TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

What do ya'll think of this post from TRP? "Is there anything more pathetic than an unmarried woman over 30?"

[deleted]

July 19, 2013
7 upvotes
/r/RedPillWomen
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title What do ya'll think of this post from TRP? "Is there anything more pathetic than an unmarried woman over 30?"
Author

[deleted]

Upvotes 7
Comments 69
Date July 19, 2013 8:06 AM UTC
(13 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/RedPillWomen
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/1imbnq/what_do_yall_think_of_this_post_from_trp_is_there/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/RedPillWomen/what-do-yall-think-of-this-post-from-trp-is-there.164971
https://theredarchive.com/post/164971
Red Pill terms in post
the red pill

Comments

[–]Needsbirthcontrol 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd argue that a full-on beta male taking orders from his wife is just as pathetic, but I don't disagree with this post. It's truth.

As Steinbeck said, "There is more beauty in truth, even if it is a dreadful beauty."

[–]hateCaptchas 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I look at it and I think some variant of "same shit, different day" or, to be more specific, "Look!! There's a group of men talking amongst themselves about women!!!" yawn

I mean, I don't know about you, but I've never sat and listened to a group of women spouting nonsense.

Look. This is the Internet. The vast majority of stuff out 'here' isn't worth the bandwidth. Here is a very early example of people fooling around with the Internet (back before it was the Web, even): http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~coke/history_long.txt . (Ah, Finger, I've missed you... we had such good times with archie...)

So, what's the takeaway from that thread?

  • Men like young, hot women. yawn
  • Vagina's can stretch. just wake me up when it's over
  • Women hit a 'wall' around the time(ish) that men peak snore
  • Someone, somewhere, read something upsetting on the Internet and wants other people to care. drool

snort startle Oh, we're done? Make sure you clean up your mess and turn off the lights on your way out.

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago* (34 children) | Copy Link

Every time I read something like this I think "I hope I don't end up like that". You see, I'm in a relationship with a red pill alpha who will never marry. So, if I continue this course, I will be unmarried by the time I'm 30. And if he decides to drop me after I'm 30, I will end up like these girls. While, I understand the rationality behind not wanting to get married for men, I also understand the rationality behind wanting to get married for women. Whether or not a man stays with you long term is a simple equation comparing 2 things. Whether it's easier to stay with you, or it's easier to find a new girl. Marriage, by making divorce extremely difficult, unfairly weights "easier to stay with you" higher than "easier to find a new girl". It's a smart decision for women to secure her relationship into her un-dateable years, 30+.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

I'm kind of with you on this. Marriage 2.0 is kind of too much to ask...

"I don't want to be old and alone, so please let me put this electric collar on your neck? That will make me feel secure and loved"

I think your description of not wanting to "end up like that" perhaps explains what we want from marriage. Status. The status of having secured something beyond commitment from a man. Fear of "ending up like that" is not fear of loneliness (that will happen anyway, if the only reason he stays is fear), it's a fear of looking bad in front of other women. But why fear that?

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

Fear of "ending up like that" is not fear of loneliness

Well, I think loneliness is part of it. Humans are not solitary creatures and we crave companionship, so especially for a women, whose chance to create companionship is in a measly 10 year window, will want to secure a relationship (and all the benefits that come with it) for when they are 30, 40, and 70.

Status... It's a fear of looking bad in front of other women. But why fear that?

I actually came to this realization myself recently, and I agree with you that this is part of it too. Status is important, and you can show it by the quality of male you "secure", but there's more to it than that. When a man proposes to you, he is saying that you are a high enough status individual to want to enter into a marriage contract for. Think about how bad marriage 2.0 is for men for a moment, then realize that men get married anyway. There is an element of "look what he was willing to give up for her". But, then the women who don't get married look incredibly low status by comparison.

Let me give you an example. Recently my sister got married. Now don't get me wrong, I love my sister, but she is not just fat, she's obese. And, that's just one reason why I outrank her in SMV. There is a real temptation to think if her husband, is willing to... well... be her husband, in spite of all of marriages disadvantages, he must think she's worth that. Women see a girl like that getting married, and wonder if she was capable of getting married, and higher value girls, like me, are not, there's the temptation to think that we must be even lower value than those girls. "Men are willing to give that up for her, but not for me." See, it not only becomes a problem of status, it becomes a problem of ego, and the two are closely related. That's why women care about status.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I don't think most men realize how bad marriage has gotten, and this is the major reason why they still marry. And if they know something, they think "it won't happen to me".

[–]margerym 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Some men do know and are still willing. Case in point the Red Pill men that are looking to marry. Going for women that believe in more "traditional" gender roles is a better bet though not a perfectly safe one.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I suppose if they want children, they would accept marriage. The traditional girls tend to expect that. In general, there seems to be little point in traditional gender roles (female housewife+male breadwinner) if you don't have children.

[–]margerym 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Think about how bad marriage 2.0 is for men for a moment, then realize that men get married anyway. There is an element of "look what he was willing to give up for her". But, then the women who don't get married look incredibly low status by comparison.

You know I never thought of it like this but I think you're right.

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think this might be one of the reasons women are so opposed to the idea of not getting married. It may be part of the reason that women are more attached to the idea of being married, rather then the person they are getting married to.

[–]WhisperTRP Founder 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Women see a girl like that getting married, and wonder if she was capable of getting married, and higher value girls, like me, are not, there's the temptation to think that we must be even lower value than those girls. "Men are willing to give that up for her, but not for me." See, it not only becomes a problem of status, it becomes a problem of ego, and the two are closely related. That's why women care about status.

Yes, but "men" are not interchangeable cogs.

She was able to get the guy who is now her husband to marry her. Would you be willing to marry that guy? Would the guy you are with be willing to marry your obese sister?

The lower someone's SMV relative to their partner, the more concessions they have to make in their relationship. The higher someone's SMV relative to their partner, the less concessions they must make.

Mating is a choice between a higher SMV partner who has more control over you, and a lower SMV partner who has less. Everyone has to choose where they want to be on that continuum.

If you want to "be married" in general, rather than to "be married to X" where X is some particular guy, then what you really want is not him at all, but the status. Or the ego boost.

And if you seriously want a guy to sign up for Marriage 2.0 just so you can feel better about yourself, then how important can his needs really be to you?

[–]margerym 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She was able to get the guy who is now her husband to marry her. Would you be willing to marry that guy? Would the guy you are with be willing to marry your obese sister?

This is exactly what I have been trying to get through my friends' heads. I am worried to death about losing my husband for obvious reasons but also because I'd be screwed in the relationship department (or, more accurately, not screwed). They keep saying "Oh, you could find a man!" Yes, I could, but the type of man I would want and need wouldn't be willing to date an older widow with a ton of kids. I can think of some scenarios where this may be the case but they are pipe dreams. They always like to say "Well, so-and-so got a man." Yes but I wouldn't want her man. I wouldn't want a man that would marry an obese shrew with three kids by three different men.

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you want to "be married" in general, rather than to "be married to X" where X is some particular guy, then what you really want is not him at all, but the status. Or the ego boost.

That was my point, that the status and the ego boost is part of the reason women want to get married, and don't understand women who aren't getting married.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I thought about this one longer, because it seems like a very hard question. I'd say one can't demand an unfair contract, but one can't accept one, either. If not marriage, you gotta have something else "on him". I have plenty of ideas on what that could be. For example, he could be past his prime somehow, and losing SMV/getting complacent together with you, losing about as much. That's less fun, but fairer and more safe. Or you could know all his secrets (something he wouldn't reveal to someone he's only loosely bound to). Or, you could be living together, at least.

Any other ideas? Frankly doing this with an alpha seems too terrifying and I'd snap under pressure of it pretty quickly, but good luck. My mom held out for an alpha and won, but she was far above average and could afford it. For every success story such as this one, there are many unsuccessful ones.

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd say one can't demand an unfair contract, but one can't accept one, either.

Well, maybe not accepting one would be the "right" thing to do, but remember that people are selfish, and will act in their own self interest. Not accepting a contract that greatly benefits you would be an incredibly stupid thing to do. If you bought a lottery ticket for $1, and won $2.6 million, would you reject this exchange because it's an unfair deal? No you wouldn't, in fact people buy lottery tickets for the hope of winning something that is unfairly weighed to their advantage.

Any other ideas? My mom held out for an alpha and won, but she was far above average and could afford it.

That's the thing, you don't need a gimmick to keep a man around. All you have to look at the two elements that matter for keeping someone. Making sure the ease of keeping you around is greater than the ease of replacing you with a new girl. Without marriage, or other gimmicks, you both have influence over this inequality. The more alpha he is, the greater his ease will be in replacing you with another girl. In order to keep him you have to be even easier to keep around than that. This is one of the fundamental reasons why women will shy away from alphas (in spite of being attracted to them), because they know it will be harder to keep his interest. In order to be easy to keep around you have to make his time with you pleasant and desirable. Do this by being fun, by taking care of him, by caring about his needs, by keeping yourself attractive, by solving things rationally rather than getting emotional, by making sure he's always satisfied sexually. The more time that goes by the easier it will be because while one night stands are interchangeable, 5 year relationships are a 5 year investment of his time. After 5 years it makes the ease of "finding a new girl" that much harder, because he has to be willing to start over. This is why a full blown argument would be a deal breaker for a month long relationship, but for a 5 year relationship, it wouldn't make a dent (unless it becomes a repeated experience, which of course makes the idea of "finding a new girl" more and more appealing, despite the 5 year commitment of his time, since you are actively lowering the "ease of staying with you" factor).

[–]PimpinLarge 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

And if he decides to drop me after I'm 30, I will end up like these girls.

For every 35-year-old man in a relationship with a 20-year-old girl, there's a perfectly good 20-year-old guy sitting around getting nothing.

The number of alpha, "age-appropriate" men with suitable wealth levels is what percentage of all men? Less than 1%?

Obviously there aren't enough to go around.

So if you're going to throw out men left and right for not being good enough for you, it's fair turnabout when you get thrown out for the same thing.

her un-dateable years, 30+.

Women, if at all attractive, aren't un-dateable due to anything other than that they are refusing to date.

There are perfectly good guys that exist outside of the 0.1% that you've set your sights on.

Women just get absurdly picky, to the point where if they are 40, they wouldn't even date the same alpha if he arrived in a time machine from the past, aged 30, because he's too young for them now. They want the 45-year-old version of him.

As for attraction, it's not like at 30 you are much different from 29 as far as looks go.

The problem is if you're acting as bitchy and entitled at 30 as hot girls who are 21.

They internalize that they have to fight guys off with a stick, to the point where they're 35, sitting at a bar, and KEEP DOING IT to every guy who approaches them. And they're way better at it than 21-year-olds because they've had time to perfect the art of driving men away.

After they drive all the men away, they wonder where the men are.

[–]margerym 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Women, if at all attractive, aren't un-dateable due to anything other than that they are refusing to date.

The key word here being undateable. I think people are confusing dating material with LTR/marriage material. Dating a 30+ woman comes down to preference. Marrying one or entering into a LTR is another story mainly because of children.

[–]PimpinLarge -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

There's no such thing as marriage material.

Marriage and co-habitation are huge beta moves. It is not in the interest of any man to commit either of these cardinal sins.

[–]margerym 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It is not in the interest of any man to commit either of these cardinal sins.

It is if family and children are at the top of his priority list. Namely children.

[–]PimpinLarge -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You don't need to be married to have children.

And nobody running a business needs to lose sleep with a crying infant.

You can spend your 30 minutes a day or whatever time you have to spare with your infant, without having the mother at your house 24-7.

[–]margerym 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You don't need to be married to have children.

You said cohabitation as well. I was lumping all LTR together.

You can spend your 30 minutes a day or whatever time you have to spare with your infant, without having the mother at your house 24-7.

Sure, but then you run the risk of you kid being subjected to other men. Keep the mother close = keep your kid(s) close = keep them yours.

I'm, of course, not saying that you have to agree or have to want these things. I'm only throwing out there that this has value for some men of a like mind.

[–]PimpinLarge 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Keep the mother close = keep your kid(s) close = keep them yours.

What guy is going to want someone else's woman and kids?

Not an alpha.

If you don't have enough financial leverage to dominate a woman then you shouldn't be reproducing with her anyway. She should know that she'll be legally fucked over so hard she won't be able to walk, if she tries to fuck with your relationship to your own kids.

The only way women are even able to do this is by getting the MAN'S money because of a divorce.

Never get married and never give her enough liquid capital to fuck with your shit. She has to earn your patronage on an ongoing basis by continuing to be someone you want to be around.

[–]cron_nin -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Remember, marriage and co-habitation are apart of the female mating strategy.While seen as "beta" a lot of good women will not get involved without the idea of some sort of commitment.

[–]PimpinLarge 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

So you're saying that lying to them is a good idea.

I'm relentlessly honest about my intentions.

a lot of good women

What?

[–]cron_nin 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

a lot of good women What?

Haha. You're cute.

No I'm not saying lie to them, because it's not too hard to see when a guy is not truly attached to a woman if that's what you are looking for. I'm just saying that men and women are different in what they want.

Men mostly want passion. In the long-run, women want commitment. Think about it, you have your "soft harems" as you guys call it. How long do women stay in these arrangements? 3 months before she wises up? That's why they are considered soft. She knows that she is not getting the commitment that she desires.

[–]PimpinLarge -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Men mostly want passion. In the long-run, women want commitment.

Women want passion. If they wanted commitment, they'd accept one of their orbiters.

Men want new pussy.

[–][deleted] 13 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Isn't that exactly what the Red Pill is warning all women against?

Red pill is warning women against having short term meanless relationships, I'm not in one of those.

How have "you secured a relationship into your un-dateable years"?

If marriage is forcing men to be with me when they would rather have other options, then I don't want any part of it. I'd rather it be true that it's because people develop love and attachment that they choose to stay together, not because marriage is forcing them to be together. What is keeping my relationship secure is that he has developed attachment for me, and that I work my hardest to earn his love.

Do you believe he isn't going to drop you and marry a 25 year old one day, like happened with Big and Carrie on Sex and The City?

Do you really take relationship advice from Sex and the City? He's not going to marry some 25 year old, because he's not going to marry anyone.

You give women relationship advice?

Yup, I know what it takes to make men want to stay around, since I don't have the option of marriage to force him to stay around, I had better get good at the whole "want to stay around" thing.

[–]hateCaptchas 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Yup, I know what it takes to make men want to stay around, since I don't have the option of marriage to force him to stay around, I had better get good at the whole "want to stay around" thing.

How long have you two been together? Have you discussed future plans - and on what scale (5 years, 10+ years)?

Forcing people together does nothing but generate miserable people.

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

1.5 years. We have talked about one day living together... maybe. One of the things I'm trying to learn about TRP is that promises of the future can't really be made, it's all conditional. It's conditional on me not getting fat, it's conditional on him not going all beta. If things continue going the way they do I suspect we might be together a long time, I'd like it to go that way.

[–]hateCaptchas 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

1.5 years. We have talked about one day living together... maybe. One of the things I'm trying to learn about TRP is that promises of the future can't really be made, it's all conditional. It's conditional on me not getting fat, it's conditional on him not going all beta. If things continue going the way they do I suspect we might be together a long time, I'd like it to go that way.

Ah, I see. I know lots of RPM don't want any ties (sharing a residence, etc) though I don't really know how much intimacy can be established that way. I suspect it's strongly related to a person's personality.

I don't mean to pry, but are the two of you exclusive? (And, I do understand that is not entirely relevant to commitment.)

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Sorry, I don't feel comfortable answering this question.

[–]hateCaptchas 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I completely understand. I wouldn't either, at this point.

[–][deleted] 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I believe my exact words were:

I had better get good at the whole "want to stay around" thing.

Meaning that I'm learning. That's why I'm here, to learn from other women, and sometimes agree and sometimes disagree, but always for the same purpose, finding out what works.

[–]enticingasthatmaybe 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You are spending your 20's with a man who won't commit

I don't think she mentioned any lack of commitment. Is marriage the only commitment you recognize? Sounds like a narrow point of view to me.

[–]Nutz76 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hell of a catch-22 isn't it?

[–]sugarcrushEndorsed Contributor 10 points11 points12 points 13 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

I really wish red pillers would get it through their heads that "more partners=looser vagina" is not true at all. The vagina is a muscle and it is meant for sex. It has no idea when you are having sex with a different partner. Sex 100 times with different partners produces the same effects as sex 100 times with one. Its fine that women with high partner counts aren't attractive, but don't spread lies as the reason behind it!!! It discredits the movement as a whole.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, this is probably the one dumb thing in the thread that I paid the most attention to. It seems he was implying big pussy lips come from promiscuity. It's just a natural variation, and a lot of men like them ; )

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

It's not to be taken literally, it's expressing disdain for a woman who's had a too high partner count. Proof: men will talk about loose vaginas when talking about a woman has had multiple partners, not when talking about a woman who has had sex with one partner multiple times.

[–]sugarcrushEndorsed Contributor 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I'm pretty sure the people in those comments were taking it literally. This guy is even asking if it's actually true, and then the OP says it is in his experience.

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The OP says it is in his experience

Again, he says it in reference to only women who have had a lot of partners, not in reference to women who had a lot of sex. Maybe he actually thinks this is the case, but he thinks that because he has actual disdain for women who have had a lot of partners, and makes no such distinction for women who have had a lot of sex. It sounds like he's unaware of his own bias, but being a red pill man, he should understand that it is his bias against "sluts" that is causing him to make this distinction. Not that his bias is wrong, it's perfectly normal for men to not like sluts, but he should learn to recognize it for what it is, rather than engadging his rationalization mechanism.

[–]sugarcrushEndorsed Contributor 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If he doesn't understand that (which he seems not to, at least to me) it's pretty sad considering he's a mod.

[–]margerym 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

This person was asking about bat wings, not looseness, right?

[–]sugarcrushEndorsed Contributor 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Not entirely sure, that comment string is kind of hard to follow. Either way though, there is evidence against sex (directly!) causing looseness and veggie girl posted evidence against it causing anything beyond minor labial stretch.

[–]margerym 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

And they would be talking about that labial stretch here.

What strikes me as odd is that this is what you have taken away from the post. The bulk of it and the bulk of the thread hasn't been talking about looseness.

[–]sugarcrushEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

That isn't what I took away from the post, I just hate to see things like that spread around the red pill and related subs. People already criticize enough of the things we believe that are true, we don't need to give them more fodder especially when (in this case) they would be right in calling us out you know?

[–]margerym 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That isn't what I took away from the post

I assumed it was because the OP's question was What do ya'll think of this post from TRP?

People already criticize enough of the things we believe that are true, we don't need to give them more fodder

If you are concerned about giving the trolls fodder you might want avoid pointing out every single point where you disagree with a RPer instead of staying on topic. They love that shit.

[–]sugarcrushEndorsed Contributor 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

sorry for going off topic :/ what would be the best way to correct misinformation? Should I have posted directly in the trp thread? I don't want to interrupt their man space but I will next time if thats how the mods feel it should be handled.

[–]margerym 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

what would be the best way to correct misinformation? Should I have posted directly in the trp thread?

Yes. And if you want to participate in a thread at least answer the question/address the topic first. Otherwise it suggests what you are taking issue with is your take on the topic (hence my confusion).

I also took my issue with it to the thread in question.

[–]margerym 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I'll give you that more partners doesn't necessarily mean looser vaginas. But age sure as hell does. Childbirth does to a certain extent but is also reparable in large part (barring some extreme damage). Age? Not so much. The only thing we can do is take care of ourselves now through diet and exercise as well as vaginal care. Part of vaginal care is restricting partners, though. Because though it may not mean hot dog in a hallway multiple partners do lead to things like BV (not bringing up STDs and single moms here because we all know that).

[–]sugarcrushEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Oh of course I have no problem with people saying age, childbirth, or hormonal changes can cause loosening. But we don't need to spout BS when like you said there are plenty of other factual concerns with multiple partners.

[–]margerym -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It's not entirely BS, though. Multiple partners can make a woman looser. When paired with not caring for themselves, that is.

[–]sugarcrushEndorsed Contributor 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well as long as everyone understands that it is a potential side effect of damage from unprotected sex which would be more common in those with multiple partners. Having a high partner count itself does not cause loose vagina. As long as we all get that I'm happy!

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

my husband says the same thing and he sure as hell has fucked a lot more women than me.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, essentially he is saying the truth, with a few embellishments (for one, I cannot believe carousel riding leads to a "prolapsed outie" of a vagina.)

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

it would be nice if the women who posted these "outrages" would tell us what they think of them, or come back and discuss them or something

i dont understand this mentality, does she think we dont know thats what "red pill men" think? that we're going to go omg omg omg THAT'S what they think??? im a feminist now!!

[–]margerym 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

i dont understand this mentality, does she think we dont know thats what "red pill men" think? that we're going to go omg omg omg THAT'S what they think??? im a feminist now!!

Yes.

And if we agree with the menfolk we are not real women while simultaneously being self-hating women.

[–]ButterfliesOnSunday 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There was another post on TRP I read yesterday (can't find it now, on my phone) that explained the double standard as to why it's frowned upon for women to have had multiple partners but more acceptable for a man to have had multiple partners. Basically it says that the fact that a woman has been unable to start or maintain a relationship and therefore tries with new partners, shows men that there is something wrong with her. If she was worth committing to, one of the various partners she's had would have done so already. So I agree with the fact that yes an older woman who has had either several partners or a divorce (that is her fault of course, not if she had a good reason to leave) would generally have more baggage and presumed issues than these young girls that haven't experienced nearly as much as the older women have and have yet to make the decisions that can lead them to being single later on. My mentality is to have my shit together before I try having any sort of relationship. You need to be capable of taking care of yourself before you can start a healthy relationship. A relationship needs to be fun on both ends so regardless of your age, if you can have a great time with someone, have intellectual conversations, as well as, silly ones, and keep things stress free and simple, he will want to keep you around. Just keep things simple and stress free. Also, be confident in who you are. If dropping 20 lbs will make you feel confident, do it. If you can be confident while looking however you want to, then do that. But confidence in yourself makes you so much more appealing to everyone. If you don't like you, why should anyone else.

That's just what I think and believe after reading a lot of stuff in TRP. My boyfriend is the definition of alpha and I am completely happy with him. We both imply the same strategies on each other (like not giving boundaries, not showing jealousy to ensure trust). And he knows I am completely capable of taking care of myself so he is dominant over me because he wants to be, not because he has to be. He cooks, I clean because I can't cook to save my life. I take care of flight, hotel, and specifics while he will find literally the coolest stuff to do. He does things better than me sometimes and I'm ok with that. I like having a man by my side that takes care of himself and can take care of me, not a boy I need to worry about.

Sorry for the rant ): first post about TRP and I had a lot of pent up ranting lol

[–]margerym 6 points7 points8 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

One of the first things that turned me on to TRP was that it admitted (finally!) that women over 30 hit the wall biologically. That is what the bulk of this post is about. What do I think about it? I think it's a painful truth for women that the feminist fantasy tells us to ignore but an inevitable truth that no manner of shouting down can reverse.

It bothers me to no end that women in their 30s cry to their friends and family about their troubles conceiving. It bothers me because they have been told a lie and pointing out that lie makes you a misogynist. Meanwhile these women are suffering because the fantasy refuses to face reality.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

What's to think about it. It's the distilled reality of what men really think.

[–]TempestTcup 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It was an entertaining read & is pretty much spot on, I thought.

This is the way guys think; the young girls are fine with this way of thinking because it benefits them in the short term, but once she ages & her SMV decreases, it no longer benefits her but instead works against her short term interests.

[–]cron_nin 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is what I am talking about when I say take what you read with a grain of salt. As an onlooker and a woman who is not "redpill", this is very offensive.

But I have come to realize that a lot of what the redpill is about is a place where certain men can come to rant and let out there frustrations. And of course, the meaner and more controversial it is, the more certain people will gravitate towards it and enjoy it. And will increase popularity. Everything that zioncontroller writes is that way.

I don't take it too seriously. This is just pure distilled anger, resentment and validation for everything that he chooses to do. I have learned that he is the type of character that I personally will get myself involved with on a serious level in real life.

I have gotten used to stuff like this.

[–]Nutz76 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't think it's pathetic, but if she wants kids and is relationship minded she done fucked up in life.

[–]considerfly 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I love how our 'blue pill' critics cry about how red pill men are a bunch of virgins who will never be in a relationship, and then they point to red pill men talking about what they want in a partner/girlfriend/wife and cry 'misogynist!' It's almost as if there's no consistency to their beliefs, and no logic, just a bunch of feeeeelllings

[–]margerym 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Reading this thread about labias and bat wings is interesting. I find it funny that it's so hard to believe that when women have a lot of sex (not necessarily with different partners) bat wings happen. Skin, it stretches, y'all! Of course, some women just have larger labia minoras, but they do stretch over time. Why is that so bad to acknowledge?

Nature is so sexist.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

In porn there's a distinct difference between milf labia and barely legal labia. I think That's what they're talking about

[–]imoblivioustothis 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

some get their wings clipped if they aren't part of fetish porn involving it.

[–]margerym 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. But apparently acknowledging that labias change is ignorant?

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter