Does your insight into sexual dynamics apply to “most” or “nearly all?”

Mobrowncheeks · 2023-12-04T20:41:26+00:00

⁠We live in a society. Most every females in this society has been raised up to be woman, as well as being interacted with by everyone around them with wile being perceived as girl/ woman. These experiences while being perceived as as woman/ raised as one guide behaviors and thoughts a lot more then we like to admit. This same thing applies to men by the way.
⁠We aren’t All as different as we like to think we are, unless it comes to very specific situations and contexts.

1A. Women don’t represent a harsh reality, women are subjected to this reality just like we are. They just have different social pressures, expectations , and experiences then we do.

I don’t see what “ focus on women you like” means in this context.

2A. “Lesser but happier odds “ and “ numbers game” is very contradictory. I used this example the other day. Lets say for one particular man in a city, only 15% of the women in that entire city who would be interested in a date with him if he asked. First you have to sort through 85% of the pop to even find out who these 15% of women are. And then you have to sort through the 15 to find out if they are a match. The odds are slim.

3A. Idk. I don’t subscribe to this line of thinking.

mods_have_small_ween · 2023-12-04T23:10:07+00:00

My experience dating women after becoming red pilled is that the red pill is factual. It accurately describes female behavior and male/female dynamics. I tested many theories against the women I was dating and came to the conclusion that it is facts.

No-Rough-7390 · 2023-12-04T20:55:03+00:00

You can tell who actually understands the thinking by how overt they believe this actually plays out in real life compared to how it sounds.

AreOut · 2023-12-04T20:16:41+00:00

most women, also I don't think it's night&day difference between men&women but there is a noticeable pattern, women are more emotional on average, more likely to react on a whim etc.

why harp on it? Why not focus on women you like?

we don't harp on anything, harping is considered wasting energy which you can use for something useful

Why not focus on women you like?

because it doesn't work, either we improve to the point where a subset of women will like us or we don't and no women like us, focusing is useless

Why not play the lesser, but happier odds?

again, it doesn't work, we can't choose which women are going to like us

Dont you think reasoning that most women need excitement, and then playing games with them, “keeping them on their toes” will simply only net you the very women that cause you to feel that disdain?

because some women is still better than no women, also if those women that don't like "games" see us with the aforementioned we get socially approved so we now have way better chance with them as well

abaxeron · 2023-12-04T23:12:58+00:00

What convinces you that such sweeping generalizations make sense?

"Now, do we not also say that women have periods? Yes we do. And, when we say this, do we not mean that all women have periods? Yes, indeed this is what we mean. But, what if I produce a 6 year old girl and a 60 year old woman, and say, "look, not all women are like that!" If I did this you would laugh at me and my counter examples. You would say to me, "but, the 6 year old will have hers when she hits puberty, and the 60 year old stopped having hers when she hit menopause." But, what if I then go out and find a dead 6 year old and say to you, "look, this one never had her period and never will! Not all women are like that!" Again you would laugh at my counter example. You would say to me, "but, if she lived to puberty, she would have surely had her period."

Not my analogy, but I love it dearly. Sweeping generalizations about the sexes make perfect sense. Anyone capable of telling male and female faces apart with above-random accuracy - is the living confirmation that sexual dimorphism does not stop at the neck.

Why wouldnt significant numbers of women deviate from your understanding of their behaviors or patterns?

The more she deviates from my understanding of women's behaviors and patterns, the less likely I am to ever encounter her, let alone have any meaningful interaction.

She's "Not All Women Are Like That" when it comes to love and romance. Which is why she is continuously happily married to her first and only lover who is either her childhood, or school friend; despite being together for more than a decade, they are not tired of each other in the slightest, and prefer to spend their free time with each other.

She's "Not Like That" when it comes to nesting instinct and hedonism. Thus, she doesn't drink, doesn't go to bars and consumerist public events (such as cinema); in fact, she sold her metropolitan apartment to buy a small house and a plot of land somewhere that even no asphalt-covered road reaches.

"Not Like That" when it comes to career. I will never meet her at my workplace or place of studying, because she's either smart enough to work remotely, run her own small business in the middle of nowhere, or too busy raising children.

Attitudes towards the opposite sex - that is, she is neither benevolent, nor raging misandrist. Which is why her first and only lover values and cherishes her, and will never cheat on her.

Having children. She has them, and much more than two, which leaves very little window of opportunity for her to have a single minute to spend to even talk to me.

AutoModerator · 2023-12-04T19:51:03+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" 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.

SlowEffective8146 · 2023-12-05T01:50:20+00:00

Followup questions for those who believe it applies to “nearly all” women:

What convinces you that such sweeping generalizations make sense?

Why is there no room for significant interpersonal variability? Consider how different you are from your relatives, your parents, your own flesh and blood. Why wouldnt significant numbers of women deviate from your understanding of their behaviors or patterns?

I've dated/fucked enough women to recognize patterns in their behavior. I also notice that women who are low value have less toxic traits, because they can't AFFORD to be toxic since they have low value. These are the women you're referring to. You're basically just telling men to "just date low value women".

boom-wham-slam · 2023-12-05T14:56:07+00:00

1a. Do you think any generalizations about humans are true for nearly all humans? Maybe almost all people would prefer more money instead of less? To live longer than shorter? If we can assume these things which I'd assume you agree are safe bets, why do you not assume there are gender specific safe bets? The reason I'm convinced it's true is when I get in many instances with women and see x situations repeated many many times, logically so I will expect x to repeat again. Why would I see x happen many times and expect y? That seems very silly.

2a. Because "significant interpersonal variability" seems to play little role in the final outcomes. If I see x happen 100 times, I'm going to expect x to happen 101 times, not y to happen. I do not see much evidence that women are as unique as snowflakes in terms of their relationships to men. They more generally behave the same than different.

1b. Men aren't shooting for the majority. It's a numbers game to find the minority. We are looking for the ultimate prize and it follows a funnel pattern that is common in marketing. It also applies 100% to dating. You open 100 women, 30 give you a number. 15 actually converse. 5 go on a date. 3 fuck you. 2 keep dating you. Now you as the man get to choose one or the other or dump them both and keep putting more women in the funnel. That process is the numbers game. The point is we are looking for the woman who we can get that we actually want. That is the minority you are speaking about.

2b. I'm not so sure I agree specifically with that rule however as I said above, I have yet to see evidence that women are substantially different such that it makes any sense to not assume they are generally the same. So therefore if it makes sense to behave a certain way it makes sense to behave a certain way. Case closed.

Leave you with a final overall example. We all know most lotto tickets are not worth anything. But they are all different numbers and such, tons of unique combos. If one lotto ticket was on the other side of a ravine with spikes in it, will you jump across for it? No. Of course you wouldnt. Just because the ticket on the other side is unique means nothing about the likely nature of it being a losing ticket. But say tickets are all over the place, the best way to get a winning one is just get as many as you can and there is the numbers game. Hope that helps explain everything. Cheers.

Title	Does your insight into sexual dynamics apply to “most” or “nearly all?”
Author	grillopie
Upvotes	6
Comments	101
Date	December 4, 2023 7:51 PM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/18ask9z/does_your_insight_into_sexual_dynamics_apply_to/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/does-your-insight-into-sexual-dynamics-apply-to.1240042 https://theredarchive.com/post/1240042

Comments