~ archived since 2018 ~

The decay of the intrinsic value of women.

August 8, 2022
9 upvotes

Edit: definition of intrinsic means to be endowed with or born with.

This is my attempt to bring to light the reason why women aren't as respected as they were in the past.

Throughout human history, women held an intrinsic value. That value was predicated on the fact that women bear the burden of child birth. This is self evident. When the titanic was sinking and the ship crew yelled to the passenger "Children and women 1st!". You didn't wonder, "Hey, that's not fair." It was so self evident why, that you just nodded your head and said, "yes, that's how it should be."

Now that intrinsic value comes with a heavy burden. The responsibility to bear children. As a collective, we've said "we will treat you as though you are valuable because you have the burden of child bearing." And this made perfect sense. Until recently.

Bring in the era of the birth control pill. What does it mean to prevent yourself from getting pregnant? Well, on a psychological level, if you can't get pregnant, you're not much different than a man.

You can see this play out over the last 60 years.

Now the current tension between men and women is as followed. Women expect their intrinsic value to be respected, but have postpone or completely abandon the responsibility that predicated that value.

Birth rates in the west have fallen dramatically. Society has been on a constant psychological campaign to demonize motherhood and demonize children.

If you're a women, and have experienced not being respected for simply being human. Welcome to what it means to be a man. Men who provide no value to society aren't respected. It's been like that since the dawn of time.

I hope you found this psychological analysis interesting.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill content, including various subreddits and blogs. This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/AllPillDebate.

/r/AllPillDebate archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

Post Information
Title The decay of the intrinsic value of women.
Author Hodgekin
Upvotes 9
Comments 70
Date August 8, 2022 4:46 PM UTC (4 months ago)
Subreddit /r/AllPillDebate
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/AllPillDebate/the-decay-of-the-intrinsic-value-of-women.1139699
https://theredarchive.com/post/1139699
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/AllPillDebate/comments/wjdo8e/the_decay_of_the_intrinsic_value_of_women/
Comments

[–]no_bling_just_dingWhitePill (self aware MSTOW) 8 points9 points  (50 children) | Copy Link

eh i disagree. women are still more valued than men overall regardless of whether they are or arent pregnant and whether or not they can be.

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 2 points3 points  (49 children) | Copy Link

I agree that women are valued outside their ability to become pregnant. Men value just the act of sex alone.

But the point is a general trend towards more and more men starting to not respect women for simply being a women.

There are still many men who still fling themselves at women. But.. you can see the phenomen happen with the growth of the red pill movement. Idea like, "respect yourself first" or "don't be a betabucks" are essentially just that. It's an idea that you shouldn't respect women simply for being a women. And my argument is to address that idea with a psychological explanation.

[–]bludkrazeRED AF 2 points3 points  (44 children) | Copy Link

Why would i respect anyone for simply being? I don't. Respect is earned. And modern women dont do anything that makes them respectable.

Modern men arent doing much to get my respect and quite frankly women do even less.

[–]IrrungenWirrungen 2 points3 points  (20 children) | Copy Link

Why does your respect have to be earned? Are you special somehow?

Why not simply respect everyone until they give you a reason not to anymore? 🧐

[–]bludkrazeRED AF 0 points1 point  (19 children) | Copy Link

Yes i am special.

Why would i give anyone respect? I don't know them so why would I respect them? There is no reason to.

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 0 points1 point  (22 children) | Copy Link

You're a perfect example of how our society had shifted in 60 years.

You can say your views represent a growing group of people. I'm also in the same category.

60 years ago, the general view was women should be respected for simply being a women. This is when men where chivalrous to women as a general rule. The act of chivalry died, due to many reasons, but one of them is what this post is about. Which is the abadoning of the reproductive duty to society.

Before women come at this with pitch forks, the whole society and its welfare state depends on the population maintaining equilibrium or growing. Women partake in the system which is predicated on children being born and then paying taxes to help fund the welfare state. When women abandon giving birth to children, yet they still expect to draw from the welfare state, it shows that they aren't fully aware that bearing children is indeed a duty toward society.

[–]rurunoa 0 points1 point  (21 children) | Copy Link

oh so men are allowed to draw from the welfare state by default but women are only allowed to if they go through the excruciating pain of childbirth just because they happened to be born with female reproductive organs. i don’t even care about the respect part

[–]no_bling_just_dingWhitePill (self aware MSTOW) 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

well pardon my french i think the redpillers are a red herring, TRP at large still want to bend over backwards to get women. they measure success by things ("spinning plates") that the most average boring basic woman can achieve in 10 minutes by swiping on tinder along with social status that women have by default. but otherwise, i agree... sex is an "inelastic" good in economics terms. there is much good info in it, but the followers tend to do all the wrong things with it.

one half of the species have mother nature's unlimited credit card between their legs and the other is born in crippling debt.

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

Someone isn’t up to date on red pill thinking…

[–]no_bling_just_dingWhitePill (self aware MSTOW) 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

depends on who we're talking. someone like colttaine (while i dont like everything about him) or huMAN seems like they have much better judgment to me than rich cooper or gonzalo lira

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

Even if women aren't fulfilling their full, intended purpose to human society (defined as a birthrate above replacement level or 2.1 births/woman born), they'll always be more valued than men overall. Men have always been disposable people throughout history and prehistoric times even. Hillary Clinton is famous for saying (and I'm paraphrasing), "women are the true victims of war." Many people took offense to this statement due to the horrible injuries, deaths, and PTSD that are almost exclusively done to men in war (and not women, even when they're on the losing side of a conflict).

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I agree.

People seem to be missing the point.

I've used the word intrinsic value for a reason. It's a value we give to women regardless of what they do or who they are. It's a value given to them by birth.

Men don't have that same value at birth. Thus we are the disposable gender. We have to earn our value.

Sex work, as much as it's skewed towards women, they still have to earn it, and they do pay the price for engaging in it. But having the ability to propagate the next generation is exclusively in the women domain. Like the silly thought experiment, a island of 1 man and 100 women. Or a island of 1 woman and 100 men.

[–]TriggurWarning 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

a island of 1 man and 100 women. Or a island of 1 woman and 100 men

Good analogy.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

Interesting, but not sure I agree. I believe women wanting to have the perks of both womanhood and manhood, without paying the dues that manhood entails, is what's causing respect for them to decline.

Alas, it's not like men aren't losing respect as well, so it's whatever.

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 1 point2 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

I agree. I would add, they want the perks of both manhood and womanhood, without paying the dues of both manhood and womanhood!

You see it when people ask women "why should people respect women?" And then you get the hand ringing and over used response "because women give birth to the world!".

And then most people miss the fact that... "no, you've abandon giving birth to the next generation."

[–]IrrungenWirrungen 1 point2 points  (20 children) | Copy Link

Why should people respect men?

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 0 points1 point  (19 children) | Copy Link

I dont even know why your asking this question. If you actually read the post, it's says right at the end. Men don't get respect unless they earn it.

[–]IrrungenWirrungen 2 points3 points  (18 children) | Copy Link

Because the question ‘Why should women be respected?’ is stupid as well.

Humans should be respected, unless they give you a reason not to anymore. 🤷

Men always get respect from me, they don’t have to earn it first.

[–]EulenWatcher 4 points5 points  (66 children) | Copy Link

Being viewed as a baby making machine doesn't mean being respected or being valued as a human being. Valuing women for their ability to pop out kids while also treating them as lesser beings than men isn't respect imv, it's closer to valuing your livestock while you also can do whatever you want with it.

Also Titanic was the exception.

Also talking about respect we have to define it. There's "respect" as being polite to everyone and then there's respect as a feeling of approval due to one's qualities/achievements. I think these days women on average get more respect in both senses of this word. Women aren't viewed as men's property, we can get education, have jobs, achieve things on our own. It's great, definitely better than it used to be.

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 1 point2 points  (24 children) | Copy Link

That's not what's was said in the post.

I said intrinsic value. Meaning something you are born or endowed with without earning it.

Women can be respect for any number of reasons outside of their ability for child birth. It's said right at the end. Women are now in the same position as men when it comes to earning the right to be respected.

And if you don't think having the ability to give birth isn't valuable, then you're deluding yourself. If you have a population of 1000 men and 1000 women, you can kill off most men and still be able to reproduce effectively for the next generation. You can't do that to women. It would fundamentally destroy the next generation. It's wired in our biology to protect women for that very reason.

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

The issue is also the overall social stability of a society, which can quickly devolve into a depopulation situation regardless of value or intent. So if you get too many young people who can't find adequate work, can't find a mate, etc, you have a tendency to get rising social instability which can eventually threaten the system itself.

We're betting big on the sustainability and continuation of the status quo, but it might prove to be far less stable than we thought if trends on sexlessness among young men and rising cost of living beyond wage growth continue unabated. Rising debts in society are also a long term threat. Many of our social safety nets like medicare financially depend on not only having enough young people to fund the system, but they all need jobs that pay enough to support it too.

We're violating some of the principles that made human civilizations grow rapidly and work in the past, and doing so on the assumption that technology, globalization, complex supply chains, immigration, and more, will enable us to push through deteriorating human capital in society without any sort of black swan event that will throw everything into a state of uncontrolled chaos.

We shall see, because I think we will get the answer to this question in the next 20-30 years or so.

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

All your points are valid. And I agree with every single one.

This post topic isn't about the inevitable collapse of western society, though it would make a great topic to discuss.

[–]EulenWatcher 0 points1 point  (21 children) | Copy Link

My main point is that having this ability doesn't mean you're respected for it. It's valued, sure, but not necessarily respected.

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 0 points1 point  (18 children) | Copy Link

It's not respected anymore for sure. People shit on motherhood and children nowadays.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Err...no they don't.

[–]EulenWatcher 0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

We can argue about it, but let's return to the topic - your claim was that women were respected "as they were" in the past. I don't agree with it. Having less rights and being viewed as lesser human beings isn't being respected.

[–]Admirable_Bee_8714 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

It isn't respected anymore because women by and large have abandoned that role.

[–]EulenWatcher 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

My main point is that having this ability doesn't mean you're respected for it. It's valued, sure, but not necessarily respected.

[–]SaltyGeekyLifter 0 points1 point  (40 children) | Copy Link

Those women who “achieve things on their own” tend to end up owning a lot of cats.

Just an observation.

[–]alienamongnormiesBlackPill 1 point2 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

Those women who “achieve things on their own” tend to end up owning a lot of cats.

Just an observation.

I don't see how career women are a negative. But a positive. If I was a "high-value man" making lots of money, it would be more risky for me financially to marry someone of low income and low net worth than someone of high income and high net worth. Given how family court works. I'm immediately suspicious of women who want to be tradwives tbh. With inflation and housing costs being what they are now, very, very few men can afford to support a household on one income anyways. And as a "low-value man", a NEET like me, I'm totally down with being a house husband for a high income earning high net worth career woman. lmfao. I'll take that deal 10 times out of 10! Men need to start thinking with their brain and not with their dicks. Men prioritize looks over income and net worth in a woman. It's maybe time that men raised their standards! A guy making $200,000+/year is running into a lot of risk marrying a woman who works at Dollar Tree.

[–]SaltyGeekyLifter 2 points3 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

Dude…

Sorry to break it to you, but women HATE house-husbands. They say otherwise, but in reality are contemptuous of them. Women strongly resent being the breadwinner in a household. In your scenario above, your wife would be using you to look after the kids / house, while being driven to seek superior, more dominant genetics elsewhere. As soon as she thought she’d locked down a richer bloke, you’d be history. That’s hypergamy.

Why? Because at a genetic level men want fertility in their women, and women want safety in their men. House husbands don’t provide safety.

Sorry kid. Go to the gym.

[–]alienamongnormiesBlackPill 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

but women HATE house-husbands.

https://athomedad.org/advocacy/statistics-on-stay-at-home-dads/

Yeah that's why there were 2 million stay-at-home dads in the United States in 2014. And that figure is rising.

Sorry kid. Go to the gym.

I go to the gym every other day. And that is only going to increase my chances of attracting a high income high net worth woman! lol

[–]IrrungenWirrungen 0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Don’t be salty! ✌️

[–]Marzipan-Happy 0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Ummm. No. My husband is, essentially a house-husband. He wfh, and I am the primary income earner, and I am perfectly content with our situation. I did the housewife thing when our kids were little. It fucking sucked.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (17 children) | Copy Link

So high achieving women don't get married and have children? Hmm. I wonder who all the HVM are marrying, then ?

[–]SaltyGeekyLifter 0 points1 point  (16 children) | Copy Link

Statistically?

Far less of them get to the end of their lives in a happy relationship.

Oh, and that HVM lawyer? Late thirties, early forties?

He married the late twenties / early thirties paralegal. And she (statistically) left the practice.

Edit: that’s the attractive paralegal. The unattractive one went on to be a super ball-buster and own a lot of felines.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (15 children) | Copy Link

Rich, educated men usually marry other rich, educated women. There's pressure to marry within a certain bracket.

Guys in their forties marrying twenty something's is so rare it's not even worth discussing.

[–]EulenWatcher 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Supported by...what?

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

It’s an… observation?

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

Based on...?

[–]SaltyGeekyLifter 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Maybe… Although I suspect a number of other factors are at play. The death of chivalry, for instance, can be squarely blamed on feminism. If a woman is offended that you hold the door open for her then… she’s just not that special is she?

Add to that what has happened with regards respect for masculinity and men, which has dropped through the floor. Men are inherently expendable with regards something like tribal warfare or natural disasters. If you want to repopulate after some catastrophe, you need lots of women but only a few men. Therefore men were culturally encouraged to be self-sacrificing. It is still overwhelmingly men that do the really dangerous jobs.

This is a bargain that worked because masculinity and self-sacrifice was valued. A man could consider himself to be “a real man” if he did something masculine and was self-sacrificing for the women in his life. But that behaviour now just attracts ridicule - female ridicule particularly. So why be masculine? Why be self-sacrificing?

With the devaluing of masculinity you get an inherent reluctance for men to be self-sacrificing for women (no, white knighting does not count).

These things combined: the devaluing of motherhood and the devaluing of masculinity, are therefore between them responsible for the devaluing of women in general.

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

There is many other factors as you've suggested. I've been following the red pill community for several years now. I thought I'll bring in another aspect that isn't talk much about.

Well said, I didn't tie it directly to the idea of self sacrifice, but it's a very good way of putting it.

[–]herefortheparty01PurplePill 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I love how some women really are mad that men respect women for biology. They don’t need to do anything for respect and they’re still Mad

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Indeed. There's this one commenter who said men are viewing women as cattle for breeding. How stupid can you be if that's how you view childbirth?

This is how I view childbirth. The virgin Mary holding Jesus.

It's a divine and holy act to give birth! And I'll tell you how strongly I believe it to be true, I have 2 children and I want more. Simple as that. I do what I believe.

I respect my wife and love her to bits. And I actually respect every other women who decides to give birth to a child under good faith. I have no respect for women who choose to stay barren or have babies for selfish reasons.

[–]herefortheparty01PurplePill 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I’m not religious but I hold evolution in very high regard. That and probability. The fact woman have the ability to grow a whole ass human blows my mind. I wish more women had respect for themselves

[–]Glad-Discount-4761 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

It is very Obvious. Men aren't useless creatures like women.Doesnt matter whether she gave birth or not.

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

I've read several of your comments. I'm happy that you understand the evils of women, but I hope you don't forsake what is good about women.

Women who give birth and raise the next generation with love is a blessing. Women can also transmit culture and tradition as she's more entwined with raising the next generation. That art of womanhood has been eroded in the west.

This is what I'm trying to re-create with my wife. I work long hours and very sleep deprived. And so is my wife. And we decided to struggle together towards an ideal.

[–]Glad-Discount-4761 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm happy that you understand the evils of women, but I hope you don't forsake what is good about women.

If you really mean pregnancy,then I already forsake it. My mindset is very shallow.I don't see any point in not forsaking what is good about women.My life is better without them

By the way,Good wishes for your marriage.

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

I've seen your other comments. You mention you were infertile?

My condolences. I understand where you're coming from. I too would resent the world if I was born infertile.

Good wishes for your marriage.

Thank you.

[–]Glad-Discount-4761 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I am not worried about infertility. I just hate side effects of what causes infertility

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

This post is similar to what I’ve said on PPD before. Which is that simping and hypergamy were a means to an end to make the next generation better. (Hypergamy for looks, simping for ample resources for offspring) Yet with the birth rates we have in the west we aren’t even replacing the existing population. We should be more worried about that than simping and hypergamy.

Essentially both traits have become mal-adapted.

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I agree. The population crisis that's being ignored by so many. I'm in the minority when it comes to government reform. I would like to see the abolishing of the welfare state and low taxes. Government should only serve for infrastructure and defence. Everything else private.

[–]PaliantBlackPill 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I’m not sure what’s the answer. In America I’d say make it seamless to have children but Europe already kind of does that and their birth rate has tanked also.

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

I would say a cultural shift that encourages motherhood would work wonders.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (9 children) | Copy Link

You have completely misunderstood the 'children first, women second' rule - go and look it up.

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy Link

I'm not going to bother. Even if the use is out of context, it still valid as an idea. How bouts addressing the idea instead of nitpicking?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

If you can't be bothered to take five seconds to Google something before claiming it as 'fact" then why should people be bothered to read your entire OP ?

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

You realize how asinine your proposition is?

Do you watch a super hero movie and say, "this whole movie is pointless because a human can't fly through the air!"

So what if my example is out of historical context? It still helps serve as a metaphorical way to explaining the valuing of women over men.

Instead, why don't you write out the reason why I'm wrong, not just for me to see, but for everyone else who is reading this post? Instead of being a smart ass.

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

smartass

Maybe, just maybe - people will put more effort on debating you if you conduct yourself like an adult? It's just Reddit, you don't need to be belligerent.

Anyway..

By investigating a much larger sample of maritime disasters than what has previously been done, we show that the survival rate of women is, on average, only about half that of men

It seems that in natural disasters, chivalry does not exist.

[–]Ganajin -1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

So nuns were thrown to the wolves? Of course not. Bearing children is not the only reason women were valued.

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] -1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Intrinsic value my dear. Meaning a value given by birth.

Women can have value if they earn it. Same like men.

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

Everyone has value and you do not have to earn the right to be treated well as a human being.

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

Try living in your parents basement, providing absolutely no value by the age of 40. Then tell me that your parents will still respect you. Let's be real. You won't even respect yourself.

Come back down to earth. No one is respected without cause. You're privileged to live in a society where people have enough tolerance to be polite to you for simply existing. Don't push your luck. You better be useful to society sooner or later, because that patience has a limit.

[–]rurunoa 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

nah i wont have kids idc if i have to go wgtow for that i dont need men to value me sexually or romantically i just want to have basic human respect thats it and i believe everyone deserves that. respect as in treats me like a human being. i never expected special treatment just for being a woman and having the ability to give birth. funny that it bothers you as a man though

[–]HodgekinWhitePill[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I would recommend looking into the phenomenon of invisible women.

Women are treated well in society and they take it for granted, saying exactly what you just said. They don't realize how little people will actually care about them when they become like "men". Most men are born invisible from the start and learn to adapt to a world that doesn't care about them.

I care because I actually love humanity. This is more like a warning to people to wake up before its too late.

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

yeah maybe white women in white countries are being treated well by society. im from a religious and ethnic household and for most of my life i was ignored by both boys and girls because i grew up in a western country with extremely strict parents and wasn’t granted any freedom while my brother was allowed to do whatever he wanted. i no longer live there but i still have social anxiety and nobody is (rightfully) trying to accommodate me just because im a girl. if the only reason i am not being ignored is because men want to have sex with me then id prefer to be invisible

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

I can see the hurt in your soul. And you have every right to hate the world for making you suffer. But. And this is a big but... you don't have to continue to live in resentment. You can have a meaningful. You can have people who love you. You can have what you need. You just need to forgive those that hurt you, live in truth, and aim at the good.

And I say this with all sincerity. I've also been hurt and suffered. But being nihilistic only brought more suffering. So I made the decision to try and see what would happen. And now I'm living a life full of meaning and with people I truly love.

[–]bludkrazeRED AF 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

The decay of womens intrinsic value is called aging.

[–]Glad-Discount-4761 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly.I don't understand why people are having so much depth discussion about it.

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

No arguments here.

I'm just making a distinction between looks and fertility. They both go hand in hand with aging.

Women still capitalize on maintaining their looks, but they dismiss their fertility or not make use of it.

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

© TheRedArchive 2022. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter