Agree/Disagree: WAW (Walk Away Wife) is the logical endgame for most marriages

PostNationalism · 2015-05-20T07:12:41+00:00

husbands never divorce wives [people] get bored, thats just BIOTRUTH check out talkaboutmarriage.com forums ->> 10 users on LONG TERM HAPPY...

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ianturpiesmoustache3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]rulenumber3034 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]rulenumber3030 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]rulenumber3031 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (16 children) | Copy Link

They're not irresistable... It's just their "resistability" grows much slower than it grows in women. We don't have the wall in the 30's.

If you want to see some stats...

Husband 20+ years older than wife 1.0

Husband 15–19 years older than wife 1.6

Husband 10–14 years older than wife 4.8

Husband 6–9 years older than wife 11.6

Husband 4–5 years older than wife 13.3

Husband 2–3 years older than wife 20.4

Husband and wife within 1 year 33.2

Wife 2–3 years older than husband 6.5

Wife 4–5 years older than husband 3.3

Wife 6–9 years older than husband 2.7

Wife 10–14 years older than husband 1.0

Wife 15–19 years older than husband 0.3

Wife 20+ years older than husband 0.3

It's not as if about 33% of men are 4 or more years older than their wife and 55% two or more years older... and 7.5% of women are 4 or more years older than their husband and only 14% two or more years older.

Those older guys do SHIT compared to the older women.

It's like there isn't a wall, at all.

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

No. Because people are pairing up their SMV's and marrying their partners BEFORE men have reached their peak and BEFORE women have started the decline.

75% of marriages are before the age of 30 (for women) and 50% before 27. At this point (and considering they probably paired an average of 2 years earlier... at 25-28) women are pairing at their peak.

Men average age at first marriage is 29. Still approx 6-11 years before their peak.

So, for the bulk of the population "Mens SMV will rise during their marriage, and womens fall. If they started equal, men will as a result generally have a higher SMV for the entire duration of the marriage"

It's just kinda maths... As long as you accept the axiom that the male peak is around 33-38 and the female peak 23-28.

Are you arguing with the axiom or the math ?

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

It is if women are hypergamous.

Status accumulates with age. Because women prize status so highly, then they are willing to compromise on youth to get it. This pushes the male peak later.

Men preference youth over status. Because they do so they are less willing to compromise youth to get status, a lot less. This pushed the female peak earlier.

To put it in the simplest terms...

The 21 year old male has the degree that could be a good career, the potential to earn money, could potentially buy the nice house and nice car for the kids, the experience to possibly provide a good sex life, the potential. Women have to bet on the piotential being realised.

The 31 year old male has the good career the degree provided, the money is in the bank, he owns the house the kids need and the car the kids need, he can demonstrate his skills in providing a good sex life. Women don't have to take a punt on the potential no more. They can buy the complete package AS IS without taking the risks.

On the male side...

The 21 year old female is fucking hot.

The 31 year old female is staruing to look a bit ropey, and it's all going to go downhill from here rather rapidly. Saggy tits are on the way, if not already arrived.

SMV peaks at different times for different genders because... We select different qualities in each other.

So a woman SMV8 at 21 ... Becomes an SMV6 at 31.

A male SMV 6 at 21 ... Becomes an SMV8 at 31 (providing he realises potential).

It ain't rocket science. I'm surprised to see a red flair that needs it explained.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Yes.

But with the woman peaking at 24... and downhill from there... and makles peaking at 28-34...and downhill from there...

The male SMV always stays ahead of the female SMV... Providing they matched SMV's when they met and that "meeting point" was anywhere between 18-31 (Picking your male peak). Thats about 75%+ of marriages according to the census.

Look... Lets say they meet at 25 to marry at 27.

At 25, she's at her peak... He's got 7 years growth to come. At that point they match at SMV6.

By 32 he's at SMV7 (he went up to the peak) and she's at SMV5 (she went down from her peak).

By 42 he's at SMV6 (he's dropping now) and she's at SMV4 (she's still dropping)

By 52 he's at SMV5 (he's still dropping) and she's at SMV3 (she's still dropping)

By 62 he's at SMV4 (he's still dropping) and she's at SMV2 (she's still dropping)

By 72 it just doesn't fucking matter anymore. He' reasonably likely to be dead in any case.

So... Downhill from YOUR chosen point... Still supports my conclusion perfectly well. The "walk away husband" is the logical endgame.

Hence all the sturm und drang by the feminists slapping marriage 2.0 rules in place to protect teh girlz.

It's gone so far that they didn;t equalise the situation, they pushed it way too far and created the "wife walks away" logical endgame.

The target should be "no-one has an incentive to walk away" but, true to their nature, the feminists overshot.

They seem quite happy to continue overshooting too, so much so... They keep pushing the rules to allow them to overshoot even more !

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Women peak from 18 to 30 (it's a long peak for women.)

Aw, come on. Save me from the hamster... No. They don't.

Most men would prefer the 24 year old over her 30 year old twin. Now, you're right in so far as the really BIG drop starts hitting at 30 or so. Thats where "The Wall" occurs. But the peak is earlier than that even if the decline is gentler pre-wall.

You've also made it too long on the low side... A guy would prefer a 21 year old (who'd porbably picked up a bit of life and social skill) over her 18 year old twin.

It's narrower than that. I'd say 21-26 is a reasonable range that can be argued over. Not 18-30. 21 or 24 would "trump" 30 for the majority of guys.

Men peak from 28-34 (although in the eyes of a 18-22 year old woman, the 20-24 year old man's SMV is far, far higher)

There I can see you're prepared to be more reasonable. I could get with a 28-34 age range.

I don't believe in your chart at all. It's not what I see all about me. It's not what I see in marriage stats. (And the age of women at first marriage continues to rise, so we can't even go by current stats to predict future SMV of men and women)

Yeah but with older males way ahead of older females in the marriage stats (33% of men 4 years older+, 7.5% of women) there is good baseline support for this kind of calculation. As are the figures of 27 (F) and 29 (M) for first marriage.

Take two years off for a reasonable "first date, start a relationship" point. 25 (F) and 27 (M) would put women at or near her peak, and the guy before his. Even if I accepted your absurd 12 year "peak" range for girls, and your more reasonable 6 year one for boys.

Forced to picjk a 6 year peak for girls... Where would you put it ? I think most guys would put that in about 20-26.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

i was thinking of smv as being marriage desirability around the world (apart from the 'child-bride' places who like pubescents)

It doesn't matter what men or women are sexually attracted to the most. There's a lot more factors involved. A 30-34 man of a certain education level and class is going to want a 30 year old woman of a certain education level and class over a 24 year old woman who has a low education level/low socioeconomic level. It's weird that trp doesn't understand this. It's like you guys live in a different world.

The women who say "where are all the good men gone" when they're 30 most probably have personalities that are a bit prickly, might not look as good as other women their age and might live in an area where there are more women than men. Because women aged 28-34, with a good education and income, who are attractive and generally nice people - are in demand for marriage.

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

i was thinking of smv as being marriage desirability around the world (apart from the 'child-bride' places who like pubescents)

Yeah. That's how we're using it here. You have to check context though. In another conversation we could use the same term to mean "pure fuckability level". Your definition is more appropriate here.

It doesn't matter what men or women are sexually attracted to the most. There's a lot more factors involved.

Yes. Your strategy hits the world of other peoples strategies. Particularly male strategies. They battle it out. Your strategy doesn't always win. Sometimes it's a draw. Sometimes you lose (Yeah, um, what's-your-name. I'll call you later this week. I got a business meeting to go to so I'm going to have to leave now.).

A 30-34 man of a certain education level and class is going to want a 30 year old woman of a certain education level and class over a 24 year old woman who has a low education level/low socioeconomic level. It's weird that trp doesn't understand this. It's like you guys live in a different world.

No. All that's true. We recognise that. But our education levels are what they are. Given a 30yr old of the same level. Or a 24 yr old of the same level. Go with the 24 yr old. There are plenty of "middle class college educated women".

But if a guy ain't really interested ? Take the 24 yo ditz over the 30yr old ditz.

College educated you can get anywhere. Young you can only get from the young.

Does being college educated help a girl ? YUP, widens dating pool. Does it help as much as being young and hot ? Nope. Does a career help ? A bit. Does being a CEO or a 60hr a week lawyer help ? No, it detracts.

The women who say "where are all the good men gone" when they're 30 most probably have personalities that are a bit prickly, might not look as good as other women their age and might live in an area where there are more women than men.

Yeah. They're just normal women who hit 30.

When they were 24 their pool was "all men they wanted under 40" but by the time they reach 30... It reduces to "any men between 26-40 who can't pull 25 year olds any more"... This removes almost all the "good men". Because the 25 yo good men leave, most of the 30 yo good men have been snagged, and she is fiercely competing with 24-25-26 year olds for the tiny remainder."

There are still men for her. The quality falls off a cliff. They don't ask "where'd the men go". There are plenty of men for her. They ask "where'd the good ones go". It's the high value men she's lost from her pool. They're snagged, view her as too old (if young) or are dating down 5 years into the twenties market and don't bother with the thirties crowd.

So they go from having 3 cohorts of good males interested at 24 "there are loads of good men !" to 0 "there are no good men anymore ! What happened ! Where'd they go !".

Because women aged 28-34, with a good education and income, who are attractive and generally nice people - are in demand for marriage.

Oh yeah. The low value guys want to snap you up ! This is the moment they've been waiting for. The good men are gone. That competition they couldn't get past, disappears. The girls that wouldn't give them the time of day when 3 cohorts of good men were sniffing round ? She'll return his calls now, go on dates with him.

You're now just picking amongst men of way lower quality than your used to. Nice guys, usually. Nice stable guys who you don't fancy that much. Stable but not sexy. Some women make a life with them. Some make them a cash machine, sperm dispenser, then divorce rape him once she can walk with the cash and the kids and go "hot guy" hunting.

Women can always get a guy.

The question is do you want to snag one whilst your dating pool is wide and full of good men ? (20-28) or when it's small and only the low value/poor choices remain (30-38). Or basically give up on kids except as an outside chance (38+)

Your call.

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Villaintine╰▄︻▄╯0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (90 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago (52 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (51 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (50 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

Who care it wont be you and your partner raising your kids it will be your community,

Does not ensure the children are mine.

paternity becomes nice to know but not the be all end.

Men damn well care about the children being their own. It's their genetic legacy you are gambling with.

Polyamory is disgusting

Why?

Because cuckolding is disgusting. All creatures must ensure their genes.

people in society have this funny thing where they self select in to smaller groups that work with the parties involved. getting kick from one group could be life destroying.

What ensures men who get the short end of the stick to say fuck it and suicide bomb the rest of you?

If a few men get all the women the rest of the men will get angy and there will be trouble.

Even if you have both polygamy and polyamory in the same society does not solve anything as in a few generations alphas will be disproportionally selected which makes bad things happen with aggressiveness.

Society is beta, society selects for docility and intelligence, poly will take us back to cavemen and wars.

I see that you imagine a society like bonobos, it does not fucking work, our evolution is divergent from that simple society.

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

Does not ensure the children are mine.

who cares? You seem to be missing some thing, aside from the genetic legacy which is that really all that important any way? a lot the paternity issues we have today would disappear because the kids would be raised by the community.

Because cuckolding is disgusting.

Some one doesn't know what words mean.

Cuckolding or to be a cuckold is to be the partner in half open relationship. So a wife cheating or engaging in a known affair is cuckcolding her husband if he A) chooses not to seek out side partners OR B can not (for what ever reason) seek out side partners.

A open relationship is not cuckolding by definition as A) no one is cheating, and B) both parties are actively seeking 3rd party relationships. failure to find a third part relationship doesn't make a cuckold as you have the ability to find a third party at any time.

All creatures must ensure their genes.

Only matter in mono as the male could be on the hook for soley raising kids that aren't his. when poly become mainstream kids will be raised by the community. linage wont be fiat, for inheritance (not that it ever was). And would ensuring your genee really make you happy?

What ensures men who get the short end of the stick to say fuck it and suicide bomb the rest of you?

If you can't get laid or get a date in the poly community don't come complaining to me with quasi terroristic threats. ALL THIS BULLSHIT ABOUT AFBB AND STUFF DOES REALLY HAPPEN OR IF IT DOESN'T YOU WON'T NOTICE BECAUSE YOU WILL BE TO BUSY DATING/FUCKING 2 OR 3 DIFFERENT WOMEN. Poly lets you date people you other wise wouldn't. that tournament species crap doesn't happen in poly.

Even if you have both polygamy and polyamory in the same society does not solve anything as in a few generations alphas will be disproportionally selected which makes bad things happen with aggressiveness.

That is not how modern poly works, if you knew fuck all about poly other than this reactionary nonsense you would know that.

Even with baboon and other tournament species betas still reproduce. FFS

Society is beta, society selects for docility and intelligence, poly will take us back to cavemen and wars.

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST YOU AREN'T GOING TO BE EXCLUSIVE WITH ANY ONE AND NEITHER WILL THE WOMEN. BETAS WILL GET LAID AND REPRODUCE. If anything betas will start to out number alphas after a few generations.

I see that you imagine a society like bonobos, it does not fucking work, our evolution is divergent from that simple society.

NO i don't, I unlike you have this thing called REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE. You have rhetoric.

/u/thegreasypole thoughts (keeping you in this side of the convo)

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Well, I'd tell /u/adrixshadow monogamy doesn't ensure the children are his either. All monogamous species cheat.

He'd be better off "In a poly community with a mandatory paternity testing policy" than he'd be out in the wider monogamous world. The benefits of polyamory are such that both men and women involved would be likely to agree this policy.

In terms of "gene safeguarding" this kind of community, with mandatory paternity testing, care of children by a wider community, and ability to mate with multiple women without upsetting this equilibrium would also probably be a better genetic solution for his genes.

He's got a point on the suicide bombers though. It's the same point as mine. Young men will get cut out. Young men do stupid things. Young men do particularly stupid things when they ain't getting laid. Polygamy will lead to hordes of young men who are not getting laid.

I'd also add your real world experience... gathered in a tiny self-selected community... Is unlikely to translate effectively to a wider society.

You'd be like all those 19thC and early 20thC communes that made communism basically work in communities of around 100-150 or so.

They thought it would just scale as it was too.

They were wrong. Mechanisms and Proceses that work well with a load of people you know well... DO NOT scale up well to a society level populated by people you don't know well.

Nothing "proved" at the small level can be assumed to work at the large level.

It's why we didn't need laws back in our little tribal villages. Just kinda social consensus on what was allowable and what wasn't.

When we scaled, that just didn't work anymore. We needed laws, then enforcement mechanisms to make them stick, then rights to protect us from the enfrocement mechansims, then.... and so on.

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

In terms of "gene safeguarding" this kind of community, with mandatory paternity testing, care of children by a wider community, and ability to mate with multiple women without upsetting this equilibrium would also probably be a better genetic solution for his genes.

What i was trying to tell him

He's got a point on the suicide bombers though. It's the same point as mine. Young men will get cut out. Young men do stupid things. Young men do particularly stupid things when they ain't getting laid. Polygamy will lead to hordes of young men who are not getting laid.

that is some hyperbole, yeah maybe poly as practiced in the middle east, But i give to shits about the middles east. I think we need to stop bombing them but they need to get out of the 7th century, our weapons are too deadly for that shit any more.

You'd be like all those 19thC and early 20thC communes that made communism basically work in communities of around 100-150 or so.

Which is why i said you have each individual cohort taking care of it own, not the cohort 2 states over. that a problem of all federal systems. but poly governmental aspects are more newtonian the buercratic and legislative.

They thought it would just scale as it was too.

Non sequitor, to totally different things. Poly will have mores sure but not laws, and it doesn't need to govern past making sure bad apples are rooted out, communism from a societal stand point is way more complex. it has way more moving parts. Also comunism assumes all good actors from top to bottom. Poly doesn't.

Nothing "proved" at the small level can be assumed to work at the large level.

I am not assuming, in fact i am arguing for the population writ large to go poly but for it to subdivide at there leisure and then tend there own field & flock. while send messenger to other town to intel.

It's why we didn't need laws back in our little tribal villages. Just kinda social consensus on what was allowable and what wasn't.

again i am not asking for a governmental shift above and beyond chaning marriage laws (which helps every one).

When we scaled, that just didn't work anymore. We needed laws, then enforcement mechanisms to make them stick, then rights to protect us from the enforcement mechanisms, then.... and so on.

and tribal villages have always had those. but this isn't a governmental shift. This would/is be purely social

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

that is some hyperbole, yeah maybe poly as practiced in the middle east, But i give to shits about the middles east. I think we need to stop bombing them but they need to get out of the 7th century, our weapons are too deadly for that shit any more.

It's not. And it's not just the middle east. Its everywhere that allowed this practice to occur, throughout human history.

The high-status males hoover up the females. Maybe not ALL of them, but ENOUGH of them that the 18-25 crowd get majorly cut out.

Then they get frustrated and angry. Lots of them. Males. In the prime of their fuckwit period. Open to all kinds of strange ideas. Aggresive. Testosterone Fueled. Ripe for a guy in a big hat to tell them "This is the way out of your predicament. Froge your ploughshares into swords and follow me. I'll vene let you rape and pillage a little on the way...."

Jihad !

Non sequitor, to totally different things. Poly will have mores sure but not laws, and it doesn't need to govern past making sure bad apples are rooted out, communism from a societal stand point is way more complex. it has way more moving parts. Also comunism assumes all good actors from top to bottom. Poly doesn't.

Communism doesn't. You have the gulags for the "bad apples".

I am not assuming, in fact i am arguing for the population writ large to go poly but for it to subdivide at there leisure and then tend there own field & flock. while send messenger to other town to intel.

Oh yeah, because there wouldn't be an information integration problem where all 300m people need to know the histories of all 300m people in order to make informed choices.

You can't police big societies this way. There is not enough room on the jail wall for all the "Hawk Wanted: $100 reward" posters.

again i am not asking for a governmental shift above and beyond chaning marriage laws (which helps every one).

Not this way. Changing them this way would increasingly cut the young males out.

and tribal villages have always had those. but this isn't a governmental shift. This would/is be purely social

And the bigger the community of Poly is... The less the social mechanisms would function. You'd either destroy the community, or move the "shaming" mechanism into the "legal" mechanism.

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because you haven't show that your gut feeling is either widely shared OR likely to fade in the face of knowledge.

How would you have responded to a man saying "Legalising homosexuality will never work, my guts against it" in the 50's ?

Was he right ?

If your point is...

Women are all guts, and by their guts society is ordered.

Then you are shit out of luck. As womens geneticly programmed guts are going to kinda like a polygamous society. They'll be getting access to the best genes that way.

If you are relying on womans genetically set gut to save you on polygamy, you're going to get let down big time.

Their guts don't care. Just like they didn't on homosexuality. That improved their genes chance too (less chance of hubby'ing a terrible genetic match). Polygamy would do the same.

If something stops it then it will be rational argument... Not female guts.

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

He's right on the "polygamy can't scale to a society level" though. Shaming don't work well in big groups. You need laws there. Especially around sex,

I think this is the differnce on our world views of the subject.

You look at the house i am talking about and say hey its log house it could get termites.

I say the log house is just flashy panneling and what hold up the house is the brick an mortar under the log paneling. as long as most of the bricks do whats best for them and the rest of the house (which are the same thing) remain whole then the house will remains stable. So you get rid of some of the abstraction as long as each cohort of poly people excommunicate the bad apples the society will do fine. The bad apples will find few place to go as the shenaigans are exposed and they removed and the balloon goes up. even if other groups aren't warned they will still eventually excommunicate the offending party. Society remains stable, the bad actors either behave or find fewer places that will take the risk of accepting them.

each 150 person cohort guards its own and the rest of society takes care of it self.

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I think this is the differnce on our world views of the subject. You look at the house i am talking about and say hey its log house it could get termites.

Well, if it's built of logs then, yeah.

I say the log house is just flashy panneling and what hold up the house is the brick an mortar under the log paneling. as long as most of the bricks do whats best for them and the rest of the house (which are the same thing) remain whole then the house will remains stable.

Buit it could still get termites, though.

So you get rid of some of the abstraction as long as each cohort of poly people excommunicate the bad apples the society will do fine. The bad apples will find few place to go as the shenaigans are exposed and they removed and the balloon goes up. even if other groups aren't warned they will still eventually excommunicate the offending party.

Yeah. Because that system works so well at a society level with rape. Those guys eventually get shamed enough and stop.

So do the murderers and thieves. Shaming works.

Society remains stable, the bad actors either behave or find fewer places that will take the risk of accepting them.

I agree. A rapist couldn't just move from group to group in a population of 300 million. Eventually every one of those 300 million people would know him by sight and avoid him.

each 150 person cohort guards its own and the rest of society takes care of it self.

Agreed. No-one ever moved out of that cohort and took advantage of another cohort. Played the "hawk" game amongst the "doves". People just can't figure out a simple move like that. Shaming works... Because all 300 million people know the names of all the "bad eggs" in the 300 million and avoid them.

I haven't even introduced the "hordes of young horny men with no women" argument yet. I guess shaming will keep them from joining a Jihad or other "Crazy Movement" that promises them access to women.

It's not as though "Kill the guys with all the wives and take their wives as your own" would occur to anyone as a valid strategy. Even if they did, it's not as if they'd find a sex starved 18-25 cohort of aggresive men with poor impulse control just lying around with time on their hands and a burning desire to get laid, right ?

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Buit it could still get termites, though.

One easily replaceable part of the house which is for show and not structurally relevant. the core remains sound

Yeah. Because that system works so well at a society level with rape. Those guys eventually get shamed enough and stop. So do the murderers and thieves. Shaming works.

This more like a prison island.

also to consider a bad actor in poly = to rape/murder really isn't he same thing at all.

Also people who in poly are pretty rare. Most of the cheating that take place in mono is due to a need on one or both parties for sexual variety, take that away and most cheating goes away too. You will still have some petty jockying between some secondaries and primaries, but that almost never works out well for the secondary.

I agree. A rapist couldn't just move from group to group in a population of 300 million. Eventually every one of those 300 million people would know him by sight and avoid him.

Really not the same thing, also if one person in each hort come in to contact with a bad actor the put up the balloon for the other 150 members then it would take long for the bad actor to have to move.

I haven't even introduced the "hordes of young horny men with no women" argument yet. I guess shaming will keep them from joining a Jihad or other "Crazy Movement" that promises them access to women.

Birth control and decent sex ed nuff said and it wont be shamming that does it it will be free and easy access to sex.

It's not as though "Kill the guys with all the wives and take their wives as your own" would occur to anyone as a valid strategy.

I don't where you live or what time capsul you stepped out of, but that shit really doesn't happen any more especially not in the west.

Even if they did, it's not as if they'd find a sex starved 18-25 cohort of aggresive men with poor impulse control just lying around with time on their hands and a burning desire to get laid, right ?

Sex would be easier to get than it is now. About 25% - 50% of the people having problems now would still be having problems because lack social skills, terrible personality, can't over come appearance with charm.

Also orgies would be pretty common, if you can't get laid at an orgy you are beyond my help.

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

also to consider a bad actor in poly = to rape/murder really isn't he same thing at all.

I was just illustrating the hawks/dove game in another area.

Also people who in poly are pretty rare.

Exactly. You thinkthat those rare people act a certain way... and that "the rest of the people" would act the same way... No... The reason they are so rare, is that so few people can act this way.

Widen the demographics of poly... and those rare qualities you currently have will be diluted to the level of the general population. When that happens Poly as it works now will not work.

Really not the same thing, also if one person in each hort come in to contact with a bad actor the put up the balloon for the other 150 members then it would take long for the bad actor to have to move.

Yeah, but it don't matter... Hawks can be sneaky... Maybe he can get 6 months or 12 months of fun out of being a hawk in your cohort. Then move to the next.

Hawks will come to prey on the doves.

They always do.

Birth control and decent sex ed nuff said and it wont be shamming that does it it will be free and easy access to sex.

Why would women want to mate with very low status men... When they have unrestricted access to the high ststus men, ecause those high status men are not monopolised anymore ?

Polygamous societies lead to women flocking to the higher status men, and leaving the lower status men in the dust.

The lower status men (young and aggressive usually) get pissed off.

Jihad !

I don't where you live or what time capsul you stepped out of, but that shit really doesn't happen any more especially not in the west.

At least partially because the west went Mono.

But also because the west used laws as it's society enforcement mechanism for that, and not shaming.

If we went back to Poly and shaming... Society would regress to the state I outlined.

I am positing that one of the reasons "the west" don't do that anymore is that we make sure all those young guys get a chance to get laid. Anti-Polygamy laws are part of that structure.

You can't just pull a few beams out of the cathedral roof and say "But it always stayed up in the past, so this won't be any different. It's still a roof. Roofs stay up by some means. These beams have nothing to do with roof staying up. Pyulling a few big ones out won't harm anybody".

Also orgies would be pretty common, if you can't get laid at an orgy you are beyond my help.

No. No they wouldn't be.

Most people are not like the Poly community. Allowing them to be polygamous would not make them more like the current poly community in attitude and emotional control.

They'd stay the same dumbfuck humans the mono community is now.

Just like the self-selected tiny communes. When you let the dumbfucks try and do communism they don't turn into those clever, thoughtful, emotionally stable, tight-knit, tiny communities. They stay dumbfucks. Now dumbfucks working within a communist system.

Turns out Liberal Democracy is more stable for Dumbfucks than Communism (despite the successes of the tiny communities)

History shows us that Mono is more stable for Dumbfucks than Poly (despite the successes of the tiny communities)

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points0 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I don't see why RP is against poly. It seems like an insecurity thing, this concern their girlfriends will do better than them but they won't get much pussy. If that's really what they're worried about then they need to up their game surely?

I don't think poly is for everyone and I don't think monogamy will die either but I do think poly will become a lot more mainstream within the next 50 years for sure because a lot of people are more suited to poly and the current system of expecting everyone to be monogamous just creates shitloads of affairs. However there are some people who just will never be comfortable with poly and will want an exclusive partner, that's cool too, and the mainstream acceptance of poly helps them because if a woman is specifically looking for a monogamous relationship at that point she's more likely to actually want exclusivity. Whereas now it's just a big mess.

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

It seems like an insecurity thing, this concern their girlfriends will do better than them but they won't get much pussy. If that's really what they're worried about then they need to up their game surely?

Well, their insecurity is actually fairly well-founded, IME.

I spent over a decade in "alt-sex" communities (open relationship folks, swingers, poly, and their ilk). Mostly in the swinger community (though there is a lot of variation within that community).

And nowhere was the "80/20" rule more apparent than in that community. The top 20% of the guys were getting the lion's share of the action.

Couples would mitigate for this in one of two ways (generally) - 1) institute a rule that either both play or no one plays, or 2) someone (usually the woman) takes one for the team. And, usually, after operating for a certain amount of time with rule #2, the ~~woman would insist on~~ couple would wind up going with rule #1.

For those couples who either didn't know about this dynamic or chose to engage in the free-for-all regardless, the majority of the women slept with a minority of the men. A small minority of the men.

It was crazy difficult to get women who had been around a while to settle for anything but the very best men (if they could even be found), even if their objective SMV was significantly lower, and even if their SO's objective SMV was significantly lower.

The number one complaint I heard from women? "Why aren't there any attractive guys in the swinger community?"

And the swinger circles we ran in weren't the stereotypical suburban swingers portrayed in the media (think of the type seen frequently attending "sex clubs" or something). Our circles were national/international in scope and represented, essentially, the creme de la creme. You couldn't just walk into our community - you had to know someone and be invited in. Especially when it came to the men (the community was much more lenient when it came to the women). The guys were almost all, to a man, in good shape and well put together. Some were probably 1% in terms of physical fitness. The only one's who weren't were usually either incredibly wealthy (and we all know that wealth is attractive, as is the ability to bankroll some mind-bending bacchanalia) or had uber-hot SOs (and most had both). Or they had a monster cock or some other unique feature.

And even with all of that, most couples rarely engaged in actual extracurricular sex. Mostly due to the female dissatisfaction with the available men (who, again, were all above-average compared to the general population).

Hell, I was in peak condition by the end of my tenure (13% body fat, 30 pounds of extra muscle, in addition to being 6'3" and having relatively good facial structures) and I couldn't get laid to save my life (granted, I had some standards, and the whole dynamic fucked with my head such that I was almost unable to spit game at that point, which put the nails in my sex coffin). Of course, my wife and I had had enough of "taking one for the team" at that point and were going the free-for-all route (she rarely wanted to have sex with anyone else anyway), so I couldn't ride her coattails.

Anyway, a long-winded response, but...

TL;DR - the level of game that a man needs to have to compete toe-to-toe with a woman in a sexual free-for-all is ridiculously high. Almost out of reach for the average Joe, IMO.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I feel like you may be missing my point (or maybe I missed communicating my point, lol).

I think it boils down to the famous "80/20" rule (something I hadn't really conceptualized until I found RP, but I think it fits if it's not taken too literally).

Once both men and women enter the sexual free-for-all, you're going to see that dynamic at play, and men are going to feel like they are losing out. Unless a man can structure things such that he is always in the top 20% (or whatever), he may or may not have the chance to fuck. I think this is the same complaint a lot of guys are making about the college "hookup" scene.

If you are physically fit, wealthy, have good game, and all that other good shit, out in the real world, you will be above your competition

Of course. But "out in the real world", there is no sexual free-for-all. Everyone is playing a very different game than the standard "poly" game. A very different game that a guy who has what you specify can do pretty well playing.

But, for example, most poly's I know have a primary partner and then secondary partners. Few are just "spinning plates" (which is not what most poly's seem to be interested in). They have their BB side accounted for, and are now just looking to get whatever AFs happen to appeal to them (same goes for guys, incidentally - guys often enjoy having their "BB" needs fulfilled as well, IME). That changes the dynamic drastically.

And even if you're interested in just "plate spinning" (and are willing to forego female companionship - something a lot of guys, like myself, actually enjoy when done right), your pool likewise shrinks to just those women who are willing to be AF plates without the safety/security/stability/comfort of having BB in their life.

Most "open"/poly women I knew where only willing to be "plates" because they already had their BB (often in the form of a AF/BB, by the way - "cucking" wasn't much of a thing) locked in. When they are looking exclusively for sex and not a lot else, the 80/20 rule came roaring out of the shadows.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I get what you're saying here but I think it only restricts you from certain poly dynamics. If you want a relationship where you're one guy and you have two or more exclusive girlfriends this will obviously be pretty difficult to attain.

First off I think spinning plates would actually be easier. I'm sure you know poly relationships can either be exclusive or non-exclusive, and many who are into poly go for the non-exclusive route. In this case there will be plenty of women who already have their BB and will just be after lots of AF. This bodes perfectly for plate spinning, and if poly is mainstream you get a lot more women up for this. They won't be concerned about finding BB and will be out looking for AF even after they're in a relationship. This perfection for those who want to spin plates.

But as for finding an actual relationship there is something else you haven't accounted for - not everyone will want polyamory in the first place. If you want an emotional connection and a female companion there will be plenty out there who really will only want monogamy. And as I mentioned in a comment further up, if poly is mainstream I think there will be a massive reduction in cheating. It could still happen during a relationship if she becomes unhappy of course, but generally speaking if you have an option between mono and poly and specifically choose mono it's because you want mono. So I think monogamous relationships will be more stable if polyamory is mainstream, and finding such a relationship would still be easy because I think plenty of women out there do want monogamy. If anything I can imagine those monogamy wanting women fighting for the best men because most of the men will be trying to get involved in some kind of poly dynamic. This would obviously switch up the SMP quite significantly.

That's my view anyway.

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

In this case there will be plenty of women who already have their BB and will just be after lots of AF. This bodes perfectly for plate spinning, and if poly is mainstream you get a lot more women up for this. They won't be concerned about finding BB and will be out looking for AF even after they're in a relationship. This perfection for those who want to spin plates.

This is kind of what my experience entailed. The women were only interested in finding AFs. The problem with this was that most of the women were chasing after the same top 20% (or whatever) AFs, if they could be bothered to chase at all. Didn't matter if the field of "competitors" might actually be comprised of the top 20% of guys from the general population - they all just adjusted their sights accordingly, sometimes to an extent that they became totally unrealistic (and, therefore, were content to just go home with their "lower SMV" AF/BB, or to just focus on fucking other women, which was also a very common "plan-B" practice). Which meant that you really had to stand out if you actually wanted to spin a plate.

So I think monogamous relationships will be more stable if polyamory is mainstream, and finding such a relationship would still be easy because I think plenty of women out there do want monogamy.

I would say that a certain type of "polyamory" is already mainstream - it's the hookup culture.

It's actually kind of funny - I got into a debate with a female friend of mine regarding my "polyamorous" lifestyle once. She (like has been expressed many times here and elsewhere) couldn't figure out the attraction. She seemed to think it was "disgusting", too, though she didn't use that term.

"Aren't you afraid of catching diseases? Aren't the people you are hooking up with trashy and "slutty"? Isn't the whole thing kind of "degrading" (I can't think of her words, but it was that sort of view)?" and so on with her logic…

Except, as I pointed out, she held none of that disdain for all her single friends who were currently out there sleeping around and generally "slutting it up" (I use "slutting it up" as a colloquialism and not as a moral judgement). Because they were doing the exact same thing with the exact same kinds of people, but she didn't feel about them their activities the way she felt about mine.

And she couldn't answer that. She just said it "felt different" when it came to me. What was normal sexual behavior for single people became somehow aberrant and "disgusting" once someone was in a relationship.

So, yes, it could be more "mainstream" for people already in committed relationships, but it's pretty well accepted for everyone else.

If anything I can imagine those monogamy wanting women fighting for the best men because most of the men will be trying to get involved in some kind of poly dynamic.

Except that, given what I think I saw with the 80/20 rule, there are still going to be a lot of men who are going to feel left out of the sex game, so finding a monogamous partner may not be all that hard. I mean, that's kind of how it works today. The truly top quality guys can, if they so choose, remain "polyamorous" (i.e., spin plates, or have multiple sex partners even in a committed relationship), but there are a lot of still-high-quality-but-not-top-quality guys who won't have that as a choice, and they will be eager for monogamy.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The problem with this was that most of the women were chasing after the same top 20% (or whatever) AFs, if they could be bothered to chase at all.

But again you are speaking from the POV of what sounds like a Freemasons level exclusive society where only top-tier men were even allowed to attend in the first place. That's not what the real world is. If poly suddenly became normal tomorrow every man wouldn't suddenly become James Bond. Your competition would be the same and, much like now, it'd be up to you to keep your SMV high.

So, yes, it could be more "mainstream" for people already in committed relationships, but it's pretty well accepted for everyone else.

Of course, and your interaction with your friend is amusing, but the argument I hear most people come back with on that point is "but a relationship should be [describes monogamy]." When pressed for why they still can't provide a real answer beyond feels and I'm guessing a large helping of traditionalism, not unlike TRP.

But of course we know poly and hookups are still different dynamics and society at large still holds this idea relationships must be monogamous or they're not "real." It would still take a major culture shift to change that. But I could still imagine it happening in a generation or two.

I mean, that's kind of how it works today. The truly top quality guys can, if they so choose, remain "polyamorous" (i.e., spin plates, or have multiple sex partners even in a committed relationship), but there are a lot of still-high-quality-but-not-top-quality guys who won't have that as a choice, and they will be eager for monogamy.

The major difference though would be that even in relationships it would be widely acceptable to keep fucking around. Of course you've already said only the top men would benefit from that. But is that really any different from now? In hookup culture you don't get desirable women fucking undesirable men so I wouldn't expect that to start happening in poly anyway. Nah, you'd still have to work on yourself and keep your value high to get all the pussy going around, just as you have to right now. The only difference would be that once you are high value, there's a lot more pussy for you to choose from.

[–]nomdplumeFormer Alpha2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

But of course we know poly and hookups are still different dynamics and society at large still holds this idea relationships must be monogamous or they're not "real." It would still take a major culture shift to change that. But I could still imagine it happening in a generation or two.

I just don't know about this.

For one, guys are already bitching about women having it easier/getting more sex/having more opportunities for sex when it comes to the "casual scene." The strategy many men therefore adopt is to be seen as really great relationship material and hope for to have enough "alpha" to keep their partners sexual interest. I don't know that they are going to willingly give that up for the chance at some strange, especially while their partners will be more reliably actually getting some strange (or just not fucking at all). In a straight-up sexual free-for-all, women definitely will outperform their partners (on average), and their partners will have to be okay with that.

I mean, that's kind of the angle I had to go. I mean, I have always had at least halfway-decent genetics, solid social skills, can make people laugh, and can hold my own in almost any conversation (especially conversations that women tend to be interested in, such as art, literature, and music). For a time there I was about as ripped as I could ever get naturally, had a professional white collar career, and was highly regarded in my community for my "wisdom" (don't know a better word). And it still took/takes a crazy level of "game" to get laid. Even by my wife, lol.

Also, the whole nature of jealousy could easily bring the utopia down. I mean, I usually recommend against any couple pursuing a non-sexually exclusive relationship, because most people's hard-wired jealousy is just too difficult to overcome. I think my ability to deal with it is more due to my abnormal wiring rather than to some enlightened state that I achieved (and no, "abnormal wiring" /= "wired for cuckolding", at all). I only recommend even trying it for people who seem similarly wired, and I still warn them to be ready to GTFO immediately if they start feeling weirdness.

Obviously, it's all so hypothetical that it is hard to ascertain what would happen. But I'm not nearly as optimistic as guys like you, lol… :)

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The strategy many men therefore adopt is to be seen as really great relationship material and hope for to have enough "alpha" to keep their partners sexual interest.

Basically most men are beta. That's the whole assertion of RP no? That most men are "plugged in"?

It seems obvious to me that anyone with true confidence in RP theory would not fear this society because they'd know how to play it to their advantage. Instead of worrying about not being the top 20% they'd make themselves part of that top 20%.

I have always had at least halfway-decent genetics, solid social skills, can make people laugh, and can hold my own in almost any conversation (especially conversations that women tend to be interested in, such as art, literature, and music). For a time there I was about as ripped as I could ever get naturally, had a professional white collar career, and was highly regarded in my community for my "wisdom" (don't know a better word). And it still took/takes a crazy level of "game" to get laid. Even by my wife, lol.

See I don't get this. Perhaps it's a geographical or generational thing. I can get laid easily without even really trying. No joke I have even female customers for my business hitting on me. All I have to do is flirt back.

The difficult bit though is getting laid by attractive women. That's where the challenge comes in. But if I just want any pussy yeah that's fucking easy man. Practically zero effort.

Also, the whole nature of jealousy could easily bring the utopia down.

Anyone who can't get over the jealousy wasn't cut out for poly in the first place. As I said I know it ain't for everyone.

most people's hard-wired jealousy is just too difficult to overcome.

I disagree here, jealousy is generally a symptom of a problem, sometimes that problem is simply that you are only comfortable in mono relationships but many other times it's something that can be communicated and fixed.

Obviously, it's all so hypothetical that it is hard to ascertain what would happen. But I'm not nearly as optimistic as guys like you, lol… :)

Indeed. I just think I'd be the same as I am now, single but easily able to get laid from average girls, needing to take on a bigger challenge if I want to fuck a proper hot girl unless I happen to get lucky, which did happen to me once - went out with a girl who was way hotter than me for about six months, she was crazy in the head but crazy in the bed and seriously she's literally the kind of girl who I could be walking down the street with, and my friends would see and just stare in awe that I'm actually banging her. I climbed like a hundred social levels from that.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThirdEyeSqueegeed3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin🔪Yeetus that Feetus🔪9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThirdEyeSqueegeed3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin🔪Yeetus that Feetus🔪3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]adrixshadowIndigo Pill(aka dark and evil occult pill)2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThirdEyeSqueegeed7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA[S] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PostNationalismex-PUA[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kick6Red Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]kick6Red Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]kick6Red Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]kick6Red Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]wazzup987Blue pill, you can beat me black & blue for it later[🍰] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agree/Disagree: WAW (Walk Away Wife) is the logical endgame for most marriages

Comments

If it doesn't Bad things happen.

Bad things happen.

Title	Agree/Disagree: WAW (Walk Away Wife) is the logical endgame for most marriages
Author	PostNationalism
Upvotes	1
Comments	125
Date	May 20, 2015 7:12 AM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/36li3r/agreedisagree_waw_walk_away_wife_is_the_logical/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/agreedisagree-waw-walk-away-wife-is-the-logical.282058 https://theredarchive.com/post/282058