How to prevent or assess sexual incompatibility in a potential wife?

[–]Jude24257 points8 points9 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]OsmiumZulu4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]one7thing[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]one7thing[S] 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Deep_Strength6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I've been reading Christian relationships stories, and I have noticed how Christians who didn't fornicate before marriage found out after getting married that they weren't sexually compatible with their partner.

1 Corinthians 7:2 But because of sexual immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband. 3 The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise the wife also to her husband.

Because of sexual immoralities infers...

Find each other attractive
Hard to keep your hands off each other, but you resist temptation because it's the right thing to do to honor God

As far as no sex before marriage goes:

Have a frank discussion about your libido/sex drive and what both consider to be an optimal amount of sex in marriage
Have the frank discussion on 1 Corinthians 7 that you should be willing to have sex with your partner even if you don't want to and be enthusiastic about it
Examine her attitudes and upbringing in regard to sex and dispel any myths. Some girls have virginity or no sex drilled into them such that they instinctively want to stay a virgin after marriage. That's a bad thing.
Make sure you know both of each others expectation in regard to exploring sexuality. If you think oral or other positions are good to explore and she's an "only missionary" type of person that may be an issue.
Help her (and you) understand that good sex is something that is to be learned together by the husband and the wife. It's not something that is usually immediately good though it can be. Understand what is normal and not normal. Many women don't experience orgasms during intercourse, but some positions are more conducive to orgasm than others.

[–]one7thing[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Deep_Strength0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]R3dTul1p6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[–]newpointofview20 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]R3dTul1p6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

incompatibility- (of two things) so opposed in character as to be incapable of existing together.

Incompatibility implies that there is nothing you can do to fix it- you're just incompatible.

Will you experience seasons of sexual frustration in your marriage? Absolutely. But that is in no way an indication of impossibility.

The heart of RP is that women ultimately desire to be led by strong leaders, and will thus adapt to the preferences of those whom they deem high on the SMV list. So a woman's "incompatibility" with you is more of an indication of your lacking in the leadership than anything else.

As to your second comment- I would encourage you to read into why it is beneficial to wait until marriage. You seem to only live by that rule because "the Bible says so"- but every law God gives us does benefit us in light of eternity- and it's very important to understand that when thinking about sex within and without marriage.

[–]one7thing[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]R3dTul1p2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Read the comments- almost none of them affirm the notion of incompatibility. They're all telling him that the issue has a solution. As a note, this is all coming from the secular perspective.

From the Christian perspective- focus on your mission. Stop worrying about how sex is going to be and start worrying about how you're fulfilling God's call in your life to make disciples. When the time comes where you will need a helper, watch how women adapt to your frame and observe if they're willing to follow your lead in being on mission. If they're faithful and adaptable in that- then they will more than likely be adaptable in the bedroom as well. Making sexual gratification the pinnacle of the discussion is wrong IMO- because it completely takes out of focus more important aspects that need attention.

[–]I_Took-This_Name-4 points-3 points-2 points 3 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

From what I gather, the general belief is what I read from u/Red-Curious:

you can't negotiate attraction.

This statement is also used to back up the doctrine that you need to get into bodybuilding to build a fancy body that is sexually desirable (I know that TRP agrees that it can be bypassed, but it is still highly obsessed with it). Considering that they agree to marry, they are most likely attracted to each other (not granted though, given that they shouldn't have seen each other naked yet). From this, we can see that if such thing happens, it probably roots deeper than attraction - e.g. she doesn't enjoy his dick in her body. If looks are as critical as the RP/RPC theory claims - if you can't negotiate attraction, then how could you negotiate sexual incompatibility; if having a muscular body is critical (bodybuilding is the only sport recommended here and is one of the biggest teachings of RPC), then how could sexual incompatibility be less critical -, fixing an issue like that is bordering impossibility (sticking to the example, you have to change the shape and size of your dick, which isn't actually impossible, but not an easy and risk-free task and you may not even be able to achieve the desired outcome).

This question is outside the scope of vanilla TRP, since it wasn't developed for and by people who don't want to participate in pre-martial sex and the answer a red pilled guy would give you is to try doing sex before marriage (or even not to get married in the first place).

I am not a native English speaker, I wanted to quote Deuteronomy 24,1 which is about a man realizing that he does not fancy his wife after getting married to her and lets her go, but in the NKJV translation it happens when the man finds some "uncleanness" in her, which isn't the exact word used in my language here. So I am not entirely sure what condition satisfies this, but it wasn't foreseen before the marriage - in this sense it is similar to sexual incompatibility, and I guess a reason for sexual incompatibility can be some kind of uncleanness. So what I want to argue with this verse is sexual incompatibility is not something non-existent.

So to sum it up, what I tried to say is that in my current understanding I find that RPC doesn't really provide an answer for this and it isn't something it should dismiss as non-existent, since it may even be considered a more serious factor than lifting to look good.

Note for OP: The answer I could give you, as a christian, would be contracting with the core concepts of TRP, so I am not going to state a solution, just came to throw my 2 cents into the discussion. My personal advice would be to ask a question about this in r/TrueChristian, since as I said it is outside the scope of TRP and it is a relevant question to many christians, though the answers you get there may be rooted on a different core belief system. And lastly, to avoid misunderstanding, do not participate in pre-martial sex.

[–]R3dTul1p2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]I_Took-This_Name-1 points0 points1 point 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]R3dTul1p0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

But that's your problem, the answer is clear, and it had always been clear.

If your partner finds you sexually undesirable, that's an indication that you are lacking in leadership. Could be your physique, or, usually, it could be something that your physique indicates- weak frame.

The whole point of RedPill is that men who otherwise wouldn't ever have been considered are having the sex lives they always wanted because they've learned how to be the type of men women are looking for- albeit the application of secular RP is very immoral.

You don't seem to understand RP if you think incompatibility is an end. It isn't- it's just an excuse people use when they're done trying to improve things. Start improving yourself, your mission, and your physique, and you will find that even with seasons of frustration, you will see much improvement that will disprove the incompatibility ever existed.

[–]I_Took-This_Name0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Red-Curious1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

Considering that they agree to marry, they are most likely attracted to each other

I wouldn't make that assumption. My wife commented years after we were married: "I was never attracted to you. Not even when we were in dating, or newlyweds, or when you were in great physical shape."

doctrine that you need to get into bodybuilding to build a fancy body that is sexually desirable

That's not right either. TRP emphasizes lifting because it makes PUA easier. But that's ultimately a cessation to a woman's frame - trying to cater to her desires to get sex from her. The purpose of lifting is to give a man the more personal benefits that help him develop self-confidence, increase his energy, and give him a motivation to live out of his own frame and pursue his mission, while earning influence with those around him.

If looks are as critical as the RP/RPC theory claims

You're talking about the black pill. I've written before that looks aren't necessary (as long as you're past a minimal threshold). Rather, looks decide the difficulty level you're playing on when it comes to sexuality. A guy who isn't all that good looking can still do extremely well with women. Owen Cook is a prime example - short, balding, slightly overweight, and on the autism spectrum ... yet dates playmates. More on that here: https://www.reddit.com/r/RPChristians/comments/kfv5cl/rp_christians_and_the_black_pill/ggb7uhc/

how could you negotiate sexual incompatibility

I'm more with u/r3dTul1p on this one: sexual incompatibility, by and large, does not exist. What you are suggesting is distinct from "negotiating," though. You can't negotiate desire, but you can evoke it. In the same way, conditions that you call "sexually incompatible" are likely (in most cases) just desire issues which can be resolved through standard biblical living with red pill awareness.

you have to change the shape and size of your dick

Aaah - so what you mean by "sexual incompatibility" is literally parts just not fitting. In that case, this is a FAR less common phenomenon than you might think. I actually used to believe that this was the case with me and my wife for several years. Even after giving birth, she still experienced a tense pain when I'd insert. We talked to people about it and chalked it up to "incompatibility" - that our parts literally just weren't mean to fit together.

Turns out the "physical pain" she experienced was actually psychosomatic. It was a severe case of vaginismus that 100% away as soon as red pilled myself and desire entered the equation. But while I was unattractive, even with lubrication, the lack of desire created a psychological pain around sexuality and what we thought was a physical incompatibility turned out to be nothing at all. Go figure.

So, I'm not prone to listen to a guy who claims "my bits and pieces don't fit" until after he's been living the RPC life for a few years, has his wife trying to jump his bones regularly, and still suggests it's a legitimate size issue. But women's bits and pieces are generally so stretchy once that desire component is there (and sometimes even without it) that I just don't buy the "it doesn't fit" excuse in most cases. It's a copout. The very existence of "fisting" should prove this because I'm extremely confident that no man's dick is thicker than a fist. And yet if a woman can be stretched and trained to have an entire fist inside of her, I'm sure even an extremely wide-girth penis on a tiny woman can still be worked to fit ... if she wants it to.

Deuteronomy 24

That's in the context of "something indecent." You'll have a hard time convincing me that his dick being too big is her being "indecent." In fact, it's the norm today that most guys prefer a woman with a small/tight hole. Most likely, the verse is referring to him discovering she's not a virgin (but I'd have to look into it more to confirm that).

RPC doesn't really provide an answer for this and it isn't something it should dismiss as non-existent, since it may even be considered a more serious factor than lifting to look good

I disagree, for the reasons above. As stated, I'd want to see a guy RPC'd for a few years - fully internalized, not just "I read it" and apply a thing here or there - before I'd even entertain that conversation. My guess is that most men who think this is an issue will have the same result I did and it won't actually be an issue any longer.

ask a question about this in /r/TrueChristian

I can tell you their answers:

"I deal with that too. It sucks. No good answers, but I feel for you."
"Try praying about it."
"Go see a doctor."
"Try having non-penetrative sex."

You get the idea ... mostly useless garbage that doesn't actually address the problem.

And yes, this is absolutely an RPC question because I do believe that RPC and its offshoots is the only Christian forum I've seen on reddit that will actually give advice that might possibly solve the issue - unless there are other forums in /u/osmiumzulu's bank of blogs and podcasts that might have more info on the topic that I'm unaware of.

And lastly, to avoid misunderstanding, do not participate in pre-martial sex.

Agreed.

Tag: u/one7thing

[–]one7thing[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Red-Curious1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I was told by a professional that vaginismus is psychosomatic. Solve the psychological factors and it goes away. When she desires sex, the anxiety about it greatly diminishes, and when that desire is consistent over several months, the anxiety completely withers away altogether. Vaginismus cured. Apparently doctors who treat it are trying to figure out the physical condition, hence all the unknowns. Many therapists/counselors who run across it never conquer the blue pill framework that precludes actual desire from forming, thus only focus on willingness as a way to relax anxiety/tension, which doesn't actually solve the problem because conscious effort toward relaxation works against desire, functioning as a distraction (it's an attempt to eradicate certain feelings, whereas desire inherently involves putting feelings on).

[–]I_Took-This_Name0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

Awesome, thanks for this response.

My wife commented years after we were married: "I was never attracted to you. Not even when we were in dating, or newlyweds, or when you were in great physical shape."

If she married you purely because of your personality, then she is a real gem. Other than that I said most likely, because I know there are exceptions (like my parents weren't each other's type either). But in most cases, especially in an overly sexualized society (America is a leader in that), it's quite rare for it to happen as porn, social media and hookup culture made people much more shallow - even many christians.

The purpose of lifting is to give a man the more personal benefits that help him develop self-confidence, increase his energy, and give him a motivation to live out of his own frame and pursue his mission, while earning influence with those around him.

Please note that I am new to the christian version of the red pill and never been active in the secular community either, other than studying its doctrines, so my impressions may not be perfect as of now. You see, you listed many good benefits of lifting, but up until the last one that I put in bold, they aren't exclusive to lifting, almost any sport will do it for you (what's more, almost any sport will contribute to the last one as well, just to a lesser extent). However this sub is highly obsessed with lifting (e.g. the members have to post their current lifts, bodyweight and bodyfat% before every post they make in the main subreddit) - and the reason for that comes from the bold sentence, paired with the belief that you should achieve a good natural bodybuilder physique to make as many women as possible attracted to you. Doing a sport consistently will also give you a reasonable physique (once again, not every sport, but a good amount of them), however, bodybuilding allows you to achieve the most muscular and leanest physique and RPC aims for maximalizing looks. If bodybuilding was less emphasized, I wouldn't make this claim and believe that RPC claims that it isn't a critical aid.

Anyway, I am just repeating myself, in my comment, I put in brackets that

I know that TRP agrees that it can be bypassed, but it is still highly obsessed with it

I am very well aware of RSDTyler (Owen Cook) and similar people, alongside with countless stories of natural PUAs, who are unfit, nerdy etc but still get a lot of "hot" girls. Actually, Owen had a one and a half hour talk for beginners, in which he talked about how he used to be fit and thought it should get him the girls, but failed and what he discovered in the process, but like the rest of his PUA stuff, it's deleted (I just looked him up again and was surprised that he uploaded 2 PUA stuff to promote his program lol). Now, let's not misunderstand each other. I know that TRP doesn't put every value in external things, like looks and carrier and developing personality and confidence is an important aspect of it, my claim was simply that RPC puts a very big emphasis on maximalizing looks - making it critical.

I am glad you got what I was trying to say in the main comment, I was indeed thinking about a situation that you had with your wife. It's very interesting to hear your story in this aspect, thank you for sharing it, I wouldn't have thought that something like that was purely psychological - and I'm happy to hear that you asked a professional who backs this up. And I am glad that you were able to resolve it.

As for Deuteronomy 24, if you happen to find something regarding the context, don't be shy to share it with me.

And I am sad to hear that you have such a low opinion about r/TrueChristian or most likely about "non red pilled" christians.

[–]sneakpeekbot0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Red-Curious0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

If she married you purely because of your personality

Nah, she married me because she was told by the church all her life: "Find the most spiritually mature man you can and marry him." She commented at one point that she regretted it and found it to be horrible advice. She's fortunate that "spiritual maturity," if it continues in biblicality, should inevitabl lead to RP-ness and thus development of attraction, eventually. At least that's how my story went.

they aren't exclusive to lifting

Sure, just like reading the Bible isn't the exclusive way to become spiritually mature. But it's the most efficient way and it'd be darn hard without it.

However this sub is highly obsessed with lifting

We're not obsessive about it. But if a guy is asking, "My wife won't have sex with me because I told her I didn't want her to get a tattoo, what should I do?" and he weighs 300lbs, there's a good chance the tattoo issue isn't the actual problem in their sex life.

When you date a girl, there are going to be certain things you'll want to filter out right away. Correct? That's part of vetting. In the first date or two you're going to want to figure out if she has any serious mental health problems, for example. Does that mean you're obsessed about mental health? No. It just means that's one of those early filters you have to go through before you can get down to business. Lifting is like that. It's an early filter that gives us context for all the other important things that come afterward. Yes, it's massively important. But the fact that you have to post your stats isn't to glorify body building - it's to help us vet people for actual problems before wasting our time answering a question that isn't actually going to solve their problems.

Doing a sport consistently will also give you a reasonable physique

Sure. And if you're getting the results you want with that, then go with that. But this conversation has come up MANY times on this sub. Runner/swimmer builds, for example, simply don't compare with the stats on how women are attracted to guys who lift. For that matter, virtually every major professional athlete you see lifts. Football. Basketball. Baseball. You name it. They all lift. It's how you excel at a particular sport. So if you look at professional basketball players and think, "I can have that body just by playing basketball and never lifting," that's straight up foolishness.

RPC aims for maximalizing looks

Funny word. Again, "maximizing looks" is just shifting from hard mode to easy mode. It's the low hanging fruit that makes everything else far more readily achievable. If you don't want to do it, or you go for a pure cardio body build, and she keeps fitness testing you because she can't glean "This man is hella strong!" from your appearance so she has to get it from your frame ... well, then don't complain and say, "Nothing's working!" But if it IS working for you, then do what works.

Personally, I lift big numbers. At one point I was benching 315, squatting 365, and DL 415. Post-COVID a bit down from those, but still way above most people. Yet my diet isn't that great. I don't have a 6-pack. My muscles, while dense and large, are broadly undefined through my skin. But I get the results I want and I don't feel the need to fast 50% of my days just to get my body fat below 12%. Instead, I hover between 15-18%, depending on the month. Take what works and leave the rest.

If bodybuilding was less emphasized

Let me explain this another way. In my profession, I see psychologists using the MMPI2 in literally EVERY. SINGLE. EVALUATION. EVER. It's basically malpractice to fail to do it. Yet I also find most psychologists saying, "I really don't care for the MMPI all that much, and I don't use it in formulating my opinions of a person very often." How can that be?

The answer I get when I ask why everyone has to do it is simple: "Because it addresses major psychological issues. I give the MMPI to rule those out, and then I move on to the more nuanced things that matter." But if the MMPI DID find a personality disorder, for example ... well, that's going to be a major aspect to their evaluation process. If there's something that major and defining to a situation, wouldn't you want to know it up-front? Does that mean you're obsessed with the metric? Of course not.

But the reality is that the vast majority of men in the world DO NOT have an attractive physique. They want to find some miracle attitude that will let them be obese and yet still have girls pining over them. That's just not going to happen.

my claim was simply that RPC puts a very big emphasis on maximalizing looks - making it critical.

So, let's flip things for a second. Explain to me why this is a bad or harmful thing. Maybe it's not to your taste/preference. But tell me how men will be worse off in life when encouraged to take better care of their bodies?

And I am sad to hear that you have such a low opinion about r/TrueChristian or most likely about "non red pilled" christians.

I'm hard on TC because I'm one of the most respected members over there - been around for a decade (maybe more?) and have considerable influence on that sub. As such, I have high expectations of it, knowing the effort I've put in to helping build up the community - and it times it seems to be going strong. But at other times, there are just so many liberals as an overflow from r/christianity that it's disheartening. With a handful of exceptions, I've taken about the last year off from there, coming back in spurts when I'm needed. I love TC deeply, but the fact that its cultural force is so heavily ingrained with a churchianity mentality often makes it more of a time-sink than it is a good investment.

[–]one7thing[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Red-Curious0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]one7thing[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Red-Curious1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]one7thing[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]I_Took-This_Name-2 points-1 points0 points 3 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

So, let's flip things for a second. Explain to me why this is a bad or harmful thing. Maybe it's not to your taste/preference. But tell me how men will be worse off in life when encouraged to take better care of their bodies?

All I did was arguing why I think that RPC is obsessed with lifting, because when I said it, you called it blackpilled and answered in a manner that sounded as if you don't think that this is the case, it is just recommended, because it offers some benefits. I mean if you make an allegory based on lifting being as much of a superior way to achieve the listed benefits, as the Bible is superior to every other book ever written to reach spiritual maturity, I don't see why you disagree with that statement:

Sure, just like reading the Bible isn't the exclusive way to become spiritually mature. But it's the most efficient way and it'd be darn hard without it.

Based on this you clearly think that every other sport is utterly inferior to lifting. And in this reply you stated that if the poster doesn't hit a minimal baseline of looks and lifts, then you assume that this is the root of the problem. Isn't this an obsession with lifting?

I never claimed lifting was bad, nor did I say that encouraging others to lift is bad. I haven't even claimed that being obsessed with lifting is bad - as far as I remember at least, but feel free to correct me if I did.

Now I am going to change topic.

Okay, so I don't know if you are truly interested in my opinion, because that's off-topic, but I will tell you, since you prompted me to do so. I like lifting, it's a good sport, it's fun, there's a lot of place to grow and improve, goals to chase, it can be a social activity with friends, you can have a healthy competition with them. Next to all that you also get a lot of benefits - benefits you mentioned above. I don't think I have to argue why lifting is awesome, it's a good life advice for someone who is sedentary and has no sport preference to send them to do lifting. But lifting has a bad side as well. Body dysmorphia, bigorexia, using PEDs, going on cycles that effect your health negatively, just so that you can achieve a bigger body (I heard that low test cycles (around 100mg/week) may give more benefits than just easier gaining without sides, but never read into the topic, so I don't know if it's true, but the point is, cycling may not inherently be bad, especially if the main reason for doing it isn't muscle gaining), etc. The gyms have quite a few insecure people. If someone who has insecurities starts and gets a nice body, it may do him more harm than good. These people never learnt to accept themselves, now they attach their self-worth to an external thing - their body. Once they lose it, they collapse mentally back to their insecurities. And while they possess that body, there is a very good chance that they will develop a superiority complex - where they feel like they are more important, better than others, because they are more muscular. They see the world as a constant competition, which they can never win (there will always be someone who is better looking than them), which they can never escape. You can't treat internal issues externally. Then we have shallowness. People who lift for the purpose to get girls. They rely on their body, they attach their identity to their bodies. They also qualify a person based on their looks. They mostly only care about the looks of a potential mate. In an overly sexualized culture, the worth of a person is determined by their looks.

That's mostly it for the bad side of bodybuilding. Obsession with lifting causes narrow mindedness. Where every other activity is inferior. Where you chase looks and put other factors at a lower priority. You see, most people in the gym are not very "functional", although I don't like using this term. The human body was design to hold the least amount of muscle that is required to live with. Muscle weights more than fat. If we lived a hunter-gatherer lifestyle (you can find pictures of tribes that live like that), you would hold just as much muscle, that is required to climb and carry the animals that you killed. Anything more would limit the velocity you are able to run with and climbing would become harder. With bodybuilding, you sacrifice other traits/skills for bigger muscles - you are probably aware, but more muscles doesn't mean more strength, they are correlated, basically you can predicate it by: Strength = Neural adaptations * Muscle cross-sectional area (* means multiplication). The bigger the muscle cross-sectional area, the stronger you are - the bigger your muscles, the stronger you are. But training neural adaptations is a different process - powerlifters do it for certain movements. But each sport trains you differently, hence they have different benefits. It's also an endless debate, which body type do girls find the "sexiest". Girls throwing around different claims, guys claiming they know it better (the TRP way is actually a pretty good model, with the alpha and beta phase of the ovulation cycle of women, in this case the question is, what physical traits women find attractive in the alpha phase), but what's the reality? Being obsessed with bodybuilding for the sake of looking good for women, may make you close minded on the topic - because you already in the process and sacrificed so much for it. If one has a superiority complex, you can more or less sure that they are close minded.

You may have heard of the book Mark Manson: Models. I don't know what is the opinion of the RP community regarding this book, but this is probably the most popular book in the PUA community. It's more than just about pickup, it's more of a self-help book. Let me quote from part I:

There is still no clear-cut definition or model of what drives female attraction yet. That’s the truth. All I can do here is give you my best theory based on the current research, as well as my wealth of experience and explain what has consistently worked for me the world over. Anyone who claims that they have the definitive answer to what drives and motivates female attraction and sexual arousal is lying to you. The jury is still out. Psychologists, sexologists and biologists have been studying it for over a century, and there’s still not a clear answer, not to mention continued debate within academia as well as the dating advice industry. This much is clear: female attraction does not operate like male attraction. Male attraction is pretty straight-forward: visually-based, focused on physical features and more or less universal.A beautiful girl in California is almost always beautiful in New York, Tokyo, New Delhi, Beirut and Oslo. [...] This is not true for women, not even close. In fact, women and what attracts and arouses them can be maddeningly unpredictable, contradictory and whimsical. Researchers at the University of Texas at Austin recently published a book called Why Women Have Sex where they uncovered 234 separate reasons women will have sex with a man. This was based upon thousands of surveys and statistical data over the course of years.[...] The first difficulty in understanding female sexual attraction is that women can become attracted and aroused both physically and/or psychologically. This split between physical and psychological arousal is unique to women as men are sexually aroused and stimulated primarily physically. This split in sources of arousal makes it hard to perform controlled experiments and therefore test different factors that may influence how a woman feels.For instance, you may be able to show 200 women pictures of big burly men and ask them how attracted they are to them. But you aren’t able to control their predisposed belief about physically powerful men, the extent of their desire to be dominated, the sexual mores in which they were raised, their sexual histories with burly men, their emotional states at that very moment, their ovulation cycles, when the last time they had sex was, whether they just had a fight with their boyfriend, etc. And even if you were able to control such things, they’re so fluid and subjective that you can’t measure them.Men on the other hand, according to research, with a few exceptions, always like a certain hip-to-waist ratio, always like youthful features, always like clear skin and shiny hair, and like them under any circumstances. This is regardless of age, ethnicity, culture, or psychological disposition. The variance in male preference for physical features is small. In women it can be quite large.

Continued below.

[–]I_Took-This_Name-4 points-3 points-2 points 3 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Then the author goes on to describe the factors that play into the arousal of women - but there is no exact body type that girls prefer. There are girls who like guys who are fit with a six pack, but they are turned off by guys who are overly muscular. There are girls who go for guys that are bodybuilder big. There are girls who like guys with a dadbod. Now, I know the red pill community likes to claim that the more muscles a guy has and the leaner he is, the more objectively attractive he is to every women and if a woman says that she likes someone who isn't that muscular, then she is just going for a guy with lower SMV, because she knows that she can't keep the guy with the higher SMV. It sounds neat and simple, but where is the evidence for that? The truth is, based on the current scientific stand point, that it's complicated. Again, feel free to debate it, I am interested in your standpoint. If you have definitive scientific data on the matter, please let me know. One of the reasons I am here is to learn.

You may not need to lift to get the desired results. If that's your sport of love, do it, but obsession of bodybuilding may lead to excluding sports that would be more enjoyable, would have other benefits, you didn't even think about they had and they may give you a more desirable physique in the perspective of certain girls. It may even be mentally healthier for some guys to do a different sport.

And the most important: ego and pride. If someone fixes their life by lifting, their ego and pride usually grow significantly - which puts you further away from God.

These are all negative effects lifting / obsessing with lifting can have, plus some of my opinions regarding physical attraction of women. I am not saying they are present here, I just got here, but you asked why recommending it could be harmful or bad and that's the question I answered. Overall, as of now, my impression is that there is an obsession with bodybuilding here, which may be dangerous. Looking forward for your reply!

[–]Deep_Strength1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Then the author goes on to describe the factors that play into the arousal of women - but there is no exact body type that girls prefer. There are girls who like guys who are fit with a six pack, but they are turned off by guys who are overly muscular. There are girls who go for guys that are bodybuilder big. There are girls who like guys with a dadbod. Now, I know the red pill community likes to claim that the more muscles a guy has and the leaner he is, the more objectively attractive he is to every women and if a woman says that she likes someone who isn't that muscular, then she is just going for a guy with lower SMV, because she knows that she can't keep the guy with the higher SMV. It sounds neat and simple, but where is the evidence for that? The truth is, based on the current scientific stand point, that it's complicated. Again, feel free to debate it, I am interested in your standpoint. If you have definitive scientific data on the matter, please let me know. One of the reasons I am here is to learn.

Your problem is that you can't see past the BS, and most researchers can't as well. RP maxim 101: Don't listen to what women say, watch what they do.

What they don't lie about is what their sexual preferences gravitate toward in porn. Romance novels with rich, successful, charismatic and charming, MUSCULAR shirtless men on the cover. 125 million copies of 50 Shades of Gray sold. Porn has gravitated to having more men with less beer bellies into more handsome and muscular men over time. Women are even less varied in this than men in their own preferences. Men may prefer narrow preferences in waist to hip ratio and beauty, but they have many different types of women they would go for given the various categories of porn. It's not hard to see this.

Muscles are only 1 of about 5 different categories that spell attraction for women. The other 5 can generally be categorized into LAMPS/PSALM - power, status, athleticism, looks (muscular fits in here), and money. Celebrities and professional athletes which most women drool over fit most of these most of the time. Women can seemingly go for less muscular men if their attraction to some of the other traits outweighs their preference for muscles or body type.

The issue that is mainly confusing for most men and most researchers from what I've seen is that women's preferences vary depending on how they see a man. If a man they are attracted to gives them flowers it's romantic. If an unattractive man gives them flowers they're a creep. This dichotomy to the same action is often very confusing for people, until the start to understand the mechanics of it. Women are more easily turned off or creeped out than men, so this makes things volatile. Same with their period and when they are ovulating.

Yes, there are exceptions just like some men prefer obese women. The exceptions are not the rule though. Even if a woman is not attracted to a particular muscular man for whatever reason, they will at least respect him more than your average fat or skinny dude. The influence you have is much greater in matters related to your mission too.

Again, none of us are obsessing with looks, but as /u/Red-Curious said 9 times out of 10 here it's the most easily definable low hanging fruit that most men would benefit from not just with women but in their mission.

[–]Red-Curious0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]I_Took-This_Name1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]I_Took-This_Name0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

What they don't lie about is what their sexual preferences gravitate toward in porn.

That's a pretty interesting take. I guess that's really the best place to draw a conclusion from. I am not very familiar with porn though, let alone which ones girls prefer. So I would like to ask further, based on your knowledge, which one do you think is more preferable? The bear mode, which isn't very lean, usually hairy, overall pretty manly build or the lean, "aesthetic" look that most juicy bodybuilders represent? I mean, both would seem reasonable to me. Like compare Baywatch Zac Efron with his later physique: here. The latter one would require stacking up as much muscle as possible, while not getting fat, but not being lean. However at other places I heard people argue that the aesthetic look is the preferred one - based on magazines, it seems like a reasonable claim - so they claim that you don't have to go very hard on the gym, you just have to stack some muscle on and get lean, since most girls don't really notice size differences. The reason I brought the Zac Efron one, because girls went crazy for both looks, and they claimed that the latter one was more manly at the time. Or is that the body type they prefer in the beta phase and it's just a similar case, when they claim they like the dadbod?

Your problem is that you can't see past the BS

That's easily possible, but I don't want to fall into any other delusions either, so I am trying to do a thorough research.

[–]Deep_Strength0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

So I would like to ask further, based on your knowledge, which one do you think is more preferable? The bear mode, which isn't very lean, usually hairy, overall pretty manly build or the lean, "aesthetic" look that most juicy bodybuilders represent? I mean, both would seem reasonable to me. Like compare Baywatch Zac Efron with his later physique: here. The latter one would require stacking up as much muscle as possible, while not getting fat, but not being lean. However at other places I heard people argue that the aesthetic look is the preferred one - based on magazines, it seems like a reasonable claim - so they claim that you don't have to go very hard on the gym, you just have to stack some muscle on and get lean, since most girls don't really notice size differences.

I think the "Greek god" physique -- there are proportions out there for it if you want to look them up (1.6 shoulder to waist ratio for men is one of the ones) -- is probably the one which probably both men and women prefer the most, but these things are more like bell curve distributions than any one type of thing. I believe men prefer about 1.6-1.8 waist to hip ratio in women based on studies. For instance, there are few women who prefer maybe skinny runner, more prefer swimmer type, the most prefer Greek god physique, some prefer bear physique, and then few prefer the extremely muscular bodybuilder show type of physique.

It depends on hypergamy too. You notice that women who do bikini shows or are professional athletes are almost never with your average Joe but always with a man who is more muscular or athletic than them. The main exceptions are if you get someone like Alixis ohanian (reddit cofounder) married to Serena Williams. He's obviously a famous tech entrepreneur and worth 70 mil. If you want a fit woman, you'd probably best be on the Greek god, bear physique, or bodybuilder physique side of the spectrum.

It's also one thing to "prefer" something, but you also wouldn't throw them out of bed. It's kind of like attraction floors. My attraction floor for a wife was around 7/10 personally, but I would obviously prefer a wife who was a 8-9/10 (I don't give 10/10). Likewise, even though women would prefer a certain type of physique like Greek god, or bear, or bodybuilder, or whatever it's not like they would throw the man out of bed unless they had self esteem issues or something.

The reason I brought the Zac Efron one, because girls went crazy for both looks, and they claimed that the latter one was more manly at the time. Or is that the body type they prefer in the beta phase and it's just a similar case, when they claim they like the dadbod?

The problem with women claiming stuff is that they usually use examples of celebrities to prove their point. It's like confusing that they think the flowers are attractive when it's actually the an attractive man giving the flowers that is attractive. If it was your average joe who they didn't recognize would they go crazy over it? Sure, maybe they would think it's attractive to some extent, but probably not as attractive as it looks on Zac cause he's famous and rich.

[–]TheBunk_TB0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]R3dTul1p0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]I_Took-This_Name0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

I am sorry that you feel this way. Your post seems like more of an attack though, you just keep repeating that I am wrong without providing any information why that is. I already learnt from u/Red-Curious in some aspects and I was interested in his take on my post - which he has the right to ignore if he feels the same way as you do. I am a firm believer that exposing one's self to a different opinion with an open mind leads to maturity and growth, it's a hard thing and I understand if you don't want to partake in a conversation like that, no one forced you to do so.

You make broad assumptions based on what you've only recently been exposed to (you've made this very clear)

I personally found the red pill community some time before the subreddit got quarantined a few years back. I read a few bits of the red pill handbook and browsed the subreddit for a while. I didn't say I have only been exposed to the RP views recently - you are clearly projecting. I said I am new to this subreddit. I already read a few bits of the sidebar and I plan on continuing doing so. From the recommended books, I have only read NMMNG, but I plan on reading The Rational Male, I have seen it recommended in the PUA community as well, so it was already on my reading list - it got a higher priority. I am not completely new to this belief system, but I am completely new to the christian application of it.

I don't know if it's a language barrier or what

Please forgive me for my bad English in this case, I am trying my best. I may be interpreting your intentions wrong, but to me it seems like you purposefully misinterpreted my original comment (Red-Curious got it right on his first attempt, that's why I am assuming this) though, so I am not sure if you just want to discredit my opinion or my English is indeed critically bad.

I am here to learn of the views of the people in this subreddit. From your reply and your attitude, I got the feeling that your response is overall a more polite way of saying "fuck off". Altogether, I find this type of response helpful too in getting an overall picture, so don't get me wrong, I am not mad, angry or bitter. I am thankful that you took your time to reply. I tried my best to argue from inside the system of RP, except for the second part of the last long post, in which I shared why I think, that lifting can indeed be bad, because for example in the post "Lifting Is Not A Suggestion" (which is based on biblical verses that use the word "strong", not "strong looking", which relates back to my previous reply. In this case, it could easily mean that you should do powerlifting to maximize strength, which doesn't give you the chiseled look. Anyway I am drifting off-topic), nobody reflects on this and Red-Curious prompted me to do so - I didn't come here to debate from a higher ground and tell you "why you are wrong". I only shared my views, because I was asked to do so and now I am curious on Red-Curious's take on it - again, it's completely optional to debate me on his part. (Final fun fact is that under the same "Lifting Is Not A Suggestion" post, OsmiumZulu claims that PUA and RP are related - and I used the most common PUA material to argue what I wrote, which doesn't seem blue pilled at all).

And sorry for the long reply!

Edit: I wanted to add, that I won't internalize something that I don't completely agree with, only the parts I agree with.

[–]R3dTul1p1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]one7thing[S] 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheChristianAlpha2 points3 points4 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]one7thing[S] 1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OsmiumZulu1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]one7thing[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]OsmiumZulu1 point2 points3 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Any additional advice?

If you aren't already, track every life every time. You cannot make "progress" unless you have an objective standard to measure against. Not only does this provide accountability (going back and looking at how many workouts per week you are ACTUALLY doing versus what you think you're doing) it is also motivating to go back and see where you started from.

Discipline is more important that motivation. If you only lift when you are motivated you will never achieve the size and strength you are shooting for. One thing that helped me was to never allow myself to skip showing up: I had to always at least show up and do the warm up. If I got to my working sets and still felt awful I was allowed to take a rest day, but 9/10 times in this case I would do my warm up, feel better, and crank out a killer workout. Some of my best PRs and plateau breakthroughs happened on days like this.

Do not neglect recovery. It sounds like you are already eating enough (maybe too much?). Make sure you give yourself enough time to sleep. 8 hours minimum, 9-10 hours is better. Remember that lifting is the catabolic part, you don't actually build muscle until you are recovering. Take this part seriously or you will be doing a lot of work without the full benefit.

Lots more, I plan to be posting on this in the future so stay tuned.

[–]one7thing[S] 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Praexology0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheBunk_TB0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]converter-bot0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TheBunk_TB0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	How to prevent or assess sexual incompatibility in a potential wife?
Author	one7thing
Upvotes	9
Comments	50
Date	December 24, 2020 8:57 PM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/askRPC
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/askRPC/comments/kjmp0y/how_to_prevent_or_assess_sexual_incompatibility/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/askRPC/how-to-prevent-or-assess-sexual-incompatibility-in.730456 https://theredarchive.com/post/730456