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

Do redpillers think that a majority of heterosexual sex happens between most women but only a small minority of men?

[deleted]

December 4, 2014
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 Do redpillers think that a majority of heterosexual sex happens between most women but only a small minority of men?
Author

[deleted]

Upvotes 5
Comments 202
Date December 4, 2014 6:23 AM UTC
(11 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2o8kk9/do_redpillers_think_that_a_majority_of/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/do-redpillers-think-that-a-majority-of.284196
https://theredarchive.com/post/284196

Comments

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Hard to say. I've seen 80/20 described several different ways, including 20% of men have 80% of the sex, 20% of men have 80% of the girls, 20% of men have 80% of the options (this sounds most accurate to me), etc.

[–]SirNemesistitties not tithe6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I'd say the 80% of the options is the most accurate.

Also, not sure how applicable the 80/20 rule is after the late teens and early 20s.

[–]We_Are_LegionAutumn Red7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

A small minority of the men are doing the great majority of the raping.

Dunno if its relevant or this source. Just heard this fact in passing and found it interesting.

[–]AzzmoRed5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

source

On college campuses, repeat predators account for 9 out of every 10 rapes.

I wish this were more widely talked about. It's incredibly insulting and demeaning for boys and men to be told they need to get over their inner urges to rape when they have no such urges.

[–]FollowThisAdvice7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

The thing is, all that guy's male friends will know he is sketchy and will never call him out.

You may not be a rapist (or maybe you are, I dont know you), but you sure as hell probably enable one.

[–]cuervojones8511 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

How about cases when the friend didn't know a thing about the other's rape tendencies? People can be really good at wearing masks for one another, you can blame a friend for enabling another guy's/girl's rape when said friend looked like a completely sane person.

[–]FollowThisAdvice-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

An interesting hypothetical, but in practice every guy knows which of his friends get a bit handsy, take advantage of drunk girls, demeans women a lot etc.

Most rapists dont think of themselves as rapists. They arent ashamed of their actions because they dont think of them as wrong. Some will go so far as to actively boast to their friends about fucking dumb drunk bitches who are passed out at a party.

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

[deleted]

[–]FollowThisAdvice0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

LEgally maybe not, but ethically, I'm not going to be friends with someone who goes near the gray area, whether or not they actually can be proven to have crossed the line.

There are no absolutes.

There are, however, strong risk factors.

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Next time I see one, I'll be sure to chant "rapist no raping", just for you.

[–]sleuthoftradesPurple Pill Man5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Bateman's Principle says men have greater reproductive variance. Studies comparing Y Chromosome Adam to Mitochondrial Eve imply that Mitochondrial Eve lived a longer time ago, implying more women than men did reproduce (one article put the numbers at 40% vs 80%). Now we could go back and forth and argue this is only about reproduction and not sex, but I think that is a moot point. Reproduction and sex are related.

Combine this with the modern day "oversaturation of the dick market" and you have a situation where [straight/bi] women (and gay men) have easier access to sex.

[–]zlex0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

the chromosome study is scientifically agnostic on the topic of reproduction rates.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (43 children) | Copy Link

Depends on what kind of sex.

Casual sex...definitely yes.

A majority of guys can't and won't have casual sex ever. (Perhaps not exactly 80%)

The majority of women can have casual sex if they want to. Some do, some don't, some try it just once or twice, but overall I'd say yes, casual sex happens between a relatively small number of men and whatever number of women.

Comparing numbers of sex partners could work, too.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

I would guess that at least half of men at least have one casual sexual encounter.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

I don't know if it is half of all men. But I know far more men than women who never had casual sex. I should know...desperately trying to find a unicorn here.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 11 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

You're 34, and you're trying to find someone who has never had casual sex... Once?

[–]Archwinger[🍰] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You'd be surprised. There are still some people out there who actually think sex is special, not just some recreational activity. If for no other reason, the risk of pregnancy and STD makes some people pause rather than just fucking for sheer fun.

That attractive trait is getting less and less common, however, as society works damn hard to shame sexually conservative people and insist that recreational sex is a necessary milestone. And that people who never did that are deprived, brainwashed by evil conservative society, etc.

My little girl is 3. By the time she's 18 and starting college, the hook up culture will be even more prevalent. Despite my best efforts, my little girl will probably be a slut. Because that will be the majority of people in another 15 years. People like me will be the ones that get shamed for daring to try to repress my child's sexual freedom and keep her from this oh so important developmental stage.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Having a ONS once and considering sex to be special and not a recreational activity are not mutually exclusive.

[–]Archwinger[🍰] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's not something you and I can ever reach agreement on. We're just wired differently when it comes to sex.

It's clear as day to me - so clear that I can't begin to imagine how anybody could ever see it another way - that people who think properly about sex would absolutely never have a recreational ONS. Not even once.

It's equally clear to you that trying out casual sex once or twice to see doesn't affect or mean anything or define someone's attitude toward sex.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agree.

Agree.

Nope.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

That was worded poorly. Make it "I am dreaming of finding a unicorn". Not really trying to find one. I have learned my lesson after watching "The last unicorn" as a kid, loving it and subsequently looking at every plowhorse closely. None of them checked out.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

A unicorn won't want to be with a plow horse. And the plow horse wouldn't be able to see the unicorn even if it was right in front of it.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, because horses can't see what's in front of them or something like that.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They've got blinders on.

This metaphor is surprisingly good.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Horses wear blinders.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I read your earlier comment :P

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

Sorry, realized I replied to you twice. I deleted!

[–]yaseedog will hunt0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

actually horses can only see what's right in front of them because they have...blinders on? this is a weird analogy

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I was kidding, they have a 270° eyesight.

Though IIRC there is some animal that has exactly that problem because its eyes are on the side of the head.

[–]yaseedog will hunt0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I was kidding too but I'm not very funny :(

Hammerhead shark maybe?

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

"Can you really see her? Do you know what she is?" "If you had been waiting to see a unicorn, as long as I have..."

:)

If at least harpies were as easy to spot as in the movie...

Ok, we are getting really offtopic now unfortunately...

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

You should read the book. It's just as good.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

And even the German dub of The Last Unicorn was awesome because Christopher Lee voiced King Haggard for us, too!

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

Absolutely, bless him! I love that movie and it's funny how the loss of innocence is the main theme throughout. Quite fitting.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

To be fair, I think unicorns are repelled by the desperation to find one, lmao.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

You know something about attracting unicorns? Could you make a separate thread? "How to find unicorns 101 by strategicatomicmoose"?

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I know plenty of "unicorns" due to my religion's subculture - sweet, pleasant, virginal, feminine girls who want to raise families. You know what happens to these girls? They marry off to virgin, religious guys their own age at about 20 years old. Bitter, jaded terpers who think they can whore around in their 20's and marry a 19 year old unicorn in their 30's are hilariously delusional, the girls I know will turn down guys for even kissing girls before them.

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

Haredim?

[–]FollowThisAdvice4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Step 1 - reject red pill and learn to be a good person.

[–]lxnarratorxlPurple Pill Man6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You think if someone gleans helpful information from TRP they are not a good person?

[–]FollowThisAdvice1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think if someone buys into TRP as a philosophy they arent a practicing good person, yes.

If you cherry pick just the generic self-improvement advice and ignore all the misogyny, historical revisionism and conservative politics then you arent TRP in any meaningful sense.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ahahaha, I don't claim to know about attracting unicorns, but there are some tells that obviously would be unicorn repellent. Sometimes, stressing over it just makes things worse.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I think they'd be repelled by the hypocrisy and the lack of shared values.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Where is the hypocrisy and lack of shared values?

[–]GridReXXit be like that0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

See what /u/witzzzer said.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I read it and they made the wrong assumption that all red pillers whore around.

[–]GridReXXit be like that1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

To be fair, their assumption is a fair assumption. Particularly when most of TRP front page and even in PPD is "male sexuality is amoral..." and "ewww girl slooot!"

We aren't going to dig around for the minority of guys on TRP who don't share this opinion.

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

That is fair. I am not complaining.

I think you would be surprised how many guys are reading trp with the goal of finding a longterm-relationship.

"ewww girl slooot!"

Yeah, that's exactly them terpers who are looking for "the one" and don't intend to spin plates.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I imagine like 90% of men have casual sex........

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You can't be serious...

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

myself and all my friends do.....

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

More power to you and your friends.

And when you look at men who are not your friends? Still true?

[–]an_absolute_roseRed Pill Boy4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

My cousin can pull out his phone text any of the 10-20 girls he's met in the last week and get laid within the hour. He stopped, but I don't know very many men who have or ever will have the experiences he's had.

I'd say 30% (and potentially higher) of the male population will have sex less than once in their lifetime. The next 30% will have less than 5 partners. The next 30% will have 10-20 partners. That last 10% is pulling new women everyday... If they want to. Guys like Gene Simmons, who claims to have slept with over 5000 women, are absolutely having more sex than a majority of men even when you count up their collective notches.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

You reckon almost 1/3 of adult men are virgins!? 80% of men marry, even if the 20% of lifetime bachelors are all ugly trolls who never have sex, that'd still not be 30%. I doubt the number of male virgins over 30 exceeds 10% of the male population (I'd be surprised if it even exceeds 5%). 

Men who average more than 8 sexual partners a year are an extremely tiny fringe, I'm talking 5-10%. If sex surveys are anything to go by, not even college athletes and frats average that much and a "different girl every week" is pretty much limited to rockstars.  

[–]an_absolute_roseRed Pill Boy1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Have had sex once or with one partner was my first grouping, that's also inclusive of virgins.

I'd like to see your sources.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Sources for which claims?

[–]an_absolute_roseRed Pill Boy1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Your statistics, I'm curious most about the 80% of men are married though.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

80% of men have been married by age 44.

[–]RobotPartsCorp2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Here are some actual numbers

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

The 80/20 theory is so hilariously bullshit. According to the CDC, there are only slightly more male virgins than female virgins under the age of 24, and it evens out after that.

Their "theory" is wishful thinking at best, delusion at worst.

[–]We_Are_LegionAutumn Red5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

Oh yes, sex surveys. Hard to refute that evidence.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago* (19 children) | Copy Link

Yes, people BS about partner counts but assuming men tend to lie up and never down, if the male median is 6, the female median can't be much higher than that. I've heard TRPers argue that your average woman has over 50 sex partners and gangbangs/threesomes (wtf?); that's just silly. Also, while people lie about notch count, I see very little incentive for women in their 20s to lie about virginity. Perhaps, there's slightly more male virgins than reported but I highly doubt it's more than 10-15% of the 25+ male population -- unless the U.S. is radically different from my country.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Yes, people BS about partner counts but assuming men tend to lie up and never down, if the male median is 6, the female median can't be much higher than that.

Medians can be severely skewed if the distribution is off. Just to illustrate: imagine a group of 10 men and 10 women. All women sleep with 2 of these men, 8 of the women each sleep with a different one from the remaining 8. So, while the median partner count for the male group would be 1, the median for the women is 3.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Ja, but when we look at averages we get ridiculous numbers like the male average is 20, the female average is 8. That's obviously crap and it's sometimes argued that sex workers skew the numbers. 

The female median is 3/4, iirc. Men actually lie more than women, they exaggerate their numbers to a higher degree than women understate theirs. Given that, the male and female medians are unlikely to be off enough for 80/20 to hold true. What's consistently found in studies done on sociosexuality, sexual activity, etc is that there's always 15-25% of the population, in both sexes, that is promiscuous/unrestricted. IMO, what's most likely is the sluts/studs (the 20%) are mostly sleeping with each other and in environments like college campuses that could well be 80% of the sex. Players will dip into the pool of non-slutty girls every now and again. There are plenty of girls who'd have been burned by a cad once or twice, or who've tried casual but didn't like it and never did it again (these are much more common than girls who consistently have casual sex) so I find it absurd to believe that 80% of women are consistently being recycled among 20% of men. 

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

 Players will dip into the pool of non-slutty girls every now and again. There are plenty of girls who'd have been burned by a cad once or twice, or who've tried casual but didn't like it and never did it again (these are much more common than girls who consistently have casual sex)

This is exactly it! Players will dip into the pool of non-slutty girls every now and then. Playerettes into the pool of non-slutty boys? Faaaar less.

This alone accounts for much of the discrepancy when we look at how many men and women have had casual sex.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Right, but the TRP stance is that the majority of girls are out slutting it up with 20% of guys, while 80% of guys are incels. That's BS.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

This thread alone shows that it's not the trp stance that 80% of guys are incels.

80/20 is indeed not clearly defined and is discussed a lot. But no one is saying that 80% of guys are incels.

Oh and:

Right, but the TRP stance is that the majority of girls are out slutting it up with 20% of guys

People forget that the "player dips into the pool of non slutty girls" is part of this.

I don't know how many girls have at least one experience like this. Perhaps not 80% but I think a lot of them have. Most women I know do.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Players will dip into the pool of non-slutty girls every now and again. There are plenty of girls who'd have been burned by a cad once or twice, or who've tried casual but didn't like it and never did it again (these are much more common than girls who consistently have casual sex)


I don't know how many girls have at least one experience like this. Perhaps not 80% but I think a lot of them have. Most women I know do.


This is pretty much it. It's not as if all these women were exclusive with 20% of the guys and wouldn't give the remaining 80% the time of the day until they crash into the wall (though there are a bunch of redpillers who would argue exactly that because it's easier to justify one's own relative romancelessness if one assumes that all women are part of someone's harem), but it's safe to assume that most women who have at least some experiences with casual sex/ONS have them with guys who are a lot more likely to have had them with other women as well. The question is rather how many women actually tried it (I don't think it's 80%).

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

People forget that the "player dips into the pool of non slutty girls" is part of this. 

Yes, but this doesn't happen consistently enough for it to create the type of huge disparity that TRPers purport exists. You have guys who "get lucky" once a blue moon too, though I'd argue this isn't as common as girls getting played. All in all, you might have a slightly higher percentage of girls who've had casual sex, but I'd argue it's not a significant disparity by any means. 

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Don't forget that you don't need huge numbers to get that disparity pretty quickly. The following scenario (the numbers are purely hypothetical, but they serve best to illustrate what it's about):

  • the average young man out of a group has had two relationships (long-term) until the age of 20. Nothing else.
  • the average young woman out of a group has had two relationships (long-term) until the age of 20 (with one of the average guys), and has had an ONS once/has had an STR with an alpha/has been led on by a cad who was spinning her as a plate --> boom, the median is 150% of that of the average guy.

Of course the 80:20 rule (as in "an alpha has four women at his disposal while three are left in the dust") is bullshit, but the underlying idea has its merits (see my comment above).

[–][deleted] 3 points3 points3 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Er, those comments weren't hyperbole. I think it was a RPW who said men were being delusional if they believed any college-educated woman has had less than 50 men. I don't think it was in a sacred male space either, iirc it was here on ppd.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

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

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

I don't believe in any cdc study about sex and virginity and partner count. Stupid surveys and polls. Pics or it didn't happen.

[–]OfSpock1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Pics of people not having one night stands?

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

[permanently deleted]

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

[permanently deleted]

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

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

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

[permanently deleted]

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

[permanently deleted]

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

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[removed]

[–]ExpendableOneNeither0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Prostitution would be the "equalizer", I think, in this situation(the older men get, the more likely they are to be able to afford and seek out a sex workers. Doesn't mean that sex/relationships just become more available to more men as they get older). In any case, being a virgin isn't really the only issue. Overall opportunities available, social expectations(male virgins would have a harder time, simply because experience/assertiveness is far more expected of men than it is for women, which creates a circular reasoning problem) and also reasons for staying a virgin(by choice or by lack of opportunity), would be a lot more significant aspects of this disparity.

[–]LeGrandDiableBlancParochial Altruist4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In a deregulated sexual marketplace, a majority of men will be able to have sex, even casual sex, once in a while, whereas a small elite minority of men will be able to have sex almost at will. Much like how in a deregulated financial market, most people can find a job, but a majority of people struggle week to week to pay the bills while a small minority are multi-millionares. In terms of sex, the difference would be maybe 1-6 average lifetime sexual partners for a majority of men, but with the elite having as many as 50+.

Almost every women without extenuating circumstances can obtain casual sex from a guy more physically attractive than herself. The result is most women trying to (and succeeding at) hooking up with more attractive men then themselves (hypergamy). As a consequence, the concentration of casual sex is heavily skewed towards elite men, whereas is more evenly distributed amongst women.

[–]relationshipdownvotethe blue pill is a suppository1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I think there are social factors at play that skew it slightly, but if we were in our natural state, yes I believe our mating strategy would work similar to our closest ancestors, chimpanzees, where a few males have most of the sex with pretty much all the females. So if we cast aside the conservative social factors, as many young western men and women have, we will continue to act more and more towards this natural state.

[–]CulturalMarxistCultder blaue Planet-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Why not like bonobos?

[–]relationshipdownvotethe blue pill is a suppository0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Because we are closer relatives to chimpanzees. As much as we can tell, humans have had a social structure more like chimpanzees.

[–]CulturalMarxistCultder blaue Planet0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Bonobos are as closely related to us as chimpanzees.

[–]relationshipdownvotethe blue pill is a suppository0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Did you not see my link? Percentage wise they are very close (still slight advantage to chimp) but as far as the actual amount of data in common, chimps have a much larger lead.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Sexual dimorphism seems to suggest that humans are somewhere in between gibbons (über-monogamous) and chimpanzees (harems) in terms of inclination towards monogamy/sexual behaviour. The natural human "SMP" is unlikely to be anywhere near as brutal as the chimpanzee one.

[–]relationshipdownvotethe blue pill is a suppository0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I think you're right, I probably was overstating it in my post three above, but I definitely think we are closer to chimps than bonobos. I think TRP actually acknowledges this kind of market place exists in reality, while BP's are disgusted by it and simply deny it's existence.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I don't think BPers deny it out of disgust, I think it just doesn't jibe with their experiences and it's not as severe as TRP portrays it. As always, the truth is somewhere in between the two extremes.

[–]relationshipdownvotethe blue pill is a suppository0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don't think BPers deny it out of disgust, I think it just doesn't jibe with their experiences and it's not as severe as TRP portrays it.

Go to twox and say that women are hypergamous. Go to relationships and tell them that there isn't someone for everyone.

As always, the truth is somewhere in between the two extremes.

Is it really? or is that just a nice thing to say? Did god make human or did we evolve? Is the truth really somewhere between those two extremes?

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Go to twox and say that women are hypergamous. Go to relationships and tell them that there isn't someone for everyone.

Tell them "women are gold-digging whores" and they'll tell you you're full of shit. Tell them that educated women typically don't want to marry "down", i.e., marry men less educated than themselves, I'd wager you'd get a lot of agreement. The percentage of people who are alone for life is very, very small. How many lifelong singletons do you know over 60? That's why people say "there's someone for everyone". Obviously, there'll always be a few have-nots but they're a tiny, tiny minority and it's defeatist and silly to consider yourself doomed to be one of them. That considered, there's someone for everyone isn't completely inaccurate. If you go to r/relationships and say you're butt-ugly, lack social skills, are dirt poor and have nothing going for you, they'll probably agree that your chances are slim unless you somehow improve yourself.

As always, the truth is somewhere in between the two extremes.

Is it really? or is that just a nice thing to say? Did god make human or did we evolve? Is the truth really somewhere between those two extremes?

The evidence seems to suggest that humans aren't "hard-wired" to have the same sexual dynamics as any of the primates. You also have to account for culture and how malleable human brings are. To say that the "natural" human "SMP" would be like the chimpanzee SMP is just flat-out false.

[–]ArkiF0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Do redpillers think that a majority of heterosexual sex happens between most women but only a small minority of men?

I'm having trouble understanding the OP question.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Do most women who engage in casual sex have these relationships with the same few (attractive) men?

[–]ArkiF0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks sandman. I read the questions as "a majority of heterosexual sex happens between most women" (which is a contradiction, as sex between women is same-sex) and "only a minority of men" are having heterosexual sex (meaning most men are homosexual).

[–]winndixie0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, I do.

[–]wombatinaburrowfeminist marsupial2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This doesn't extend beyond the age when everyone else's balls drop and they get their acts together.

[–]lxnarratorxlPurple Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

true if you choose to only include men that have their acts together then you are taking about I would guess 20-30% and the ratio will change.

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

Yes. Perhaps not a small minority but something like 30% of men and 80% women.

[–]Christian_Kong80% Natural Red0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I lean red and believe this is true. This coming from college and many years of bar experience. I've never met many younger girls that can go very long without sex. It at many times starts with a bad relationship or a broken up relationship where the girl keeps the ex for a fuck buddy. Usually from there the have a period where they sleep with hot guys(or the hottest they can get). They dont really have to do anything or put any effort into getting laid so they get with the hot guys and become a "plate" and occasionally have several dudes as their plates.

Men don't have the same option as cause most girls(from average to hot) are sleeping around with the hot guys. Most of the hot guys dont mind having a warchest of girls from average to hot while those average to hot girls would rather sleep with hot guys.

When at the bar and a new barfly shows up you know which regulars she is most likely going to bang.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (118 children) | Copy Link

Most definitely it is. Men and women have different mating strategies. Men are most fullfilled with spinning plates, women are most fullfilled through serial monogamy. Women don't mind sharing one man if has high enough quality. Men do mind sharing. Women are extremely harsh when judging the opposite sex for mating quality. Men are extremely forgiving when judging the opposite sex for mating quality.

Add all these things up and you get: hot guys spinning plates with harems of 2-10 women, not hot guys jerking off in the corner or begging their SO for a bj for their birthday. Hot dudes are hot, girls want to get fucked by them, a lot... its not uncommon to fuck a girl 3-4 times in a night, every single night of the week. Sometimes the sex is so frequent it rubs my dick raw and I need to take days off so I can heal properly. Guys running the BB paradigm typically court their gf for 2-3 sexless months, then "fall in love" with all that vanilla cringeworthy sex, then they move in together and his beta nature amplifies, then she loses what little attraction she had for him and sex goes from once every few days to once a week to once a month to nothing.

Married couples have sex an average of 58 times a year, 111 times a year for married couples in their 20s... that's like 1-3 months worth of sex for proper plate spinner. A laughable amount. Even a moderate plate spinner should be averaging more than once per day, bringing us to at least 365 bangs a year for a plate spinner, vrs the high end of 111 times for a married couple and the math is clear as fucking day, they are having at least 3-4x the amount of sex with many many more women. And the would be worthy suitors these women could be shacking up with are likely sitting at home watching youporn fantasizing about how they are going to convince Shirley, the cheerleader next door, to go on a date with them while she is getting bent over doggy style by the captain of the football team.

But hey, don't listen to what I have to say... it's all just a bunch of neckbeard fetish porn writting and doesnt really happen this way. So just go back to burying your head in the dirt and pretending I don't exist.

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points19 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Most definitely it is. Men and women have different mating strategies. Men are most fullfilled with spinning plates, women are most fullfilled through serial monogamy. Women don't mind sharing one man if has high enough quality. Men do mind sharing. Women are extremely harsh when judging the opposite sex for mating quality. Men are extremely forgiving when judging the opposite sex for mating quality.

That is literally not at all how things work in the real world.

[–]CulturalMarxistCultder blaue Planet1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Where in the world are those women who totally don't mind sharing their bf/husband, especially if they think that there are a lot of other women willing to seduce him??? Not counting in cultures where polygamy is normal, I've never heard of such a thing for monogamous relationships. Ever.

[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

That is literally not at all how things work in my world.

FTFY

Look at all the beautiful rainbows! If I keep pretending the big bad wolf doesn't exist, maybe he really won't exist!

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

I thought TRP adopted the "spinning plates" thing from the women's handbook? I and many of my friends have greatly enjoyed having male plates.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

The typical female plate spinning would be collecting orbiters and stringing them along, not actually having sex with them (or only doing so once one gets "upgraded" to official boyfriend) - male plate spinning isn't exactly the same, but a gender-swapped equivalent.

[–]GridReXXit be like that0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

That's not plate spinning. That's whatever you described.

The women who like sex have "starting lineups."

Or a starting five.

Her plates. Who she calls at will if she ever feels horny.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Nah, you're equating "spinning plates" with sleeping around.

The most venerable St. Rollo Tomassi has written a pretty detailed posts about female plate spinning - basically an essay about friendzoning (without ever mentioning the term).

And that's his take on the male variety.

[–]GridReXXit be like that0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Exactly.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but that's exactly what those guys are doing. Sticking their dicks in anything they can. In any hole that says yes. Likely spreading herpes to the masses. AKA Sleeping around.

I call a spade a spade.

When women and men do it.

A kid with a slow metabolism who gains weight easily and gets fat and another kid has a fast metabolism, but eats just as gluttonously... guess what? They both have terrible eating habits. You may want to feel good about yourself by calling the fat kid fat, but that skinny kid probably has a heart coated in cholesterol and budding juvenile diabetes.

To clarify... a guy who works hard at being a slut is still a slut. And is not anyone's first choice LTR partner.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Sorry to burst your bubble

You didn't really, I was just giving a definition of "female plate spinning" from the guy who AFAIk definied the term "plate spinning".

The idea behind the metaphore "plate spinning" is that it takes skill to do it, and that it takes more skill the more plates you spin, that you can spin the plates in such a manner that they spin themselves. Also that plates may drop every once in a while or all at once if you screw up. Essentially, it's cultivating options. For a woman, this would rather be being able to make men fall for her and keeping them in her orbit with token displays of interest than cultivating multiple FWB options, which - let's be real here - doesn't really require much effort on her part.

If "plate spinning" was just "collecting FWBs", then it would have been easier to call it that way, or just "call a spade a spade", as you put it.

[–]GridReXXit be like that0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'll agree with that definition then.

[–]CulturalMarxistCultder blaue Planet-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

not actually having sex with them

And you know that how?

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Ask yourself the following things, preferably without BP confirmation bias:

  • how many girls do more or less indiscriminately sleep around, and how many girls are collecting orbiters/friendzoning guys (intentionally or unintentionally)?
  • who is more likely to want "just sex", a man or a woman? Who is more likely to be willing to enter a purely sexual relationship with the opposite sex? Who is more likely to be goaded into such a relationship and feel used after that?
  • who is more likely to want "just friendship", a man or a woman? Who is more likely to be willing to enter a purely platonic relationship with the opposite sex? Who is more likely to be goaded into such a relationship and feel used after that?
  • who is more likely to develop feelings when in a FWB-relationship, a man or a woman? Who is more likely to have had feelings beforehand? And who is more likely to stay perfectly content with a more or less purely sexual arrangement and never feels strung along when nothing more develops, a man or a woman?
  • who is more likely to discard a member of the opposite sex as a possible romantic prospect outright because that person has a history of engaging in casual sex, a man or a woman; i.e. who has more to lose by engaging in casual sex?

Plate spinning is usually not symmetrical, despite all bluepiller that "women want casual sex (and nothing more), too!" or that "men fall in love with their FWBs, too!" The female equivalent of plate spinning generally generally is having admirers, not having lovers.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

There are orbiters and there are plates, two very different things. Orbiters are typically unattractive whereas plates are attractive boyfriend candidates. Plates are for sex and dates and orbiters are for validation and gifts. Women don't really enjoy one night stands as much, but friends with benefits (plates) are very fun. Sorry to burst your bubble, but women can enjoy sex just as much as men.

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

Sorry to burst your bubble, but women can enjoy sex just as much as men.

And be just as manipulative apperantly. This sub never fails to present such start contradictions to what one member of the other claims. Fascinating.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Humans are all pretty capable of fascinating stuff :)

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

They are pretty interesting yes. I'm curious when you realized you could treat men so badly and why you do if you can? Like, as a man, if I knew I could treat someone really badly and still get what I want, I wouldn't because that defines my character and speaks to the kind of person I am or want to be. As a woman who can get pretty much anything I want, I'm curious why you'd bother being such a nasty individual when you could be really cool/empathetic and accomplish the same goals?

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

I can't recall ever treating men in my life badly, or women for that matter.

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

You just called incels being pathetic and talked about sexually manipulating men whilst encouraging other women to do the same. Those things are mutually exclusive with respect.

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

People manipulate each other all the time, it's just part of being human.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It doesn't work that way.

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

Yes it does. Sleeping around implies one night stands with strangers, not friends with benefits.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It wasn't about sleeping around, it was about the idea of "spinning plates". Just semantics.

(interestingly, an ONS technically wouldn't count as a plate for either gender because after all, she isn't spun if one sleeps with her once and never sees her again)

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (86 children) | Copy Link

Men are most fullfilled with spinning plates, women are most fullfilled through serial monogamy

Citation needed. To make that generalization ignores the fact that a lot of men also have the desire to be strictly monogamous, or do those men not exist?

Edit: Also, plenty of men and women both have low sex drives. Your view of the world has some major biases and really needs to be cited before you can start making those claims.

TL;DR: Your wall of text does seem like TRPer fantasy porn.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

To make that generalization ignores the fact that a lot of men also have the desire to be strictly monogamous, or do those men not exist?

Verifying this actually requires giving these guys guaranteed access to an abundance of sexual variety and the absence of any sort of fallout (i.e. no opportunity cost for them giving in to these urges if they have them). I assume you can guess how likely it is you can pull that off.

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

See, what sort of "consequences" though?

I mean I'm not personally insistant on monogamy, and the last three guys had/have no problem finding interested women. On the other hand I'm not interested in being a concurrent girlfriend to another person.

But in a tiny anecdotal sample the first two HotGuys (TM) enjoyed the attention but felt really uncomfortable with anything other than monogamy. Gentleman is a lot more gungho about it, but in practice has the lowest libido, and just seems again to bask in a cloud of female cooing.

There's no such thing as "consequence" free- its like all those jokes about trying to solve real world problems with physics that start with "first imagine a spherical cow!".

My observation is that given full freedom, humans still tend to have primary relationships. They do not, however, nessarily give up sexual titillation by other people, so both genders seem happy to have "plates".

Matters are made more complicated by the fact that some people enjoy jealousy or feeling "naughty" because it amps things up for them.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

See, what sort of "consequences" though?

Pretty much everything you can think of that could discourage someone from sleeping around. Being beaten up by jealous lovers, having relationship drama, losing the love of your life (or losing the chance to have a shot with her), social ostracization (or at least getting a certain reputation you don't want), STDs, a bad conscience, avoiding entanglement of any kind etc. pp. But though any of these things serve as a deterrent; the inability to have sex pretty much at will is the biggest hindrance.

My observation is that given full freedom, humans still tend to have primary relationships.They do not, however, nessarily give up sexual titillation by other people, so both genders seem happy to have "plates".

You are most likely right for the vast majority of people (including men); however, this doesn't really speak against the claim made above because your scenario lacks monogamy - being (emotionally) loyal can be a lot easier once you have a free pass at giving in to any temptation otherwise.

One of the Kings of Saudi Arabia (arguably the most misogynist country in the entire world) supposedly was heartwarmingly faithful to his wive for decades, and this certainly wasn't because he would have had to fear any kind of fallout (apart from her disapproval) for straying from the path of virtue, given the values and morals of the society he ruled over. So yeah, even under the most unlikely circumstances, you will find loyalty. The question is rather how common would disloyalty be if being disloyal was both easy and guilt-free?

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think the issue is that its not "disloyalty" if there is no guilt or consequences. I think one base point about "consequences" is resolving that some people also want a specific person above all and the trade off is undivided interest for undivided interest.

Different parts of the world and different periods of history approach the pair bond differently, including infidelity according to polite social rules (eg everyone is doing it but pretends otherwise) or even offering your spouse as a matter of hospitality and friendship. This makes any sort of broader judgements on people hard, because the tribal behaviours of certain South African groups are just as "natural" as an urban Canadian or 19th century titled European nobility.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

In the post I was replying to, the poster made the claim that men are most fulfilled having multiple partners. That is one hell of a claim to make to essentially say most men are polyamorous essentially.

Edit: I'll say this though, good point on how it does need to be verified, but at the same time, the claim that most men are most fulfilled having many partners at once needs just as much verification.

Edit 2: All that being said however, it seems the poster that I was replying to also holds contempt for men who prefer to be monogamous, seeing them as inferior/pathetic. His bias seems to paint his view, and I was aiming at refuting his bias, if anything.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Well, you could use (male) celebrities as a control group, though the question arises "are they promiscuous because they can or are they promiscuous because they have the personality which facilitates becoming famous on the one hand and sleeping around on the other".

Personally, I am somewhat divided on the issue.

On the one hand, I'm certain that a lot of guys would sleep around far more if it was as easy for them as it is for girls. Apart from that, a lot of guys have internalized the narrative that desiring just sex as a man is questionable and objectifying and therefore would reject the option to pursue it by default; so the question is how they would behave if they adhered to a more neutral narrative.

On the other hand, moral standards aside, sleeping around (usually) means a lot of work and is also only really an option (as a lifestyle) for the top men; and evolutionary seen placing all your eggs in one basket instead would have been a workable strategy for beta males (at least as long as their mate held up her end of the bargain), so it's hard to say how promiscuous lower T-level men actually would be if given the chance.

[–]FollowThisAdvice8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Most male celebrities are serial monogamists. There are a few who cheat. There are very very few that stay single.

And even then its a self-selecting group for men who seek external validation.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Even among male celebrities it's a specific type that's über-promiscuous. You've got your rockstars, actors, athletes, etc who tend to be performers and extroverts and this crowd skews promiscuous. Even there you've got Hugh Jackman types. And then of course there's the entrepreneurs/billionaires a la Zuckerberg, Gates, Jobs, etc who aren't/weren't promiscuous (as far as we know, at least). So, even among the men with the most options you've got guys who commit.

Apart from that, a lot of guys have internalized the narrative that desiring just sex as a man is questionable and objectifying and therefore would reject the option to pursue it by default.

I don't think that's it. Romantic love is real, as is the desire for a long-term companion and children. Not for all men, of course, but I'd argue, for most. That's probably why they'd reject the Roosh lifestyle, not because they've internalized casual sex being wrong. Casual sex is actually strongly promoted in the culture, especially by/for dudes (see: "bro" culture, for example).

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Romantic love is real, as is the desire for a long-term companion and children.

How is this mutually exclusive from spinning plates? You do realize a guy can have a long term companion, children, and still have sex with random women for fun occassionally.

[–]VoiceofKane2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Of course. That's called "cheating," or by some, "adultery."

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

All social constructs designed to force men to sacrifice their desires for the happiness of women, if anything the very existence of such constructs is more proof of the underlying biological tendency humans have to fuck around. Adultery / cheating wouldnt exist if the world was as you say it is.

[–]Shirrapikachu2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But y'all say it's cheating if a chick does it. thats really hypocritical, isn't it? So is society forcing women to sacrifice their desires for the happiness of men?

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

Adultery / cheating wouldnt exist if the world was as you say it is.

Actually, cheating wouldn't exist if the world wasn't filled with shitty people who cheat.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

You seemed to be implying that the male ideal lifestyle was constant "plate spinning" a la Roosh. Social/emotional monogamy ("monogam-ish" as Dan Savage calls it) with occasional sexual infidelity is a lot more typical and common (for both sexes btw). Most men and women would be willing to sacrifice variety for monogamy in the context of a romantic relationship, i.e., a pair bond. Most people don't want to share; sexual jealousy is real. Or, do you really think women are wired to mate for life and men are wired to cheat?

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Plate spinning is plate spinning, an LTR is an LTR. They arent mutually exclusive. Is it morally corrupt to live both lifestyles? According to present day society yes, according to me no. I long ago discarded the notion that my sexual strategy is morally reprehensible, as it should be given equal moral treatment to female serial monogamy and AF/BB which are perfectly acceptable within our society, and even this so called "monogamy" you speak of, as if there truly are people out there who are genuinely monogamous, I see no reason why I should follow their genetic blueprint if mine was constructed so differently, it would be insanity for me to run around pretending I'm a cat if I'm a dog. Serial monogamy and AF/BB require me to make a personal sacrifice for a woman. Plate spinning requires women to make sacrifices for myself. One person always loses out and I'd prefer it not be me, because I am a selfish like every other person on this planet.

Both sexes are wired to cheat, in different manners of course. Females engaging in serial monogamy or AF/BB situations are just as likely to cheat at some point as men, if not more so due to society's "you go gurl" mentality that bodes them on and absolves them of all wrong doing and responsibily for their actions.

The real difference between cheating men and cheating women, is cheating men know they are wired to cheat, cheating women believe it will never "just happen," then it does happen and "oh he wasn't paying enough attention to me" or "oh I was drunk and he took advantage of me," or some other variation of "i tripped and fell on his dick then decided not to move till he blasted inside me."

[–]FollowThisAdvice5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Anyone with money can get laid (not prostitution, merely dressing expensively and going to the right kind of bars).

Yet most guys with money are in monogamous relationships....

[–]GridReXXit be like that3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. Because despite the hamster about plate spinning, most guys like the idea of having a lifelong partner in crime. There's something very intimate and safe about having "a person."

You don't get that being a lifelong bachelor. You get a thrill but you get no one at your funeral except your living siblings.

[–]FollowThisAdvice0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Right, so the only lifelong bachelors are the guys too obnoxious or shallow to form emotionally intimate partnerships.

[–]GridReXXit be like that0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Plenty of cat ladies. But they have their cats. And many of them have close bonds with their girlfriends.

[–]FollowThisAdvice0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Same thing applies.

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

They can't pull that off, but man, I would love to see the results of this study.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Me too.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (60 children) | Copy Link

To make that generalization ignores the fact that a lot of men also have the desire to be strictly monogamous, or do those men not exist?

Men who can't even nail down one girl without months of effort often adopt this strategy. Complying with social standards is a nice way gain some standing with the ladies and allows one to feel moral superiority. If they had their option of this or bedding a new woman every night theyd chose the latter. Yes yes yes, I know they will SAY they prefer monogamy, because their world is proped up on the idea that this is their only option. Deep down sex with a new hot young chick on a daily basis is incredibly fun. Source: my dick.

Citation needed.

Lmao, like our BP society would ever bother to delve this fucking deep into the human psyche. You really need to engage in some deeper thinking if you haven't realized how fucking desperately our society wants to moral police men's mating strategies.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (45 children) | Copy Link

Men who can't even nail down one girl without months of effort often adopt this strategy. Complying with social standards is a nice way gain some standing with the ladies and allows one to feel moral superiority. If they had their option of this or bedding a new woman every night theyd chose the latter. Yes yes yes, I know they will SAY they prefer monogamy, because their world is proped up on the idea that this is their only option. Deep down sex with a new hot young chick on a daily basis is incredibly fun. Source: my dick.

Give me a proper source. Seriously, most men aren't these hyper-sexual creatures that you are painting them to be. I can sense the condescension in your tone. A lot of people do a lot more than just chase sex.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (19 children) | Copy Link

Seriously, most men aren't these hyper-sexual creatures that you are painting them to be. I can sense the condescension in your tone. A lot of people do a lot more than just chase sex.

On the one hand you are right. I know plenty of men who only want sex in longterm-relationships and don't "chase sex" at all. I would have seen myself as exhibit A for this.

On the other hand, he does have a point. We don't know how much this is the result of subconscious stuff that happened when they/me couldn't get laid in their formative years.

You know I want to think that I made the conscious decision to value sex in a way that I only want to have it in a commited relationship and "with someone special" (lolz)...but the more I think about all the red pill stuff, I have to admit that a large part of the reason I feel this way is that I couldn't get laid in my teenage years. And when I had the chance to have sex with someone unspecial in my 20s, but decided not to, who knows if it was just because I didn't want to admit that I was a failure in my teens?

So he does have a point. We don't know what would happen if every 15 year old boy had girls throw themselves at him and how that would influence his later views on monogamy.

For clarification: I have been in LTRs for most of my 20s, but between them, I had opportunities that I didn't take.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (17 children) | Copy Link

And when I had the chance to have sex with someone unspecial in my 20s, but decided not to, who knows if it was just because I didn't want to admit that I was a failure in my teens?

My take on this is that if you have let go of your past, it's because your view is genuine, not because of deep seated issues that you may or may not have.

Personally, I have had an experience or two with casual sex and I didn't enjoy it at all, so if we take me as average (for the sake of argument, I really can't say for sure), it is very well possible that many men just have no desire to because that type of physical relationship just does nothing for them on a deeper level, for many possible reasons.

To clarify, a deeper level could mean emotionally, intellectually, whatever. For me personally, it just felt pointless, and I really was never into it.

TL;DR: Sex is not all that interesting to me.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I guess, I mean, it's quite obvious that my sex drive is on the lower end. One of the perks of that is that nothing I do is really motivated by sex unless I want it to be. Gives a certain freedom really, to be that in control of myself.

[–]GridReXXit be like that1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I like sex. But it has never driven my actions.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

I emphasized that I know that there are many men who only want to have sex in a commited relationship.

But we don't know why they/us don't like casual sex. Sure "it feels empty" is a reason, but why does it feel empty to you and not to others? Why is "not feeling empty" a necessity for having sex in the first place? Could still be fun after all. But for whatever reason "not feeling empty" is important to you. For others it's not.

I could come up with dozens of reasons why I feel about it this or that way but I can never really be sure.

[–]FollowThisAdvice4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It doesnt feel empty for you because you've never been "full" basically.

If there is one thing consistently in common across the men who embrace TRP, its a lack of past emotional intimacy with women.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

It doesnt feel empty for you because you've never been "full" basically.

And that is the only possible explanation?

If there is one thing consistently in common across the men who embrace TRP, its a lack of past emotional intimacy with women.

Can you reverse that for women who are sluts? Do they only enjoy having casual sex because they have a lack of past emotional intimacy with men?

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Because people are different and desire different things.

Of course, but it makes sense to ask yourself why you like or dislike something when you want to learn more about human behavior. Or about yourself.

To_Pi makes huge assumptions and leaps in logic to justify the idea that all men want casual sex and those who say they don't have some subconscious reasons not to desire it.

He makes very big assumptions. But "I just don't like it and there is no reason for it and it wouldn't be different if my past had been different" is a big assumption, too.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

To_Pi makes huge assumptions and leaps in logic to justify the idea that all men want casual sex and those who say they don't have some subconscious reasons not to desire it.

Subconcious or physical reason man, don't shit on what im saying here. Men with low T (aka not real men) will not desire large amounts of casual sex. Men with small dicks will not desire large amounts of casual sex. Men who suck with women will not desire large amounts of casual sex. Why? Because for these men casual sex is a painful reminder of all their failures in life. A real man, who takes care of himself, doesn't have a 2 inch pecker, doesn't suck with women, has the access to it, doesn't have mental blocks regarding it, will most definitely want it, in other words, the top 20% will want it, the men that women are all spreading their legs for. As others have stated there are a LOT of reasons to not act on those desires, but simply because one doesn't act on those desires does not mean they do not exist. You guys seem to making a lot of really retarded conclusions regarding this, and drawing lines where they don't really exist.

But then again, these are all the reasons why people end up in TRP to begin with. Eventually we take a step back and say whooa... was I really drawing conclusions this silly? Yes. Yes I was.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'll break this down before I go to bed, since that might help shed some light on my logic just a bit.

but why does it feel empty to you and not to others?

It could be for a variety of reasons. Values are generally the source of that, or you could be far more passionate about other things and you are more intellectually/emotionally drawn towards other activities.

Why is "not feeling empty" a necessity for having sex in the first place?

If it "feels empty" so to speak, it could be seen as a waste of time that could be better spent elsewhere. For example, I love writing, and I would probably turn down a chance at a casual encounter to get some more time to write or make beats or something.

But for whatever reason "not feeling empty" is important to you. For others it's not.

I think this does tie in with one's past, but not only with their upbringing, but their friends as well. If the people you are closest with are more likely to chase casual sex, it wouldn't be a surprise if you shared that, or learned that from them, and vice versa.

[–]GridReXXit be like that1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

"Feeling empty" is valid.

If I win the lottery for a million dollars verus if I start a business and profit a million dollars personally.

I'm going to value the latter more. The good old woman/dolla bills sex I have with that earned wad of cash is going to be orgasmic.

Whereas I'll simply have fun spending that lottery million.

Some people like feeling totally connected to whomever their with via shared experiences hopes and dreams and memories ON TOP of the carnal pleasure of fucking.

And others just like fucking.

A hug from a stranger is "nice."

A hug from a crush "makes your heart shutter."

It's hard to experience complete physical and emotional intimacy in tandem and just go back to one or the other.

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

My dad did at 15. Since then he seems to attract aggressive women, my mother included.

He seems to be emotionally monogamous, and sexually indifferent to his wife having concurrent sexual partners, but sets his limits with having an actual impact on his primary relationship.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

Lol, theres no fucking sources for this shit. No CDC study confirming this shit. There is an inner desire for men to prop their egos up on the principles they've lived their lives by. BP men account for 90% of the male population, if there was a survey about this you'd get your desired answer. If you want the real answer there is only one way to find it, and you have to live it in order to understand it, which you'll never do because you're so fucking desperate to know that it isn't true.

TRP isnt about what a government survey of BP shitheads can confirm. It's about discovering our true unleashed biological tendencies. The closest thing to a source you'll get on this is the fact that 80% of females reproduce while only 40% of males do (in nature, where piles of BP shit isnt shoved down our throats). But even then it takes logic to tie these dots together, which you're obviously lacking simply based on the fact that you seem so captivated with your own desire to downplay this information based on a lack of source for citation lol.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

How do you know your answer is the 'real answer'? What about the possibility that the 'BP answer' is the actual answer for these men?

Perhaps because Ive seen both sides of the fence, lived both lifestyles, and can say 100% beyond all doubt which is the one I as a man, would prefer. Not to mention all the other countless men I know in the same position who agree with me. You've seen one side, weve seen both, you won't find a single TRPer who wasnt once a BPer, and youll never find a BPer who has seen both sides, simply because they dont exist. Wonder why.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This absolutely screams confirmation bias.

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

[deleted]

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

There are plenty of 'BP alphas'

Alpha is just a glorious overused concept that never stands in stone and always transforms from situation to situation. It's a pointless endeavour to waste time pursing to be 'an alpha,' but consoles and sooths the ego of men who worship themselves.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Because every other man Ive ever talked to who has seen both sides of the fence agrees. Every, single, one.

[–]savois-fairePurple Pill Man7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

As a man who has seen both sides of the fence and doesn't agree: I don't agree. And there are plenty of men like me, trust me. You may not want to acknowledge their existence because it goes against your position that you have it absolutely 100% right in a 100% of cases, but it is true.

I had tons of casual sex when I was younger, was quite red pill without knowing there was such a thing, and tired of casual sex quite quickly. I really get next to no enjoyment out of it, whereas I find a pretty much inexhaustible source of satisfaction and happiness in having a partner whom I consider an intellectual, emotional and personal equal and can genuinely respect.

I couldn't care less about the amount of sex I get, though I have nothing to complain, I care a lot about being in a meaningful relationship with another person I love and care about.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Which screams confirmation bias! At this rate, I don't even need to debate you, your points don't even stand on their own.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

u/strategicatomicmoose said upthread that he'd found casual sex unenjoyable. He's probably not a unicorn, there are other men like him out there. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend?

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

he'd found casual sex unenjoyable

Unenjoyable doesnt mean he lacks a basic desire to have sex with hot chicks. It more likely means he can't achieve it, just like 99.99% of the male population. My ego would not be in a healthy state if I spent all day yearning after the impossible.

Besides his argument is BS, he had the sex because he enjoyed it. Was his dick hard? Did he bust a nice nut in those ladies? Were his biological urges placated? If he didnt have a biological tendency to fuck randoms, he would have never done it in the first place. Most BP men who go through a "casual sex" phase all say the same shit he does, again this is because the human ego NEEDs to believe it is making the right choice. That choice to remain monogamous for the sake of his sanity, happiness, pleasing his loved ones and society, does not take away his biological desire to spread his seed.

I'm not denying that men live BP lifestyles, on the contrary a large majority of men do. What I am saying is, if the world was truly built by men, for men, and controlled by men, we'd have a whole lot more guys living a lifestyle geared towards keeping them sexually satisfied, and it would take a whole lot more sex than 55 times per year to achieve this. Go check out /r/deadbedrooms if you dont believe me.

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

It more likely means he can't achieve it, just like 99.99% of the male population. My ego would not be in a healthy state if I spent all day yearning after the impossible.

Or I just don't like it because it was fucking boring. More massive assumptions. The blinders are real.

Besides his argument is BS, he had the sex because he enjoyed it. Was his dick hard? Did he bust a nice nut in those ladies? Were his biological urges placated? If he didnt have a biological tendency to fuck randoms, he would have never done it in the first place. Most BP men who go through a "casual sex" phase all say the same shit he does, again this is because the human ego NEEDs to believe it is making the right choice. That choice to remain monogamous for the sake of his sanity, happiness, pleasing his loved ones and society, does not take away his biological desire to spread his seed.

You have no idea what my motives were or why I did what I did. Maybe you should stop making assumptions before you sound even more ridiculous.

[–]watamIreading9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The closest thing to a source you'll get on this is the fact that 80% of females reproduce while only 40% of males do (in nature, where piles of BP shit isnt shoved down our throats).

U wot, "in nature"? As in, humans, in nature? 80% of human females in nature reproduce while 40% of human males reproduce in nature? ... Oh, right, I see, you're using research cobbled together by the Stetson-Harrison institute! That explains everything.

[–]pillburtRed Pill Mana mana0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

We have twice as many female ancestors as male. It checks out.

[–]watamIreading1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Doesn't really seem to care much for the whole "nature" thing, there. Since outside of that, I'm not too surprised. What with wars, harems and so on and so forth.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

If you want this answer there is only one way to find it, and you have to live it in order to understand it, which you'll never do because you're so fucking desperate to know that it isn't true.

I say it's true, therefore, it's true /s

You gotta be kidding me. Most people aren't hyper-sexual.

which you're obviously lacking simply based on the fact that you seem so captivated with your own desire to downplay this information based on a lack of source for citation lol.

Anecdotes are just that, anecdotes. I'm downplaying what you say because you aren't putting your money where your mouth is.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[removed]

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No you're being a fucking cunt. There's no sources for this information, NONE. So I cannot provide you with one. You know there are no sources for this because researching something like this with an open mind would never happen in our society, EVER. So it's a disengenious debate tactic to imply that a lack of source for something unsourcable is proof that the claim is wrong. Lol, you BPers and your logical fallacies, it's like you took classes on how to fuck up your own arguments.

I feel the roid rage, ahahaha. I'm calling you on your shit because you have absolutely nothing to back it up, and you resort to personal attacks because you clearly have nothing relevant to contribute to this discussion.

Edit: Remember, you are the one resorting to getting angry, making personal attacks, and pulling arguments out of your ass.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

I think you are destroying my own view of men. All men like casual sex, but there are plenty of others who are forced into monogamy. Casual sex isn't an option for everyone.

FTFY

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm saying plenty of men like casual sex and plenty of others don't. That seems to be a much more reasonable conclusion than yours.

I am counter-evidence to your claim. I don't like casual sex. I've had/have the option for lots of casual sex (Grindr ftw!). I chose to be in an exclusive relationship. How do you explain me?

Lol, once upon a time I would have said the same thing. Mostly it was because I hadn't experienced the other side and lacked the capacity to do so.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

So people can't find casual sex to be an absolute bore? That's news to me.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Not when it's as easy as taking a drive to the bowling alley. Most people that say this shit are people that simply can't get casual sex. Hence the duality of male sexual strategies: BB & AF.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Not when it's as easy as taking a drive to the bowling alley. Most people that say this shit are people that simply can't get casual sex. Hence the duality of male sexual strategies: BB & AF.

To assume that ALL people that say they aren't interested in it aren't capable of experiencing it is disingenuous.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

=]

You guys want your fairy tale so bad it's almost cute.

It's this type of head burying that brings me to despise BPers, such an utter lack of honesty carries the man who convinces himself, that he is not himself.

The question is not: what does that man want?

The question is: what do the man truly want?

You seem to be confusing these two. I bet you never watch porn, or catch a pretty woman walking by in the corner of your eye either. I bet you never dream of having sex with random women at night. I bet all of these nice fairy tales come true in the land where all you need is to believe it is true.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I love your massive assumptions, except that all you are doing is proving that you have no argument because you can't defend anything you say ;)

I punked you man, deal with it.

Also, just because you are a slave to your hormones, that doesn't mean that every man is as well.

[–]GridReXXit be like that1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't think you've ever met a man who has had a lot of casual sex.

You're new to this casual sex game.

Call me in ten years.

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

The only thing you have provided for your view is anecdata and you are completely unable to see things from outside your own bias. You are being, for a lack of a better term, a solipsist. Don't like being asked for sources? Don't make stupid fucking claims.

[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Edit: Also, plenty of men and women both have low sex drives. Your view of the world has some major biases and really needs to be cited before you can start making those claims.

TL;DR: Your wall of text does seem like TRPer fantasy porn.

I've lived this fucking life, and I've known plenty of other high end dick slingers that have as well. That's all the citation I need. It's real, it works, and it makes you want to pull your fucking hair out. /dgaf

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I've lived this fucking life, and I've known plenty of other high end dick slingers that have as well. That's all the citation I need. It's real, it works, and it makes you want to pull your fucking hair out. /dgaf

Good for you, now let's come back to the real world. Most people aren't as hyper-focused on sex as you seem to be.

Also, I thought TRP was home of the STEM-lords.

It doesn't make me want to pull my hair out, I just think you sound ridiculous and out of touch with the world, given that you are denying that the other side exists.

[–]FollowThisAdvice6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Men are most fullfilled with spinning plates, women are most fullfilled through serial monogamy

I've always wondered what evidence TRP has for this claim? specifically, the "fulfilled" part.

All the most impressive men I've ever come across (both personally and in the public sphere) are serial monogamists.

[–]ExpendableOneNeither2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There are plenty of men who are most fulfilled through monogamy. Plenty of men who fall in love, and then can't even think about(let alone pursue) another woman. "Oneitis" is a thing for men too.

[–]ArkiF3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Men do mind sharing.

What do TRPers imagine their 'plates' are doing what they're not around? Looking at beautiful rainbows?

[–]GridReXXit be like that4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

LOL.

Reminds me of True Detective when Marty was very upset his mistress was on a date with another man.

And she pretty much laughed saying "You're married? Did you think I was sitting at home waiting for you to call me when your wife is busy?"

Every guy with a plate or plates is also a plate.

Also women who like monogamy HATE SHARING. The thought of my boyfriend moaning or kissing or fucking another person would boil my blood.

TRP is delusional if they think women are happy their cheating dudes are intimate with other people.

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