698,464 posts

NAWALT

Reddit View
August 27, 2013
107 upvotes

Not all women are like that.

I must have just experienced the few bad ones. Right?

Hey, not every drive results in a crash, but you wear your seatbelt?

Not every ship sinks, but you include lifeboats?

Not every cigarette kills, but you don't smoke to avoid cancer?

Not every day it rains, but you keep an umbrella in your car?

Not everybody has an STD, but you use condoms every time?

Not every wild animal has rabies, but you avoid getting near them at the park?

Not every person will rob your house, but you lock your doors every time you leave?

Not every day you get sick, but you still have health insurance just in case?

Not every woman divorces you, but you avoid marriage to avoid divorce rape.

There's a pervasive myth that the red pill is about treating every woman as a definite threat. I think they really miss out on the idea here that not every person is a threat, but you take precautions to avoid scenarios that increase your chances.

Apparently that sort of thinking is unique to men. I'd like to say women can understand it, but then again, they seem pretty angry at us for using rational techniques like this. Nobody does a disservice to women's image like women.

Edit: I'd like to add a great example, because I hear this about marriage a lot. I hear people say it's overly paranoid to avoid marriage just because there are a few bad apples out there. I think the difference is in pragmatic thinking- for instance here's how I see the cards being held:

I don't think all women (or even most) will divorce rape you. However, when you're married, she holds the cards and you have zero options to intervene.

If you don't get married, this dilemma never exists, therefore you have all the cards in regards to divorce rape.

A prudent man ensures he is never stuck with zero options. It's not because all women are like that- it's because some are.


Post Information
Title NAWALT
Author redpillschool
Upvotes 107
Comments 63
Date 27 August 2013 04:33 PM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit TheRedPill
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/6453
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1l72o4/nawalt/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
NAWALTdivorce rapethe red pill
Comments

[–]neXianXavia33 points34 points  (8 children) | Copy

You know, I was just thinking that.

NAWALT didn't really make sense to me. I mean, women are individuals, some are incel, some find disco sticks to jump on nightly.

This is what I was missing.

It's not that all women are the same, it's that you should take precautions against all women in preparation for the women that fuck you over.

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (2 children) | Copy

Deriding the guy who exclaims "NAWALT!" is not an assertion that there are no exceptions to the rules of female we describe here. Of course there are exceptions.

But the likelihood that the one specific girl you have oneitis to death for is one of those exceptions, is really damn small.

It's possible to finish an inside straight. But you never put money in the pot thinking that this is the hand where you're going to. Make the high probability play.

[–]Meglomaniac14 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy

As someone who is just getting over a oneitus himself, it isnt even about realizing that the girl you so desperately want is exactly the same as other women in terms of wanting to be fucked hard by a dominant man.

Its about realizing that you will NEVER EVER keep her unless you know how to behave as an alpha male in a relationship. Frankly, im glad that my relationship crashed and burned, because its what got me to read TRP. I know that if I ever get another shot with her in a few years, I can do it right, but also every relationship from now on will be done right.

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

Well, you would put money in if the pot odds were correct. Assuming you flopped the draw your about a 6 to 1 dog to hit it by the river. So, if the pot odds are better than 6 to 1 then the right play is to draw.

I know what you meant though...

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

NAWALT didn't really make sense to me. I mean, women are individuals, some are incel, some find disco sticks to jump on nightly.

TIL this isn't just an invention by Lady Gaga.

[–]neXianXavia1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Fuck. You got me.

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points  (1 child) | Copy

Oh have some fun, my joke was sick.

[–]RedeemingVices7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy

Meta.

[–]1nowboarding0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

This is what I was missing.

My thoughts exactly.

[–]Max___Power15 points16 points  (0 children) | Copy

Since no one has mentioned it yet, the idea that women are impossible to please is known to us as Hypergamy.

EDIT: I posted this in the wrong thread

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

I thought NAWALT was employed as a conceptual tool in TRP to help us all understand that biology trumps good intentions. That is to say, if you think a woman is not an animal who has biological imperatives that are stronger than her will to do good to a wo/man in her life that is not her child, you are delusional. I suppose the same could be said for NAMALT, but that's not the focus of this sub.

[–]HansJuan0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Yeah I think most comments here are missing the point. NAWALT is about the biological imperatives which we can only supress up to a certain level.

[–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn43 points44 points  (9 children) | Copy

One of the fundamental differences in the way men and women think has to do with risk. Men live in an environment of risk scale, while women live in a risk dichotomy.

Men know you cannot eliminate risk, so the choices you make can increase or decrease your risk and it is up to the man to decide if the increase in risk (chance of getting mugged) is worth the reward (shortcut thru the bad side of town).

Women live thinking the there is such a thing as "safe" and that things are either safe or they are not; that "risk" means "will happen" and therefore they must take all safety precautions regardless of the opportunity cost of losing the reward.

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

This is so true. Fucking spot on man.

[–] points points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn16 points17 points  (2 children) | Copy

Aye. yet another reason that women's suffrage is so detrimental to a society.

[–] points points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–]Senior ContributorDemonspawn10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy

But I guess those particular red pills are outside the scope of this forum.

It's societal Red Pill rather than individual Red Pill. Personally, I think it fits simply because of the massive changes to the sexual marketplace which it causes. Might as well understand the causes as well as how to deal with them.

[–]Moh73 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Another way to look at it.

Men make decisions and think based on logic.

Women make decisions and think based on emotion.

[–]NascarWilde0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Not all women live in a risk dichotomy! :)

It's interesting because I've always thought that women were simply more risk/loss averse than men. What you've written here may be a better explanation.

[–]jakethesnake760 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

This is true when women and men think of heaven on earth , men don't believe it ,women do, and continue to demand it.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (1 child) | Copy

Even in marriage a man has options. They are called "non extradition countries".

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

cambodia has actually become a pretty nice place in the last 10 years.

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (12 children) | Copy

A man, confronted with an uncertain situation, considers the possibilities, keeps his options open, and prepares without assumption to defend himself if it becomes necessary.

A woman, confronted with an uncertain situation, assumes the worst, blames everyone but herself for the fears she invents out of that uncertainty, and screams for help and/or goes on the attack.

Women are not evolved to handle danger competently. It is natural and right that a woman's risk responses would be very different from a man's. A man's correct response is to explore the risk and either establish that there is no danger or defeat the danger that presents itself. A woman's correct response is to get a man, or, if none is available, go berserk in an effort to quickly overcome what is likely to be a superior foe if there is any foe at all.

Are you familiar with the Schrodinger's Rapist essay?

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

I loved the last part of the last line,

...if there is any foe at all.

Made me laugh. Spot on man.

[–] points points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (6 children) | Copy

But it's important to understand that this actually is how a lot of women think. Every unknown is a danger. Every male is a threat. Every social contact is potentially the start of a sequence of events leading to rape.

This woman isn't an isolated case of paranoia. She gave words to a whole culture of paranoia.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (4 children) | Copy

I think my favorite part of that essay was how she hampstered how it's ok for women to make instantaneous judgements about men based on physical appearance, but when men judge women based on physical appearance we are misogynist.

Awesome.

[–]deville050 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

Yeah i dont think judging women on their physical appearance makes you a misogynist. I dont even think thats what it means. I see that you are trying to disregard that article just for the sake of it. Women are the weaker sex and they know that. They need to protect themselves at all times.. Just like what OP said men should be doing in their own way. We as men walk around with this notion that every person is probably a nice guy until we find out more about them. Well thats easy for us to do cuz no one is looking at us like sex objects every 2 seconds and trying to stick something in our butts. Women dont have that luxury man. They need to look out for themselves. There is nothing crazy about reserving trust untill you are sure of your safety. Women might be emotionally crazy fucked in the head but it does not make them crazy to be extra careful in avoiding getting physically assulted. You kind of get that way when ever since you open your eyes, someone tries to offer/show you their penis. I have been alive for 28 years. I have never had some stranger jack off to me, grop me, lure me on the streets. Pretty much every female my age that i am friends with has been through something sexual and creepy. Some multiple time and some a lot worse. And sometimes at a very young age. Try having a positive dandy fucking outlook when you have to carry emotional scars like that.

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

I'm actually not disregarding the article, and i'm older than you by the way. Anyway, it is bullshit for a woman to judge a person based on their physical appearance. By your logic women should be more afraid/wary of black people because they are black. Or more wary of me if i'm wearing ratty jeans and a hoodie as opposed to me wearing a suit and tie.

Everyone has emotional scars and baggage, doesn't give anyone the right to take it out anyone else.

[–]deville051 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Well we all judge people by their appearance especially the opposite sex. I dont think being careful is the same as taking it out on someone. And actually you do have right to look at the world based on your past experiences. I didnt say anything about women 'judging' one person more than the other based on appearance. Even the article does not really say that. I only said that is not what misogynistic means.

What I was actually talking about was why women dont just assume every guy is a nice guy right off the bat. So if you say that by my logic women should be more afraid of black guys... Then thats completely besides the point because..

  1. I didnt say anything to imply that.

  2. That is completely what you think because you feel that black people obviously look more threatening than non-blacks simply based on their skin color.

  3. You think that "women" means "white women or non-black women" cuz I dont see why according to your statement, black women would find men of their own color more dangerous than foreign ones.

Getting back to your point.. I dont think being careful is the same thing as judging someone. Rather its reserving judgement. if men assume every girl is a non-threatening then its because we have the luxury and past experience to do that. And most women dont. In the end we both do it in our own way.

if a vagina is a door to a home, women are the ones inside, deciding who to selectively let in based on who looks non-threatening. We on the other hand are the ones trying our best to get in like salesmen. We are the ones who knock. We are the danger

[–]SeekingAlpha0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

It's not bullshit for anyone to judge anyone else by their appearance. Every person is fully within their natural rights to judge any person as they see fit. Of course, wisdom dictates that quick and emotional judgement can prove to be folly. However, it can also save a life.

It is when people move to condemn, obstruct, harm the other person and their liberty that you get into the bullshit element of judging. These behavioral responses to internal judgement will always occur. This is where we find the dilemmas.

[–]SeekingAlpha0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Plenty of males appear to also see many other males as threats today. I believe most of it is conditioned and not some primal reaction to real potential threats.

[–]TRP Vanguardscottishredpill0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Oh man, that essay! I blanked I ever came across it. Uuugh

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

hehe =) trollface.png

[–]supercortical0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Do you have a source for the female/male danger response? I would like to read up on it.

[–]TRP VanguardHumanSockPuppet62 points63 points  (3 children) | Copy

Not every man is a rapist, but you still dress more reasonably. Oh wait.

[–]TRP Vanguardscottishredpill13 points14 points  (0 children) | Copy

Ha

[–][deleted] 38 points39 points  (1 child) | Copy

Not every man is a rapist, but you still mace him if he matches your course and speed for probably-innocent reasons like living in the same dorm

Not every man is a rapist, but you still maintain that all men are rapists

Not every man is a rapist, but you still call the cops if you retroactively withdraw consent a week after a sexual encounter

FTFY

[–]TRP VanguardHumanSockPuppet24 points25 points  (0 children) | Copy

It's not victim blaming because the guy doesn't become the victim UNTIL I've blamed him.

I am morally unassailable.

[–]Endorsed Contributorpontifx11 points12 points  (4 children) | Copy

It's a fundamental failure to grasp probabalistic strategy. This is one of the reasons why I think games like hold'em (and to a far greater extent mtg) are excellent for kids. It grants you the ability to make these assumptions a bit earlier in development and eventually you apply those theories to other areas of life.

I've been in a couple close calls in my life and women as a whole are actually incredibly even-handed. They won't send you to prison, extort you, or hold your cock ransom unless they are backed into a corner or don't know a life outside of being a ratchet. The thing is, it doesn't matter who put them there. If they are in that corner they will go ratchet mode.

I actually contest your thoughts here RPS - everyone is a threat and always assume compromise but do it in a way that allows you to trust what they are saying and doing. You can only verify it against the outcomes you believe are likely in any situation. Guilty until proven innocent. They thing is, you are a threat too. Everyone's weapon is a change of state. You enter someones life and if you are doing it right you shake it up a little bit. People tend to think they aren't powerful when everyone really is. We are the dominant species for a reason.

Additionally I think women are mad at you and this sub because you are calling them out not because of the rational thinking that goes with it. It's a stressful job I imagine, thanks as always. ;P

[–] points points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

[–] points points | Copy

[permanently deleted]

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

Nobody does a disservice to women's image like women.

Right the fuck on. As I'm fond of saying, if you don't like the stereotypes, don't whine and censor, prove them wrong.

[–]FortunateBum5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

A caveat I'd add:

The exceptions to the rules as regards female behavior are exceedingly rare. For genetic reasons, females are going to exhibit much less diversity as compared to males. In my own experience, this is the case.

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

Fewer blue pull examples, more posts like this, please. This shit is good.

[–]1nowboarding1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

There's a pervasive myth that the red pill is about treating every woman as a definite threat

Thank you for this. I was starting to feel overly cynical about buying into TRP so strongly. But this says it right. Certainly not every woman is a threat, but I can still enjoy a cruise with the lifeboats on board!

[–]Overshadows0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Thanks, I thought your list was successful at communicating a healthy NAWALT perspective. A sort of 'trust, but verify' moment.

Its good to know the risks and pitfalls so you know when to bail or steer clear... not to mention inform a serious decision should you choose to marry.

I also appreciate the sanity. 'What women are like' can sometimes turn a little emotional; a reflection of previous bad experiences.

[–]MrsStrom0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

she holds the cards and you have zero options to intervene.

This just sounds so blue pill/defeatist to me. TBH, its very unattractive. An Alpha with a good game/MAP will almost always be the one in charge.

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

An alpha with a good game plan won't put himself in a position where he has zero options. Marriage does put the power of threat-point in the hands of the wife, and she will realize it, alpha or not.

[–]MrsStrom0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

I disagree. My husband does an amazing job of maintaining his SR and I (even though I know that he's gaming me) strive daily to make him happy and earn his approval.

IF we divorce, sure I'll get half, but then I won't have him; and he'll have no problem finding another woman. He's in charge and has options other than me. (Knowing he has other options is both terrifying and motivating.)

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

I don't expect you to understand.

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

Oh man, I remember this conversation on IRC. Way to go , man

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

Haha, too good to let disappear in the annals of the chat.

[–]wolfie10100 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

living together long enough in most states is the same as being married and having kids together is the same regardless of marriage. That's not the silver bullet. The trick is to marry someone who earns as much or more than you do and who has a good work ethic and is self motivated. Avoid lazy partners.

[–]TRP Vanguardss_camaro0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

yeah but r/NAWALT anyway.

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

Misogynist.

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

No, you.

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

Only on days that end in "y."

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

No, that reasoning sounds exactly like the whole "Schrödinger's rapist" schtick, except with personal responsibility ("take precautions to avoid scenarios that increase your chances") in place of a vain attempt to control the minds of vast swaths of the population through whining and crying.

A critical difference, sure, but at the very least they got partway there.

Baby steps, and all that...



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

© TheRedArchive 2020. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter