I posted this in TRP but want in-depth feedback here too. http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/22ugxz/to_be_or_not_to_bein_a_ltr/.

Disclaimer: The following "math proof" reflects why I reject LTRs. Lots of guys here are in LTRs, and that's cool (this post is not "calling guys out"). But I do think it logically shows that LTRs are simply unfavorable (although not completely untenable) for men. I'm sure there will be a strong debate in the comments...

Hypothesis: LTRs are more "economically" favorable for women than for men (economics refers to RP economics).

Premise A1: Interactions between men and women come down to an exchange of "resources". Men want sex. Women want commitment. Each holds what the other wants.

Premise A2: Thus, the most favorable goal for men is to maximize their access to sex, whereas the most favorable goal for women is to maximize their access to commitment.

How men and women approach their interactions with each other must be based on this framework if maximal resources is the goal (e.g. if you are a beta who wants to be pegged in the ass, then maximal resources isn't your goal).

Premise B1: In LTRs, you will see your gf/wife with greater frequency compared to simple plate-spinning or casual dating (in fact, you probably will be co-habitating at least 3x a week, if not more).

Premise B2: Thus, the following is indisputable:

  • The amount of money you use both directly and indirectly on her will increase (Directly: paying for her drinks/food. Indirectly: paying only for your share of a movie/dinner that you wouldn't have gone to otherwise if she wasn't living with you).

    Here, money = commitment. Thus, she has obtained more of your resources than you have received back.

  • You will not have sex every time you see her. In plate-spinning, I have sex with a girl every time we meet. No exceptions. If she's on her period, it's a CIM blowjob. That is the frame I require. However, if you're living together, this is untenable. There are times she will simply be too tired/angry/smelly/late/sick.

    Thus, while she hasn't "gained" commitment resource from you here per se, you have actually lost your sex resource.

  • There are times when you want to have sex and she does not. That means NO sex. Building on the last point, there will be times in LTRs when she won't want sex. In plate-spinning, if she's tired/sick/angry, you simply ignore her or don't meet her. Meet another day. But in LTRs, she's gonna "drop by after work unannounced", but "I just want to shower and go to bed, honey!".

    Thus, you have lost sex resource here and she has gained commitment resource (emotional partner) simultaneously.

All 3 points support my hypothesis of LTRs being more favorable for women. Further:

Premise C: Despite the above demonstrating loss of access to sex resource, a man is still expected to provide commitment resource in a LTR. In plate-spinning, you can simply not talk to a girl anymore. You can fuck other girls. She must earn her place back.

But in LTRs, a woman's denial of sex is not subject to the same repercussions; in fact, it's immune to them! You cannot withhold your shower/bed/TV/oversized T shirt to her when she comes waltzing in. You are still expected to pick her up from her mundane work/school/shopping activity...because your her bf. If you do decide to equally deny her your commitment resource by not performing these bf "duties", you are in for a helluva fight for the evening (at the very least, passive-aggressive drama bullshit).

Premise D1: The only thing women do offer in LTRs (and hence the only advantage of LTRs for men) is stable childbearing/caretaker of your children. However, this is irrelevant to our discussion because the vast majority of men these days are not in LTRs to have children in the first place. They are in LTRs because they believe it offers the most steady access to sex; they view the above drawbacks as "necessary economic expenses".

Premise D2: Thus, the potential danger of "losing" a girl by not girlfriending her is irrelevant because the only thing you are essentially losing is a childbearer/mother, which you aren't seeking in the first place.

Conclusions:

  • LTRs are more favorable for women due to the skewed distribution of resources.

  • Even if you do manage to maintain more "power" than your gf/wife (due to your RP actions or just her submissive nature), you still won't have as much as you could if she was only a plate.

  • The "gamble" of losing a girl is minimized because men don't want what women offer in LTRs anyway: stable childrearing.

  • TRP is an alternate and thus more effective way to secure steady access to sex versus LTRs.

This study posted by /u/Vornash provides support of my point:

But women, he said, have evolved to have a high sex drive when they are initially in a relationship in order to form a "pair bond" with their partner.

But, once this bond is sealed a woman's sexual appetite declines, he added.

He said animal behaviour studies suggest this could be because females may be diverting their sexual interest towards other men, in order to secure the best combinations of genetic material for their offspring.

Or, he said, this could be because limiting sex may boost their partner's interest in it.

In other words, it is natural and evolutionarily advantageous for women to withhold sex after they enter into a LTR.

Is this the framework with which you want to interact with women? Why fight an uphill battle? My take: Keep the plates spinning.