put out a tiny fire by tearing the bricks out of the foundation.

2 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

I am sorry, but I fail to see how you are not a troll. HOW IS IT A VIABLE STRATEGY IF IT LANDS YOU IN JAIL FOR 20 YEARS?

1 upvotesRP154 years ago

This is true and very valid, but that is a strategic critique. As it stands now, nobody could have a moral problem with such a strategy, and that's just stupid. There has to be a line drawn somewhere. It does not have to be along my line, but you cannot shout me down by saying this is an amoral discussion of strategy and then have a moral issue with force.

1 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

and that's just stupid. There has to be a line drawn somewhere.

Why exactly? I prefer no arbitrary lines and simply strategic/utlitarian/machiavellian view on methods. Thats what I care about. I care about morals in the extent that I have to follow them due to social cost, preferably not any more.

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Most rapists are never successfully prosecuted. As far as crimes go, it's probably the easiest violent crime to get away with.

1 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

Still seems like a bad risk/reward to me, besides it no way helps you to better yourself & due to your inbuilt instincts you will propably dislike it/ feel bad.

0 upvotesDoctor_Mayhem4 years ago

Well... I dunno... Technically, it has worked for, oh... thousands of years?

2 upvotesvengefully_yours4 years ago

So you want to advocate rape and equate cheating with rape? Hell lets just consider it ok to murder while we're at it. You can't possibly be that stupid or myopic, I refuse to accept that someone capable of using the Internet could be that dense.

These are not the same things, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the difference. Morality isn't the same for everyone, this should be common sense but many religious types simply can't see anything but what they believe, and it conflicts with the moral code of others. I for one am not a fan of rape, slavery, and genocide, but lust, sodomy, cotton polyester blends, sex outside marriage, and I covet shit all the time then go get my own, and it puts me at odds with christians. I have zero problems with gays, they hit on me all the time and I tell them I'm straight, but flattered...just like when a fat girl hits on me. They aren't destroying the universe, they simply exist. It's not a moral issue for me.

I reject your morality because I have my own code, it's not universal to everyone. Giving some bored housewife the cock she craves is not the same as grabbing a bitch off the street and forcing her in the back of your free candy van. To you it might be the same, but one wahts it and the other most likely doesn't (though I have known some fetish girls who have that set up to happen to them).

There is also the legal aspects, rape is illegal for good reason, so is murder. Cheating isn't illegal, and in fact most states encourage girls to cheat and branch swing because the Feds give them money when they charge a man with child support.

So if this isn't clear to you, then you have some serious mental issues and a dearth of reading comprehension, not to mention a seriously fucked up moral code.

1 upvotesRP154 years ago

So you want to advocate rape and equate cheating with rape?

Excellent straw man argument. I don't equate the two, I am saying that since the mods have declared this sub 100% amoral, there can be no moral qualms with force. That is the last thing I want to see.

I entered in this conversation from the opposite direction. I don't care for marriage; it is just a shitty contract. My critique of that guy was that his activity would destroy the childhood of that man's kids. In a sub where the men who stay in a shit marriage give their kids a family come to crawl out of the mud, that cad guy had to know the consequences of his actions. Knowledge and responsibility for actions are key points of being a RP man, and since that guy lived in willful ignorance of the consequences of those actions, he was indistinguishable from a woman.

I didn't even say the entire sub should change, I just said that guy should be aware of what he's doing and that he was acting like a woman. Go ahead and read them if you'd like.

2 upvotesvengefully_yours4 years ago

No, not a strawman, it's exactly what you did. Otherwise we agree, but no, using force is not something you do to get laid.

15 upvotesMatharon4 years ago

Thank you so much. I've been sick of that morality shit. You mods do a pretty good job, and I appreciate the work you put in here.

8 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

I am impressed with the consistency of the mods. They must have a red crystall ball which issues commands.

11 upvotesDildo_Saggins4 years ago

I know we have a whole slew of new members. 117,000 subs, compared to the 8,000 when I first came around.

Kinda off topic, but we're getting close to the size fatpeoplehate was before it was banned. What happens when theredpill posts make it to the frontpage? Or are we exempt from it? I'd sure hope so.

15 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

/u/redpillschool has made it clear that www.puerarchy.com is the off-site recovery zone. He's been hard at work developing a contingency plan. I won't reveal more than that until it becomes prudent to do so.

4 upvotesDildo_Saggins4 years ago

Oh I know that. I'm just curious to see what the reaction of reddit in general will be once we're regularly hitting /all. I think it'd be funny.

21 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

I'm pretty sure we set up the sub not to show up in the /r/all listing.

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago


What is this?

9 upvotesNeoreactionSafe4 years ago

The Jerry Springer Show

Some watch it to observe Immoral behavior as someone who is just curious about how crazy things can get.

Others watch it to sharpen their skills to actually do something similiar.

It's Enjoy the Decline contrasted with Enjoy the Collapse.

The people who actually imitate the Immoral behaviors are enjoying the decline. Those who see an end to all this coming (the Misandry Bubble) sense that these behaviors hasten the end and it sort of liberates one in the present because it loses it's attractiveness. It wakes you up.

One really should laugh at how crazy this stuff gets. (and they are true field reports)



...Mozart could see the Chaos and make fun of it.

2 upvoteskalstate4 years ago

TIL: Mozart was RedPill. Awesome!

4 upvotesNeoreactionSafe4 years ago

That was pointed out to me by someone I don't remember when I first got here when there were about 30k subscribers.

Just passing on the favor.

6 upvotesdisposable_pants4 years ago

Genuine question from someone who doesn't have a dog in this particular fight. How does this purpose statement:

This sub is about discussion of sexual strategy in culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.

Square with the sub's stance on amorality? How can we create a positive identity for men without morals? Isn't morality a prerequisite for defining what "positive" is?

7 upvotesun-affiliated4 years ago

Genuine question from someone who doesn't have a dog in this particular fight. How does this purpose statement:

This sub is about discussion of sexual strategy in culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.

Square with the sub's stance on amorality? How can we create a positive identity for men without morals? Isn't morality a prerequisite for defining what "positive" is?

He's not saying this sub will create a positive identity. It won't. He's saying that lack of a positive identity has created a knowledge gap for men in how to to succeed at whatever they're trying to do. All we're told is what men do wrong, without being given any info on how to do things right, and effectively. How do you get laid? Don't be an asshole or a PUA or a redpiller. No mention of anything you can be, other than yourself... the same unsuccessful person that needed to ask for help in the first place.

You don't need morality in order to build a framework of what works and what women respond to. As a matter of fact, you need to ignore morality if you're going to be truthful. You need to know that doing more housework or counseling in a dead bedroom situation will get you either nothing or resentful obligation sex, but ignoring her, working out, and catching the eye of other women will get her genuinely turned on. Talking about morality enables the most sensitive to shut down any productive conversation.

No one is saying to not be moral or to not discuss your choices. They're saying not to try to shut down conversations simply because you believe your morality is more important than another man's knowledge.

In the end, you can substitute "affirmative identity" for positive one. We're building an archetype for what a sexually successful man looks like.

6 upvotesdisposable_pants4 years ago

Fair enough. We should clarify that purpose statement, then, because "positive identity" has strong moral connotations and saying that society lacks that implies that we're in the business of creating one. Your "affirmative identity" idea is on the right track.

2 upvotesRonin11A4 years ago


"Positive" in this sense refers simply to whether a thought or behavior leads towards the man in question achieving dominance in his life, or the sexual conquest of his choice. "Negative" in contrast refers to something that might detract or inhibit the aforementioned goals.

Morality has nothing to do with it. If the behavior moves him closer to being the most alpha version of himself (lifting weights, eating better, reading quality nonfiction, improving his frame and game with women), then it is positive. If it moves him away from being the dominant social animal in his kingdom (excessive porn, video games, poor eating, poor grooming), then it's negative.

If he then chooses to use that new TRP identity to prey on the Desperate Housewives of Yogapantsville, USA, well, that's his call, and he will endure the benefits or pay the price on his own.

2 upvotesdisposable_pants4 years ago

If the behavior moves him closer to being the most alpha version of himself (lifting weights, eating better, reading quality nonfiction, improving his frame and game with women), then it is positive.

That's a radical redefinition of what "positive" means, though -- there are regular discussions on here about how certain alpha archetypes are not necessarily desirable (a drug dealer is alpha, but not the kind a reasonable person would want to be). If all "positive" means is "whatever gets you closer to alpha," I could say "becoming a drug dealer is positive," and that doesn't make sense by any conventional definition of the word "positive."

0 upvotesRonin11A4 years ago

Context is everything; the world is grey.

I specifically said positive refers to whatever behavior "moves him closer to being the most alpha version of himself." Not "most alpha."

Whether an archetype is desirable depends on the context of the man's surroundings. If I'm growing up in an inner-city ghetto, becoming a drug dealer or embracing organized crime might be the most efficient way to establish social dominance in my life and achieve my goals. If I'm a middle class kid from Normalsville, USA, it would likely do the exact opposite, and I'd be better off studying finance and accounting and lifting weights.

and that doesn't make sense by any conventional definition of the word "positive."

Your point? The "conventional" definition of positive may not have any relevance in TRP because TRP by essence is socially unconventional, as it reads between the lines and embraces truths society and women don't like to admit.

2 upvotesdisposable_pants4 years ago

The "conventional" definition of positive may not have any relevance in TRP

It's one thing to have jargon that's a bit opaque to the layman -- every group develops that over time. It's another thing entirely to fundamentally redefine commonplace words to the point where even normal phrases are confusing.

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Skillful karma is what usually results in skillful outcomes. What skillful means varies from person to person and there is no absolute standard for behavior. Do what works for you, suffer the consequences or gain the benefits accordingly. This is how life works, no?

14 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Personally, I think not wanting to pound a vag that is getting pierced by other dicks is a choice, not a moral.

Frankly, I am disgusted at the thought of any girl I am having sex with getting slammed by another man while she can have me. It is the least attractive thing a girl can do for me. It does not make me feel alpha to know that a girl desires someone else. If she thinks she can do better, I say go do your best. Being alpha, to me, is being the optimal choice, not one of many. Thus, banging married women is not an option.

I won't hook up with women who have children either. I refuse to participate in the propagation of another man's DNA. This is a personal standard, not some objective morality that I believe everyone else must live by. The difference is the level of judgement that I have regarding others. I don't find others who don't live up to my standards immoral. I just think their standards are inferior. But in truth, I think most men are inferior to me anyway, so that doesn't change much.

18 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

And that is all personal, which is totally OK. As long as you don't project your own values onto other men and shame them, you are totally cool with those values. Hell, I completely agree with you about single mothers. I won't go near them with my best friend's dick. But I also won't shame another man if he chooses to game them for easy pussy.

2 upvotesDollarWill4 years ago

Couldn't it be argued that banning objection to "Pro-Cheating" or "Disloyal" field reports is the same as promoting that behavior?

For example, it's well-understood in social psychology that you can influence the actions of a group by exposing them to examples of behavior. "I destroyed that relationship" posts/FRs are examples of behavior, and thus embolden others to replicate said behavior. The issue only becomes imbalanced when those who would seek to display a moral imperative can't write FRs where they describe in immaculate detail how they "Totally didn't bang that chick that one night and instead told her almost-cucked bf how much of a slut she was" .

There are also economic arguments regarding this as well, and I invite a private discussion of those should you be open to the idea.

In a subreddit like TRP, the ability to write grandiose accounts of purportedly real-world events is what garners the most attention and imitation. When the discussion moves in the direction of encouraging vs discouraging discourse, as I believe you are laying judgement on, the inherent advantage lies with the course of action that is made the most difficult to oppose by banning rejection of it's core tenements.

There's a mirror scenario of this manner of thinking in the wider political landscape. It's very, very easy to tell people to not oppose the actions of others, because, after-all, "how would YOU like it if THEY opposed YOUR actions?". As we all know, this precedent of action can very easily lead to a breakdown of the power-structure of the system into which it is introduced. It's the driving force behind the "Progressive" movement and we're all party to it's effects.

Earlier, you mentioned that TRP isn't about "Changing the world", and that instead members are encouraged to recognize the slow degeneration of western society and attempt to enjoy it instead of working to reverse the process.

This sentiment may be the result of many believing that any sort of reversal is impossible. Perhaps you share that belief?

Shaming tactics are exactly that. Tactics. They are easy to employ, take no real intelligence to aim, and few know the correct response to them^(Ignoring them completely + providing evidence of exclusion) . For those reasons I completely understand where your judgement on banning them as an action comes from. I would, however, advise reform when it comes to banning sentiment.

This is because I believe that TRP CAN "change the world".

TRP has all the relevant properties of a powerful social force; It passively recruits members who seek to imitate results, It is based on rational thought and evidence-based examples^(making it hard to refute) , and it acts as a locus for organisation and planned action^(on an individual scale no less) .

While TRP's offensive "teeth" only come from it's passive-aggressive opposition to it's detractors, it's greatest strengths lie in it's adhesion to empirical evidence and the scientific method^(providing a rock-solid defense and promoting it's adoption as an effective, rational ideology) .

This, however, is getting into the greater realities of the current "Culture War", and TRP's comments-section is probably not the place to discuss those concepts in-depth.

TLDR; Banning dissuasive feedback of "Fukked yo' grl" posts encourages more "Muh dik" FRs, alters the culture of the subreddit, and encourages in-fighting within TRP.

3 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

But that's just it, you see? I've been here since this place had 8,000 subscribers. TRP is not trying to change the world. We aren't trying to fight a culture war. TRP's stance on the culture is that the culture is fucked, there is no turning back, and a man's best strategy in the 21st century is to adapt his behavior to maximize his benefit in our new bereft culture, i.e. "enjoy the decline". We are not, indeed, attempting to "reverse the process". That's the core difference between TRP and Mens Rights.

8 upvotesmej714 years ago

To quote something I don't remember

"A relationship with a woman who already has kids is like playing someone else's saved game"

5 upvotesA419a4 years ago

Honest question here. What about morals concerning the age of consent. For example, the advice to go somewhere where the age of consent is low to look for girls who would be great for LTRs (and where there is a chance they really are virgins). Nothing illegal in the country we are talking about but definitely illegal in the US. I ask this because the young virgins are the closest thing to a unicorn you will find and if you wait to 16 or 18 like in the US you'll realize the CC ride has already started for many.

Think of how normal women and BPers respond to a man dating someone much younger. "Can't handle a woman your own age?!" they say. But to anyone who knows enough about reality will realize that women depreciate with age and that a man who can have someone younger is doing things right.

Maybe this can be the one spot where we can admit that younger is better without having to add an 18+ clause.

3 upvotesCyralea4 years ago

Ask yourself this. What's more important to you, lifelong happiness or satisfying the opinions of strangers? Are you better off making someone who brings no value to your life happier?

Ignore SJW's and BP mentality people. Don't do anything that can get you locked up, but fuck the haters. Your happiness comes first in life.

1 upvotestrplurker4 years ago

What about morals concerning the age of consent.

I would think it doesn't fucking matter.

The only concern should be the self-serving one regarding an individuals legal situation and the desire not to get thrown in jail. Other then that, some dude fucking a 16 year old chick in some other country is absolutely zero concern of yours.

1 upvotesA419a4 years ago

You would think but this is THE issue that seems to get people to become moral crusaders.

6 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

college frat guy here

nothing feels better when looking down at a chick giving you head and seeing that hand with a fat diamond rapped around your dick

11 upvotesIllimitableMan4 years ago

Appreciate you stickying the link to my newest article it will help the topic get seen more. Some good book recommendations at the end I urge you all to check out. Thanks!

6 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

It's completely relevant to the topic at hand.

6 upvotesRPMahoutsukai4 years ago

You should also consider shaming towards people who prefer LTR, contemplate marriage, or think that women worthy of commitment exist in the world. There's quite a bunch of people on TRP, endorsed even, who shame you, begin ad hominem attacks, and so on, only for the fact that you consider commiting to a woman being an option.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

LTR shaming is not moral shaming.

There's a difference between "you are a bad person if you do this" and "you are an idiot if you do this".

I doubt many LTR critics fall into the former category.

10 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

3 upvoteskalstate4 years ago

Yes, hold them accountable already! What's wrong with society these days?

8 upvotesasymptotic_salvation4 years ago

Any shaming language from one man to another is going to trigger my ban-hammer.

When you see such language would you say you're triggered?

3 upvoteswakethfkupneo4 years ago

You might as well enforce the same rule in AskTRP. I unsubbed from there after too much morality and "positive thoughts". Not sure how is it today, but last time I've checked people couldn't grasp the idea that assholery IS valid strategy for getting laid and fast. It's losing it's edge and it's watered down a bit too much /rant

5 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Morality is subjective anyway. You can't impose something subjective onto someone as if it were an absolute truth; that is simply ridiculous.

16 upvotesCowardlyPetrov4 years ago

This sub is about discussion of sexual strategy in culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.

What does the positive part of that mean then?

Shaming is the tool of feminists and blue pillers. It has no place here.

Does the fact that some people use misplaced shame as a tool for manipulation to manipulate others mean that a man can never be ashamed when he is genuinely wrong and deserving of shame?

I don't know the answers. I tend to like seeing discussions on morality here, and even stupid posts, because the sledgehammer of RP knowledge that quickly follows is generally pretty good to read.

I don't trust in anyone and I don't know enough to say either way, but I hope this all works out as intended.

9 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

I think the 'positive identity' is where the discussion of morals gets involved, whether something is right, or wrong. Sure, a groupe of people have no problem banging married chicks, while the number of married men that would like his wife banged buy some other dude is able to be rounded down to zero.

It's pretty shitty, but it all gets resolved like this-

'You should have been a top tier guy to stop her from cheating'

'There is always someone one step higher, or is able to run effective game- why can't they be loyal, why can't it be fair'

'Dem hoes ain't loyal, ALWALT, it's not your girl, it was your turn'

"This pill is really bitter, I'm not sure I can swallow it, I'm not sure I want to swallow it"

Shit, I don't want to swallow it. But I have too. The pill is basically in my brain, but I haven't been able to get it into my core. My brain knows all this stuff, but my being repulses it.

On the upside I just found out my future ex-wife has 20K in credit card debt and 32K in student loans. And she is going to take it all. WHOOO! My mind elates at what a good decision I've made getting divorced, while I only sometimes get super emotional when I'm home alone without my son for a week at a time.

24 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

positive = beneficial.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

The whole concept of "beneficial" involves morals to discuss. Just try to answer the question "is surfing porn beneficial"? Whatever your answer, you involve some form of moral. The whole concept of redpill is that some behaviors and thought patters are beneficial and some are self-defeating.

And if we can discuss what is positive/beneficial for a man, it must be allowed to ask the question "is fucking a married woman beneficial?"

4 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

You don't need morality to determine what's beneficial.

Eating isn't moral or immoral, but it keeps you alive. You could debate what you eat, but you wouldn't debate that eating is beneficial.

"is surfing porn beneficial"?

Does it give you immediate release, help you with frustration? Yes? Beneficial?

Does it cause ED later in life? Maybe? Perhaps not beneficial.

Does pent up sexual frustration make you try harder? Yes? Then don't fap.

None of this is a question of morality.

1 upvoteseserai4 years ago

this is not that place to identify said men who are wrong and deserving of shame. this is a place to discuss sexual strategy and self improvement. beyond that, you can do whatever you want with your new hard earned muscles/power and your tight game.

9 upvotesSleepNowMyThrowaway4 years ago

Yea I never did get their soapbox moralizing; these women are DTF and it's not like they're being raped - and if you refuse to fuck them, they'll find another cock.

It's not like they'll see the error of their ways, and join a convent or something.

11 upvotesdocbloodmoney4 years ago

People who are still stuck in gynocentric mindsets are unwilling to blame women for any transgression. In their minds, it's completely the fault of the lover -even though she is the one cheating on her spouse

1 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

Good old whiteknight mindset. "But...but... my super special RP girl luv of my life would never cheat, you DIRTY PUA MADE HER DO IT"

6 upvotesQQ_L2P4 years ago

The man who shames another about fucking married women is usually one who holds a deep seated fear about it happening to him.

If this is you, step up your fucking game and stop worrying about what other people do.

11 upvotesalreadyredschool4 years ago

"B-But muh opinions, people NEED to hear them, I am important, look at MEEE."

I find shaming language amusing, especially if it hits me in a pm with nothing more than "faggot"

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

I really, really hate the term "fee fees". And I also can't really explain why.

2 upvoteswhatsazipper4 years ago

It's feminine baby-talk.

5 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

It could be that, but it almost feels like it's more. It's almost intentionally condescending, like someone trying to troll you but very obviously. Instead of a subtle trolling insult, "fee fees" almost feels like a troll calling you a "fuckface asshole". It's just...lazy.

4 upvotessunwukong1554 years ago

One might think that men fucking married women might contribute to a society that lacks a positive view towards men. But that's just my opinion.

4 upvoteslifeliberty4 years ago

The only thing worse than someone "whining" about people's choices , is whining about the fact that it bothers other people. Can we man up and stop being so fucking sensitive ??? Say what you want ,I'll either read it, ignore it or vote on it. We don't need a policing nanny state to cry about he said I'm a bad person bs. Seriously men , this isn't fucking lifetime let people say whatever the fuck they want and go about your damn day.

6 upvoteslongerdistance4 years ago

And as a final reminder, keep your damn morals to yourself. Any shaming language from one man to another is going to trigger my ban-hammer. This is fair warning.

Ha! Keep up the good work guys! Everyone is entitled to their own morality, but this is a place to share knowledge and experiences. "Immoral" behavior will uncover truths that would otherwise have remained hidden, and as such it is valuable to share. Neither shaming men who have sex with taken women nor shaming those who don't has a place here.

2 upvotesprincessvaginaalpha4 years ago

I agree with the mod. Glad that you cleared it all up.

2 upvotesJablesRadio4 years ago

Just want to say thanks for putting this up. White knights are a cancer.

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

I don't think TRP should have an official viewpoint on morality, personally. That gets filed under personal philosophical beliefs, and it's a very complicated philosophical issue (although you may not always see it when you're surfing around reddit's atheist hug-bubble). I'm sure, for instance, that Dalrock would chime in on this differently than some of you. Also, while one of TRP's mantras is "don't ever get married" (and good advice no doubt), you can still apply TRP principles if you do happen to be married. Even Rollo Tomassi writes about plate theory that "The way to circumvent this dynamic is brutal honesty and a commitment to truthful, non-exclusivity with the plates you’re spinning" -- supporting the fact that being dishonest isn't necessarily a good thing. Regardless of whether or not there are hedonistic reasons for such, it's still fundamentally a moral stance, even if the philosophy behind it is superficial. The difference of course is how it's presented.

My point here is that TRP to me has always been a philosophy in and of itself, and tool for self improvement rather than a set of rules to follow. That inherently comes with a certain moral code. You've essentially set forth a rule here, but isn't a set of rules to follow a certain moral stance itself? This post itself violates the very rule it's supposedly imposing. More importantly though, this post seems to be addressing a symptom of the underlying issue rather than the disease itself: the "You being a bad person hurts my fee fees, and I'm going to let you know about it" is the problem here, not some philosophical viewpoint on morality. Although, from what I've seen here, those types of posts typically get downvoted to oblivion around here, so in a sense we're already self-moderating this issue. I guess I could be wrong, I'm not sure exactly which posts in question inspired this OP to begin with.

3 upvotesRealGucciSosa4 years ago

TRP is against one's own morality. That's for you to decide and implement as fit. This forum, however, should be and is entirely amoral. Its about discussing strategy. If you don't like a certain persons behavior, then just ignore it. Follow the one that you do feel like. This sub isn't going out of it's way to stop people from being BP either, its your own pejorative. Live your own life as you see fit. Just don't break the rules here, that includes white-knighting or bro-knighting. I don't understand why some find it hard to understand. Maybe its too nuanced.

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

I don't think TRP should have an official viewpoint on morality

TRP to me has always been a philosophy...[t]hat inherently comes with a certain moral code

Pick one, idiot.

isn't a set of rules to follow a certain moral stance itself

No. A set of rules that aren't moral rules do not comprise a moral stance. The rules of soccer are not a moral code. The rules of a forum do not say "You are a morally bad person if you follow these", but "you will be banned if you do not follow these".

There is no moral judgment in this post. It is not saying "having morals and pushing them onto others is morally bad". It is saying "If you have morals, fine. This is not the place to debate morality. If you want to, go elsewhere.".

TRP is a tool, not a moral code. That you don't understand this basic difference is kind of sad.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

The rules of soccer are not a moral code.

They are actually, and that's my point. You can't sit there and tell me that a cheater is doing so morally. Look it up in the dictionary if you have to.

I get the motivation behind wanting to distance the two -- when you claim the rules you're proposing of sexual strategy are "amoral" it psychologically absolves you from any responsibility of harm that may be caused from following said rules. Don't take that the wrong way, I'm not saying that RP theory is harmful (in fact I think just the opposite). I also understand where OP is coming from here, I just think he and others should be more careful with his terminology.

One of the main tenets of RP, as I've come to understand it, is personal responsibility. That in and of itself is a moral stance. We also do our best to take a scientific stance: if we try a certain sexual strategy and find that it is harmful to others, then we can conclude that it is immoral. Feminism is harmful for instance, so by that I can say that it is an immoral sexual strategy. However, we can't sit here and say that feminism is wrong and at the same time say that sexual strategy is amoral, as the two statements cannot logically both be true.

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

You're telling me that carrying a soccer ball with your hands in-game is IMMORAL? If a 12-year-old in a recreational game with his friends picks up the ball in the middle of play he's acting immorally? Patently ridiculous.

There are no "rules" of sexual strategy. TRP says, "this is the way women are and these are some tools and situational reactions that we've found, through anecdotal experimentation, are useful to getting laid".

That's all. Nothing more, nothing less. There is no morality involved, only guidelines of what is useful and what is not useful. There is no judgment about when it is appropriate to use TRP or who to use it on.

One of the main tenets of RP, as I've come to understand it, is personal responsibility


That in and of itself is a moral stance

How? TRP does not say "personal responsibility is morally correct". TRP says "personal responsibility will make you more effective, useful to society, and attractive".

if we try a certain sexual strategy and find that it is harmful to others, then we can conclude that it is immoral.

Absolutely false. The entire idea of "Machiavellian" [sexual] strategy is that it disregards morality. Either you've been here for all of one week or your reading comprehension is very poor.

An example: dread game. Dread game is inherently harmful to a plate, as it tells her she's worth little and is easily replaceable. The entire point of it is to lower self-worth and establish the power of the man in the relationship. It is TRP canon and preached as a very effective sexual strategy regardless of whether it is "harmful" to the woman.

The point of TRP's "scientific" stance (it is not truly scientific; it only emulates the core ideal of the scientific principle) is to say whether a strategy works, not whether or not it is "nice". A sexual strategy is objectively effective or not effective; how and when to apply it is up to individual morals.

Feminism is harmful for instance, so by that I can say that it is an immoral sexual strategy.

Feminism is not a sexual strategy, nor is it immoral. It is a smart and very empirically successful strategy to grant women more power in society and the court.

We can absolutely sit here and say feminism is bad for society in terms of utilitarian goals while endorsing amoral sexual strategy. TRP makes no claim that it is the "right" thing to do - many here even fully understand and admit that it is worse for society as a whole to have a bunch of unmarried players rather than stable monogamy.

Our society is going down the drain, and to be honest, TRP is not about how to "fix" society but rather how to survive, navigate, and thrive in the brave new world.

TRP makes only the claim that it is true, and that following the guidelines within will on balance improve a man's lifestyle, both in and out of the bedroom.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Patently ridiculous.

That's not an argument. Hell, you don't even have a basis for that claim. You're acting as if I'm trying to conflate "right and wrong" in our personal lives and "right and wrong" in a soccer game. Yes, life is not a soccer game, but right and wrong are still right and wrong -- that's what morality is.

The entire idea of "Machiavellian" [sexual] strategy is that it disregards morality.

Being immoral is disregarding morality. Is English not your first language?

Feminism is not a sexual strategy

Okay, clearly you are new here. Please read the sidebar.

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Okay, so let me get you straight. You say a kid who picks up a ball in a soccer game is acting in an immoral fashion, yes?

Being immoral is disregarding morality

No, you fucking moron. Immoral is not the same thing as amoral. Is English not your first, second, or third language?

Immoral = morally bad. Amoral = disregarding morality.

Feminism is not a sexual strategy

Feminism is not a strategy to get laid. It is a movement to change the role of women in society, and has obvious impacts on the sexual/dating scene, but is not a sexual strategy in and of itself.

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

What's wrong bro? I see you deleted your post after probably taking 2 seconds to google "amoral" and "immoral" and realizing you outed yourself as a class A retard by critiquing my English and then quoting it for posterity. I suppose posterity should know proper English, but you would have looked 30 IQ points better if you googled before making your comment. In the case you didn't, let me post some links here:

amoral: not involving questions of right or wrong; without moral quality; neither moral nor immoral.

immoral: violating moral principles; not conforming to the patterns of conduct usually accepted or established as consistent with principles of personal and social ethics.

Maybe you even looked up feminism and realized that if feminism was a sexual strategy, "sex-positive feminism" would be redundant and "sex-negative feminism" would be an oxymoron. Maybe the fact that many feminists are open proponents of misandry and that some view all PIV sex as rape tipped you off.

Maybe you thought that calling a kid picking up a ball "immoral" was kind of stupid, or realized that TRP's wide endorsement of dread game and Machiavellian, amoral strategy meant that it was truly a set of guidelines and not a moral code.

Shit, going out on a limb here, maybe you read the comment chain and realized you didn't actually answer a single one of my arguments. Maybe, just maybe, you realized you were wrong.

But probably not. And evidently, whatever you realized or googled, you're not man enough to admit to your ignorance, and that's the real shame here.

EDIT: Changed "tautology" to "oxymoron" after reading the sentence. See this? It's called owning up to a mistake.

5 upvotesLionLaw4 years ago

There is no such thing as morality on The Red Pill.
All of us here are dogs with our own agenda, some of us more worthless than others. But that's the point of TRP in the first place; to become the top dog.
Being morally responsible won't get you very far, particularly when society is against us men as much as it is anyway.
Be your own boss and make what you do seem morally responsible like a real alpha would

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Please. Of course there is. "That is beta behavior", a frase common on this sub in different versions, is nothing short of a moral statement.

1 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

That's nonsense. Beta is descriptive, not a measure of your heavenly worth.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Who said moral statements are not descriptive? Morals is not the same as religious judgements.

2 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

If I wear red instead of blue, and you described me as wearing red, which disqualifies me from joining the blue team, do you think that's a moral statement as well?

Like I said, nonsense.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

No. Moral statements can be descriptive, but descriptive statements is not necessarily moral. But it could be that I have misunderstood the meaning of descriptive in the English language (I'm not a native speaker).

However - the use of "beta" in this sub is based on the subgroup norms, some behaviors is considered "alpha", and some "beta". Then these labels are thrown out more than a fundamentalist Christian label people holy or unholy. Classic moral statements.

4 upvotesSW98764 years ago

I absolutely hate the definition you have for the red pill, "Discussion of sexual strategy in culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men". TRP means so much more. It is a real disservice for this entire sub reddit to label it so poorly.

5 upvotesQraQen4 years ago

Censoring oposing views now?

I guess this place is truly no better than the left you claim to despise and I guess this really is no more than a PUA sub now.

"I can do whatever I want and nobody is allowed to criticize me".

-The mantra of feminism and now the mantra of TRP as well.

2 upvoteskalstate4 years ago

It's not censoring opposing views. Try to understand this: all kinds of people are on this sub--those who date one woman, those who date several women, those who have 100s of 1 night stands, married men, cheaters, the list goes on and on. The problem that OP is addressing is that the signal to noise ratio is at a critical threshold and therefore, to keep the message on point, Moral Justice Warriors MJWs have to find another place to vent.

Take another example, I can't submit a post about Bioinformatics in this sub, because it's not the right place. If you call that censorship, then that's your prerogative, but it's a downright stupid position to take.

3 upvotesECoast_Man4 years ago

You just don't get it do you? This isn't censoring opposing views it's cutting irrelevant views that add nothing and are highly likely to be SJWs masquerading where they're not allowed like an underage girl at a bar.

Someone's personal morality is irrelevant here. At least on topics like this. Personal morality is fungible and transient, but most importantly individualized. That's not the topic of discussion.

If someone wants to post, 'should I sleep with my married neighbour?' Then the discussion should be limited to the rational pros and cons such as - well, if the husband catches you he might blow your brains out. That's not morality but rational advice.

Allowing personal morality in this inevitably leads to 'that's immoral bro, cheating is immoral, so there!' That adds nothing at all, and is the general tone of most feminists 'how can you say you're not a feminist, you don't believe women should vote? Gawwwd'.

Get outta here.

2 upvotesRoadToOneFifty4 years ago

Cmon dude. This is all a bit silly. The OP is basically saying if you don't agree with his interpretation of TRP (i.e. Sexual Strategy is Amoral™...end of story!) then you're automatically a troll/beta/broknight/whiteknight and you'll be banned. I understand maintaining a framework and having community standards around here but this isn't the way to go about it.

5 upvotesQraQen4 years ago

And why does that have to be removed by mods? Whats wrong with the down vote system doing what its intended to do?

The parallel here is hilarious with TRP being paranoid of the threat of infiltrated SJWs.

3 upvotesECoast_Man4 years ago

Irrelevant shit has no place here and derails meaningful debate and information.

I don't see any parallel or humour in it. If you have a problem with the rules or the mods then go somewhere else. Who the fuck are you to stroll in here and dictate terms to the mods?

1 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

And why does that have to be removed by mods?

Why don't you go start a subreddit with a topic but do no moderation and see how long it stays on topic.

1 upvotesjdgalt4 years ago

The opposing views have their own subs. We're not welcome there. Why shouldn't we have one too?

2 upvotesQraQen4 years ago

Well a sub that actually supports open speech is much more appealing to me than an echo chamber.

1 upvotesjdgalt4 years ago

Sounds like you want to be reading purplepilldebate.

6 upvotesH424 years ago

But ... but ... but ... Someone on the Internet is WRONG!!

Cheers to you Mod. Thanks!

5 upvotesstudiov344 years ago

I just find it interesting that a sub with so much complaining about how women are so awful because they're scheming gold-digging cheating whores (the essence of AWALT, and basically a moral judgement), wants to be exempt from the moral implications of their own actions.

3 upvotesun-affiliated4 years ago

No one is exempt from repercussions, real life ones, that is. That's why it's perfectly okay to say that screwing your friend's girl will likely end badly.

Moral implications according to a 3rd party is not a concern, however. There's how you feel about it morally, and how you'll sleep at night. There's also how people in your life will respond to your actions. Some stranger on the internet thinking less of you doesn't harm you in any way, except making it hard to find useful information in between their sermonizing. How narcissistic do you have to be to think that your disapproval is important enough for a stranger to worry about?

7 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

When you say "I see no problem in fucking married woman," you are making a moral judgement, are you not? Well keep it to yourself broheim; Red Pill is amoral; No one cares.

4 upvoteseserai4 years ago

no. that is not a moral judgement. a moral judgement would be "i think it is morally correct to fuck married women" however, he is saying that there is no PROBLEM "a matter or situation regarded as unwelcome or harmful and needing to be dealt with and overcome." will chad thundercock have any PROBLEM fucking married women? NO, and that is talking amorally and logically. no moral here.

4 upvotesLeFlamel4 years ago

Moral arguments - "you should/shouldn't fuck married women."

Amoral arguments - "you can fuck married women if you want to, but personally I..."

4 upvotesNinebythreeinch4 years ago

It's the way of Reddit: to judge and condemn everone that doesn't share ones own opinion. That's why it's turning into such a hugbox, where everyone try to make it a "safe" place where nobody gets their feelings hurt.

1 upvoteskalstate4 years ago

Haha, that's funny and completely wrong. I've had my share of arguments in this sub. Am I conforming? To some degree, perhaps, but it's because I am testing the theory and verifying the analysis myself. From a distant viewpoint (i.e., yours) it may seem like it has the essence of a hugbox, but it's really not the same. Try some of these methods out for yourself, and you'll see...unless, the truth is too hard to swallow...then you can go back to your dreamworld.

1 upvotesNinebythreeinch4 years ago

I'm not talking about this sub, I'm talking about Reddit in general.

2 upvoteskalstate4 years ago

Ah, got it. I don't follow any other subs anymore...probably for that reason.

5 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

-2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

you're an obvious troll. ban is coming.

7 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

But he's right though lol. You're just avoiding the question again because you'll look silly.

11 upvotesbartallen47904 years ago

That's a load of bullshit. Raping someone is not sexual strategy so it has nothing to do with having sex with a willing married woman.

-1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

raping someone isn't a sexual strategy

Do you even listen to the things you say? Or does it just spill out of your mouth around /u/RedPillWatchTower 's cock?

-2 upvotesbartallen47904 years ago

Good lord please stop trolling our sub and go somewhere else.

2 upvotesomnipedia4 years ago

Uh that thread you linked to, including the OP had shaming language from the "pro married women" crowd but all of the comments opposed were deleted.

You can't have discussion when one group gets to harass those who disagree and the moderator threatens to ban the victims of the harassment.

So what you're saying by "no morals" is that only one viewpoint will be allowed. You're fucking lying when to claim its shaming-- and you're threatening people with a ban.

If you have no morals and can't even be honest with the membership here, then this is just as enforcing of political correctness as the worst blue pill subs.

This moderator needs to be removed from this group immediately.

13 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

I just took a stroll through both, and there really weren't any deleted comments except for a few automoderator got to, so you must have some info that I don't know.

Listen, there's nothing wrong with having morals, and even making a case for why your moral values are beneficial and others should adopt them.

But if you come out swinging on why your morality applies to everybody and therefore you are our judge and jury, it's straight up trolling and doesn't belong here.

Otherwise, we would have to entertain posts like "treat women like people, you can't generalize you guise!"

And, yes, we've always banned people who come in here trying to take a morally superior tone and shaming people for deciding to live their lives differently. Always have, and always will.

And no, /u/RedPillWatchTower isn't being removed for helping enforce this.

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

But if you come out swinging on why your morality applies to everybody and therefore you are our judge and jury, it's straight up trolling and doesn't belong here.

Some A-grade common sense policy there. TRP is almost unique on reddit in that it's not reflexively dogmatic, and by and large, rational discussion about tricky subjects is supported. Entrenched moral or political positions do nothing but give the person advancing them a little buzz of validation.

My thanks to the mod team.

-8 upvotesomnipedia4 years ago

Except that's not what he said? You think we are stupid or you don't care?

He's banning anyone who expeesses a certain opinion about a topic, and he engaged in shaming in this post which you both say is bannable.

So either ban him or you're a fucking liar.

I know you're just a lying cunt whole is the courage or brainpower to be logically consistent.

You guys are just as bad as fucking SJWs, you fucking pussies.

Fuck off with your lies. Everyone can read this post. We are not as stupid as you.

Lay off the roids.

4 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Theres nothing wrong with roids.

11 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

Moral lecturing. Arguing from a standpoint of morality.

That is what is banned.

That is what I have just confirmed for you.

I'm not going to spoon feed you reading comprehension.

If you want to continue flinging insults instead of using your big-boy brain to understand these words, you're out of here.

4 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

I know you're just a lying cunt whole is the courage or brainpower to be logically consistent.

You guys are just as bad as fucking SJWs, you fucking pussies.

Fuck off with your lies. Everyone can read this post. We are not as stupid as you.

Lay off the roids.

Excellent RP copypasta fodder.

This is the equivalent of that 4chan one about "what the fuck did you just say to me you little bitch? I was a navy seal"

I'm gonna start calling people lying "Cunt Wholes"

3 upvoteseserai4 years ago

are you trolling?. he did not shame, he explained. unless you are bad at reading comprehention and cannot understand english.

yes we are not as stupid as YOU.

and he is not banning people who express an opinion, rather, people who is morally judging. if people where stoically judging, that is another story. but saying "you are doing something immoral and bad, poor beta hubby" is not the same as saying "you are not being effective in sexual strategy because a b and c."

-1 upvotesIupvoteforknowledge4 years ago

Lol this fucking guy. Go outside. Nothing wrong with roids. Your so upset about a post your crying and flinging insults like a...woman. I'm gonna fuck your wife one day you blue pill bitch, take your fee fees somewhere else. Maybe you are a chick...

6 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

/u/redpillschool is the head moderator. Please feel free to message him regarding my removal from the mod team.

7 upvotesIupvoteforknowledge4 years ago

Who the fuck is downvoting our amazing mod team? Probably omni's multiple accounts. Just ban that fucking retard and anyone else who acts like him. We already know RP is the truth and amoral. We've seen it work time and time and time and fucking time again. I say ban all the stupid fuckers who even disagree. Nobody has time to debate their faggot shit that clogs up the sub. I don't care if they think its censorship. I remember when this sub had 1-2k members. This crying shit didn't even exist. The men posted and the rest of us kept our fucking mouth shut except to ask for advice. Now we got a bunch of blue pill bitches fucking it up.

You guys are the best mod team on reddit, period. Stand your ground and don't cave to anything.

11 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Thanks for the vote of confidence. None of us are paid for this, we do it because TheRedPill literally changed our lives, and we want the message to remain clear and un-distilled, as we grow in membership.

3 upvotesRonin11A4 years ago

And many of us appreciate you wading through the bullshit to try and keep this sub's quality high while more and more hop on without even reading the sidebar.

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Wow those comments are ridiculous on that article.

All the people act like she is completely a victim and he over reacted.

He just wasted god knows how much money, time, and whatever else on this girl and she literally destroyed him.

I mean granted it was all his fault, but fuck.

2 upvotesOlipyr4 years ago

This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy. It was created to help protect users from doxing, stalking, and harassment.

If you would also like to protect yourself, add the Chrome extension TamperMonkey, or the Firefox extension GreaseMonkey and add this open source script.

Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, scroll down as far as possibe (hint:use RES), and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.

Also, please consider using an alternative to Reddit - political censorship is unacceptable.

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Regarding shaming language, I often see commenters using power talk and the 48 laws of power in their responses.

While we should learn and employ these tactics in our personal lives, I see TRP as a place where straight talk should be the norm.

A lot of guys coming here for help (myself included) will understand and benefit from straight talk much more than power talk.

2 upvotesPabloEscoba4 years ago

A great read.Im still reletively new here but ive noticed the moral high road in some responses. Its fucking annoying.

3 upvotesbattyryder4 years ago

this is funny, if a woman married or otherwise wants to fuck you then, fuck her if you want it. there ain't no bro code when it comes to a dicking. unless it is a literal blood relatives woman, that might be trouble. all these bitches are fair game outside that in my opinion. especially if she's attractive to you and making herself available to you. fucks sake it is her choice just as much as yours.

1 upvotesSQQQ4 years ago

"Happy Sunday."

not Father's Day? :p

1 upvotesredpilldiscourse4 years ago

No? It's fathers day in the US, but not in most other countries. Different countries have Father's day at different times of the year.

nfi if OP is in American, but even if he is no reason to assume every reader is, so 'Happy Sunday' works just fine.

3 upvotesBlueFreedom4204 years ago

Ok, ill quote this thread if I get gigged for posting my thoughts.

I hope this is not "Don't spew your morals on me! but you must respect my morals!"

I think rape is a valid way to get sex.

1 upvotesFLFTW164 years ago

I think rape is a valid way to get sex.

Mother nature agrees with you. The police, however, disagree with you.

That word "valid" is interesting. One meaning is having a sound basis in logic or fact. Factually, rape does indeed get a rapist sex at least that one time. But another meaning is legally binding due to having been executed in compliance with the law. So, no, it is not valid.

Rape is valid and invalid at the same time.

1 upvotessmurfiply4 years ago

If you can't deal with an opposing position besides laying down the ban hammer, maybe your own identity is in question. Maybe the mods have a bit of an inferiority complex.

3 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

Yeah. Right. If you want feminist, go to every other place on reddit. As it happens, this is an island of truth and objectivism amidst an ocean of judging and shaming.

Vote brigades and concern trolls, like you, are too effective to be let run free. Not because you are right, but simply because you are many.

1 upvotessardinemanR4 years ago

I've participated in some of these, although I have never used shaming language. Just stated that society is in decline and clearly doesn't have those "morals" and TRP exists as a result, something to that effect.

I don't anticipate ever starting these discussions and I've always just been on topic, but I am rather curious if that is ban worthy. Is it that the opic is just completely banned or just to shaming language part? I think there is a pretty large difference between the two.

1 upvotesSmirkAddict4 years ago

What about the race baiting? There's no issue creating needless desention but you are banning guys for morality debates. Interesting....

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Just had to repeat this to a poor novice a few days ago.

Tldr, don't worry about morality, worry about setting your own hard lines of conduct. The red pull IS NOT MORAL NOR A PHILOSOPHY


As a student of ethics (what is right and wrong) and metaethics (how do we know what is right and wrong) and the red pill (a praxeology for male actualization) I outline the two primary camps of moral judgements, that they are true/false, or they are not true/false. Presuming either to be the case, I explain trps association (as a praxeology) with either view of moral judgements,  hopefully putting the morality debate to rest.


Morality=ethics ( what is right and wrong) we are not discussing what is right and wrong. We are discussing peoples judgements of what is right and wrong.

moral judgement= a statement about ethics." (it is wrong to murder) these are what we are discussing. Not whether murder is actually wrong, what it means when someone calls it such.

wrong= you ought not to do (x)

right= you ought to do (x)

praxeology= a system or strategy based  on empirical and experiential reality, a so called toolbox to deal with a set of circumstances.

predicate= a phrase that enacts on a subject, (x). Example, I close the door, (i=subject) (close the door =predicate)

philosophy= a love of wisdom, an appreciation of a certain theory on the functions of something being observed, internal, external, theoretical, concrete, or metaphysical.

logic= a bimodal system used to measure truth and falsity, in terms of the principal of noncontradiction. (we shall exclude trimodal systems and further for this discussion)

argument 1

Moral judgements are predicates.

Predicates are exclusively true or false, except when referring to themselves or non real things. (Chicago is a city = true or false), (unicorns are beautiful = not a predicate, as unicorns are a non real thing)

Moral judgements are true or false, except when referring to themselves.

All moral judgements are equivalent to stating an (ought to do) or (ought not to do).

argument 2

Moral judgements are not predicates, and only seem to be.

Moral judgements are based on feelings, and are not true or false.

All moral judgements are permissible, and so don't imply an (ought to do), or, (ought not to do).

trps relation to argument 1

Moral judgements are true or false.

Well trp itself holds no moral judgements, as a praxeology it is a subject. (a system or tool box). A subject is not a predicate.

This means you may make moral judgements about trp, but they are ultimately irrelevant, as you are doing the same as saying "you ought to use a toolbox" or "you ought not to use a toolbox" as you can see, it's a silly statement standing alone, as there is no further context. Regardless of whether you believe moral judgements true or false, any judgement about trp itself is of little note. However if you were to say something about how you use trp, that could be a moral judgement. For example, (you ought not to use trp for x) would be a moral judgement, either true or false. The problem within is as follows.

Making a true or false claim (a judgement) is dangerous and ultimately self destructive. The reason why is that in forming a judgement about a praxeology, your judgement now must be airtight. If someone can provide even one example where the judgement doesn't hold, your judgement is false.

Example: (using trp to game women is wrong).

Well now what you've actually said is, (using trp to game women is something you ought not to do), is true. 

If someone can name even one circumstance that contradicts that, your judgement is broken or must be revised.

Ex (so you should not use trp to game a woman, even if that woman loves and enjoys being gamed, it provides her the happiest lifestyle and fulfilment

1 upvotesfitnesspm4 years ago

If a married woman is doing you, she is doing other men too. Once a cheater, always a cheater where you doing the husband a favour and exposing her early on. Its best he gets his heart broken early compare to 10, 20 years into the marriage when he busts her cheating. And plus women over 30 are ugly and fat!

I use to feel gulity but i found out these women were doing every man in her zipcode behind her husband back (westernised women brainwashed to be care free today).

If a woman has more then 5 dicks she isn't relationship material unless they where long term relationships.

If you want a real relationship you have to head to the east and stay there. Bring her back to the west and she will be poison by Feminism.

Women in the west are just hoes, don't be stupid and fall in love with one!! I try to have little interaction with women in the west cause most are seriously broken things.

Trust me, you will find real people in the East and be 100× happier!

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Guys, if you're planning to sleep with someone else's wife, make sure you're not from Hawaii, Illinois, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Dakota, or Utah. Wronged husband can sue you big time under the cause "alienation of affection". Google that.

2 upvotesadiktif4 years ago

"This sub is about discussion of sexual strategy in culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men."

what it is about and what people write on here are two different things. theres no sexual strategy on writing a post about banging some married chick. lol

0 upvotesspectrum_924 years ago

You can argue that this sub is about discussing sexual strategy, but at least half is really just decrying the awful and immoral behavior of women. Why shouldn't people here be able to call out the shitty behavior of men? If a wife cheating is immoral behavior, like every second post here implies, then fucking a married woman is just as immoral - to say otherwise is male 'hamstering' at it's finest and most hypocritical.

In any case, no immoral person is going to be convinced their behavior is immoral, so there might not be any point discussing it. But this sub is all about talking straight with no bullshit, and we're all opposed to the awful state of censorship on reddit that threatens this subs existence. To fall prey to those same pathetic tactics to try and enforce uniformity and purity like a fucking inquisitor is completely hypocritical and bad for the sub. People don't like being told their behavior is immoral? Fuck them, suck it up, I thought that's what being 'alpha' was all about.

2 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

Why you ask? Why not just men here too?


Go there for your feminist fix.

1 upvotesspectrum_924 years ago

Lol you think I need a feminist fix? I fucking hate feminism. I hate it because it ignores reality and prioritizes people's feelings over reality, which is exactly what censoring anti-adultery posts is. If you are so weak that you need people calling you out on your immoral behavior banned, you're no better than a fucking feminist,

1 upvotesinterestedplayer4 years ago

You dont get it, due you? Yes, in the context of reddit we are weak. Its nothing but the truth. Look at the numbers of major subs like askreddit and you will see that they can come in and change the discussion as they like if they are allowed to.

1 upvotesYouDislikeMyOpinion4 years ago

A man and a woman enter into an exclusive relationship. The woman infringes on her pre-established agreement. I on the other hand do not infringe on any of my prior agreements.

Here's another great one for the feminists. I respect the woman's individuality and independence and let her make her own decisions.

In any case, no immoral person is going to be convinced their behavior is immoral

And what if I told you that there are some people that understand what they are doing is immoral and don't care?

You want to talk straight with no bullshit. Here's reality. If the woman is cheating, the problem exists with her. Why does that problem exist with her. That's what you have to look at. When you look at it deep enough you'll see that she's either trying to get something she's not getting from the marriage or she just enjoys cheating. She's not fulfilled and the only solution you're offering is for her to not get her fix of fulfillment. That hardly solves the core problem, doesn't it.

Here's the thing, I'm not here to solve her problem. I'm here to solve my own. It's really that simple.

3 upvotesspectrum_924 years ago

The same age old excuse of every second pimp, drug dealer and thug - if I don't do it someone else will.

1 upvotesYouDislikeMyOpinion4 years ago

What's your solution? Convince 1% of those fucking married women to stop? Institute shaming tactics an have men abide by a moral code? Or address the core problem?

1 upvotesNaughtyFred4 years ago

The following is not shaming and should not be interpreted as such. Fuck a wife or don't, I don't care what you do but...

Most of the guys here who fuck married women absolve themselves from any responsibilty by hamstering "She was going to cheat anyway so it's got nothing to do with me"

You stuck your dick in her so it does have something to do with you.

If a guy commits suicide by jumping off a 50th floor balcony and you shoot him in the head as he falls according to the law you're guilty of murder.

Saying "well he was gonna die anyway" in court won't prevent a conviction.

If you DGAF about ruining a marriage that's fine with me, I've made my peace with the amoral nature of rp, but don't act like you had no part in it happening.

3 upvotesLimekill4 years ago

Saying "well he was gonna die anyway" in court won't prevent a conviction.

You wouldn't be charged with murder, but rather manslaughter (and a jury probably would let you go), plus it certainly would reduce the sentence significantly IF that was the only reason why.

As for the issue - Look the woman has agency. We can all say "you shouldn't do it", but this woman is looking to fuck, she is sending out the signals. It is NOT up to us to police other guys women. In fact RP says be the best man you can be so she will not cheat. The question is - what is the guy at home doing to make himself a better person apart from yelling at his bitch?

Additionally this is why PARTNER SELECTION (and asset protection) is very IMPORTANT. A good partner will reduce the chance of this happening by not putting herself in these situations. In fact one could consider this a warning - if a girl is going on a girls vacation kick her to the curb - so thanks to the original OP for reinforcing this message for us (remember guys - don't hate the messenger).

Now I wouldn't screw a married girl because of the drama involved and also I wouldn't trust her character not to steal stuff from me or throw me under a bus if she needed to (in fact I was recently involved in a "rape" case where the woman claimed she fell asleep and the guy was raping her - when her husband walked in - of course affair for 6+ months - the joke was mr rapist must of had the smallest dick in human history for her not to feel something was happening), but hay if a guy wants to do it - fine. I cannot stop it.

TRP is a set of actions to deliver a result. It is basically a tool and thats why its amoral. I do NOT want this forum to turn into something other than guys (even the chads we used to hate) telling us the truth. I do NOT want censorship via 'pressure' or some bs 'activism' - I want the truth. The complete unvarnished truth, and the ONLY way we get that is to allow guys to tell us their stories without us casting 'moral judgments' (that they are going to ignore anyway).

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

If a guy commits suicide by jumping off a 50th floor balcony and you shoot him in the head as he falls

you're guilty of a sick headshot tbh

-2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

11 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

I mean, throwing a notebook seems like a loss of frame.

4 upvotesrobo234 years ago

I don't think that has anything to do with morality, but the fact that it is a weak move to act like you did. I hope that didn't shame you - I certainly wouldn't want to be banned...

2 upvoteslugubriusTRP4 years ago

Not going to lie throwing her notebook was excessive and a bit of a bitch move. You would of gotten the same reaction (Apologies etc.) if you just had a strong word with her in front of everyone.

1 upvotesWhiskeyGrin4 years ago

OP drives his point home in a logical concise manner here.

1 upvotesBuchloe4 years ago

Cheating seems to garner similar non-objective judgement . "Be a man and break it off, don't be like women and cheat of you're in an LTR"

1 upvotesSdom14 years ago

To me, there are two kinds of moral choices - the ones that you purely make for yourself based on your feelings, and the ones that actually have some sort of effect on the world, however small. You can't judge someone for the former, while you CAN for the latter. Banging married women falls under the first category - your choice is for your own personal reasons but means nothing.

Why, you ask? Well, if a woman, or a man for that matter, wants to cheat, they are going to cheat with someone. For a woman, it's only a brief matter of time before she meets someone who gives her tingles and is down to fuck. For a guy, either he's plugging his secretary, one of his wife's "friends," or he's hitting up the rub and tug.

Now, if you'd rather not be involved in that, that's OK. It's risky on several levels and comes with its share of headaches besides. But never think that because you said no, then you righted some kind of moral balance and she never cucked her hubby. She is still cucking him, just not with you.

-4 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Yeah, keep your morals to yourself, you cunts!

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

4 upvotesRedSovereign4 years ago

That would be a pragmatic response, and perfectly in line with the level of conversation we expect to maintain here.

3 upvotesA419a4 years ago

Responding by explaining how something is unwise is far different from saying it is immoral.

1 upvotesYouDislikeMyOpinion4 years ago

You get a text essentially indicating the time and place. You're not going anywhere to waste time. She's coming somewhere to fuck your brains out and leave before her husband suspects anything.

0 upvotesMudane4 years ago

Agreed, definitely on the last part

0 upvotesJoseph_the_Carpenter4 years ago

In light of this post not only am I going to continue to fuck married/engaged/boyfriended women, I'm going to fuck only m/e/b women and step up my homewrecker game.

Come at me.

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Science is decidedly NOT amoral. Anyone who says otherwise has NEVER worked in a research laboratory with human or animal subjects. All kinds of MORAL imperatives drive science in all kinds of ways both good and bad.

TRP is indeed a strategy with an aim and to say morality has no place the discussion is frankly... ignorant. There are ALREADY existing moral red lines that would not be tolerated here... <insert raging hyperbolic examples here. Try to include Hitler>

So really what this post says is two things. One is 'I'd prefer not to junk up this sub with giant threads on morality' to which I say.... good luck with that one! Have you been to the internets before?

The second thing it says is that I like to bang married chicks (fair enough but most of us think you are an asshat for doing so) and it hurts my feelers when I'm called out on it so let's pretend like everyone except me is too dumb to understand what amoral is (we're not) and yell I'll use my ban hammer if you call me out for being a jerk.

So ban away.... ban away...

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

I like red pill ideology and information. it gives a man knowledge and wisdom. especially young 18 year olds like me who are surrounded by sheep and terrible masculine role models...

but this is too much for me. I can accept the true nature of the human being, the true sexual and emotional nature of women, self improvement, putting yourself first, protecting yourself from getting fucked over by this bullshit feminist society and all the other types of philosophy in this sense....

...but I don't agree with fucking married women and treating people like filth. don't get me wrong a slut is a slut but I don't feel good for betraying a man like this. I wouldn't want a man to treat my mother like this, nor m sister. people can make their own choices, and today women have now got the status of "equality" so it's called, so women can make whatever the hell choice they want. the consequences are not my problem.

but the reality is women are inferior to men in every way. thats nature. they are unreasonable and futile. easily led. easily seduced.

I want to think how other men would feel knowing their daughter is getting played by douchebags and left as single mothers. of course it's the girls fault for choosing to fuck him but still. I don't want my family treated like this so I'm not going to do it.

the married woman thing.. unless they are separated or something, have some fucking respect for the husband. he's your fellow man, your brother, your comrade....

that's just my two cents. take it or leave it but I'm allowed to have an opinion that's different. I don't think I'm going to read the red pill posts much anymore, I don't appreciate the being a douche.

if it takes being a complete douchebag, alpha male type guy that's full of himself to get women, I ain't going there. I have always been taught to respect other men as if they were my brothers, comrades fighting with me to the death. even if they are fat guys with wives as long as they aren't White knight feminist suck ups

2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

I can accept the true nature of the human being, the true sexual and emotional nature of women, self improvement, putting yourself first, protecting yourself from getting fucked over by this bullshit feminist society and all the other types of philosophy in this sense....

...but I don't agree with fucking married women

So you agree that you don't want to get fucked over by feminist society, but for some reason, you choose to respect and hold the feminist notion of modern marriage above your own reproach? Interesting.

the married woman thing.. unless they are separated or something, have some fucking respect for the husband.

Why should I "have some fucking respect" for a man that obviously doesn't have any respect for himself? If he's doing his job as a man worthy of respect, his wife wouldn't be looking to step out on him in the first place.

Secondly, though, you are keen to admit that you would have a different answer if she was "separated"? Guess what, tiger, "separated" is still "married" in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of whatever god you may or may not pray to.

Finally, as you are probably picking up, I am a guy who has fucked married women. Wanna know what they literally all had in common? Not a single fucking one of them told me they were married. Not one. I would find out later when I see their Facebook pictures. See, women do this one particular thing that all humans do but women do particularly well: they lie. They lie so often, it's particularly a language for them.

On a personal note, you sound like a guy who is either on the younger side, or has a romantic notion of brotherhood amongst men that reality hasn't drummed out of you yet. Or both, IDK. I will tell you one thing that you will learn hopefully sooner rather than later, and that is that all men are not your brothers. They are not your comrades. Give a thirsty, sex-starved man a crack at your woman, and the condom will be sliding on far quicker than the notions of honor fill his brain.

1 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

yes, I'm young indeed. only 18. I wasn't implying men who fuck married women unknowingly. I meant the ones that fuck women which they know are married.

should've said that tbh. look here man, that's my opinion. it can change, but while I hold it I don't need to justify it to you and you don't have to agree. take it or leave it.

my point is not many men are aware of the reality, I'm not talking about men that are humanist feminist social justice warriors who deserve no respect... never judge what you don't know. plus I sincerely condemn married people who cheat. seems like a wawawa his opinion is different comment u just made.

-1 upvoteshavelbrandybuck4 years ago

I don't believe criticizing someones morality over TRP should be immediately bannable - as long as their points are unbiased and encourage discussion, analaysis, and are not a blatant personality attack. Just because TRP is critical towards the social behaviours between genders does not mean that you should actively censor people whom may rightfully take the side of the contrary, or have an opinion which is non-conventionally against what TRP supports. The moment you start supporting the male regardless of actions or context is when the line between 'male-identity discussion' and 'women hate group' become blurred. TRP is an amazing resource when it welcomes different viewpoints and interpretations.

1 upvotesredpillschool4 years ago

I don't believe criticizing someones morality over TRP should be immediately bannable - as long as their points are unbiased and encourage discussion, analaysis, and are not a blatant personality attack.

If you make a good case for or against a behavior, just back it up with evidence.

For instance:

Don't have anal sex, it angers the gods.

is nonsense bullshit and will be deleted.

Avoid anal sex because infections will make your dick fall off.

is a point I disagree with but is nevertheless valid on the board.

Avoid anal sex with indian chicks because they eat curry

Is funny to me.

-2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Moral law is an invention of mankind for the disenfranchisement of the powerful in favor of the weak.

4 upvotesmej714 years ago

It's actually generally to keep society together. Just because you can shoot your neighbor doesn't mean you should, at the very least because it's non-productive to society (removing a member of the workforce, a potential provider for children, etc)

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

I was actually quoting a book, "Blood Meridian," by Cormac McCarthy. Great book, check it out. Definitely makes you question where you stand with your morals.

1 upvotesjdgalt4 years ago

There are things I won't do because of morals; and as a result, my success, in women and elsewhere in life, may be somewhat less than optimal. And most people on the sub can probably say the same. These are the trade-offs we all make.

But having this place be morals-free is important because it constantly reminds us that your gf, and the guy she's cheating with, don't give a hoot about your moral code! And if you don't deal with them as they actually are, then you lose.

-5 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

4 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Door's over there.

-2 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

BTW, I, and the mod team, decide what is "red pill" and what isn't.

-5 upvotesplenkton4 years ago

I suspect many recent threads are made by op, where op is trying to gain credibility in TRP, in order to cause trouble in other threads, and claim to be a genuine TRP member.

Much more censoring would be great against those new to TRP who are creating threads.

-5 upvotesIupvoteforknowledge4 years ago

ITT: a bunch of concern trolling and faggots.

-9 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

[permanently deleted]

0 upvotes • [deleted] • 4 years ago

Shame is a societal tool used to enforce our cultural standards on anti-social degenerates. It can be a force for good and a force for bad.

Also does this mean I can't call out the effeminate men on here whose response to the immorality of women is to lower themselves to their level?

© TheRedArchive 2020. All rights reserved.