695,976 posts

Female youth and beauty is the most valuable commodity in the world: "Women converted their youth and beauty into resources by having sex with a man who would provide those resources. This social contract was upended and replaced, however, and very recently so."

Reddit View
November 1, 2019
692 upvotes
https://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2019/05/seeking-arrangement-might-just-burst.html


Post Information
Title Female youth and beauty is the most valuable commodity in the world: "Women converted their youth and beauty into resources by having sex with a man who would provide those resources. This social contract was upended and replaced, however, and very recently so."
Author iLLprincipLeS
Upvotes 692
Comments 140
Date 01 November 2019 03:01 PM UTC (10 months ago)
Subreddit TheRedPill
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/293589
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/dq5eas/female_youth_and_beauty_is_the_most_valuable/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
the red pill
Comments

[–][deleted] 147 points148 points  (20 children) | Copy

What fascinates me the most about the red pill is how we are - both men and women - being lied to. The lies creates - in both men and women - later regret. Beauty and time fades from the woman. Time to enjoy and succeed fades away for men awaiting payment for “doing as they’re told”.

At least men can turn it around by seeing the red pill. For women, the lie is even more regretful. Because you can’t get time back, your youth back, the attention back.. That train left the station while you believed you’d become fulfilled by following a (well intentioned?) lie.

What other lies are we being fed?

[–]1iLLprincipLeS[S] 62 points63 points  (5 children) | Copy

What other lies are we being fed?

Besides education, the media is the other dominant force shaping public opinion. The effect of the media is such that many political scientists basically see public opinion as little more than a fabrication by media elites, a view that is so well established that it has been called the Almond-Lippman consensus.

Public opinion is volatile, shifting erratically in response to the most recent developments. Mass beliefs early in the 20th century were "too pacifist in peace and too bellicose in war, too neutralist or appeasing in negotiations or too intransigent

Public opinion is incoherent, lacking an organized or a consistent structure to such an extent that the views of US citizens could best be described as "nonattitudes"

Public opinion is irrelevant to the policymaking process. Political leaders ignore public opinion because most Americans can neither "understand nor influence the very events upon which their lives and happiness are known to depend."

[–]5Imperator_Red 2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy

That’s why only stakeholders (taxpayers) should vote. People with skin in the game are much more rational.

[–]42gauge 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

Isn't that already the case?

[–]cupshadow 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Everyone pays taxes and the votes of the majority are pretty much irrelevant after the election.

[–]odaklanan_insan -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

I disagree. White people are not the only conservatives.

[–]IndiansSmellLikePoo 64 points65 points  (4 children) | Copy

What other lies are we being fed?

That white people are evil

[–]crazymysteriousman 44 points45 points  (2 children) | Copy

Also, that brown people are evil

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points  (1 child) | Copy

That anyone is evil. It’s just prejudice.

[–]IAmBotJesus 12 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy

No, there's evil people, just not evil peoples.

[–]livingInSimulation 13 points14 points  (2 children) | Copy

The traps of society College, Marriage, Consumerism, Media. All brought to you by cultural marxism.

[–]HuntDownFascists 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Imagine thinking that consumerism, traditional marriage, and corporate media are products of Marxism lmfao

[–]livingInSimulation 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy

Not products of marxism. Ruined by marxism. Consumerism is a womens market, you see this in the ads and ways companys market products.

Marriage will ruin mans life in todays day, because of divorce court laws bias. Half of everything you own, your house, car, and your kid. While at the same time paying alimony and child support.

The media is awful. I live in Canada and one of our only news source that gets recognition is CBC which is state funded propaganda that Canadian tax payers pay for. It is all extreme bias to the left and going to a more sjw rhetoric we see today.

[–]youcantstopmyzed 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

People lie to you all the time so they can make you dependent and use you to their own advantage.

[–]kyledontcare 25 points26 points  (0 children) | Copy

Racism is the reason for every evil under sun, and if you disagree with me, you're a racist and a bigot.

[–]akzunamoon 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

THIS my friend, is the red pill. Realising, you are being lied to.

[–]zer165 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

The Epstein killed himself.

[–]liberules 79 points80 points  (62 children) | Copy

Sure, I agree with virtually all of this. It's plain observable economics. But it doesn't properly answer the question of where we're headed. We can all agree on the tenant that all versions of the social contract are centered around men trading resources for sexual access. So what is sexual access? It's getting off and reproduction.

The first issue (getting off) is foreclosed on by sexbots. Sex robots are ridiculous now, but so were cell phones in 1999. If you brought your phone today back to 1999, they'd think it was some scifi movie prop. Same with bluetooth headsets and dating apps... what was socially unacceptable even 15 years ago is now the norm. Sex bots don't have to be perfect. They just have to be better than their meat based competition. And for many guys, they already are. And as the bots become more realistic over the next 20+ years, that percentage is only going up. This is why sexbot brothels are being protested or even vandalized out of business whenever they pop up. Silicone blobs are already beating out the meat women, and it's only going to getting worse for women.

The second issue (reproduction) is only a part of it. Look at Japan, where over 70% of men are already foregoing women entirely, not reproducing because they believe the juice is not worth the squeeze. So now you're left with a percentage of men who want children, divided by those who are willing, and those who are unwilling to take the legal liability of divorce rape. This is currently addressed in very limited form by surrogacy. To do a surrogate in the west, you basically work with an agency in eastern europe, and they mix your sperm with the egg of a girl (usually who looks like a supermodel), a girl gestates it, and then 9 months later you get a baby that's legally yours in every way, free and clear. It currently costs $40-75k to do this, depending mostly on the quality of the lawyers helping you out. That's significantly cheaper than the expected value of marriage (and coin flip divorce rape). Surrogacy is so damaging to the economics of all iterations of the resources-for-sexual-access contract that many western countries have made it illegal to do in most forms. While they can't make it illegal to do abroad and bring back a child that's biologically yours, it's usually illegal to pay for it or be paid for it domestically. But the day that artificial wombs become a reality, it's game over for women. When the tech catches up to demand, the cost will come down massively, to the point where an artificial womb will cost less than a real live pregnancy, never mind the legal risk.

And at that point, what does anyone need a woman for? Not even the top 10%+ of guys who can get women will need one. That's when you're going to see harpies pushing for full-on communism. They'll be removed from the social contract provisioning sex for resources, and they still won't want to produce/accumulate resources via labor (female labor force participation rate is almost 20 points lower than the male rate). Hell, that's why feminist societies today are all far left leaning... they require wealth reallocation from producers (mostly men) to non-producers (mostly women).

[–]ruffyamaharyder 27 points28 points  (19 children) | Copy

I was going to post something very similar to this. This is the pendulum swinging the other way and truly is the next step.

We'll have sexbots and this will demolish porn, strip clubs, sex workers etc. Women's value will plummet extremely fast. Those women who lived through the first part of their lives worry-free, knowledge-free, and ability-free, will be (rightfully) criticized and looked down upon. They will be not only losing their good looks due to age but also have nothing in their brains to fall back on. Too bad.

The next generation of women, will see what's coming and will actually begin to learn and produce things like their male counterparts and help move society into the future. As it should be.

Interesting note on reproduction. This too will change in the future where a surrogate won't be needed.

In short, men today and for the past 50 years or so have been getting burned by women who took advantage of men without investing in themselves (other than looks). The deal was they play a role, and men play a role. They broke that deal and sold themselves to the highest bidder. Men, who invented pretty much everything as stated in the article are now inventing the perfect women with advanced AI, robots and reproduction technology. Payback for this will be rough for women.

[–]waxrivers 31 points32 points  (11 children) | Copy

The next generation of women, will see what's coming and will actually begin to learn and produce things like their male counterparts and help move society into the future. As it should be.

That is what we wanted to believe with Generation Z women but we see them falling into the same trap of cashing in quick on their sexuality. Unfortunately, women are very short sighted on economic matters. About the only thing they seem to instinctively have foresight on is ways to manipulate men into providing for their children.

My own opinion is that women will exceedingly push for more draconian laws on Male Privilege. We are getting a taste for this with the freak-outs over sexbot brothels, etc. I can see a Bachelor Tax easily being pushed in the next ten years. I can see White Straight Male Reparations being pushed as a form of female welfare. With each new ridiculous Anti-Male legislation that is passed, more men will drop out and refuse to participate.

I don't think women will See The Light and become productive members of society. I think they will finally understand men-are-men and women-are-women and it's a beautiful joy to raise children and be cherished as a mother. This epiphany will most likely be Post Collapse of society though. In the short term, we'll simply run out of female welfare; watch society collapse; have a huge war.....and then after a time of darkness, build another strong Patriarchy from the ashes. Then there will be a good 150 years of pure prosperity until we make the same stupid mistake again and allow women to vote.

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (6 children) | Copy

I don't understand this perspective.

I mean 100 year ago you had to fight in wars, disease was rampant, black people were segregated by law. shit was fucked up.

life was fucking TOUGH.

and 200 years ago there was quite literally slavery. more disease. short life expectancy. no modern medicine. a civil fucking war.

life was EVEN TOUGHER.

so for all this fall of the west talk... I mean bruh. lots of shit is fucked up right now don't get me wrong. but I'd hardly say things are getting worse.

certain things are getting worse. but overall shits getting better.

[–]waxrivers 9 points10 points  (4 children) | Copy

You're focusing on social issues such as slavery and medicine. Think more along the lines of economics and resources. They didn't have a massive welfare state back then. Half the population was not financially enslaved to pay for the other half of "Do Nothings". When you have this kind of welfare state situation that we have now, you will have the money and resources run out soon. That will cause a massive upheaval and collapse of society. Also you had native citizens having kids back then. That created a harmonious society. Today you have the country being flooded with outsiders. That is the last stage before a society collapses because all the various groups that come in want to chop of their own portion of the country and make it their own.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

yeah but even economically in 1930 there was the great depression.

in the 50s you had mccarthyism and the communist hysteria.

but yeah as far as your talking about I agree.

[–]GroundPole 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Financial enslavement is a little harsh. The eslaved population still makes more after tax by a large margin.

Most are also not do nothing's. Workforce participation is above 60% and i think that includes retirees.

[–]5Imperator_Red 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Financial enslavement is a little harsh

No, it’s accurate.

The eslaved population still makes more after tax by a large margin.

Irrelevant.

[–]waxrivers 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

When the white male starts to research just how much tax money goes into Entitlements for women and minorities he is SICK TO HIS STOMACH. We have an Out Of Control Welfare State. There is no choice but to drop out and live off the land. For the most part the Controllers know that this is a ticking time bomb which will lead to massive civil unrest and the population reduction they wanted.

[–]ruffyamaharyder 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

I think they will finally understand men-are-men and women-are-women and it's a beautiful joy to raise children and be cherished as a mother.

Would be nice, but I don't think that will happen again. Laws will be hard to create against male privilege when we are dealing with some people wanting to give robots themselves rights.

[–]Satou4 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

War is not a necessary part of your equation.

Sexbots can't get here fast enough. They may literally save humanity from itself.

No more of this wishing you were someone else, living in a romcom - you'll be it.

[–]waxrivers 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

War is inevitable. Society has been on the brink of war for the last 50 years. Look at Hurricane Katrina and how quickly the city fell to barbarianism. All it takes is a shortage of food or gas and people go completely berserk. It doesn't take hardly anything for the sheep to short-circuit and loose their minds.

The minute the population realizes there is no rule of law it gets crazy.

[–]liberules 5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

the point is that if the value of the commodity women use to exert power over men falls to zero or near zero, there's no reason to have female children. why would you want a child who is in all likelihood, smaller, weaker, slower, dumber, less likely to ever produce enough to support themself, and more emotionally volatile?

the men at the bottom of society end up in prison. this means that across the sexes (and post widespread sexbot/surrogacy), the average male in society is objectively better than the average female... at literally everything. the gap only gets bigger when you start talking about the top men in any endeavor.

[–]ruffyamaharyder 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

At that point in time it will just be a preference. We'll be advanced enough to create women who aren't smaller, weaker, slower, etc via gene editing (already available, but looked down upon, today).

[–]Distractingyou 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

Sex bots sound like when christians say the end is near which is not true, this bots would need a near perfect general AI that at that point it sounds so unrealistic and if it actually happens then this bots would simply get rid of humans cause they would despize us. Sex bots sound like some stupid milenial basement losers dream

[–]ruffyamaharyder 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

They need pretty basic social AI which we are very close to now. Are you planning to have full-on conversations during sex?
It just needs to look, feel and move well. This isn't too far off from our current technology. They wouldn't be conscious either - meaning it's not like the movies where they will try and take over or be built with real feelings. AI just means machine learning, like it can recognize your phase, learn what you like, etc. It does not mean they think on their own and are free to think of random thoughts or come up with new/abstract concepts.
Here's a Nightline segment on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cN8sJz50Ng
That's from a couple years ago but you can get an idea of where tech is at from random people (not big companies with billions of dollars) who are building it.

[–]TricksterOfFate 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

They just need a good social program and enough general knowledges to be entertaining.

[–]5Imperator_Red 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

The next generation of women, will see what's coming and will actually begin to learn and produce things like their male counterparts and help move society into the future. As it should be.

No they won’t. They can’t. Women aren’t as smart or capable as men.

[–]ruffyamaharyder 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

You must understand that the next generation will have gene editing capabilities (currently being used in this generation). The mental capabilities will even out between the sexes as well as everything else (if they so choose).

[–]lala_xyyz 9 points10 points  (4 children) | Copy

I used to think this as well, but I don't think artificial wombs and surrogacy can scale society-wide. Marriage as an institution is too resistant. Surrogacy is being banned country after country for the last 20 years. What I think is happen is that simply women that are not naturally feminine, submissive, fearful of being alone in old age, that want to have many children and so on will after several generations replace all the masculine, feminazi, empowered, high-IQ low-fertility bitches that have 0.5 kids on the average. This process was curtailed with marriage where every women had to get married or become a nun, prostitute or die of hunger/crime, but it has been going during the entirety of our species.

[–]liberules 17 points18 points  (1 child) | Copy

Marriage as an institution is too resistant.

marriage as an institution is over. have you looked at the numbers? the probability that a millennial who isn't already married gets married is virtually zero, and is already 20 percentage points lower than prior generations (80%+). the probability that a gen z gets married is already peaking at ~20%.

meanwhile, financial advisors and attorneys the country over are now regularly advising men to not formally get married. no prenup because there's no nuptuals. no asset division, no alimony, no right to coverage of legal bills... tons of the legal doctrines women weaponize against men in divorce suddenly become no longer available.

[–]lala_xyyz 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy

these are all projections, I think it will peak at about 30-40%. marriageable cohort of women will have many kids and will eventually self-select and the unmarriagable women coming from divorced parents and broken families will be permanently tainted, and eventually dying out

[–]TricksterOfFate 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Homosexuality was forbiden in the past, it is now authorised. Artificial wombs and designed children will be allowed too one day, but it will have to be costly to limitt the number of children created.

As for marriage, it is already dying and is pretty much nothing else but a relic of the past.

[–]lala_xyyz 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

artificial wombs research for humans is already banned in a number of developed countries and the tech is in its infancy. I don't think that designed children other than for elimination of simplest Mendelian traits (usually diseases) will ever be ever be a possibility, the genome is simply too complex and there are too many risk factors. marriage will bottom out eventually at some 20-30% rate, and will turn into a social status marker with the religious, well-to-do and others. patriarchal societies that have positive fertility rates all have marriage as a rock-solid institution and will supplant the low-fertility hedonistic cultures of the West

[–]Qba1994 7 points8 points  (16 children) | Copy

Hit me hard. So what do I live for from now on? I think it’s pointless...

[–]liberules 33 points34 points  (13 children) | Copy

well if you're a woman, increasingly nothing. if the wall doesn't end your existential outlook of life like it does for most women, sexbots and artificial wombs surely will. what utilitarian purpose does a female serve when the only two advantages she has over males is commoditized and bottom barrel accessible to every male through technology? in 200 years, if we're not overrun by muslims, meat based women will be obsolete. no one in their right mind would artificially gestate a female.

if you're a guy, you have to remember the timeline is going to take another 20-40 years to get the tech solid and normalize it socially. that might be outside your timelines, so the options are:

  • you can cage yourself up in an escapist fantasy land with drugs and porn and video games (many choose to do this already)
  • you can spin plates until plates are lower value than bots
  • you can go see the world while stuff is still worth seeing. get a drone, record some really cool shit. go surfing. cliff diving. scuba. hike everest. enjoy life because you only get one.
  • you can build and create some shit not for the sake of attracting women. shit, look at zuckerberg... he's a billionaire and his wife is fugly.

[–]Redpiller77 10 points11 points  (5 children) | Copy

Men as workers will also be replaced by AI and robots. We'll probably just live Wall-E style until we all die or a disaster resets humanity.

[–]liberules 10 points11 points  (3 children) | Copy

eh, unless you work in transportation or manufacturing, the timeline on that is longer than any of our lives. granted, transportation is the largest employment sector in the US by sheer number of workers. the transportation AI revolution alone will cause mass unemployment levels typically associated with revolution / civil war / mass rioting.

[–]2Overkillengine 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

the transportation AI revolution alone will cause mass unemployment levels typically associated with revolution / civil war / mass rioting.

Which is why it is stupid to import more low skill workers that will have to compete for what few jobs are left after automation. It just makes the riot crowds larger.

[–]Redpiller77 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

the timeline on that is longer than any of our lives.

We can't know for sure, but I'm guessing about 50 years until AI can replace around 80% of jobs. Most shit isn't that hard to do.

[–]liberules 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

people think that shit happens in a vacuum too. when people can't afford something and it's cheaper to make than ever in history, the price falls. significantly. and as automation causes mass unemployment, the key will simply be to remove the minimum wage.

[–]TricksterOfFate 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Men will become cyborgs push their intellect to extrem hight, create new technologies and explore the universe. Virtual reality worlds so real they look like new worlds will be created, with artificial general inteligences that truly live in these virtual worlds. It will be like Westworld.

[–]nadolny7 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy

I can’t tell if this is some next level true red pill or just some Lunacy conspiracy crazy bullshit. What really scares me is that both options are somewhat reasonable. Huh

[–]liberules 0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

it's already happening in japan.

[–]weatheringwow -1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy

have you ever been to Japan?

[–]liberules 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

yes, i've been every year for the last 4+ years

[–]weatheringwow -1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

What's happening ? daycare not full? grade school does not have 40++ student per class?

[–]1iLLprincipLeS[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy

'Only after disaster can we be resurrected. It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything. Nothing is static, everything is evolving, everything is falling apart.'

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (16 children) | Copy

You're obviously an incel. No sane man is going to have sex with plastic.

[–]liberules 0 points1 point  (15 children) | Copy

i'm well over 6 ft tall, fit, wealthy, and have consistently spun 3-10 plates at a time for the last 3+ years. if you disagree with this, you don't understand red pill even in the slightest. you're projecting and the only incel here is you.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (12 children) | Copy

"i'm well over 6 ft tall, fit, wealthy, and have consistently spun 3-10 plates at a time for the last 3+ years."

Sure you are and I'm also the president of the United States. Seriously kid lets be honest here. You're just an ugly virgin reject still living in his mother's basement and no one likes you. If you were the stud you make out then you wouldn't be craving sex with plastic. You would just be pumping and dumping thots all day everyday.

Thats the easiest way you can tell a guy is an incel when he can't stop talking about plastic sex dolls. Thats just gross and creepy as hell.

[–]liberules 3 points4 points  (11 children) | Copy

hahaha, you really don't understand the foundations of TRP. for example, 70% of japanese guys have given up on real women entirely. many have switched to digital characters. many have switched to sex dolls. some sexdoll brothel opened up in europe and it's been the victim of arson multiple times. i'm not saying i condone it... just that in late stage open hypergamy, the guys at the bottom are getting fucking nothing. for those guys, sexbots are already better than real women and that's when it's just some silicone blob. give it 20 years and for the bottom 50%+ of guys, sexbots will be strictly better than women. not saying i want one. just that i understand the sexual economics at play. you clearly don't.

keep projecting incel.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (10 children) | Copy

Actually I don't think you understand the foundations of the red pill. TRP is about understanding female behaviour and then exploiting it for ones own gain i.e pumping and dumping. Plastic sex dolls is a foundation from incels.

I've noticed scum incels like you after the incel sub got permabanned from reddit have infested the other subs such as the red pill, mens rights and mgtow with your shitty propaganda and trying to mislead everyone into the incel mindset.

"just that in late stage open hypergamy, the guys at the bottom are getting fucking nothing.".

Good. I'm glad incels like you get nothing. The likes of you shouldn't ever get to reproduce and spread your genes into this world.

Your kind are a joke and everyone hates you. Your sub got banned for a reason because you are toxic little shits that should be exterminated from society.

[–]liberules -3 points-2 points  (9 children) | Copy

hahaha. how triggered can you get? you have no fucking clue what TRP is. keep projecting, incel.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (8 children) | Copy

Go fap to your plastic sex doll you sad pathetic incel. Thankfully the likes of you won't breed.

[–]liberules 2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy

still projecting... you done yet?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

Go back into the holle you came from incel.

[–]Ageoft 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Who has time to spin ten plates at a time ?? Ugh sounds like a nightmare

[–]liberules 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

past 7 is hard because it means you're regularly fucking two girls a day multiple days a week. just making the time for that chunks out a bunch of your life. i usually keep it around 3 nowadays just for practical matters.

[–]5Imperator_Red 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

I honesty just think that you are underestimating the time scale of all this. If it does happen, all of us will be old men and unable to really take advantage.

[–]liberules 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

surrogacy and shit tier sexbots are already here...

[–]1iLLprincipLeS[S] 156 points157 points  (30 children) | Copy

TLDR:

If women did not exist men truly would just be living in caves, occasionally going out to hunt for food and at best, AT BEST, some creative cave man might have created poker along the way just so we'd have something to do inside the cave during downtime.

The larger point is since men have built civilization, created and discovered nearly everything, and work harder and in harder subjects, we earn and make the lion's share of the world's income, giving us the most purchasing power in the world. And the number one thing we demand is female youth and beauty, making female youth and beauty the most sought after, and thus most expensive commodity on the planet.

Converting Beauty into Money

The problem facing women in the past was how to convert or "cash in" on their youth and beauty. Traditionally, and across all cultures, this was done through marriage. The "social contract" was that women would provide men their love, affection, support, and sexual access, raise the kids and keep the home, while men would go out, work, make the money, toil in the fields, get killed in war and provide for the family. Some might argue this was barbaric. But whether this arrangement was good or bad is moot. It was what it was. Women converted their youth and beauty into resources by having sex with a man who would provide those resources.

This 2 million year old social contract was upended and replaced, however, and very recently so. Because with rapid advances in technology, women's suffrage, democracy, and the elimination of traditional gender roles, women were no longer relegated to the home to rear and tend to the children. Like men, they were allowed to go out and work, support themselves, own property, etc., freeing them from the expectation that they would have to exchange sex for resources, putting their own livelihoods in their own hands. Furthermore, to cement this "new contract", the traditional role of men was replaced with the government. The ultimate authority and responsibility in providing for a woman (and any children she might have) would no longer be men or an individual man, but the taxpayer through the state. Thus, while men still made the lion's share of economic production, individual husbands would no longer pay individually to support an individual wife in exchange for sex. Men (and working women) would pay communally for all women (and any consequential children) via the government, and sex would be incidental. For the first time in human history women were truly free from men, and it was thanks to this "second social contract."

But before women get too excited about this "second social contract" and the freedoms it has afforded them, it gets even better. Because the internet has provided for what could be considered a "third social contract" that combines the best aspects of the previous two with the drawbacks of none.

Old habits die hard, especially 2 million year old ones. And just because women no longer need men, and men no longer need women, it doesn't mean men's genetic and biological desire for female youth and beauty has gone away. Furthermore, men still make the majority of money, produce the majority of GDP, and control the majority of wealth. So whatever success feminism has had in freeing women from being resource-dependent upon men, the fact still remains female youth and beauty is still the most valuable commodity in the world and men have most of the purchasing power. Thus, even if women are taken care of via themselves or the state, they can still convert their beauty into cash as an "added bonus" if they wish to do so.

The problem was in the past (whether under the "first or second social contracts") directly converting your youth and beauty into money required either prostitution, stripping, or mistressing, all of which come with an abundance of problems and complications of their own. Prostitution was (and still is) largely illegal, socially shunned, and the risk of STD's doesn't need pointing out. Stripping may be legal, but there's the risk of drugs, slipping into prostitution, abuse, stalkers, pimps, mental illness and the whole underworld of stripping. And though mistressing is perhaps the "healthiest," it also takes a toll on marriages and any children unfortunately indirectly involved. But all of these problems have one thing in common. One thing, that if eliminated, eliminates all these drawbacks without lessening the benefits - the physical presence of a man.

So if you can get rid of the physical presence of the man, all these drawbacks go away, but the benefits remain.

And the internet allows women to do precisely this.

STD's, pimps, drugs, abuse, stalkers, possessive men, and even the inconvenience of the physical presence of an annoying man, all these problems are eliminated by the internet. We highlighted these pro's before by delving into the revolutionary business model of "Chaturbate." But the ramifications (and benefits) that the internet has for women goes well beyond the mere obsoleting of the strip club industry. Additionally, there have been some sociological changes as well that makes this "new and improved third contract" a drastic improvement over the previous two.

  • First, underpinning all of this is the increasing reliance (and preference) for digital relationships over real world ones. It is no secret that Millennials-and-younger increasingly rely on social media for their social lives, but it is also the case with sexual ones. Impossible as it may seem (since sex by definition is PHYSICAL), millions of Millennial boys prefer to jerk off to internet porn than engage in the daunting and costly task of pursuing a girl in the real world. "Why spend all that time in the gym, classroom, traffic and office when I can just jerk off to this girl on Chaturbate for free in my mother's basement?" And young women's counter to this is "Why should I have to physically have sex with a guy or show up for a date when I can get attention and resources by flashing my boobies on the internet from THOUSANDS of men at the same time?" It is part economics, part fear, part laziness, and part technology, but also simply a change in generational behavior that younger people have moved their relationships online (including sexual ones). And though this has resulted in a lot less real-world sex, a lot less dating, even a lot less kissing, it does not negate the fact that it is now more socially acceptable to "have sex online," removing traditional social stigmas surrounding porn and selling one's bodies online. Thus you old, antiquated Gen X'ers and Baby Boomers might think it's shockingly "risque" your wife sends you a nudie pic on the phone. For Millennials-and-younger a girl masturbating herself online is just another Tuesday.

  • Second, if you look at it from a purely "resource-extracting" perspective, the digital world is just as profitable as the brick and mortar one, just without all the drawbacks. In the US the prostitution industry is estimated to be about $14 billion, while the porn industry (the figures of which are not as precise) are about the same. However, these statistics only measure what has been traditionally considered "porn." It does not include all the money girls make today online through booming sites like Chaturbate, Seeking Arrangement, Name Your Price, and a score of others. Furthermore, it's practically impossible to measure the millions (perhaps billions?) of private financial transactions online between men and women where women simply "send nudes" or "send pics." Furthermore, if you're going to focus on mere "resource-extraction" a lot of things that aren't porn still are women trading their beauty in for money (cute pics, attention, subscription services, and patreon donations - which we will discuss below). I'm no economist, but given this wider definition of resources-for-beauty, as well as the booming growth digital female beauty is experiencing online, I would very conservatively estimate the "Digital Female Beauty Commodity Industry" to be 5 times larger than the analog one today, easily reaching 10 times that in the next 5 years. So yes, most girls today won't be pulling tricks on the street. But what percent of girls today and in the future will pull metaphorical "digital tricks online?" It's safer, easier, and multiple times more profitable, so much it will become the norm.

[–]1iLLprincipLeS[S] 100 points101 points  (17 children) | Copy

There is, however, just one small, minor, technicality.

The entirety of this Brave New Digital World, and all of its financial promise, and all of the ease of life it can afford, as well as all of the pain it avoids, it all hinges on one minor thing:

That you actually have youth and beauty.

And while being young is easy, being beautiful is hard.

The reason being beautiful is hard is for more reasons than today's modern man might think. Yes, going to the gym regularly is hard. Yes, dieting religiously is hard. And yes, the process beautiful women put themselves through daily with makeup, fashion, hair, etc., is VERY hard. But the real reason it's incredibly hard for your average young woman to be beautiful today is because establishment women loathe and detest female youth and beauty. So much so the entire second-social-contract establishment is actively waging a war against beauty and any young women who have it.

Everyday young women, even little girls, are propagandized to believe that beauty "is on the inside." Corporations, desperate to increase sales lie to women saying "big is beautiful." Establishment female publications engage in self-worship claiming "every woman is beautiful." Pretty girls who make a living on their looks are slandered, if not protested out of a job. Companies that WERE BUILT ON THE PREMISE of female beauty abandon it. And our education system clearly tells women their education is the ONLY thing that matters. Even the concept of being female or feminine is attempted to be erased as establishment women and our institutions try to eliminate the concept of "the sexes" altogether. The question then is why do establishment, second-social-contract women hate female beauty so much? Why do they put up such hurdles for young women to attain it? Do they not want young women to be both smart AND beautiful? And there are many possible reasons for it.

The most obvious of which would be pure and simple envy. An ugly woman probably begrudges a pretty woman her looks. Laziness is another explanation because the effort needed to stay in shape, diet, and be beautiful is quite a daunting commitment. Perhaps most modern women have drank the cool aid and truly do not believe female beauty has any value and instead bow down at the altar of education and career. And one musn't forget the "retaliatory strike nature" of some misandrist women who just hate men and take pride in depriving men of what they want (the ones who define themselves by screeding "I don't live my life for a man!!!").

But while all those explanations are plausible, and certainly explain why some second-social-contract women hate female beauty, the real reason is much simpler - sunk investment costs. Most modern day women, most establishment women, most second-social-contact women have committed their time, youth, energies money and investment to their careers and education. They are fully vested in the second-social-contract. Their entire lives have been lived in the second-social-contract.

And that's the problem right there - "their entire lives."

Because they are old now. They have no youth left. They cannot be beautiful anymore. And if they can't have access to the world's most valuable commodity, then by god no one can. That is the real reason behind the war on beauty - establishment women can't face the fact they wasted their youth.

Wage a war against something like "female beauty" all you want, what's sad is these establishment women are wasting their time. Because no matter how much propaganda they spew, no matter how many trillions of advertising dollars they spend, no matter how many decades of K-college indoctrination they install in young women, it's going up against two much more powerful forces - genetics and economics.

If this whole "anti-beauty" thing was completely insular to the female world, then yes. Big would be beautiful. Brains would be the only thing that matters. Sex could be a social construct. And whatever other psycho-nonsense modern day establishment women want to tell themselves. But it's not. There's this other small segment of society called "men" and men ultimately determine what is beautiful in a woman. And matter of fact we don't even get to determine it because it is our hard-wired genetics that forces us to. You can launch all manner of campaigns, lie to your children about being transgendered, feed every one a ton of hormones and drugs, all your efforts will be for nothing because men are hard-wired to like traditionally beautiful women and we forever will be.

But the real trick played on second-social-contract women comes from the world of economics. Specifically the Law of Supply. And just like genetic laws are unbreakable, so too is the Law of Supply.

It's already hard enough to be beautiful. But if second-social-contract women want to shame women from being beautiful, by all means go ahead. Because it will simply lessen the supply of truly beautiful women. Sadly, according to the Law of Supply, when supply goes down, the value goes up, making true female beauty all that more valuable. And any women willing to attain it will reap even more rewards because of their rarity. Alas, trying to eliminate the value of female beauty by making fewer women beautiful is like trying to lower the value of diamonds by producing less diamonds and flooding the market with dirt. I'm sorry ladies, you just simply can't win.

Still, while we can focus on the war being waged on female beauty, it is my belief the Brave New Digital World is going to give modern day establishment women a run for their money. Again, the spectacular failure of the Millennial generation is on display for all young women to see, the miserable lives second-social-contract women lead will also become increasingly-apparently miserable, the costs to enter the second-social-contact (college tuition, and life-long debt servitude) are becoming prohibitive, and the wages/freedom being offered by the Brave New Digital World is bordering on compelling. The real issue is simply what percentage of women are going to commit to be beautiful?

"The ugly will always be with us." Whether it's out of laziness, sloth, brainwashing, indoctrination, even misandry, a certain percentage of women will always choose the second-social-contract, no matter how horrific it is, because they just refuse to be beautiful. But if you're willing to put in 4 hours a week at the gym (as opposed to 8 years in a women's study program), maintain your decorum, and actually be feminine, a much better, enjoyable, easier and profitable world awaits if you're just willing to be beautiful.

If you're brave, courageous, and intelligent enough to still have common sense, you'll realize nothing has changed. Since the dawn of time it was female beauty that drove the human race and today it still is female beauty that drives the human race. The only real question is whether society wants to acknowledge this fact.

For those that do there is success and happiness in life because basing your decisions in reality is the only guaranteed formula for success. But if you base your decisions in lies, which all of society decided to do with the second-social-contract, you can expect to pay a dear price. In this case we ignored men as the engine of economic growth, and denied them the fuel they needed to make it hum (female beauty). The price we paid was slower economic growth, lesser standards of living, divorce, broken homes, broken families, national debts, cripple student loans, and overall more miserable people. And I would also argue, ironically, it has hurt those who advocated for the second-social-contract the most. But for whatever price we paid and no matter what sociological or political experiments the government, media, the education industry or "establishment women" wanted to play on society, it was all moot. It was all a waste of time. Because in the end reality always wins.

Target Corporation can tell us "big is beautiful." Formula One racing can fire their F1 girls. The colleges and universities can scream at women they don't need a man, just an education. The government can cut checks here and there to keep women just barely above the poverty line. And feminists can yell at the moon. It still won't change the fact that female youth and beauty is the most valuable thing on the planet. And if you're smart, you'll make damn sure you have it.

[–]redpill77 39 points40 points  (5 children) | Copy

Thanks for the tldr.

I've noticed hot girls dress very conservatively, at least in my progressive city. I think partly it is to avoid unwanted attention, but I think that it has also become faux pas to dress sexy most of the time.

[–]PS2Errol 41 points42 points  (2 children) | Copy

The more conservatively they dress they hotter they are - to any man with a good eye.

[–]surfingjesus 15 points16 points  (0 children) | Copy

I have a good eye for hoes

[–]Ivan_The_Reddish 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Boris Johnson's letterboxes really get my motor running, if you know what I mean.

[–]Whopper_Jr 32 points33 points  (1 child) | Copy

Hot girls do downplay their hotness—herd mentality. Only the most exceptional, confident women refuse to cow to the herd and take pride in their beauty.

[–]NorthEasternNomad 31 points32 points  (5 children) | Copy

The inevitable end of feminism is eating itself. The old and jealous will either repulse or devour the younger women they need taking up the mantle.

They will do this out of jealousy. Because if there is one thing a middle age and up woman hates...its a younger, prettier, fitter, trimmer woman who is also successful. They will tear her down with a smile and revel in the flotsam of her shattered existence.

And this is happening younger and younger. Far girls live to tear down fit, beautiful women. And they dont wait until they get old to do it. They start young.

And this is why feminism is doomed. Because the now old women who started it, despise and tear down the very demographic they need to attract.

Turns out, creatures who allow emotions to govern their decisions are shit at running a movement.

[–]bjcm5891 30 points31 points  (2 children) | Copy

That scene in Snow White where the Queen (disguised as a creepy old hag) gives Snow White the poisoned apple is a perfect metaphor for these middle aged feminists trying to push their socially, spiritually cancerous ideology on young women in the name of "equality".

[–]NorthEasternNomad 13 points14 points  (1 child) | Copy

Wow. It...really is. Even down to potentially sleeping away her youth....

[–]drsherbert 20 points21 points  (1 child) | Copy

Not only do these middle aged women hate younger, more fertile women, they also hate the older men that fuck them.

[–]NorthEasternNomad 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yes, theres that, too. Good point.

[–]Nicolas0631 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Just a remark, the women that are the most successful at work are both smart, educated AND beautiful.

[–]JoePersonman 8 points9 points  (3 children) | Copy

"Makeup and hair are VERY hard....it's already hard enough being beautiful" What a fuckin cuck.

[–]whyamiotaku565 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

I think makeup looks pretty hard to do properly tbh, but in no way is fashion or haircare hard.

[–]30dirtyfingers 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Make up is hard, at least when u do a good job it is. From what I can tell, the object of make up is to either look like ur not wearing any or to look very different. Most girls that do their own are barely touching the surface of the art.

[–]whuttupfoo 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

I mean look at all the girls with shit eyebrows. It has to be hard if they can’t even create a normal looking eyebrow. Drawing the same picture on your face 365 days a year and still can’t get it right.

[–]chomponthebit 21 points22 points  (3 children) | Copy

It’s safer, easier, and multiple times more profitable, so much it will become the norm.

Chaturbate is profitable to hb9s and above. I know 20 year old, very bangable 7s & 8s who’ve complained of making only $20 after putting toys in just about every hole... Nevermind the fact these images and videos are recorded by third-party sites and available for download forever. Zero forethought

[–]Nicolas0631 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

That's funny of them to complain ! It seemed obvious. This stuff is like youtube but with porn, only a few can make significant money. What the catch ? 99% of male only watch the free porn. The remaining 1% maybe spend a few bucks here and there on chicks they like the most.

On top I don't even think it is necessarily that you need to be hb9, but you need to create a brand, an event and to be known. It is like the rock stars & celebrities.

[–]2awalt_cupcake 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

This isn't a hotness thing it's a business thing. Those 7 & 8's most likely lack any sort of business skill. I've seen 5's make a living because they know how to control supply through limited streaming, purchasing through their own website, and other services like used panties and premium snapchats.

It's not the product that's failing it's the strategy.

[–]Putin-Nanny 36 points37 points  (2 children) | Copy

Ooga booga! Krog does not want Krug to poke Stacy before Krog so Krog will craft empires, jets and thinking machines from sand stone and dirt.

[–]Gearski 23 points24 points  (1 child) | Copy

I hit Krug with club and now Stacy belong to Krog, ahh the good old days..

[–]_do_not_read_this_ 41 points42 points  (0 children) | Copy

I don't think you quite understand what "tl;dr" means, LOL

[–]RocBrizar 8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

Saying men would live in cave if not for women is a typical Freudian reduction, and the article is full of rash statements like that (the stripcam industry is very far from being this big and the article provide no data to support its claim, porn is definitely not safer than prostitution and far from being socially accepted, and there is definitely some social stigma on women who monetize their sexuality, coming from about everyone).

We have multiple appetencies that provide incentive for our behaviors, including sex, certainly, but also competition / domination / social recognition. These are not specifically derived from sex though they increase our chances of mating (like most of our selected behaviors & traits). They provide their own rewards in themselves. Just think of the entire casts of high-ranking eunuchs, scholastic scholars, philosophers, ascetics that contributed to most of our intellectual progress.

I just think you seriously overestimate the importance of the digital soft porn market based on a few successful Instagram models & streamers, who hide -as often with these new digital trends- the overwhelming majority of people who won't make a dime through these medias no matter how hard they try. Because -and as an aspiring economist you should have figured that out quickly- if there is no barrier to entry, then you have a tremendous competition and very low average returns, with some very few highly successful exceptions that capitalize on a their exposure momentum.

So the truth is, strip cam is really not such a big deal, and only a very marginal industry compared to porn, which, even then, don't pay that much for most women involved in it (only a few successful pornstars make a decent living, if they don't overdose before reaching their mid-twenties).

[–]chomponthebit 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

It’s safer, easier, and multiple times more profitable, so much it will become the norm.

Chaturbate is profitable to hb9s and above. I know 20 year old, very bangable 7s & 8s who’ve complained of making only $20 after putting toys in just about every hole... Nevermind the fact these images and videos are recorded by third-party sites and available for download forever. Zero forethought

[–]Nicolas0631 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

The digital has one issue for girls. 1 girl that is doing webcam a few ours a day has maybe hundred of customers. Pornography is having thousands/million customers.

While the old arrangement of getting married would allow almost everyone to get a partner and say half the population to have a decent one, you only need a few percent of porn/prostitution and cam girls to provide for the whole population. It isn't as subtainable as getting married that would give you half the male wealth. Males don't spent much on prostitution & porn.

[–]rockyp32 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I dont know why but reading this just made me sad. Everything you posted here is the truth I always like the figure out the root reason for things and you found it right here.

[–]AnyHead 44 points45 points  (18 children) | Copy

I guess I'm old fashioned because I don't consider watching a girl on a webcam to be anywhere close to the same experience I would get with a lap dance. Obviously the former channel is way more attractive to the "suppliers" (for the safety, capital, labor, etc. considerations mentioned) but damn... I guess we as the "demanders" are being less and less demanding.

[–]1iLLprincipLeS[S] 52 points53 points  (9 children) | Copy

Cosplay THOT Belle Delphine makes 154k per month just from patreon

[–]BuzzLightGear321 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy

"The real story here is that the western sexual marketplace is such that just having a pretty face, being skinny, having long hair, and pretending to like nerdy shit can make you a millionaire in the incel economy without you even needing to bang any of them, and most girls still won't stop eating."

HAHA True words.

[–]ZeppKfw 42 points43 points  (5 children) | Copy

Bitch is smart though. Gotta give props for her hustle. It ain't easy to be unique from other thots.

[–]Psycholephant 30 points31 points  (4 children) | Copy

Biggest reason she got so famous is because she is good at memes, and at being a degenerate. She started making ahegao faces while in her outfits. Then she embraced the whole tiktok and gen z culture. She's smart, or maybe just lucky.

[–]Bingbongfly 16 points17 points  (0 children) | Copy

She has a pretty savvy boyfriend that helps her. I respect the hustle

[–]ZeppKfw 5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy

Except a bunch of other e thots do the same thing.

[–]Psycholephant 18 points19 points  (0 children) | Copy

Right but as far as I know, she was one of the few first and kind of grabbed the whole crowd along the way.

[–]xkcd_puppy 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Dear IRS... (IRS doesn't care)

[–]1RevolutionaryPea7 36 points37 points  (7 children) | Copy

I don't watch porn any more and I've never watched webcam sluts (and never even dreamed of paying for it), but I find lapdances incredibly frustrating compared to watching porn. With porn I know it's just me and my dick. With a lapdance I'm having to restrain myself from grabbing her and basically fucking her right there. I don't really understand how guys can find that enjoyable.

[–]NorthEasternNomad 20 points21 points  (3 children) | Copy

Right there with you. Stopped porn myself, save the drive for the real thing.

But lap dances and strip clubs? No thanks. Waste of time, pointless frustration.

[–]RightHandWolf 25 points26 points  (2 children) | Copy

It's like paying to get into a restaurant where all you can do is look at the food.

[–]NorthEasternNomad 8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

Holy shit. That's spot on. Well put.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

deleted What is this?

[–]RealMcGonzo 5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

I don't really understand how guys can find that enjoyable.

I've wondered that as well. My best guess is they cum in their jeans. I'd rather do the porn.

[–]RealMcGonzo 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Ooo, got a downvote. Guessing I nailed that one. Yuck.

[–]andreas-mgtow 24 points25 points  (3 children) | Copy

Good article overall, but I disagree with the conclusion that men would live in caves if the mating imperative did not compel them to build shit to impress women with resources.

A common trait of many hyper productive men is refusing to waste time and resources on women.

You have (Science/Tech) Sir Isaac Newton, Nikola Tesla, Albert Einstein, the Wright brothers; (Philosophy) Sartre, Thoreau, Voltaire, Descartes, John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Plato; (Art) Beethoven, Vivaldi, Da Vinci, Kafka ...

Without these men and many, many others, We would certainly not be living in a modern society.

[–]waxrivers 19 points20 points  (0 children) | Copy

I thought this too. That is what a Boomer would say but the Author said he was Gen X. If you leave men alone without the distraction of women, you get these massive philosophical clubs and thinker societies. Think Ancient Greece or Rome. There is something to having Testosterone pumping through your veins that makes you curious; inquisitive and problem solving. Soon that Cave would be a skyscraper because men love to do awesome tasks just to say they did.

There is cross-over and correlation that "Men build cities for women" but it's more complicated than that. Men often build things for the sense of accomplishment and then gift it to women for the prize.

[–]GroundPole 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Those are the genuises, they arent like the rest. Their autistic obsession is unusual. Civilization is built and maintained by the majority of men that are average. And they build (by following leaders) and maintain when they have something to invest into it, like family.

I dont want to diminish the contribution of genuises, but you need a solid population of people to maintain the civilization too.

[–]JihadNinjaCowboy 46 points47 points  (2 children) | Copy

All social contracts are invalid now, including marriage. It serves the elite in the short term to divide and conquer and demoralize potential competitors/adversaries.

Feminism was highly financed by Carnegie, Ford & Rockefeller groups, which incidentally all have CIA ties. For the world economic implications of elites, read 'Confessions of an Economic Hitman'.

The only real valid social construct now is that there are elites, and there are free-range slaves, with some of those free-range slaves serving as useful idiots for the elites. (feminists, economists, journalists, law-enforcement, etc)

[–]Aptote 8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

free-range slaves

not for much longer, as cars are being done away with

soon slaves with much less "range"

[–]GroundPole 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Marriage is actually more beneficial for the poor. And the dissolution of marriage is keeping the poor down.

They used to be able to pool their resources and provide for the next generation. They would be incentivized to save up for the future of their genetic legacy. But without marriage and with govt subsides to single moms. The poor stay in broken families.

[–]waxrivers 12 points13 points  (3 children) | Copy

I thought the one point the author missed glaringly is in how these economic trends shall play out in future generations. He suggests that there are "Piles of Money" for female beauty, but doesn't touch on the fact that much of that wealth was built up by past generations. This is wealth that is being "squandered" by Boomers, etc. The money came from a generation where men worked hard and invested (The parents of Boomers); built and produced goods. Now the money is being "pulled from the wealth bank account".

So I'm not so sure that a THOT will be able to make 150K a month on Patreon so easy in another generation. My Generation X is broke as fuck. The Millennials are a joke as the author states. The young men today, who are not building up wealth, will be looking for much more economical solutions like VR Headsets and Sexbots that go the long mile. I scarcely believe that women being pretty will grant them a career because wealth will be scarce.

Perhaps a small group of 10/10s can make a life career of camming, but where does that leave the rest of women? There will be no Welfare State because young men will not have built up any wealth. That is less property to tax; less income tax; less money to go into female welfare. Not ALL women will be pretty and young. And once they loose those two traits, they need traditional welfare (eg: Marriage; State Welfare; FoodStamps; etc) that are all paid by male taxes.

TL;DR I believe that by the time the Millennial men come of age to build wealth, they will already be "leaving society" and fucking off playing vidya. This will kill the Female Welfare State within one generation. We are literally watching the collapse Right Now.

[–]whyamiotaku565 5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy

Definitely, while there are undoubtedly cucks of all ages, old men who have the money seem to be the biggest sugar daddies and this won't be the case in a few decades (hopefully).

Instead, I propose that popularity will be more important than beauty, whereas a 10/10 with little social media presence will find it hard to get paid by virtue of beauty, a meme page with a 7/10 female mod and 500k followers would be rolling in cash with some work.

The idea being that finding a sugar daddy with that level of money will be harder in the future, but getting the average cucked joes (2k?/500k) to donate a fiver will be easy, especially considering if the fem mod regularly posts selfies the factor of familiarity will reel them in by turning her from a 7 to a 10.

[–]waxrivers 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Absolutely. Popularity will play a huge part. So take a slice of 100 women who are still young and beautiful participating in cam-whoring. I think that top 10% will still be raking in a Lion's Share of the money.

This leads me to believe that women will cry and moan how it's "unfair" and "not equal". If they cannot compete in Capitalism, this is what they do! The lesser women who are not making that much would have to resort to this tactic or go back to male-provided welfare or work a dead-end job. Women eventually tear each other apart. I can't see a select 10 women in our test group raking in all the profits for long.

[–]AtlasHJack69 8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

Finally, these are the type of posts I subscribed to read. Kudos to OP!

I would suggest that I don't entirely agree that without women men would not have developed civilization. Isaac Newton is largely rumored to have died a virgin as were many of the royal academy back in the day. Nikola Tesla also thought women were a waste of time and died a celibate, there are couple of other famous physicists that died virgins, or barely cared about women found them superficial and only useful for sex. Einstein fucked his cousin and was extremely mean to his wife he didn't care. The dude who won the Nobel prize in 2012 said his children were alone most of the time. Because he was in the library most of the time.

Men are motivated by abstract and other non superficial things. Women are blank slates and will build themselves in the image of whatever man she wants to attract and keep.

[–]hoopingblob 13 points14 points  (1 child) | Copy

It angers me to see that some people in Suits and with pink hair are trying to stop the human progression because of their laziness and envy.

We have so much potential and yet we are being stopped for developing it to it's fullest. I will break these limits and like this going against the system and showing it a big fuck you.

It's time to win this war.

[–]russian_nlgger 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy

seeking arrangement is not just for sugar babies. most girls on there will literally hit you up with a price and you go from there. they're straight up hookers

[–]Skuggasveinn 4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy

Given that it's true that online female beauty is getting more valuable. How can I invest (and hopefully profit) out of this?

[–]noPTSDformePlease 10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy

build a competitor to chaturbate. com, get women to sign up, market it to incels, and take a cut of the proceeds.

[–]whyamiotaku565 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

Look out for the next biggest craze and profit on it. e.g Belle Delphine becoming famous for making ahegao faces & e-girl aesthetic popular due to mixing in well with gen z meme culture

[–]quieroser 5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

beauty fades fast, very fast

[–]Frequentwinds 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

yes, no flower lasts for ever

[–]RelativeTeal 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Lol. “As an economist,” and then “I’m no economist?” Like, reread and edit your own content, dude

[–]Senior Contributordr_warlock 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

Aaron Clarey doesn't get the cred he deserves.

[–]Putin-Nanny 14 points15 points  (4 children) | Copy

From a female perspective, the value of this commodity can depend on how it's sold and on what market. Jeff Bezos's wife is decent but how much would she make in porn? Why sell the milk on the cheap when the cow could be worth it's weight in gold?

Sorry this knowledge won't directly get you laid but can give more perspective in female game.

[–]BACONisKEWLEST 31 points32 points  (3 children) | Copy

Remove the qualifier, we don’t care if you‘re a woman. Your comment either stands on its own merits or it doesn’t.

[–]Putin-Nanny 17 points18 points  (2 children) | Copy

This gives insight on female decision making and convincing them they are getting the most (that being the pua) for what they have.

I'm also a father of a daughter. This may be useful in preventing her from slutting herself if translated in a proper way.

[–]BACONisKEWLEST 13 points14 points  (0 children) | Copy

Ah gotcha, I understand your previous comment better now.

[–]Spicychickenaholic 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I really can't agree with this. I think female beauty is the most valuable commodity in a few places, such as the US. There are places where female beauty means a lot less than what class you come from or how you speak.

> Men (whether you like it or not) have single-handedly built civilization.  We build buildings, roads, aqueducts, bridges, and forges all so we can get a beautiful, young woman.

This completely insane and reductive. You would be right to argue that reproducing is the primary drive of everyone and so in a sense all other endeavours are inherited from them but that is the absolute limit you can take that. Men have built society because it was the correct thing to do in that time and that place. Not because they were trying to get some pussy. Henry Ford didn't mass produce the first automobile so that he could get some pussy. Edison didn't invent the lightbulb for some ho's. This is a case of drinking too much TRP coolaid and trying to view the world in terms of a univariate analysis.

[–]3SKRedPill 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

For all those wondering, at a global level, the mass of humanity is still operating in a woman's frame (which as we've seen, has no solidity or long term idea where it's going) - aided by the legal system. At a macroscopic level, all men are guilty of surrendering their frames and power to women for pussy.

The only solution lies in bringing them back into our frame again. Or else gets ready for an eventual insane future and a very hard crash of society.

[–]mtriad 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

If women or man did not exist... no one would exist. This post put them in a huge pedestal even tho it’s not intended too

[–]Fenarth 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Read the whole article and while it was an okay, but very entertaining read; I find it hard to agree with.

It severely overestimates the practicality of what it implies

Just because you are pretty and pretend to be a conservative for example, doesnt mean you'll be popular

Having a presence on social media to reach financial sustainability requires an AMPLE portion of luck as well as hard work. Work is work. Even if it's not in the traditional sense

A very small portion of women can achieve the kind of easy life he makes seem so easy to obtain as a woman, even if they want to



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

© TheRedArchive 2020. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter