Women serve two primary purposes in a man's life: 1. Sex, 2. Companionship. How to acquire both in the most cost-effective way.

Reddit View
August 6, 2017

Extracting value

Man wants happiness. To achieve it he'll enlist in his life the greatest number of conditions that give rise to the greatest quality versions of it. Each man will seek some unique variety of those conditions, partially due to individuation of personality among different men and partially due to some being able to recognize certain conditions for happiness as being of an objectively higher quality than others.

In either case, for the great majortiy of men a portion of his potential happiness exists in the form of an ideal kind of female interaction pattern. That ideal kind consists of two primary components: Sex and companionship. For clarity's sake let's identify what each combination of these two variables look like:

Sex without companionship: Tinder hookups, one night stands, fuck-buddies (less so), etc. Sex without companionship is great. Sex without companionshp has my partial endorsement.

Companionship without sex: Female friendships are of value insomuch as they open doors to new people and experiences, are attractive and therefore vaguely enjoyable to be around while doing something you'd still otherwise enjoy, and/or provide a degree of interesting conversation--female intelligence exists. In general, females do not and cannot provide actual, legitimate I-care-about-you friendship. Altruism in women is properly reserved for her children and to some degree her alpha-male lover. While all friendships should be seen as disposable and conditional upon the value they provide, it is female friendships that should be expected to lose value the quickest and most reliably. Invest gently.

Sex and companionship: The most desirable pattern of interaction with the opposite sex, in my view, involves consolidating much, but not all, of the two values available from women into one reliable female who provides both these benefits eagerly. While these two seem straightforward, I'd like to further describe them so as to make clear their value before discussing how to best procure them.


Scientifically, sex is arguably more of an essential aspect of human existence than even survival--as individuals we survive to have sex, not visa versa. This is not to suggest that simply because sex is critical to the survival of the species that it's somehow a moral imperative; I'm a birth-control advocate after-all. Rather, it seems inductively highly likely that sex is valuable to a man for many more reasons than that it feels good at the time. I'd postulate, for example, that our hard-wired mechanism for self-assessment and mood regulation looks, perhaps above anything, at the frequency and quality of our sexual encounters.

Assuming that, I'd claim point-blank that it's universally prudent for a man to cultivate a relationship in which he is having sex 1. with someone who is enthusiastic and eager to have it, 2. in exactly the fashion that he wants to, 3. exactly as often as he wants to. Exceptions to number 3 include temporary and rare interference related to her health. If you wont allow for that, kill yourself.


  • You want to go shooting so you invite her because she makes it more fun.
  • You want to try a new restaurant so you invite her because it makes it more fun.
  • You want to swim in a lake so you invite her because it makes it more fun.
  • You're going to a family event SYIHBIMIMF.
  • You're going on a work trip SYIHBIMIMF.
  • You want to get take-out and watch a show in pajamas SYIHBIMIMF.

Companionship is experience-enhancing. It is inherently enjoyable. It's not a payment for sex, a boyfriend duty, or just something-that-you-do.

The tricky part is that for every 10 girls that you would fuck there's only 1 who would really enhance a non-sexual experience in the ways that my examples above describe. This is primarily because of human personality diversity and the mild rareness of psychological compatibility.

For R-selected types here who innately crave a variety of pussy, this post may be either not for you at all or simply not useful to you at this particular stage in your life. On some objective level, however, I'd ask you to inquire whether you'd prefer it if you didn't have to engage in the seduction process--from 0--on a regular basis. Perhaps you're energized by that. If so I recommend Real Social Dynamics on YouTube--although even Owen himself eventually realized he vastly prefers relationships to ONS. I predict he'll eventually embrace Buddhism and monastic celibacy at this rate.


Acquiring a relationship (I never mean this term to necessitate sexual exclusivity) in which sex and companionship is achieved unto satisfaction requires that you increase the value that you demonstrate to a woman.

Please note that when discussing how to provide value to a woman, the motives here are strictly self-interested. When discussing how to make $1M, no one accuses another of putting wealth "on the pedestal" or of a misguided altruistic commitment to providing goods and services. You provide value because the greater value you can provide the greater value you can bargain for. In short, if you want an attractive woman to worship your cock month-in and month-out and actually enhance other experiences outside of the bedroom, you need something to offer that most men can't.

Incidentally, the traits required to offer said value are inherently desirable and beneficial to you in and of themselves, unlike money. In short, cultivating alpha traits is all upside.

The value you provide to a woman can be compartmentalized into two categories: The visceral and the lifestyle.


The visceral value that you provide a woman involves her vagina, her tingles, her limbic system. This is the part of a woman that she has no control over whatsoever. The female limbic system is designed to respond with sexual arousal to the demonstration of traits in a man that identify him as most importantly carrying genes that will produce strong and capable offspring and secondarily himself capable of protecting her and their offspring. To provide visceral value to a woman you must exhibit traits that subconsciously demonstrate the power to dominate the environment, animals, and other men. The traits that most directly demonstrate this power are general muscularity and confidence. For that reason I recommend lifting and nofap--I promise that when you start actually doing those things it won't be such a pain to have to keep reading people advocate them 24/7 here.


The lifestyle value that you provide a woman extends beyond her sexual arousal faculties and integrates into her general, more conceptual desire for stability, safety, and happiness. The lifestyle value you provide a woman is verbalized to herself in this way: "He cares about me."

After visceral value is provided, lifestyle value allows a woman to be all-in. She's no longer entertaining battling thoughts like, "He's an asshole but he's just so hot. I should just block him." She can think "He's so hot and he really makes me happy. I don't want to mess this up."

I realize it's gospel in this community that if a woman feels cared for her pussy will become as dry as the Gobi desert and she'll immediately run back to her violently abusive drug-dealing ex-boyfriend. This is because TRP is heavily represented by men who have cared for a woman from the place of betahood (the pill they were raised on) rather than from a place of alphahood. For a girl to say to herself, "He cares about me," "he" must be an alpha male because only the love and care of an alpha male has any real value to a female.

When you only provide visceral value to a woman, she may fuck you for a time. Perhaps from the majority of women you see this is all that you want and therefore to provide lifestyle value would be unnecessary. But if you find yourself sleeping with a woman who you legitimately enjoy doing non-sexual things with, it behooves you to provide lifestyle value to her so as to trigger her more deliberative, conceptual faculties in a way that reinforces her mere sexual attraction to you. It also just feels good to care about someone every once and a while.


The overlap between the visceral and the lifestyle aspects of your value includes the strength of your frame. If your mood is not stable and strong, she will lose both her visceral faith in your strength as a partner and her conscious, conceptual assessment of the quality of your relationship. Nothing is more common and more destructive to the faith a woman has in a man than that man becoming emotionally hurt. There is never a level of relationship closeness or intimacy at which you expressing any sort of emotional pain will not begin to erode her attraction and faith in you.


The difference between a woman who has been provided visceral value and a woman who has been provided both visceral and lifestyle value is that the latter will actively try to make the tenderer of said value happy in a variety of ways. She will cook for him, massage him, compliment him, listen to him, be his cheerleader in his adventures and projects, and will cater to his fetishes (including hair-dying and even cosmetic surgeries). She will actually change who she is to make him happy. She will give more than he gives. She'll ride on his coattails for as long as he wants her around.


When relationships of this nature end, men are liable to feel pain from loss. This is a cost I've factored into my assessment of the value of these relationships and my response to it as an objection is verbalized well by Osho:

"Experience life in all possible ways -- good-bad, bitter-sweet, dark-light, summer-winter. Experience all the dualities. Don't be afraid of experience, because the more experience you have, the more mature you become."


  • The male-female interaction dynamic most desirable for most men will involve him having one female in his life that provides a satisfactory measure of both sex and experience-enhancing companionship.
  • To achieve this sort of relationship, you want to activate her visceral tingles via alpha traits like confidence and muscularity. You also want to provide lifestyle value to her in the form of a degree of benevolence that allows her to really give herself to you.

Post Information
Title Women serve two primary purposes in a man's life: 1. Sex, 2. Companionship. How to acquire both in the most cost-effective way.
Author SLMC1
Upvotes 745
Comments 133
Date 06 August 2017 12:06 PM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit TheRedPill
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/45162
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/6ry0fl/women_serve_two_primary_purposes_in_a_mans_life_1/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
tinglesalphaframenofapONSliftthe red pillpedestal

[–]aigamithite348 points349 points  (19 children) | Copy

I realize it's gospel in this community that if a woman feels cared for her pussy will become as dry as the Gobi desert and she'll immediately run back to her violently abusive drug-dealing ex-boyfriend. This is because TRP is heavily represented by men who have cared for a woman from the place of betahood (the pill they were raised on) rather than from a place of alphahood. For a girl to say to herself, "He cares about me," "he" must be an alpha male because only the love and care of an alpha male has any real value to a female.

This is too important to be such a small part of this post, and deserves a post of its own if you have time to spare.

[–]0signal0118 points119 points  (12 children) | Copy

This is because TRP is heavily represented by men who have cared for a woman from the place of betahood

It's because TRP is heavily represented by men from a certain part of the world. Being a provider is something highly esteemed in more traditional, healthier societies.

[–]JackGetsIt46 points47 points  (0 children) | Copy

This is a very important point to note. The women in western societies value being cared for much less because of social norms allowing women to work as well as government/social aide when women fail. Other societies around the world don't have those structures for women thus putting women in a position to value male stewardship higher.

[–]Alienziscoming5 points6 points  (9 children) | Copy

Care to name some of those societies?

[–]asymptotic_salvation0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

South East Asia: Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia etc.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

Haha. As a Vietnamese, I agree.

However, with more people in Vietnam being literate in English, Vietnamese women are being slowly exposed to "equality", "feminism" now.

[–]asymptotic_salvation1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Lucky you -- what a beautiful country.

I agree though. I met a few women who had proto-feminist inklings, especially in places like Hanoi.

[–]JohnFitzWeaver2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Thanks for highlighting this. I admit I started skimming part way through the full writeup, and I'm glad I went back to finish it.

[–]brinkleybuzz2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Benevolent dictatorship is a good model to follow.

[–]boodie19612 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Problem is dictatorship is not benevolent. Most often is brutal and repressive.

[–]Disciplinedgenius0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Absolutely. People need to understand the difference between the good guy alpha and the bad guy alpha.

[–]Neuroentropic_Force24 points25 points  (1 child) | Copy

One of the most quality posts I've read here in a while. It is noteworthy because it presents an alternate strategy to achieving sexual and relational success with red pill tools and a red pill understanding of relationships.

Personally, this is how I do things right now. I'm a busy guy, I don't have time to spend on Tinder or chat people up. Working new plates is time consuming, and sometimes frustrating, and it hosts it's own array of risks.

This strategy is not for anyone with any remaining beta qualities. This is advanced TRP. As you mentioned, it requires faultless frame over a long period of time. There is no room for anger, bitterness, jealously, or admittance of weakness.

There is risk associated with focusing on one girl, if you are weak, you could face oneitis, and a loss of abundance mentality (both fatal errors).

But if you can pull it off and maintain frame. it is bliss. No effort and little game, just great sex and lots of fun.

Thank you for this quality post, your observations and analysis were spot on. Sometimes members here get too narrow minded how TRP is to be used or what it can achieve. It is great to see some alternative understanding articulated so well.

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

Really good commentary here. Thank you.

[–][deleted] 34 points35 points  (10 children) | Copy

Lately I've been going back and forth between a more mgtow approach, continuing to spin plates, or engage an LTR with this girl i'm seeing. My head is spinning and it's causing bouts of depression and withdraw. That is the biggest problem with mgtow, it's not the inherent philosophy per say as voluntary celibacy is a demonstrated spiritual path, but the down regulation of testosterone and the suppression of motivation.

The mental frameworks advocated on this sub are often disjointed and irreconcilable. Like you I am predominately k-selected and would prefer intense, high intimacy sex to high variety. Thank you for providing this post which I think exemplifies what having a healthy relationship with sex/women can be and without the addicted, vindictive, or negligent mentalities exhibited on 70 percent of the stuff I find on here, while still not being blue pill. Keep up the good work!

[–][deleted] 25 points26 points  (8 children) | Copy

inherent philosophy per say as voluntary celibacy is a demonstrated spiritual path, but the down regulation of testosterone and the suppression of motivation.

I saw that you edited/expanded your comment with this and I found it interesting.

I have never witnessed a MGTOW embrace celibacy as a sort of spiritual path. Instead I've seen "intellectually induced asexuality" utilized as an attempt to avoid suffering they see as an inevitable result of dating. All the MGTOWs I've seen discuss the topic flatly admit as a matter of course that they masturbate to porn.

I fully respect Brahmacharya and spiritual celibacy as a path to a different kind of happiness than the "householder" life can provide, but simply avoiding women but jacking off to porn is really the worst of both worlds.

[–]1naMlliPdeR7 points8 points  (6 children) | Copy

NoFap has changed me greatly. Have not masturbated for over a year. People will never understand it until they try it.

[–]smyger0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy

Doesn't no fap decrease testerone levels? I read somewhere long time ago that when you stopped masturbating/having sex then after 7 days the testerone levels went up to max, and after that point it went down again.

naMiliPdeR since you write so strongly about it I am gonna take your advice and try it, but worried about potentional negative effects since we all heard that "masturbating is good for health"

[–]1naMlliPdeR1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Long term no bad effects on testosterone. I've had mine checked many times.

Try it for 3 months at least, that's the usual recommendation.

[–]pFlap0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Where can I get my T levels tested and how much does it cost?

[–]1naMlliPdeR0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Depends on ur country. If u pay out of pocket, any clinic. If u want insurance to pay, need doctor prescribe.

[–]1empatheticapathetic1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

No definitely decreases test if you're not getting laid. The guy below has conveniently missed that out.

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

Suffering is not an inevitable result of dating. Getting your life ruined is a possible result of dating. Therefore porn or pump and dump makes a lot more sense, especially if your life has been almost ruined once, twice or more by women.

I don't take either approach, but I've found a solution to women's nature so that the power is always in my hands without even needing to hold frame or lift or any of that.

Most men can't figure out or implement such a solution tho, and most men are either emotionally weak/become co dependent or will be crushed by womens behaviour or not be able to deal with it wisely, therefore MGTOW is more reasonable for most men than taking the very real risks of an LTR, imo.

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (0 children) | Copy

I'm a monogamist; I spin plates because so few women on the market are suitable. But my headspace has gotten to the point where I'm ok with a relationship failing. If your stoic enough I'd say persue the LTR, but keep it in its correct place

[–]1AfterC76 points77 points  (26 children) | Copy

Spinning plates is the cheapest way to get it all.

And look, fellas, this is the most important part. You're spinning plates not to find one you then want to LTR (hint: if you do this, your LTR will crash and burn), you're spinning plates for yourself.

You'll reach this nirvana point, when you get a good three loyal plates going, where you start to love everything about women. Their essence, the love they give. It's intoxicating and amazing. But you realize you can't get it from one. You have to have multiple.

If you don't have any plates right now you can replicate this feeling by laying five bricks a day. Say hi to 5 random girls a day. Next time you make eye contact with a girl don't both quickly look away. Say "how's it going" or "what's good" and you'll start to understand. You'll get some pussy on the side just by doing this too, now that I think about it.

Also another good trick I've adopted is to use very feminine pet names on my girls. Set the tone and the frame with your language!

[–][deleted] 84 points85 points  (15 children) | Copy

I think the majority of my plates were too conservative to really feel comfortable with being just that. I'm attracted to good-girls so that makes sense. The ones that were totally comfortable being just a plate indefinitely seemed to have emotional or personality issues that became unenjoyable to be around. I had a girl leave my house plastered (after I strongly advised her to not) only to crash her car a block away before walking back to my house and fucking me again. But yes, spinning plates is fun. I'm just not sure it's the most cost-effective unless you're really willing to indefinitely spend time with broken individuals who you know are desperately trying to justify in their minds their self-destructive behavior.

[–]1AfterC28 points29 points  (10 children) | Copy

Ah true, that's some wisdom right here. Granted, the good ones won't stick around for more than 3 months, I'd wager.

But damn dude, that's also a reality. Girls just aren't smooth. They do dumb things. For every success story I got 8 weird dates, awkward hook ups, or early times of slapping that abort button.

[–]p00nbrigade21 points22 points  (8 children) | Copy

Dude right? It's seriously like playing the lotto. Sometimes you hit a win and get a normal girl that just has a lot going on in her life so she's down for something casual and sometimes you get a girl that's only down because that's all she's ever expected from men because all the past men in her life realized her craziness and won't commit.

[–][deleted] 27 points28 points  (7 children) | Copy

playing the lotto

For me the big jackpot are the really socially conservative / religious girls who suddenly snap and go hard in the other direction and you're the first guy they pick because you've maintained that place in their mind labeled: "If I ever lose my morals I'll go directly to that guy." The incredible combination of naivety and sexual eagerness is pristine. Happens all too rarely though.

[–]p00nbrigade12 points13 points  (3 children) | Copy

I just experienced something similar. Met a girl at the gym two days after moving home for the Summer and I swear to God she hasn't had a good man in her life in a long time. Girl treats me like a king and she really is just a fucking joy.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (2 children) | Copy

There you go. Not sure if this describes that situation but sometimes, by sheer chance, you meet a girl who has simply been drastically under-exposed to alpha males (except perhaps her father) and when she finally meets one and the attraction is reciprocal, it's like dynamite.

[–]p00nbrigade10 points11 points  (1 child) | Copy

Yup. Dad's a cool dude, family had a hardship so she never went away to college. Had like one bf in highschool, in walks me to much of my benefit.

[–]Endorsed ContributorMetalgear2227 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy

Broke it off with a Christian virgin cause I didn't want to put the time into getting to fuck her, perhaps that was a mistake lol

[–]Op2mus5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

She'll end up fucking some Chad the first day she meets him.

[–]AntiBernardPollard3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

"Slapping that abort button" haha I'm going to use that

[–]CQC35 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

I really enjoyed your post, and I think this first paragraph stood out to me the most as something ill expressed here on this sub in most cases.

Man wants happiness. To achieve it he'll enlist in his life the greatest number of conditions that give rise to the greatest quality versions of it. Each man will seek some unique variety of those conditions, partially due to individuation of personality among different men and partially due to some being able to recognize certain conditions for happiness as being of an objectively higher quality than others.

One thing I realized about myself is that I'm not as stimulated or motivated by ONS or low emotional investment relationships. It's not even a matter of preference but it is to my belief that it is just straight up how I'm wired. I'm fairly aggressive by nature in bed even back when my mindset was more beta, and yet when I see women out in public that I'm definitely attracted to, the initial attraction is nothing compared to getting more intimate with them. Intimacy is the biggest turn for me. It's not that I don't enjoy random hook ups once in awhile, but not on the same level.

From reading this sub I saw for myself how men have really different sexual inclinations and some guys are more than happy to fuck around and with many women and conversely some guys naturally are more inclined to--and even enjoy taking a more invested approach. It is important to consider this because people just tend to "hurr durr AWALT plate them and hard next" to which this statement is key:

being able to recognize certain conditions for happiness as being of an objectively higher quality than others

That is why the TRP is a toolbox line is an important one, it basically says okay, here's how things are now do what you will with that better approximation of reality.

I think many men here do the plating approach while being emotionally distant and ready to next is because it is easier to do that than to let yourself get intimate with someone while simultaneously accepting the volatility and typical impermanence of relationships. It behooves a man to learn to be unwavering in his resolve and adopt a more stoic approach to dealing with stressors, but I believe that the next step is to allow oneself to feel and be vulnerable to some extent by your own will. Not like before when you were needy and desperate and out of control.

In the plating game many men here fear any sort of closeness and only develop utility relationships with women who they attract with behavior that is suited to attracting these types of women. I think they fear backsliding if they get any closer. I want to be careful here though, because I don't want this to be misinterpreted as telling men to be more emotionally vulnerable to women as a means of attraction, I'm referring simply to how you treat yourself.

I've learned a lot from this place, and with those lessons I have the understanding to let myself get a little closer and more intimate without getting totally blindsided. I see the difference between needy emotional narcissism and letting yourself get close to fires without getting blistered by the heat and that is certainly a life experience.

If through it all you still would rather just have low investment plates and to bust a nut and move on, that's cool. However I suspect many men adopt this lifestyle now because of conditioned fear of being betrayed/hurt again like they were in their beta days. If you want to get stronger, you have to get over that too, you are still assuming others can hurt you like that when it is in fact you that hurts you.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

The ones that were totally comfortable being just a plate indefinitely seemed to have emotional or personality issues that became unenjoyable to be around

I've found the opposite - that these are the fairly sorted ones.

The long term/exclusive ones have rapidly bored me to tears.

But then I quite like the bad girls so maybe it's a compatibility thing.

I'm just not sure it's the most cost-effective

It's the most cost effective for me. They provide constant dread for each other and constant social-credit for me. They never feel that dumping me would be a win, because they know I'll be happy elsewhere.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon22 points23 points  (1 child) | Copy

You'll reach this nirvana point, when you get a good three loyal plates going, where you start to love everything about women. Their essence, the love they give. It's intoxicating and amazing. But you realize you can't get it from one. You have to have multiple.

Wow. Three is exactly that point. More than three and it starts to fall apart because I forget about some of them. Less than three and it's not really working and I'm either too attached or too focused on looking elsewhere.

There is an exact amount of "not quite enough" attention to give to women and an exact amount of "remembering stuff about them but not so much" and "being available but not too available" and also a certain amount of... not sure how to describe. Like... cross-pollination. Girl A tells you she likes her ass slapped, so you try it on Girl B and she loves it too and tells you to pull her hair and you try that with Girl C.

Anyway. Exactly as you say..... hit three good(ish) ones and the world is a different place.

[–]Thephilhouse2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

"remembering stuff about them but not so much"

"Girl A, Girl B, Girl C"

Sounds like you are remembering about the right amount about them...

[–]Pumptodump0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

Can you please give examples of very feminine pet names?

[–]1AfterC0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

sweetpea, cutiepie, thundertitties, pretty girl

make them feel like a woman and they'll treat you like a man

[–]Pumptodump0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

Isn't pretty girl validating their ego?

[–]1AfterC3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

Only if you let it. Game is more than treating a girl like a piece of shit. Well, actually, it isn't, but you'll only get 7's with daddy issues if that's your game.

Cultivate the traits you like to see in your women. For me its an emphasis on femininity.

[–]Pumptodump0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I love feminity. Hate girls who wear even pants. lol

[–]cornylamygilbert0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

hey go on

Or link some helpful sources brah

[–]Endorsed ContributorUrsusG50 points51 points  (10 children) | Copy

If you put all your sexual, emotional and companionship eggs in one basket, that basket will gain helluva power over you.

Also, the first point of your summary makes some big assumptions about 'most men'.

[–][deleted] 40 points41 points  (2 children) | Copy

By far the biggest downside to investing disproportionately in one person.

I think that the power a woman has over you when you are not actively seeing others is inversely proportional to how many women you have been with previously and how confident you are that you can replace her. This is why I continue to practice day-game and shoot the shit with girls on Tinder.

[–]Rollo_Mayhem38 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

Well said, having the past success and sexual experiences really primes you for what can be should this one start acting crazy, wierd, bitchy whatever WHICH IS why early 20s guys need to build experiences as much as possible, fuck as much as possibly and date all kinds of girls..

[–]PreOrgasmGroanLness10 points11 points  (5 children) | Copy

Never he said one basket.

Check out Blackdragon. You guys on TRP here are really old fashioned.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy

Blackdragon really has it down when it comes to abundance mentality and building genuine connections with women without beta backsliding.

[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

Black had me as long as he wasn't trying to sell dildos.

[–]PreOrgasmGroanLness0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

I value what works. I don't care if he were selling tiny colorful ponies marketed for extraterrestial aliens, if his lifestyle ideas work, that's good.

[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

tiny colorful ponies marketed for extraterrestial aliens

Good for you, because this describes pretty much that dildo-article.

The problem with Black as opposed with ECs here... he lives off his blog. So he has to post, no matter if he has anything valuable to say in a given week or not.

And people are mocking GLO for his t-shirts... shesh....

[–]Wolffy931 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

My dad warned me about placing all your eggs into one basket.

I bought into the Disney fantasy for 4 years.

Needless to say, he was 150% right.

Lesson learned.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon21 points22 points  (7 children) | Copy

Great post.... one quibble:

every 10 girls ... there's only 1 who would really enhance ... This is primarily because of human personality diversity and the mild rareness of psychological compatibility.

No, it's not and I can prove it: I can have a great time with a lot more than 10% of the male population and a lot less than 10% of the female population.

Fundamentally women are solipsistic value takers. There are very few that genuinely enhance my life - even for simple company. Most of them are just wearing - because fundamentally they seek to take rather than to give.

Her attraction does cause a significant improvement - but even then most women are value takers who seek to get more than they give. When they're attracted they feel entitled to be given sexual advances as well as everything else. It's better than not being attracted, but it's not usually enough to make her good company.

There are a very few who have the combination of a reasonably positive nature with a slightly more giving, slightly less taking nature with enough attraction that they're genuinely good company. But it's not 10%. I've met a few, I'm seeing one. But take sex off the table, would I still enjoy her company? Probably not.

It's not psychological compatibility that's the issue, it's female nature. How many fat/ugly women would you genuinely want to hang out with? Surely they're more fuckable than your guy friends, so sex isn't the problem. And let's say it's in private and noone will see you two, so it's not affecting your SMV you sensitive little wall flower.

The answer is still virtually none, and it's rooted in the selfish, value-taking, solipsistic, selfish male-exploiting nature of the female.

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (1 child) | Copy

selfish, value-taking, solipsistic, selfish male-exploiting nature of the female.

This is how females operate towards betas because they can get away with it. Around alphas their entire modus operandi is different. She must seek to please or she will be dismissed.

Women take from betas because they can and seek to please alphas because they have to.

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

n and seek to please alphas because they have to.

They don't have to, they want to. They want the associated status and the dick from alphas.

Good point about how much female nature changes depending how she sees the guy she's with.

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

It's not psychological compatibility that's the issue, it's female nature.

I agree with this. They aren't there to make the experience better, they are there to increase their value. It just works out that for the males, the presence of their feminine energy and physical body makes the experience better.

[–]BassNet5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

the presence of their feminine energy and physical body makes the experience better

I think this is it. Most girls aren't worth actually hanging out with, but something about their femininity makes things interesting, especially if they're actually quality girls.

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

Why are women natural solipsists? I've noticed this and how it always manifests itself as perpetual victimhood, af/bb mentality and just the general sense of entitlement women seen to have

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

Why are women natural solipsists?

For the same reason young children / babies are naturally extremely selfish: They're physically weaker and less capable of procuring resources and protection on their own.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

It's how they are, because it benefits them to be this way (socially / genetically).

There are rewards for male selflessness (although probably only for betas), there are no rewards (genetically) for female selflessness.

[–]JackGetsIt4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

Everything women do is an act for resources because they historically have had very poor means of finding and securing their own. They have evolved to gain and secure access, not procure. Any companionship a women provides you is an act that she will pull away if she feels you are not going to provide legal subjugation (marriage) in the mid to long term. If you are not a strong provider that increases the resources of the family on a regular basis she will pull both companionship and sex away. Often times women will pull companionship and sex away even if you do consistently provide because women always want more (this is why you vet women). Therefore successful LTR management means giving women the bare minimum and training them to accept it. Increases in resources should be seen by the female as a bonus from a benevolent superior male. You must always be the clear superior or she will seek other mates.

[–]ahtopsy8 points9 points  (3 children) | Copy

Is anyone in this sub actually happy?

[–]BassNet5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

I think many of us are because we understand women and are able to freely discuss how they act. Thanks to what I learned here I had a lot of sex and now have a girlfriend that I'm very happy with.

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

Your question puzzles me. Care to elaborate?

[–]gELSK0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

// , Not all. In any self-improvement or strategy subreddit, there are the losers, and the former losers teaching the losers.

[–]AwakenedSovereign7 points8 points  (3 children) | Copy

Acquiring a relationship (I never mean this term to necessitate sexual exclusivity)

This should be more noticeable in your post. The walkaway message is very oneitis sounding.

Also, you paint this picture that "this One girl" is somehow a superior source of sex and companionship than multiple plates, FWBs or STRs could be. That simply is not true.

Men delight in variety. It is women who benefit most from pedestalizing and idolizing their mates, having every need fulfilled by one alpha at a time on their way through the carousel.

I enjoy companionship with my plates, FWBs, even ONS. Shit I talk with the pros I pay for sometimes if they are chill. But the more non-sexual time you spend with a girl the more you are slotted into BB/emotional provider category. That's just facts. Easiest solution to that for men is to have many women he behaves like this with instead of just one so that competition anxiety balances out the scale.

I've never had more fun with a woman than my 1st oLTR/main plate last year.. who knew I was not exclusive, actively supported my pursuit of other women, and yet who I could invest significant amounts of non-sexual time and emotions into without ever risking a betabux label. You can be a 'lover' and still alpha fucks in that frame.

It's an amazing feeling to be able to have that companionship with almost zero risk of losing status, and the ONLY way you could possibly get that, in my mind, is competition anxiety whether that be active, passive, overt or implied.

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

Can you explain how you created this dynamic between you and your oLTR? Did you expect exclusivity from her as well? And in what ways did she actively support your pursuit of other women?

[–]AwakenedSovereign7 points8 points  (1 child) | Copy

I plated her for ~3 months. After 3 months we were oLTR for an additional 6mo (I Love Yous etc.) At various periods of time during she was the only girl I was fucking, BUT the perception was always that I had one or more other girls in the pipe or in my bed. ONS or short term FWBs would come thru and then drop

From the beginning I established that I was not seeking anything 'serious'. I said specifically: "i'm not in a good place for something exclusive right now" This was a bit self-deprecating in hindsight, but it also spared her ego.

To whit, this was a fairly attractive, spunky HB6 redhead, slutty past, seemed to be a bit insecure & very much craved emotional closeness. I was told by a few friends I was likely to be the most attractive guy she had ever fucked.

I initiated & led a conversation where I basically asserted that we should be honest with eachother about other people we are seeing, and that I will not judge her whatsoever, but this is only for our mutual health (IE STD prevention).

So from that point forward I told her about any girl I was either about to fuck or had fucked. Dread.

I continually reminded her that she was free to do the same, and never heard a single peep about it, from her or any of her friends. Far as I know I was the only guy she was fucking at this time, while I was fucking other girls. Maybe she was fucking around and not saying anything, maybe not. If she was, she hid the fact meticulously, and as I was actively & openly seeing other women, I did not care one whit.

As an example, I took her to a burn (ie drugged up hippies festival) and she would on occasion break away to go find her friends or do something without me. She always told me she was doing this. My response was always a genuine and unemotional "ok babe have fun, cya later". In hindsight I surprised myself with that, because usually I'm clingy and possessive as fuck. But for this girl I truly felt like she was replaceable, like I could find another one just like her at the drop of a hat, and so I let her go without a second thought.

If anything, being that DGAF about her activities & having the dread/preselection with other women made it far more likely for her to be loyal to only me.

Around the ~3 mo. mark I decided to try an experiment. I told her I loved her. We had just taken some molly so i had a little plausible deniability. When fucking her that night she said "please be mine!" or something like that.. where I stopped, kissed her softly, and reminded her that I was not ready to be exclusive. But I did love her. Then fucked her til she stained the sheets and cuddled her to sleep.

Later on she initiated & signalled that she would be down for 3somes, helped wing me with chicks at parties, introduced me to social groups as her "boyfriend.. ya I've got him right now if his other girlfriends would chill!" I'd wager heavily this was all competition driven behavior IE she was afraid I'd leave her behind for one of these other hotter women.. which is exactly what I did.. mistake in hindsight but live and learn.

Hamster = loved

Emotions = roller-coaster as fuck

Status = preselected alpha fucks with multiple hotter women.. that loves HER for some magical reason

For the record, I did actually love her. When other girls flaked out on me and/or I was just feeling down I would sometimes feel beta around her. I worried, from time to time, that she would find someone else and I would lose her.

In general though keeping the relationship open was a goldmine of both status and valuable experience.

I will repeat the procedure, to be sure. I can only imagine how good of a system it would be to maintain multiple such oLTRs, with emotions being 'useful' to balance with dread, instead of inherently undermining status, in addition to ONS/FWBs coming through for variety and replacement of any free oLTR slots.

As emphasized before, these oLTRs would probably be less likely to seek out other men than traditional monogamy. Why?

She has what she needs. A high value male who gives her the sex she craves, the emotional uncertainty she needs, and the passion/romance she has been trained to seek from such a person since birth. The only thing I see stopping that gravy train is the babyclock.

[–]SamuraiPizzaCatz3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Assuming that, I'd claim point-blank that it's universally prudent for a man to cultivate a relationship in which he is having sex 1. with someone who is enthusiastic and eager to have it, 2. in exactly the fashion that he wants to, 3. exactly as often as he wants to. Exceptions to number 3 include temporary and rare interference related to her health. If you wont allow for that, kill yourself.

Cut a man's balls off quite literally and he will lose all interest in women and sex. Tell me again how it isn't purely a reproductive desire.

[–]NeoreactionSafe11 points12 points  (16 children) | Copy


Actually objective reality takes the first position.


  • Reals before Feelz


So women are objectively needed for children as their biological primary purpose.

In essence that is their primary reason to exist.

But that has been fucked up by the Family Court system which encourages the "Whore of Babylon" lifestyle where women ride the Cock Carousel™ only to marry a beta and then Divorce Rape him.

Within this overall nightmare we try to have pleasurable sexual experiences and a wife or girlfriend who isn't like "Taming the Shrew".

So the sex and "companionship" (whatever that means... sounds like "mommy love" to me) is actually not part of the "Reals".

Women once were for making children and that's pretty much all we thought of them.

Gentlemen never really talked about anything with their wives, they went to places with other masculine men and discussed business or politics. This man would not tell his wife much.

Just realize we are in a bizarre inverted Blue Pill mythology now and the Red Pill seeks to wake you up and be able to adapt to this screwed up situation.

The primary purpose of women historically wasn't "Feelz".

And in the old days (1700's) they hadn't even created the "Romantic" type of love pushed hard by Disney movies. The "Gentleman" of those days was absolute master over his house, assets and children. Women looked "up" to their husbands and if the women were disobedient they could be divorced and she would leave with nothing. (however, she had to do something seriously bad)

Anyway... try not to make your opinion based on current trends.

Hedonism is the modern adaption for man as he has lost his former glory.


[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (15 children) | Copy

The divorce rape epidemic isn't interesting to me or worthy of discussion because I feel like the majority of people here already fully understand that marriage is a bad idea. Also, marriages are already declining in the west anyway.

"companionship" (whatever that means)

That's why I provided several examples in my post of what I mean by companionship. I'm assuming you didn't read the post itself.

this screwed up situation.

This screwed up situation is probably the most advantageous to men generally that has ever existed in the history of mankind.

[–]NeoreactionSafe8 points9 points  (14 children) | Copy


No, this is the Feminine Imperative gone wild.

Women are waaaaaaay out of balance with Natural Law these days.

All I'm saying is don't fool yourself with "happy talk" and hedonism as a way to hide from yourself what is really going on.

The Red Pill is about the idea of "Kill the Beta".

The beta wants:


  • Sex with a woman because it makes him feel loved.

  • Comfort of female companionship because he lacks a masculine independence.


What the post does is leads with the two primary "wants" of a beta.

A masculine man is one where stoic objective reality is primary.

The stoic masculine man must know Game because in the manipulative mind wars between men and women we need to win that war to achieve anything.

So the goal is to use Game to have objective dominance of the situation then afterwards you worry about the "feelz" part.

Place the "Reals before Feelz".


  • Masculinity + Femininity = Attraction


That's the Game you focus on because that is objective reality.

The sex and "companionship" is like the cash you win by winning the conflict.

In any competition you focus on the competition, not what you get afterwards.

"Reals before Feelz".

And if yor goal is children then your Game must be really good because you have to figure out how to dominate a woman to such a degree as her being a good parent.

This is the Red Pill LTR.


[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (13 children) | Copy

It's not at all clear to me how anything you just said relates to or contradicts my post.

It sort of seems like you've identified my analysis about how to create and maintain multilayered attraction from a woman as an endorsement of hedonism at the expense of traditional western values or something. I don't see how that is even connected.

Your advocacy of "objective reality" and "realz" is vastly too ambiguous and wispy to be meaningful. I don't know what to do with your comment.

[–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp11 points12 points  (5 children) | Copy

It's not at all clear to me how anything you just said relates to or contradicts my post.

LMAO, that's how he writes. What you're saying is irrelevant for him, he just uses this as means to say more of his usual mumbo jumbo.

[–]DayGameChirality3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy

Yea. How the fuck is this guy an "endorsed contributor"

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (3 children) | Copy

Read some of his top posts and comments. He's got an interesting neo-reactionary spin to everything, even if it's overly conspiratorial at times. I reject his seeming comprehensive traditionalism but it's not a perspective to be dismissed across the board; some aspects of our society would be better if we had retained some of our older social institutions. I dunno.

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

Neoreactionary isn't a great label, and to the extent that it has a coherent definition, NRXsafe isn't really all that neoreactionary. He gets a lot of things right; most of the "conspiracy" stuff he talks about is conspiracy in the sense that men do indeed conspire and most of what happens in the world is the result of such private organization; I have no idea what motivates him to expend such a ludicrous amount of time typing in front of his glowing screen.

[–]Endorsed ContributorJamesSkepp2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

I have no idea what motivates him to expend such a ludicrous amount of time typing in front of his glowing screen.

Popularity and attention. People who like to talk a lot, like to be listened. This is mostly feminine trait - women talk a lot and it's irrelevant if it makes sense as long as others listen and give attention.

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

Good clarification on terminology, thanks.

[–]NeoreactionSafe5 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy


Let me describe a story Mike Tyson (former boxer) said about winning:


  • "A guy is in a foot race and is running faster than all the others he is competing against. Since he believes he will win as he nears the finish line he stops and reaches down to admire the trophy which he soon hopes to win. While he is distracted the other runners catch up and sweep past him. He loses the race because he got distracted."


That's the point here.

What matters is knowing the system is corrupt.

The Feminine Imperative has gained excessive power over men.

We must adapt to this imbalance.

What rewards we get are small compared to holding true Power.

Building Power isn't hedonism... it's not the Trophy we want but the win.

Trophies come after Victory.

Hedonism comes after Dominance.

Feelz come after Reals.


[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (4 children) | Copy

You're tickling my conservative nationalist, alt-right sympathies. I'm trying to retire them so I can enjoy life rather than crying over my civilization slowly going to shit.

[–]NeoreactionSafe0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy


With Game you can achieve dominance.

Then you need not cry...

Enjoy the Destruction of the Blue Pill mythology.

The pleasure these days is in the fighting.

There is no crying in Red Pill.


[–]WolfofAnarchy1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

God damn it man I really try enjoying your posts but your way of writing is so damn weird and cryptic.

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

We must... Destroy... The Feminine Imperative...

[–]BassNet0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

You're just more intelligent than him. That's what it seems like. Or maybe you're just a better writer. But what you write makes sense and what he writes is too cryptic for me to follow.

[–]Roaring40sUK2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

I really enjoyed this post... and I want to believe..but...

In Rollos new book, Positive masculinity, he argues that modern women won't believe in the "caring Alpha" Archetype.. they will rationalise you as Beta, because Alphas are so rare and Alpha Providers even rarer, they have no experiential point of reference.

Where I think it can work, which I know you alluded to is the " I want to do this, come with me.." approach, but I think thats as far as you can go with it.

[–]mymonster8u 1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy

You forgot #3. They actual hold their own value as individuals and contribute to all facets of society. They hold jobs and create things that you use on a daily basis. They are able to help you solve problems and are able to perform most tasks unassisted. Just like the men in your life.

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

The shirt I am wearing was probably made by some female factory workers in a third world country. I'm not sure that that level of contribution qualifies for the sort of discussion my post was geared towards. The topic is what value a woman has for a man in his life and the value he should provide in order to access it, not the entire possible value a woman has to society as a whole.

[–]mymonster8u 1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy

Ya. Maybe compairing women to 3rd world factory workers is why ur single in the first place or only have access to trash women who fit your world view. Sad.

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

I'm not single.

I encourage you to read my post. It provides some of the most positive, pro-woman content that I've ever read before on TheRedPill. It teaches men that women are a high value to be worked for and earned by being attractive and treating them well.

[–]refusewool1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Amazing that even on a post like this there are still accusations of misogyny.

[–]2Dmva1007 points8 points  (6 children) | Copy

Sex, yes. Companionship, no. Build a strong social circle and get a dog or something. Smells like codependency. Doesn't matter if it's more than one woman you're still leaning on them. If you said sex and babies, that'd make more sense.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy

No girl can replace a social circle. Ideally you've got a social circle that keeps you satisfied in the friendship department, and your girlfriend is more of a tag-along to things you already want to do than a princess to be wined and dined.

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

Companionship, no

This is generally the view of red pillers who either can't obtain the higher value women, or choose not to because the drunk party sluts are so easy.

I can assure you that women can make excellent companions in many things that I would prefer over my male friends.

I'm not attracted to party sluts, I've had my fill of probably 70 of them, I prefer the upper middle class, educated, dad in the home girls that are quite enjoyable to have a conversation with, a movie with, and also fuck in between.

[–]thetrpthrowaway3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy


I read the comments here and I just can't believe that some man are so scared/trapped or whatsoever that they can't enjoy the wonderful companionship of women.

I have a female friend, I've visited and stayed with her for a while (she leaves in a different state), we've fucked, she showed me around, we talked, I showed her around and it was exceptional.

If you can't enjoy the companionship of women then you need to work on yourself.

[–]keysomea1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Now this a quality post. One question: I feel like companionship has a big importance for me as I get very very bored with the majority of plates I spin. I wonder if I can make they at least seem interesting or fun or that's unlikely?

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

I don't think females are interesting in and of themselves as much they can make something else more interesting by being present. I like my shooting-range example. The girl is not interesting. What's interesting is teaching her how to shoot, watching her struggle, being amazed when her grouping is tight, or what have you.

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

Great post. There's some original framing of points that always need repeating such as how you've show Visceral and Lifestyle as important points.

Much appreciated, I got something from this.

[–]gingerbreadman421 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

What would the female version of this be? What primary purpose of a man in a woman's life?

[–]maggieG426 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy

I would say with most women working and being able to support themselves. And in most societies the wild wilder beast no longer being around and hoards of killers no longer around.

Exactly the same.

Sex and companionship. We're all just looking for someone we enjoy having sex with and is fun to be around.

It really is that simple.

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

This is a good post OP.

Your ideas resonated with me, so I went thru your post history and found in your writings someone who thinks like me, but expresses it better.

Good luck on your journey and all the best

[–]natrahhh1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Fleshlight and hobbies . Profit . Win?

Edit * Don't masterbate with it either, fuck it like you would a woman no0bs

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

Fun story: I lost my Fleshlight in my parents unfinished basement storage area while I was using it to store some belongings there. It was many years ago and I suspect that at some point my parents went through my boxes of things and confiscated it.

[–]juzeza1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

No offense but these posts are way too damn heady and long

This reads like we're in a damn PhD course!

I would much rather see posts where you just give it to me straight and simple

This is getting incessant here

It's like every other guy feels the need to be the Einstein of game

Really hope this trend dies

[–]strwbry-wild1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Very good points here. Women are emotional creatures yes. I know we are way more sexual than credit is given because our feminist Society has tried to make it not ok to be. Women are told if they want sex and are not using it as a tool, they are sex fiends or something is wrong with them. Which is simply not true. Men have the same primary 2 purposes in a woman's life if she's honest. Kids are important, don't get me wrong... So is getting laid right lol

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

On mobile please disregard commenting to save this thread

[–]CapitalDragons1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

While all friendships should be seen as disposable and conditional upon the value they provide, it is female friendships that should be expected to lose value the quickest and most reliably. Invest gently.

This is the most succinct and effective way I have ever seen my outlook on personal relationships phrased. Thank you for helping me articulate that.

[–]1sezamus1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

This isn't gold. This is a platinium post.

[–]JanLul1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Thank you. This is very recognizable and helped me to get my bearings more.

[–]Johknee51 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Wow dude. Golf fucking clap! Someone get this guy a book deal!

[–]hypergraphia1231 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I love your writing style. Very "no bullshit". I agree with every word of it

[–]LOST_TALE1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

It's not a payment for sex

This. Lift and fuck planning hours of your life just to scru a vagina.

Better do other things.

[–]sherlokt21 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

didn't read. this isn't redpill lol. this is low smv betas trying to use redpill tactics for beta reasons and blue pilled dreams to try keep this ONE girl there unicorn..

all this bs for one girl... it's the defentition of oneitus

while you're giving this girl your time energy and attention with this she's fuckin chads in ons from 10 mins of knowing them lol and then we move on to the next hoe dude no relations while she plays "good girl" for you

there's a whole game going on that some of you aren't seeing.. because you're blinded by this ONE girl from seeing the game

this sub has been overtaken by low smv betas wanting to ltr these hoes it's become literally toxic.. jesus

;LTR/monogamy is a beta's strategy to secure consistent sex for himself by exchanging his resources -- financial and emotional -- for, theoretically at least, consistent sex. If you've developed a repeatable game plan to bang new chicks regularly, the thought of even PLATING chicks makes no sense, much less LTRing or, gasp, marrying them. Even plating would be unthinkable. Think about it. You can very easily judge the experience of guys by reading about their "ideal" dating life. and this isn't anger phase cause i love sluts this is from slaying/reality lol

[–]pabloethcobar3 points4 points  (5 children) | Copy

This is a really fantastic post for the red pillers who have broken out of betahood, gotten some poon, and now are looking for the next step.

The ultimate goal for me at least is not to be a poon hound. I want to be the captain, or alpha bucks.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy

alpha bucks

Alpha bucks is interesting. I admit to having some massive provider instinct going on because I fucking love my girl in my house, eating my food, wearing a cute/sexy outfit that I got her, holding the teddy bear I got her. Maybe that's fucked up. I have spoil-tendencies but try to balance it with a sharp eye for the remotest bit of sense of entitlement from her. Also, good to withhold any "bucks" and go full alpha for a while just to teach her that you're under zero obligations.

[–]3whatsthisgarg2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

The ultimate goal for me at least is not to be a poon hound. I want to be the captain, or alpha bucks.

No, /u/pabloethcobar , good start, bad ending. Forget about the bucks part, just be the alpha fucks in a LTR. It can be done.

The provider instinct you have can be fulfilled without the involvement of material goods. Seriously, women only have so many brain cells, and they WILL be distracted by your funds.

Think about it: if you are a good cook, she will love that, and that will satisfy her, but then she'll be ready to move on to the more important thing, the sex. She won't be continually distracted by the food. Or if you introduce her to some good music, that will not be a continual distraction away from the physical part of the relationship. Money and the stupid shit she wants to buy with it CAN BE a continual distraction.

[–]1naMlliPdeR2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

What you're saying, enjoying being a provider, it's not anti TRP and it's not hard to understand. It comes from a place of abundance.

Whenever I have a problem in regards to social dynamics (how to respond to something, how to deal with a shit test, etc. etc.) I use my concept of Brad Pitt 2.0 (because Brad Pitt is not perfect).

Brad Pitt 2.0 has access to every single woman in the world. Including all the married ones. He holds the definition of absolute abundance. If Brad Pitt 2.0 really like a specific girl, more than all the others, he'd definitely spend his time on her. And if he enjoyed giving her stuff, great, he'd do that too. But not for the wrong reasons.

He wouldn't do it to keep her interested in him (because he knows she is by default). He wouldn't do it as favors to expect other things in return (he already knows that just being himself is everything she can ever ask of him). No, he does it because it brings him happiness.

So if making her happy makes him happy, he'd spoil the shit out of her. But being perfect as he is, she'll always be crazy for him since he also carries the ultimate dread game. She knows he can replace her any time he wants. So she'll always be respectful and pleasant.

Anyway, when it comes to "should I do x/y/z" or "how do I respond to that", I ask myself what Brad Pitt 2.0 would do. And it's almost always the right answer.

So as to "should i spoil the girl I like because it makes me happy?", Brad Pitt 2.0 would do it, as long as it's for the right reasons, because then it's congruent to the alpha personality you've taught her to know of you. If you do it for the wrong reasons, you come off as incongruent and you lose attraction.

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

Dude, stop jerking off into your girl and have an heir or three already.

[–]atlastic10 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Are you describing your plate or daughter?

[–]Lukatheluckylion2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

This popped up on my popular and my eyes started bleeding from massive brain hemorrhaging, caused by bull shit in extreme quantities.

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

Where did you find that quote from Osho?

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

[–]Hormander0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Very intersting point of view thanks

[–]TimmySatanicTurner0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I don't wanna spend too much time on one bitch doe

[–]tolerantman0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I don't need women for companionship, I can get that from friends.

Women serve for 2 things: sex and reproduction.

Since they are too empowered now to reproduce, then its all about the sex.

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

I've got an easier solution: buy a pet for companionship and a hooker for sex. Shit, if you're into that kind of thing... you might not have to bother with the hookers 😂.

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


Lol just ctrl+c ctrlv buddy

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

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter