The Rotating Soft Harem. This one goes out to all the harem members I've lost...

Reddit View
June 5, 2013

Last night wasn't my favorite, it was the mid-season repeat episode of my life where one of my harem members decides it's time to leave.

It's not my favorite, but it happens, and it's expected. Some leave sooner rather than later, but eventually the feminine imperative forces it's ugly head into all interactions and reminds women ever-so-subtly that I am not giving them ultimately what they desire (or think they desire) which is monogamy.

Funnily enough, if I ever did cave to their desires, I don't think they'd like what they ended up with. It's a pull and it gets into everybody's mind at some point. Why have fun? You need to either lock this down or walk away.

Relationship strategy isn't discussed enough on here, so I thought I'd write a little bit about my relationship strategy. Somewhere around here you'll hear from Softharem who advertises a similar approach.

The Rotating Soft Harem

I have ditched monogamy as an effective mating tool. As per Rollo's advice, I have decided the only weapon in my belt is spinning multiple plates.

The dating market is stacked seriously against men, it's difficult to have any sort of value at all. If we left women to their devices, they would see to it that men have no value in the dating market so they could be free of the shackles of liking any of them. (though they would express extreme concern because they want good men).

The only rebuttal that I see fit is to keep a rotating harem of around three women at a time. It satisfies the plate spinning requirement, enables self-actualization of value in the market, and keeps you from giving away the only item that gives you value in the market- your commitment.

I have learned through trial and error that what we understand as monogamy is only to benefit women. They would like the security and validation that you are a one-gal-man. They, however, will never stop shopping. Hypergamy will insist that they continue fitness testing you as a mate, as well as analyzing all other potential mates. It's only a matter of time before another more apt branch is found.

To take your commitment from you, they minimize your options and strategy, and maximize their own.

So we introduce the rotating soft harem.

My Approach

First of all, I am up front with the fact that I will not be exclusive.

You don't start off on that note, however. Most women will date for a month or two before having "the talk." It's programmed into them, they need to know. They'll have the talk when they're sufficiently in love with you.

I approach it very simply: "I'm sorry, but I'm really just not in a place in my life where I'm ready to enter into a relationship. I really like you and love spending time with you. I would like to keep seeing you, but I understand if you don't."

Some decide it's worth it. Others don't.

I don't talk to them about other harem members, but it becomes implied by the lack of exclusivity.

I attempt to keep around 2 - 3 at a time, replenishing when one drops out.

Most girls seem to do alright in it for about 3 - 4 months after "the talk." I've had a few last over a year.

But .. monogamy!

After learning what happens to me with extreme oneitis, after understanding that without fail- these women will swing to another branch, I have learned that this is the new mating strategy demanded by women. Monogamy is dead.

It's tough, because the imperative becomes very convincing, and at times I lose sight of my goals and why I set them. The demand for commitment and monogamy can be strong and seemingly innocuous. Maybe this one's different.

Do not surrender that freedom, it is the only bargaining chip you've got. Once you surrender it you will find yourself at the mercy of the woman who is most certainly not in it for you.

Post Information
Title The Rotating Soft Harem. This one goes out to all the harem members I've lost...
Author redpillschool
Upvotes 53
Comments 114
Date 05 June 2013 01:40 PM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit TheRedPill
Original Link
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
Rollobranch swingingmonogamyhypergamyplatethe red pillfeminine imperative

[–]veggie_girl24 points25 points  (8 children) | Copy

Monogamy is dead.

This is true, and feminists are to blame. I hope they all get pump and dumped repeatedly as a reward.
Go forth and create single mothers, after all, GIRL POWAH! The sluttier the girl is the less likely she is to know who the father is.

This is why feminism infuriates me, and what's its answer to all of this? "Be attracted to a beta." Heh, nope. Not going to happen unless I get super fat and desperate.

Feminists dug women into a hole by killing off monogamy. "There are no good men left" because all of the good men turned into women or stopped offering commitment.

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

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 6 points6 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] -1 points-1 points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]socal8312 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy

Do not surrender that freedom, it is the only bargaining chip you've got.

man, if the average bluepiller knew this, he'd be so much farther ahead. like light years ahead.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (17 children) | Copy

Monogamy is actually a pro-male institution. Or was when the culture tried to heavily suppress female hypergamy and promiscuousness. Today, monogamy is sort of only on the surface. There isn't any substance to it, so it doesn't perform its original purpose.

This is because the ratio of men to women is approximately 50/50. In a world where a man can take as many wives as he wants, he will take many wives. For each additional wife he takes, there is a guy at the bottom who can't have any woman. What this does is allow financial inequality to create sexual inequality amongst men. A society that has many young men without any access to women, and who can plainly see a few rich guys with many wives is inherently unstable. Sexually frustrated men start destroying things without caring too much about society or anyone else. So monogamy was created to communize the sexual market. It suppressed rich men's desire to have many wive's as well as women's desire to have the guy with the most resources to benefit the whole of society and make it more stable.

We haven't had a return to the overt polygamy that existed in ancient times. Rather what we have today is discreet polygamy. That is a few men discreetly bed many women, while many others do without. Monogamy, as originally defined often doesn't even exist since there is no longer any bite on the women who violate the original rules. Without the strong rules, monogamy is essentially meaningless and now serves to further the individual interests of women rather than the interests of society at large.

[–]jsh11381 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy

more women are born than men, and women die off at slower rates in pretty much every age group. so the ratio favors men at birth and continues to favor men more and more the older you get

by the time you hit your 70's, the population is 3 women for every man

not arguing with anything you've said, just pointing it out

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (3 children) | Copy

True enough, but it is close enough to 50/50 over the entire population, especially for reproductive age, for my point to hold true.

[–]jsh1138-2 points-1 points  (2 children) | Copy

that's true, just saying that not everyone here is the same age. if you're 50 (or 60) and still trying to get laid then the odds are significantly different for you than if you're 18

[–]BoyMeetsHarem0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Only if you're pursuing the used up old hags in your age group. The reality is we have a large population of men aged 18-60 who are mainly competing for women aged 18-30.

[–]jsh11380 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

there are tons of younger guys who are going after 40ish women.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 1 point2 points  (11 children) | Copy

Monogamy is actually a pro-male institution. Or was when the culture tried to heavily suppress female hypergamy and promiscuousness. Today, monogamy is sort of only on the surface. There isn't any substance to it, so it doesn't perform its original purpose.

Monogamy as a concept isn't pro-male, it was pro-female as she was the one who required dedicated provisions. It was our attempts to control and supress female hypergamy that were pro-male. (correct)

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy

Monogamy isn't pro-female. In terms of resources, 100 women would be better sharing bill gates than having one average pay guy exclusively. And for all the women who are left over they would be able to move up the SMV ladder since those 100 gold diggers took themselves off the market and are no longer competing.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] -1 points0 points  (9 children) | Copy

I think you missed the target there- 100 women would be better sharing bill gates? Then 1 woman owning bill gates is even better. What does he benefit with 1 woman verses 100? What does she benefit?

He can impregnate 100 women, she can carry only one child at a time. She wants to monopolize resources that is her goal- monogamy from him is her tool. Mind you, that doesn't mean she will adhere to the same standards- she may cheat and get better quality sperm from an alpha, but monogamy from him serves her, not him.

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

I am not thinking about individuals. That 1 woman is better off yes, but the other 99 are worse off making for a net negative (and by a quite a bit I might add). The women who were standing behind those 99 are also worse off because now they too have to lower their standards for the men they will have to marry.

From an evolutionary standpoint, Bill gates benefits from having more children with 100 wives vs. 1.

Monogamy also doesn't benefit the wealthy either. It doesn't benefit Bill Gates. (from an evolutionary standpoint). But it does benefit the 99 men who would not be able to get a wife if Bill gates took all 100 off the market. Again making for a big net positive for men.

When you look at the cumulative benefit over the whole society from the institution of monogamy (as was practiced pre-feminism), it is clearly men as a group who benefit the most. Although there were certainly select men and women who lost out to the arrangement.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] -1 points0 points  (6 children) | Copy

The institution that put controls on female hypergamy were a way to level the playing field and make monogamy work for men too, yes.

But without those controls (and make no mistake, they do not currently exist today), monogamy is entirely for the benefit of women and only women.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy

Yes, that is the state of affairs today. Monogamy has evolved from the original set up (which was pro-male, or more specifically pro-male of lesser means) to be meaningless. Marriage, which is meant to make monogamy happen but isn't the same thing, is undoubtedly pro-female today.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy

Well, the order of events started a little closer to -> Women are hypergamous but require men to survive. Men see that in order for society to thrive, they invent religion, to include monogamy. -> Religion loses relevance, hypergamy once again unleashed.

Women trying to gain a man's commitment and resources has always been a component of hypergamy. Man trying to create a religious institution of marriage was a middle-game that hasn't always been around, and is no longer.

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

Your explanation seems about right to me.

Men see that in order for society to thrive, they invent religion, to include monogamy.

I don't know if this was conscious or not. It is also possible that cultures which just so happened to adopt monogamy were able to outcompete polygamous ones due to enhanced stability and possibly greater fertility. There is really no way to know.

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

Well, we might find out :)

[–][deleted]  (1 child) | Copy


[–]Default82 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

This in part is what annoys me about the alpha concept. It often has different meaning to different people. If alpha is social power then there aren't many people who are more alpha then bill gates. All things being equal someone who is more confidant and better at manipulating others will be the alpha but when you are the richest person in the world that smooth talking salesman ain't got shit on you. Do you really think Bill Gates worries that he isn't having sex with hundreds of girls? He doesn't give a shit and he's to busy wielding his power over all the plebs who can only think with their dicks.

Not saying red pill ideals are wrong but there seems to be a lot of ripping on bill gates here, I think he has proven his sperm has a pretty high social value.

[–]TRP Vanguardnicethingyoucanthave16 points17 points  (11 children) | Copy

May I toot my own horn here a little? Here's a post I made on this topic a few months ago

she'll want to have some sort of "what are we doing" talk. At no point during any of this do I ever lead her to believe that she's the only girl I'm dating. "I really like you. I think we're developing something great here. I'm going to keep seeing other people and I'll always be honest with about that and about where I am with you and anyone else. And I want you to respect me enough to be honest with me in the same way."

This is the point where, in my experience, pretty much all women are not okay with things. They want you to say that you're "looking for the right girl" and moving the relationship to the next level. Obviously you can lie to them and keep them around for a while by telling them that you're thinking about girlfriend then marriage, but eventually lying ends badly. They'll feel led on and you wont stay friends. So it's very important that you be honest, but stick to your guns.

there's no hard feelings. You didn't break up with them. You're that guy who was really fun, always polite, great in bed, but just not ready to settle down (and bonus, he didn't lead me on). Some of them are going to start calling you up when they're just frustrated with the dating scene or they just need to get laid. If they're feeling depressed, you take them out for a real date. If they're bored, they can hang out. But at this point, when you go out or when they come over, there's no pretense - it's for sex. And they know they're not the only one and they're okay with it.

That's the summary of my experience. I've never had what you would call a harem. I pick up ladies when I can, date those that I can, etc. But it ends up being a situation where they call me when they want to hook up - and it works pretty well. I'm happy, and they seem happy.

I have one girl right now that likes me enough that I can call her up just for sex. Only once in my life have I had two women in that situation at the same time. I take this one girl out sometimes. I cook for her when she comes over. I treat her really well, but we have an understanding that I try to pick up other women - and if she's smart she's dating other men.

I couldn't say how big the pool of other women are. Sometimes I write them off and then they come back. Got a text Sunday as a matter of fact from a girl I haven't seen since August. She had moved away, but now she's coming back - so, I know what that means :-)

One thing I'd like to point out for the benefit of people thinking this is all sunshine and roses: women take revenge on you by fucking other men. So when they inevitably have "the talk" and you politely and kindly explain that you're not going to do an LTR, in my experience, they're going to fuck another man - like within 24 hours. The next swinging dick to say "hi" is going to hit it. I'll post more about my experience with that if anyone is interested.

Suffice to say, those of you with Madonna complexes or jealousy issues are going to have a bad time.

[–][deleted]  (4 children) | Copy


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

that's great advice.

[–]FountainsOfFluids-4 points-3 points  (2 children) | Copy

Manipulative has too much negative connotation. Women are often unhappy with themselves after sleeping with low value men. I once ran into an ex and she just started dumping on me how she got depressed after I broke up with her and she slept with three guys over the course of two weeks or so. She was not happy about what she had done. If I was better with break-ups, I might have been able to encourage her to keep seeking good men that she would be proud of spending time with. She was a good person, and could have done better for herself.

[–][deleted]  (1 child) | Copy


[–]FountainsOfFluids-3 points-2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I didn't "fall for" anything. We didn't get back together, it was just a conversation. I like to remain friends with my exes when possible, and I strive to be the kind of man who lifts up everybody around me. It's one of the tenets of my own personal definition of alpha. So I count it as a personal failure when I fail to support people around me to be the best they can be. Not something to beat myself up about, just something to learn from and do better next time.

[–]lono120 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

I am interested.

[–]TRP Vanguardnicethingyoucanthave5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy

ok well, I guess maybe they go through those five stages (denial, anger, etc.) and when they're in the anger stage, the way they express that anger is by denying you what they think you want, which is (they think) exclusive access to their body. In other words, if you want to fuck them, but you aren't giving them the relationship that they want, they fuck someone else to punish you.

And they can do that - it's easy for her to fuck someone else. So basically, if you're sure you don't want a relationship, then you'd better make peace with your god about this reality - it's going to happen.

Fortunately, I've never been burdened with feelings of jealousy ...except maybe for my last girlfriend. In fact, she's probably the reason that I discovered this wonderful place I'm in now. I've had generally very positive and healthy relationships with women. Hell, I'm still friends with my ex-wife. I didn't have a terrible or drama-filled breakup with the last girlfriend, but I did honestly want it to work. So I still had some feelings for her when I met another girl - and as a result, I told that girl that I didn't want to jump back in to a relationship.

And I'll never forget what she said to me. She said, "I have too many options to waste my time with someone who is playing me." That's harsh considering that I wasn't playing her.

Now the funny thing is, a few years ago, I would have jumped at that. I've always been an LTR guy. Hell, I had one girlfriend through most of college while my buddies were banging girls three at a time! So if a girl tells me I need to shit or get off the pot, my nature is to lock her down, commit to her, sign on the dotted line.

But it just so happened that I was still carrying some water for my last girlfriend, and she had been a solid 10 - no kidding, the most beautiful, sexy woman I've ever met. So I almost laughed when this girl gave me an ultimatum. "I just got finished with a girl a lot hotter than you" I thought (but didn't say).

I just let her go. "okay, peace." I had never done that before in my life. A month went by before she called me, and I'm convinced that if I had called her or pursued her in any way, I would never have fucked her again.

So, that was sort of a threat. "you better do what I want or else I'll do something you don't want." That was her being angry. You just have to be ready, that's all I'm saying.

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

Very nice. I'm assuming you're currently spinning multiple plates, her being one?

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

I'm assuming you're currently spinning multiple plates, her being one?

I'm not seeing her anymore, unfortunately. There's another girl that is, I'm sorry to say, a lot more drama, and she's my only regular meetup.

[–]lono12-5 points-4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Thank you. I doubt you could have fucked her either. Its all just a power game in the end.

[–]Senior Contributorwhiskey_bearfist1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

it sounds more like you have what I would call an "optimal single" situation, whereas OP is specifically keeping multiple women around intentionally. basically similar, but there is probably more weight to the implication that he is not exclusive. they can sense it when you have other ass on lock. theres nothing more powerful for your frame when you are talking to a girl you want to sleep with when you KNOW you can call up another girl who is just as hot and get it in. she can sense the lack of neediness because it genuinely isn't there.

abundant mentality is massive

[–]James_Coook5 points6 points  (29 children) | Copy

Dude you are not concerned about STDS?

[–]FountainsOfFluids4 points5 points  (6 children) | Copy

Wrap your willy, dude. Prevents pregnancies and pretty much all the dangerous STDs.

Be smart and cautious with a girl you just met, and if you want to see her long-term, go get tested together. Tell her it's a bonding experience. You'll probably still want to wear a condom anyway because you'll never know if she goes off her birth control.

Follow those guidelines, and you're more likely to die in a car crash than from an STD.

[–]KetoJennic4 points5 points  (5 children) | Copy

HPV can be spread with condom use, and can be transmitted during oral sex. It ultimately causes cancers of the reproductive system (in women for sure, in men, the research hasn't been done yet) and oral cancers in both.

Also, while herpes isn't dangerous, it is incurable, and can be spread despite condom use.

[–]FountainsOfFluids2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy

Then live your life like a monk. Safer that way. It's not what I will choose.

[–]KetoJennic1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

I'm not saying live like a monk. But I would suggest that one select their sexual partners carefully, as that's the best way to avoid diseases, and to be sure you don't accidentally knock up crazy (sooo common!).

Either way, running around telling people there aren't serious health risks to promiscuity is irresponsible. You're on the Internet- there's no excuse for being ill-informed about sex.

[–]FountainsOfFluids1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

The possible outcome from sex is death. The possible outcome from crossing the road is death.

I already told people to wear condoms. Do you really want to look at the statistics to see how likely it is that you will catch HPV from a stranger and die from cancer? Dollars to donuts it is miniscule, and not worth changing your lifestyle over.

Risk is inherent to life. If you deny yourself the pleasures of life based on risk, there is no point to living. Just be smart, take the simple precautions like buckling your seatbelt. Otherwise enjoy yourself and ignore the doomsayers, for they are unhappy.

[–]KetoJennic3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

Accurately judging risks is important. When you cross the road, you look to see if cars are coming, right? And if you look and see eight lanes of traffic rushing by, you think to yourself that maybe this road is too risky, and find another one.

Same thing with lovers. Assess the risks, and minimize them. Perhaps by not sleeping with strangers, so you don't accidentally stick your dick in crazy.

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

Seriously, what you are saying is that I shouldn't sleep with this girl tonight, because there is ...maybe... a 1 in 10,000 chance that I might get an STD.

That is stupid. I'm going to enjoy my life, not sit in a corner shaking because there are so many dangers in the world.

Furthermore, let's look at that "sleeping with strangers" statement. Does it change the risk of catching an STD if I wait a month to get to know someone before sleeping with them? No. Not unless I demand that every one of my potential partners gets tested before I sleep with her.

If that's what makes you happy, go for it. I think you're living in an illusion of safety that simply doesn't exist, and is reducing the amount of enjoyment you get out of life.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 3 points4 points  (21 children) | Copy

See a doctor and what not.

[–]James_Coook9 points10 points  (20 children) | Copy

What about herpes dude? That shit marks you for life and condoms don't prevent it. Aren't you afraid that you'll limit your future choices in mates with this. I'd imagine most folks would run for the hills if they found out a casual dating partner had herpes?

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 4 points5 points  (19 children) | Copy

Are you trolling son?

[–]James_Coook6 points7 points  (18 children) | Copy

No sir! I swear. I have read quite a bit about stds and herpes is the only STD I fear. From what I have read a straight man who only has sex with women can not get AIDS....its supposedly impossible. The other major STDs can be cured with some meds. However, herpes marks you for life and I have always been afraid of its ability to limit future mate choices. Bear in mind this is all hypothetical since I am married. I'm only on here researching for my marriage and my sons' future.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 6 points7 points  (11 children) | Copy

The worst part about having herpes is what people think about herpes. It's a completely manageable disease with very few symptoms (when on anti-viral). A huge number of people have it and don't realize it. Tons of people have cold sores, and there's no social stigma from it, so nobody really cares. But when you consider genital herpes (which can be transmitted via oral sex with cold sores), people only go crazy because of the stigma, not the disease.

Because of this, most doctors don't even check for herpes in their standard STD test, citing "knowing you have herpes is worse than having herpes."

It's a social disease.

I haven't gotten it yet, but I suspect I probably will eventually. They say in the next 50-100 or so years, pretty much the entire population will have it.

Best bet is to come to terms with the reality: if you are sexually active, you will catch a few things. It happens. Don't fear it, just deal with it. Stop by the doc, get yourself some drugs, and keep on keeping on.

[–]KetoJennic6 points7 points  (10 children) | Copy

You've forgotten HPV. Can cause warts, has been proven to cause cervical cancer in women and oral cancer. It stands to reason that we will eventually discover a link between it and male genital cancers.

[–]rocraidah2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy

In my country 1 in 4 of women ages 18-25 have HPV.

It scares me a lot because men performing oral on these women are at-risk for throat and mouth cancer.

Recent statistics for my country show that more men die from these hpv-related cancers then the total of people killed in traffic! read that right, more people dead from giving head then total people killed in traffic. The casulalty rate was so staggering it is 10-12 more then total homicides. So, in my country you are ten times more likely to die from eating pussy then being murdered.

Fortunately we have started vaccinating girls for HPV.

(sidenote;) when we started vaccinating the doctors were asked why only vaccinate girls. Their answer was that their research showed only a small number (20-30%) of men had sex with the majority (70-90%) of women. So wasting resources on low partner count men was uneconomical.

[–]KetoJennic0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy


The fact that 25% of women has HPV scares you because the men going down on them may get oral cancer? What about the women!? They are at much greater risk for reproductive cancer than those men are of oral cancers!

This is the same problem as with feminism. Only caring how an issue effects one gender, when it effects both.

Also, if one gets it in their mouth from eating pussy, it stands to reason one can then give it to someone else by kissing. This is why condoms don't solve the issue.

[–]rocraidah1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Yeah well....I'm not really worried about getting cervical cancer since I don't have a pussy.

But you seem to have one. To paraphrase what you said; OHHHh....NNNOOOOo someone is thinking about themselves and not putting me and my needs before himself.

BTW, the death rate for cervical cancer is much lower because women have regular check-ups on their junk while in almost all cases the male oral cancers are discovered when it is to late to do something about it. And women for some reason were not dying in record numbers from oral cancer, only men.

ps. who the fuck was talking about condoms?

[–]James_Coook-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy

Isn't there a vaccine for that already though?

[–]KetoJennic6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy

It's only given up to a certain age, so many women (myself included) never had the opportunity. It also only protect against a few of the most worrying strains, not all of them (and not the one that causes genital warts). And it's not given to males at all, AFAIK.

There are almost certainly women who did not get it because their parents felt it would encourage them to have sex. Because the penalty for sluttiness should be cancer, obviously. rolls eyes

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

There's a vaccine now for women and I think eventually men will get one too for HPV

[–]Jovianmoons0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Why the downvote? Its good news!

[–]Sarcasticbenji3 points4 points  (5 children) | Copy

Of course men can get AIDS from women...

[–]James_Coook1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Yeah they can. But the probability is sooo low. Read this post on Postmasculine.

[–]Wrecksomething1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

What this means is that even if you somehow had unprotected vaginal sex with an HIV-positive girl, you’re still quite unlikely to be infected.

Here are transmission rates:

Vaginal sex, female-to-male, studies in high-income countries 0.04% (1:2380)

Receptive anal sex amongst gay men, partner unknown status 0.27% (1:370)

So yeah, you're about "6x safer." Meaning, if you think it is risky for a gay guy to have unprotected anal sex with one random partner, and you go out and do the same with 6 women, you're not evaluating risk very well.

In fact your transmission rate is almost identical to the rate for insertive anal sex for gay guys:

Insertive anal sex, gay men, partner unknown status 0.06% (1:1666)

Insertive anal sex with condom, gay men, partner unknown status 0.04% (1:2500)

[–]James_Coook-2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy

The probability of a straight man getting AIDS from unprotected sex with a woman who has not had any lovers who were either gay or bisexual is very low. According to this article you would have to have sex with 3,000 women unprotected to get this disease.

[–]sartres_spectre0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

3000 to pretty much guarantee you will get, only 1 for you to actually get it.

But each man decides his own risk tolerance

[–]MSoftHarem3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Running a soft harem seems to be the most sensible choice for the professional RP man in today's social climate. As men we want sex as often as possible with the most attractive women as possible and this accomplishes both of those goals. Sure, pump and dump also works but that has a much higher turnover rate, and personally I have reached a point in my dating career where an emotional connection is required for me to even consider the sex worth it anymore. I honestly enjoy the early stages of a relationship, when women actually work for it.

Monogamous relationships are obviously terrible ideas because they are basically marriage training, and RP men know better than to have legal ties with a woman. No marriage. No children. No cohabitation. Period. Because her hypergamy will not be satisfied without grandiose displays of affection and commitment for the long term, you will be rotating them in and out based on your own personal limits with how much "commitment" you can put up with. I do not advocate lying under any circumstance, but often times it is necessary to just not say anything and let them believe you both are "on the path" to exclusivity. She'll figure it out based on your attitude that you have other options and it will excite her at first, but eventually she'll walk away. I like to keep around 2-4 at all times depending on a lot of personal factors, but every man has to decide how much he wants to work.
Remember, gentlemen, if you've raised your SMV high enough you are the prize, not her. She thinks she knows what she wants but we all know women are clueless and slaves to their emotions, use that to your advantage to get what you want. Don't lie, and don't break the law, but other than that anything goes. This takes a lot of experience and practice to maintain the right balance, but I honestly do not see a better dating model, especially in the First World. Relationships are AMORAL, and in the end remember how much hypergamy cares about you, even less than the family court systems do.

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

Great post.

I think one problem in the way you deal with it is being up front with them and clearly telling them that they are one of X. Women want to be THE ONE for the alpha. They WANT the alpha to be beta for them. Feed into that:

Me: I think what we have here is pretty special, I'm not going to lie, but you know how hurt I was when <Y did Z> and although I'm over <Y> I just don't want to make myself that vulnerable right now. Can you understand that? Is it possible for us not to put a label on this for a while?

A few days later, send her a small, inexpensive gift (NOT like a bag of Skittles, right now you're showing your beta side).

IMO, this:

  1. Reinforces that she is special to you
  2. You are someone she wants to fix/help

I've tried this a couple of times and it works to keep the women around and interested. Problem is of course, you end up becoming less interested... Wonderful.

If you're lying, make yourself believe it's true and you'll be fine.

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

Push/pull. Good stuff.

Also the phrase "it's complicated" works wonders.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy

Damnit, I always forget to use that one...

[–]AlwaysLateToThreads-2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy

I started using it, mostly because I don't know what to say, but it's surprisingly effective.

[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp-3 points-2 points  (0 children) | Copy

If it works, it works. I find that less is more sometimes. Most of our communication is nonverbal anyway, and the barrier to your mind certainly creates intrigue.

[–]Senior Contributorwhiskey_bearfist2 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy

good write up. Do you think this is a viable strategy for a man who wants to have children?

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 10 points11 points  (2 children) | Copy

I don't think so. But I'd say having children in this culture basically means being ready to become a paycheck, so this might be as good as any strategy.

I am not planning on having kids.

[–]enticingasthatmaybe7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy

Well if there is a silver lining to growing up blue pill it's that I got my reproduction done early. I have a daughter - she is a healthy and vibrant example of the genetic benefits of hypergamy. Yes, I am a essentially a pay check, but I understood the risks involved with having a child. It's certainly not fair and should be criminal, but I'm at the acceptance stage of dealing with child support. I simply can't do much about it and I choose to rationalize that everything is actually going to my daughter.

That being said; I have a wonderful and involved relationship with her despite the efforts of my ex and the family court. Now that I'm in my mid-30's I enjoy every part of TRP. I run my soft harem while I laugh in the face my ex-wife's current husband. He's overweight with a round face, but works hard - probably a genuinely decent guy. Never had a real LTR until my alpha widow ensnared him. He's a civil engineer and from what I could tell had decent savings, all of which appear to be gone now. He still drives the same beat up rig he had when they met, she of course has a new car because he's being a real mantm by providing for a child that isn't his.

All that to say that I agree with you; it is possible to enjoy a fulfilling red pill lifestyle and still promote a genetic legacy. It's just going to hurt. How much depends on how well you adapt and understand.

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

If I were you I would get a vasectomy as a small insurance policy.

[–]Cask_Strength_Islay-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy

I wouldn't take that risk if kids are involved. This isn't the 'good old days' when a husband could spin plates on the side without impunity.

If you did get caught, and you get taken to divorce court, you can bet your ass the judge will take you to the cleaners; and don't even think about getting custody of your child.

[–]Senior Contributorwhiskey_bearfist0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

that is kind of what i figured.

also, as to your account name, the ardbeg 10 year is an interesting smoky bastard that makes me so happy. i would highly recommend to an 'islay guy' if you haven't already tried their stuff.

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

Ardbeg 10 is my go to scotch. Laphroaig is awesome as well. I'm just a sucker for peat

[–]kmmeerts2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Man, I'm happy you have that luxury, but I'd be ecstatic if I could attract just one woman.

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

We all start somewhere.

[–][deleted]  (2 children) | Copy


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

Well first of all, don't answer past dating experience questions. "I'd rather not talk about other women, if that's ok.."

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

I respect the privacy of my partners, past and present. "I can keep secrets. ;)"

[–]Mouth_Herpes4 points5 points  (6 children) | Copy

IMO, this is an overreaction and not a way to have a fulfilling life. Having a long-term female partner is rewarding and satisfying. You just can't turn into a whipped bitch once you have a girlfriend. She doesn't have you "at her mercy" just because you decide to stop banging other women, so long as she knows it's your choice and you could get another girl at any time.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy

She doesn't have you "at her mercy" just because you decide to stop banging other women

But she does, because when she decides to leave, it'll be because she hasn't stopped shopping.

[–]Mouth_Herpes4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy

Not all women leave their men. If you have your mind right and your frame right, she'll stay in love for decades. And if she does leave; so what? If you're the kind of guy who can juggle three women, you're the kind of guy who can get another one without much trouble. Taking the red pill just means you see women for what they are; it doesn't mean you have to spend your life as a nihlistic loner. The red pill gives you the tools to attract a good, feminine woman and to keep her (and you) attracted, fulfilled and satisfied. Don't be afraid to use them.

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

And if she does leave; so what?

She'll leave when you're down on your luck and most in need. You've lost your job, become impaired with a medical condition, etc. At that point all of the resources you've invested into a monogamous relationship will be gone along with the woman.

[–]TRP VanguardVZPurp1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yes, and then when you recover, she'll suddenly want to be in your life again, without even processing how you may have taken her sudden switches in attraction or the context in which they occurred or how poorly she treated you when she felt unattracted to you. Then she'll rationalize some bullshit for her current vagina tingles toward you.

At that point I say completely disregard her, but you could always do a pump and dump. It'd pretty much be some rough hate-sex, from my perspective, though. So I just go with the former.

Plenty of girls out there :)

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

I agree with you, but each person has to make their own decisions based on their own preferences. I prefer to say "Having a long-term female partner can be rewarding and satisfying, for the man who wants that." The point is that we as a society should stop pushing that as a goal that every single man should have or else be considered a deviant. Everybody has a right to decide for themselves what is right and fulfilling.

I have fond memories of my last long term girlfriend, but I had to break it off when the urge was too strong to see other women. I'm totally open to the possibility of finding a woman that makes me not ever feel compelled to chase another skirt, but realistically I doubt it will happen.

[–]James_Coook1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

I am curious OP. Have you seen the effects of pre-selection in all this plate spinning? Has a girl ever seen you out with another chick? How did the interaction go down?

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 16 points17 points  (2 children) | Copy

I try to avoid being seen in public by other harem members when they're part of the harem. However- I do use harem members to attract new women. It actually works really well. But they'll act like it upsets them.

For example a few weeks ago I was at a bar and a girl I've been flirting with lately happened to be there. I had texted one of my harem to meet up with me, and they got to meet face-to-face. There was a clash.

The harem girl wasn't impressed, was really pissy that night. The girl flirting was embarrassed and felt awkward about it.

That week, the harem girl stepped up her game 200%. Bringing me dinners and going out of her way to be nice.

The girl I was flirting with became a lot more into me. (Sealed the deal within the week).

Just the fact that I was bold enough to enable that clash, turn the attraction up to 11.

They would both describe the event as insensitive, and it does require a little smooth talking, but the visceral reaction to it is immeasurable.

[–]soyanon6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy

First of all, I am up front with the fact that I will not be exclusive. You don't start off on that note, however. Most women will date for a month or two before having "the talk." It's programmed into them, they need to know. They'll have the talk when they're sufficiently in love with you.

Just the fact that I was bold enough to enable that clash, turn the attraction up to 11.

This is KEY. Boldness is what allows pre-selection to have its power.

If you attempt to have many women at once, you must be up-front and shameless about it. Make no apologies.

Sneakiness, straight-up lying, and most importantly, SHAME is an instant attraction-killer.

It bears repeating: there is no "alpha" or "beta" - you can be an authentic man or you can be a coward. That's the real difference between red-pill and blue-pill.

[–]FountainsOfFluids0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

you can be an authentic man or you can be a coward.

So true. Every man is going to have to decide what "authentic" means for himself, but I guarantee you it will be difficult, painful, and you'll have to expurgate quite a bit of denial before it is accomplished. I would wager it is a lifetime's worth of effort.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy

How do you avoid building a "player" reputation? Do you keep them from meeting your friends, constantly change venues etc. or just don't give a shit since they all think they're special enough to tie you down?

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy

I don't really care about the "player" rep, and I do have a bit of one. I think it works to my advantage. I actually had a girl say this to me last week,

"I think you lie about a lot of things. You're too cute and charming to be telling the truth."

The irony was, I had no reason to lie about anything.

They meet my friends, my friends usually know what's up.

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

That's pretty much what I thought, thanks.

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

is a player reputation bad? if you dont apologize for it i dont think its a problem. its also pre selection.

also, the way i know things men are proud to be successful with women, so i am confused that you would want people to think you are not.

[–]SpawnQuixote1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

If you're fucking the town pigs then yeah, reputation can hurt you. It's also very difficult to nail a mom then daughter, but not daughter, then mom.

It's all about your status in the social pecking order.

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

A rep can definitely help within a social circle. I had a rep as someone who was fun but discrete (I didn't kiss and tell, anyone and would deny it or play coy if asked about it) and got a lot of action from girls who wanted to hookup but didn't was a rep themselves.

[–]jsh11380 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

if you think monogamy is pro-female you need to go check out a swingers club sometime

i promise you that every polygamous situation leads to more sex and more attention for decent looking women and less for men

so in that sense if you tie down a woman into a 1 on 1 relationship with you, she is actually missing out on more partners and attention than you are

unless you're Usher or Vigg Mortenson or something. then you might could tie with a decently good looking woman for the amount of attention you'd get

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

Maybe you've interpreted this wrong- when a woman demands monogamy from a man, it is her attempt at monopolizing his resources. That is her end goal. If he is not monogamous, there is a risk his resources will be split among other offspring from other women.

She, of course, would hold herself to no such standards- her mating strategy is still alpha fucks, beta bucks.

[–]jsh1138-3 points-2 points  (1 child) | Copy

if she's trading sex/attention for resources/attention then they both benefit, was my point

so "monogamy only benefits women" is inaccurate, the way i see it. unless you mean that it only benefits women financially or materially, that's obviously true

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

Monogamy (Marriage) as an institution if enforced upon women was mutually beneficial, yes. But those days are even longer gone.

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

pleuston's prezzes creepie decolouriser inebriate chemosmotic pharmacologically amidmost Hinson sanitation vibrator clandestinenesses Kleenexes Lowder outwith events Merceer retraced emaciation's curatives durgan flourish dedicators Wimauma chetrums stubbornness queening's Leonard's suspensions patristics sexdecillion sluggardly's Acushnet's vermiculated irradiator mentalist Ripuarians ditheists Gareth victrix fishkills barchans mile incoherent ochre uredines pleiotropism's nonfissionable Negritoes elaeolites steaminesses constrictor snappishness's rippingly Daoists Bregenz Malamut stoited Conchobar's octahedron's cogitating Athapaskans fogbound morbidness Vita

[–]TRP Vanguard: "Dark Triad Expert"IllimitableMan-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy

Trivia: Haram (not harem) is "disallowed" (the opposite of Halal, meaning "allowed") in Arabic. Since I learnt that I can't help but draw the parallel everytime I see the word "harem" in English. I don't believe in coincidences when it comes to anything, especially not languages from two different language families. Irony being, muslim societies are largely polygamous so a harem would not be haram. Haha.

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

Well that's the etymology of the word. The idea being that the harem is forbidden to other men.

[–]TRP Vanguard: "Dark Triad Expert"IllimitableMan-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

Ahah, yeah. But what doesn't match up there is that the harem is forbidden to OTHER MEN but not forbidden for a man to build (based on what you've said) whereas a muslim man can have 4 wives if he's rich enough, effectively a HAREM which is not HARAM (disallowed), which is strange because HARAM means forbidden in all senses, not just forbidden for OTHERS but not for the self. Etymologically this is quite interesting, it appears the British Empire imported the word from the Ottoman empire. (Turkey)

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

I just told a girl I didn't want to be with her(because I'm in no place to nurture a relationship blah blah blah). she went cluster B on my ass. what a nightmare. the wiles of women keep me away from the dating scene.

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

First off:

Thank you for the My Approach, I never understood when to bring up this issue, or even how to phrase it without appearing aggressive (i.e. if you think this is a waste of time, then maybe it is) and losing the girl due to the phrasing.

Also, best advice ever:

Do not surrender that freedom, it is the only bargaining chip you've got. Once you surrender it you will find yourself at the mercy of the woman who is most certainly not in it for you.

Man's only saving grace is that they understand "loyalty". Men are loyal to their friends, to their nation, to honor, to companies, etc. It's ingrained in our social psyche. Women however will never comprehend this, are not brought up to understand the notion of "loyalty" (not to be confused with fidelity - that is only one concept of loyalty) or "honor" and thus will never respect you for being either. They'll expect it but not respect it. They only way for them to understand it, is to show them that you will not give it up for them.

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

as sad as it is to admit i think this is true.

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

Reich called this "The Mass Psychology of Fascism."

People are terrified of the possibility of human freedom. If/when you confront them with that, is when they will try to make you their victim.

I do know of women who genuinely want freedom. As with men, they are the vast minority. Most PEOPLE want you to take away their freedom, in exchannge for order and security.

They want to RELY ON YOU. It's not easy to fulfill this role. But that's what we're here for.

[–]gordonthrows-2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy

How often these girls end up exclusive to you? Do you encourage that on them?

What I'm trying to get at is: if they are often exclusive to you, what is the difference of having the same attitude, but you being also exclusive to her? You still don't label it as a relationship, if you find a hotter/better girl you just end with the first.

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

I used to do it like this. Nowadays - just only date em if they like girls too. Makes shit much easier

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

I'm confused... aren't you married (or at least you were a few months ago)?

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

Never married here.

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

My mistake, I thought /u/Redpillwifey was your wife for some reason.

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

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter