The Empress is Naked

Reddit View
December 9, 2015

"A weaker sex drive is at the basis of female superiority."

I don't normally review books, but occasionally I'll stumble across something that's too good not to share. The Empress is Naked by Adam Leonas happens to be just one of these books.

I'll start with a few disclaimers. First of all, I do not take unsolicited book review requests. Don't send me your book I won't read it. Secondly, I am not making money off of this, nor does the author realize I'm doing this review, nor has he asked me to.

Now that's out of the way- The Empress is Naked.

This book and author has been around TRP and mensrights for a while and one afternoon I decided to take a peek just to see what it was about and I have to say it's one of the most interesting insights into the history and current state of sexual relations in culture that I think I've seen.

The ideas in this book aren't necessarily unique or new to anybody familiar with TRP, however the author actually does a pretty good job of organizing and arranging the ideas in a coherent narrative that constructs a plausible history of sexual relations between the genders, and explains why we're in the quandary we're in today, and what the causes of the frustrations are on both sides.

The book begins by challenging some popular misconceptions- that women are systemically oppressed, or that men are institutionally put in charge. Again, not exactly groundbreaking territory, however it's nice to see the arguments made succinctly in small bite-sized chunks that can easily be digested.

It continues by analyzing to what degree sex, and the availability of sex, has affected relations between the genders. It draws a connection between economy and restriction of sex, suggesting that women were freer with sex when there was surplus, and the restriction of sex became the norm when there was scarcity. The most interesting thing it highlights, in my opinion, is the fascinating use of sexual access (or the restriction thereof) to control and use the male population.

I recommend highly grabbing this book, if for anything, for the first half of the book. If you can, get a paper copy that you can share with people you know who are on the fence.

I will admit the second half seems to drag a little and ventures outside the realm of plausibility into conjecture and suggestion, but nevertheless I believe it's worth a read if the battle of the sexes is a topic that interests you the way it interests me.

Reposting an Excerpt that the author originally posted on reddit:

Games People Play

In this section we will see why women are in a better position to satisfy their social needs. But first let's define a frame of reference for these needs. To do this, we will use Games People Play, a book by eminent psychologist Eric Berne.

Berne describes the interactions between people as exchanges of what he calls “strokes”. The baby needs his mother's caress in order to feel intimacy and safety. This need for positive stimuli, the “infantile stimulus-hunger”, is transformed in adults, due to social and other difficulties, resulting “into something which may be termed recognition-hunger”.

“A movie actor may require hundreds of strokes each week from anonymous and undifferentiated admirers to keep his spinal cord from shrivelling, while a scientist may keep physically and mentally healthy on one stroke a year from a respected master... ‘[S]troking’ may be employed colloquially to denote any act implying recognition of another’s presence. Hence a stroke may be used as the fundamental unit of social action. An exchange of strokes constitutes a transaction, which is the unit of social intercourse...”

Stimulus-hunger and recognition hunger are two fundamental aspects of human psychology. A third one is “structure-hunger”. To many people “unstructured time”, when there is no framework set for an interaction, makes them feel at a loss, awkward, uncomfortable. They dread the specter of silence, these moments when no one can think of something interesting to say. “The eternal problem of the human being is how to structure his waking hours. In this existential sense, the function of all social living is to lend mutual assistance for this project.”

One of the activities that structure time is work, but “it is of interest here only insofar as [it] offer[s] a matrix for ‘stroking’”. Conventional social interactions offer another way to structure time.

Beyond these, “as people become better acquainted”, interactions in the sphere of personal relationship begin to take place. And this is where things start to get interesting:

“These incidents superficially appear to be adventitious, and may be so described by the parties concerned, but careful scrutiny reveals that they tend to follow definite patterns which are amenable to sorting and classification, and that the sequence is circumscribed by unspoken rules and regulations. These regulations remain latent as long as the amities or hostilities proceed according to Hoyle, but they become manifest if an illegal move is made, giving rise to a symbolic, verbal or legal cry of ‘Foul!’”

Berne calls these kind of interactions Games. Indeed, “the bulk of social activity consists of playing games”.

So what is the problem with Games? “[G]ames are substitutes for real living and real intimacy”. They have “ulterior quality” and have profit as their goal. “Every game … is basically dishonest”.

Female Games

Using the above terminology, we can posit the following: Society has been configured so that it is easier for women to get the “strokes” they need, as attested by measurements of happiness and the dramatic reversal of life expectancy in their favor. Due to their more controllable sex drive, they are in position to play dishonest games with men, so that the strokes they receive are obtained at men's expense. “Good” women do it completely unconsciously, just because they can and it pays – i.e. it is pleasant. “Bad” women do it on purpose, calculating their profit in advance.

The Flirting Game

A woman's life, from the end of childhood up to decrepit old age, are spent playing the flirting game. Women set its rules and derive pleasure from it. The great majority of men play this game at a negative psychological cost. The game, in its milder form, goes as follows: “[She] signals that she is available and gets her pleasure from the man’s pursuit. As soon as he has committed himself, the game is over.” In a more “advanced” level, “[She] gets only secondary satisfaction from [his] advances. Her primary gratification comes from rejecting him, so that this game is also colloquially known as ‘Buzz Off, Buster’. She leads [him] into a much more serious commitment than the mild flirtation ... and enjoys watching his discomfiture when she repulses him.”

As in all Games, in flirting, the female motivations are unconscious. At the conscious level, she has put on make-up, a nice dress, highlighted secondary sexual characteristic (her legs, chest, butt) supposedly because “she just feels like doing that”, not because she likes men to look at her of flirt with her. In other cases, a bit more consciously, she does want men to flirt her, but only the “alpha males”, not every second-class loser in town. The Average Frustrated Chumps who are attracted to her are summarily shot down “collateral damage”.

Social scientists have called this “social flirting”. The game is virtually free, with no cost for women, and, as mentioned earlier, with a negative cost for men. It is like playing craps, with men winning only with double sixes, while women win with all other outcomes. If we wanted to balance it from the perspective of game theory, we should introduce a cost factor for women, a punishment, i.e. some form of violence, verbal or physical, from the conned man. However, as this is forbidden, socially or legally, the average man is left completely unprotected.

One result of the flirting game is that since the great majority of approaches are rejected, many men decide to stop playing the game altogether. It is quite telling that PUA's in their recipes for how to get a woman, explicitly forbid asking her out. The “benefit” for women, especially the most insecure ones, is that they can derive extra pleasure from whining “what has happened to real men?”

“Nora Vincent ... said she thought dating women would be one of the most pleasant parts of her undercover life. As a lesbian, she had already dated women, but now there would be many more available to her, and she looked forward to the experience. She found it sobering and discouraging. As a man, she would approach women at the bar to try to chat them up, and more often than not she got a quick and unkind (sometimes downright humiliating) rejection. She soon lost her nerve and, were it not for the demands of her experiment, she says she would have given up. She wondered how men manage to do it, to persevere, to summon up their courage to approach women despite the expectation of being rejected most of the time and despite the accumulating history of bad outcomes. She said she did not know which was worse, the women who rejected you at a glance without giving you a chance to prove yourself, or the ones who rejected you after a couple of dates and some degree of getting to know you.”

While the game has only immediate profits for women, it does nevertheless have an indirect cost. It produces a disappointment in men that might turn into rage. This is why women can fall victim to “sexist” teasing on the street, especially if they are dressed provocatively. However, women who are teased are not necessarily those that “play” the most. This statistical deviation is perhaps the reason cat-calling is generally presented as a problem for women, while it is only a minimal cost that the female sex pays, in relation to the psychological benefits they derive from the Game. And let us keep in mind that only a very small number of these “teasings” is really annoying. Most are good-natured and welcomed by women. If you are feeling down and want to fix your mood, you can wear something nice and go out for a walk at a street market, where you can enjoy the sellers' humorous cat-calling...

The Raping Game

Revealingly, Berne does not consider the Raping Game as being separate from the Flirting Game. Berne argues it's just one of its variations, in the “3rd degree”. The description of the game is as follows:

“[She] leads [him] into compromising physical contact and then claims that he has made a criminal assault or has done her irreparable damage. In its most cynical form [she] may actually allow him to complete the sexual act so that she gets that enjoyment before confronting him. The confrontation may be immediate, as in the illegitimate cry of rape, or it may be long delayed, as in suicide or homicide following a prolonged love affair. If she chooses to play it as a criminal assault, she may have no difficulty in finding mercenary or morbidly interested allies, such as the press, the police, counselors and relatives.”

Rape fantasy is one of the most common fantasies for women. Studies in the past 30 years have indeed found that “between 31% and 57% of women have rape fantasies, and these fantasies are frequent or preferred in 9% to 17% of women. Considering that many people are ashamed to report rape fantasies, these stats are most likely lowball figures.”

Certainly, not all rapes are caused by women. To go from a fantasy to provoking a real rape you need to be at least a bit disturbed. But then, “Mental disorders are common. World wide more than one in three people in most countries report sufficient criteria for at least one at some point in their life.” Given this, it is not unreasonable to suspect that many rapes are actually female-initiated.

Post Information
Title The Empress is Naked
Author redpillschool
Upvotes 581
Comments 204
Date 09 December 2015 05:24 PM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit TheRedPill
Original Link
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
alphascarcityframegamethe red pillPUA

[–]Exogyra_Ponderosa203 points204 points  (63 children) | Copy

There's a reason ancient cultures portrayed women as evil. Women have unchecked power to sex. Bottom line: Power corrupts.

[–]babybopp154 points155 points  (38 children) | Copy

Look at porn actor James Deen. His pornstar girlfriend Stoya claimed he raped her. That she said their safe word and he did not stop. This claims of course after they broke up. Then you see a gaggle of hamsters crawl out of the wood works to claim that they were also raped by James Deen ..WHEN DOING A SCENE. And the worst part is that another pornstar (gaby dunn :mutual friend) says she knows it is a false allegation for a fact but will not defend James Deen, her longtime friend because it will mean she is saying that pornstars cant get raped. That it will take female lib rape movement behind. His friend who knows it is false refuses to defend him.

This girl Kora Peters said he raped her. Here is the video, NSFW According to her, he anally penetrated her without permission. If you watch the video, you can see what bullshit this all is. i will only link to his website.

That teen mom farrah also claimed her porn video that she got paid $10,000 (estimate + royalties if tape sells well), by fucking james deen on camera, was rape to her now that she thinks about it. Farrah recently revealed to In Touch magazine. “If I went back in time, I would not have done it. The sex tape ruined my life.

I am not responsible, The money is mine but I am not responsible for my actions. She thought she would get kim k fame.

It is a woman scorned and like you say OP at the bottom, mercenaries, allies and SJW are there ready to white knight these women and their convoluted minds. And believe me, they do not have a conscience that would tell them to do the right thing. If you place your trust on the conscience of a woman to do the right thing, then you are a fool by definition.

I have my friend whose girlfriend of 18 months just broke up with him and went back to her EX. This EX has made it clear that he has other girlfriends and two kids since they broke up. My boy is full beta but self sufficient with a good job and looks. He does not understand when she told him that even though her ex kept on cheating on her, being with him after the two broke up is just the same as HER cheating on her EX for 18 months. Her hamster wheel said that. That she considers her relationship with my friend to be cheating on her EX just the same way her Ex cheated on her. He will heal.

My thing is never to trust a woman. Those giggles and smiles will turn into demon eyes and hate as soon as the tide turns. The ugliest and fattest girls will still turn down a reasonably good looking beta, if they think that it will mess up with their chance of getting chad thundercock. Hypergamy is there, your mom, your sister, your grandma and your wife..

Dont drop your guard with the premise a woman will consciously and morally do the right thing. They hold no allegiance to any moral agency. The only thing they adhere to is the feels. If pornstars are accusing their pornstar boyfriends of rape on set, what do you think will happen to you?

[–]mugatucrazypills88 points89 points  (2 children) | Copy

James Deen flew too close to the feminist sun and his wax wings melted. He was foolish to enough to think that the activists were his friends.

Now the MSM media only posts pictures of him giving "rape-y eyes"

A further irony is that after banging his way through thousands of women like some BDSM feminist superhero his downfall was the one girl that he had oneits for and wouldn't shut up about on his blog for a year and a half.

[–][deleted] 41 points42 points  (14 children) | Copy

So much truth. This reply should be sidebarred.

Here's Deen's side. Most interesting part is right after Stoya dropped the initial charge, she plugged her new website.

2 takeaways : 1) Almost all pornstarlets are fucked up in some way. Play w/ fire you will get burned. Deen today, Sheen yesterday, some other fool tommorow. If you trust a snake, then it's your own fault when it bites you.

2) The Feminist who cried Rape is the Boy who cried Wolf of our era. It's has been perverted to mean nothing more than some woman is upset w/ a dude that at some point banged her. This great article nails it :

If a woman says she was raped, ask her if she ever brought charges. If not, then 9 times outta 10, she was not actually raped. Sadly, we all know what finally happens to the boy who cried wolf...

[–]babybopp33 points34 points  (9 children) | Copy

so there is this other pornstar called Cytherea. Well known for squirting. Now she was actually raped for real by two guys who broke into her house. They were young and got arrested and charged with rape, home invasion the works...

Now as you see, right now the feminists have created a hash tag #something something stoya... No one ever talked about cytherea's actual rape, because as long as their bullshit stays virtual, they can milk it from the highest court in the land to getting a free coffee at starbucks. Reality is a concept far removed from these women.

[–]RedSugarPill7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy


Why do feminists ignore real rape victims like Cytherea to focus instead on rape hoaxes, such as the recent Rolling Stone/University of Virginia controversy? Because the modern feminist movement is not about protecting women: it’s about subjugating men.

Truer words have never been spoken.

Source: http://defund(dot)com/ornstar-brutally-gang-raped-4-times-by-three-men-in-horrific-home-invasion/

[–]Freiling1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Why do feminists ignore real rape victims like Cytherea

Because that's a cut-and-dry, non-controversial situation. No one needs to argue about whether those guys need to get taken down. There's no discussion to be had there.

[–]Schrodingersdawg3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Weren't those guys part of a minority group that the SJW crowd has been saying matters? To acknowledge that minorities can be perpetrators of crimes would break the narrative that straight white males are everything that's wrong with the world.

[–]netgrey -2 points-2 points [recovered] | Copy

Just curious what race where these rapists?

[–]Namkcalb 5 points5 points [recovered] | Copy

Would it change the point he is making?

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

I fucking called it. Either criminal charger, or more likely, a new book, acting career or other bobble for sale.

Never trust a rape thats coming on the heels of a book tour

[–]mugatucrazypills1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

has St*ya dropped the allegation ?

Last I read she'd accused him of aggravated rape on twitter, then said she was logging off the internet for a month and wouldn't be answering any questions.

Let's make the most serious allegation you can make against another person in the most damaging public manner possible, and make these serious allegations in the most trivial medium on earth, not go to the police, then make myself unavailable.

So why isn't Deen suing her for libel/slander ? Either he really is the Bill Cosby of Porn or he's got residual Oneits and he's hoping his nice behavior will bring the magic unicorn around ... which as you RPs know will get him raped in the game of life(tm).

Then there was the other theory that Stoya will reappear in the new year and say "Just Kidding !" and say "Snap SJW !", thanks for all webtraffic.

Sidenote: Have you noticed the BP reads TRP more religiously than anyone else ?

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

Bret Easton Ellis just dropped an article along the lines of what you said.

We need a Deen mega-thread...

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points  (7 children) | Copy

If there's one thing I've noticed in my life, is how easily a woman can go from being extremely friendly with you to absolutely hating you and making sure that you are exiled by all your friends because they're all white-knight faggots.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 14 points15 points  (4 children) | Copy

Like a light switch. I've seen it myself.

It's insane how good they are at it.

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

What's also insane is how they can twist any situation to make them appear the victim... The victim card is a brutal one friends.

[–]mugatucrazypills0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

without becoming ted kazinskhi(sp) we need to screen out friends better for being white-knight faggots

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

Unfortunately its pretty difficult if you arent equipped to see the signs. If the guy is whipped by his gf he's probably a white knight. That's the most obvious sign.

Otherwise you're screwed unless you actually see them whiteknighting and until that situation arises you're blind.

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

don't be mad because she can Machiavellian better than you can. Next time, learn how to shape a narrative better and not blame her for your failure.

Go far enough back in any bullshit, and there's always a point where you fucked up from poor, or inaction

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

She was not a love interest merely a friend. A good friend. But very manipulative.

[–]babayega13 points14 points  (4 children) | Copy

I've heard someone mention this before. It looks like MGTOW is the endgame for redpill.

[–]Diarrhea_Van_Frank16 points17 points  (0 children) | Copy

It's where it ends up if you follow it to its logical conclusion, but I tend to think about it in terms of mitigated risk. The only way to be 100% safe from this sort of thing is to never interact with women ever, but most people aren't gonna do that, so there's a lot of talk about how best to stack the odds in your favor.

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

just live life, remove value leeching, and add value promoting people. Then work your ass off to ensure you're high enough quality to command these type of interactions.

I'm sure anyone worth his salt could see the potential crazy coming from a BDSM porn star, it's not like this blindsided him

[–]1PantsonFire12340 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Just make sure you are always prioritizing yourself and not the girl/girls you are dating. When they try to play the game with you and they are noticing that you aren't- they will lie to you and try to deceive you with the guilt of breaking their poor heart.

Ignore it and decide what's best for you. Even if that means crushing her.

[–]Endorsed ContributorBluepillProfessor0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I prefer victory. We should fight.

[–]Annoyinggorilla 20 points20 points [recovered] | Copy

"Hypergamy is there, your mom, your sister, your grandma and your wife.. "

This should be drilled into the minds of men. Whether 22 or 72, "Hypergamy is there".

[–]1PantsonFire12340 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

But what this book suggest is that beyond hypergamy (the optimal selection of mates for either need) there is another aspect to the games women play. Which is the need for validation, gratification and satisfaction in spite of men (even alpha men).

This forces men into a 'all bets are off' state. AWALT, Nexting, Plate Spinning. These are all ways to handle the unsure situation that women put all men in.

[–]mcavvacm2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

You keep calling this woman his friend.

I don't think this means what you think it means. :)

[–]Endorsed ContributorBluepillProfessor2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

The Blue Pill attacked my thread over on Married Red Pill when I asserted the same thing. This is about power and nothing else. The "friend" of Deen can't speak out against this naked female power grab. They want the ability to DESTROY ANY MAN THEY CHOOSE.

Check out Dalrok's recent posts: Even a Christian minister who is in prison in a 3rd world hellhole can be accused of "abusing" his wife OVER SKYPE WHILE HE IS IN AN IRANIAN PRISON. The Christian media publishes stories like: "Why Did Pastor Abuse Wife?" They question nothing and assume the wife is right- why, he DID abuse her. According to her he missed so many anniversaries and birthdays SINCE HE HAS BEEN IN AN IRANIAN HELLHOLE FOR 4 YEARS. Apparently he continues to physically and sexually abuse her over skype from prison. They are serious about this power bro and they have it and they are not giving it up without bloodshed.

[–]benzostruggle1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Those giggles and smiles will turn into demon eyes and hate as soon as the tide turns.

When this happens I find it is like dealing with evil incarnate...

Don't be fooled by the qt3.14 front, there is an agenda behind it.

[–]iamkarnath0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy


I see what you did there.

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

I feel like I'm the only one who sees this whole Deen situation like something out of a comedy skit. A pornstar-- one step above a whore-- who has had hundreds, maybe thousands of dicks inside her, seriously accuses someone of rape. It's like a serial killer calling someone who brandishes a knife a murderer.

[–]AmazonExplorer17 points18 points  (0 children) | Copy

It would be superb for there to be a book that goes into how the ancient world perceived some and they arrived to those conclusions.

[–]nerdybetaboi8 points9 points  (5 children) | Copy

Islam literally says that hell will be majority inhabited by females: check this out:

It was narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) that women will form the majority of the people of Hell. It was narrated from ‘Imran ibn Husayn that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “I looked into Paradise and I saw that the majority of its people were the poor. And I looked into Hell and I saw that the majority of its people are women.”

(Narrated by al-Bukhari, 3241; Muslim, 2737)

With regard to the reason for this, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was asked about it and he explained the reason.

It was narrated that ‘Abd-Allah ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “I was shown Hell and I have never seen anything more terrifying than it. And I saw that the majority of its people are women.” They said, “Why, O Messenger of Allah?” He said, “Because of their ingratitude (kufr).” It was said, “Are they ungrateful to Allah?” He said, “They are ungrateful to their companions (husbands) and ungrateful for good treatment. If you are kind to one of them for a lifetime then she sees one (undesirable) thing in you, she will say, ‘I have never had anything good from you.’” (Narrated by al-Bukhari, 1052)

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

human behavior has remained constant since the stone age. it doesn't mean anyone should believe fairy tales written back then.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

it doesn't mean anyone should believe fairy tales written back then.

Are you questioning the reports coming from Hell?

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

Are you questioning the reports coming from Hell?

you mean the news stories about isis & religious zealots burning what's left of their shithole countries to dust? no, why?

[–]anjkh2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

So this prophet never got over his rage fase, got it.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (15 children) | Copy

Women are fucking evil! I know males have a hamster but that shit compares to the female hamster. A guy will hamster away bad behavior from an oneitis, usually to try and salvage the relationship. Usually a male hamster is just trying to justify a womens bad side. I can't count how many times I knew a dude that his family and mother told him a girl was no good but he still continued and got burned in the end. A guys hamster usually ends up making him the victim, it is never really as bad as a womens hamster. The worst it can get for a male hamster is that he burns a male friend in order to get pussy but that shit is trivial to the female hamster. A female hamster will kill anyone and harm anyone including her fucking self in order for her to justify her actions. I saw a report in the news about this women in the middle east that urged her children, the males to commit suicide in order to kill infidels or non muslims. She said she would send all her male children to die for allah, she says she is justified.

This is her right here:

Who the fuck does that shit? Oh yeah a female hamster does that shit! The more and more I look at women the more and more I realize they are fucking pure evil, even if their actions are based on nature, that shit is still evil as fuck! A women will hamster away anything, "ANYTHING"!

[–]TRPhd8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

Usually a male hamster is just trying to justify a woman's bad side

Good point. A RP maxim should be: all hamsters end up working for women, in one way or another.

[–]pfvneh5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

So it will be found that the fundamental fault in the character of women is that they have no sense of justice. This arises from their deficiency in the power of reasoning, but also partly due to the fact that Nature has not destined them, as the weaker sex, to be dependent on strength but on cunning. For as lions are furnished with claws and teeth, elephants with tusks, boars with fangs, bulls with horns, and the cuttlefish with its dark, inky fluid, so Nature has provided woman for her protection and defence with the faculty of dissimulation - Arthur Schopenhauer

[–]fingerthemoon5 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy

Evil is a mental construct and completely subjective. It's all just evolutionary biology.

Freedom lies in seeing beyond duality, excepting reality and taking care of your biology.

[–]Evilpagan1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy

I think saying evil is relative is more fitting than saying it's subjective. For example, burning a toddler alive is evil, it is universally accepted; if you disagree, you have psychopathy and lack empathy. One person might say if you walked up to your elderly neighbor and punched them in the face then that is evil, maybe not to the degree killing an infant is. Another person might say if the old neighbor stole your lawnmower then what you did isn't evil at all. That doesn't mean that evil doesn't exist.

[–]writewhereileftoff2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy

I don't think you understand what this is about.

Nothing is either good or bad, only thinking makes it so - William Shakespeare

It doesn't really matter how foul the act is. I would much rather use immoral. Just to be clear for the hamsters reading this, I'm in no way condoning what you just described.

Consider this: I have hardly ever heard anyone describe themselves as "evil". Yet the world is filled with "acts of evil". People consider the Redpill evil. It's not evil, it's immoral. Considering morality is based on society and what is "universally accepted" good & evil are completely subjected to perception. Most people adopt their morality from the society they live in and there is also the fact that humans are a species that excell in groups. So morals are advantageous to the preservation. So when you say good, you actually mean moral, evil would be immoral.

Come think of it, if you want utter & complete truth you have to completely disregard morality and that is a hard pill to swallow. Almost like feelz before reelz.

People consider ISIS "evil" Do you really think they consider themselves so? They consider themselves hero's and martyrs.

I hate to break it to you but good & evil does not exist.

[–]Evilpagan1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Ahh, I wasn't sure exactly what you were saying. Makes sense.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]writewhereileftoff0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Thanks for claryfying. You are absoluetly correct.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy

Socrates called the word 'evil' useless, because of it's simplistic and subjective way of explaining behaviour.

Surprised we are still on it after 2 thousand years.

She just played a game better than he did, in fact, it sounds like he didn't know he was on the field

[–]writewhereileftoff0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Exactly...evil is a matter of perception.

[–]NikoMyshkin 1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy

perhaps selfish would be more apt. they don't empathize with the wants and needs of men. and really - why should they?

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

I'd agree. Hell, would you act any different if the feedback you were getting was nothing but positive?

I'd probably start acting out just out of boredom, looking for a boundry that keeps getting pushed back

[–]NikoMyshkin 1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy

TRP is an ideology to get the ball rolling. ideally, the positive feedback, as you have mentioned, would then maintain the positive momentum as life becomes satisfying and rewarding. at least that's how i see it. it is the central liberating ideology of our time.

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

Praxeologty. Forgive the spelling, on phone

[–]1PantsonFire1234-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

It's a great conclusion for a man if he wants to bang sluts. Because all of this simply empowers a man to go through life guilt free. Sadly when a man gets lonely there's no honest relationship out there beyond the unicorns.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon91 points92 points  (15 children) | Copy

with men winning only with double sixes, while women win with all other outcomes.

It's more like men win with double sixes, women win with all outcomes. They get to reject or accept, and win either way.

Same with marriage. They win if the marriage works out, they win if the marriage doesn't. The man only wins if the marriage is successful and usually that's not much of a victory compared to the alternatives.

Women will only play a game if they will win regardless of outcome, 100% of the time. Men pander to this by offering them a zero risk game in the hope that they might not lose too badly.

If marriage came with a 75% chance of them getting divorced and having to pay alimony, they simply wouldn't do it and romance be damned.

It is quite telling that PUA's in their recipes for how to get a woman, explicitly forbid asking her out.

What does this mean? Most PUA advice I've read is "escalate, get numbers, pursue hard, ask her out".

While the game has only immediate profits for women, it does nevertheless have an indirect cost. It produces a disappointment in men that might turn into rage.

In game theoretic terms this is the Tragedy of the Commons. The game theory is that the aggregate impact on men is beyond any one woman's control, so she maximises her own results. These actions are in her best interests whether other women do the same or not. Either way, a little more destruction to the male perception of women matters nothing to her, and she gets the benefits. The result is aggregate destruction of the commons, the commons in this case being the male perception of the female.

However feminism demands respect for women, regardless of merit. The worse the behave, the louder they shout their demands of respect. The more violent they are to men, the more they outlaw reciprocal violence against them. The more emotional and deranged they behave, the louder they shriek that they are our equal and must be treated as such.

This statistical deviation is perhaps the reason cat-calling is generally presented as a problem for women,

Everything is defined to be men's responsibility and blame and fault. Absolutely literally everything in dating. Escalated too much? Too little? Read the signs? Didn't read the signs? Had sex? Didn't have sex? Too forward? Not forward enough? Waited too long to call? Called too quickly? ... Absolutely everything that goes wrong is always defined to be somehow men's fault. And if it all goes well, the woman gets the credit for playing the game well and bravely. Well done you go getting risk taker you. /s.

between 31% and 57% of women have rape fantasies ... most likely lowball figures

Definitely lowball figures. This is the percentage of women that admit to having rape fantasies.... the real percentage is very much higher, judging by my experiences with women.

Given this, it is not unreasonable to suspect that many rapes are actually female-initiated.

But that would mean them accepting responsibility for their actions, something we know women go to exquisite lengths to avoid. Even suggesting this is beyond socially acceptable and will get you labelled a rapist by the SJW and BP whiteknight crowd.

A woman must never, ever be held responsible for her sexual actions, lest her purity be questioned. And we must all stand up and defend a woman's purity and honour, regardless of how slutty she is or the terrible decisions she makes or the Machiavellian games she plays. /s

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l19 points20 points  (1 child) | Copy

Bullseye on every single one of your comments.

It is quite telling that PUA's in their recipes for how to get a woman, explicitly forbid asking her out.

What does this mean? Most PUA advice I've read is "escalate, get numbers, pursue hard, ask her out".

Explicitly asking her out is I believe discouraged by serious PUA's. "It was so AFC of me. I was asking her out on a date." Neil Strauss, The Game, Step 11, Chapter 3.

[–]Senior ContributorSkorchZang19 points20 points  (0 children) | Copy

You can easily see why, the typical blue pill way to ask a woman out involves in some way getting down on one knee, humbling yourself to her and filing this tenderly formal request with Her Highness.

This is traditionally followed by all-expenses paid dinners and entertainment for her.

PUAs naturally reject all that, because it's a rigged game, rigged for and by women, a game that a man cannot win. How could he, if as soon as he steps in the ring the very first thing required of him is to serve up his balls on a silver platter to this female stranger...

[–]2rp_valiant4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy

Given this, it is not unreasonable to suspect that many rapes are actually female-initiated.

But that would mean them accepting responsibility for their actions, something we know women go to exquisite lengths to avoid. Even suggesting this is beyond socially acceptable and will get you labelled a rapist by the SJW and BP whiteknight crowd.

At least one woman has openly admitted to doing this - reddit user "ekafemanresu". She's previously posted about going out with the express intention of getting gang raped. Now, I don't know if that's true or not, but it certainly lines up with the idea of women having these kinds of fantasies.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

The fantasies are beyond question to anyone who has dated on the alpha side of the coin (ie short term / FWB / no-commitment type of things). Now I'd freak out if a woman claimed not to have these fantasies.

I play to these fantasies when I'm talking to girls... but don't act them out of course. Often the fantasy is plenty to get her going, and then I enjoy the ride. And yes, I'm careful not to date nutters.

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

well, isn't that a surprise. I figured it happened, but it seems so woefully incapable of understanding what she's asking for there.

would be like suicide by cop, except for instead of cop, it's guys, and instead of suicide, it's everyone else.

I'm glad she gets hers, but thats playing with fire if I've ever seen it, and I thought I've seen all the crazies while in the navy.

[–]2rp_valiant0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

oh yeah, she's definitely on the extreme end because her desire to fulfil her fantasy seems to override survival instinct. I honestly believe that most women have rape fantasies, but would never act on it outside of a very trusting relationship where all fantasies are on the table. A lot of women play it out as a smaller variation on the rape fantasy, the "sex with a stranger" fantasy, or perhaps some form of BDSM.

[–]Endorsed ContributorCrimsonCapsule4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy

Sure. Biological imperative screams for babies, so it's gotta be structured to be a sure thing. And it's worked pretty well — there is a fuckton of people bumbling around these days. You have to wonder at what point the bartender finally says "sorry ladies — I think you've had enough."

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

You have to wonder at what point the bartender finally says "sorry ladies — I think you've had enough."

The problem is that the more they get, the more power they have to demand ever more. The less power men have, the less power they have to say "enough".

Conversely of course... many men just have very little to do with them and don't date effectively. More betas, more unfulfilled women, more opportunities for the masculine man. So it's not all bad for those in the know.

[–]TRPhd2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

The less power men have, the less power they have to say "enough".

This is the heart of MGTOW.

[–]unassuming_aussie3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

A woman must never, ever be held responsible for her sexual actions, lest her purity be questioned.

The sad thing is that it's mainly their own female friends that do the questioning (& blaming, & judging!). Most men really couldn't give a shit as long as it was his knob was getting polished.

[–]verify_account0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

women have always been the biggest "slut shamers"

[–]1PantsonFire12344 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

Know what kind of person only wants to play a game if they can win? A child.

Men like a challenge, they like the idea of playing a game where they can lose and win. Because it makes victory all the more sweet. Sadly women have fucked the odds up beyond expectations. It's like playing a game of football and removing the goal on one side of the field.

If you can't win, there's no point in playing the game right?

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

My experience of men bears out what you say.

Most when told how awful marriage is will shrug and say "yeah... I know it's a risk... but this just feels right". The observation that it's a one sided risk is lost on them. The observation that she just can't lose and he'll be paying for her regardless of how she treats him, that she's motivated to leave him now.... all this is lost on your average beta.

[–]systemshock869 -5 points-5 points [recovered] | Copy

/s is for retards unless it's actually hard to tell, which in this case it isn't.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

Agreed.... and that's why it's there

[–]FrameWalker87 points88 points  (21 children) | Copy

Call it cognitive bias if you'd like, but take a look around. Look at the young men and young women. The old men and old women. You can see the consequences of the psychological games. The net drain on them leaves a quiver in their voice. Their eyes often sink to the ground. Even the alphas wear proud emotional scars.

Validation matters. Get as much internally as you can, but structure positive interactions to avoid social isolation. Weekly poker game, or music session. Happy Hour with the guys. Stroke each other actively because it won't happen passively.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l24 points25 points  (0 children) | Copy

Validation matters. Get as much internally as you can, but structure positive interactions to avoid social isolation. Weekly poker game, or music session. Happy Hour with the guys. Stroke each other actively because it won't happen passively.

Sage advice.

Meet up with four friends, twice a week, to keep mentally healthy, found Robin Dunbar.

[–]Veqq21 points22 points  (0 children) | Copy

proud emotional scars.


[–]WillWorkForLTC27 points28 points  (15 children) | Copy

And if you're gay, then stroke each other even more regularly.

[–]improvingme6333 points34 points  (14 children) | Copy

Must be convenient not having to deal with the bullshit.

[–]WillWorkForLTC25 points26 points  (13 children) | Copy

Must be. I envy them sometimes.

[–]-TempestofChaos-7 points8 points  (9 children) | Copy

I've said this multiple times while at the gym, only quazzi-joking.

The only reason we ever want to meet women is for children.

Anything else, another man can provide.

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (6 children) | Copy

Pretty sure the Athenians figured that out 2,500 years ago.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l26 points27 points  (4 children) | Copy

Male homosexuality was one thing in ancient Athens. More important, though, were brothels.

Athens was perhaps unique in the ancient world, because they had managed to get female sexuality checked. Here's how:

Athenian Democracy as an Exception

According to Claudine Leduc, a feminist who studied ancient Athens, “Women were the chief victims of the invention of democracy”362.

“Leduc makes the very interesting point that it was in the more socially conservative city-states, such as Sparta and Gortyn, that women could be citizens and own property in their own right;... In Athens, which was socially more innovative and inclusive with respect to male foreigners, the locus of citizenship remained the (male-headed) household, and women passed from father's to husband's household, treated not so much like chattels as like children.”363

The superior social position of the woman in the authoritarian regime of Sparta, compared to Athenian democracy, is not a paradox. Athenian democracy was the victory of the free citizens against the oligarchy. Since women always had special relationships with the ruling class, restricting the power of the aristocracy and restricting the power of women went hand in hand. This does not mean that the position of women in Athens was worse than the position of men, it just was not so blatantly better, as in Sparta.

As shown above, women's power is based in their sexual superiority and their control over reproduction. Athenian democracy targeted these two areas. Of all the measures taken by Solon, who is considered the founder of Athenian democracy, perhaps the most important was that he filled Athens with good and cheap brothels.

“At some point during his career, Solon perceives that too many married men are plunging heedlessly into too many adulterous liaisons with questionable characters of either sex – it’s not the adultery that bothers him, it’s the heedlessness – which seems to be causing family chaos. The antidote to chaos is order, and that’s just what Solon creates in the extramarital universe. Deciding that domestic life would improve if men’s needs for casual sex could be met cleanly, safely, efficiently, and without fuss, he develops a network of whorehouses stocked with male and female slaves, known as concubines. Although Solon’s brainstorm may or may not improve Athenian family life, the brothel business soon becomes an indispensable accessory to sexual life. It suits the Athenian government, which profits from men’s patronage. It suits the patrons, who can be good citizens and please themselves at the same time. And because it simplifies – clarifies – men’s relations with women, it suits the prevailing aesthetic. What is current practice for the Israelites would be anathema for the Athenians, with their apparent distaste for emotional and domestic sturm und drang. Multiple bedmates, definitely; multiple wives, no way.

… If it works half as well as it sounds, the Athenians win the gold medal for wife control in the Western Olympics, twenty-five centuries running. Among the champions is Demosthenes, the orator who famously summarizes the code about two hundred years after Solon establishes prostitution: “We keep hetaera for our delight, concubines for the daily needs of our bodies, wives so that we may breed legitimate children and have faithful housekeepers.”

Maybe this is why the men of Athens are so productive. With their sexual needs identified, compartmentalized, and fulfilled by a dedicated service team assigned to each one, they can be laser-focused on the work that turns the classical age into a golden one.”364

Women didn't have it so bad in Athens: they had a dowry, protection, and if they wanted they could be educated and live an independent life as heterae. “As long ago as ancient Athens it is possible to find cases in which men, but not women, were put on trial and punished for adultery.”365 As was always the case in historic societies, it was just easier to live a life free from responsibilitiy.

The waiver on the part of women of adult personhood was related with the wide-spread homosexual relations of the ancient world. There were not so many real women to fall in love with, so the only real persons available were other men.

The notion that women were “victims of democracy” can only be understood as an anachronism, as the view of a modern bourgeois, for whom “oppression” seems a bigger problem than hunger and war – precisely because she has never come close to either. It was infinitely preferable to be a woman in Athens than a man in Sparta, where you were a soldier from 7 to 60, i.e. practically all your life. “[S]o crass was the contrast between the “Spartan” life of men and the luxurious ways of women that Aristotle blamed it for the city's decline”366. In fact it was better to be a woman in Athens than a man in Athens too, as the male “privileges” and civic participation were paid for with the obligation to go to war, which was not a rare occurrence, a thing which feminist historians tend to forget or deem an irrelevant detail.

And, of course, if we extend our discussion to the tens of thousands of slaves on whom the economy was based and who numerically outnumbered the free citizens367, the advantage of being a woman becomes glaring: instead of working in the Laurium mines368, were life was brutal and short, you worked in the house, and you often became the mother of your owner's child, with all the privileges this entailed.

It is tempting to say that women were so much “victims of democracy” as were aristocrats – that is, as much as they should be. In reality, both of them were much less so.

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

That was cool as fuck to read. I appreciate your time spent on that.

[–]henry2nd2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

I second that, very cool information and thought provoking. Thank you.

[–]paradimeshift2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Thank you, excellent digression. Make's me wonder how many harsh historical truths our society shies away from.

[–]LukeMcFuckStick1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

This is awesome. You should make it into a post

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

See? This is why we need history. We should have learned.

[–]nrjk3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

Well, I guess I'm off to fuck a guy in the ass. Being strait is great!

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]WillWorkForLTC0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Milo would disagree with you. He considers men his brothers before be considers them in any other way.

[–]fingerthemoon2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

We're all looking for someone to punch our ticket for us but we need to learn to punch our own damn ticket.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l66 points67 points  (3 children) | Copy

Thank you /u/redpillschool, for the review and the stickie.

It is truly an honor to get acknowledged by someone who's made such catalytic impact on the modern state of the War of the Sexes.

The book blog is, where you can check out some more excerpts, reader comments, and the contents.

There is no print version yet - but since you deem it useful for getting guys unplugged, I'll be working on it.

It has taken me three years to research and write the book - and this is in addition to being actively involved in (gender and other) politics for two decades. It is highly consolidated, and should give anyone a clear overview, as well as a deep understanding of the gender dynamics. Nonetheless, I've put a very low price tag because I want many men to read this - for the good of themselves, their fellow-men, their children, and society as a whole. If you guys fell it worthy, you can contribute by writing a review (even if it's only a couple of lines) on Amazon.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

So here you are, gentlemen, there is now a print edition of the book..

[–]reigorius1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

And he delivers, sweet.

[–]fingerthemoon-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

You're awesome. I stroke thee, master of insight and communication. May you live long and prosper.

[–]Jaques_Fury53 points54 points  (0 children) | Copy

Clever material. I've always thought of social interactions as exchanges of status, but "strokes" is a pretty good way to describe it.

In relation to his take on "The Raping Game", I think it's relevant to mention the Victim Blaming component. That is, by demanding everyone not to blame "victims", the Feminine Imperative enforces three rules upon this game:

  1. Women are always victims
  2. Conversely, the accused is always guilty
  3. Risks may not be chastised

As this post says, most of life is spent playing games. And yet of all the games we play, the Raping Game is one of the few where it is completely unacceptable to chastise someone for making a bad move.

Consider footballer Ched Evans, who somehow got convicted of raping a woman who walked herself into his hotel room at 4 AM. He gets put in jail, loses his career, and years later articles still refer to him as "the rapist Ched Evans." Yet somehow, every article I find ends with concerns about protecting the "victim" from online Twitter bullies.

Women really pay no cost for the games they play.

[–]10xdada18 points19 points  (0 children) | Copy

There are a few questions I have to women who insist on a right to presenting themselves as sexually provocative:

  • what do you think "provocative" and "to provoke" mean?
  • how should a man respond to being provoked?
  • if a man is provoked repeatedly and must, under threat of social and professional exile or even state violence, suppress his response, how do you expect him to behave?
  • if he adapts by developing kinks or perversions that substitute for his suppressed response to provocation, how do you benefit? (Ask the Brits)

Personally, I think more women should be catcalled and cheesed onto by dirty old men. We need more aspie PUAs swarming shopping areas to irritate women. When a woman gets called out for waving it around like an animal in heat for a few days each month, it maintains a level of sexual civility in public. By civility, I mean being able to go about your non-woman business without constant provocation.

Catcalls and responding to provocation with a proposition is not rape.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (9 children) | Copy

In reality, the illusion of female superiority is only made possible by male ignorance and in some cases fear of our own natural, inherent masculine superiority.

If you do a thought experiment and imagine a world without women, where sex drive was made irrelevant by asexual reproduction, the world would continue to operate, business as usual. The trains would run, food produced, technological progress would continue, NFL on Sundays, etc.

Now imagine the opposite, a world without men. Society would surely collapse within a few weeks if not days.

Pussy and drama: the only thing women provide that we can't supply ourselves. They need us way more than we need them. Unfortunately, too many of us have been indoctrinated to believe the opposite.

[–]Borsao667 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy

"Without men, civilization would survive until the first oil change." - Fred Reed

[–]macguffin224 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy

I agree with your assessment. Thats why i personally think the "game" will be over for women when sex robots become sufficiently cheap, lifelike, and destigmatized to render pursuing females, for most men, at best completely unnecessary. What happens to women once men by large have absolutely no use for them?

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

It's already there to an extent, and it hasn't stopped the world from turning.

mail order brides, prostitutes are the same concept, just less invasive. The social stigma and shaming will always be there, and MGTOW are already checked out, this will just bring those in that are on the fence, because sex is great.

If anything, it might work the oppositte way, having a real girl seen as a status symbol, like a luxury watch. Imagine it then.

Though I could see that turning women into what femenists always wanted... men, where the top 20 percent are getting everything, and the lower 80 are largely ignored. You'd have to be hotter than a sexbot, or at least better company, and the way it stands now, my own personal ratio is 30:1 for women I've wanted to spend more than a solid month with socially.

though as a thought experement, an economist would love to see it, and I'm sure there's correlaries between that, and any other new technology that upends a luxury market of essential goods, especially ones with over inflated value. Diamonds come to mind, as does any manufactured luxury item (raybans or starbucks anyone?) where just the act of telling you it's more expensive raises it's percieved value.

[–]fingerthemoon2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Sexbots will never be as good as the real thing though. When I have good sex I can feel her pleasure responding to mine almost like there's some kind of telepathic link between us and I don't think this can be mechanically reproduced. There are ways our bodies and minds communicate beyond the physical... It'd still be fun but in the back of my mind I'd be aware that it was basically high tech masturbation.

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

Sexbots will never be as good as the real thing though.

Factory manufactured furniture and cars wouldn't be either. But we are in the 'good enough' age. That's why I think the idea of women in a sex-bot marketplace ending up in a niche, high end area... at least those who can.

And I agree, high quality men don't want high tech masturbation, but incels will take it in droves, as will divorced men who have been run through the coals. Thats at least 50% of the marrieds right there.

[–]tallwheel3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

In reality, the illusion of female superiority is only made possible by male ignorance and in some cases fear of our own natural, inherent masculine superiority.

There's still that damn sex drive though - meaning that there will always be a resource men want, that only women are capable of providing (for now, with current technology). Even if it weren't for male ignorance - if all men were RP enlightened - you'd still have alphas and betas, including hopeless incels. I don't think there's any way to do away with female superiority without doing something to satiate that pesky male sex drive.

[–]pedre12314 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy

As far as the rape thing goes, recently James Dean the pornstar has been getting called out a few times for "raping" women either on set or off. Dean for a while has been known as something of a sex God. All dudes want to fuck like him and all chicks want to get fucked by him. His style is essentially what many women consider to be their ideal way of getting fucked. "I want you to manhandle me and use me, but be sensitive at the same time". From my viewing point, this sounds like a classic have your cake and eat it too situation that applies not only to the act of sex but also to relations between the genders. "I want a nice guy". No you don't. Nice guys are all around you. You could at a whim have dozens of nice guys kissing your feet. You want to be the one at the man's feet, and for 90 percent of women it's a huge turnoff to have it the other way around. It sucks because you get told all your life "sensitivity is important... you're gonna make some girl so happy one day... just be a nice quiet guy a girl will find you", and then all of a sudden you wake up in your twenties and realize that has shaped your whole personality into being a mentally weak pussy beta bitch. This is of course nothing new for people in TRP, it just really really sucks to come around to realizing that you've been negatively affected by this new age of softness.

[–]RedDeadlift13 points14 points  (0 children) | Copy

Nice write up. This has definitely piqued my interest. I'll pick up a copy.


[–][deleted] 33 points34 points  (11 children) | Copy

Good initiative to that guy for writing a book. He sent me a copy but I'm in law school and not gonna have time to read it until close to Christmas when finals are over. I looked at the chapter summaries and shit though and it looked like good stuff. Plus he took shit like cover detail seriously, which lets me know he took the idea seriously.

Felt kinda bad that I stopped responding to him in PM. I thought I'd get to reading it sooner and respond with my thoughts, but instead the PM just sank away in my perpetually abused inbox and now it's basically unfindable. I noticed a week later that his name was endorsed despite him never making a post or comment that got more than 23 upvotes, and figured that you guys must have been really fucking impressed by that book, since a book's obviously worth more than a good post would be. I've still got it saved and I'm definitely gonna give it a read over the break.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l13 points14 points  (1 child) | Copy

Hey Cis,

lag in internet communication is to be expected, no worries.

My guess is that you might find the latter parts quite challenging for your point of view on society, so I'll be looking forward to your comments.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy

Didn't your professor tell you to get through those 1000 page judgments in an hour? Cmon, what are you good for?

[–]babybopp1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

yeah how are we going to get away with murder in less than one episode?

[–]TRP Vanguard: "Dark Triad Expert"IllimitableMan7 points8 points  (6 children) | Copy

Felt kinda bad that I stopped responding to him in PM. I thought I'd get to reading it sooner and respond with my thoughts, but instead the PM just sank away in my perpetually abused inbox and now it's basically unfindable.

Same here, /u/adam-l's books is great, I just unfortunately am swamped in heaps of shit to do, and as such, haven't got around to reading as much of it as I'd like. Being a writer, you find you don't read as much as you'd like because you're always writing shit.

It's good /u/redpillschool has stickied a link to his book, because lord knows this guy deserves it. Great book. If the rest of his book is as good as the few bits I've read, it should be on this subs recommending reading list IMO.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l4 points5 points  (5 children) | Copy

Hi IM,

I' still reading your articles breathlessly, they have the most unique combination of insightfullness and conciseness I've been able to find in the manosphere.

There is one issue in your posts that has been gnawing on me, but I haven't been able to put together a short and clear enough answer, because you really need a fundamental change of perspective to discuss about it. (I'm glad you are looking into my book, it's all in there). It is the issue of reverting back to monogamy and "patriarchy" as an answer to modern female primacy.

On the one hand, monogamy was never, and will never be, a satisfying arrangement for men. On the other, "patriarchy", meaning literally "ruling of the father", never really existed. It was always the woman having the more influence in the house, even if this was done in indirect ways. (Barring, perhaps, some of the top 1% of men).

It all comes down to this: if you want to trully empower men, you need to give them sexual power, i.e. free sex (or very cheap one), including sexual variety. Everything else is comperatively perfuctory.

[–]fingerthemoon0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

if you want to trully empower men, you need to give them sexual power, i.e. free sex

I don't think this can ever happen, not that it shouldn't but that it's impossible for men en mass (reserved for the top 10%). It would upset the balance of power between the sexes. And it truly is balanced. Nature is a wonders thing.

Seems the best way for men to become empowered is through enlightenment (although few will ever actualize). We have an autonomy that women will never have which makes it easier for us to find true freedom and peace, once we master ourselves. It's part of the balance.

[–]1james-watson2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Oh yes, in nature our relations are balanced. We can bash in the skulls of females who disrespect us.

In modern societies? Males are complete eunuchs. We are at the mercy of the state. Our monopoly on force has been completely destroyed. Have you ever seen a female openly disrespect a male in public, with a big smile on her face? She knows you can't use your manly strengths, but she is fully free to use her female wiles.

Market corrections are oftentimes sudden and violent.

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

Even paying for sex is reserved for the few that can afford the extortionate prices (esp. in the West). While ordinary guys have to forgo both opportunists of either paid, or a normal hookup.

Really the perfect conditions for MGTOW, as these conditions don't favour most guys.

Great post, op.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

Here's some logistics from where I live, where an "OK" salary is around 1000€/month, while prostitution is legal, monitored and relatively safe.

A back-street blow-job from a black immigrant is 5€ (five).

A cheap brothel is 10€ for the 10 minutes fuck. (Their clientele are usually immigrant men).

A normal brothel is 20€ for the 10-15 minutes.

"Studios", where you have the comfort of spending a full hour in quite clean and luxurious environment, are around 40-50€.

And "gfe" call-girls are around 200€ for the night.

The girls are from the former soviet block, so they can be very-very attractive.

Let's do the logistics for a lifetime, say 40 years, 15yo to 65yo. (I always wanted to do that:). Budget in 2 fucks per week (this seems to be the average need for men) in a normal brothel, while every second week you treat yourself to a Studio. And every couple of months you splurge with a call-girl.

6 x 20€ = 120€ 2 x 45€ = 90€ 0.5 x 200 = 100€

So it's around 300€ a month, 3600€ a year, 144000€ for a lifetime.

Raising a single kid costs around 200000€.

It is not by coincidence that in all the totalitarian regimes, as well as in the US and Japan (and until ten years ago, Germany as well), prostitution is illegal. Quality, affordable prostitution is such a great deal, compared to wife, that the system needs to eliminate it as an option, so that men are forced to enter the rat race - and support the reproduction of the working force, i.e. children.

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

I work in a very poor country where salaries of 150$-400$ per month are normal and the prices for prostitutes are frequently 50-200$ per hour or more. I have never been able to make sense of this. How the economics of prostitution can function here when women can expect several weeks worth of salary for one hour of sex doesn't make sense. Very few people could afford that and here aren't enough rich people here to keep the market alive. I also dont' understand how the prices haven't self-regulated, i.e. why haven't some women lower their prices to undercut the competition and get more business. I have literally hundreds of times more disposable income than 95% of the people in my area, and I would never pay 100$ per hour for sex because I consider the price extortionate.

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

Thanks RPS, nice review. I'll have to add it to my Christmas reading list.

I must confess to a bit of nostalgia when I read the bit above about women being validated by toying with and rejecting AFCs. I remember (not fondly) being that guy.

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

I totally get it too.

I remember when I was in college. There were two types of stories, the guy who got the girl, and the ones I preferred, where the guy could have, but shot it down. Those were always more interesting to me, and I never understood why until lately,

abundance mentality is a much better storyteller

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

"Hey, you wanna dance?"

"Eww no!"

Said to me in a club by a 4 at best who was sitting around with her one fat friend. Stung like a bitch.

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

Serves you right for chasing 4's :)

[–]Endorsed ContributorRed_August4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

In the flirting game, women do have a cost but it is very low. When they bloom in order to attract men, they get a lot of unwanted attention. It is still worth something subconsciously even if it is from creeps but it does come with inconveniences (or worse) thus their constant complaints about it. They do get occasionally burned but it is extremely rare if you view it "per incident of flirting".

In nature systems find an equilibrium. When sexual assault and straight plain physical assault directed at women had a different cultural meaning, when the violence was socially policed differently and sometimes accepted as needed, when different rules of engagement existed (imagine 10,000 years ago), women could pay a much higher price for flirting. There was a proportional countervailing force to their primary force. It is clear that their behaviour had to be radically different for self-preservation. Today, a 17 year old slut can walk the streets in a micro bikini rubbing her crotch in heat and walk away with all the attention she needs with likely nearly zero cost. In a previous epoch this would have been unthinkable without being dragged into a cave to be gang raped for months by a horde of 100 men.

Power exercised between people finds an equilibrium. The same power equilibrium applies in gender games. The challenges we face today is that we removed some significant powers from men (I won't make a moral argument here) and hence the old equilibrium is broken and we are shifting to a new point. This new point may not be very palatable to men.

[–]callmeunicorn3 points4 points  (9 children) | Copy

I agree with your analysis of how women are able to control men based on their weakness of essentially a stronger sex drive. Conversely, a woman's weakness is her lifelong yearning to be loved and to completely give herself to someone in love. Men exploit this by showing just enough attention or affection to make them stick around or answer the phone in order keep them as a sexual partner, or to use them in other ways. One sex's power/weakness is not better or worse than the other, just to clarify. I just wanted to present a comparable statement from the flip side.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l12 points13 points  (8 children) | Copy

Your idea is logical, but imo doesn't weigh things adequately. I'll quote from the book:

The problems of the two sexes are of a different order: What is a given for women, and allows them to take their tastes and wishes further, i.e. a good level of sexual opportunities, becomes a requirement for men, and blocks them and consumes their energy. Women may complain that they are unhappy because they cannot find someone like Brad Pitt to make wild sex to them and love them truly, while shunning the Average Frustrated Chump that desires them. But that chump is much worse off, having no sexual outlet at all...

Sex is a more basic need than love, so men are blocked at a more basic psychological level - leading to more problems. And in fact, men yearn to be loved much more than women do: men will do idiotic things to gain the "love" of a -2 SMV woman, while no woman will do anything like.

[–][deleted] 11 points11 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]callmeunicorn9 points10 points  (2 children) | Copy

Well THAT comment escalated quickly lol

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

so you fuck caveman, world shattered ...

this is pretty standard advice for sidebar stuff from athol kay, or many of the married parts of the manosphere

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

On the personal level, the solution is friends. Friends for intimacy, prostitutes for sex should be the staple. Anything else, i.e. intimacy from women and sex from non-prostitute women is a welcome bonus. Men underestimate the importance of having their intimacy needs covered through buddies at their peril.

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

and also better tools to mitigate those outlets.

Abstract thought, drive to innovate. Those same incels developed online porn, video games (or more realistically, those endorphin shots they call games e.g. call of duty; )

spinsters have had thousands of years to be spinsters, what do they have after all that. Still the same harem of cats

[–]RiseAboveRuin7 points8 points  (7 children) | Copy

If we wanted to balance it from the perspective of game theory, we should introduce a cost factor for women, a punishment, i.e. some form of violence, verbal or physical, from the conned man.

Off of the top of my head, the sexual strategy that TRP prefers to employ as the cost factor for women are soft/hard nexting, dread game for the LTR, showing low levels of interest, refusing to play her game and instead making her play yours.

Can anyone else think of others?

[–][deleted] 8 points8 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy

Not agreeing here.

Slut-shaming is mostly done by women, against those that give it away cheaply, thus lowering the price of sex.

Ideally, we men would like all women to be sluts, so that we get easy sex. Of course, we know that it doesn't work that way. Women can choose to be slutty at one time, when it suits them personally, and shame others for being slutty at another time, thus keeping up the female price fix on sex. There is no need for consistency and objectivity for the average female mind.

"Slut-shaming" by men is a desperate attempt to control runaway female sexuality, with very questionable results. What, you want to revert back to virginity standards, and spend your whole youth celibate, until you get desperate enough to marry someone just to get laid?

Male-centered solutions would focus on limiting the female sexual veto as well as women's exclusive right to choose. For today's society, this practically boils down to prostitution as the single solution. But in older societies, that was not the case. In several ancient societies, for example, there were sacred priestesses-prostitutes. And there were ritualized orgies. And if you go back to the first human tribes, sex was basically free-for-all, with every man getting his basic sexual needs met, while more masculine men got a special "bonus" on sexual opportunities.

Now, I can understand your statement

A woman's value is inversely proportional to the number of men she's been with.

if you have your mind on finding a good wife. But don't. Doesn't every man in TRP, married, single, divorced, say Don't Get Married?

[–]1james-watson1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

You have to define marriage very precisely. Most men who wax poetic about "marriage" are referring to Marriage 1.0. Adultery is a crime, no divorce, no alimony, no female vote, virgin bride, and male makes the rules.

Marriage 2.0 is the exact inverse of all of the above.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

male makes the rules.

I'm afraid not quite so. Marriage, from its initial institution, was in favor of women.

You can find more about it in my book, and if you need a more detailed historical analysis, check out the excellent book by Martin Van Creveld The Privileged Sex.

[–]1james-watson0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Marriage favors women in the same way a pet owner favors a pet.

Men owned women, and were for the most part benevolent masters. The tables have completely turned now. Women own men, and enforce their will through the state's machinations.

Your linked sources are nonsense, as they ignore the very powerful evolutionary evidence (mate guarding, minor sexual dimorphism, small testes, etc.)

High status men owned multiple women, and low status men risked life and liberty to own one through work and toil. It is what built civilization.

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

At the conscious level, she has put on make-up, a nice dress, highlighted secondary sexual characteristic (her legs, chest, butt) supposedly because “she just feels like doing that”, not because she likes men to look at her of flirt with her.

This is sooooooooo true. "I don't do it for men, I do it for myself. It makes me feel good." Biggest load of horseshit a woman could ever say.

[–]1PantsonFire12342 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

“[She] signals that she is available and gets her pleasure from the man’s pursuit. As soon as he has committed himself, the game is over.” In a more “advanced” level, “[She] gets only secondary satisfaction from [his] advances. Her primary gratification comes from rejecting him, so that this game is also colloquially known as ‘Buzz Off, Buster’. She leads [him] into a much more serious commitment than the mild flirtation ... and enjoys watching his discomfiture when she repulses him.”

This shit is fucked up man.

[–]Free_skier13 points14 points  (33 children) | Copy

I don't think women have a weaker sex drive. My opinion is that the game is biased toward them because men do all the flirting/heavy lifting.

In several older culture, women were thought to have a stronger sex drive:

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 42 points43 points  (15 children) | Copy

I'll quote Rollo's 'Women & Sex' because he says it best:

One of the single most annoying tropes I read / hear from men (more so than women) is the “Women are just as / more sexual than men” canard. Nothing stops me in my tracks more abruptly than reading this line parroted back in some form by a self-effacing white knight trying to convince himself, hope against hope, that it could be true. This is a VERY effective feminine social convention, even internalized and spouted back by the likes of more than a few infamous PUAs. This fantasy belongs among the higher order social convention myths like the Myth of Sexual Peak. Just a rudimentary knowledge of female biology is all that’s needed to deconstruct the myth.

Women are more sexual than men, but they are repressed due to a lack of “trust”.

Patently false. A healthy male produces between 12 to 17 times the amount of testosterone a woman does. It is a biological impossibility for a woman to want sex as much as, or as often as men. Trust me, when a woman says, “I don’t understand why sex is so important to guys” she’s speaking the literal truth. No woman will ever experience 17 times the amount of her own testosterone levels (barring steroids). Amongst its many other effects, testosterone is the primary hormone involved with stimulating human libido. I should also add that, on average, and barring environmental variables, a mans testosterone only declines 1% per year beyond age 40, so even at age 60 the average, healthy male is only dealing with an average 20% deficit in testosterone.

Critics of this observation like to argue that, for female sexual response and arousal, testosterone isn’t the only factor to consider. To which I’ll agree, however it is the PRIMARY factor in sexual response. A woman cannot possibly understand what 12 to 17 times their present amount of testosterone could feel like without steroid use. In fact the first effect female bodybuilders report when cycling anabolic steroids is a 100 fold increase in sexual interest and libido. So in terms of natural female hormonal / biochemical response there is no unaltered way a woman could ever make an accurate comparison to what a man’s baseline libido is in relation to her own. Women’s sexual desire is also cyclical. Even at the peak of her ovulatory cycle, when she’s at her horniest, she’ll never experience what men do 24 hours a day. This is the root of the myth, and the source of the social convention.

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (1 child) | Copy

Women are sex objects by nature. That's what it means to be non-disposable via reproductive value. Sex is always on their mind because it's basically why they exist. However, they only need to have it one or two times to provide their worth in reproduction, and that means they can hold off and not think about having it this second. The result of that dynamic is that they think about sex so often that they genuinely believe Rollo is wrong, but have it rarely enough due to lack of necessity that Rollo turns out to be right.

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

Agreed, women spend all day thinking about guys but I doubt it's only horniness as we know it. Think about being needy and anxious and lacking self-awareness, incessantly pestering one guy (top of the latter), while dodging or shrugging off the rest. All commitment, all day... I would venture to bet that we as men are unable to fathom certain forces that act on women. I think this from my limited post-RP experience being on the top of the latter a few times, probably for the first time. Past relationships seldom had women as 'horny' as these ones, coincidentally they're near-wall, so these drives are probably really fucking absurd. Edit: I think sex is a tool that is useful for fulfilling the other desires that I posit must exist, fueled by things other than T. What hormone(s) would cause somebody to want to accumulate resources and nest, for example?

[–]Senior Contributordeepthrill17 points18 points  (3 children) | Copy

I actually read this old sci-fi / fantasy book series "Incarnations of Immortality", written a few decades ago, in which at one point, a female protagonist was put into the biological body of a man, and she was completely and utterly shocked at how much difficult it was to suppress her newly acquired sex drive and her desire to essentially rape everything in sight.

Obviously fiction and a silly idea barring some hormone replacement therapy, and yes, not all men are rapist. But it goes to show that even decades ago, the idea that women could never "truly" understand the male's sex drive, that we are forced to learn how to somewhat suppress growing up, was in the subconscious of our culture.

In all honesty, the biggest thing I have taken from this subreddit since joining a few years ago was the simple idea to embrace my inner masculinity unashamedly. I wouldn't be where I am in my career if it wasn't for that value.

[–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn18 points19 points  (1 child) | Copy

I actually read this old sci-fi / fantasy book series "Incarnations of Immortality", written a few decades ago, in which at one point, a female protagonist was put into the biological body of a man, and she was completely and utterly shocked at how much difficult it was to suppress her newly acquired sex drive and her desire to essentially rape everything in sight.

There was an article written by a FtM transsexual that basically said the same thing once she started hormone therapy.

[–]mrrooftops6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy

I read that article a fair few years ago. It was eye opening. He/she said that after they started the testosterone treatment it was like a red mist of lust taking over every thought they had.

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

I was going to say, that idea of locking down the highest quality man may get her riled up, but it was my understanding that it was a different pathway than the test--sex one.

More like that drive you have when your dream to go to the olympics is just one more match away, and that high one gets just before one heres the start gun

[–]2renzy7714 points15 points  (1 child) | Copy

I don't think women have a weaker sex drive. My opinion is that the game is biased toward them because men do all the flirting/heavy lifting.

Could it also be that women's sex drive is simply more "laser" like (extremely focussed on a very small population of men) vs men's "shotgun" approach (widely spread on a large population of women)?

To put it another way, if a woman is around 1000 "average" men, it would be easy to conclude her sex drive is low if she doesn't end up sleeping with any of them. But if you put that same woman in a room with Chris Hemsworth, you might come to the opposite conclusion: that she has a sky-high sex drive when she proceeds to act like a hyper-sexual super-slut with him.

[–]BradPill8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yes, I tend to agree. Ever seen a bunch of women at one of those hen-parties with male strippers? I have heard women tell they were ashamed and/or shocked by the shameless sluttyness of their usually 'proper' sisters at such events.

Also, once she's into a guy, that knows how to give her tingles, she's constantly wet and might cross boundaries she would have never thought possible - maybe she will not openly initiate sex (she's not a slut, right!), she will certainly hint at it - repeatedly - only a feminist guy will not get the message - as he will be too shocked by her vulgar innuendos.

[–]1rporion16 points17 points  (9 children) | Copy

I don´t think women have a weaker sex drive, I think they have a different sex drive.

They do not have the constant urge but, facing the right man, it can be overwhelming.

For them it is not like hunger or thirst, more like a lightning strike.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 23 points24 points  (5 children) | Copy

The fact remains, if men are willing to screw almost anybody at the drop of a hat, but women are discerning and will wait months until the right guy comes knocking... one of them has a weaker sex drive.

[–]1rporion6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy

I won´t argue that point, but what I was trying to say that if it hits them it can be overwhelming.

Whether that is because they are not used to it or because it is THAT strong, I really have no way of knowing.

edit: I will say though that if the female sex drive were anything like the male sex drive the whole world would be a giant gay bar.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy

if it hits them it can be overwhelming.

Try getting an average guy, a 7, with a +2 SMV woman, a proper 9, and see what overwhelming sex drive is about.

There is nothing strange in women getting sexually overwhelmed when they get to pair with men they deem way out of their league - no indication of a volcanic sex drive in that.

[–]fingerthemoon1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Women do have longer more intense orgasms and they can have more of them in the same night. But it's more difficult for them to get there.

I've witnessed a few women having orgasms that I'm somewhat jealous of. It's like they completely go somewhere else... Then there's the ones who rarely cum no matter what. It's like everything has to perfect with the stars aligned.

[–]172p2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

for men it's overwhelming to the point where they have been known to rape women.

[–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn10 points11 points  (2 children) | Copy

I don´t think women have a weaker sex drive, I think they have a different sex drive.

I will agree with this. I think that the only thing the male and female sex drive have in common is that they are sex drives.

What causes attraction, what causes becoming horny, everything else between the two are different.

The male sex drive is very direct and also release based: a man gets horny by seeing hot women, his epididymis is full and he needs to fuck so bad it's like holding a full bladder of piss...

The female sex drive is very reactive: a woman gets horny when a man she's attracted to is shows interest towards her, she doesn't have a biological trigger like the epididymis causing a "must fuck anything now" type of feeling...

One gender gets pregnant, the other doesn't... to think that their sex drives could be comparable doesn't make a lot of sense.

[–]1rporion3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Reactive and narcissistic, which is a fancy way of saying that women want to be desired by a man they deem worthy.

[–]sweetleef7 points8 points  (1 child) | Copy

If women wanted sex as much as men, we'd see tons of male strip clubs, male hookers standing on street corners, porn wouldn't be overwhelmingly male-targeted, there'd be mail-order grooms, etc.

We don't see those things, and never have.

[–]screenmagnet1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I have a theory, and I am too lazy to see if it is at all substantiated. I think that when men orgasm, there is a greater release of oxytocin and prolactin than in women, accounting for the man's classic refractory period, and also my anecdotal observation that masturbation seems to completely satiate a man's sex drive for a certain length of time. The length of time is variable, but the key here is that the satiation is enough to allow the man to go about his business. This is not so for women, in my experience.

[–]NPK56671 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

The reality of it is that this isnt true. Its definitely skewed towards men having the higher sex drive. Its anecdotally obvious to almost all men and unbiased females and probably has evolutionary purposes.

[–]fullhalf1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

for the longest time, there used to be a big social consequence to the flirting game for women. feminists have turned it on its head and that's why within the last 20 years, women have been dressing more and more like sluts. now we're in a stage where i don't see where else it could go. i mean, their pussy is practically hanging out by now. i hate how most women refuse to admit that they dress up for men. yea no shit it feels good to look good but why do you look good? isnt it because men consider that beautiful?

women get off big time on being admired physically. it is proven now by the amount of pics they post on social media. men do too but not as much. nowadays, you can't shame a girl for doing anything sexual. at the same time, they can claim rape and everyone would believe them. truth of the matter is, we ALL judge others by how they look. if you see a guy dressed in raggety ass clothes, would you think he was poor? if he was a black guy dressed in a suit, would anyone think he was ghetto or aggressive? no, you would think he was an educated man and is mild mannered. now this next part is funny, i was about to describe a slutty looking woman but then i realized that it has been normalized now. if i were to describe a slutty look now, i would have to go crazy like have half her ass hanging out or something. this is the world we live in. meanwhile, men are expected to ever be the same supporter and to bear the burdens of society.

[–]colmatterson1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

What does the title specifically mean? I assume at some point in the book he explains what he means by the empress is naked, can you tell us, OP?

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

Well, you're familiar with the old tale of the emperor's new clothes?

A vain Emperor who cares about nothing except wearing and displaying clothes hires two weavers who promise him the finest, best suit of clothes from a fabric invisible to anyone who is unfit for his position or "hopelessly stupid". The Emperor's ministers cannot see the clothes themselves, but pretend that they can for fear of appearing unfit for their positions and the Emperor does the same. Finally the weavers report that the suit is finished, they mime dressing him and the Emperor marches in procession before his subjects. The townsfolk play along with the pretense, not wanting to appear unfit for their positions or stupid. Then a child in the crowd, too young to understand the desirability of keeping up the pretense, blurts out that the Emperor is wearing nothing at all and the cry is taken up by others. The Emperor suspects the assertion is true, but continues the procession.

This book exposes a similar charade: the myth of female oppression, and the misconceptions of the war of the sexes.

[–]Basuntas1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Is there a paper version or only kindle? I don't have any kind of digital book reading device, I either read a "real" book or on the pc.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Is there a paper version or only kindle?

Only kindle, for the moment. I'll probably have a paper version in a few days.

[–]Basuntas1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

thank you for your response. I look forward to it

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

I read Eric Berne's books like holy scripture. Games People Play has changed my life. As a doctor, it has been instrumental in my practice.

The one caveat I'd like to add about the flirting game is that this holds mainly true for American/WASP tyoe women. With black, hispanic, and some varieties of middle eastern, it's a lot more WYSIWYG. I'm speaking as an Hispanic. These cultures tend to not bullshit themselves regarding what they want and are more direct. The good news is that they usually tell you how the feel. That's also the bad news.

If you liked "Games" look for a copy of "What do you say after you say hello?" Although overcomplicated at times, it adds on "Games" with other concepts such as my favorite "Grocery Stamps."

[–]reigorius1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Could you expend on what you took from the book from Eric Berne?

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

So as OP described, TA's about strokes. But that's half of the doctrine. The other half is platform for those "transactions." And that's in the three mental archetypes or modes that everyone has: the parent, adult and child. For an explanation of those, go here.

Transactions occur from one of those to a target archetype of whom we're dealing with. Some examples:

A: "How do I get to the highway?" (adult to adult) B: "Two blocks further then a right." (adult to adult)

A: "I'm sorry sir, the playland is closed." (Parent to Adult) B: "Yeah, I know, can you give me a break here? My kid really really wants to go." (Adult to Parent) A: "I'm sorry, it's closed." (P:A) B: "C'mon, man, quit being a dick and work with me!" (C:P) A: "Get out of the store now!" (P:C)

When the lines cross, ie, P:C to P:C, shit is popping off.

These transactions can be overt but with covert undertones, like this classic example:

Mafioso: "Look, just help us help you. We're looking out for you. You don't want anything bad to happen, do you?" ("Pay us the protection or we're lighting your store on fire or worse!") Overt, it's Child-Adult, but covertly, Parent-Child.

Now one reason I struggled with women was because I didn't recognize flirting when it happened. So when a girl came up to me while I was working on my Mac and said:

Girl: "Is that a Mac? Where'd you get it? How do you like it?"

I thought it was Adult-Adult. And it is, but overtly. Covertly, it's Child-Child.

Classic PUA negs appear Adult-Child or Parent-Child (tres douche), but are Child-Child. You're resurrecting those feelings of childhood when daddy was scolding her.

And on that note, ever wonder why we love it when they call us "daddy" and baby talk us (well, most guys)? No, not inherent pedophilia (well, for most probably), but because it's Child-Child or Parent-Child interaction bringing those feelings back. "Who's your Daddy?" Is just good ol' Parent-Child, dad telling you that you screwed up and are now in time out.

It can get more complicated, with "adjusted child" and other details, but that's the gist of it.

Where it helps me is in any type of counseling situation, like at the clinic. SO I have the typical patient who doesn't want to lose weight, stop smoking, eat right etc. So we have our three approaches:

Parent: You need to be more healthy! Child: Please do it, think of your family. Adult: Do you have a living will written up yet? Got a life insurance policy? Because you're gonna need it soon. (ok, I don't go that hard, but yeah).

One thing to keep in mind: None of these modes or targets are bad, but they can only be inappropriate. A good parent-child is needed when you've got to tell your friend that he's getting played and needs to dump that bitch stat. But it's not good for giving directions to the bathroom.

Hope this helps.

[–]glasspot 2 points2 points [recovered] | Copy

Attractive women are pieces of shit, simple as that. And my true opinion is that they are actually theoretically infinitely 'bad'.

That's why TRP exists. Or else there wouldn't be a need for it.

But the relationship dynamic is you're either in control or being controlled. But everyone knows that. Even people that haven't studied game in their life pretty much know that.

So, armed with the knowledge that a woman is, literally, infinitely bad in nearly every way. I have a very powerful tool at my disposable or call it part of my arsenal if you want. In understanding something like that, among many other things, you can begin to craft your perception of women to be one that is streamlined for not only dominance, but generating attraction, and winning sex. The Western and American perception of women is one that will get you burned, bad. And, it being in place as it is, results in a very large number of things, which I won't go into at this time. Fact is, 99% of guys are fucked. Kind of like a mental castration, if I were to put it in those terms.

[–]whisky11111 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

"winning sex"

Actually I think that reconditioning oneself as to not see sex as a "prize" to be won is a very big step towards male freedom.

At 44 years of age nature is doing this for me naturally but if I could have grasp that concept years ago my life would have been much better for it.

[–]glasspot 1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy

No, you're wrong on that.

You're playing a game to win sex. That's the way to look at it. Like it or not.

[–]whisky11111 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

But is sex really that great of a prize? I've had plenty of sex and it was OK but just like another part of life, not like a big prize.

[–]screenmagnet3 points4 points  (23 children) | Copy

I've read "Games People Play," and it's a great book. But a few niggles. First of all, while games are dishonest, they are not inherently 'bad'. Many games are benign. Benign games also allow us to navigate social situations by falling back on known, predictable patterns, which is comforting to us, and allows us to avoid using our brainpower on mundane interactions. For example, that whole exchange you do with you coworker every Monday about how your respective weekends went? That's a Game - a benign one.

Also, everyone participates in games, not just men with women, but men with men, women with women, people within groups, etc.

Now, moving onto the Flirting/Raping game. The Flirting Game is supposed to go like this: Woman wears something revealing. Man Flirts with her. Woman pretends to be offended by the attention. That's how the Game goes. A man can choose to play or choose to abstain from the Game. But if he responds by, say, calling her a slut, or raping her, he has turned a safe, predictable game into a dramatic situation. The whole point of Games is that they are predictable. Everyone knows how to play their role. When one person goes off script, everyone else gets Confused and Lashes Out. So Going Off Script is generally maladaptive. You either go along with a (benign) game. Or if its a Harmful Game, you refuse to play. But you don't start playing, then confuse the fuck out of everyone else by changing the game. That's not what Berne was advising at all.

Finally, on the subject of 'provocation'. Yeah, that doesn't fly. Remember, rape fantasy is supposed to be a FANTASY. And the women play the flirting Game precisely BECAUSE it's got predicable rules (the man is supposed to play along, but not push the boundaries too far), so they feel SAFE playing it. If, as a man, you break the rules of the game and rape a woman because you feel you are provoked, not only are you screwing up the game, but you are also not exercising self-control.

Take another common game -- the arm wrestle. If you enter into an arm-wrestle with your buddy, and he goes overboard and breaks your wrist, he's gone off script. It was implied that you weren't really supposed to hurt each other. Same thing with the Flirting Game.

[–]tallwheel7 points8 points  (16 children) | Copy

But if he responds by, say, calling her a slut, or raping her, he has turned a safe, predictable game into a dramatic don't start playing, then confuse the fuck out of everyone else by changing the game.

The idea that either of those actions are against the rules of the game is based on modern societal standards. In more patriarchal cultures, calling her a slut was considered a perfectly normal and deserved response, well within the confines of the rules of the game. And if you want to go deeper, rape is also a valid move as far as biology and reproduction are concerned - regardless of how society defines and views rape.

The issue is that the 'rules' used to be different. Then, we went about, as a society, eliminating all the potentially negative outcomes for women.

Also, you're completely ignoring the outcome of rejection here. Either sex can reject the other, but in the majority of cases it is the woman rejecting approaches by the man. In this case, the woman gets stroked, and the beta man without abundance mentality takes a huge emotional hit. I'm not entirely sure I'd consider the outcome completely benign to the man in that situation.

Remember, rape fantasy is supposed to be a FANTASY. And the women play the flirting Game precisely BECAUSE it's got predicable rules

All I'll say is that the line between rape fantasy and reality are a lot more blurred than you are making it out to be here. A rape fantasy can very easily be retroactively rewritten in a woman's mind as rape reality if she feels differently about it later. Most/all of the James Dean accusations are likely good examples of this.

[–]screenmagnet-1 points0 points  (14 children) | Copy

Yes, of course the rules of any Game are based on the standards of the society in question. They differ between cultures and time periods. Behaving according to outdated social norms is still going to confuse the shit out of people, and violates the rules of the Game.

If anyone, for any reason, feels that participating in any Game is detrimental, the best course of action is to simply not participate in it. So, when the woman walks by in the short skirt...just ignore her. Hell, I can think of many a night in college I tarted myself up to go to the club, only to be ignored all night by all the men at the bar. Granted, I wasn't playing a Game...I was actually trying to get laid. Oh well.

Edit: The line is definitely not blurred, though, if you actually rape her.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l9 points10 points  (4 children) | Copy

So, when the woman walks by in the short skirt...just ignore her.

Confirmed, you are indeed a woman :)

[–]screenmagnet0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

Eh, I think you misunderstood me. When I'm scantily clad, I definitely don't want to be ignored. I enjoy catcalls and comments. What I don't enjoy (and have gotten in the past) is rude comments from men to cover my tits up. One guy even tried to cover them up for me, until his friends apologetically pulled him away!

In that case, yeah, he should have just looked somewhere else if he was so bothered by them.

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


Oh woman, the eternal attention seeking, solipsistic child. Like a black hole, your desires for attention will never be satiated.

Go elsewhere, and do not disturb us when we speak.

[–]172p2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

Granted, I wasn't playing a Game...I was actually trying to get laid

If only you had spoken directly to men you wanted to bang.

[–]screenmagnet0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

I tried that with friends/classmates in college, and it only seemed to freak the guys out. I actually got some bizarre/scary overreactions (one guy called me on the phone and ranted at me incoherently for 'upsetting the balance' until I started crying...). I had much better luck being direct with guys I met through online dating.

[–]172p0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I went to college when I was 25. Not surprised - bunch of boys with weak/fake frames.

[–]stawek2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy

Men cannot chose to not participate, as 70% or more of our work efforts are taken away in taxes.

Cut all benefits and then we might start talking about non participation.

[–]screenmagnet0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

What's your point. I pay taxes too. I don't get to be in a magical lower tax bracket because I have a vagina.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

Says the single mom to the day laborer: I pay taxes too!

[–]1james-watson0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Is it too much to ask to ban attention whores? This female has added nothing to the discussion, and is succeeding in its derailment with disheartening effectiveness.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Not too much, she broke the tits or gtfo rule lol

[–]stawek2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Men DO pay more taxes cause they have to earn more and they don't get freebies from anybody.

Women either get the benefits or salaries paid by those taxes (like education jobs and governmental offices jobs) while men usually get nothing.

[–][deleted] 7 points7 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]screenmagnet1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I wish! If that were the case, there wouldn't be any work left to be done!

I think what you meant to ask me is: "should men and women be treated equally." Yes, I think they should be treated equally in the legal and professional spheres. With respect to the personal sphere, I think adults can make their own decisions, and that once we have achieved full parity in the legal and professional spheres, choices in the personal sphere will become freer.

With respect to myself, in the personal sphere, I am sort of in between. I am not someone who could be a SAHM. I like to work outside the home. But I also like my husband to handle the finances, take the lead in social situations, and choke the shit out of me in bed. Fortunately, my guy is more or less cool with the above.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy

The Flirting Game is supposed to go like this

You say that's how it's supposed to go. Women exploit the flirting game for selfish ends, regardless of its consequences to men.

Women fake their sexual allure and sexual interest to secure resources, often with no intention at all of following through on their lies. Women play the game for their own benefit, at the expense of men who have little choice but to play.

If it was the other way round, this would be called exploitation. In fact when men occasionally do win this game, that's exactly what we call it. Women on the other hand are given carte-blanche to act exactly how they please, with zero consequences.

Maladaptive because it's going off script? Oh hell no, it's very very well adapted. She makes everything the responsibility of the man, enjoys the resources and the attention and the validation, and then says "oh I didn't mean anything! I was just flirting!" should she need to. That she does this with fifteen men in parallel while fucking someone else is rarely revealed.

It was implied that you weren't really supposed to hurt each other.

Getting as much investment and resources from as many men as possible is hurting people. Lying to them is hurting them. Saying that you really love their earning potential while fucking Chad is hurting them.

Women hurt men with careless abandon and often gloat about it to feed their egos.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy

I don't agree that female games are "benign".

Other than that, thanks for your input, it is useful to have the female perspective on the issue laid out.

[–]1james-watson1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Other than that, thanks for your input, it is useful to have the female perspective on the issue laid out.

You are man of sinister wit. A lesser man would not have caught the sarcasm in this statement.

[–]screenmagnet0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Not all female games are benign. For example, "Let's You and Him Fight,"

[–]ArcherAV0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

On the subject of approaching women and getting cruelly rejected. It is a good thing that young people have Tinder now, and other dating sites. So there is at least some shared understanding. I have heard that there is still some issue when people do meet. But at least it is an improvement.

Maybe better sex education would help. If women have more information about their sexuality and feel more free to be sexual. The message, as far as I am aware, seems to be "This is how you get pregnant, don't" and not imparting information about how women can gain pleasure from sex. It is a difficult thing to get right, but I think improvements can be made.

[–]machimus0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Well shit, this is just a derivative review of Games People Play, Rapo included. Go read that book, it's good.

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

"A weaker sex drive is at the basis of female superiority."

This is the female viagra

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

Certainly, not all rapes are caused by women. To go from a fantasy to provoking a real rape you need to be at least a bit disturbed. But then, “Mental disorders are common. World wide more than one in three people in most countries report sufficient criteria for at least one at some point in their life.” Given this, it is not unreasonable to suspect that many rapes are actually female-initiated.

1/3 people do not have a mental disorder so fucked up that it will cause them to rape women. Anxiety is a mental disorder, and that does the complete opposite.

The only well-known disorders that would be the reason for someone to rape are psychopathy and psychosis.

[–]BlueFreedom420-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

Great synopsis. I had thought about buying the book on Amazon but I was hoping for a print version -though i realize printing is very expensive. I think I will pick up the digital copy.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

[–][deleted] -2 points-2 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

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

Maybe you commented on the wrong post?

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

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter