I wanted to further dissect a snippet from /u/RedPope's Field Report, "Dirty Sheets". It is an excellent field report, and you should definitely read it if you haven't already. Mr. Pope displays an excellent example of amused mastery and frame control in the face of female sluttery.
https://archive.is/fOQ7T
The part I wish to dissect a little bit is this, which will (should) be obvious to the veterans but may still be a bit hazy for the newly unplugged and the lurkers:
"I don't even like him!" she protested. "It didn't mean anything. I wanted you, but you weren't there!"
It used to mystify me, in the days of my blue pill slumber, how women could say this after cheating. I literally couldn't wrap my brain around it. I couldn't understand how women could just nonchalantly dismiss allowing another man to spray her uterus, whilst in the middle of a (supposedly) committed, long term relationship, and then upon being discovered for the tramp that she is, simply dismiss it as:
"IT DIDN'T MEAN ANYTHING.", or in the case of one of my past blue pill LTRs, "IT WASN'T A BIG DEAL."
But that's the rub, see? And it's a rub that you simply can't understand until you start looking at the realities of women through a red lens rather than through the aqua colored delusion that our "Women are Wonderful" society feeds us. That rub of reality is simply this:
All sex, be it sex with you, sex with Chad, sex with Brad, or sex with Thad, is literally meaningless and no big deal to women because, quite simply, sex is orders of magnitude easier to obtain for women than it is with men. It is common; far more common than a blue piller or newly redded man will either admit or acknowledge. Common like dirt or air. And as we all know, things that are "common" are taken for granted. You don't get ecstatic over eating rice, because rice is common and cheap. You don't savor the air in your lungs because it is common and quite literally free. And things that are common and easy to have are not appreciated.
This is what sex is like to the average American modern woman. After 12 years on the carousel, it's very cheap and common to her.
Even the most adonis-belt, six-pack adorned, monied, good looking HB9 of a stud male will not have anywhere near the access to immediate, at-will sex that even the most average HB6 of a woman in her early 30's will have. There's a saying we used to have here that I haven't seen in months, and that saying is you are never going to out-slut a slut. She will always have access to more cock than you will have to pussy.
"So JP," you ask, "that's all well and great, but what is your point with all of this bloviating?"
My point is that there are valid reasons why we say committing to post wall women, namely older than 30 to 32, is a terrible, terrible idea. It's not some random postulated theory that we Vanguard fucks cooked up over a pot smoking session to make fun of muffin-topped 30-somethings.
An unmarried woman at that age (early- to mid-thirties), who's been riding the cock carousel for 12 to 16 years, has completely divorced the act of sex from the concepts of love, commitment, and passion. Sex is no different than smoking weed, drinking her mimosa with her girlfriends at Sunday brunch, or riding with the top down in her Mazda Miata convertible. It's just another source for serotonin release, and nothing more.
See, that's ultimately what /u/RedPope's girl was saying to him when he confronted her about the dirty cum stain on her bed. The explication was that sex with her weed dealer "didn't mean anything." However, the implication of those words is that those five months of, what on the surface looked like "passionate" "loving" sex, was also, ultimately, meaningless to her. If she wasn't gonna get dicked by Mr. Pope that day, a substitute would do. See, dick for women is what economists would call a fungible good. Google it if you don't know what that means.
A woman who reaches 33 and is still single is single for a reason, and 99/100 times that reason is cock carousel. A woman that old, who is even mildly attractive, has undoubtedly turned down multitudes of "good men" who tried to lock her down into an LTR.
Remember how we say watch what they do and ignore what the hamster says? Well, a 30-something may say that she's "not like that anymore" and that she's "ready to settle down". Well her history demonstrates otherwise.
Take heed, beware the post-wall hamster, and remember AWALT.
Since reading TRP for a few months, woman have taught me more about economy than econ class ever did.
The further I progress through business school and the further I read through this sub, the stronger the analogy becomes. The sexual marketplace as a concept is so fucking solid that at times it's scary how accurate it is.
That's because it's existed, in some form, for at least 25% of the earth's history.
The "sexual marketplace" can be simplified down to three major points:
1) Genetic diversity improves survivability. Therefore, sexual reproduction is superior.
2) Division of labor is always more efficient. Therefore, "sperm" and "egg" instead of isogametes are superior.
3) Animals are mobile. Therefore, males evolve to pursue females.
To be anal about it:
1) Sexual reproduction is not necessarely superior. You have two pairs of characteristics that work well together: big individuals/sexual and small individuals (often unicelular)/asexual.
Unicelular living beings like virus and bacteries reproduce a lot since creating another individual is cheap. So they achieve genetic diversity by reproducing a lot with higher mutation rate. Its assumed that they will create unfit and even invalid individuals, but since they are cheap it does not matter.
On the other hand, the cost of creating a big multicelular individual is very expensive, so an unfit or invalid individual is a big deal. So mutations are much more risky and less desired. Therefore the way of achieving genetic diversity is by combining half the genetics of two fit individuals.
Both strategies work.
This is called R-Selection , it has nothing to do with asexually , and most small creatures(I mean so small we can barley see) are asexual.
Since evolution isn't exactly a game , I can't declare humans the winner but lets be honest, we are the apex predator
It always has been a market place right beneath the surface. We just needed the red pill as a tool to scratch the surface a little.
EDIT: since you are in biz school you might be aware of multi sided markets. The SMP is a single sided market place for the players involved - men and women. For a club or a bar it is a multi sided market place(2 sided for our intents and purposes): They offer a physical location where men and women can come together and do the SMP dance. But you need to flood the bar with one side of the market to attract the other side. Hence Thursday free drinks for women. The women side of the equation fulfilled the men show up and the transactions begin and the registers start ringing.
That's because economics are a facet of Game Theory, just like women and everything else. It's not an easy subject, but well worthwhile as it confers many advantages in your day-to-day life when used with Statistics & Combinatorics.
Anything involving decision making can be exploited or optimized using the aforementioned.
Yes, I've also noticed it's like Intelligence and Marketing. Fishing out intelligence subtly, signalling theory, and managing yourself like a Brand to her. No fun to think about all this consciously, but the dynamics are the same. It's not war, but is an arms race btwn 2 superpowers.
Governing Dynamics (Nash Equilibrium); or, Ignore the Blonde
Scene from A Beautiful Mind
Like AFPJ said, Game Theory factors in more areas than just economics.
The way the movie explains Nash Equilibrium isn't correct
That's true, I realized that when I rewatched the scene after posting it. Still, what the movie demonstrates isn't terrible advice if you're playing a numbers game.
I'm going to be nit picky here - game theory is a facet of economics. Not the other way around as you said it.
lol, was twitching on that detail too
That's a good insight, and an important one to have in the process of your awakening.
Going from regarding sex as an act between two loving people, to seeing it as a commodity that it is exchanged
That's the most sad thing I've read on TRP in the past 8 months.
It's sad because with my current LTR, even though she treats me so much better than my last, there's a large lack of passion on my end going from blue to purple to red.
It's no longer something I reserve for those that I feel for, it's something I give away to those I feel I can get off to.
All those blue dreams of being a great husband and raising God fearing American children are gone.
Sorrow is a natural phase of the Red Pill awakening. It's the realization that women will never love you the way you want to be loved. The way you wish they could love you.
But that's no cause for despair.
Once you recover from your initial disappointment, you'll come to understand just how much power you have.
You are a man. You alone have the Power of Rational Thought and Deferred Gratification. And make no mistake: they truly are powers.
Once you begin coming in to your own power, you will soon discover that women can be inspired to be loyal to you. Not out of some nebulous fantasy like "love", but out of a pragmatic, predictable, and controllable desire to keep you by pleasing you. You'll have more control in your interactions, and as a result you will have greater potential for happiness and fulfillment than you ever could have had by simply leaving it to "fate".
Now is not the time to give up your dreams of happiness. It is simply time to reinterpret the map, and plan your route based on your newfound understanding of the terrain.
Great post. You should make a post about the "rational power", if you feel like you got enough content for it. Would be a good read.
spoken like a true conqueror
EDIT: Clarification/format.
Edit 2: A lot of this has to do with my parents raising me in an extreme way that isolated me from pop culture entirely affecting my socialization process.
Edit 3: Thought about it, I was placing too much hope in the emotional aspects of my current LTR to seek comfort while going through large life changes. may need out.
I only feel sad because many of the realizations I've made from TRP have made me much more reserved and I haven't had almost any intense feelings, even when intentionally casting inhibitions to the side.
I've controlled enough people as it is, and controlling them like, say, human sock puppets has left me feeling as empty as a vessel that only moves when there's a large hand up my ass, the hand being my sadism. I don't have many things that stimulate me anymore, not sex, I've never used nonprescribed drugs, not danger. Hell I used to be able to drive 150mph/240kmh and feel a rush, now it feels like time slows down to compensate.
The only dreams I have left are of happiness, I was happy for a while, but I let myself become an empty vessel for which my TRP learnings could act through, and while it has made life a bit more fun and happy at times, I had to think significantly less in order to enjoy things, which I've grown tired of. My natural reaction to people is to always walk away and shut myself off. When I don't think, I feel stupid like regular people, and when I do think, I feel that everyone around me is missing a piece that I have or that I have a piece that makes me incredibly socially maladaptive, which seems to be my intense capability of high levels of rational thought that dictate my emotional state. I understand that rationality is a power, I look down on those not capable of it, but at times, it really sucks. I already went through a phase of "Woe is me, no one understands me," and attributed it at the time to just being a teenager. But the feeling still lingers as I cannot feel I have any connection to other people.
I feel like you intended to reply to an entirely different comment than mine. The fact that I have pragmatic, predictable, and controllable desire doesn't make me feel fulfilled, tons of people pat me on the ass about my achievements, but manipulating someone to want me, even if they wanted me before I manipulated them into never wanting to leave isn't what I want.
My dreams of happiness are big, but being as socially maladatptive as I am, that being caused by years of being bullyed, and no connection to my peers other than destructive sadism causing a decade long span of depression (as diagnosed by a professional, not WedMD,) I really don't know how to understand what those dreams even are. I'm still another lost teenager and I figure that I'll stumble into something that makes me happy one day, but I feel like I'll try and hold on tightly to it rather than plan for the worst and hope for the best.
Not trying to be a bitch, I figure everything will work out in the end and worst case scenario is that I die like everyone else, but the journey to finding out what I really want may suck.
I wanted to make a post about asking how other members deal with the loneliness accompanied by understanding that there is no female love the way we were taught, but I don't feel my post would be up to par, so I got stuck. I'll keep trying because I feel like there's something deeper than "We never cared/just got over it."
TL;DR, I'm most likely just your typical antisocial 19 year old.
bro this is the natural stage, like other said. After I read the book Manipulated Man, I was pretty sad for a long ass time because everything I believed in came crashing down
Ignorance is bliss, it really is- but be happy you found out this way instead of the alternative.
It doesn't really make me feel sad, but its the sad truth. I believed everything when I dumped my ex and found this place, with a few mood swings. I've been having a rough week.
[permanently deleted]
I know plenty of men who married virgins and still get AWALTed and divorce raped, though. Even if they didn't ride the CC, at some point they're realize they hold all the power in the event of a divorce, and start acting out. Most guys don't know how to handle that.
That's because the Econ major in most schools is biased in favor of statist economics, which make absolutely no sense (hence why our economy is in shambles and our country is on a downward slope of poverty, misery, tyranny, and death).
The dating market is unaffected by the state, so free market economics perfectly describes it, and that's why it makes so much sense and is easy to understand once you filter out the statist and feminist/blue pill bias and propaganda.
Well.....not quite true. The state manages welfare and other social safety nets that obviate the default immediate (and some long term) consequences of being a bad actor in the sexual marketplace for women.
Thus the degradation in conduct over the last few decades.
Fair enough. You could even go so far as to say that the mere fact that the state exists alters the way people behave in the dating market. Not going to as fancy of a restaurant because the state stole a tenth of your paycheck, for example.
If like to live where the tax rate is only 10%
Microeconomic modelling describes the SMP well, but it's not that free a market. It's more like a crony-capitalist system where the government (inter alia) subsidises the rich, or you could view it instead as a regressive welfare scheme where the people with the highest "income" - ie. women - get income redistributed to them from the "poor", ie. betas and omegas.
As /u/thefisherman1961 pointed out, you were taught the wrong economics. Real micro economics, best described by the Austrian school of thought, is really interesting, and applies as well to the SMP as any other market.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School
https://mises.org/
So fuckiing glad I learned this at 24. Huge thanks to the two of you for posting this. Needed to hear it.
I know right. It's like learning this lifted a huge weight off my back and actually made me look forward to living my life. Not having to worry about a wife and kids freed me from 95 percent of my self inflicted burden.
Well, wife and kids with a post wall Alpha widow. There's still a chance if you consider a low or no partner count, well-raised girl, as long as you remember AWALT
well raised doesn't even mean much anymore. A whore is a whore.
And pre up, and protected assets through family managed trust fund (by your parents) so that you can't lose much besides your child care, cars and alimony
How well does simply hiding the majority of your wealth from your spouse work?
The courts get a cut of it so you better do it legit through a trust or attorney or they will fuck you up if they find out.
everyone here that is under 30 is eternally grateful for waking them up.
Nailed it.
This is a subtle distinction. And you explained it very well.
I had a relatable experience with my ex and it didn't even involve cheating. Rather, she was very jealous. So the appearance of any women in my life: a friend, a Facebook post, a stranger on the bus, was a cause for her to get her claws out and have an uncontrollable fit of jealousy.
During one fight, caused by me mistakenly (but desperately) trying to reason with her about her jealousy, she tried to flip the table on me and cover up her jealousy by telling me about how many men she's fucked. I don't mean numerically. I mean "attitude"-wise. Let me explain. What she said to me, in a nearly blind, screaming rage, was "I've fucked guys with big dicks who didn't know how to use them, and I've fucked guys with normal dicks who used them very well." Off the bat, I took this in a very literal way. I thought maybe she was even referring to one of her exes in particular, to taunt me with the image of his "big dick". (N.B. I broke up with her within 3 days of this incident.) Later, I thought it was just her trying to generally stir up the meanest kind of thing she could say. A nuclear shit-test to push me to fight back against her childish bile-spewing.
I eventually realized there were two factors at play in this. One, she has absolutely no control of her emotions. Her jealousy pushed her to say the meanest things possible to "get revenge on me" for giving her these jealous emotions. (And this obviously implies a high level of insecurity.) An irrational, but emotional, reaction. Two, and this is what OP helped me understand, she revealed just how broken she is as a woman. To tell the boyfriend she desperately wanted to keep by her side how she's fucked all kinds of varieties of men shows that she no longer understood that sex had ANY VALUE. It is meaningless, apart from the neurological stimulation it provides. As she said in another choice quote from that evening, there were times where she just "needed to be penetrated." Fair enough, I understand the physical need for sex. But to be so broken that you tell your own boyfriend how meaningless sex is to you because it's so meaningless you can't imagine anyone else would find meaning in it, is really tragic.
The lesson to me was that she would always hold sex over me, even without cheating or threatening to cheat, because she told me how little she valued it, and therefore, how little I could offer her by physical intimacy.
My only move against someone who basically told me without words that they have no sex to offer me was to take away the commitment I had offered her. Do you see what I mean? We had good sex all the time; she liked it with a very high frequency. But at the same time, there was nothing in it to offer me that I couldn't get from any vagina-owner. She gave away all the power of her sexuality till she had no shame in telling me sex meant no connection for her. So she had no sex to offer me.
She was 32 years old, FYI, but stylish, fit and Eastern European. I feel like me breaking up with her was her official run-in with the wall. She didn't see it coming. She was totally confused. She wrote me a few days after the breakup that there was a guy who would be ready to fuck her in 30 minutes if she only called him. Amazing. You still don't get it. You're telling me yet again, how cheaply you value sex. And then a few weeks later she wrote me to tell me she was fucking her new boyfriend and the sex was the best she's ever had. Obviously, this wasn't even true or she wouldn't have wasted time telling me about it. But just another sign of extreme brokenness. But she saw it as her empowerment. It was truly just meaninglessness upon meaninglessness that she tried to sell to me as something of value in her.
Part of me believes that women think the double standard is gone in this modern era. I've heard more than a few bragging about their sexual conquests as if it made them anything other than disgusting and pathetic to me.
Congratulations on that, sweetheart. I just bought a pack of cigarettes. We probably experienced the same level of difficulty and emotional investment in our respective transactions.
Pretty much all women nowadays are as detached as prostitutes from the sex they have.
I'll disagree on that. I have a friend who is a high dollar prostitute and has an incredible amount of money saved and invested and easily makes over ten grand a month. Her clients are precious to her. She values them. She learns their likes and dislikes. Remembers their birthdays. Visits them in the hospital.
It's really just a matter of the quality of a prostitute. Yes most women are worth as much as a cheap crack whore when it comes to consideration for LTR, but not all prostitutes are most women, some are better. Sadly.
So she is concerned about the well being of these highly successful men spending buckets of money on her?
Yeah, that's just smart business.
I had never thought about it in such a way that women could and would dismiss having sex so carelessly with chavs under the guise of "It didn't mean anything! I really love you!" when they had a perfectly "good man" (subjective, obviously) at home.
JP_Whoregan's reply to the thread in question and your post - especially the cited parts - just gave me a new found realization I haven't had in a while since I started reading TRP.
It really does boil down to a simple, often repeated quote: she's not yours, it's just your turn. Enjoy it for as long as it lasts and get off the ride once the fare price increases.
Same. The concept of how much value sex has to a person is something I've considered in a general sense and as a power dynamic/bargaining chip but never delved into from this angle. This is a fascinating thread.
Women value sex, that is undeniable, but they value emotional commitment more.
If you cheat on a girl, she's going to be hurt, but if it was a purely physical relationship it won't hurt as much as if you were emotionally involved. Now comes the solipsism.
She assumes the same is true for you, because she doesn't comprehend how it could be otherwise. Thus, when she says “but it didn't mean anything", in her mind she's mollifying you. In reality, she's filled a fire extinguisher with gasoline and tried to put out an industrial fire with it, but again, she doesn't realise what she's doing.
Hence her confusion when her pained admission that “it was purely physical" does the opposite of what she thought it would.
Not too proud to say I had to look up the definition of mollify. Learned a new word today and expanded my vocabulary.
Mollify: appease the anger or anxiety of (someone).
It's a great word. Highly appropriate in the context of SJW's.
Most of us would only be slightly annoyed if she talked about her life problems to our competition but if he didn't get the puss at all then it could be chalked up to just a shit test. If the dude wasn't planting subversive ideas in her head then he might have done us a favour not needing to hear about all of that crap.
[edit] My account just went into a weird state where I was subscribed but it was giving me the "Not member of this community" message. I fixed it by unsubscribing, subscribing and then reloading.
Pure. Fucking. Gold. Great post dude. Gotta tweet that shit.
I'd like to further add that these women in the 30-something age bracket will combat my assertion with "but muh CAREER!" As if having a career and committing to one man and a youthful, fertile age are mutually exclusive concepts.
When she says "career" is the reason she's 32 and still unmarried, she's not lying. She just means her "career" on the cock carousel.
The female hivemind is shaming women for going the traditional route and encouraging the cat lady route. Shit's to be expected.
This comment also always cracks me up. It's either complete bullshit, or a blatant admission that women aren't as capable as men. I mean, men have been holding down careers (and usually actual real careers that require significant time and effort) since the dawn of civilization, and still managed to find time to court and wed a woman, and raise a family with her. But somehow for a woman, having a career precludes them from doing any of these things?
Ironically BPs now days do the job while also having to do all the woman shit in the relationship. So they're filling both roles and still beating out women.
She got a promotion as Director of Cock Operations.
I always operated under the assumption she was a level 3 ball fondling technician? Looks like someone got their BJ cert and was promoted.
Certified in Python & C++, excels in Object Oriented environments.
Pretty sure she's certified in D
Bj cert is required for an internship. As part of the red board of hiring interviewers we demand that you retake the requirements and litmus test, go over the mission statement, and review immediately.
Edit- you probably were referring to the deep throat cert, my bad, management has been informed. Carry on citizen and send that new secretary my way.
Or in the very rare case, she actually adopted so many alpha traits she's no longer tolerable by any male.
So rare I probably wouldn't have bothered posting this had I not been drinking. "I also love outliers"
100 times this. We have a pretty good looking solid 8 in my office, she is actually 37 but looks 25 still. Reason she is still single is she fucks pretty much anything with a hard cock. She sucked off no less than three guys from my office during and after the last office Christmas party. Has a new boyfriend every other week, but can't figure out why she can't find "a good guy". The wall is approaching and now she is trying to tie down one of the guys here whos already been divorced twice. Her family is an AF/BB CC factory though.
I actually met her sister at a company party last summer, she was the younger, hotter, better, albeit dumber version of her. 21 and without a single ambition in life other than "living comfortably". She was a pretty good fuck though, gotta love those Latinas.
Finding an attractive 35 year old without a husband or a career that sucks up all their time is one of the biggest red flags out there.
Tbh at 37, she's smashed herself on that wall several years ago.
She might very well have handled 100+ cocks by this point in her life.
I'd avoid like the black plague.
It'd be an unrealistically conservative assumption that a girl has 1 cock per month of being single from age 18. That's already conservatively assuming she was even a virgin by the time she turns 18 - putting her at 100 cocks at 26 y/o.
Any 22+ y/o 7+ that hasn't been in the same 1-2 LTRs since 16-18 has probably already had at least a dozen.
These numbers seem scary but are conservative for any big city like LA, SF, SD, Washington, NYC, so far so on.
I'm sure you'll run into a 1-5, maybe 0 if you jackpot, cock girl by going after the introvert types long enough.
A different cock every month is unrealistically high.
Had 4 college female roommates for a couple years, 2 new cocks a month and a couple had jocks they would continuously see when they're not at the bar on weekends.
Guess what their degrees were?
Sign Language.
Chinese.
Food Science.
I don't know what the 4th one had.
No, I didn't fuck any of them.. I was still a virgin using my hand.
[permanently deleted]
I would classify it as "above average" I knew girls from college that were fucking 3 new cocks a weekend, so it happens. Trust me.
Reminds me of story from years ago.
Me, my friend, and his girlfriend at the time were having lunch and talking about some of the differences in the study abroad program we had gone through. We had all gone to the same school, but she was one year behind us and did the study abroad thing a year after we did.
So one of the things that came up was this other guy we all know that did the program with her. This guy was a decent guy, but he had hooked up with a total of FOUR women over the course of their program. Well my buddy's gf was shocked! Four women! How could the guy sleep around that much?!?!?
My buddy and I just laughed at her indignation as we told her it only took a weekend for one of the girls that went with us to sleep with four guys, and that wasn't the only action she got during those few months.
[permanently deleted]
For an average guy to put his in every month, perhaps.
Cock for girls is readily available everywhere and sex feels just as good so I'd rethink that.
I wish. You should hang around current 27 year olds.
These days? No. Man. No.
Remember, these girls have no hobbies other than drinking and fucking on the weekend. Maybe a few games, etc.
If the 'designated fucker who provides cash' is away, they'll fuck someone else with ease and do. If you see anything like 'roommate is out of town for the weekend' that roommate is a provider boyfriend (you see it commonly on r for r). Women generally don't need to post this stuff on the internet, but it's a common enough saying in bars and stuff.
The stats for how much sex/partners they have is way lower than reported in science surveys. They tend to just 'forget' all of them once they're looking to have babies.
Your perception of young women is too narrow. Their N count is high, but not "100 by 26". This sub is supposed to be rational, c'mon.
Would a quick fuck with her, no strings attached, be worth it? Or too dangerous?
That does not exist. Not unless she drinks the blood of lovers or something. She's just good at using creams and make up and hair coloring. She stayed fit and dresses right.
But if you get a woman naked, 18 is 18, 25 is 25 and 37 vagina is an airplane hangar.
It exists. But it's pretty rare.
Once had a fling with a 45 year-old that I swore was 27 at the oldest. Perfect body, skin, etc. - naked, without make-up. I didn't believe it when she told me her age. I even made her show me her driver's license to prove it.
Again, super, super rare but there are some older women who are gifted with genetics and who take impeccable care of themselves.
Definitely exists, but you can always tell from the other women in that family.
Dated one, 22 looked like 15, her mother was about 40 but was constantly, and I mean PREDICTABLY recognized as an older sister, maybe 25 at most. Her aunt was the same and the girls younger sister, "19" looked like she was a middle school kid.
All the women in that family had severe, almost detrimental baby face, baby bod, short, and hit the gym 5 days a week, minimum, plus cardio from their swimming obsession. more than most gym rats I know. "They also rode more gym rats than I've every known" that entire family was pure dissociated hypergamy too, the dad was an alpha bucks, but he and the mom happily screwed anything they found attractive, didn't even mind discussing their dates over dinner in my presence.
That was such an extreme wake up call, I'm hard to shock, REALLY hard to shock, but, damn.
I agree. I have had a co worker exactly as you described. Hell, we can even look at movie stars to know that it IS possible. They are the exception to the rule.
Same here, was 18 having a fling with a 42-43yo woman. Body and sex was better than anyone I've had since then and I'm slowly approaching 40 now myself.
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/58651/20150608/researchers-find-genes-that-can-make-you-look-younger-by-10-years-fountain-of-youth-within-humans.htm
I'd love to see a picture of such a creature just to see what age I come up with. I'm very good at picking out the age, usually land on people's correct year.
My girl is in her 40's and has a body of a 20 year old. No extreme diet (veggies + cake are pretty much daily... different meals of course), no formal exercise (she keeps busy though) and she has perfect tits, a flat hard stomach and great curves. No hair coloring, no grey hair. Her parents are both great looking too for their age, little fat.
It can definitely be genetic.
Her face and arms look older though. It's from the sun.
She might have a great body for 40, but it's not the body of a 20 year old. If she's honest she'll tell you herself her body changed over the last 20 years. Humans just aren't that durable.
The one exception I know is asian women looking 10 years younger than their age in some cases, so I'll buy a 30 year old asian passing off for a 20 year old when naked (the real test). But not a 40 year old Caucasian passing for 20 year old when naked.
Now can her body still be attractive ? Sure why not? I'd say it can be very attractive but it's definitely NOT a 20 year old body.
Well, I'm not going to debate it since I'm not going to post photos or allow a touch test. Yes, she is not exactly the same as 18. But she has a better body than even 18yo with great! fuckin bodies. 0 fat except on ass and tits and thighs. You couldn't have perkier tits without a boob job. Skin is tight.
Maybe her pussy is looser. I don't know what else would be different.
But if we look at face? She looks her real age. Pretty, but mid 40s. And yeah, she's caucasian.
Anyway. I'm just here saying it's possible.
I respect your view of it. But I don't share it.
That depends on how many planes have departed from that hanger. Ain't no Chad in the world who's cock is gonna tear up that runway like a kid or two.
I've fucked a lot of single moms in the Philippines and Thailand, at 20 they were plenty tight.
In my modest opinion, age rules all.
Lol. Only a person who can count their lays on one hand would say this. I've seen / been with plenty of mid 30's women who do religious yoga, eat clean and take care of their skin have bodies that are sexier and tighter than most 18 year old girls-gone-wild types.
As far as the pussy goes, in my experience that's been as much about genetics and the overall size of the girl than anything else.
A 5'10 20 year old white chick is not going to have as tight a pussy as a 34 year old 5'0 Asian chick.
LOL a severely mutated hand, like fallout 7 perhaps ;) But in all seriousness, the tightest pussies aren't asian by far, not enough muscle, arab/syrian/etc... those can feel like a flesh vice.
Asian pussies are mostly short so you can bottom out and hear them moan if you got 7 inches or above.
This is more a product of age+unfitness+babies than notch count.
A woman who is serious about fitness can be as tight as anything. Especially if she does barbell squats.
I don't deny that. Age is the MAIN factor in all thing health related. After a while cells are degenerated clones of their former selves.
Her sister is 16 years younger?
My oldest brother is like 30 years older than me. The second oldest is 12 years my senior.
It happens.
Not uncommon, im 15 years younger than my sister.
Fungible good
If Alice lends Bob a $10 bill, she does not care if she is repaid with the same $10 bill, two $5 bills, a $5 bill and five $1 bills or a bunch of coins that total $10 because currency is fungible (noting that, in practice, some denominations might incur additional operational or processing costs). However, if Bob borrows Alice's car she will most likely be upset if Bob returns a different vehicle—even a vehicle that is the same make and model—as automobiles are not fungible with respect to ownership. However, gasoline is fungible and though Alice may have a preference for a particular brand and grade of gasoline, her primary concern may be that the level of fuel be the same (or more) as it was when she lent the vehicle to Bob.
Thanks for the lesson.
Brilliant explanation, I was actually going to Google Fungible goods. But your examples are vivid and easy to understand.
I've always been told money is fungible, but what is the difference between fungible good and a commodity?
Define what you think a commodity is. If you think of a commodity like money then you are correct there is not much difference. If you think of a commodity like coffee then the difference is that there are many different types of coffee but they are not interchangeable. If you do not want decaf coffee but trade me one bag of coffee for another, you would be pissed when when you got home and couldnt stay awake for shit.
Oil is a commodity. Metals and minerals are commodities. As far as coffee, I'd argue that it's the beans that are commodities.
Sex, at least in the way that I see it, is definitely a commodity.
Sex is not a thing that you can touch and trade between people. Especially people who are not attracted to each other. If I trade you oil for food, even if you did not want or need the oil, right now, it would still have value to another person for trade. I cannot take sexing with you today and trade that for food tomorrow.
A better question is, why is dick fungible while pussy is not. Dick is dick, a chick just needs to lay there in order to get off. Maybe some hand movement. Pussy you need to work for. All chicks know that just touching a dick will get it hard, trying the same moves on different pussy might yield different results. So pussy will always be non-fungible because it is not easily traded, especially as a currency system.
I dunno... to me, that's the opposite of TRP. Personally, it generally doesn't matter who it is as long as she is attractive and does the stuff I like. There are exceptions, of course, but when it comes to down and dirty fucking, that's about how it works.
I have a feeling if it was, we'd get nowhere because we'd just be constantly smashing everyone without worries
If you want to know what it is like to be a woman get a reasonably fit picture of yourself or some random dude. Then get on gay tinder and start right swiping. Dont worry you dont actually have to suck any dick. Calm your butthole.
Unlike hetero Tinder you are instantly going to be flooded with matches, requests to meet up, compliments and requests for sex. This is what (normal BMI) women experience. They litteraly have sex on tap any time any place.
Now imagine having an unlimited cock pass for 15 years. That's why uggo chunkler women treat men that are far more attractive and accomplished then them like shit. The smart phone compliment extravaganza has warped their sense of reality.
This is a very good point. Last summer I went to a local nudist spot, just because I felt like lying in the sun with my kit off. I'm not 20 and Dwayne Johnson chiseled but I am lean and have a runners physique. I suppose a 7 or so, maybe an 8 on a good day. Ten minutes in I was absolutely drowning in gay guys complimenting me on my body and cock, and offering anything I wanted (or didn't, as the case may be).
Women can never understand the "double standard" of why it's okay for MEN to have a high partner count but why it's so terrible for WOMYNS to do it too.
Your post was spot on JP. Women don't appreciate or value what they've always had available.
I remember after breaking out of my first LTR, I talked to the chick 2 years later and she was flabbergasted that I had only hooked up with 2 people in that time frame. While she had hooked up with atleast 10 but I'm guessing probably more like 20, since tinder and okc exist. She knows I'm attractive, and fun to hang out with and all that shit, but just couldn't fathom that (A) I didn't want to and (B) I didn't have as much access to sex as she did.
Let's be fair though...1 lay per year is reaching incel territory.
Oh it was a small amount I didn't disagree with her. She just couldn't comprehend the difference in access. I turned down a good chunk of people, but it would have not been anywhere near 20, when comparing the two of our personalities at the time. A introverted male vs an introverted female. She'll double your number no prob because the dick seeks her out like shes on the Truman Show.
Those 2 were in the first few months. Then I took stupid advice from my sister to "take a break from dating for a year" and while solid advice here, the way I interpreted it at the time with no other information was to just go full introvert, which stunted the fuck out of social skills in general. After the year was up I realized how sexually and socially retarded I had become and took another 6 or so months to get out of the funk.
Women understand. It's men who are clueless to respond when confronted with this statement
Another universal truism is that women who have discovered this do everything in their power to conceal or lie about the fact. Deep down every slut knows that men don't want sluts, but with enough cheerleader support and self-delusion they manage to live with the mental dissonance.
Great post JP. The way sex is distributed works exactly like a marketplace, with all of the economic principles intact.
Women who have rode the carousel have built up tolerance to the powerful chemicals released during sex, rendering those chemicals powerless. Those chemicals normally bind a woman emotionally to the man she's having sex with; if they don't work anymore, it's quite literally impossible for that woman to form a deep, committed emotional bond with a man.
Of course, men will be fine. We'll find another woman who hasn't broken her body's normal functioning, if we want a long term relationship at all. Like must other doctrines of feminism, encouraging women to pursue casual sex is in direct opposition to women's legitimate best interests.
I see this repeated here a lot. Can I get a link to the study that confirms this?
A study that confirms what, exactly? Here's a study that covers pair-bonding. Do you need one to confirm the existence of permanent tolerance to neurotransmitters you've had repeated exposure to?
Seriously. It's hilarious how society is fine investigating both men and women at once under the label, 'people', or just men, about subjects such as tolerance ( a fact), but if you single out women, not for hatred, but just for objective investigation, their brain short circuits, and demands extra facts and studies. Then if you happen to have the studies at hand, "but it's only a correlation!", "the sample size was too small! You can't generalize women like that. NAWALT, blah blah blah"
They're subconsciously (or possibly even consciously) recognising that the results of such investigations threaten to reveal truth and drop hints to BPers, and truth is what women desperately have to suppress to keep BPers in the dark.
Can't let those BPers catch any unwanted hints about how women really work.
[permanently deleted]
What the Hell did you just say?
Here's some analysis, which has a link to the original study.
http://markmanson.net/forum/Thread-Correlation-between-successful-marriage-and-sex-experience
Correlation doesn't equal causation. This may infer that sluts are more high maintenance but it doesn't in anyway prove that their neurophysiology is irreparably damaged. Human anatomy and physiology is so resilient - it would have to entail a serious trauma to permanently damage someone's neurotransmitter functioning. Don't get me wrong, sluts are disgusting on their own merit and deserve all the denigration and public humiliation they have coming, but I don't suffer spurious conjecture riddled scientific claims lightly. This study doesn't prove shit. There needs to be a definitive study conducted before we can claim that sluts don't produce adequate levels of oxytocin.
Additionally, what I can anecdotally attest to is that extreme public humiliation is the perfect example of the kind of trauma that can induce severe protracted major depressive disorder in women (i.e. permanently alter their neurotransmitter functioning). If you're in a state where it's legal to share your chick's nudes and you felt like being punitive, this is something that will definitively alter her neurochemistry, if you were so inclined to experiment.
I wouldn't be surprised to find out that her fertile body is going haywire trying to figure out why all of the dicks being inserted into her aren't making her pregnant.
[edit] My account just went into a weird state where I was subscribed but it was giving me the "Not member of this community" message. I fixed it by unsubscribing, subscribing and then reloading.
Or for one particular women I know, an addiction to public sex and degradation.
My ex wf rode the CC hard before I met her, 7yr ltr. Yeah I suppose we pair bonded but at the end of the day it was just my turn.......as BB. I never asked her when we were younger but after we split I did. If you really want to pair bond do it when your young, get it over and done with. I think it's over rated personally, I don't think I'm wired for it anyway.
Sounds like sex fatigue. I wonder if "pair-bonding" can somewhat be re-sensitized by avoiding sex for a long period of time.
Dude this is the reason I get bored in an LTR. Once it's been a few months, I can't get interested unless she's new to me.
I was thinking more of terms of sex with anyone not monogomously. But relationships too?
meh, anything is POSSIBLE but highly unlikely. Just like a recovered drug addict is way more likely to use again then a sober person to start. if you could choose between the two obviously you wouldnt choose the ex-meth head.
A woman with little sex experience also has little relationship experience. Maybe that's what makes the difference and so a relationship slut is just too aware of all the other possibilities, and so her expectations can never be met.
It's her awareness of all the shorter checkout lines that keeps someone like that from ever being happy in the line she's in.
Wouldn't that happen to a woman in an ltr, especially since she would probably be having sex more frequently.
Is it though? Seems like it's only against their best interests if you consider those to be being successfully hypergamous and socially accepted. But who cares really? A slut is going to be a slut. I'm not sure it's in our interest as men to encourage them either way. If you're trying to find an LTR, it's only in your interest to choose wisely, not to worry about fixing women. I've met some really cool women that were fun to hang out with, but whom were complete sluts. I wasn't out to change them. I wasn't out to encourage them to be different. I had fun, I let them live their life with free agency, and when time came, I kept it moving on down the road. And you know what? God bless em'!
I really don't get the prevalence of men suggesting that women should be shamed for promiscuity around here. It seems completely counter intuitive to the goals of red pill (e.g. self improvement, analytical and observational skills, integrity, etc) I don't go around telling people not to drive their e92 M3 because their going to wear it out and put miles on it, I just don't buy the high mileage one when I go to get my own.
"you are never going to out-slut a slut."
For sure agreed.
To build on this, I think the myth that a carousel rider faces necessary dire consequences is also false; I have a Facebook friend who rode the carousel hard in her twenties (hundreds of partners), who is now 37, with a strangers kid, and has a beta provider happy to be A REAL MAN for her.
Charm is powerful and thirst is real.
That's another post I'm going to do when I have more time to put thought into it.
Squash your revenge fantasies; in all likelihood, she will still find her Beta Bux.
Yep. Sluts it up her whole life, no doubt humiliating good men time and time again, contributing nothing to the world save her pussy and it's associated misery, and what does she get at the end of it all? Rewarded with a shower of love and money for the remainder of her life by BB. She'll never learn, will pass it on to her children because BB won't have the balls to teach otherwise. Hell she'll most likely stay on the CC to boot.
My favorite was an ex of mine who said she "didn't want to be a slut anymore". After we broke up I guess she forgot what she said because she had at least 3 FWBs within a week and half. When I talked to her a couple months later when I was living out of state she apparently succumbed to her impulses because she told me she literally had to fuck a guy everyday.... bitch was crazy
Last I heard from her was that she is a long term relationship (probably half a year by this point). It's weird because she kept on talking about wanting to get married by like 25 and shit. Like she was delusional about. Poor bastard has no idea the shit he has gotten himself in.
''Sluts it up her whole life, no doubt humiliating good men time and time again''
Then they're not really good men then are they? they are nice guys... You don't have to admire women's nature just accept it, It's societies (mens) fault because contrary to popular belief, we men do actually still own the world, It's powerful men who are allowing and funding feminism, for their own agenda.
Although most guys behave in a 'beta' manner these days, there have ALWAYS been beta guys who's wives owned the relationships and didn't respect them, ALWAYS. 'beta's' are natural, although the widespread beta behaviour is not so natural.
Men are competitive. Biology necessitates that men occupy the most superior and the most inferior positions simultaneously.
Of course, humans much like many other mammals follow a hierarchical structure. My point was that many people (on TRP included) seem to think that the women and feminists are running the show, they are the puppets, but sure enough the show will come to an end.
Good on her. She's just doing what's best for her, same as us.
Hell, my revenge fantasy is that she does find her beta bucks. Knowing that she will have security but no true happiness or sexual satisfaction (without putting that security at risk) is revenge enough.
[deleted]
Divorce rape, while common, is far from universal. Especially if the BB is smart enough to have a competent lawyer craft a prenup, divorce rape is extremely unlikely. A fair property division can be bargained for and alimony can be waived. Beyond child support and custody issues, there is little room for a raping.
And?
She is not going to be happy with him. She betrayed the implicit trust on how she ought to be towards men, and now, this is what she gets. A Beta Bux, and nothing more.
I've been saying this all the time. This goes with the theme that life isn't fair. Better get yours.
Wait till she divorces her REAL MAN after her kid is old enough to be left in school all day.
You know, I don't think this is even necessarily true. I know we say that on The Red Pill as a cautionary tale against marriage, and while she certainly might divorce him, the real issue is that he married a slut who can never respect him.
...and a woman who doesn't respect her man won't stay with him. She will treat him like shit, fuck around on him and, one day, take him for all he's worth in divorce court.
I think the reality of this is weighed against how well each retain their value.
Too often we are reductionists regarding beta providers in thinking that they only have their beta value to provide- while this beta value is certainly foremost, the beta may be physically attractive or sexually skilled, but only not self-aware or naive about the world.
Even in a best case scenario where they stay together and she doesn't cheat, he still married a whore and is raising another mans kid, and that's good enough to stay far away from marriage in a culture where all women are whores.
I think it is worth noting that in addition to this woman not valuing sex, she placed high value on the emotional connection. Her years of riding the CC and living in western society has separated her heart from her genitals. Monogamous relationships worked when the heart and genitals were one and the same, when sex and love were inseparable. Now that sex has been so polarized and trivialized by media throughout the entire life of anyone under 40, emotion can be easily separated from the act.
This is a primary cause of this archaic fuck-your-weed-dealer-while-in-a-committed-relationship female mentality. RedPope's ex-lady would have been ashamed if she cuddled and talked for 3 hours with her weed dealer. That would have been cheating to her.
Penis is simply the cheapest resource on the planet.
Pussy is too, with an abundance mentality and actuality.
I mean, I get what you're saying, but it's still not even remotely close.
One thing I feel is important to point out is that women have ready access to sex with men far above their pay grade, i.e. good ol' Chad Thundercock. They must, however, lower their standards drastically to find that post-wall BB to lock down into a relationship. Locking down a Chad to them is "getting lucky."
As a reasonably attractive and successful single male, I too have access to pussy on demand. I could send a text and have my Johnson serviced RIGHT NOW if I wanted. However, I might have to lower my standards to do so. Now, I know that many of you are big dog alphas, so this doesn't apply to you or your Thundercock. You are outliers.
Conversely, I could easily get into a LTR with a very attractive woman with as little effort as it would take a HB6 to fuck a Chad.
Point being that the market drives the value (as JP says), but it's not black and white. A woman will not automatically put great value on a LTR; it is a function of SMV. Just as you put a greater value on your HB9 conquest, she will put a greater value on her relationship with Chad. Do NOT for one second believe that she automatically places so much value in your relationship that she won't do something to fuck it up. That's like a HB6 thinking you're in a relationship just because you banged her a few times.
Part of me thinks this comment is unnecessary, but a bigger part of me feels that our growing ranks need a reminder of the fundamental differences in the dynamics.
Good points but sometimes a hoe is just a hoe.
Not about to argue that. I just wanted to reinforce the concept that men and women aren't just playing by different rules - we're playing two completely different games.
What I don't get is if "it doesn't mean anything" and "it wasn't a big deal" than how does she understand that this is something she should hide?
Because hamster, my friend, the hamster. Women aren't stupid, they know that it does mean something and that it is a big deal, because tacitly she knows that she isn't the one that gets to decide whether or not its a big deal; her partner gets to decide how important it is to him.
When a woman says these things, what she's really doing is trying to gaslight a man into deceiving himself.
It's a form of shaming when you think about it. Basically she is saying
"How dare you question what I do when you aren't around? I am a strong, empowered, independent woman!"
It's verbal jujitsu. She is trying to deflect your anger and then use it against you.
Boom goes the dynamite.
If a post wall woman has been single for a long time, and isn't in acoma and needs a poop bag, then there is definitely something wrong with her. She is either crazy, completely unpleasant, and/or slutty. Women need men, but not a particular one. They have a constant need to have men on stand by as a safety net should they fall off the carousel whether it be for attention, provisioning, and/or venting. It's their insurance policy, their retirement plan should their SMV no longer be noticed by Chads.
She didn't turn down 100 'good men'. The cock carousel is exclusively for 'alphas', 100 alphas turned her down. Any betas in the notch count were used as a water break from the carousel ride, more security. Promiscuity never trickles down.
When 100, supposedly decent quality men, turn her down in a row, it shows that 100 men didn't deem her worthy of commitment. That should tell you something. 100 men found her only useful as a pump and dump. She's just some slut good for nothing else.
They need attention!
Story time. My last plate is 32, few months later she will 33. I know her for years, 15? years maybe, she was on the far end of my social circle. Through the red lens, i asked her few questions (different occasions), and realized she was an active CC rider in her early 20s, after that had few LTR-s, but she was the one who broke up all the time.
Despite the fact that she was a CC rider, she was really bad at sex, i was baffled by this, she thought that she was good.
While i was spinning her, she had a "group of friends", mostly males. Orbiters of sorts. She hung out with them, during the week, and she spent some time with me, at the weekends (we live in different cities, she come back home on the weekends).
My point is, that group of friends provided her constantly needed attention, because she was pretty much the only woman in the group. When she had "no one", she would (at least) fuck one of them, when she was drunk, or just needed someone. Her problem is, that you cannot give her enough attention, she is a reserved, introverted girl on the outside, but if i haven't wrote her something on Messenger for 2 days, she was freaking out.
After we broke it off, she told me that her "clock is ticking" really loudly. Most of her GFs are all married, babies on the way, or they already have one. While she is constantly working, "she has so much stuff to do", she is always out of time. She is not actively dating, just wasting her time, and with this speed, she will be a wife, and a mother around 36+, and i was kind to her.
There is no BB on the way for her, because she cannot commit for one man's attention only. And no man is okey with that fact that she likes to hang out with her "friends".
Attention source: group of male friends
Sex source: the CC
You know what really "doesn't mean anything" and is "no big deal?" Your relationship with a whore.
This explains everything very well. Low body count women are the best for LTRs.
Things to note: if she drinks and/or smokes a lot and/or parties a lot, its only a matter of time until she's fucking someone else. Real talk.
Smoking weed though?
It's not a mindless activity for me. I usually get a burst of creative thoughts and images flashing through my mind.
I don't see anything wrong with smoking weed. But from my experience, every chick that I know who smokes weed is full of shit or has/will ride a lot of dicks before she settles down. When I used to smoke, it made everything 5x funnier. Aside from that, I didn't get anything of substance from it.
EDIT: I've notice there is a big difference in personalities between women who do and women who don't smoke. Of course there is always an exception. But those are rare.
Every chick, "I used to be a slut" lol
Glad my post has led to so much great discussion. Allow me to confirm this:
During our first month of dating, she bragged about having turned down marriage proposals from two previous boyfriends.
The sex is no big deal and is given out freely, but only a few will receive the best part of her: her love.
Great.
The great tragedy for her is that when she really does feel "love", the ultimate tool of expressing that love, sex, will be dulled to a point where expression of her love is impossible. Her lack of passion during sex will be palpable to her.
Not just any sex, sex motivated by desire. Sex not had on the carousel is usually of the duty variety.
To be honest, women don't need to hit the wall for this phenomenon to begin. The average 26-28 year old women is not just on a path to the dark side but already a slut Sith Lord.
We've all seen it. Off the top of my head the ones I've heard from women, all under 30 include -
1) 'it was just sex?'
2) 'but everyone knows that I'm in love with you?'
3)'But I don't even care about him?'
And so on. Also, every time they have a look on their faces while they're saying these thing that screams 'isn't it obvious?!'. They've reached a point where they can't even comprehend that what they're saying isnt true.
I find it sadly ironic that women can trivialize sexual intercourse with men in such a jaw-dropping, meaningless manner, yet tell men that we are the ones who trivialize and objectify women.
What kind of fucking bizzarro world are we living in?
Feminism and the feminine imperative is socially accepted insanity. Fun times.
Women can get dick at any point in time. It's so valueless to them; that's why sex isn't that big of a deal to them as it is for men because they don't ever have to work at all for it. Giving pussy away for them is like someone giving out free money. Extremely easy to do. The curse on their part is they never raise themselves to be bigger than their vaginas; which will ultimately set them up for failure.
I don't know about you guys, but this really shakes things up on previous LTR's where the writing is on the wall.
They were cheating on me long before I found out. Tough to swallow but these posts have hit home.
Well, this just got added to my "manosphere" bookmark folder.
I read recently that the number one reason people cheat is because they can. That is, having the opportunity to cheat is the most likely reason to cheat than any other.
So then, who has the most opportunity to cheat? Men who work all day and must have high SMV to attract a woman to have sex with or a woman who on average works fewer hours, has more free time, and can get sex when she wants much easier than males can?
Since coming here I've all but given up on the idea of monogamy and LTR. Marriage was already ruled out. I simply can't imagine a woman being faithful and have yet to piece together the methods and behavior by which I might guarantee her fidelity. And while I consider an open relationship, previous posts have shown me that men always get the short end of that deal.
Women always out-fuck men in open relationships. Never forget that; it's why it's usually the woman that broaches the topic initially. If your girl is talking open relationship, it means she's already got a cock on lock that she wants to rock.
Ditch her immediately.
Is this true? I always got the impression that sex and emotion were inextricably linked for women, while the opposite is true for men. I'm not in my 30s yet though, so I don't associate with women who have reached the point you're speaking of (30+ with at least 12 years on the CC).
That emotional connection is what makes a physically unfaithful woman so much worse than a physically unfaithful man, at least in my mind. If a man fucks some random girl, big deal? It was just a wet hole to stick his dick in, there's less than zero emotional attachment in most cases. Probably some spur of the moment impulse -- pump and dump. But if a woman fucks another man, she most likely formed an emotional connection with him first. Then she probably fantasized about it for weeks or months before acting on it. She's cheated in both senses of the word (physical + emotional), and in the most egregious way possible. Oh, and she's probably already fantasizing about their next encounter while she fucks you...
Women start off this way; linking physical sex heavily to emotional connection. However, as they become hardened and weathered by the cock carousel over the course of 6, 10, 12, or 16 years, those hormonal associations between sex and emotion become decayed and eroded.
When a woman starts having sex, there are actual chemicals in her brain that causes her to pair bond with the man she's having sex with. However, as the cock count starts to rack up and eventually she's 32 with an N-count approaching 100, she loses the ability to react to those hormones.
Think of it like a drug addict. A drug addict eventually needs more and more of the drug to achieve the same high, right? And eventually, he needs the drug just to feel normal and not go through withdrawal symptoms.
This is how older, weathered women start to approach sex; she needs to be dicked not to form an emotional connection, but simply to feel worthy as a woman and a person.
And if she had an early pair bond with an alpha, she is doomed for life.
They are, but it gets dulled with every dick she takes.
That's true. If a guy cheats he won't leave his wife and children over it, perhaps unless he has already emotionally abandoned them (abandoned as in the Saving the Best story).
Wouldn't it be more related to the quality of sex she has had, rather than the number of partners? For example girl A has had a small amount of lackluster sex with 4 guys, and girl B was pounded within an inch of her life by one guy for years. Which one would retain the most ability to pair bond through sex? RP convention would be to prefer girl B solely based on N count, but I'd think rocking girl A for the first time in her life would bond her pretty firmly to you.
Not a purely hypothetical situation either.. for example: a girl who dated some nerds, leveled up some in attractiveness, and then landed a guy far superior to her ex's.
You'd probably be right. It's not really about how many partners she's had...but if even one of them sufficiently alpha widowed her she'll have trouble bonding. That risk, of course, goes up with the amount of partners she's had.
Amazing post, you've helped me understand a lot. I read the other post then stopped back here to read what you said, and you put it together perfectly for me.
I needed to hear that sex is meaningless to her because you're so fucking right she has had plenty of it and it's just like eating rice. Not a big deal. It's exactly how we should feel, because we've been brought up in school/church/whatever that sex is some magical romantic bond of love and you're fuckin right. It's all bullshit
Thank you and cheers, friend.
This is a great follow up. The original post and this analysis which further develops the perspective of women are exactly why I check TRP daily for top posts.
I have a question for OP: "Since women do not value sex due to it's availability, then what do they value in their experiences with men? What is the most valuable and scarce commodity?"
Unabashed, monogamous commitment from a high value man; a man who could pull other women but chooses not to in deference to her. This is the holy grail for the female, and the modus operendi of today's modern women is to try to use sex to get it.
Pity for them that it never works and only serves to de-value her as long term mate even more. Ironic that they give up their most valuable asset, their healthy womb, as a cheap commodity to secure what they want.
Died at fungible good. Awesome post btw
but her past doesn't matter...and since she fucked him yesterday, isn't it technically in her past already? Checkmate redpillers
Funny story : when I broke up with my ex girlfriend, she tried to get back with me and she came back to fuck me. Her goal was to make me commit again.
Here is the interesting part : she didn't want to make me want to commit to actually get back together. She did that so she could be the one who left. She waited for me to come say hi normally because we agreed to get sort of back together after she got me back. In the meantime she has been telling all her friends and everyone (we were at the same college) that I has been desperatly trying to get her back and that I was the one who came to her and that obviously she said no. All those SJW were waiting to dig their claws in me in order to defend this girl. Finally I picked up on the signals (she refused eye contact, very clearly tried to avoid me) but instead of acting beta and going up to her asking why she is behaving that way since we were supposed to be back together, I didn't give one fuck about her behavior.
Now, h ere is why it is related to OP's post : I broke up with her because she has basically been cheating with at least three men and 2 women in a timespan of...4 months. When we fucked the night she came back to persuade me to commit, she actually had already commited to another guy. So not only she cheated on me, but she cheated on her new guy with me.
It astonished me that she would give away her pussy (and asshole, I got the most out of it that night) just to harm me later by publicly humiliating me.
That was when I understood than contrary to everything I've been taught, women's body and sex are something they give away for anything...because they are bored...because they just feel like it...it's literally like video games or chocolate for us.
I'm a new red piller but I completely agree. I see women do this with men so much more than I see men do it to women (but there are those who do, not saying they don't exist) and yet women scream and shout that it's only the menz!
Of course no one hates women more than women, but women hate men more. At least, that's what I've found.
Ha, you remind me of my surprise as a teenager when one girl ask another girl if she loved her boyfriend....up until that point I had never thought a relationship can be faked or that it would be so common that they have to ask each other.
There's something here I felt that the article touched a little bit on but not completely, and it's that for a woman, a guy cheating, for example, or banging around doesn't mean much to her, even if she's seeing him and she's interested. A woman prefers sharing a high-quality man than being a loser's one and only (~Rollo Tomassi). Whereas it's unforgivable to a man for his woman to go astray. That's because a girl's value is basically genetic and he is providing the value, whereas a guy's value is his masculinity and honor, which are his religion, even if he doesn't consciously follow it. A girl deciding another brand is better is sabotaging his own. Men are the sellers, women are the buyers.
I'll admit I'm quite new to TRP and still need to read up on all the sidebar stuff but I have a quick question: How is it that all the women out there are sluts but still complain that there are no "good men", often even when swarmed by orbiters? How in any stretch of human imagination do they think that they make any sort of sense?
http://youtu.be/0BAHdXHtwFE
Everything you said was correct except this paragraph. Beautiful women are far more abundant than beautiful men. A man blessed with beauty lives a life where sex is equally meaningless, in fact its not hard to imagine a beautiful man in his 30s cheating on his post wall wife and mother of his kids and seriously considering it meaningless due to how easy women and sex have always been, whilst still believing he is a good husband because he loves his wife.
While I respect your opinion, my basis for this paragraph was a social experiment video I saw a couple years ago. I'm at work now and have to reddit on the down low, but if I have time tonight I'll try to find it.
It was basically a good looking man and a good looking woman randomly approaching people on the street and asking straight away "will you have sex with me". The man, though good looking, was almost always flatly denied by the women, while the woman almost always got men to say yes; the only ones that denied her thought it was either a trick or a prostitution sting.
Brad Pitt can't get the amount of pussy an HB 7 can get in dick.
Someone asked Channing Tatum stories about his fans. Long story short, non of his fans approached him with a quick sex offer in an alley/bathroom ever. And he said, he was genuinely surprised by this. I think this was in his recent AMA.
It's not only the fact that women require more time to assess their mate, but the fear of being seen as a slut that creates these results.
Wouldn't wanna spread our legs for a beta wearing an alpha disguise, now would we?
True, but flat out asking is a fairly efficient means for a woman to get laid. If my goal were to bang the most women possible, standing on the street asking random strangers to have sex with me would not be the most efficient.
Its the means of soliciting people for sex that gave the woman her advantage. You gotta let chad do his thing naturally. Women aren't going to think a guy begging for sex on the streets is all that alpha.
Also how many of the guys who said yes to the girl were guys whom she actually would want to have sex with, and how many girls who said yes to the guy were actually girls he would want to fuck?
We need to control for quality. How many HOT guys can an average girl get to fuck her, vs how many HOT girls can a Chad get to fuck him.
Social status matters much more than physical beauty for a man.
For LTR yes, for ONS no not at all.
As hypergamy increases and women become the new men, men's looks are going to matter more and more.
I thought sex was a more personal act for a woman due to being penetrated,and there was more emotion attached to it.what is the difference between a a woman who can no longer pair bond and the average polygamous man.we can still pair bond after fucking 20women. Women can play the field better than men,and not get attached,tl.they appear as cut out if not more cut out for casual sex than men and id say worse for long term relationships than men. The fact that women lose there ability to pair bond after only 1 or 2 dicks,and the constraints for a successful marriage are so tight (virgin) ,that they inherently cant be meant for monogamy.im still prone to getting oneitis even spreading my seed
Im 26, been with 50ish or so ladyfriends. I've felt that the large majority were or are below me and subsequently they've been ok/fun for a while. The woman or women im truly after looks wise I feel are accustomed only to a higher level of catering and bitch man type spending that only a higher socioeconomically ranked man can provide. I do not wish to provide that level and my frugality and savings minded habits keep me from doing things like taking a woman out to a $20 or $30 dollar dinner.
I feel as though I am trained to approach lower socioeconomic women because of their ease of lay and lack of discerning taste.
How should I approach this matter? On one hand I am so viscerally repulsed by the spending habits and princess mentality of the women I desire that I do not even wish to approach them... on the other hand they're usually fit and hot.
Dopamine realease*. Other than that a very good post.
Don't be scared of women's sexuality. Both men and women are able to separate sex from love. When I've cheated I've used that line about meaning nothing. Sometimes both men and women's desires are too strong to make them rational. Some girls will dump you for cheating, I knew that but my desire was too string, same goes for women.
Not true. Sex is a big deal for women because of the consequences of pregnancy. The risk of a beta cumming in them makes them selective.
Not true. Women today have 11 different methods of birth control to ensure they don't get pregnant (EDIT: and legalized Plan B or abortion if they somehow do get pregnant). Birth control is the carnival operator that allows the cock carousel to operate.
Will not disagree here. The idea that sluts will fuck anything that moves is a myth; sluts are indeed some of the most alpha-seeking women out there. Which is why Mr. Pope's ex-girl couldn't resist fucking one of the pinnacle signs of IDGAF alpha behavior, being a drug dealer. Because drug dealers are sooo "hawt".
We have access to essentially infinite calories, but our metabolisms don't magically ramp up to compensate.
It doesn't matter what types of birth control there are. Evolution is evolution, and women like the exact same (broadly defined) traits today that they liked 50,000 years ago, and will continue to like 50,000 years from now.
So what if a man is in his 30 and is single? Do we have "expiration date" as well?
Yes, we do, but it's much better than with chicks.
Oh come on. I can't believe he dumped her for one mistake. She had so much sex with him! And she seemed like a great person too. And him being cold-emotionally is not a good thing. He should have just been himself and talked to her about it. Waiting till the next day over text is so fucking passive, especially for somebody who's a part of this group.
A real man would have talked to her about it, been brave enough to express his emotions, and forgive her if he still wanted to love her.
"you are never going to out-slut a slut. She will always have access to more cock than you will have to pussy."
Nah, go to thailand :D Outslut anyone by a factor of 10.
Just one thing though.
Sex doesn't mean much to a guy like me either. I treat my plate as someone I like fucking and that's it.
What's the issue here?
This is not true.
Fungibility of an item means that two separate instances of that item are interchangeable for the purposes they're used for.
Money is fungible, because one $10 bill is perfectly equal to another $10 bill for the purposes people want a $10 bill for.
However, no two humans look the same, except for twins (and even then, most twins show a significant difference in appearance).
Theoretically, there could be several different looking men who have the same objective value. Objective value could theoretically be calculated by having the men date several thousand women, and having the women rate the men. There could be men who don't look totally alike, but attain the same objective attractiveness score.
These men are objectively of the same value, but not fungible for a given individual woman. This is because they have differences in appearance/habits/interests.
As an example, there are some women who are legitimately into Asian men. For the vast majority, though, white men is the preference. Objectively, an inherently attractive Asian man would be equal to an average looking white man.
But, if you ask a woman who happens to genuinely prefer Asians, or has little racial preference, she will prefer the Asian. One instance greatly serves her purpose, while another does not, even though they have the same objective value across the population.
I think you are reading too far into the spirit of what I said. Women, especially the woman in RedPope's example, can use a man's cock the same way I put gasoline in my car.
I prefer to use Shell gasoline. However, if my car is running on empty and the nearest Shell station is nowhere in sight, I will settle on Citgo or Exxon gas.
That's how many women treat the different cocks in their lives. Take for example a long term relationship. The reason so many of them don't work is because when she gets horny and her BF is 500 miles away at college, she just might replace his cock with the nearest convenient cock to sate the horny urges.
The problem with this analogy is that gasoline's performance is objective. You may prefer one brand for whatever reason, but assuming the quality is the same, they both do the job (powering your car) identically. Your car's engine doesn't discriminate.
Meanwhile the performance of a sexual mate is completely based on the preferences that you have, nothing else. People discriminate.
The BF being at a different college doesn't make a good analogy either, because fungibility includes same time and place as a constraint.
Women and man fuck exactly the same amount. In order to fuck you need a man and a woman. Saying that women have more access to sex its just stupid. Who they fuck? the air? A ghost? They fuck men! And it is a 1:1 ratio if we exclude homosexual men and women.
Do you understand that women fucks men, right? If a woman has sex that means a man has sex. You can't say they got it easier because they still have to fuck a man. And for that man it's easy to get laid as it is for a woman. 1:1 ratio.
What if I wanted to have kids? Should I just ditch that whole notion altogether? Everything RP seems solid to me except having kids. From what's said, no woman above 30 can even be close to being a worthy mother.
Is there any part of my original analysis that doesn't make sense? An unmarried woman over 30 has demonstrated via her actions that she doesn't want to be a mother, at least not to healthy kids. This "having babies in your 30's": nonsense is media hype. Any fertility doctor will tell you that fertility drops to near single digit percentage points at 35 and is practically 0 at 45. Not to mention the risk of Downs Syndrome skyrockets after 35.
I'm not saying it doesn't make sense. I full-heartedly agree with the whole analysis. However TRP teaches that it is best not to settle up until at the very least when you enter your 30s. In regards to children how does one act? Get a kid while in your 20s with a valid female without commiting, getting a female in her 20s while you're in your 30s or going ahead with alternative ways of reproducing?
I want my blood to continue but I can't fathom the best way while maintaining RP values.
If you don't think high value men in their 30s can't land 20 year olds, you need more sidebar.
Start dating when she's 20. Live together at least for 5 years before having kids. Finish having kids before she's 30. Just simple biology and simple math.
25 years is the cutoff age (for women) if you want children.
So it's not her explication who is important but the implication. And the implication is : she had divorced sex from love long ago and she will get her sexual needs met by anyone whether or not it was dr Pope.
But with this reasoning, one understand that she could still love him.
I don't really understand the problem here, could you enlighten me please?
Remember: monogamy is a social construct. Inherently all human beings want and need to fuck as many other human beings as possible, to perpetuate their blood and DNA.
That's why marriage is so toxic to a man - not only does it hinder you from pursuing other women like the innate hunter you are, it actively transforms you into a pacifist incapable of attaining true sexual glory. Listen to your biology, and everything about human sexual interaction will begin to make sense.
Tl;Dr - women will be women, and men will be men. Maximize your gains, and cut your emotions out of the picture.
What's our goal here.. locking down someone young who is a female who hasn't been with many men? Are we after pussy in terms of quantity here or is the goal an emphasis on quality of woman and promotion of bonding?
Or is it just a study of female sexuality? Im semi lost..
From what I understand there is no "goal" except understanding. We are simply learning the rules of the game. Choose your own adventure.
There is hamstering apparent in her justification for why what she did is "okay", or "not a big deal". However, I think it's inaccurate to say that women are more likely to regard casual sex as meaningless. In fact, I think it's far more typical for it to be the other way around. This aspect of your dissection seems like it's coming from a place of hurt, and not from a logical and objective place of observation. The truth is that the sex that woman engaged in with the pot dealer WAS meaningless. The sex she had with the author was meaningful. There wasn't anything untrue about what she said, nor did what she say imply that all, sex she has is equally meaningless. The only thing to learn from this as far as TRP goes, is that women will justify their disrespectful behavior and ultimately tend to be ungrateful about what they have.
You're missing the point. The woman does not get to decide whether or not it was meaningless. OP does. It may have been meaningless to her, but it certainly wasn't meaningless to him. And if you are someone (and forgive me for being "old fashioned") who regards sex as the ultimate expression of love and emotional connection, then sex is either always meaningful or it is always meaningless.
If a woman is willing to give all of herself and her womb meaninglessly to some douchebag loser drug dealer, the same thing she gives to the man she supposedly loves, then she is basically saying that her lover is no better than a worthless douchebag drug dealer. Two different men, both getting the same access to her body.
If one is meaningless, then the other is meaningless. Hamster this away all you want.
Did you read the story? OP regarded the entire relationship as a short, 6 month fling for spring from the get go. There was never any love there in the story. The entire thing was an arrangement of convenience. OP's decision was made based off of the simple disrespect of her actions, not because he regarded some deep, spiritual connection had been betrayed. There never was such a connection. My point was that it doesn't matter who found what to be meaningful or meaningless, and that women are not more likely to regard sex as casual and meaninglrss as men. The point to be taken from this is that as a man, you honor your word and you don't justify breaking it by hamstering shitty excuses like she did. That's really the only thing to take from it.
You can hamster all you want, but it was clear that there was an agreement of monogamy during the term of the relationship. And she violated it. Period.
Buddy, here's your problem...
For one, you're attacking a straw man by saying that I'm hamstering to justify the woman's behavior. I have made it very clear that the woman was disrespectful and that she was hamstering in trying to excuse her behavior. She was in the wrong. Hence, OP was righteous in his decision and course of action. So right there, you can drop your ridiculous straw man argument.
Secondly, OP obviously did not subscribe to your way of looking at sex (i.e. a magical, deep connection) when it came to his interactions with her. He was clearly emotionally unattached, and had every intention of dumping her in a month or so anyway (according to him). OP didn't ultimately dump her early because he had his heart broken; he dumped her because she is a typical, ungrateful, disrespectful broad who he would not allow to compromise his integrity. All that shit you brought up about "love" and implying that he was hurt because he thought it was meaningful is nonsense and is not the point of the report. It's not a sob story. It's an example of AWALT and the proper, righteous way to handle such a situation. You're bringing a bunch emotional nonsense into it. Her female folly is in her inability to honor an agreement, not because she's promiscuous. There is nothing inherently wrong with promiscuity, and I don't think that's what TRP should be about. What's wrong is not having honesty and integrity. And that's exactly what I think TRP should be about.
I see I've been downvoted, but I fail to see you or anyone else refute my logic. I also find it interesting that we're pretty much in agreement about everything other than this extra focus and attention being brought to the woman being a shitty person, not just for the simple fact that she cheated on OP and dishonored an agreement, but because she did it with a "drug dealing loser". What exactly does that aspect of the story have anything to do with it? Why is that relevant to TRP? Why should any focus or attention be paid to who she cheated on OP with? If they had an agreement to remain exclusive, then that's all that matters. Would the woman have been any less wrong if instead of a "loser", it had been an alpha stud? Would that have justified her "giving her womb", as you put it, away meaninglessly? Would OP have any less reason to feel disrespected if she only gave that access to someone more attractive than him? I would argue no, it would have absolutely no bearing on the situation, because that's not the issue. This whole "love" angle you're imposing on the situation is completely irrelevant conjecture on your part.
My only contention with what you wrote - because again, we're pretty much in agreement - is that it seems irrelevant to criticize the behavior of being promiscuous, or for temporarily having lowered standards, and erroneous to paint that as a female trait. We do this as men all of the time. We like to fuck. We desire lots of women. The reason why we will refrain in certain situations, I would argue, is because we honor our word when we give it to someone, not because we're above fucking some "loser" chick to get off when we're horny. Am I wrong here? Enlighten me. Because as I see it, OP remained monogamous out of an honor of his word, not because he loved this woman that he only wanted for 6 months to begin with. Again, love had nothing to do with it.
The woman should be shamed for cheating, not for who she cheated with or the fact that she desired other men. We don't do that to men, and as far as I can see, the only reason we would hold that double standard to women is if we were trying to improve their ability to be successfully hypergamous; which quite honestly, makes no sense to me. Why would we do that? It doesn't matter if she cheats up or down, the point is that the bitch cheated. End of story.
In the guy's case she was probably Nymphomaniac, she craved dick even from low SMV guy which is disgusting.
Claiming nympho is a cop out. It's a slut excuse as old as time.
Nympho is just a bullshit excuse for no self control.
[permanently deleted]
It means you need to do less posting and more sidebar reading right now.
This is pretty solld, however, if you are a guy in his 40s, an early 30s woman can be a catch, especially if she was taking care of herself in her 20s. And I don't buy into this "still single" crap, marriage is more disastrous for men and women than being single, or dating, or in a non-marriage LTR.