Women’s morphing need for male investment. - Dalrock

Reddit View
April 23, 2016

Read the Full Post Here

When women are young and have the power position in the SMP, promiscuity is intoxicating to them. Since they have the power, the short term nature of most of their relationships isn’t seen as them being rejected by men, but as them rejecting men. Young women today don’t feel the need that previous generations did to secure commitment in their late teens and early 20s because:

  1. Only small numbers of other women their age are going after the more public and durable forms of male investment.
  2. Their hopping from man to man is seen as occurring on their own terms.

However, as women progress into their late twenties all of this starts to change. Their SMP power relative to men starts to decline and at the same time their peers start to marry in much greater numbers. In other words, their need to secure male investment occurs fairly suddenly, and at the very time their SMP power is starting to dive. This is surprising to many young women because of our cultural denial of the SMP realities Rollo describes.

The Washington Times: piece Economy of sex: It’s cheap these days describes this phenomenon:

Although plenty of women dabble in sexual-market relationships and then settle down successfully with life partners, he said, many women are “not witnessing marriage happening on the timetables they prefer and expected.”

This is because, as economist Timothy Reickert has found, power shifts away from women as they move toward their 30s

This is where as we continuously see in the media the panic starts to set in. Yet despite the fact that marriage trends are moving in the wrong direction, the vast majority of women in the US still do manage to marry. Only 20% of current 35-39 year old women in the US (all races) have never married. If you understand the reality of hypergamy and women’s tendency to focus only on the top tier of men, you can see how powerful the desire to secure male investment is for women.

Read the Full Post Here

Post Information
Title Women’s morphing need for male investment. - Dalrock
Author redpillschool
Upvotes 67
Comments 57
Date 23 April 2016 04:00 PM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit TheRedPill
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/57956
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/4g413r/womens_morphing_need_for_male_investment_dalrock/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
DalrockRollohypergamythe red pill

[–]tb8767030 points31 points  (37 children) | Copy

It's a fucked up pyramid scheme. Women who are 5's do not accept men that are below a 6, women that are 6's do not consider any man below a 7 and etc. so forth. This leaves a large vacuum of men unable to get an equivalent mate. This only changes once the woman becomes a single mother or hits the wall (varies in the 30's for most, 25 for some and 40 for few) then all of a sudden they actually act accordingly to their sexual attractiveness. A woman who is a 6 as a single mother will pay attention to guys who are also 6's since they finally figured out they are not as much as they were cracked up to be. That guy that was an 8 that fucked her once didn't do it because she was an 8, he did it because he needed a sausage wallet for the night and was too cheap to pay rent.

[–] points points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]tb8767016 points17 points  (10 children) | Copy

It happens a lot actually. A woman gets banged by a higher quality man than she deserves because eh, it was 1am and the guy was horny. He wasn't even trying. A lot of single mothers are alpha-widows with a spermling in tow from said alpha, so technically he did his biological purpose of spreading his genetics as much as possible.

You think as an 8/9 male (when I dress up and have my fat down on a cut) actually want to focus any of my attention on a single mother when I'm 21

The point of even trying a single mother if you are capable of it (toxic in general, new TRPers avoid completely and many older ones still avoid) is either pump and dump or a fuck and chuck. It's purely for you to get sex, never LTR single mothers because they not there for you. Try it, date one and say you do not want to be a part of her kids life. Bam she disappears because you won't be a cuckold and pay for a kid that isn't yours. Single mothers are more desperate for resources and support and hand out the sex more willingly. All women know how to make men happy, very few choose to do it. This is why single mothers will toss the book at you, back rubs, lots of sex, cook your meals, act pleasant etc. because they are attempting to snare you. Once marriage is in the works that shit shuts off like a light switch. This is exactly why many wronged men come here, the woman puts up a lie of how she will act all the time then it turns out she is only trying to take advantage of you. Do not let them take advantage of you.

It is optimal as a male not to let your feelings fall for the woman putting on this act, just take advantage of it. Know how women can back out anytime be it sex or promises and no one can hold them to task for it? Just simply show interest even if it's a feint, get that sex, do not commit. Once she slows the good stuff down after the realization you won't commit then you leave, you got what you could. I'm not telling you to do this, just explaining why some guys do it. Even before TRP I had a friend who kept hitting up single mothers and I get it now years later, he was getting ass on tap during that period where each one was trying to ensnare him and would bail between a few months and one even lasted a year. Summary: Do not attempt single mothers unless you are already experienced and want extra kinky and frequent sex. Must have willpower to walk away as soon as talk of commitment begins, in general still not considered worth the effort to many TRPers. I myself am dabbling in the waters with one but anticipating having to bail at any time.

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

After breaking out of my 5.5 year monogamous relationship to "go become RP" my first fuckbuddy was a hot 21-yearold single mom. I knew going into it exactly what she really wanted, but I played ball because, well, hot pussy. She was all about it when I was talking my usual nice guy routine (couldn't stop myself at first), but when I course-corrected and explained how I would never be a part of the kid's life.. poof she's gone.

Completely predictable. If I run into that situation again, knowing what I know now, I'll probably keep the plate spinning longer. Part of the problem is I am still trying to divorce my internal validation from women.

I.e.; that first single mom, I wanted her to 'want' to just fuck me like girls just want to fuck an alpha. It felt horrible that she only wanted to use me for resources, but I went along with it for sex and managed to avoid commitment. Still think it was a good experience, but I've got to get away from that kind of thinking.

[–]tb876701 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

This, I have experience now. Before TRP I was literally at zero. None. Mid-twenties, and no that is not sad I actually lost my virginity quick compared to lots of guys I see around pushing 30 and never having even an HJ. Now I have experience I am trying the single mom thing, they do seem eager. Like you listed the nice-guy routine thing seems to work, play purple (red with a bit of blue) and they eat it up. I think this is due to them proactively seeking a Beta Bucks more than an Alpha Fucks at that point. I'm just going to have to figure out how to keep things in the green-zone before she absolutely cuts off the good stuff without me committing first.

You did like I probably would have several months ago, you just said straight up you didn't want anything to do with the kid and as you predicted she was gone. I predict same with this one I am with. Sexual strategy is amoral. Women abuse men at a way higher rate than the inverse. Promise things, lay clues about you being well off (even if you are not) so she tries to unlock the treasure chest with her cunt as hard as she can. When it comes that time she is starting to wise up to what you are doing she gives two options: she cuts it all off until you lay down all your cards or you walk and be called a liar. Just walk, law is still on your side and still says you are a free man as long as you didn't make a new kid with your DNA. That's how I think it should be done when dealing with single mothers and how I am conducting myself at this moment.

[–]Boobz4Noobz-2 points-1 points  (3 children) | Copy

Why would you get involved with a single mom if you're not the kind of guy who could be involved in a kid's life? Life is about finding someone who can be your partner in managing jobs, a household, families. Kids are part of that.

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

That may be what you're life is about, but that's not what my life is about, at least for now. If that was my primary goal I already had that girl. My goal right now in regards to women is to self-actualize, prove to my hindbrain that I can get a date and get laid when I want to and therefore don't need to be afraid of women who might lie, cheat, etc.

As for family, not even sure if I want kids at all, let alone right now. I need to become a person who I can respect and admire first before I go squirting babies into anyone and fucking up their lives and the lives of the potential children we would have.

[–]Boobz4Noobz-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

There are always going to be people who lie and cheat out there. All you can do to protect yourself from that is to treat yourself and others with respect and then surround yourself with people who do the same. Like attracts like.

Don't let sex drive your self worth. Drive your own self worth through your own hard work, skills and capabilities.

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

You seem to have failed to understand my post.

"Surround myself with others who respect me" sounds great in a sentence typed in Reddit. In reality, what you are referring to is Abundance Mentality. Being able to discard bad apples and actually find good apples by sorting through the bushels full of bullshit in the modern world. This requires high value and skill to generate options.

This doesn't just apply to women; but to every single person in your life.

Sex has a role to play in my self worth, being less important than some things, equal to some and more important than a few others. It is measured, as you say, by my hard work, skill and capability. Trying and succeeding at becoming sexually successful with women is the charter of this entire sub, so while I agree that pussy should never be on a pedestal, i completely and 100% don't get your point, if indeed you even had one.

You seem to be trying to say "get married, have kids and white picket fence, don't worry about getting laid at all, find happiness somewhere else in life".

Have you even read the sidebar? What are you trying to accomplish with your replies?

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

Dated a single mom for 4 years, and had her live with me. Main benefit: I will, for the rest of my life, be able to stay with single moms as long as I please and have zero real attachment to them.

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

I have a harder time fucking single mothers than women without kids. They're standards are higher for some reason and since they're not worth it, only an idiot would try that hard for her. She is biologically useless to you.

[–]tb876702 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Say what? Single moms have much lower standards and act much better because they know deep down they are biologically useless to me. They try hard to ensnare you into the legal contract of marriage by being perfect in every way they can just until the deal is done. Just do not commit, show all signs of it but don't do it and ride that wave as long as you can.

[–]1rporion13 points14 points  (14 children) | Copy

This sub reminds me of the overall degeneracy of society

It should, because it is a reaction to it.

[–]JimmyJiangh2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

What makes you think you're a 8/9/10?

[–]Senior ContributorNightwingTRP1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

throw themselves at me for sex and am starting a trend of waiting for it to weed out even more of the girls I don't want.

Just as a warning on that, you're going to get caught out by any girl who is well practiced in her "Good girl" game. A while back I was almost fooled by one, but I pressed on for sex, got it, and then had to have a hard look in the mirror at myself that I'd almost deluded myself into thinking I'd found some kind of unicorn. Evaluation just takes time. Don't fail to pursue sex.

There's a whole other discussion to be had on how not escalating will eventually be seen as beta behaviour, but I'm not really in the mood for writing about that right now. It's all food for thought though.

[–]1Entropy-70 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I had one LTR with a single mother that started to get serious, but that crashed and burned and the results of the relationship autopsy concluded that she was BPD so it was doomed from the start. Kind of a shame. She was size zero, pretty face, big hair, fun to be with, did lots of kind things, and fucked like a mink. But after that, I concluded that single moms are only good for sport fucking, with or without BPD.

Other than that I have had a few ONSs with some real hot mamas, and got into a fuckbuddy/plate dynamic with one for about 6 months. The latter was cool because I told her flat out that I didn't want a relation ship or to even have sex with her if it was going to get weird, and she was perfectly cool with out weekly bang session; never met her kid and maybe paid for one lunch date the whole time.

[–]1Entropy-71 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

There was an article about Sheng Nu (left over women) in China, which is basically over the age of 27-30 but unmarried. The culture is such that 80% of girls are married by the time they are 24 (largely as it should be IMHO). Among the rest, many will get married before they are 30, a relatively small number are too low value to attract a mate, some are just quirky, and then there is a class of elite women.

These are the HB8+ with 130+ IQs, a good education, and ambition. They take a career path and then as they approach 30 they have a great income and even more earning potential but they stop and look around. One that was interviewed in an article said:

"The A-level men marry the B-level women; the B-level women marry the C-level men; and the C-level men marry the D-level women. So who is left? The A-level women and the D-level men."

So at that point they give up, or have boy toys (rarely) or go for foreigners, or try to insinuate themselves into the circles of AA and AAA men, but it is usually too late by then because those guys are either playing the field or hooking up with the HB9s who are half a dozen to a dozen years younger.

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

it shows that her rating system is wrong.

[–]1Entropy-70 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

She was probably A-level 6 or 12 years ago, but ain't age a bitch.

[–]dissentforall2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Up voting for sausage wallet, ham wallet would also have been acceptable.

[–]Luckyluke230 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

this is true.

I was out with weekend with some friends ( went to the bars just to chill n shit). A friend of mine brought one of her friends. she wasn't too bad. she was a 6 maybe a 7 cos she was done up. other than her big tits, she didn't have much. pretty average right.

at the end of the night, she went home with this big athletic America guy. he was defo a few points above her for sure.

gave me a bit realization that I have to raise my SMV

[–][deleted] 26 points27 points  (1 child) | Copy

I'll sound like broken record on this sub, but this is an over-analysis.

Women simply do what is fashionable. Getting married young and starting a family is no longer fashionable for white women. GRRRL POWER and pantsuits are.

This will not change until men take back control of their countries and culture.

[–]2popthatpill15 points16 points  (0 children) | Copy

Exactly. Childbearing isn't fashionable - careers are.

The reason why, I suspect, is because careers take time and effort, but shitting out kids? Any welfare loser can do that.

Free Northerner says something similar:

It’s obvious that women want to work rather than procreate, but this is not because (most*) women particularly like working or because they prefer work to marriage and family. It’s not because housework is drudgery, most women who work do something similar to housework in their jobs.

The reason women want to work is because working is high status.** The reason women don’t have children is because having children is low status, and the more children the lower the status.


Having children is lower status than eduction, working, travel, or having status-giving interests. Being a stay-at-home mother is low status compared to being a working mother. Having many children is lower status than having one or two children. Having children young is lower status than having them once infertility hits.

This, more than anything, is why he have such low birth rates.

So, the answer to the fertility crisis is not tax changes, natalism benefits, or motherhood welfare. The way to get women to want to reproduce is to make children the ultimate status symbol.

[–]Senior ContributorNightwingTRP9 points10 points  (2 children) | Copy

In the bit Dalrock quoted from some young chick, there's a sentence which is even more revealing than I think he analysed:

“I don’t want to go through those changes with you. I want you to have changed and become enough of your own person so that when you meet me, we can have a stable life and be very happy.”

Note firstly that this is again how women don't care about the effort men have to put in to become high value. They just want the finished product. They want the doctor, not an investment in a young man who might become a doctor. They want the muscular ripped man, not an investment in a young man who has a 3 month training program mapped out and a membership at a gym.

Note also how she talks about his journey. Not hers. She doesn't want to take a journey. She doesn't want to improve. She doesn't want to do anything. She just wants happiness because she feels entitled to happiness and a high value man because she just is. She's not even thinking about what she brings to the table to attract you... you will just go for her because you've met her. Sometimes some of the things women say are so subtle and borderline narcissistic that it makes you want to head right back to the anger phase.

[–]furiKuriTRP1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

borderline narcissistic

nothing borderline about it.

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

This is the single RP truth that took the longest to sink in.

My BP conditioning had me thinking you find a woman and life partner to journey with when you are young and build each other up and become better people. LMAO.

Women have no interest. I forget who said it, but I see it here all the time, women don't want to win, they want a WINNER.

[–]Senior Contributoradam-l1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Just so you don't get off the right track of mind, take this article with a dose of this one, On Female Consequences and Ditching Your Revenge Porn Fantasies.

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

Only 20% of current 35-39 year old women in the US (all races) have never married.

20% is a lot. I think we can already see some changes in the market.

[–]Jaso-n4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy

20% is probably the fatties.

[–]1Entropy-74 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy

Egads! Since 60% are obese then 40% of guys settled for fat chicks!

[–]TheReformist942 points3 points  (14 children) | Copy

This sub needs to get rid of the idea women need commitment.they don't want it.if they did monogamy wudnt be fucked. Women have all the lower in their 20s, in their 20s is when it counts,and they don't want commitment in their 20s. Good luck withholding a commodity they don't give a fuck about

[–]RedSugarPill8 points9 points  (13 children) | Copy

This sub needs to get rid of the idea women need commitment


Read /u/archwinger 's recent post: "Stop trying to be someone women need; Be someone they want". 600 points and still trending..

[–]TheReformist940 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

they still don't need commitment. its not commitment from a person. it can be from the same or different person as their LTR. if the money is coming, whether it be from mum, dad, state, BB, then they are sorted, and the structure of the LTR is obsolete. they have no emotional need for commitment like a man does. As men, we want commitment, and need it because we need to be certain of paternity. Also, out main achilles hill which women don't have is oneitis. we love unconditoinally, to ensure we provide for our family and stick to the woman we are bonding to to raise our child. Women don't have oneitis. they fall out of love within a year, then it's a matter of chasing the first high like a crack addict. There is financial need for commitment, but not an emotional mental need like men. So men arent rele the gateholders of commitment. You cant be the gatholder of a commodity that can be subsidised by other people or even instutuions

[–]TheReformist94-1 points0 points  (11 children) | Copy

The fact is TRP preaches women are the gatekeeps of sex,men the gatekeepers of commitment. THEY DONT WANT COMMITMENT.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy


I think you should take a look at Rollo's Schedules of Mating series. They do want commitment, just not all the time.

[–]Endorsed Contributoralways-be-closing1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

It's generally true, I think, that women's fundamental desire for commitment is ever present, but drastically heightened with the aging of the father, and their own biological clock ticking more loudly.

Their basic desire for enjoyment and entertainment, though, massively supersedes their deeper drive for security, particularly when they're young (and often supported by a non-sexual set of males: the fathers and orbiters) leaving little 'commitment' of material investment and emotional outlet lacking, so that they are free to only prioritize entertainment and excitement.

Withholding commitment of emotion and material security, without having demonstrated great capacity for sexual entertainment and excitement, if not having delivered on it (or worse, being incapable of supplying it), really doesn't have too much effect.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRed_August2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy

You need to understand that women need men. The biological procreation drive necessitates a safe nest to unfold. Redundancy in parenting is even worse now that the palaeolithic village of our ancestors is no more. Women want the best quality sperm they can get and the safety and comfort of a good nest to be able to engage that route. It's hardwired into them so even though they may still be in fun-fucking-the-alphas mode, she still seeks commitment by nature because she seeks safety. It's not a conscious decision.

Contrast that to men: the alpha on top of his game will absolutely avoid commitment because his primary drive is to fuck many. Commitment would get in the way.

On top of the biological desire for commitment, from a wider practical point of view, even if they can now buy the services of a plumber and pay for it with their own wages, they still need men. Committed friend-zoned betas are useful for that, but also just boyfriends however temporary they are. Every hot girl has a boyfriend. The reverse is not true. Men don't need women, except for sex.

Lastly, there is also the completely artificial construct of today's societal rules which makes women opportunistic in that they will also seek to lock-down the best man they can "buy" through marriage before her post-wall body can no longer afford it. This way she can keep her pecking order amongst her peers with the quality of the husband she managed to snag. This is a more conscious decision for her to seek commitment, it isn't as strong as her biological need for safety but it still counts.

[–]TheReformist941 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

• WOMEN DO NOT NEED RELATIONSHIPS IN AN EMOTIONAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL/MENTAL WAY MEN DO. Men are the true romantics who yearn for love, not women. If it wasn’t for this, TRP wouldn’t exist, and you’d just fill the bitter swallowing of the pill and subsequent depression and void with prostitutes. This evidently doesn’t work. Men require a lot more than sex.

• WOMEN ONLY NEED COMMITMENT FROM A FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE. Therefore the money can be provided by mum/dad/state/BB/AF/AB/BF etc. Once the shelter or nest is provided, they fuck around with commitment and LTRs the absolute last priority, E.g. University, bored trapped in monogamous marriage at 34y.o with rich BB or AB husband.

• YOU CANNOT BE THE GATEKEEPER OF A COMMODITY THAT IS DIVISIBLE OR SUBSIDISED BY A PERSON/SEVERAL PEOPLE/OR INSTITUTIONS (NOTE UN-HUMAN FORMS E.G. THE STATE.) If you don’t give commitment, she can extract it from another/several men, or even from a non-human entity, through taxes. #

• SHE DOESN’T LOVE YOU, JUST THE WAY YOU MAKE HER FEEL.If you make her feel worried that her financial support (commitment) is evaporating she’ll fuck you like a child scared their parents will kick them out. SHE DOESN’T LOVE YOU, SHE LOVES THE FINANCIAL COMPONENT. SHE LOVES YOU AS A PERSON AS MUCH AS SHE LOVES THE HOLISTIC IDEA OF COMMITMENT FROM YOU/OTHER MEN/WELFARE STATE INSTITUTIONS. HER LOVE ISNT PERSONAL.

• WOMEN DO NOT HAVE A NEUROLOGICAL NEED FOR LTRs/COMMITMENT. If they did, they wouldn’t sever a 14 year marriage like it never happened.

• MEN HAVE ONEITIS NOT WOMEN. This is because we need to bond to the women and children we are raising and protect them. We are disposable and have to ensure genes are passed to the next generation. We get oneitis and strong “unconditional love” as we need to ensure our paternity and bond with the mothers

• MEN NOT WOMEN ARE CRIPPLED BY INFIDELITY. We need to ensure our children are ours. For obvious biological reasons, infidelity affects men more. Commitment on the woman’s part is required.

• WOMEN NATURALLY FORM HAREMS. Again, one man commitment is useless. She can extract it from several

• MY MATE IS AN ALPHA AND NEEDS COMMITMENT. Sure, he’s an alpha, he rakes in 50matches a day on tinder,but at the end of the day ,if he doesn’t commit, she’ll move onto another alpha. You singularly as a person don’t hold the cards. She owns the deck.

When a woman’s heart is broken, its not the same as a man’s. Its just a temporary crack cocaine withdrawal and she is pissed and panicking FOR HER OWN SAKE (READ SOLIPSISM) how is she going to get her next fix?

My mum’s bf (investment banker, oxford university rugby team)died of cancer. She isn’t upset that he is dead as a person. She has no biological need to. She doesn’t love him.


• She is grieving The fact she is alpha widowed hard at age 50. They were together from 34-50. My mum cheated on my father.

• She is grieving the fact she has lost the validation of a man who was chased by many women.

• She is grieving the loss of tingles, and how she is gonna get those tingles again.

• She is grieving like a drug addict is panicking where his next crack fix is.

None of it is personal. When shelter is provided, the monogamous relatipnship with commitment is redundant.

[–]BrunoOh2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy


They need commitment, in the form of lesser value men giving her attention, telling her how wonderful she is and being there when she needs to cry.

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

• WOMEN DO NOT NEED RELATIONSHIPS IN AN EMOTIONAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL/MENTAL WAY MEN DO. Weak men seek the relationship they had with their mother: security and comfort. Grown men do not. The "true romantics" tenet does not support nor invalidate the fact that women seek security for nesting through commitment. It is a biological drive. It is temporary.

• WOMEN ONLY NEED COMMITMENT FROM A FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE. Today, in practice, some women mostly need commitment from a financial perspective and men can largely be replaced in that function. This is correct. They however still have a biological vestigial need for protection and their behaviour reflects this. They still seek commitment. In addition, despite having gained a large degree of financial independence, women still act on reality through men and require men to craft their world. On an individualised basis, you won't be able to see the forest for the trees but women need men to survive or 'certain-death' alarm bells ring in the primitive recesses of their brains. This has been naturally selected.

• YOU CANNOT BE THE GATEKEEPER OF A COMMODITY THAT IS DIVISIBLE OR SUBSIDISED BY A PERSON/SEVERAL PEOPLE/OR INSTITUTIONS (NOTE UN-HUMAN FORMS E.G. THE STATE.) Yes. But she still has a biological requirement to seek male support especially after her epiphany phase. She will however have greater security because of the pro-feminine political state she has forged. She can get commitment from several sources.


• WOMEN DO NOT HAVE A NEUROLOGICAL NEED FOR LTRs/COMMITMENT. No. You're conflating serial monogamy with a woman's need for commitment. You can seek commitment and change it's source. The fact that she seeks commitment does not mean that she will not easily change the source of this commitment.

• MEN HAVE ONEITIS NOT WOMEN. This is simply the male behavioural contribution to pair-bonding. This does not add or detract from the 'commitment' discussion.


• WOMEN NATURALLY FORM HAREMS. Commitment harems. See? Women seek commitment (for what it will provide). She will extract security and resources from more than one if necessary. In the olden days that was from the palaeolithic band. Today, that's from the state, the husband, the job, the parents, the beta supplicants, etc.

• MY MATE IS AN ALPHA AND NEEDS COMMITMENT. How is this relevant? Don;t bother answering.

When a woman’s heart is broken, its not the same as a man’s. Irrelevant. You keep conflating the concepts of needing commitment and ability to walk away from commitment. They are not mutually exclusive.

My mum’s bf (investment banker, oxford university rugby team)died of cancer. She isn’t upset that he is dead as a person. She has no biological need to. She doesn’t love him. And so what?

SHE DOESN’T LOVE HIM, SHE DOESN’T MISS HIS COMMITMENT. Must you always drink your water from the same well? No. Because it doesn't matter. Again, what's your point? Don't bother answering.

• She is grieving The fact she is alpha widowed hard at age 50. They were together from 34-50. My mum cheated on my father. • She is grieving the fact she has lost the validation of a man who was chased by many women. • She is grieving the loss of tingles, and how she is gonna get those tingles again. • She is grieving like a drug addict is panicking where his next crack fix is.


[–]1Entropy-74 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy

They want a commitment from a guy who has both a higher SMV and higher earning (potential) than they do.

They may sidestep and dabble with dick because the guy is interesting, but otherwise they put out for alpha-ish guys who (will) have money as they go through their 20s. Meanwhile, alpha guys with the bux are playing the field either because they don't want to commit ever, or because they will only commit to an HB8++ or 9++.

Women want to commit but they set high standards and use the CC to try and lock down a high value man who is more than willing to fuck them but will never commit to their HB6 ass.

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

And they often get all confused because they want that man with higher earning potential they somehow end up thinking that if they raise their own earning potential this has anything to do with helping them actually get a man with higher potential.

I've found that many women are confused and think that they are really guys. They think that guys will find their earning potential attractive. I've also found that they just don't think about it at all and have cause and effect confused. Because women are hypergamous and are more attracted to a higher potential man, and this can create a result in the SMP, they think it somehow has causation.

I'd much rather fuck a cute nineteen year old who works at the mall making pretzels than my thirty four year old execucunt ex wife, no matter how much money she makes.

[–]1Entropy-70 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I don't think women shoot for higher earnings because they think it will increase their SMV, if anything that is a post hoc hamsterization. All things being equal, it is better to marry a woman with a good salary, but things are never equal and high income women think differently.

[–]RedSugarPill0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

I think we both agree on what women want. The only thing we disagree on is whether the sub believes women want commitment or not. Putting it into context: AF/BB..in other words, it depends on her situation.

[–]Joseph_the_Carpenter2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Women want the alpha fucks, until the day they die. The only reason it changes is because they can't get what they want 80% of the time. A married woman in her 40s that hops on chad's dick never wanted Mr. Billy Beta for the husband, she wants to get fucked by alpha males. Her beta is the panic response, her settling for what she can get. Commitment isn't her main goal, but perpetual alpha fucks her whole life is.

[–]1Entropy-70 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

Statistically speaking, getting married at 27 or 28 has the best chance to avoid divorce.

One psychological theory is that if you are younger you don't really know who you are because you have not experienced enough; and if you are older you know yourself all too well and become fixed in your ways. In the first case of marrying young, you can later discover more about yourself and your spouse and realize that you really weren't meant to be together. In the latter case, people who are fixed in their ways can have a difficult time living with a new person.

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

The older the woman is the less likely you are to get divorced. Because in fake marriage 2.0 she has all the power. So the less options she has the less likely you are to get divorced. Of course their is no reason you should ever be getting married.

[–]1Entropy-71 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

The absolute age of the woman - regardless of when you initially got married - is very statistically significant. And for good reason too: the chances of getting remarried drop as the woman ages.

The only rational reason to get married is to protect your parental rights if you have children. On the flip side, in a place like Canada, there is no reason to shack up with your LTR because after 2 years it is likely that you are as good as married anyways.

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

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter