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

If AWALT, can we blame any of them for being themselves?

[deleted]

May 11, 2016
5 upvotes
/r/PurplePillDebate
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 If AWALT, can we blame any of them for being themselves?
Author

[deleted]
Upvotes 5
Comments 42
Date May 11, 2016 9:27 PM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/4ix8xo/if_awalt_can_we_blame_any_of_them_for_being/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/if-awalt-can-we-blame-any-of-them-for-being.274704
https://theredarchive.com/post/274704
Red Pill terms in post
AWALT

Comments

[–]kick6Red Pill Man14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can't blame a fish for swimming, nope. When men finally realize all the things that frustrate them about women just simply are and can't be changed, is when the anger phase finally ends.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Nah

And that's the acceptance phase

[–]starista1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

If I read correctly, AWALT is indeed a sweeping generalization that admits that women do not really want equality in their relationships.

They think they do but it's not what they need.

It also shows how and why women nag/complain and how a strong man should handle her that will provide an outcome of what's best for her, him, and (if applicable) their marriage.

[–]kick6Red Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

AWALT is an acronym for "all women are like that." It applies to a lot of things not just whether or not they want equality in their relationships.

[–]starista1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes. I was speaking of one of the ideas, one of the ones that stood out to me as I first read RP theory. That, combined with shit tests, were two of the most valid reasons why I swallowed.

[–]despisedlove2Reality Pill Tradcon RP5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

TRP doesn't blame women for hypergamy any more than you blame a scorpion for being poisonous.

Once you stop looking at women as human beings capable of being driven by any noble impulse regarding the men they date, sleep with, or marry, the world becomes a far more comprehensible place.

It is a bit like spending a lifetime trying to fit a set of points on a plot to a straight line with high errors, and then finding one day that they fit a parabola so much the better.

Women aren't some hypercomplex creatures. They are actually pretty simple to understand. The complexity arises entirely from traditional male desire to put them on a pedestal and then failing to understand that that just doesn't fit.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

No. AWALT describes a set of internal traits and tendencies. It is what they are/feel/think.

We can, however, blame them for their conduct.

We can't blame them for hypergamy and being attracted to the best men.

We can blame them for acting on that hypergamy to their detriment -- for selecting hawt guys and then complaining that none of those hawt guys will wife them up. For detonating a decent marriage to Beta Bob because Bob "just doesn't do it for me anymore" or "I love you but I'm not in love with you".

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 10 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

but I've seen women shamed several times here for wanting "hawt" guys.

The problem is that this usually comes with some unfortunate side effects

  • denial about having basic desires ("I love him because he's special and nice and kind if you know him, not because he's hot. Me, superficial? never")
  • complaining about a self-inflicted woes ("all men are pigs" after having been pumped and dumped by guys out of her league or "nobody loves me" because she only registers guys above a certain attractiveness threshold)
  • treating men who don't meet her attractiveness standards as second rate human beings
  • and then complaining about all the stuff above when men do it, i.e. being a big time hypocrite.

[–]Nazrath2112Blood Splatter Red2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Waiting for the right guy is not a bad thing. Swinging from dick to dick always trying for a better guy is.

[–]HigHog0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

A marriage where one partner is not in love with the other partner is not "decent".

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

If she wasn't in love with him then she shouldn't have married him. If she wasn't head over heels with him, want to rip his clothes off, dying to suck his dick attracted to him, then she shouldn't have married him.

She gets the blame for her actions, not her nature.

EDIT: If she doesn't have a "decent" marriage because of her own actions, then she's a piece of shit.

[–]HigHog0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Right, because when you fall in love with someone you stay that way forever no matter what. No one has ever stopped loving someone.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Love is a choice. Love is an action. Love is not a feeling.

She doesn't get to blow up a marriage because she isn't "feeling" "in love". Women who do that are shit.

[–]HigHog0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Why don't you "choose" to be in love with a 67 year old gay man then?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Now you're confusing "love" as a feeling, with biology.

I can't choose to love a 67 year old gay man because that runs counter to my biology.

If a woman's biology is such that she's not "in love with" (i.e. not sexually attracted to) her husband, then she should have known and identified that from the beginning, and refused to marry him. That fuckup is on her, not him.

Epic fail. thanks for playing, though.

[–]648262Red Pill0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

We can blame them for acting on that hypergamy to their detriment -- for selecting hawt guys and then complaining that none of those hawt guys will wife them up. For detonating a decent marriage to Beta Bob because Bob "just doesn't do it for me anymore" or "I love you but I'm not in love with you".

I disagree. They all more or less do this - at least to such an extent that it is part of the AWALT-issue, and therefore is not something to blame them for. They really, really are the blameless gender, and this is not something we should say out of spite. They can't help themselves for doing anything in their way to avoid responsibilities like that. And anytime you become angry for women fucking you over you should conclude that the anger is misdirected as it should be aimed inwards. You took a chance, and it failed, because AWALT and you should have known better.

[–]BetweenTheVelvetLies0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

Well, technically you should not blame men either, cause you know, AMALT ;)

Men just can´t help themselves for doing anything in their way to avoid responsibilities ... and the like... So I guess for them it´s much easier to make an oversimplified generalization as AWALT and get it out of the way than ACTUALLY take responsibility for their choices of partners and for their actions in a relationship.

[–]648262Red Pill0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

AMALT? Absolutely! And thanks for pointing it out. It basically means you should direct your anger where it can be productive. If you hang out with assholes you should learn your lesson and stop doing so. Don't be angry at them as they're just doing them, and you need to do you.

Stoicism 101 right there.

PS: In my experience I can't say that men tend to go out of their way to avoid responsibility. Look at who has the most CEO positions for example.

[–]BetweenTheVelvetLies1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

At a moment i thought you got my point... that is until your PS. Of course I don't think that AMALT or actually claim that ALL men avoid responsibility. I was just exaggerating trying to show you how absurd it is to think that ALL people belonging to one gender are some particular way.

Of course there are men that hold CEO jobs and women holding CEO jobs too, as men janitors and women janitors... Are all your male friends exactly as loyal and as trustworthy and as responsible?

But the funny thing I find about the AWALT thing is that men who actually believe it, claim that women cannot take responsibility about their actions but actually these men use AWALT so that THEY would not take responsibilities for their choices of partners and their behavior in their relationships. And I love the irony that lies in that :)

[–]648262Red Pill0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Let's talk a bit about expectations.

For a moment you were almost surprised that someone from TRP got your point. You have some ideas about what a TRP-person act and how they see the world. You did not expect me to get your point. Not because you're unable to communicate, but because you have an expectation that All TRP-people Are Like That.

I expect women to avoid responsibility, and I expect men to seek responsibility. I expect my male friends to be as loyal, trustworthy and responsible as the next of them, but I don't have such expectations from my female friends.

Why? Because my experiences has shown me that is the most likely situation. I am sometimes surprised, and then I react to that. I have dropped friends when the expectations of them was lost, and I've become happy when female friends willingly take responsibility.

AWALT can't have merit if it says women can't actually take responsibility. There's a million and one examples that debunks it. In my opinion AWALT says women will avoid taking responsibility if they can.

There are women who take responsibility and men who don't - without doubt; but I don't expect the people I meet to behave like that. And I don't become emotional when people act like I expect.

But the funny thing I find about the AWALT thing is that men who actually believe it, claim that women cannot take responsibility about their actions but actually these men use AWALT so that THEY would not take responsibilities for their choices of partners and their behavior in their relationships. And I love the irony that lies in that :)

That's no irony, though it is unfortunate - like a good advice you just didn't take, or like rain on your wedding day.

But the original post asks exactly about what you're on about. Should men be disappointed if women avoid responsibility? I say no, and they should, as you're on to, take responsibility and blame themselves if they are ever in a situation where that happens. They should have expected it to be like that.

[–]BetweenTheVelvetLies1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Let's talk a bit about expectations. For a moment you were almost surprised that someone from TRP got your point. You have some ideas about what a TRP-person act and how they see the world. You did not expect me to get your point. Not because you're unable to communicate, but because you have an expectation that All TRP-people Are Like That.

Now, wait here, I never stated that I was surprised that someone from TRP got my point. What I said is that although at the beginning of your post you seemed to get it, your PS overturned my first impression. Cause I realized that we seemed to basically have reached a common conclusion but we had completely different premises to begin with.

However, if I understood correctly, you were trying to make an analogy here. Implying that AWALT has only to do with expectations and maybe you have certain expectations from women the same way that I had certain expectations from TRP people. (Which only states your expectations about my expectations if you come to think of this, cause I never expressed such a thing).

But let us give you this. Let's say that I did have expectations that a person who chose to label himself with the name of a certain "philosophy" has adopted the beliefs of this philosophy. (seems like a tautology, not an expectation though). Do you find that it takes the same logical reasoning when someone concludes that people belonging in a whole gender - without choosing it - have for sure certain negative traits, without any exception?

There are women who take responsibility and men who don't - without doubt; but I don't expect the people I meet to behave like that. And I don't become emotional when people act like I expect.

Well, if there are women who take responsibilty and men that don´t then you are practically saying NAWALT and NAMALT. And we could even agree if you chose to describe the same observation by saying that not all people are the same; there are people with negative traits and people with good traits. (Bear in mind that TRP AWALT does not only refer to responsibility).

But you see, you don´t say that. You choose to say AWALT. You describe it and its actually SWALT (some women are like that, since you found exceptions) and you analyze it and it seems that it has only to do with your expectations without actually believing it is true.

So why would a rational person say such an undue generalization that can so easily be debunked? Why would say one thing while he means another? And why would he try to spread this idea to other people, since he doesn't believe it either?

And this last part is what made me answer to be honest. People are free to believe and to expect whatever they want. But if they claim that their beliefs are universal truths and try to spread them to other people as such, then they should be prepared to prove them when they are challenged.

For me the saddest part is that, through TRP, such views are communicated unchallenged to people that are not mature and rational enough to judge them (e.g. high-school kids). And, you know, this is almost as unfortunate as rain on your wedding day :)

[–]648262Red Pill0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Now, wait here, I never stated that I was surprised that someone from TRP got my point. What I said is that although at the beginning of your post you seemed to get it, your PS overturned my first impression. Cause I realized that we seemed to basically have reached a common conclusion but we had completely different premises to begin with.

Fair enough - I jumped to conclusions perhaps.

There are women who take responsibility and men who don't - without doubt; but I don't expect the people I meet to behave like that. And I don't become emotional when people act like I expect.

Well, if there are women who take responsibilty and men that don´t then you are practically saying NAWALT and NAMALT. And we could even agree if you chose to describe the same observation by saying that not all people are the same; there are people with negative traits and people with good traits. (Bear in mind that TRP AWALT does not only refer to responsibility).

You skipped the paragraph that clarifies your question, which was this:

AWALT can't have merit if it says women can't actually take responsibility. There's a million and one examples that debunks it. In my opinion AWALT says women will avoid taking responsibility if they can.

The bolded part is what you didn't pick up.

So why would a rational person say such an undue generalization that can so easily be debunked? Why would say one thing while he means another? And why would he try to spread this idea to other people, since he doesn't believe it either?

Have you ever seen gangster movies where they want to pay off some guy and says "How much do you want? Everyone has their price", and he doesn't really want to, but there's just so much money that he goes along with it?

That's the premise for AWALT. Women will cheat, as long as the price is right. For some the price is higher than others, but the price exists. And this is valid for men as well (AMALT).

I don't see why you consider this to be such a crazy idea.

If we went for the SWALT/NAWALT alternative we would say that some women would never cheat under any circumstances. I don't believe in such a concept. Everyone has their price. It is what I consider to be a universal truth that I am willing to spread to others.

[–]BetweenTheVelvetLies1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

You have to admit that it takes a certain ability in mental gymnastics to start from here:

Straddle jump

They really, really are the blameless gender, and this is not something we should say out of spite. They can't help themselves for doing anything in their way to avoid responsibilities like that.

Pike Jump

I expect women to avoid responsibility, and I expect men to seek responsibility. I expect my male friends to be as loyal, trustworthy and responsible as the next of them, but I don't have such expectations from my female friends.

Somersault

In my opinion AWALT says women will avoid taking responsibility if they can.

Cartwheels

There are women who take responsibility and men who don't - without doubt; but I don't expect the people I meet to behave like that.

and....

Backward tucked rolls

That's the premise for AWALT. Women will cheat, as long as the price is right. For some the price is higher than others, but the price exists. And this is valid for men as well (AMALT).I don't see why you consider this to be such a crazy idea.

Tada!!

So, let me sum up things for you, you can just check which answer applies to you, so that we don´t have any missunderstandings.

A. I believe that ALL women have more negative traits than men. Therefore, I expect my male friends to be loyal, trustworthy and responsible but not my female friends to be so. I have encountered examples from both genders that proved me wrong, however I chose to still believe otherwise. Cause I just debunked AWALT myself I will place 3 little words after AWALT and bold them so that I will be able to explain the exceptions that disprove the rule. These words will be if they can. But by still believing the original statements I imply that men will not do bad things even if they can, cause that is why I trust them and not the women, no? Even a million examples of Women That Are Not Like That prove nothing cause they obviously are not like that because they can't. And who says so? I do! And this is the universal truth AND good luck debunking that!

B. Women and men are people. I believe that all people will cheat as long as the price is right. Men and women equally. I call women though the blameless gender and I don't trust them while I trust men because reasons. So, although APALT holds true for me AWALT as a subset of APALT holds a negative connotation whereas AMALT as a subset of APALT actually holds a positive one!

C. Saying AWALT brings me closer to my bros, kind of a bonding thing while we drink beers and watch football matches, just like girls say that All Men Are Pigs when they get together doing each others hair and exchange beauty products. Now leave me alone you annoying XX devil!

kk, sorry!

[–]648262Red Pill0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You have a good point - no doubt.

Mostly B.

[–]InformalCriticismProbably Red2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nope.

That's why I think it's pretty telling of a person who stays in the anger phase to talk shit about women the whole time. It's a maturity thing. You acknowledge the serious differences and accept reality. But, those who stay in the cycle only give credence to the thought that maybe TRPers are just crazy misogynists after all.

Once you acknowledge AND accept that women aren't going to change, you then have the agency, indeed the opportunity, to enact change in your own life.

Women really ought to be glad we've realized our agency, because they get to go on being themselves, like they were going to anyway, without any fear of abstract responsibility.

Now, philosophically, does that mean women don't deserve consequences for their actions? Yes, of course they do - the point is they are the control, we are the variable; there's nothing different about how the world works after recognizing their inability to change their nature.

[–]Nazrath2112Blood Splatter Red2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, hence the gun analogy. The gun cant help itself if its loaded or not, best to assume it is though.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

One can't blame people for being attracted to who they're attracted to.

One can blame people for lying, gaslighting and using others.

[–]lady_bakerRed Pill Woman4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You can blame them for not curbing the worst excesses of their instincts the same way you would blame a man for fucking 18 year olds indiscriminately. The instincts are there, but so is higher cognitive function.

[–]Villaintine╰▄︻▄╯1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This, it's also necessary to understand that the behaviors aren't simply binary, but the severity of the behaviors fall along a spectrum and that the severity is malleable.

[–]you_done_messed_upMarried1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Depends. Do you blame a successful businessman for giving in to his urges, thinking with his dick, fucking the young dumb assistant and after it comes to light losing his family, his wealth and his business in the divorce process?

He just followed his biological programming that urges him towards seeking out new, young pussy.

All of us have to control our animal brains to some extent to function well in society.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But TRP doesn't. That's the chief difference between TRP and MRA and likely MGTOW(depends on the kind of MGTOW).

[–]AutoModeratorBiased against humans[M] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Attention!

  • You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.

  • For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.

  • If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.

  • OP you can choose your own flair, just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]Entropy-7Old Goat0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There is a lot of commentary that accepting AWALT leads you out of the anger phase. There is no point in getting angry over something doing what is in its fundamental nature to do. You prepare for it, avoid it, insure yourself against it, control for it, minimize the chance of risks materializing, and in the case of a person, do what you can to condition them out of that behavior.

You start a business but it fails. Did you do your homework? Did you have a business plan? Did you do your market research? Have you field tested the product? If you have done everything right and were aware of the risks, why be angry at the market because it didn't make you rich? Why be angry at yourself? Just move on and try again.

On the other hand, if you didn't do your homework and prepare appropriately, you definitely have no one to blame but yourself if you go bankrupt.

Play with snakes and you are going to get bitten if you don't take precautions: ASALT, take precautions, don't blame the snake.

[–]questioningwomandetached from society0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

They don't want women to be themselves. They want us to submit to female socialization of submissiveness.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I take it you don't like BDSM much?

[–]questioningwomandetached from society0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Let's just say the manosphere made me far more militant.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Got it. You are more of a spanker than a spankee.... That works for some people.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The same way we can't blame a murderer because he was biologically, psychologically, and sociologically destined to be a murderer.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin🔪Yeetus that Feetus🔪3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

and this is the moralizing thats killing TRP. women are not comparable to murderers for having human female nature, any more than men are evil for being men

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

My point was simply that regardless of influence, people should be held accountable for their actions.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Relatively few people are murderers, and we "blame" them to both discourage other murderers and to isolate them and prevent them from murdering more people.

If everyone was a murderer, and acting on it, given the opportunity, then blaming them would, in fact, be pointless. The only useful thing to do would be to deny them the opportunity to murder you or your loved ones.

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