AF/BB doesn't exist and is out dated

Muscletov · 2026-07-22T12:18:36+00:00

Men that get casual sex aren't "alphas", often they just don't meet the extra requirements for a relationship.

The vast majority of men who are able to get casual sex are also able to get relationships, easily. Men who can and do fuck around but are, for some reason, mass rejected by women for LTRs are extremely rare, if they exist at all.

Men that get casual sex may be more attractive but that is about it in terms of what features they have that are "better".

That feature is extremely important and many women prioritize that over character traits pertaining to a man's suitability for long-term relationships, despite women's protests. Women enter relationships with turbulent, impulsive, broke and worse men who happen to be attractive all the time.

Women work so men aren't supporting them, this isn't the early 1900s where men would have to wait for marriage for sex and support the woman.

Which caused women to either upgrade their standards for what men need to provide in benefit or to prioritize men's attractiveness much more strongly.

Men that have casual sex don't get to pass their genes on. In terms of the term "alpha" in the wild, the alpha gets to pass the genes on not usually betas. But in casual sex condoms are used and if the woman gets pregnant she usually has an abortion. The one that gets to pass their genes on is men in ltr.

That is a semi-valid point. Semi-valid because there are quite a few absent or even unknowing fathers among the men who have casual sex. Women becoming pregnant from casual relationships is not a mass phenomenon, but not exactly rare either. And as I said above, a man who qualifies for "alpha" status can easily find LTRs to pass on his genes as well.

Guys in ltr don't have to "put in more work to get sex", ltr and dating just works differently than hookups and if what you care about is sex and you are jealous then just try to get a hookup not a relationship.

They absolutely do have to put in more work if the women tey're with don't find them inherently attractive. While a casual sex type of guy just needs to be there to have sex, a beta has to provide material, financial and emotional work, though even that is no guarantee for a satisfying (for him) sex life. There's a reason why women's libido declining in long-term-relationships or full-blown dead bedrooms are common scenarios and why certain "milestones" often accelerate women's lack of lust (going official, moving in together, marriage, childbirth).

Overall, this entire post futilely tries to play down the value women place on "alpha" type guys. It reads like part fake bravado in the sense of "oh us women totally do not value alpha guys, they're good fucks and that's it" and part desperate advert for men to keep being beta because "women totally love stable LTR guys and give them the best treatment".

Stevefr0mYellowstone · 2026-07-22T16:36:43+00:00

1) You have it backwards, women want relationships with alphas but alphas often don't want relationships with such women because they are not sufficiently attractive to them for an LTR and more importantly because women's preferences give alphas such an absurd amount of options that they'd be fools to tie themselves to just one woman.

2) By women's actions, alphas are better as women provide little to no barriers to having sex with them and want LTRs with them. A woman would immediately eject a lengthy relationship with a beta for a chance to be with an alpha.

3) If that is the case then why do women have demands on what men's income is? Why do Only Fans "models" extract so much money from their male simps?

4) Well first and foremost, this is the alpha's choice, not the woman's. Women want to have the alpha's children. But the alpha doesn't want to be tied down, forced to pay child support, etc... so he doesn't want to reproduce with her. Second, there are a great many betas who have been fooled into raising the alpha's kid because the woman lied about paternity

5) Sex is fundamental to the relationship. The fact that a woman provides an alpha sex immediately while forcing a beta to wait, go through hoops, etc... shows that she values the alpha far greater than the beta.

If anything, we're in a time that highlights more than ever the AF/BB dynamic.

growframe · 2026-07-22T10:13:45+00:00

AF/BB isn't strictly casual vs ltr though.

TankfarmMurdock · 2026-07-22T10:14:44+00:00

I think it exists but it’s WAY less common than RP/blackpillers insist it is.

Somebody, somewhere is getting taken advantage of. But that’s not the majority of relationships or even close to it.

Mandino_5 · 2026-07-22T14:42:24+00:00

"I dont like what this thing implies about women, so I'm going to pretend it doesn't exist."

MarioWilson122 · 2026-07-22T18:01:48+00:00

Nah, it’s still a thing. A man who can consistently get casual sex can usually get a relationship too, so it’s not necessarily that women see him as unfit for anything serious. He may simply choose not to pursue those women long term, especially if he enjoys the benefits of casual dating without wanting the added commitment.

The argument also assumes casual sex means a man failed some higher relationship standard, but that only makes sense if he was actually seeking a relationship and being rejected for one. Plenty of men who do well casually have the option to pursue something serious; they just may not want it with those particular women.

The point about passing on genes doesn’t really change that either. Casual success and long-term success are different outcomes, but being able to attract women casually still signals a level of desirability that many men do not have. A man in a relationship may pass on his genes, but that does not automatically mean he was more desired than the man who had more options and chose not to settle down.

SmertriosPPD · 2026-07-22T10:18:59+00:00

1) Sexual assertiveness is more alpha than absence of sexual assertiveness.

2) Men who get casual sex are also more masculine looking than those who don't.

3) Women still choose men who earn similar or more than them, who are similarly educated or more than them, who are same age or older than them. Men still end up paying the bills more, and women still end up being the ones who make professional and monetary compromises for kids. BB is still true and well alive.

4) Male casual sex havers have no sort of issue getting commitment and convincing a woman later to give them kids. But I'm not sure why you think the invention of contraception is an argument against the existence of a primitive behavior. Since there's no natural unselection on women who possess this AF/BB behavior it's not going away anytime soon. Plenty of women are still having kids with men who end up being too "untammable" for long term relationships.

5) just calling it "different" doesn't stop it from being "more work". Saying "if you're unhappy just don't" isn't an argument against the existence of AF/BB.

So you don't have a point other than denying statistics.

YourMrFahrenheit · 2026-07-22T11:00:42+00:00

AFBB was a sensible strategy under patriarchy where women had limited autonomy. Now that women have more financial and reproductive autonomy, there’s no reason to have a ltr with a man the wouldn’t also hook up with if ltr wasn’t an option (unless it’s on the general principle of not wanting to be with a “catch” for short term when they’d rather have long term, “if I can’t have him the way I want him I’d rather not have him at all”).

Relative_Profile_980 · 2026-07-22T12:49:15+00:00

This idea of promiscuity being a genetic dead end assumes men aren't playing the field until they eventually settle down. They could also end up with children without meaning to.

ARTriple · 2026-07-22T19:41:02+00:00

1. Men that get casual sex aren't "alphas", often they just don't meet the extra requirements for a relationship.

false

they're not in relationships because they don't want to be, not because they can't

2. Men that get casual sex may be more attractive but that is about it in terms of what features they have that are "better".

false

attractiveness isn't the only factor, even for casual sex (at least that's what women keep telling me)

3. Women work so men aren't supporting them, this isn't the early 1900s where men would have to wait for marriage for sex and support the woman.

false

women are doing for themselves in ever-increasing numbers and yet women still not only want, but expect to be financially supported by the men that they date

4. Men that have casual sex don't get to pass their genes on. In terms of the term "alpha" in the wild, the alpha gets to pass the genes on not usually betas. But in casual sex condoms are used and if the woman gets pregnant she usually has an abortion. The one that gets to pass their genes on is men in ltr.

false

nothing more to address here, just......false

5. Guys in ltr don't have to "put in more work to get sex", ltr and dating just works differently than hookups and if what you care about is sex and you are jealous then just try to get a hookup not a relationship.

false

not because this is actually false, but because repeatedly on this subreddit (and society at large), whenever the topic of a man wanting a hookup comes up, he is automatically placed in the immoral category, because men aren't supposed to actually want to have sex or something

random_radishes · 2026-07-22T11:45:07+00:00

With all these comments it really feels like some guys don’t exist in the real world.

Proudvow · 2026-07-28T04:29:52+00:00

If there are guys you'd hookup with and guys you'd only sleep with after investment, that's AF/BB.

Men that have casual sex don't get to pass their genes on.

??? Plenty of these guys have multiple kids across multiple baby mamas.

wtknight · 2026-07-22T11:12:04+00:00

Men that get casual sex may be more attractive but that is about it in terms of what features they have that are "better"

This is precisely what makes them “alphas”. Men who aren’t as attractive for casual sex but who can attract women long-term through mostly a display of emotional commitment are “betas”. Note that a pure beta often has to wait for sex.

While provision of resources is not as important as in the past since many women are better off financially, it is still sometimes important, as not every woman has a great job. Single moms especially who could use more help monetarily for children are also more likely to choose betas.

brassbuffalo · 2026-07-22T13:56:53+00:00

This is a cope from women on this sub, and not true. It's routinely contradicted by women in this sub such as you in point 2.
That's the point of the complaint.
Even working women want a man that finacially uplifts them, or at least stabilizes them. A man's finacial status is very important in dating.
This is false on 2 accounts. First is that 40% of children are born out of wedlock in the US, and 20% of mothers are single mothers. Lots of women have kids from casual sex. The second issue is that the "alpha" can have LTRs. One of the key components of the AF/BB paranoia is that the woman probably has kids.
You seem to have misunderstood what people say. AF/BB says the beta has to work hard and prove himself before sex, while the alpha doesn't. It doesn't matter if it's casual or not. It's not a distinction between casual and LTR.

bondepart · 2026-07-22T11:16:09+00:00

No such thing as “alphas” or “betas”. It’s all made up.

Constant-Station-536 · 2026-07-22T12:26:17+00:00

Woman who want children settle for a BB for stability. It most definitely is still a thing.

I think they “love” their husbands but moreso for what they can provide and because they are easy to control. If you can define that as “real love” then I guess af/bb doesnt exist.

Most guys like this are just oblivious af because they have such little experience with women. Also like most people their ego stops them from seeing the reality of the situation.

IgorXY · 2026-07-22T10:38:40+00:00

Then what does it say about men who don't have casual sex?
Women going for men they are less attracted to later in life when other features play bigger role is what AF/BB is.
Yes, but still most things are easier if you have a partner who can support you, especially when you want kids.
Weird argument. Women say they are attracted to who they are attracted to because of biology, but if they don't have kids does it mean they lie?
Ltr works differently than hookups, I agree. The thing is, some people just want to have a partner and will make you prove your worth over time before even considering having sex with you. If you pass, sex is easier and better most of the time. But damn I am tired of interviews and just want the raw passion. Don't forget that some settled women try to convience themselves that they are attracted to their spouse and fail, resulting in cheating and dead bedrooms.

Motorcycles_r_cool · 2026-07-22T11:46:19+00:00

I'm kind of confused why men even care about this so much to the point of garbling up these weird creepy pseudoscience "theories." You have to be extremely privileged for something as stupid as this to be a "concern" in dating lol.

howdoiw0rkthisthing · 2026-07-22T11:54:24+00:00

Just to be clear, AF/BB is TRP’s bastardization of David Buss’s research and theories on dual mating strategies.

One way TRP likes to frame AF/BB is that a woman will have kids with Chad and then find nice beta to settle down with and support those kids. Another way is that women will simply have a lot of wild casual sex with various Chads (cock carousel) before settling down with a beta.

Buss’s actual theory is that both men and women participate in short and long term mating strategies and mate switching, though they prioritize different things in different types of partners.

He did at one point have a hypothesis that women engaged in extramarital affairs to secure “good genes” but the research didn’t support it and he’s since dropped that hypothesis. The redpill did not.

Logical_Breadfruit49 · 2026-07-22T15:14:07+00:00

They are because they have to be attractive. There are studies that show that women care more about looks for short-term than long-term relationships, meaning that for long-term relationships, many women are willing to take a man who is not as attractive if he checks other boxes like emotional intelligence, financial stability, and shared values. These don't matter for short-term encounters, where it's just looks and charisma.
It's still the most important feature, as the man getting casual sex is still getting what most other men wish they could get, but can't because they aren't attractive enough.
Men are still expected by 68% of women to pay for the first date, to pay for the wedding ring, and to physically protect the woman from other men. It's true that in terms of income, the gap has decreased, but there are still many couples where the man is a betabuxx provider for a woman who already had her fun with Chads. So in these situations, AFBB would still apply.
Men that have casual sex still pass their genes on. Many of them end up getting married eventually or at the very least have baby mommas. I have seen no evidence that the men having casual sex are less likely to be fathers than the men not having it. Do you have such evidence?
A lot of men don't have the raw sex appeal to just walk into a bar/club and pickup a girl for sex. There is much greater demand for female sexuality for male sexuality, so if a woman wants a hookup, why would she hookup with a guy that isn't the top X% in looks? For the men that are in the bottom (100-X)% for looks, they would still have to betabuxx/jester their way into their LTR into order to obtain sex.

virtualPasserBy · 2026-07-22T10:57:24+00:00

1 or 2 are great arguments to continue just fucking around.

As for 4 whos to say guys like me want to bear children? We could, doesnt mean we want to. How the heck am I supposed continue fucking women if I get a child lol.

Men in LTRs dont have to put in more work? Theyve gotta provide, placate and keep their woman happy to get sex lol. I just have to woo the woman for around an hour and Ive got her in bed. And Im usually good enough to get repeats. Low effort, high reward. The only argument is probably the accessibility, and even then its not that much of a pro IMO.

AutoModerator · 2026-07-22T10:10:16+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

AutoModerator · 2026-07-22T10:10:17+00:00

Hi OP,

You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. PPD has guidelines for what that involves.

OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.

An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:

Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;

Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;

Focusing only on the weaker arguments;

Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.

Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

waffleznstuff30 · 2026-07-23T13:19:20+00:00

I think it exists but it's fringe and not as common as men here make it out to be. Transactional relationships exist. It's shitty. It's usually both people who have a transactional mindset about relationships to begin with. Women do. And men do. Also browbeating women into settling for a guy they don't like because their self esteem is shot.

It goes back to guys finding "husband material" insulting. That you wouldn't want them casually but you enjoy spending time with them you enjoy their presence you genuinely like them. That them as a casual fling is sad because the depth of them is what pulls you in that if it was just something passing with nothing to offer but "dick" and "good vibes" limits down this person you ACTUALLY like. You want them all the time.

Lemon_gecko · 2026-07-22T10:56:05+00:00

Well yeah and no. Men call them alphas because they get what men want, so to them they are. But even so, some men are just average, there are those who are pathetic, and there are those who still meet requirements but simply don't want to be in relationships, and they kind of stand out because they seem great for relationship but they are also extra charming etc, that makes them successful for hookups. For the purpose of this discussion we can call them alphas, tho i dislike that word.
That depends. Who we are comparing them to? Guys who can get relationship but can't casual? Guys who can get both? There is no strict line anyway. Guys who can get casual simply can appeal to women who are open to casual, that's it. It's smaller pool than women who want relationship.
That is true. But then there are kids at play. Because 50/50 household only possible before kids. After kids a woman needs to recover, someone needs to look after children, someone needs to get more pto and sick days etc. Women usually don't have equal opportunities in work because of that, so they work part time or do freelance, and basically major benefits come from husbands income, insurance, work benefits. If you're asking me, that's one of the reason why birthrate is dropping. Women are financially screwed if they want kids.
I would agree.....if we didn't have deadbeat dads and so on. Women are not inherently smarter than men. So those men do pass their genes (tho i don't think that's important to them).
They kind of do. The thing is it's not supposed to be FOR sex, it's supposed to be for relationship on itself, but many men enter relationship only for sex and woman's labor, so yeah, they work for sex and labor and feel like that's a lot.

Crime_Dawg · 2026-07-22T16:28:30+00:00

Condoms are used in casual sex? News to me, I never did.

Title	AF/BB doesn't exist and is out dated
Author	Axis_Control
Upvotes	0
Comments	117
Date	July 22, 2026 10:10 AM UTC (1 week ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1v3bu37/afbb_doesnt_exist_and_is_out_dated/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/afbb-doesnt-exist-and-is-out-dated.1585599 https://theredarchive.com/post/1585599

Comments