Q4RP: Do you genuinely believe AWALT?

bergkampinthesheets · 2016-04-03T07:31:08+00:00

I believe that most women in most cases will have instincts that are specific and typical to their gender. Just like most men are born with aggression, which is linked to testosterone levels.

questioningwoman · 2016-04-03T10:24:07+00:00

Yup, even the smartest most rational women I know get all emotional and feefeetacular (in a bad way) sometimes and are suuuuuper catty.

I don't think every woman will cheat and trade up, I think some are raised better than that, but most aren't now that parental discipline is practically illegal and kids are raised on their iPhones and shit. All women do have certain baseline characteristics and behaviors, which are different from male baseline characteristics and behaviors.

Sepean · 2016-04-03T08:35:00+00:00

AWALT is one of the obvious tenants of TRP. The idea that Machiavellian traits are intrinsic to all woman. To any outsider, this comes across as quite ridiculous.

It is a heuristic, and men do well to assume that women are intrisically Machiavellian. Also note that we don't assume that she is consciously aware of her Machiavellian behavior. It's how they're wired.

To add to that, how do you justify the resentment of these traits by adopting the same manipulative attitude toward them? It seems counter-intuitive.

Who said anything about resentment? Some are in the anger phase and resent it, but many or even most of us just accept female nature as it is.

And I have no idea what your are talking about with justification. What is there to justify? Being high value? Being attractive? What is wrong with that?

[deleted] · 2016-04-03T11:26:27+00:00

Jesus, not this shit again.

Interversity · 2016-04-03T06:21:14+00:00

justify the resentment of these traits

Resenting traits would be pretty stupid. You can't control it, so why get angry about it? It just is.

Also, it's 'tenet' not 'tenant'.

RidinTheMonster · 2016-04-03T07:48:48+00:00

I'm Purple pill but I lean heavily red.

The answer: Yes and No.

AWALT runs off the idea that women act with different incentives than men, and that during the courtship dance, a man should keep these inner incentives in mind.

It's a praxeological tool. It's based on taking a priori assumptions and then performing deductive reasoning to determine likely or possible outcomes in the long-term.

AWALT doesn't automatically mean that a woman will automatically cheat on her boring Beta bux with a charming Alpha Fux like some kind of deterministic robot, but that - lacking a strong counter-incentive (social shaming for instance) - it will be very probable.

I'm sure there's an AMALT as well e.g. a man in a deadbedrooms marriage will be much more likely to cheat with an beautiful, aggressive woman than a man in a sexually satisfying marriage.

So, yes, I believe all women are more incentivized to cash in on their natural neotenous beauty, higher EIQ, and our cultural women are wonderful effect to effectively engage in Machiavellian social manipulation to achieve their ends.

Incentivized, not predetermined.

Can I predict with certainty that your girlfriend in your current relationship will automatically cheat at a particular time on X day of the week? No. That's impossible without breaking every privacy law. But I can predict that if you're a boring doormat, every failed fitness test increases the probability of her cheating on you at some point in the future. But it's probabilistic, so one may luck out, but I hate gambling.

RidinTheMonster · 2016-04-03T06:18:51+00:00

Of course, are women not self-interested?

All this virtue shit is fake, people are people

OlBastard · 2016-04-03T15:14:57+00:00

It's AWALT, not AWAT(All Women Are That).

It introduces a type of fuzzy logic to the phrase. Instead of All Women Are That, it goes to mean That Woman is X with a probability of P.

Why is this useful? It helps men understand that even the most unique snowflakes are potentially hypergamous whores who will branch swing at their next opportunity.

It has a similar depedestalizing function as the oft-repeated phrase: "For every beautiful women, there's a man fed up with her shit".

lostapwbm · 2016-04-04T03:21:30+00:00

AWALT is not only demonstrable, but women vacillate between NAWALT and AWALT as it suits their purposes.

At this point, you are understandably skeptical. I can prove my point in two concise points. During era of Title VII lawsuits and women's equal protection claims, lawyers successfully argued that, despite the demonstrable differences in interests and capacities of women in certain male-dominated fields, women should be admitted because the similarities between men and women were greater than their differences, therefore, women were entitled to equal protection. To shorthand it, "I'm not like all of those other girls who want to stay at home and pump out babies! I want to be a lawyer/doctor/cop/firefighter/rodeo clown/etc.!" NAWALT.

In the 1980s, "dominance theory" championed by professor Catherine MacKinnon, came to the fore. MacKinnon applied Marxist theory to feminism to apply what she argued was the inherent subordination of all women to a patriarchal society/culture. This is the prevailing theory of feminism as evidenced by such pithy ad campaigns as "YesAllWomen." AWALT.

Of course, TRP applies AWALT to women in that women utilize a self-serving and inherently manipulative sexual strategy. Feminism applies AWALT to women in that women are the eternal victims of men. So if feminists believe in AWALT, and TRP believes in AWALT, two philosophies in opposition to one another, that lends credence to the idea that AWALT is true.

RidinTheMonster · 2016-04-03T07:33:25+00:00

The only AWALT definition that I need and "believe" in, is Sands' description in his thread "My take on AWALT".

Some quotes:

The AWALT woman is

... the ideal type of the adversarial woman, the concept that was only created to illustrate a woman whose sole reason is to demonstrate guys in which way women can and will be trouble.

In other words, the AWALT-woman doesn't exist. But the same way you can expect a person who has been socialized in an Arab influenced social framework to also behave in some, even many regards like the people depicted in The Arab Mind, *you can practically bank on women behaving in one way or the other like TRP tells you all the time. *

and

...all these big and little things that don't really make sense from a male perspective, and that add only to confusion for guys who operate from the assumption that the general default mindset is not dissimilar to theirs, and all the deviations women display from that personal standard are chalked up to some "feminine mystique" instead.

and

And this is why I am pretty comfortable with AWALT. It gives me a means to deal with a behavior of women that can be described as "needlessly complicated" (from a male perspective). If she doesn't behave like that - awesome! [...] And, more importantly, we don't need a special guide that tells me how to deal with women who behave (from a male point of view) "normal" or cooperative - we need one that tells us when they're doing the opposite, when they're adversarial or (to us) irrational and erratic

TL;DR: /u/exit_sandman wrote a thread called My take on Awalt. I recommend reading it. It's also hilarious that I link to said thread in a TL;DR.

exit_sandman · 2016-04-03T13:10:28+00:00

Guitars already linked it, but for convenience's sake I'll do it again:

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/3ext05/my_take_on_awalt/

[deleted] · 2016-04-03T16:18:50+00:00

I don't think of AWALT in terms as something machiavellian but more in terms like "all women don't want to date loser guys" and "AWALT but some are more AWALT than others." That doesn't mean that she's going to jump to Chad Thundercock the second you're not looking... But some women might.

Truth is, most partners aren't gonna stick together through thick and thin too. 99% of relationships end, etc.. I also believe that "AMALT" is a thing too. I definitely have plenty of AMALT traits.

RidinTheMonster · 2016-04-03T16:57:49+00:00

I believe that any women, could be like that, or could not be like that. A woman should never be given a sense of innocence purely because she is a woman.

kick6 · 2016-04-04T20:42:21+00:00

It's a generalization. So do I believe it literally? No. Do I believe it in the way TRP intends it (as a cautionary device)? Yes.

lolobviously · 2016-04-03T06:05:03+00:00

Machiavellian : "the employment of cunning and duplicity in statecraft or in general conduct"

To any outsider, this comes across as quite ridiculous.

Seriously?

AutoModerator · 2016-04-03T05:58:49+00:00

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.

LifterofThings · 2016-04-03T16:18:51+00:00

Q4RP: Do you genuinely believe AWALT?

Yes.

To add to that, how do you justify the resentment of these traits by adopting the same manipulative attitude toward them?

I guess you meant RP men? Ultimately everyone decides how "far" they want to go to "win" the game, knowing what the risks and rewards are. You can fight manipulation with manipulation, or opt out, or whatever you like. RP is just descriptive-- what individuals do with the knowledge is up to them.

JPDG · 2016-04-03T19:51:20+00:00

Yep, yep, and yep!

DietCokeImOnMyKnees · 2016-04-04T12:03:29+00:00

No. I get that it's a heuristic, but even that takes it too far. A lot of women are like that, but TRP consistently underestimates that amount of variation in human behaviour and preferences, of both men and women.

winndixie · 2016-04-04T21:02:15+00:00

No, women with mustaches don't have the charm to be like that.

prodigy2throw · 2016-04-03T07:48:28+00:00

All women are exactly the same. They wear the exact same clothes, talk the same and act the same always no matter what. That's what AWALT means. Right?

ppdthrowawai · 2016-04-03T11:50:59+00:00

I believe AAHALT (Almost all humans are like that)

It's not a big deal. Most people aren't going to be my friend of they're not getting anything or of it

[deleted] · 2016-04-03T13:07:04+00:00

No. Theredpill in my mind, is only discussing sorority girls. (or that type of girl) That's all I picture when they refer to women.

Title	Q4RP: Do you genuinely believe AWALT?
Author	RidinTheMonster
Upvotes	5
Comments	117
Date	April 3, 2016 5:58 AM UTC (10 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/4d55bz/q4rp_do_you_genuinely_believe_awalt/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/q4rp-do-you-genuinely-believe-awalt.275322 https://theredarchive.com/post/275322

Comments